6D as a Compliment to 5DMkiii

[Skirball]

2) no-one who can afford a second 5d3 is going to buy the 6d as a backup /second body;

I wont labor the point except to note that this is YOUR criteria. Photogs like to pretend that their preferences are somehow 'better' than those of others. We see this here in this post. If you want to see how unreasonable photographers want to make their 'opinions' into science check the post on "Crazy... go Nikon?". Your point #2 is what I would be weary of .. "who can afford" Professional/Serious photography is about needs and business justification - buying all that you can afford (and that usually involves overspending) this is gearhead and fanboy talk! PERIOD!

If your budget is limited, get a 6D. If you can get another 5d3, get a another 5d3. That's all I'm saying.

For me affording is something I can buy that it within my reach without having to extend myself unnecessarily. Your definition may be different.

By your own logic though, what you wrote is YOUR criteria ... What's the whole point of getting oh so emotional over it?

That's funny, because that's the same criticism I'd give back to you two.

I disagree with this idea that you only get a 6D if that's all you can afford, otherwise get a 5D3. That's all I'm saying. But as you say, people get all emotional over it. Most the people on here seem to decide what camera they want, then they reverse engineer the reasons of why they NEED it. Which is fine, if it doesn't put them out financially. My problem is when they come on here and convince everyone else that they NEED to do the same, usually by exaggerating the lack of capabilities of everything below that camera. So you get more noobies coming on here saying that they were going to by XXX camera but read online that they need to get the YYY. Sorry for trying to give them more than one sided opinions.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

There has been a sort of love hate reaction toward the 6D. I feel that the 6D is the perfect complimentary camera to the 5Dmkiii. Many pro photographers need a second camera, and I believe the 6D is perfect if you use the 5Dm3 as your primary camera. Almost every feature is complimentary. The 5D lacks the fancy connectivity/gps capabilities not to mention the remote EOS software for your phone, the low light focusing ability. The 6D lacks superior focusing, video ability and a few others. All while maintaining similar IQ. I have not heard this discussed. If you own both, you have almost all you bases covered with duplication of the most important qualities. If only the 6D could be had for 1500$ or less - maybe in a few months, the ebay offers will appear.

In a similar boat. I just rented a 6d to give it a test drive and see how it stood up against/with the mk3. The 6d did impress me, many of the things I thought would be an issue weren't (that center point can AF in very dark conditions!!!). I'm giving it a month and a half to make the final decision - if I can find one of those refurb mk3's for under $2500, I may go that route. But for a backup body, I just can't justify the extra 1k+ it would cost to get one new or used, especially given how well the 6d performed.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

If you have a 5D Mark III, there wouldn't really be any reason to buy or have a 6D, unless you shot with a backup camera and didn't want to spend the resources to buy another 5D Mark III. Pretty much all the wedding photogs I know shoot with a backup camera, so this makes sense. That's really the only reason I can see in owning both, and I don't think in the real world the 6D offers much anything over the 5D3. However, I can see advantages of the 5D3 over the 6D.

The 6D market is primarily I'm guessing for those entering FF for the first time and who want to get serious about photography. I look at the 6D as what the 5D2 was back in 2008. So there's really no reason for 5D2 owners to complain about the lack of differences between the 6D and 5D2, because there weren't intended to be any. The 6D probably has a better sensor and that's it.

backup/2nd bodies CAN have different uses and differet funtions. The way this is worded, one must have the same lens on each because your doing the same with each. I look at it a little differently...one body as a scalpel, and the other as a macheti. This is how I see the 2 complimenting each other nicely. A wider lens on the 6d, and a long lens on the 5d3...using each cam to its strengths. Of course in a perfect world we'd all have 2 5d3's ad a 1dx too. But this isn't a perfect world and sometimes compromises must be made.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

If you have a 5D Mark III, there wouldn't really be any reason to buy or have a 6D, unless you shot with a backup camera and didn't want to spend the resources to buy another 5D Mark III. Pretty much all the wedding photogs I know shoot with a backup camera, so this makes sense. That's really the only reason I can see in owning both, and I don't think in the real world the 6D offers much anything over the 5D3. However, I can see advantages of the 5D3 over the 6D

So you dont see any benefit in controlling your camera wirelessly or the GPS functionality (yes I know that you could spend a couple hundred dollars on a gps sensor for the 5D). The 6D is said to focus is said to work better in low light, and i have experienced this annoying characteristic in the 5D3.

