6D Autofocus not impressive

Status
Not open for further replies.
RLPhoto said:
So, where does the 6D fall in? A market where users who NEED Wifi Controls and GPS built in camera. (Considering Eye-fi cards are a good compromise but don't allow control)

A market for users who want a $1600 camera, not a $2400 camera.

I'm happy for you and your financial situation that this is a few bucks for you, it's not for a lot of people. That's 50% more for an AF that I don't think I need. Evidently there's a lot of people that feel the same way. It's ok that you don't, now just try to open your mind a bit and accept that not everyone thinks the way you do.
 
Upvote 0
Skirball said:
RLPhoto said:
So, where does the 6D fall in? A market where users who NEED Wifi Controls and GPS built in camera. (Considering Eye-fi cards are a good compromise but don't allow control)

A market for users who want a $1600 camera, not a $2400 camera.

More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P
 
Upvote 0
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!
 
Upvote 0
Wildfire said:
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!

Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.
 
Upvote 0
Marsu42 said:
Chuck Alaimo said:
Also, got to shoot an event with the 6d today - dyngus day...there was dancing..

Thanks for the pics, but the most important information for me is to get real life impressions about how the 6d feels in real life, stress shooting conditions where different camera bodies do make a difference.

Some good or bad shots alone don't mean anything, you can get them out of any half-decent dlsr, though the keeper rate, constraints by limited fps/af system & the trust into the gear is much more important. But the 6d seems to do ok - and it should, in 2013 even @€1800 this is pretty damn expensive for what it is.

Marsu, here are some more thoughts on it. IT's really not a bad little camera. I did not find the limited AF to be much of an issue, at least in my situation (that's where my 5d3 shines). I don't think anybody would be able to look at my images and be able to say, oh that ones obviously from the 6d. Colors are good, detail is good. From an IQ standpoint, I see no red flags at all. It's in the little things that make me wonder what to do. If i buy one it will be a compromise.

Likes:

Weight - the 6d with 16-35 lens attached weighs about as much as my gripped 5d3 with no lens attached. I can see that being a huge plus for full day wedding coverage

IQ - the images do look pretty damn good. I can't say too much on keeper rates because I was overshooting with it (not because I didn't trust it - but because it was a retal body and i wanted to view as many images as i possibly could)

AF - that center point is pretty damn accurate and I couldn't find many lighting situations where the 6d said no, can't do it (without a flash attached!)

ISO - Very impressed with how well the 6d did at high ISO's. Files are very usable in the even at 12,800-25,600

Wifi- this is quite a neat feature. it may or may not be useful (doing some final tests on it today before packaging it up - actually right now I am doing it - with the camera set to never power off, just making sure i can still access the camera after my phone goes to sleep mode - also going to try the remote triggers again with the live view off) PS - tests done - the wifi does seem to just shut right off and you need to access both camera and phone to get it back going - so that limits what can be done a bit ---- and - if you turn the liveview off on the the phone ap, you can trigger off cam lights...)

Dislikes:

no sync port - this would be a deal breaker if it were to be my main body.

AF - once the light gets dim the outer points become useless, not a deal breaker though because the center is solid

sync speed - I do wish it could sync at 1/200, but, I don't forsee this being too much of an issue

max shutter of 1/4000 - There will be situations where this will limit options, but again, not enough of an issue to be a deal breaker (this is another one of those if i didn't have a 5d3 as a primary body this would be a bigger issue)

read/write speeds - SD is slow!!!!! This may be the back breaker for me with it. At the small wedding yesterday, it was in big greenhouse and the light was shifting a lot, roaming clouds so it would get real bright real quick and if i fired a burst of 3-4 shots and went to get a quick preview to make sure i compensated, it would hang on the 'busy' screen for longer than I'd like.

battery life - battery does drain quite fast when wifi is enabled (note, I have no use for gps so i never tried using that). Battery life is fine without using wifi, but, with that on be careful!


Other thoughts. given the choice for backup bodies, at regular prices I can't see shelling out 3k when the 6d performs as well as I have witnessed. If i can find a used or refurb 5d3 for around $2500, then the choice becomes harder. this also depends on what deals pop up for either camera. If I see another deal for a 6d at $1800, it will be hard to say no

RLPhoto said:
Why would anyone buy a 6D when a refurb 5D3 is only a few bucks more?

My answer - if you are on a 5d2 and looking to upgrade, yeah, snag the 5d3. I see the 6d as filling two niches - those looking to upgrade from crop to FF and those who are on a 5d3 and are looking to upgrade their backup. I would recommend the 6d for those running the 5d3 5d2 combo - IQ is just as good as mk2 but its high ISO abilities make the 6d a much better backup than a 5d2.

