The surprisingly good 6d!!

[nc0b]

I am very happy with my 6D and 400mm f/5.6 for BIF, particularly raptors. Center point is not a problem, either single shot or AI servo. Focus and reframing isn't an issue with a hawk or eagle, as the challenge is tracking a raptor in flight.

 

[cpsico]

This is ISO 1600, color and dynamic range is awesome for this iso

 

[Jack Douglas]

Also love my 6D IQ but for BIF it doesn't have expansion of AF to surrounding points which helps an awful lot if you wander just slightly, as I did with 300 2.8 II X2 III on the 1D4 (yes X2, once tracking AF was plenty fast, but don't lose it!). I would have missed easily half my eagle flight shots this spring and that's what I traveled 1500 miles for. Also exposure linked to spot focus points is very handy, not to mention FPS. For low light, it's (6D) the camera!

So, I've come to also lament the AF system.

Jack

 

[tomscott]

But unfortunately all your images will look the same as everything is in the centre of the frame. Reduces creativity.

If your shooting bird the 6D is probably the last camera you should be looking at.

 

[lholmes549]

...well I totally agree with you - the 6D is definitely capable of some decent shots in sports/bird-shots/action, but if you are shooting that sort of things most of the time, you're way better off with a 7D2 (about the same price).

Do not buy the 6D for that sort of photography! There are better alternatives out there for the same price or even less. I wouldn't drive a Ferrari Enzo Ferrari if I want to participate in the Dakar rally raid because it's not made for this kind of race.

Well yeah, obviously!

95% of my photos are landscape/nightscapes but if I was primarily an action shooter I wouldn't buy the 6D; however, a lot of people act as if the 6D is awful for anything that moves when it is perfectly adequate for many circumstances if you can use it well.

 

[Crosswind]

Does that mean if someone's shooting landscapes he (or she) is an introvert? Is that even a bad thing?

So, if someone's shooting the exact opposite like sports/action, he's an extrovert who does spray & pray, right. ;D

 

[Jack Douglas]

No one has praised the 6D more than me but I've had my unhappy moments such as a close vertical shot of a not patient bird using vertical orientation and the upper spot focus point for that crisp eye in focus shot (also that focus point does not perform as well). Now if the head is a contrasting shade from the body your exposure can sometimes be significantly off (think Pileated woodpecker). Manual would be better but things are here there and everywhere in a moment, and it helps to have the pro features. Exposure linked to focus point is high on my list and one reason I didn't buy the 7DII..

As far as center point goes, well I'm just not good enough to be moving focus points while a BIF is suddenly moving this way and that and I'm waving 600mm (780 reach). Sometimes correct focus is missed but cropping usually can move the bird off center unless it totally tight. 420 is better. Guess it depends on the subject such as geese flying by which can be more predictable.

Point well taken, there is room for improvement in personal technique!

Jack

 

[jeffa4444]

I don't think it can't be used for action its just hard work unless your subject is in the middle. Canon has just spoilt us with the 7D and 5DmkIII AF system and going back to 9 with one cross type just seems so antiquated and using focus recompose for fast glass makes nailing focus hard work.

The 6D has 11 points not 9. Ive used this camera numerous times at airshows and with two or more aircraft in the frame and not encountered any focus issues and Im sure hundreds of photgraphers did the same thing with the 5D MKII. Canon never billed this camera as a action camera it was positioned to be a travel / landscape camera for those moving up from APS-C and it fills that roll really well and its why I chose it over the 5D MKIII as I saw the benefits of built-in wi-fi especially for remote shooting with my iPhone and GPS both of which are an expensive after thought with the 5D MKIII. IQ wise its impossible to split the 5D MKIII and the 6D so for me it was a no brainer it certainly wasnt about cost.

 

[Jack Douglas]

That's it jeffa4444. That's why we are all pretty happy with it, and for a decent price. But humans like to grumble! And we always want more for our money! It was my choice over the 5DIII too, same reasons.

Jack

 

[turbo1168]

I have really been enjoying the 6D, had it just under 2 months and have never used anything from the 5D or 1D series. Also, I'm a very amateur photographer, just getting into DSLRs less than a year ago with my wife's T3 hand-me-down and her newer 70D. Up til then I have had numerous point and shoots or cell phone cams. After using the T3 and 70D I found that most of what I was photographing was in low light and even though they both have on board flash, using it gave less than spectacular results. So, there I was, bit by the bug and wanting my own DSLR. I purchased it after reading a lot of reviews and knowing fully what it could AND what it couldn't do. It is reasonably capable for some action from what I have found, although the 70D is better. I have done a few exif comparisons between the 2 and found what I expected, that the 6D produces better pictures at the same ISO (less noise) or for comparable aperture uses a lower auto ISO. I'm not proficient enough at the controls yet to be adjusting ISO, aperture, and shutter speed manually on the fly, so I'm usually in AV mode.

