6D- An amateur's review
- Thread starter abcde12345
- Start date
Marsu42 said:
I agree it's nice to have two bodies, but if you really don't need the backup body, or a swivel screen, and can use the money to help fund the purchase, it does make sense to sell. I sold my 50D for a fantastic price right after I bought the 6D. And unlike your precious 60D, the 50D had AFMA...so there!
I'm actually considering buying a Rebel T5i (I forget what it's designation is over there, maybe a "60million D"? Joking!) The reason I'm considering it, is because although it lacks AFMA, it's probably good otherwise, has that magical swivel screen, and refurb units have recently been on sale for $419, body only. I sold my 50D for 50% more than that! If I can't get one for close to that price, then I'll just wait till I can, even if it's a year from now.
Since nobody answered my other thread, what's your favorite pocket size camera, Marsu? Or maybe you're not opinionated enough to say? I might have to coax it out of you!
Upvote
0
caerolle said:abcde12345 said:
You can set up the 6D so that you can press the 'Set' button and use the top control dial to change ISO in shooting mode. This has a second advantage of automatically activating the viewfinder head's-down display, which pressing the ISO button does not; if you are trying to do it with the camera to your eye and want to see the changes in the viewfinder, you have to half-press the shutter release.
The quickest way to set this up is probably to open the Q menu, then select the 'Custom Controls' icon (the little camera with the lines to the right). Press 'Set' to open the menu, then scroll over to the Set button icon at the top right. Press Set to open the menu for the Set button, then scroll to the ISO selection. Press Set one last time, then close the menus (press the shutter release halfway is fastest way). Now you can press the Set button when you are shooting, and use the top dial to adjust ISO! The only problem I have with this is my hands are small, so it is a stretch for me.
Something else I use is to set the ISO steps to 1-stop rather than 1/3-stop, which makes it quicker to make changes in the ISO.
Now if they would just allow you to set white balance to some button!
Hope this helps!
Carol
Very interesting technique, I might try it. I mostly just set the ISO to auto, because there isn't a noise penalty.
Upvote
0
CarlTN said:I sold my 50D for a fantastic price right after I bought the 6D. And unlike your precious 60D, the 50D had AFMA...so there!
You were lucky then, my 60D is really worn down from outdoor use and has a lot of shutter cycles... as for afma, with crop it strictly speaking isn't necessary if you buy your lenses accordingly and return them if they would need heavy afma, it's only with ff that I need it at all with the 100L @f2.8.
CarlTN said:
None, the 60d/6d are small enough for me because I always carry a backpack around or have a bicycle with me, really no need for anything smaller - I really rely on the usability of a real dslr with two dials, no p&s for me thank you very much.
Upvote
0
It's in a good condition, but some 3 years old now. I have some 13k shutter cycles. I'm trying to sell it with my Sigma 18-125 F/3.8-5.6 lens, a battery grip (from Phottix) and a second (3rd. party) battery.Marsu42 said:
But so far nobody showed any interest (trying some 900 USD for the kit, which is around the auction price of the body and 90% of the new price of the lens). Maybe I need to lower the price a little more, or sell it piece by piece.
Upvote
0
pato said:
Of course the resale value is the catch with 3rd party lenses like Sigma, and in all honesty for most people the 70d is a much better camera for newbies because of the dual pixel af and for anyone else because of the far superior af system... I know what I use my 60d for (Magic Lantern, it's n/a on the 70d), but for everyone else it's plain outdated and has the same sensor as every Rebel or cheap EOS M. But good luck finding a buyer for a decent price anyway, 13k shutter is really low!
Upvote
0
Marsu42 said:
Like you I chose to keep my 60d when I bought my 5D3 for the same reasons. That swivel screen is just too handy in awkward shooting positions and having 2 bodies at sporting events. However I had to go with the 5D3 because I prefer to shoot sports and the AF tracking and extra burst rate is important.
Thanks to the OP for the fair review. Like you I noticed the increase in size stepping up to FF (especially the extra stretch to the DoF preview button) but it didn't bother me so much after the first few shots.
Upvote
0
Thanks for your post which I agree with - I upgraded from a 500 after a year of deliberation and trawling through review sites and hiring various bodies to try out.