Me personally, no and no. I don't care to control anything wirelessly and I have no reason to use GPS and the 6D's focus is only better at center, and since I'm a sports photog, I don't care about center focus. The 6D has no real-world improvements for real-world shooting over a 5D3. In fact, for a sports photog like myself, the 6D is worse. The 6D is not meant for me. I think wedding photogs could really, really benefit from it, but in reality, if you already have a 5D3, you're not going to really notice it as much as if say, you were coming from a Rebel. The sensor in the 6D has to be better than the 5D2 and we all probably already realize this. I think the 6D makes for a great wedding, portrait, and landscape camera, but for me, not a sports camera and since I already own a 5D3, I have little reason to even consider a 6D. In fact, the 1DX is actually the ultimate "everything" camera, and would whip both the 5D3 and 6D at wedding photography .

AHA....ok, yeah, if i were a sports shooter I would be on the exact same page...but...I am not a sports shooter!!!!

Edit: now after reading all this...uggggg people are silly. is the 5d3 the better camera, heck yeah it is. But, with all things there are compromises that need to be made depending on level of income and expenses. For me right now, a second mk3 is definitely an option, if I can find a refurb for $2500. If not, then the 6d is the more reasonable choice because I would like my secondary body to be performing a different task than my main body. Backup covering the wide and mid range, main covering the longer range/finer detail work. For me, this is how I'd run the combo regardless of whether it was with 2 5d3's or a 5d3 and a 6d....

All that said, I am still not convinced either way!!! LOL. When I rented the 6d, I was basically trying to find reasons not to snag one. But that little camera impressed me enough to make the decision much harder...so it all comes down to price point.

 

[J.R.]

2) no-one who can afford a second 5d3 is going to buy the 6d as a backup /second body;

I wont labor the point except to note that this is YOUR criteria. Photogs like to pretend that their preferences are somehow 'better' than those of others. We see this here in this post. If you want to see how unreasonable photographers want to make their 'opinions' into science check the post on "Crazy... go Nikon?". Your point #2 is what I would be weary of .. "who can afford" Professional/Serious photography is about needs and business justification - buying all that you can afford (and that usually involves overspending) this is gearhead and fanboy talk! PERIOD!

If your budget is limited, get a 6D. If you can get another 5d3, get a another 5d3. That's all I'm saying.

For me affording is something I can buy that it within my reach without having to extend myself unnecessarily. Your definition may be different.

By your own logic though, what you wrote is YOUR criteria ... What's the whole point of getting oh so emotional over it?

That's funny, because that's the same criticism I'd give back to you two.

I disagree with this idea that you only get a 6D if that's all you can afford, otherwise get a 5D3. That's all I'm saying. But as you say, people get all emotional over it. Most the people on here seem to decide what camera they want, then they reverse engineer the reasons of why they NEED it. Which is fine, if it doesn't put them out financially. My problem is when they come on here and convince everyone else that they NEED to do the same, usually by exaggerating the lack of capabilities of everything below that camera. So you get more noobies coming on here saying that they were going to by XXX camera but read online that they need to get the YYY. Sorry for trying to give them more than one sided opinions.

Why would you buy the 6D if your budget allows for a 5D3? :

 

[Skirball]

2) no-one who can afford a second 5d3 is going to buy the 6d as a backup /second body;

I wont labor the point except to note that this is YOUR criteria. Photogs like to pretend that their preferences are somehow 'better' than those of others. We see this here in this post. If you want to see how unreasonable photographers want to make their 'opinions' into science check the post on "Crazy... go Nikon?". Your point #2 is what I would be weary of .. "who can afford" Professional/Serious photography is about needs and business justification - buying all that you can afford (and that usually involves overspending) this is gearhead and fanboy talk! PERIOD!

If your budget is limited, get a 6D. If you can get another 5d3, get a another 5d3. That's all I'm saying.

For me affording is something I can buy that it within my reach without having to extend myself unnecessarily. Your definition may be different.

By your own logic though, what you wrote is YOUR criteria ... What's the whole point of getting oh so emotional over it?

That's funny, because that's the same criticism I'd give back to you two.

