EOS 5D Mk iv or EOS 6D Mk ii

[itnithand]

I am looking at these two models and I am seeing marginal gains on the 5D versus the 6D, but I am seeing a sharp increase in price for the 5D. Is there anyone here who had used both and can tell me if the cost justifies the gain with the 5D.

I really need something that preforms well in low light, saves me time in post, and is easier to use in the field; while not being an investment that takes me months to recoup without any gain in productivity. Showbox Tutuapp Vidmate


One of the features that I am drawn to is the dual pixel focus adjustment that allows me to adjust the focus in post on the 5D. Primarily I get work doing personal shoots and porteaits, some events, and personal projects for myself and others.

Based on that can anyone weigh in on what the best choice for me would be? Either one of these is already a big investment for me based on my current modest set-up.

 

[AlanF]

It would help those who have both to know what you will be using it for. There is negligible adjustment of focus by DPAF possible with the 5DIV, so you can remove that as a factor. You may also wish to consider the EOS R, which as the superior sensor of the 5DIV and is closer to the price of the 6DII, and has won many fans.

 

[SecureGSM]

It would help those who have both to know what you will be using it for. There is negligible adjustment of focus by DPAF possible with the 5DIV, so you can remove that as a factor. You may also wish to consider the EOS R, which as the superior sensor of the 5DIV and is closer to the price of the 6DII, and has won many fans.

with regards to "EOS R, which has a superior sensor of the 5dIV":

http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 5D Mark IV,Canon EOS R

I am having difficulties in supporting your statement, unless you are referring to the EOS R low light sensitivity being -6EV vs -4EV of 5DIV...


P.S. it is a Dual Pixel RAW focus adjustment..

 

[Hector1970]

I wouldn’t buy a camera over another one because you think you might be able to adjust focus during post processing.
If price is no object go for the 5DIV without a second thought.
If the budget is tight and you don’t need the higher FPS go for the 6DII (or even a second hand 6D) and spend any savings left over on good glass.
5DIV is great - you can’t blame it for bad photographs.
I know plenty of people with the 6DII and are very happy with it.

 

[AlanF]

with regards to "EOS R, which has a superior sensor of the 5dIV":

http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 5D Mark IV,Canon EOS R

I am having difficulties in supporting your statement, unless you are referring to the EOS R low light sensitivity being -6EV vs -4EV of 5DIV...


P.S. it is a Dual Pixel RAW focus adjustment..

You have clearly misread and then misquoted me. I didn't write "which has a superior sensor of the 5dIV" but I wrote "which has the superior sensor of the 5dIV", which means precisely that it has the 5DIV (or equivalent) sensor, which is borne out by the link you posted.

 

[SecureGSM]

You have clearly misread and then misquoted me. I didn't write "which has a superior sensor of the 5dIV" but I wrote "which has the superior sensor of the 5dIV", which means precisely that it has the 5DIV (or equivalent) sensor, which is borne out by the link you posted.

my apologies. you are correct

 

[AlanF]

No offence taken!

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have both a 5D MK IV and a EOS R. While the 5D IV is great, I find that it gets used about 20% of the time now.

The always accurate AF of the R means no more AFMA or issues with autofocus at MFD, where many lenses have focus errors. While I seldom use 3rd party lenses, for those who do, the improvement in autofocus consistence and accuracy may be even more important.

Even though I AFMA my lenses, the DPAF manages to get a little sharper focus in many cases. Its not perfect, it is possible to do better with manual focus if the camera is bolted down, and very carefully focused with high magnification on the LCD or tethered monitor. My 5D IV has been relegated to being bolted down and tethered because I can use MF and tweak the AF manually for product photography, but that's overkill.

I'm leaning towards selling my 5D MK IV by this spring and getting a 2nd mirrorless when it comes out. For now, I'm using all EF lenses, once the 5D MK IV is sold, I will start acquiring RF lenses if some come out that look good to me.

One thing that those who have never owned a 5 series or 1 series will experience is the weight of the camera. A 6D feels light, almost like a toy after using the heavy cameras and lenses for years. I still remember getting my first FF 5D way back and having difficulty with the weight after using my 30D, which was a pretty solid camera.

