6D Autofocus not impressive

[bdunbar79]

Maybe I'm reading the post wrong. But the OP's subject line says it's not impressive. Not that it doesn't work, or that it's not satisfactory, it states that it's not impressive. Well, it's not impressive. It works ok and can do its job but it's nothing outstanding. The 1Dx's AF on the other hand, is impressive.

 

[dgatwood]

One big thing to consider with the 6d is that they've put wifi and gps into the body, which adds up to be about $700-800 in accessories if these things were not to be added. Take that amount off the current price of the 6d and you've got yourself an $1100 full frame camera. I don't know about you, but I'm sure as hell not expecting a lot in terms of AF or anything for that matter when I'm paying that much for full frame. Just something to consider.

A GPS chip typically adds somewhere between two and five dollars to a device's bill of materials, and Wi-Fi is not much more expensive. There is, of course, the additional cost of the antennas, but either way, it isn't $700-800 worth of hardware. Drop two zeroes and your estimate would only be slightly low.

Marketing heads don't work that way. Say $$ price of accessories (not bought) * number of potential buyers of these = Unrealized profits. I'd say $300 off that current retail offer from Canon point of view.

The marketing folks I know would almost certainly use a more realistic equation: the price of the accessories times the percentage of camera buyers who would have actually bought those accessories. That's a big difference, particularly when you're talking about the difference between an add-on accessory and something built into a device.

I'd imagine that most users would use GPS if it were in the body. However, I doubt more than 1% of Canon camera users would even consider using an add-on GPS receiver, because they're clumsy. Of that 1%, probably 90% own an iPhone or Android phone that can run a free GPS logger, which means that 1% is now a fraction of a percent.

Based on that, if the retail price is $300, then the actual cost in terms of lost sales is probably measured in pennies. Even after adding that to the BOM cost, it is still lost in the noise.

Also, there's another loss that probably more than counteracts that loss—the folks who decide to use an iPhone that supports geotagging instead of their DSLR that lacks that feature. If even one out of every 10,000 people who shoots with a low-end DSLR decides to forgo an upgrade because they find themselves shooting more photos with their phones, the theoretical loss of accessory sales looks like a drop in the bucket.

 

[CarlTN]

Maybe I'm reading the post wrong. But the OP's subject line says it's not impressive. Not that it doesn't work, or that it's not satisfactory, it states that it's not impressive. Well, it's not impressive. It works ok and can do its job but it's nothing outstanding. The 1Dx's AF on the other hand, is impressive.

My neighbor/cousin bought a 1DX, but I still haven't gotten to play with it much. He's relegating his 5D3 as "the wife's camera"!

Well, I disagree with the premise of this whole thread, because...why does the 6D's autofocus need to be impressive? I would argue that it does not need to be. It needs to simply function well, which it does. I've never had a problem locking onto objects moving away from me, or towards me. I've never had any problems at all in servo mode. The only time my shots aren't sharp, is when I'm in single shot AF mode, when I should have been in servo (and didn't take the time to multi-half-press).

Frankly, the 6D is an awesome camera for the money. And that's what's impressive! It also feels light as a feather with my 70-200 f/4 lens...where my cousin's 1DX with 70-200 f/2.8 mounted, feels like you're holding three bricks in your hands. He finally bought a monopod, haha...along with something else I suggested he buy...a 300 f/4L. He loves using it with the 1.4x converter...it's a lot easier to carry around than his 600 f/4. He's 73 years old...So now his 70-200 is relegated to event shooting, where it belongs!

I snapped a RAW image at dusk with the above 1DX / 300 f/4 + 1.4x setup, and the chrominance noise at ISO 25.6k, looked about like what my 6D does at ISO 12,800 or 16,000. The luminance noise looked about identical to what the 6D does at the same 25.6k. However, the luminance noise of some of his 1DX shots at lower ISO, around 5000...again remind me of the 5D3. It's larger and coarser in grain size than the 6D's is...I don't care if any of you self proclaimed experts disagree. My eyes aren't lying here. I'm not saying the 6D's sensor is "superior", but I definitely would miss it if I had to give it up and use a 1DX all the time. My point is, the 1DX is not perfect...

 

[J.R.]

I wish the 6D were available for $ 1,100 WITHOUT the GPS and the WiFi. Not everyone wants these features built into the camera.

Me too. I wonder if it would ever be economically viable for Canon to turn out a model like this?

It's called a used 5d2.

Canon isn’t going to strip things off and offer a budget version unless their research tells them they are losing shares on a market. They did just that on the 6D to keep the same price point held by the 5d2 when they launched the 5d3 on a higher tier. Judging by the amount of people shooting 5d3s, I’d say they’re not worried about having their price points set too high on the 6D.

True - Though IMO the 6D was brought to the market only to compete with the D600. Canon also probably introduced the 6D as a new product with the WiFi and GPS rather than a rehashed 5D2. I don't think a $ 1,100 FF will ever be released by Canon unless the competition drives them to it.