I disagree with this idea that you only get a 6D if that's all you can afford, otherwise get a 5D3. That's all I'm saying. But as you say, people get all emotional over it. Most the people on here seem to decide what camera they want, then they reverse engineer the reasons of why they NEED it. Which is fine, if it doesn't put them out financially. My problem is when they come on here and convince everyone else that they NEED to do the same, usually by exaggerating the lack of capabilities of everything below that camera. So you get more noobies coming on here saying that they were going to by XXX camera but read online that they need to get the YYY. Sorry for trying to give them more than one sided opinions.

Why would you buy the 6D if your budget allows for a 5D3? :

Because I don't feel a need to have the best just to have the best. My budget could allow a 1DX, why not that? Why not a 600mm to go with it? Everything in life is cost vs. benefit, and I didn't see a significant enough benefit given the cost difference and my intended use. It's different for every single one of us, I just don't understand why those of you that justify these purchases to yourself have to degrade everything else.

 

[J.R.]

2) no-one who can afford a second 5d3 is going to buy the 6d as a backup /second body;

I wont labor the point except to note that this is YOUR criteria. Photogs like to pretend that their preferences are somehow 'better' than those of others. We see this here in this post. If you want to see how unreasonable photographers want to make their 'opinions' into science check the post on "Crazy... go Nikon?". Your point #2 is what I would be weary of .. "who can afford" Professional/Serious photography is about needs and business justification - buying all that you can afford (and that usually involves overspending) this is gearhead and fanboy talk! PERIOD!

If your budget is limited, get a 6D. If you can get another 5d3, get a another 5d3. That's all I'm saying.

For me affording is something I can buy that it within my reach without having to extend myself unnecessarily. Your definition may be different.

By your own logic though, what you wrote is YOUR criteria ... What's the whole point of getting oh so emotional over it?

That's funny, because that's the same criticism I'd give back to you two.

I disagree with this idea that you only get a 6D if that's all you can afford, otherwise get a 5D3. That's all I'm saying. But as you say, people get all emotional over it. Most the people on here seem to decide what camera they want, then they reverse engineer the reasons of why they NEED it. Which is fine, if it doesn't put them out financially. My problem is when they come on here and convince everyone else that they NEED to do the same, usually by exaggerating the lack of capabilities of everything below that camera. So you get more noobies coming on here saying that they were going to by XXX camera but read online that they need to get the YYY. Sorry for trying to give them more than one sided opinions.

Why would you buy the 6D if your budget allows for a 5D3? :

Because I don't feel a need to have the best just to have the best. My budget could allow a 1DX, why not that? Why not a 600mm to go with it? Everything in life is cost vs. benefit, and I didn't see a significant enough benefit given the cost difference and my intended use. It's different for every single one of us, I just don't understand why those of you that justify these purchases to yourself have to degrade everything else.

Dunno what gives you the idea that when I say that the 5D3 is a better camera means that I am degrading the 6D. I could easily get back and say your are simply degrading the 5d3 for not being value for money and justifying your not purchasing the 5d3.

The 5d3 makes more sense than a 6D, maybe not too you but that doesn't mean those advocating the 5d3over the 6D are wrong or justifying their purchase. The sales of the 5d3 have far outstripped those of the 6D and for good reason.

 

[Skirball]

I could easily get back and say your are simply degrading the 5d3 for not being value for money and justifying your not purchasing the 5d3.

I looked through the last two years of my photos when deciding which camera to purchase and saw that I shot a very low percentage of action shots. I further saw that my trusty Rebel did ok at the times that I did. I reasoned that it wasn't worth an extra $1000 for a function that I use a low percentage of the time. I'm sure RLPhoto will shoot holes in my logic, but I did try to objectively look at the situation before buying.

The 5d3 makes more sense than a 6D, maybe not too you but that doesn't mean those advocating the 5d3over the 6D are wrong or justifying their purchase.

I'm not saying advocating it as a great camera is wrong, I simply think that there is a majorit here that vocally chant the 5d3 mantra regardless of a prospective users background, financials, or type of shooting s/he does. Look through the forums on here, people suggest it before they even know what people shoot. Yes, it's a great camera, but there are many situations when a lesser camera can do every bit as good. Hell, a lot of people on here could take a moderately priced Point and Shoot and capture a landscape pic better than half the crap that's put on Flickr everyday from high end dSLRs. Why? Because 61 points doesn't help when the earth doesn't move. And you don't need 25.6k ISO if the lights good. Do I care that some guy goes online and decides he needs a 1DX to capture photos of his granddaughter to put on Facebook? No, but it'd be nice if when he went online there wasn't an overwhelming chorus convincing him that he needs to do so.