The EOS R is very solid, and falls between the 6D and 5D IV in weight, but with my large lenses and EF adapter, the overall feel is closer to the 5D MK IV.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

The above is all true, if you don't need some specific to 5DMkIV features such as FPS or dual card slot or optical viewfinder, EOS R will be a better and cheaper choice.

 

[stevelee]

I've been using a 6D2 for a year and three months and have not felt like I missed anything by not having a more expensive camera. Unless you have some particular need that will be met by another model, it makes more sense, I believe, to take any extra money and buy good lenses. That's the route I took, and I would make the same choice again. I got the current versions of the 16-35mm f/4 and 100-400mm L lenses over the course of the year, and thus spent more on glass than I had on the 6D2 with the STM kit lens.

 

[mikekeck]

I have a 6D, 6D ii, and 5D iv, but I just bought the 5D iv, so I have not evaluated it yet. I was perfectly happy with the 6D ii, but I started doing weddings in 2018, and I was worried about not having dual card slots on the 6D ii. Portrait sessions can be re-shot, but I was scared of losing someone's wedding photos to a failed card (so far, I have never had a card fail on a shoot). The other reason I bought the 5D was price--they are significantly less expensive now, with lots of freebies added. However, the 6D ii seems like a steal to me right now, at around $1299 US with a battery grip.

The 5D weighs 1/4 lb more (1.76 lb vs 1.51 lb, according to B&H). With a lens on, I personally don't notice the weight difference. The two cameras feel very similar to me. I don't shoot a lot of sports or birds-in-flight, so the 6.5 fps of the 6D ii vs the 7 fps of the 5D iv is a trivial difference to me ( I suspect the buffer might matter more than the fps for action shooters).

If price matters a lot, and if you can re-shoot most things, I would probably just go with the 6D ii. It's a fine camera.

 

[Michael Clark]

There are a few differences.

Only you can decide if one or several of them combined is worth the extra cost for the type of shooting you do.

The primary differences:

5D Mark IV :

Slightly higher resolution (30.4 vs 26.2 MP)

Better, more configurable AF system with wider coverage, more AF points (61 vs 45), more AF points (61 vs 27) and cross-type AF points (21 vs 9) that work with f/8 lenses or lens+TC combinations.

Higher resolution full color RGB+IR light meter (150,000 pixel in 252 zones vs 7560 pixels in 63 segments).

Tighter spot metering area (1.3% vs 3.2%).

Shorter minimum shutter time (1/8000 vs 1/4000).

Larger (8.1cm vs 7.7 cm), higher resolution (1,620,000 dots vs 1,040,000 dots) LCD screen

Slightly faster flash sync speed (1/200 vs 1/180)

More in-camera editing options (cropping and in-camera DLO being the most significant ones)

Slightly faster frame rate (7 vs 6.5 fps), larger JPEG buffer (unlimited vs. 150 frames)

Higher maximum video resolution (4K vs. HD) and headphone jack (yes vs no)

Faster USB interface (3.0 vs 2.0)

Two card slots (CF + SD/SDHC/SDXC UHS-1) vs one card slot (SD/SDHC/SDXC UHS-1)

Magnesium alloy body vs polycarbonate body

Shutter rated for 150,000 actuations vs shutter with no published rating.

6D Mark II:

Better battery life rating (1,200 vs 900 shots)

Built-in Wi-Fi

Twelve Special Scene modes and Creative Auto exposure mode

 

[jd7]

There are a few differences.

Only you can decide if one or several of them combined is worth the extra cost for the type of shooting you do.

The primary differences:

5D Mark IV :

Slightly higher resolution (30.4 vs 26.2 MP)

Better, more configurable AF system with wider coverage, more AF points (61 vs 45), more AF points (61 vs 27) and cross-type AF points (21 vs 9) that work with f/8 lenses or lens+TC combinations.

Higher resolution full color RGB+IR light meter (150,000 pixel in 252 zones vs 7560 pixels in 63 segments).

Tighter spot metering area (1.3% vs 3.2%).

Shorter minimum shutter time (1/8000 vs 1/4000).