As to whether the 6d is the right solution for you? It really depends on what you shoot. If your in lots of controlled light and shoot between ISO 100-800 mostly, then the 5d2 is probably the better value for you. If your shooting weddings though, the 6d performs really well at high ISO's, this beats out the 5d2 and then some. If you shoot sports, the 6d won't be what you need - FPS is not that high and the read/write speeds will leave you waiting more than shooting.

back to the question of, is the 6d the answer? I am still debating this myself. Not sure which way I will go. It will depend on a lot of things like how many more weddings will I book this year, what happens with deals and rebates, and what happens with the used/refurb market. If i were to see a 5d3 refurb for $2400 and actually had the $2400 in my account, then there I go! But, I have noticed that those refurbs tend to sell quickly. And used ones are still pricey - B&H had one up a few weeks back for $2800. I will say this though, after a hands on with the 6d, it does make my decision harder because it is quite a capable little body.
 
Upvote 0
RLPhoto said:
Wildfire said:
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!

Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.

The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.
 
Upvote 0
Chuck Alaimo said:
The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.

I agree and surely these other improvements must carry some weight?

quiet mode
full support for rt flashes
faster FPS
7x bracketing
dual afma for zooms
flexible min/max auto-iso
min shutter speed setting

As has been said on this forum (correctly) a camera is so much more that a sensor. I really believe that if Canon had just put 11 good cross AF points in the 6D there wouldn’t be any arguments about 6D over 5D2 and that wouldn’t have taken anything away from the 5D3.
 
Upvote 0
Chuck Alaimo said:
RLPhoto said:
Wildfire said:
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!

Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.

The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.

I never said the 6D is a bad camera, I just simply stated its a bad value currently.
 
Upvote 0
I purchased the 6d over the 5d mark ii back in December. My primary reason for doing so was that I was upgrading from a canon 60d and the improvements in image quality in low light were a huge factor for us as wedding photographers. My wife used it last Saturday to do a newborn shoot in a living room with fairly low light, shot at iso 5000, and got great results.

As far as the speed of SD cards go, I have not shot with a CF based camera, but I did make sure to by one of the new SD UHS-1 card since the 6d supports it. I don't shoot sports or other things that often require me to shoot more than 5 or 6 frames in rapid succession, but I did some of my own tests to see how fast it would write raw files in burst mode once the buffer filled up. From what I can tell it would clear an raw image and be ready to take another every .6 seconds (my card is rated at 45mbs). Since each image is around 20 Mb, that means I am getting write speeds of around 35 mbs. There are faster cards out there and I assume it would increase the write speed since the 6D is UHS-1 compatible. Here is someone else's take on UHS-1 vs CF
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11175.15

So far the camera has proven to be a great buy for us because of the low light capabilities.
 
Upvote 0
RLPhoto said:
Chuck Alaimo said:
RLPhoto said:
Wildfire said:
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!

Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.

The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.

I never said the 6D is a bad camera, I just simply stated its a bad value currently.

It's funny, because back in September everyone thought that price was a great price for a 5d2. People were talking about it being a steal at $1700. You recommended some guy buy one for $1650 off Craig's List.
 
Upvote 0
Skirball said:
RLPhoto said:
Chuck Alaimo said:
RLPhoto said:
Wildfire said:
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!

Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.

The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.

I never said the 6D is a bad camera, I just simply stated its a bad value currently.

It's funny, because back in September everyone thought that price was a great price for a 5d2. People were talking about it being a steal at $1700. You recommended some guy buy one for $1650 off Craig's List.

It was a good deal at the time, now I would pay 1200-1400$ for a 5D2. It's the same good 'ol 5D2. Why pay 2000$ for 6D for what essentially is a 5D2?
 
Upvote 0
RLPhoto said:
Skirball said:
RLPhoto said:
Chuck Alaimo said:
RLPhoto said:
Wildfire said:
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!

Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.

The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.

I never said the 6D is a bad camera, I just simply stated its a bad value currently.

It's funny, because back in September everyone thought that price was a great price for a 5d2. People were talking about it being a steal at $1700. You recommended some guy buy one for $1650 off Craig's List.

It was a good deal at the time, now I would pay 1200-1400$ for a 5D2. It's the same good 'ol 5D2. Why pay 2000$ for 6D for what essentially is a 5D2?

Because it isn't! $1400 for a body that is only good up to ISO 3200, vs $2000 for a body that can produce clean files up to ISO 25,600???? That means a lot if you shoot in low light often
 
Upvote 0
Chuck Alaimo said:
RLPhoto said:
Skirball said:
RLPhoto said:
Chuck Alaimo said:
RLPhoto said:
Wildfire said:
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!

Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.

The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.

I never said the 6D is a bad camera, I just simply stated its a bad value currently.