The sales of the 5d3 have far outstripped those of the 6D and for good reason.

I could argue that that proves my point every much as you yours.

 

[RLPhoto]

Skirball, can you simply let a different opinion/s alone? I was in the same spot of buy a 2nd 5d3 or the new 6D. It came down to saving that extra cash to buy what later on won't limit me.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

For me, this is why I am considering the 6d over the 5d3 as a backup/secondary body. This is only my second season shooting weddings. So my income is not at the level it should be, and I want my shots to be as good as they can be. So a secondary body is needed, mostly so I can get 2 uniquely composed shots without having to run to the bag to swap lenses, and also for the piece of mind a second body gives you (the good old just in case!) From that perspective, the mk3 gets a big extra point because then I have no falloff in capabilities. Now lets add in the other factors. I am currently using the older non-IS 70-200 2.8. I am interested in upgrading to the v2 IS because IS would improve my keeper rate at the long end, and give me more flexibility in Shutter speed. I'm also considering options with my 24-70 v1, seeling it and upgrading to the v2, or, fill in the gap with another prime (either the 24mm or the 35mm). I would also really like to snag a 135 f2...

I can't make bold moves with glass if I spend 3k on a body, an mk3 now means no new glass until the end of the season or next season (and in theory, I could do a 6d now then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3)...

Add in another factor, I am getting married this year, and weddings are freaking expensive!!!!!!

So whats the better option, a 5d3/6d combo with top end glass? Or, 2 mk3's and no moves on glass?

 

[Skirball]

Skirball, can you simply let a different opinion/s alone? I was in the same spot of buy a 2nd 5d3 or the new 6D. It came down to saving that extra cash to buy what later on won't limit me.

Heh, really? Pot:Kettle? I was just trying to answer his questions. I don't see where I'm attacking or dismissing. And as I said, I don't think advocating buying the best is wrong, it'd just be nice if it were more balanced.

 

[J.R.]

For me, this is why I am considering the 6d over the 5d3 as a backup/secondary body. This is only my second season shooting weddings. So my income is not at the level it should be, and I want my shots to be as good as they can be. So a secondary body is needed, mostly so I can get 2 uniquely composed shots without having to run to the bag to swap lenses, and also for the piece of mind a second body gives you (the good old just in case!) From that perspective, the mk3 gets a big extra point because then I have no falloff in capabilities. Now lets add in the other factors. I am currently using the older non-IS 70-200 2.8. I am interested in upgrading to the v2 IS because IS would improve my keeper rate at the long end, and give me more flexibility in Shutter speed. I'm also considering options with my 24-70 v1, seeling it and upgrading to the v2, or, fill in the gap with another prime (either the 24mm or the 35mm). I would also really like to snag a 135 f2...

I can't make bold moves with glass if I spend 3k on a body, an mk3 now means no new glass until the end of the season or next season (and in theory, I could do a 6d now then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3)...

Add in another factor, I am getting married this year, and weddings are freaking expensive!!!!!!

So whats the better option, a 5d3/6d combo with top end glass? Or, 2 mk3's and no moves on glass?

You suggest the perfect solution yourself 6d now, then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3.

The 6D is pretty good (I don't think I need to tell you that) but it appears a compromise over the 5D3 - though in reality it might not be a compromise at all for shooting weddings ... after all prior to the introduction of the 5D3, more than half the weddings were clicked with the good old 5D2 and the 6D is even better.

BTW, do you feel a used 5D2 will not suit your purpose as a backup / second body? Why not get a used 5d2 AND glass right now - I would say better glass would improve IQ more than a 6D over a 5D2.