 

[eml58]

I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)

Having said that, I've looked on CR at the 6D Images site, I'm Damned Impressed with what The People there are doing with the 6D, to the extent I bought the Camera for my Lad, cant see too much wrong with it, No, it doesn't have 61 Point Focus system, but refer to Line one in this Post, the Camera suits a Budget, has all the Bells & whistles for that Budget, and in the right Hands, produces pretty fine Images.

I'de like a couple of the Bells & Whistles built into the 1Dx & 5DMK III that the cheaper 6D has, but it gives me a reason to buy in a year or so the 1Dxs & the 5DMKIV.

 

[J.R.]

I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)

That's exactly the reason why the 6D's AF was kept more or less the same as the 5D2 by Canon.

 

[bdunbar79]

Maybe I'm reading the post wrong. But the OP's subject line says it's not impressive. Not that it doesn't work, or that it's not satisfactory, it states that it's not impressive. Well, it's not impressive. It works ok and can do its job but it's nothing outstanding. The 1Dx's AF on the other hand, is impressive.

My neighbor/cousin bought a 1DX, but I still haven't gotten to play with it much. He's relegating his 5D3 as "the wife's camera"!

Well, I disagree with the premise of this whole thread, because...why does the 6D's autofocus need to be impressive? I would argue that it does not need to be. It needs to simply function well, which it does. I've never had a problem locking onto objects moving away from me, or towards me. I've never had any problems at all in servo mode. The only time my shots aren't sharp, is when I'm in single shot AF mode, when I should have been in servo (and didn't take the time to multi-half-press).

Frankly, the 6D is an awesome camera for the money. And that's what's impressive! It also feels light as a feather with my 70-200 f/4 lens...where my cousin's 1DX with 70-200 f/2.8 mounted, feels like you're holding three bricks in your hands. He finally bought a monopod, haha...along with something else I suggested he buy...a 300 f/4L. He loves using it with the 1.4x converter...it's a lot easier to carry around than his 600 f/4. He's 73 years old...So now his 70-200 is relegated to event shooting, where it belongs!

I snapped a RAW image at dusk with the above 1DX / 300 f/4 + 1.4x setup, and the chrominance noise at ISO 25.6k, looked about like what my 6D does at ISO 12,800 or 16,000. The luminance noise looked about identical to what the 6D does at the same 25.6k. However, the luminance noise of some of his 1DX shots at lower ISO, around 5000...again remind me of the 5D3. It's larger and coarser in grain size than the 6D's is...I don't care if any of you self proclaimed experts disagree. My eyes aren't lying here. I'm not saying the 6D's sensor is "superior", but I definitely would miss it if I had to give it up and use a 1DX all the time. My point is, the 1DX is not perfect...

Side issues again.

 

[Skirball]

I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)

Likewise, people are a little miffed that the 6D has less cross points than a Rebel ($750).

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)

Likewise, people are a little miffed that the 6D has less cross points than a Rebel ($750).

Apples and oranges... FF vs Crop. if the 6d was a 1.6 crop for 2k then yeah, let the miffing begin. But, the 6d is a FF camera with outstanding high ISO performance. A rebel can't touch that.

When it comes to stuff like this, there are always compromises. Ifg you want the bells and whistles, then you grab a 5d3 or a 1dx. But if that's out of your reach, then your choice is used 5d2, 6d, or a high end crop body. the high end crop may get you a more robust AF, but there is a trade off in overall IQ and ISO performance. What area are you willing to compromise in?

 

[Sporgon]

I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)

Likewise, people are a little miffed that the 6D has less cross points than a Rebel ($750).

I wouldn't get too hung up on x type sensors. There are situations where this type can become 'confused', yet a | or - sensor can nail focus on an appropriate line.

 

[J.R.]

I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)

Likewise, people are a little miffed that the 6D has less cross points than a Rebel ($750).

I wouldn't get too hung up on x type sensors. There are situations where this type can become 'confused', yet a | or - sensor can nail focus on an appropriate line.

+1

 

[Marsu42]

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!)

This thread is getting a bit long and random, but I have a new & real question here. Today I had a test with the 6d (again ) with the 70-300L and while I still feel the 6d is overpriced (Germany: 1700€) for various reasons I ran into a real issue:

How do you manage to get something in focus in the corners?

Obviously it's me because people have been shooting with the 5d2 and thin dof lenses for years, but I cannot seem to manage - on my 60d the outer af points are further from the center, but on the 6d once I focus and recompose the focus is off most of the time. Are there any tutorials how to do it? How do you do it - trial and error, then take the in focus shots?

 

[J.R.]

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!)