It's funny, because back in September everyone thought that price was a great price for a 5d2. People were talking about it being a steal at $1700. You recommended some guy buy one for $1650 off Craig's List.

It was a good deal at the time, now I would pay 1200-1400$ for a 5D2. It's the same good 'ol 5D2. Why pay 2000$ for 6D for what essentially is a 5D2?

Because it isn't! $1400 for a body that is only good up to ISO 3200, vs $2000 for a body that can produce clean files up to ISO 25,600???? That means a lot if you shoot in low light often

Again, if we're going to quibble over numbers at least quote the right ones. It's under $1800 on Amazon, and has been that for over a month.

I like my 6D and all, but calling it clean at 25.6k is a stretch.
 
Upvote 0
Skirball said:
Chuck Alaimo said:
RLPhoto said:
Skirball said:
RLPhoto said:
Chuck Alaimo said:
RLPhoto said:
Wildfire said:
RLPhoto said:
More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$. :P

Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!

Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.

The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.

I never said the 6D is a bad camera, I just simply stated its a bad value currently.

It's funny, because back in September everyone thought that price was a great price for a 5d2. People were talking about it being a steal at $1700. You recommended some guy buy one for $1650 off Craig's List.

It was a good deal at the time, now I would pay 1200-1400$ for a 5D2. It's the same good 'ol 5D2. Why pay 2000$ for 6D for what essentially is a 5D2?

Because it isn't! $1400 for a body that is only good up to ISO 3200, vs $2000 for a body that can produce clean files up to ISO 25,600???? That means a lot if you shoot in low light often

Again, if we're going to quibble over numbers at least quote the right ones. It's under $1800 on Amazon, and has been that for over a month.

I like my 6D and all, but calling it clean at 25.6k is a stretch.

Ok, clean maybe not...usable though, yes...It is clean as hell though at 6400, and pretty damn good up through to 12,800. Either way, still a step up from the 5d2.
 
Upvote 0
RLPhoto said:
2000$ for 6D or 2375$ for a Refurbed MK3? You all are quibbling for the 500$ difference from the 5D2 to the 6D, which is minimal gains, while from the 6D to the 5D3 is day-night difference. ???

agreed...5d3 is much better than the 6d. But, finding one at $2400 is a bit more difficult. Yes they do pop up (never when I actually have the $$$ to snag one!!!!), but it's not like refurb mk3's are flooding the market. They pop up and then they're gone real quick. I see more frequently used ones starting at $2750. B&H is still doing a deal on the 6d --- 6d +16 gig sd card + a little shoulder bag for $1899. So we're more realistically talking about a $1000 difference. And if we're talking brand new - $3150.

All of this is very subjective --- what are your needs? Everyones are different. I have a mk3 and need a backup body. The 6d has many good selling points to me, unless it's timed right and I can find a refurb mk3. But in regards to that, I want this decision to be made by mid may. My side note is that I am trying to finance my own wedding, and yeah, that extra $1000 may make a big difference for me (and yeah, there are other buying decisions too, I have some glass in mind!).

Either way, I still feel that the 6d is better value than the mk2
 
Upvote 0
I considered the 6D briefly. I have shot weddings for years with my 1dm3 and 5dc. Guess what if i took 200 images during a 10hr wedding i was surprised. The 1dm3 was my go to. There are too many situations where tracking and focus speed are absolutely necessary shooting weddings. I'd rather have the confidence i get the shot and in focus. Not to say the 5dc didn't take absolutely stellar images, its more that I didn't trust it or its surrounding points. Even though the images would be even better on the 6d, i still wouldn't have confidence in it so i decided to take a pass on it. Really i am holding out for a 7D2. If only it were available now like the 5dm3 was this time last year id have it now. I decided to get a 7d in the mean time. Now i won't worry about focus or taking many images with that camera in a wedding. I know its not a king in low light but i can work with it.
 
Upvote 0
RLPhoto said:
Skirball said:
As I said in my post, I needed to buy a 24-105. It's a matter of perspective, but in my situation it was another $1000 to add to the cost if I was to buy new.

24-105L's are dime a dozen now. Many people are stripping the kit lenses out and selling them second hand for 750-850$ brand new in box. Even the 2350$ kit from amazon, when selling the 24-105L for the market price, at best its 1600$ for the body, Minus the effort and time to sell the kit lens.

While If you purchase the 5D3, sure its a few more dollars but your getting alot more camera for not alot more monies. If you really want value per $$$, a used 5D2 is unbeatable. So, where does the 6D fall in? A market where users who NEED Wifi Controls and GPS built in camera. (Considering Eye-fi cards are a good compromise but don't allow control)

You situation also assumes that the person must buy a kit. What if they don't want the kit lens? :P

I'm not knocking any 6D users, I just feel canon didn't do it justice.

I sold my 24-105 brand new $900
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.