It's entirely my opinion, Skirball may differ

Cheers ... J.R.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

For me, this is why I am considering the 6d over the 5d3 as a backup/secondary body. This is only my second season shooting weddings. So my income is not at the level it should be, and I want my shots to be as good as they can be. So a secondary body is needed, mostly so I can get 2 uniquely composed shots without having to run to the bag to swap lenses, and also for the piece of mind a second body gives you (the good old just in case!) From that perspective, the mk3 gets a big extra point because then I have no falloff in capabilities. Now lets add in the other factors. I am currently using the older non-IS 70-200 2.8. I am interested in upgrading to the v2 IS because IS would improve my keeper rate at the long end, and give me more flexibility in Shutter speed. I'm also considering options with my 24-70 v1, seeling it and upgrading to the v2, or, fill in the gap with another prime (either the 24mm or the 35mm). I would also really like to snag a 135 f2...

I can't make bold moves with glass if I spend 3k on a body, an mk3 now means no new glass until the end of the season or next season (and in theory, I could do a 6d now then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3)...

Add in another factor, I am getting married this year, and weddings are freaking expensive!!!!!!

So whats the better option, a 5d3/6d combo with top end glass? Or, 2 mk3's and no moves on glass?

You suggest the perfect solution yourself 6d now, then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3.

The 6D is pretty good (I don't think I need to tell you that) but it appears a compromise over the 5D3 - though in reality it might not be a compromise at all for shooting weddings ... after all prior to the introduction of the 5D3, more than half the weddings were clicked with the good old 5D2 and the 6D is even better.

BTW, do you feel a used 5D2 will not suit your purpose as a backup / second body? Why not get a used 5d2 AND glass right now - I would say better glass would improve IQ more than a 6D over a 5D2.

It's entirely my opinion, Skirball may differ

Cheers ... J.R.

I considered a 5d2 (have been actually since before there was a 6d). The 5d2 is a great body, but, its so close (used price even) in price to the 6d that it's a hard sell (LOL, b&h still has new 5d2's with a price tag of 2199!!!!) my fear in buying a 5d2 would be that it would sit in the bag for the vast majority of the day - it would get lots of use for outdoor ceremonies, but indoors I can see myself heavily favoring the mk3 (leaving the mk2 as an expensive lens holder). I just sent a rental 6d back to lensrentals... I had kind of hoped that using a 6d would give me more reasons to opt for the mk3, but, I was pleasantly surprised, which makes the decision that much harder because it is a fun little camera to use (and yeah, weight is a factor, i rather like the idea of being able to switch to the 6d later on in the day - lighter, easier to move and yeah, deep into the reception at weddings the weight does become an issue). It does in fact do quite well at the high ISO's too, and I like to do a combo of natural light, on cam light and off cam light --- I think the 6d outshines the 5d2 for those situations (thinking reception, ambient light, 16-35mm lens...center point is just fine for that kind of stuff!)

Edit: I will admit, at MAP price ---I would not opt for a 6d at $2099...the biggest reason I am considering it is because B&H is still offering it at $1779. IF i can find a refurb 5d3 for $2400 then that is what i get (it would make my glass plans more difficult, but still possible), but at $2800 used, and $3100 new...that would end up being the only gear move I made this year...

 

[J.R.]

The 5d3 makes more sense than a 6D, maybe not too you but that doesn't mean those advocating the 5d3over the 6D are wrong or justifying their purchase.

I'm not saying advocating it as a great camera is wrong, I simply think that there is a majorit here that vocally chant the 5d3 mantra regardless of a prospective users background, financials, or type of shooting s/he does. Look through the forums on here, people suggest it before they even know what people shoot. Yes, it's a great camera, but there are many situations when a lesser camera can do every bit as good. Hell, a lot of people on here could take a moderately priced Point and Shoot and capture a landscape pic better than half the crap that's put on Flickr everyday from high end dSLRs. Why? Because 61 points doesn't help when the earth doesn't move. And you don't need 25.6k ISO if the lights good. Do I care that some guy goes online and decides he needs a 1DX to capture photos of his granddaughter to put on Facebook? No, but it'd be nice if when he went online there wasn't an overwhelming chorus convincing him that he needs to do so.

You must not have visited CR for very long. There are lots of balanced posts out here, probably more than you think.

BTW, you didn't like the "balanced" idea of RLPhoto suggesting a used 5D2 over the 6D - really, there is not that much of a difference between the two cameras in the field.

The sales of the 5d3 have far outstripped those of the 6D and for good reason.

I could argue that that proves my point every much as you yours.

No you can't, unless your argument borders on the assumption that you know what you are doing while the others don't. It is undeniable that the 5D3 is the better camera so why is it a sin in your eyes if posters recommend it to someone who comes asking for an opinion?

