Poll: Are 5D3 owners going to buy a 6D2?

[monkey44]

I've been contemplating a second 5DM3 for backup, and to carry two lenses ... saves changing in the field, and cleaner with no switching in dust and wind and dirt areas.

Depending on the specs and reviews on the 6D2, I may do that instead. If it brings more to the table than another 5DM3 (which serves me just fine, and I own the 7D2 as well) -- and the price might make a difference between one or the other. It's not a replacement for the 5DM3, just additional support for my field work.

The 5DM4 - in my opinion - does not improve enough over the 5DM3 to warrant $3K-$4K price tag for what I shoot ...

So, I'm more curious than "waiting for it" ... and will see what it brings first, then decide.

 

[ahsanford]

I'm almost 100% sure that I will pick up a 6dmk2 instead of a 5dmk4. I absolutely love the build quality of the 5d series but I really want a full frame that is smaller and lighter. It seems to me that 5dmk4 is superior only in terms of build quality and slightly more megapixels and may be slightly speedier. I'm not willing to pay over $1000 more just for these things. I will very likely keep my 5dmk3 as backup.

I keep hearing smaller/lighter with the 6D, and though it is, it's not that much better:

6D 755g
1 battery 80g
24-105 L II 819g (in-use weight with hood per TDP)
Total 1,654g

5D4 800g
1 battery 80g
24-105 L II 819g
Total 1,699g

And the corresponding size is attached. I appreciate the 5D4 went on a diet from the 5D3 (about 150g) and the 6D2 may follow suit, but that would be a tiny difference in the stack above. So for me, in use, these cameras are equivalently large and heavy.

I do not anticipate a SL1-ification of the 6D design into something super tiny/light -- does anyone else?

- A

 

[Maximilian]

I don't see any reason to change.
The improvements are too low in relation to the price rise (5D4 in Germany).
And I don't see enough advantages in the 6D2, referring to the rumored specs.
For me a 5D5 will be the next body I'll take a closer look on to decide.

 

[Maximilian]

...
I really think the 5D4 dropped the ball with only +1 fps over the the 5D3 and +2.5 fps over the 6D.
...

I do not have the need for more fps than the 5D3 or 4 can deliver. But I agree with you especially if you compare that improvement not only within the Canon portfolio but also others (e.g. Sony alpha99 II @ 12 fps in about the same price segment) it looks a little bit misplaced.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

If Canon were to make a camera just for me it would:

• 28 MP
• 30-60 high quality AF points covering 80% of the frame
• 9 fps
• Better shadow noise/DR/less banding than the 5DIII (newer sensors seem to be what I want)
• Take whatever I can get at higher ISO
• wi-fi
• DPAF or something else that improved Liveview focus
• Touch screen that allowed you to select AF points on the LCD while looking through the viewfinder (seems like a great feature on the M5)
• Built in intervalometer, focus peaking, etc

Really not that far off of the 5DIV.

I really think the 5D4 dropped the ball with only +1 fps over the the 5D3 and +2.5 fps over the 6D. What happens when the 6D2 comes in at 6 fps -- only 1 fps lower than the 5D4 -- at only 60% of the price? There are a ton of things that differentiate models, but AF system, fps and MP count seem to be the biggest price differentiators.

I'm not even a burst shooter (I live in single shot / one shot AF) and I see that 'horsepower spec' of fps and start to justify a 5D4 purchase as a future-proofing move in my head. 7 fps isn't why I didn't get it, but 8-9 fps would have helped Canon's cause there with a lot of people I think.

- A

You are absolutely right. 9fps would have been a compelling reason for me to upgrade to the 5D mk4 now, but 7fps just isn't enough of an increase on the 6fps I have with my 5D mk3 today. Rather than buying a 5D mk 4 I have been looking at second hand 1DX mk1. For me, this is a more attractive option than the 5D mk4 and it is £1,000 less expensive.