1)Ergonomics - yes whilst heavier than the 500, I liked the feel of the 6D in my hands the first time I tried it. I find it a great body to hold for long periods of time
2)Layout - I find the layout fine. One aspect that for me is a huge step up is the easy access to C1 and C2 on the rotary dial. I have both set for common setups a use a lot and it is brilliant to be able to switch the camera instantly into a set of known settings rather than setting them up individually. Makes the difference between taking an unexpected shot and missing it.
3)Image quality - yes a big difference from the 500. Like you I was impressed by the improvement using exactly the same lens.
4) Flash - If having a built in impacted significantly on other aspects like size or weight then I would rather it was not built in. I tend to avoid flash anyway and with the better ISO performance it is not that often I miss it. Happy to have an external unit if I need it.
5)wifi and gps - yes I agree, not used much at all as yet by me. I will use wifi more when the EOS phone app abilities with bulb exposure mode improve
6) IS - The reason that I decided to move to FF. The improvement from my old cropped 500 body is very significant and really useful for a lot of the photography that I do. This in itself is enough for me to justify getting the 6D
7) AF - Struggled before buying the 6D with all the review negative feedback about this. Yes I am sure I would like a better AF system but after shooting with the 6D for a year I cannot make a strong case that I really need it for most of the shooting I do and certainly I am not interested in paying the extra cost of the 5D to get it. The centre AF point works great and it is rare on the 6D that I use anything else.
8)Other? - Yes I prefer the 6D viewfinder to the 500. As regards other features that the reviews have had an issue with such as dual card slots, these have not been a big issue for me.
Verdict - Canon seem to have got a lot of flack over the last year. However as far as I am concerned they nailed it with the 6D as regards being clear what their target market really needed from a lower cost FF body. I love my 6D and am delighted to have a FF body.
1)Ergonomics - yes whilst heavier than the 500, I liked the feel of the 6D in my hands the first time I tried it. I find it a great body to hold for long periods of time
2)Layout - I find the layout fine. One aspect that for me is a huge step up is the easy access to C1 and C2 on the rotary dial. I have both set for common setups a use a lot and it is brilliant to be able to switch the camera instantly into a set of known settings rather than setting them up individually. Makes the difference between taking an unexpected shot and missing it.
3)Image quality - yes a big difference from the 500. Like you I was impressed by the improvement using exactly the same lens.
4) Flash - If having a built in impacted significantly on other aspects like size or weight then I would rather it was not built in. I tend to avoid flash anyway and with the better ISO performance it is not that often I miss it. Happy to have an external unit if I need it.
5)wifi and gps - yes I agree, not used much at all as yet by me. I will use wifi more when the EOS phone app abilities with bulb exposure mode improve
6) IS - The reason that I decided to move to FF. The improvement from my old cropped 500 body is very significant and really useful for a lot of the photography that I do. This in itself is enough for me to justify getting the 6D
7) AF - Struggled before buying the 6D with all the review negative feedback about this. Yes I am sure I would like a better AF system but after shooting with the 6D for a year I cannot make a strong case that I really need it for most of the shooting I do and certainly I am not interested in paying the extra cost of the 5D to get it. The centre AF point works great and it is rare on the 6D that I use anything else.
8)Other? - Yes I prefer the 6D viewfinder to the 500. As regards other features that the reviews have had an issue with such as dual card slots, these have not been a big issue for me.
Verdict - Canon seem to have got a lot of flack over the last year. However as far as I am concerned they nailed it with the 6D as regards being clear what their target market really needed from a lower cost FF body. I love my 6D and am delighted to have a FF body.
Upvote
0
I moved from an xti to a 6D a year ago. There is no comparison. I can look at my photos on the computer and see the day that I switched without looking at any data...and so can everyone else. I know everyone worries about AF but I just use the center point for action then crop. For non-action I use the center point and recompose. (which is how I used to take pictures with film anyway). I would love the 5D3 but I couldn't afford it and I'd rather save up for a used 300 2.8 I (lens rentals had them for 3400...if I could just find someone near me to split it...).
Upvote
0
It's clear that 6D would produce better IQ than crop sensor if high ISO or shallow DOF is required. I'm curious how much difference there is in other situations. Do you really get significantly better detail, colour, etc at "normal" ISO? I'd appreciate if anybody could post a comparison shots taken with 6D and a crop.
Upvote
0
Got my 6D the other day and the only thing i'm disappointed so far it's the ergonomics and the cheap feel of the body and buttons. It simply doesn't compare with my 5D II. Ofcourse i was not expecting the same build quality as the 5DII ( that's 5D3 territory) but i was expecting something better than this.