Cutting the chase, most (please see that I say most, not all) 6D users will want to get a 5D3 but the chances of the opposite happening are range right up there between slim and none

 

[J.R.]

For me, this is why I am considering the 6d over the 5d3 as a backup/secondary body. This is only my second season shooting weddings. So my income is not at the level it should be, and I want my shots to be as good as they can be. So a secondary body is needed, mostly so I can get 2 uniquely composed shots without having to run to the bag to swap lenses, and also for the piece of mind a second body gives you (the good old just in case!) From that perspective, the mk3 gets a big extra point because then I have no falloff in capabilities. Now lets add in the other factors. I am currently using the older non-IS 70-200 2.8. I am interested in upgrading to the v2 IS because IS would improve my keeper rate at the long end, and give me more flexibility in Shutter speed. I'm also considering options with my 24-70 v1, seeling it and upgrading to the v2, or, fill in the gap with another prime (either the 24mm or the 35mm). I would also really like to snag a 135 f2...

I can't make bold moves with glass if I spend 3k on a body, an mk3 now means no new glass until the end of the season or next season (and in theory, I could do a 6d now then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3)...

Add in another factor, I am getting married this year, and weddings are freaking expensive!!!!!!

So whats the better option, a 5d3/6d combo with top end glass? Or, 2 mk3's and no moves on glass?

You suggest the perfect solution yourself 6d now, then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3.

The 6D is pretty good (I don't think I need to tell you that) but it appears a compromise over the 5D3 - though in reality it might not be a compromise at all for shooting weddings ... after all prior to the introduction of the 5D3, more than half the weddings were clicked with the good old 5D2 and the 6D is even better.

BTW, do you feel a used 5D2 will not suit your purpose as a backup / second body? Why not get a used 5d2 AND glass right now - I would say better glass would improve IQ more than a 6D over a 5D2.

It's entirely my opinion, Skirball may differ

Cheers ... J.R.

I considered a 5d2 (have been actually since before there was a 6d). The 5d2 is a great body, but, its so close (used price even) in price to the 6d that it's a hard sell (LOL, b&h still has new 5d2's with a price tag of 2199!!!!) my fear in buying a 5d2 would be that it would sit in the bag for the vast majority of the day - it would get lots of use for outdoor ceremonies, but indoors I can see myself heavily favoring the mk3 (leaving the mk2 as an expensive lens holder). I just sent a rental 6d back to lensrentals... I had kind of hoped that using a 6d would give me more reasons to opt for the mk3, but, I was pleasantly surprised, which makes the decision that much harder because it is a fun little camera to use (and yeah, weight is a factor, i rather like the idea of being able to switch to the 6d later on in the day - lighter, easier to move and yeah, deep into the reception at weddings the weight does become an issue). It does in fact do quite well at the high ISO's too, and I like to do a combo of natural light, on cam light and off cam light --- I think the 6d outshines the 5d2 for those situations (thinking reception, ambient light, 16-35mm lens...center point is just fine for that kind of stuff!)

Edit: I will admit, at MAP price ---I would not opt for a 6d at $2099...the biggest reason I am considering it is because B&H is still offering it at $1779. IF i can find a refurb 5d3 for $2400 then that is what i get (it would make my glass plans more difficult, but still possible), but at $2800 used, and $3100 new...that would end up being the only gear move I made this year...

I'd say, get a 6D and some glass.

5D3 + good glass = good photos
6D + better glass = better photos

Part of my reason for buying the 6D as a backup body over the 5D3 was that I was roughly in the same lens-upgrade boat wanting to upgrade my lenses with the 70-200 f/2.8 II, the 24-70 f/2.8 II and a few more. I am saving up for the lenses but was unwilling to blow an extra $ 1,500 for the 5D3 at this moment in time.