This thread is getting a bit long and random, but I have a new & real question here. Today I had a test with the 6d (again ) with the 70-300L and while I still feel the 6d is overpriced (Germany: 1700€) for various reasons I ran into a real issue:

How do you manage to get something in focus in the corners?

Obviously it's me because people have been shooting with the 5d2 and thin dof lenses for years, but I cannot seem to manage - on my 60d the outer af points are further from the center, but on the 6d once I focus and recompose the focus is off most of the time. Are there any tutorials how to do it? How do you do it - trial and error, then take the in focus shots?

Simple ... use live view and focus manually if necessary

Focus and recompose is a tough baby at wide open apertures. I don't use the focus and recompose method at anything wider than f/4 - However, there are people who do it with success but the chance of error is usually high.

It may be worth pointing out that in low light, all focus points save the center point don't lock on focus at all and focus and recompose is the only option left

 

[StepBack]

thanks 4 posting the brochure. And for those who repeated the already well worn wisdom of what a 6D is for.

 

[Marsu42]

Simple ... use live view and focus manually if necessary

For the 6d and macro shooting I'm used to mf and even then move the camera forward and back to get something in focus, problem is that this takes some time and the butterfly is often gone by then...

But using lv (or mf with a €1700 camera and €1400 usm lens) for general photography: no way - I like focus peaking with Magic Lantern for tripod shots, but in a live scene I don't have the time to put the camera in p&s mode or move it away from me to see the display (e.g when lying on the ground). Plus in bright ambient light I cannot see anything on the display anyway. So +1 for 5d3 :-\ if it wouldn't be so damn expensive.

It may be worth pointing out that in low light, all focus points save the center point don't lock on focus at all and focus and recompose is the only option left

Yes, the outer 6d points have the same light sensitivity as the 60d, and I know in dim light I can forget af :-(

 

[J.R.]

Simple ... use live view and focus manually if necessary

For the 6d and macro shooting I'm used to mf and even then move the camera forward and back to get something in focus, problem is that this takes some time and the butterfly is often gone by then...

But using lv (or mf with a €1700 camera and €1400 usm lens) for general photography: no way - I like focus peaking with Magic Lantern for tripod shots, but in a live scene I don't have the time to put the camera in p&s mode or move it away from me to see the display (e.g when lying on the ground). Plus in bright ambient light I cannot see anything on the display anyway. So +1 for 5d3 :-\ if it wouldn't be so damn expensive.

The only way I've found the LV to work properly is when the camera is on the tripod. Using the LV for normal shooting is more trouble than it is worth - probably tougher than focus and recompose given that you hold more than kilo in your hands away from your body so if the camera moves half and inch, the shot is rendered OOF.

 

[Marsu42]

given that you hold more than kilo in your hands away from your body so if the camera moves half and inch, the shot is rendered OOF.

Exactly - and that's why I was so unimpressed (thread title...) with the 6d af today with shallow dof. Btw I also had a look at the new Rebel 700d and this thing actually does lv servo af pretty well, and of course contrast af works anywhere, even in the edges - it'd actually call it "working" rather than the joke of a lv af on 60d/6d/...

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

given that you hold more than kilo in your hands away from your body so if the camera moves half and inch, the shot is rendered OOF.

Exactly - and that's why I was so unimpressed (thread title...) with the 6d af today with shallow dof. Btw I also had a look at the new Rebel 700d and this thing actually does lv servo af pretty well, and of course contrast af works anywhere, even in the edges - it'd actually call it "working" rather than the joke of a lv af on 60d/6d/...

I have no problem using the outer focus points for these type shots. I think the other piece of the puzzle is in post - cropping. I will sometimes crop into a more pleasing composition. The clean output from the 6D (which is much, much better than your 60D [owned one for years]) enables you to crop considerably while retaining detail and size.

This is one example:


May in Technicolor by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

 

[Marsu42]

I have no problem using the outer focus points for these type shots.

My original point that was that the "outer" 6d points are too much centered so that there is too much recomposing needed resulting in a focus loss with thin dof. On 60d, the outer points are really outside and the way to move the camera is shorter...

I think the other piece of the puzzle is in post - cropping. I will sometimes crop into a more pleasing composition. The clean output from the 6D (which is much, much better than your 60D [owned one for years]) enables you to crop considerably while retaining detail and size.

Absolutely, and that is the one point why I most likely still buy a 6d - the iq is impressive in contrast to the current crop sensor @iso400+.

As for cropping, well, currently I'm trying to train enough so no crop is needed and I can get most shots @max resolution straight out of camera, maybe with a little angle correction - and I'm getting better at this. That's why I am not that much excited to have to crop because the camera can only acquire focus around the center of the frame :-\ ... but as I said, my thin dof technique is certainly lacking.

 

[CarlTN]

I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)

Likewise, people are a little miffed that the 6D has less cross points than a Rebel ($750).

I would be happy to participate with my 6D, in any autofocus challenge with anyone who has any Rebel...