I plan getting the battery grip, hopefully the extra size will help balance out my 70-200
I plan getting the battery grip, hopefully the extra size will help balance out my 70-200
Upvote
0
roguewave said:
At iso 100-200 and straight out of camera shots you most likely won't see any difference, iso 400 is also very ok on current Canon crop sensors. Unlike the competition, at 100% magnification Canon crop shots display a little grain at any iso, a fact often criticized but imho nothing to worry about too much until...
... the big difference shows when you start postprocessing, the raw files from full frame are much more elastic meaning better gradients and plain color areas (red is a problem for Canon, esp. on crop), a bit more dynamic range plus sharpening simply works better. As for banding when raising shadows, with Canon it rather depends on the camera model than the sensor: 6d seems to be a bit better than 5d3 which in turn is much better than 5d2, and on the crop side 7d is worst, newer models gradually seem to improve.
Upvote
0
The 6D is a good choice for someone moving up from a Rebel who wants to do so without breaking the bank.
Upvote
0
Marsu42, thank you! I think that's a very good comparison - it definitely matches my experience with crop sensors .
The reason I asked for side-by-site shots is that a few posters mentioned a significant jump in IQ going from crop to FF. I'd imagine a good lens would produce quite similar results on both at lower ISO (aside from FOV difference), but I could be wrong. Or perhaps the posters also meant IQ after post-processing, as you mentioned.
.The reason I asked for side-by-site shots is that a few posters mentioned a significant jump in IQ going from crop to FF. I'd imagine a good lens would produce quite similar results on both at lower ISO (aside from FOV difference), but I could be wrong. Or perhaps the posters also meant IQ after post-processing, as you mentioned.
Upvote
0
roguewave said:
Probably, and as I really like my 60d I somewhat hate to say it - after proper postprocessing and sharpening, the 6d shots blow the crop sensor out of the water when it comes to fine details like fur (using the 100L which is good on both sensors) - I have shot the same scenes with my 60d & 6d, though I'm too lazy to dig them out atm
Upvote
0
roguewave said:
Well, what exactly do you want to see and what lens do you want the samples made with?
1) If you will try to compare 'camera JPEGs' the huge difference will be the DIGIC brains that do RAW -> JPEG conversion (with lens correction, ALO, etc.). (In case of XTi to 6D comparison, 6D is the Einstein and XTi is the caveman
)2) If you will try to compare 'camera RAWs' you will be at mercy of RAW conversion software camera presets (and number of bits in RAW data -- 6D has more than XTi).
PS: In my experience it's the FOV that makes the main difference. I used to shoot with XTi and 10-22 + 24-105 lens pair for years, and I always considered '24-105' as normal-to-tele lens (and I did not use it very often). The 6D changes the picture, now all my EF lenses make very (and I do mean 'VERY!') different pictures...
Upvote
0
Marsu42, if you later feel like digging out your comparison photos, I'd like to see the difference. I can imagine that 6D has better IQ than just about as many pixels crammed onto 2.5 times smaller area, but is it dramatically better for monitor viewing / moderate size prints, or only fine fur details noticeable at 100%?
Upvote
0
Zlyden said:Well, what exactly do you want to see and what lens do you want the samples made with?
1) If you will try to compare 'camera JPEGs' the huge difference will be the DIGIC brains that do RAW -> JPEG conversion (with lens correction, ALO, etc.). (In case of XTi to 6D comparison, 6D is the Einstein and XTi is the caveman
2) If you will try to compare 'camera RAWs' you will be at mercy of RAW conversion software camera presets (and number of bits in RAW data -- 6D has more than XTi).
PS: In my experience it's the FOV that makes the main difference. I used to shoot with XTi and 10-22 + 24-105 lens pair for years, and I always considered '24-105' as normal-to-tele lens (and I did not use it very often). The 6D changes the picture, now all my EF lenses make very (and I do mean 'VERY!') different pictures...
I agree with you. So yeah, I didn't consider JPEG. I also didn't mean FOV, because that's an obvious difference.
Other than that, I didn't have anything specific in mind. Because several reviewers mentioned that IQ is a BIG upgrade from crop, I just wanted to see an example, whatever shots they choose (other than high ISO) and see for myself how big the difference is.
I remember a landscape scene comparison on POTN between 7D and 5DII. While FF looked slightly better with color and detail / contrast, at web resolution it was not a huge difference by any means.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