 

[Wilmark]

After reading the Crazy... go Nikon? thread under "Third party manufacturers", I think the D800 is the best compliment to my 5D3. Sure I will have to buy some extra glass - but you cannot beat the DR and the shadow detail. I shoot alot of wide angle, and long exposures. The Nikon glass is great at wide angle. Ill get one of the best wide zooms say the 14 -24 and a couple of general purpose zooms - up to maybe 300mm and leave the long stuff for the 5D3. that way i'll have duplication and alot of extra functionality.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

For me, this is why I am considering the 6d over the 5d3 as a backup/secondary body. This is only my second season shooting weddings. So my income is not at the level it should be, and I want my shots to be as good as they can be. So a secondary body is needed, mostly so I can get 2 uniquely composed shots without having to run to the bag to swap lenses, and also for the piece of mind a second body gives you (the good old just in case!) From that perspective, the mk3 gets a big extra point because then I have no falloff in capabilities. Now lets add in the other factors. I am currently using the older non-IS 70-200 2.8. I am interested in upgrading to the v2 IS because IS would improve my keeper rate at the long end, and give me more flexibility in Shutter speed. I'm also considering options with my 24-70 v1, seeling it and upgrading to the v2, or, fill in the gap with another prime (either the 24mm or the 35mm). I would also really like to snag a 135 f2...

I can't make bold moves with glass if I spend 3k on a body, an mk3 now means no new glass until the end of the season or next season (and in theory, I could do a 6d now then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3)...

Add in another factor, I am getting married this year, and weddings are freaking expensive!!!!!!

So whats the better option, a 5d3/6d combo with top end glass? Or, 2 mk3's and no moves on glass?

You suggest the perfect solution yourself 6d now, then glass, then sell the 6d over the winter and snag a used mk3.

The 6D is pretty good (I don't think I need to tell you that) but it appears a compromise over the 5D3 - though in reality it might not be a compromise at all for shooting weddings ... after all prior to the introduction of the 5D3, more than half the weddings were clicked with the good old 5D2 and the 6D is even better.

BTW, do you feel a used 5D2 will not suit your purpose as a backup / second body? Why not get a used 5d2 AND glass right now - I would say better glass would improve IQ more than a 6D over a 5D2.

It's entirely my opinion, Skirball may differ

Cheers ... J.R.

I considered a 5d2 (have been actually since before there was a 6d). The 5d2 is a great body, but, its so close (used price even) in price to the 6d that it's a hard sell (LOL, b&h still has new 5d2's with a price tag of 2199!!!!) my fear in buying a 5d2 would be that it would sit in the bag for the vast majority of the day - it would get lots of use for outdoor ceremonies, but indoors I can see myself heavily favoring the mk3 (leaving the mk2 as an expensive lens holder). I just sent a rental 6d back to lensrentals... I had kind of hoped that using a 6d would give me more reasons to opt for the mk3, but, I was pleasantly surprised, which makes the decision that much harder because it is a fun little camera to use (and yeah, weight is a factor, i rather like the idea of being able to switch to the 6d later on in the day - lighter, easier to move and yeah, deep into the reception at weddings the weight does become an issue). It does in fact do quite well at the high ISO's too, and I like to do a combo of natural light, on cam light and off cam light --- I think the 6d outshines the 5d2 for those situations (thinking reception, ambient light, 16-35mm lens...center point is just fine for that kind of stuff!)

Edit: I will admit, at MAP price ---I would not opt for a 6d at $2099...the biggest reason I am considering it is because B&H is still offering it at $1779. IF i can find a refurb 5d3 for $2400 then that is what i get (it would make my glass plans more difficult, but still possible), but at $2800 used, and $3100 new...that would end up being the only gear move I made this year...

I'd say, get a 6D and some glass.

5D3 + good glass = good photos
6D + better glass = better photos

Part of my reason for buying the 6D as a backup body over the 5D3 was that I was roughly in the same lens-upgrade boat wanting to upgrade my lenses with the 70-200 f/2.8 II, the 24-70 f/2.8 II and a few more. I am saving up for the lenses but was unwilling to blow an extra $ 1,500 for the 5D3 at this moment in time.

yup. I think my threshold price for a backup body is $2500 if I want to make any other moves with glass this season.

 

[Marsu42]

5D3 + good glass = good photos
6D + better glass = better photos

My thinking exactly (and Canon's, that's why they get away with the 6d specs) - except if the shots aren't in focus, i.e. the keeper rate is to low for the desired application, or the faster fps really make a difference like for sports.

 

[Skirball]

BTW, you didn't like the "balanced" idea of RLPhoto suggesting a used 5D2 over the 6D - really, there is not that much of a difference between the two cameras in the field.