 

[NorbR]

I keep hearing smaller/lighter with the 6D, and though it is, it's not that much better:

6D 755g
1 battery 80g
24-105 L II 819g (in-use weight with hood per TDP)
Total 1,654g

5D4 800g
1 battery 80g
24-105 L II 819g
Total 1,699g

Interesting ... I didn't realize that the 5D4 had shed so much weight compared to the 5D3.
The difference between 6D and 5D3 is certainly noticeable, but given those numbers I agree that the difference with the 5D4 is likely less significant.
I really should get my hands on a 5D4 some day, just to try it out ...

Edit: OK I did a bit more digging, and while it's not always easy to know which weight exactly is quoted depending on where you look, I think Canon USA gives a reliable answer. So comparing apples to apples:

Body only weight:

• 5D4: 800g
• 5D3: 860g
• 6D: 680g

CIPA weight (incl. battery etc.)

• 5D4: 890g
• 5D3: 950g
• 6D: 755g

So yes the 5D4 is somewhat lighter than the 5D3, but the 6D remains significantly lighter imho.

 

[ahsanford]

...
I really think the 5D4 dropped the ball with only +1 fps over the the 5D3 and +2.5 fps over the 6D.
...

I do not have the need for more fps than the 5D3 or 4 can deliver. But I agree with you especially if you compare that improvement not only within the Canon portfolio but also others (e.g. Sony alpha99 II @ 12 fps in about the same price segment) it looks a little bit misplaced.

Agree Canon could go higher, but not that high.

Sony, as usual, is glossing over realities with marketing on the A99 II. Depending on the lenses you use (older lenses, f/4 lenses, etc.), jumping to the 12 fps mode locks the AF after the first exposure and/or drops to a lossy compression format. Check the manual out on that. (It can do 12 fps with AF, but make sure you own the right lenses to do that.)

- A

 

[StudentOfLight]

I've already dropped the 5D-III with the introduction of the 5D-IV as I wanted to maximize on resale value before lots of 5D-IIIs hit the 2nd hand market. I already have a 6D and 1Ds-III (and can rent a 5Ds/R if required) to cover my full frame requirements, so not missing out on having full frame coverage when I need it.

Anyway, I listed the benefits of the 5D-IV to me:
1) Improved DR (especially useful at low ISO)
2) Tighter pixel pitch - gives more pixels on target in reach-limited scenarios
3) 7fps - slight boost is useful for sports/action/wildlife
4) Slightly wider AF coverage
5) UHS-1 support
6) DPAF - excellent servo AF in video
(The 4K implementation on the 5D-IV was so ridiculous that I would never use it so it didn't make it onto my list of useful features.)

When I looked at that list I realized that Canon already made a camera that had all those benefits but was better and less expensive - the 80D.

With it's 1.6x crop it provides 100% more pixels on target than the 5D-IV in reach limited situations. So where I'd need to use a 1.4xTC on the 5D-IV I could use the bare lens on the 80D. It also had a fully-articulating touch LCD which I find beneficial for run & gun situations (e.g. video, overhead and ground level shots, freehand macro) So the 80D provides all the useful-to-me benefits of the 5D-IV (and more) at a faction of the price.

Sadly, I see the 5D-IV as a Benjamin Button camera - it was born old and will probably be rejuvenated with firmware updates and Magic Lantern tweaks. Depending on how those go, and the final 6D-II specification, I might be a late adopter of 5D-IV or an early adopter of the 6D-II. It really made no sense for me to be an early adopter of the 5D-IV.

 

[ahsanford]

Edit: OK I did a bit more digging, and while it's not always easy to know which weight exactly is quoted depending on where you look, I think Canon USA gives a reliable answer. So comparing apples to apples:

(truncated)

So yes the 5D4 is somewhat lighter than the 5D3, but the 6D remains significantly lighter imho.

I was using TDP's data, which I believe is the CIPA data. But citing only the body + battery is not unlike people comparing FF mirrorless vs. FF SLR size of the just body -- it's misleading. In reality, we need lenses, and they tend to diminish the size/weight savings of that tinier body.

See below. One pic has you believe one will be smaller to use, and the other just punishes your hands for chasing that idea. Only the tear-down (non-lens) packing size is better, which is not a consideration for a single body shooter like I am.

So I think some form of my first calculation is more like the reality of owning a 6D. Knock 150g off the math for the 6D2, but it's still going to be within 15-20% of the 5D4 setup for a standard zoom. So unless you only shoot with pancakes, the weight savings is not much to write home about.