Larger (8.1cm vs 7.7 cm), higher resolution (1,620,000 dots vs 1,040,000 dots) LCD screen

Slightly faster flash sync speed (1/200 vs 1/180)

More in-camera editing options (cropping and in-camera DLO being the most significant ones)

Slightly faster frame rate (7 vs 6.5 fps), larger JPEG buffer (unlimited vs. 150 frames)

Higher maximum video resolution (4K vs. HD) and headphone jack (yes vs no)

Faster USB interface (3.0 vs 2.0)

Two card slots (CF + SD/SDHC/SDXC UHS-1) vs one card slot (SD/SDHC/SDXC UHS-1)

Magnesium alloy body vs polycarbonate body

Shutter rated for 150,000 actuations vs shutter with no published rating.

6D Mark II:

Better battery life rating (1,200 vs 900 shots)

Built-in Wi-Fi

Twelve Special Scene modes and Creative Auto exposure mode

Pretty good list but I'd add for 6D II:

Tilt flip screen

Lighter

Smaller

(I'd call those things advantages but some may disagree)

And for 5D IV:

Sensor with more DR (at least at low ISO)

100% viewfinder vs 98%

5D IV is the higher level camera, but I'm still pretty happy with my 6D II, and it's definitely cheaper!

 

[Act444]

I don't have extensive experience with the 6D2 but I did have the original 6D for a couple of years which I used alongside a 5D3 before upgrading that 6D to a second 5D3 body. My takeaways:

IQ-wise, I was hard-pressed to tell the difference between the two. The difference between 20 and 22MP was negligible; and in fact, I'd even give the 6D the edge in low-light IQ due to high ISO. But the issue for me was two-fold: AF and usability. The 5D3's AF was head and shoulders above the 6D...the 6D I had to use the center point for everything, which led to a lot of cropping in post. I was far more confident in the 5D3's outer points when composing, which led to less cropping (and less work, etc.). Also, I found the extra customizability of the 5D3 made it far easier to "get the shot" with that camera. So, eventually, once I had the funds, I swapped the 6D out for another 5D3. But the 6D got me some great shots, and overall I liked it.

The 6D2 at least has more AF points than the original 6D did, although I'm not sure how many are of the cross-type variety. The usability issue would still exist, but it depends on what you shoot. If speed isn't critical I think the 6D series would be plenty of camera to be honest.

ETA: Of course, nowadays, there's also the new EOS R to consider, which sits between those two cameras, but that's going to be 6D-level in terms of usability (plus you'll need an adapter unless you have additional funds for native RF lenses).

 

[Del Paso]

The build quality of the 5 D IV is classes better, the same applies to the wheather "sealing".
I believe that durability justifies a higher price, if you think of a "long time" investment. Yet, the 6 D 2 is an excellent camera, but....the 5 D IV is better!

 

[Michael Clark]

Pretty good list but I'd add for 6D II:

Tilt flip screen

Lighter

Smaller

(I'd call those things advantages but some may disagree)

And for 5D IV:

Sensor with more DR (at least at low ISO)

100% viewfinder vs 98%

5D IV is the higher level camera, but I'm still pretty happy with my 6D II, and it's definitely cheaper!

I thought I included the tilt/flippy screen thing in the list.

As to the other things, in my humble opinion there's not enough difference for it to be a real differentiator.

 

[LesC]

Depends on what your priorities are; I went for the 6D MKII for the smaller size & articulating screen. It's tough enough and has good weather sealing although obviously not to the same standard as the 5DMKIV. lowlight performance is excellent - here's a shot at iso25600 which only needed very minor noise reduction & looks virtually noise free printed to 15" x 10" ...

 

[Del Paso]

Depends on what your priorities are; I went for the 6D MKII for the smaller size & articulating screen. It's tough enough and has good weather sealing although obviously not to the same standard as the 5DMKIV. lowlight performance is excellent - here's a shot at iso25600 which only needed very minor noise reduction & looks virtually noise free printed to 15" x 10" ...View attachment 182652

25600 ISO?
Very very good quality, I' m impressed! And an interesting picture too!
Need some Chianti quick...

 

[Michael Clark]

Depends on what your priorities are; I went for the 6D MKII for the smaller size & articulating screen. It's tough enough and has good weather sealing although obviously not to the same standard as the 5DMKIV. lowlight performance is excellent - here's a shot at iso25600 which only needed very minor noise reduction & looks virtually noise free printed to 15" x 10" ...View attachment 182652

Is that color or monochrome + sepia?

 

[LesC]

Is that color or monochrome + sepia?

Desaturated colour