That has nothing to do with it. I believe I even addressed this in this thread, but I'll say it again. I, personally, don't want to buy used for an electronic at this price. It's just not worth my piece of mind. I have no problem with refurbished, but to me $1600 is a lot of money for a camera, and it's worth a couple hundred to me for that piece of mind (and some fluff tossed in for good measure. I know a lot of people who have had no issues buying used, and good for them. I'm glad to see things get reused instead of tossed and replaced. But I'm just not willing to do it for an electronic of this complexity. Lens, fine, but I won't do it for a body.

The sales of the 5d3 have far outstripped those of the 6D and for good reason.

I could argue that that proves my point every much as you yours.

No you can't, unless your argument borders on the assumption that you know what you are doing while the others don't.

I have a hard time following your train of thought, it seems to jump around. So what are you arguing, that the fact there are more sales of 5d3 than 6D means it's a better value? Please, there are far too many variable involved to draw any conclusion.

Cutting the chase, most (please see that I say most, not all) 6D users will want to get a 5D3 but the chances of the opposite happening are range right up there between slim and none

See, this is the heart of the matter, and I disagree. It's not that everyone is recommending the 5D3 , it's that their doing it with this thought behind it. That it's a compromise, that we couldn't achieve 5d3 status, so we settle for 6D It's wrong, we don't all feel that way.

There have been several people on here that said they bought the 5d3 first and returned it for a 6D and are happy with that decision. I think at least one of them posted in this very thread; so I don't know about your slim to none. There are many more who have repeatedly stated they love their 6D, so I'm going to put them in the not upgrading camp. That's what I'm trying to get at: there is a niche for the 6D and it's not full of sulking, jealous paupers who dream of one day upgrading. It's a fine camera that fits our needs. There are people whose needs fit the 5D3. It's ok to have both.

 

[J.R.]

BTW, you didn't like the "balanced" idea of RLPhoto suggesting a used 5D2 over the 6D - really, there is not that much of a difference between the two cameras in the field.

That has nothing to do with it. I believe I even addressed this in this thread, but I'll say it again. I, personally, don't want to buy used for an electronic at this price. It's just not worth my piece of mind. I have no problem with refurbished, but to me $1600 is a lot of money for a camera, and it's worth a couple hundred to me for that piece of mind (and some fluff tossed in for good measure. I know a lot of people who have had no issues buying used, and good for them. I'm glad to see things get reused instead of tossed and replaced. But I'm just not willing to do it for an electronic of this complexity. Lens, fine, but I won't do it for a body.

The sales of the 5d3 have far outstripped those of the 6D and for good reason.

I could argue that that proves my point every much as you yours.

No you can't, unless your argument borders on the assumption that you know what you are doing while the others don't.

I have a hard time following your train of thought, it seems to jump around. So what are you arguing, that the fact there are more sales of 5d3 than 6D means it's a better value? Please, there are far too many variable involved to draw any conclusion.

Cutting the chase, most (please see that I say most, not all) 6D users will want to get a 5D3 but the chances of the opposite happening are range right up there between slim and none

See, this is the heart of the matter, and I disagree. It's not that everyone is recommending the 5D3 , it's that their doing it with this thought behind it. That it's a compromise, that we couldn't achieve 5d3 status, so we settle for 6D It's wrong, we don't all feel that way.

There have been several people on here that said they bought the 5d3 first and returned it for a 6D and are happy with that decision. I think at least one of them posted in this very thread; so I don't know about your slim to none. There are many more who have repeatedly stated they love their 6D, so I'm going to put them in the not upgrading camp. That's what I'm trying to get at: there is a niche for the 6D and it's not full of sulking, jealous paupers who dream of one day upgrading. It's a fine camera that fits our needs. There are people whose needs fit the 5D3. It's ok to have both.

Please note, I didn't say that, YOU DID!

I like my 6D but another 5d3 would have been better. Aspiring for something better doesn't make someone a sulking, jealous, pauper as you suggest.

A couple of users returning the 5d3 for a 6d would fall under "slim".

Losing you cool and making wild allegations seemingly claiming that I am suggesting the 6D users are sulking, jealous, paupers is uncalled for. I'm as entitled to my views as you are to yours and there is no reason for you to try to burn me here.

Its better to agree to disagree and move on! Back and forth arguing doesn't resolve anything,