I'm not opposed to weight reduction -- any bit helps -- but I'll take a tougher build over a very modest weight savings every time.

- A

 

[mnclayshooter]

I'm in a slightly different camp. 6D - is there a reason to upgrade to the 6D2?

• tilty-flippy is attractive to me for macro or other similar odd-angled shots
• sensor- meh... unless it gives me a TON better low-light performance - the 6D is pretty good all around in that regard
• Higher MP count? meh - I print mostly at 16x20 or occasionally 24x36 at the largest... resolution of the 6D is fine for that so far.

The bigger question - will the hopefully more versatile AF system be "Good enough" to warrant spending additional money, but not so much additional money that the 5D4 doesn't make better sense?

In a round about sort of way, I'm re-hashing the debate of what is the right price point for the 6D2 to not undermine the 5D4 but still provide enough features to entice people to upgrade from _______ body.

 

[ahsanford]

I'm in a slightly different camp. 6D - is there a reason to upgrade to the 6D2?

If you are a 6D owner, the upgrade value proposition is a lot clearer. You'll get (we presume):

• AF system overhaul -- a major upgrade (even if Canon doesn't go all the way up to the 61/65 points of the big boys)
• Tilty-flippy touchscreen
• 4-8 MP bump in resolution (I think it might actually be 24 MP and not 28 MP)
• DPAF
• Clever recent stuff: NFC, anti-flicker, intervalometer, customizable menus, possibly even DP RAW functionality or touchscreen AF point selection
• A higher quality sensor, perhaps 1-1.5 stops of base ISO DR due to on-chip ADC
• A second memory card slot
• A small weight reduction
• +1 to +1.5 fps (total guess, to be fair)

Now take a step back and think about that list and how it applies to different camps of photographers:

• Landscapers get a little more detail, a little more DR, and an intervalometer.
• Wedding folks get the trust/reliability of a second memory slot and strong video AF.
• Lower budget / more casual videographers (who haven't bought a GH4/GH5) don't need to bolt-on monitors and LCD loupes anymore now that there's a tilty-flippy and strong video AF
• The hockey mom or soccer dad can shoot indoor sports more reliably with anti-flicker and better AF
• Folks who want to dabble at wildlife get a few f/8 AF points and better AF in general
• Journalists and vloggers get a tilty-flippy for self-reporting and NFC to share things more quickly

You have to give Canon some credit here -- that's a roundly attractive value proposition to a host of different camps of users. Not every 6D1 owner will upgrade, but I expect more 6D1 folks to get a 6D2 than a 5D4.

- A

 

[docsmith]

If Canon were to make a camera just for me it would:

• 28 MP
• 30-60 high quality AF points covering 80% of the frame
• 9 fps
• Better shadow noise/DR/less banding than the 5DIII (newer sensors seem to be what I want)
• Take whatever I can get at higher ISO
• wi-fi
• DPAF or something else that improved Liveview focus
• Touch screen that allowed you to select AF points on the LCD while looking through the viewfinder (seems like a great feature on the M5)
• Built in intervalometer, focus peaking, etc

Really not that far off of the 5DIV.

I really think the 5D4 dropped the ball with only +1 fps over the the 5D3 and +2.5 fps over the 6D. What happens when the 6D2 comes in at 6 fps -- only 1 fps lower than the 5D4 -- at only 60% of the price? There are a ton of things that differentiate models, but AF system, fps and MP count seem to be the biggest price differentiators.

I'm not even a burst shooter (I live in single shot / one shot AF) and I see that 'horsepower spec' of fps and start to justify a 5D4 purchase as a future-proofing move in my head. 7 fps isn't why I didn't get it, but 8-9 fps would have helped Canon's cause there with a lot of people I think.

- A

You are absolutely right. 9fps would have been a compelling reason for me to upgrade to the 5D mk4 now, but 7fps just isn't enough of an increase on the 6fps I have with my 5D mk3 today. Rather than buying a 5D mk 4 I have been looking at second hand 1DX mk1. For me, this is a more attractive option than the 5D mk4 and it is £1,000 less expensive.