 

[nc0b]

I shoot raptors all the time with my 6D and 400mm f/5.6. Body and lens are not heavy or expensive, compared to big whites and a pro body. A sports photographer would choose something else, but don't knock the 6D for BIF. It would be rare that I could get close enough to a flying raptor to need a non-center focus point. I wonder what it would be like to shoot with a 5DS or 5DS-R since I am always cropping the raptor. The 6D runs circles around my 60D from a focus accuracy standpoint for this kind of subject.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

Its a great camera especially for the price. The older diamond pattern focus points are a bit of a pain, but image quality is great

Hope the new 6D2 comes with a better AF system covering most of the frame so it could be a good all-around travel camera.

 

[Viggo]

Its a great camera especially for the price. The older diamond pattern focus points are a bit of a pain, but image quality is great

Hope the new 6D2 comes with a better AF system covering most of the frame so it could be a good all-around travel camera.

Perhaps the old 7d system?

 

[midluk]

Its a great camera especially for the price. The older diamond pattern focus points are a bit of a pain, but image quality is great

Hope the new 6D2 comes with a better AF system covering most of the frame so it could be a good all-around travel camera.

Perhaps the old 7d system?

If you put an AF system for APS-C on a FF camera, the AF points will be much more compressed in the image center. You will not magically cover the part of the image that the FF sensor adds compared to APS-C.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Hjalmarg1, I will not buy another 6D, i.e. 6D II unless AF outside of center is improved. This conclusion is influenced by me having used the 1D4 in recent months. It's been painful deciding between the two because of the loss of IQ with the 1D4 particularly in lower light.

You're right, it needs improved AF to be a better all around camera.

Jack

 

[cpsico]

Hjalmarg1, I will not buy another 6D, i.e. 6D II unless AF outside of center is improved. This conclusion is influenced by me having used the 1D4 in recent months. It's been painful deciding between the two because of the loss of IQ with the 1D4 particularly in lower light.

You're right, it needs improved AF to be a better all around camera.

Jack

It's almost a given canon wanted this not to compete with there high end body's, the IQ is so high in this camera it certainly would have. I still think it has its place as a wedding camera

 

[Jack Douglas]

Hjalmarg1, I will not buy another 6D, i.e. 6D II unless AF outside of center is improved. This conclusion is influenced by me having used the 1D4 in recent months. It's been painful deciding between the two because of the loss of IQ with the 1D4 particularly in lower light.

You're right, it needs improved AF to be a better all around camera.

Jack

It's almost a given canon wanted this not to compete with there high end body's, the IQ is so high in this camera it certainly would have. I still think it has its place as a wedding camera

I and my friend bought into Canon together. I bought the 6D and he bought the 1DX and when we'd shot stationary together he had the edge but not by much. I never felt like I couldn't compete, not that we were particularly competitive. So I didn't regret my cost effective choice but when I went to Haida Gwaii shooting eagles the 6D got neglected big time. The 1D4 loss of IQ was always nagging me and that's when I had serious thoughts about a 1DX.

Jack

 

[cpsico]

I agree the autofocus is very limited, I have a 1ds MkIII and paired with a great lens its awesome to have all those focus points, but there are times i need more high iso performance than it can give.
This shot is iso 6400 converted straight from raw with no noise reduction, the lens was 16-35L 2.8 at f 2.8 1/30 of a second with no flash. If only this camera had a pc port for wireless flash triggers i would be a happy camper. I bought this camera as a lightweight travel camera and it is flawless in that regard. I am still looking very very seriously at a 1dx myself.

 

[DBECK]

I have the 6d and is very happy with it for portraits, travel and landscapes.

But I do some kids soccer pictures and find the autofokus to be a problem.
I am not getting paid for that. I am thinking of buying a used 1d mark III to use for that (600,- USD) any thought ?

 

[Jack Douglas]

DBECK, I bought a 1D4 for a decent price, facing exactly the dilemma you face. In some ways it's fantastic but it is hard to accept a decrease in IQ once you're used to looking at 6D stationary shots. That's 16 MP vs 20 and it shows when cropping. Not sure about the Mark III. So it depends how fussy you are on IQ.

I also previously bought a Mark II for $250 and I think that was 8 MP. For closer shots it produced good photos and it was 8 FPS and really fast enough. I sold it because it was ergonomically not my cup of tea. That purchase was to determine if I wanted to lug the extra weight and I must say it really was a contrast to the 6D. I didn't like it. However, the 1D4 performance is high enough that I was happy to have the weight so now I'm foolishly looking forward to a 1DX Mark II. If the performance is great, other factors tend to fade away when you see what you're getting. These comments are generally relative to camera plus 300 2.8, which is quite a hiking load for a 66 year old. A sports field would allow a monopod and that could be OK.

Jack