The bottom line is that pragmatic people ask them selves basic questions before spending $3,500. You know...such as, why am I doing this? Or specific questions like "what does this camera do that can't be done with my current camera?"

It isn't just about horsepower (although I get the analogy). 8-9 fps would make a camera so much more reasonable for sports, BIF, and a number of other things. THAT is a reason to upgrade. But 1 fps....not a reason to upgrade.

The 5DIV is a very solid if not great camera. It is a little better than the 5DIII in a number of ways, which is great. But, at least for me, it has lacked that compelling reason to make me want to spend the money on it.

My quick guess, I'll pick up an early refurbished model (CPW alert is already set) in about a year. Get the price down to $2,500-$2,750. I'll sell my 5DIII and have to add in $1,000-$1,500. Ok. For a new camera and a number of features that begins to make sense. But $2,000-$2,500 investment after selling my 5DIII hasn't made much sense yet.

But, as I have money in the bank, I'll continue to evaluate cameras until I decide to pull the trigger. So here is room for the 6DII to come in an impress me. Until then, I'll happily continue to use the 5DIII.

 

[Don Haines]

You need another option in the poll: darned if I know!

Don't know the features....
Don't know the price.....
Don't know the release date.....
Don't know how well it will perform.....

How could one know if they are going to buy?

 

[soldrinero]

I'm a bit unusual, because I picked up my 5D3 just last February on a good "open box" deal. I am rather cash-constrained, so I waited until the end of the life-cycle for the mark 3 to become affordable.

If I hadn't just gotten the 5D3, I'd be a great candidate for a 6D2. I had been shooting a Rebel for years, mostly of social dancing (https://flic.kr/s/aHskDhL6jM). My two requirements for an upgrade were significantly better low-light performance and better AF. Lots of APS-C cameras could have improved the AF, but the high-ISO performance always seemed too incremental. I actually rented a 6D as a test drive; I loved the sensor but the AF seemed worse than my T1i! (It probably wasn't in an absolute sense, but the shallower depth of field made it relatively worse.) If the 6D2 has 80D-level AF, it would be the perfect camera for someone like me - a dedicated hobbyist without the cash for high-end pro gear.

As it stands, I don't need improved low-ISO DR (because I almost never shoot there), and there's almost no chance the 6D2 matches the 5D3's AF (I'm still improving with it, but my keeper rate has climbed considerably). I'm happy staying with last year's excellent gear!

 

[Maximilian]

Agree Canon could go higher, but not that high.

Sony, as usual, is glossing over realities with marketing on the A99 II. Depending on the lenses you use (older lenses, f/4 lenses, etc.), jumping to the 12 fps mode locks the AF after the first exposure and/or drops to a lossy compression format. Check the manual out on that. (It can do 12 fps with AF, but make sure you own the right lenses to do that.)

- A

*lol* I didn't recognize that. Thank you for pointing that out, ahsanford.
I only cast an eye at them to stay up to date.
As I will never buy anything with the "Sony" brand on it again, it doesn't matter to me.
I had several issues with them on mutlimedia items since the Walkman time.
I swore to me "Never again!"

 

[LDS]

My next camera will be probably an M5 - I need a smaller/lighter one to expand my photo occasions. Personally, I see little reasons to get a 6DII over my 5D3, nor the 5D4 justified the upgrade price (for the photos I take). Got a TS lens instead, which again expands my images to new territories. Sensor performance and fps are not everything

I'll wait for the 5DV, or later, until my 5DIII becomes really too old.

 

[sanj]

I would consider it for family travel because of light weight/size.

 

[Ozarker]

Holding out for a 5D Mark V if there will be one.

 

[romanr74]

Holding out for a 5D Mark V if there will be one.

On the same page here... (this being the first time I skip a release...)

 

[rpiotr01]

Have had a 5D3 since 2012 but since starting to shoot almost exclusively with MF lenses it feels like some overkill. Can't say for sure since specs are not out but a 6DII in theory seems like a nice upgrade for my purposes. Trading some AF performance for better noise, newer sensor tech, less weight and hopefully replaceable focus screens is a good deal for me.