What do you NOT like about the Canon 6D?

[Malte_P]

to be honest for me the DOF preview is the most useless feature on my cameras.

imho the viewfinder does not show a real impression of the DOF anyway.. yes even with the DOF button pressed.

i first noticed this with a 50mm f1.8.
wide open at f1.8 the images looked way more out of focus then they did via the viewfinder.

The DoF Preview button does nothing when shooting wide open - focusing and looking through the VF is done with the lens wide open, the DoF preview is intended to show you the DoF when the lens is stopped down to something narrower than wide open.

if you read more carefully you will notice i know that.

i said i FIRST noticed that the viewfinder does not show the correct DOF when i shoot wide open.

shoot wide open -> focusing apperture = shooting apperture.

the image i see in the viewfinder looks not as much out of focus as the image shoot at f1.8.

i don´t care much why (perception i guess) but it makes the VF pretty useless for me to judge DOF.

when stopped down the difference between the DOF i see in the viewfinder (with pressed DOF button) and the image DOF i see on the monitor is not that big anymore.
but i still prefer the display for making sure my DOF is how i like it.

 

[Loswr]

if you read more carefully you will notice i know that.

i said i FIRST noticed that the viewfinder does not show the correct DOF when i shoot wide open.

Yes, I read carefully. You stated, "the viewfinder does not show a real impression of the DOF anyway.. yes even with the DOF button pressed....i first noticed this with a 50mm f1.8...wide open at f1.8." That statement suggests you think the DOF Preview button should do something with the aperture set to wide open, and I pointed out that the DoF Preview button has no effect with the aperture set wide open.

Apologies for explaining the reason behind something which you apparently know (even if that understanding is somewhat incomplete)...but I suspect that not everyone knows that the stock focus screen shows the DoF of ~f/2.8 even with a faster lens. Even though you don't care why, someone else reading this might, especially since there is a simple and cheap solution to the problem you describe, even if you don't care to implement it - the 6D is one of those cameras where the stock focus screen can be user-swapped for the Eg-S screen that does show the true DoF of a fast prime like your 50/1.8.

 

[PKinDenmark]

I decided in April for the 6D - to replace my old and trusted 450D - after serious considerations.
I expected big improvements, and I must say, that I am absolutely happy with that decision.
My pictures have so much more intensity and quality with 6D.

I like almost all about the camera. This includes all the improvements that come with FF, with newer technology, high ISO capability etc. etc.
I also like the size and weight (compared to the FF alternatives).
I like the build and the handling very much.
I like the responsiveness - and am delighted with the low-noise shooting.
I find the WiFi very useful - for remote shooting and for reviewing pictures.


The AF capabilities represent an significant upgrade for me, and I knew what not to expect. So I will not complain about it (though you could always dream that it had 1DX-like AF).
To me the AFMA was a great improvement. I have made (small) adjustments for all my lenses - some of these absolutely makes a difference.

What I miss (although I knew about it, so it was deliberately included in my decision):
- flexible screen - I loved that on my old G5, and still miss it
- built in flash-trigger
- the added 1.6* reach of crop (that is more than compensated by quality and resolution in my files)

I hope to see Canon improve the Firmware to allow:
- practical use of GPS without draining battery
- allow AF at F/8 (would love to use 2* TC with my 70-200 f/4)

 

[AcutancePhotography]

I was disappointed when I learned that the RF wireless system on the 6D can't be used to control OCF units. But despite that, I will still buy one. Sounds like a good camera. It is not the best camera that Canon makes, but I don't think anyone is claiming that it is.

 

[CarlTN]

The thing I dislike the most is the people who bought this camera and do nothing but whine about it. I am pretty sure nobody put a gun to their heads to force them to buy it.

The specs for the camera were widely known, why would you buy a camera and then moan about the the focus points, i upgraded from a 7D and was fully aware that the 6D had fewer focussing points and only ONE cross type..... needless to say that is not why I bought the camera. i wanted full frame and I got full frame, I also wanted wifi and gps which I got.

Just get on with it!!

+1 !!!!!

 

[Etienne]

A friend of mine has the 6D. The battery drains overnight even with the power off. He sent it to Canon and they upgraded the firmware and then said that they could not reproduce the problem.

It worked properly for a couple of weeks, but now it's doing it again. He can't leave the battery in the camera without it draining in a day or two, even with the power switch shut off.

Has anyone else heard of this problem?

PS... too late to return it.

GPS on?

otherwise no.. never heard of that problem.

GPS and wireless is off. Even the main power switch is off, so it shouldn't matter what the GPS and wireless are doing.

 

[CarlTN]

Having gone back and forth between options, I am thinking a 6D is my most practical choice. ($$$). Of course, I would rather have a 5D Mk III. But that being said, what do you 6D owners find you don't like about the 6D? I really want a full frame and an upgrade to better low light...... Focus points.... well, I guess I can be OK with the few that I would get..... But day to day, in hand, what don't you like about the camera? And what do you like better than your previous camera? Is the joystick too far away for easy point selections? Etc..Currently shooting a 20D and a 40D. Want to put my 17-40 and my 100 to work for me on a full frame body.

I have questions for you, rather than the other way around. Why would you rather have a 5D3? Have you tried one? What type of photography do you do, and how much of it is professional? How much of it is with a flashgun? How often do you shoot above ISO 1000, and how critical is that to you? Do you like grain (luminance noise) in your photographs?

In my opinion, the only reason to have a 5D3, is to make full use of it's autofocus sensor and the extra 2 frames per second over the 6D (which is not all that much difference alone, but the 5D3's autofocus sensor's ability is certainly stellar compared to all other Canon bodies other than of course the 1DX).

So if you mostly shoot on a supertelephoto lens, and you are shooting sporting events professionally and critically...then the 5D3 is an inexpensive alternative to the 1DX, and should be bought instead of the 6D.

If however, you don't really fit into the above criteria, and you are just wanting the 5D3 for the bling factor of having one, then don't waste your money. Put that money toward more and better lenses.

To answer your thread title's question...the only things I don't like about the 6D, are the inferior (perhaps intentially handicapped) video ability due to moire (compared to the 5D3), and the single card slot only using an SDHC card.

That said, I don't think the 6D really needs a CF card slot, unless you are mostly shooting video with it (and especially if ML ever hacks the 6D to enable RAW video capability...which they just might not ever do.)

I do like most everything about the 6D. The grip and ergonomics are better than my 50D (which I promptly sold), and the body is also lighter and every bit as rigid as the 50D. I don't miss the joy stick at all, nor having most of the buttons on the left (on the 50D they were along the bottom). I also prefer the 6D to the feel and ergonomics of all other Canon and Nikon cameras, all of which I have at least played with in a store, if not rented, or tried those of my relative. The 1DX is a fantastic camera, but it is very heavy. If you ever got used to holding it, everything else would feel too small and light like a toy.

There are those who don't like the ergonomics or various other aspects of the 6D. As others have said, that's fine...then don't buy one, or sell it and buy something else.

I feel the 6D is the best overall camera Canon has ever made. The main reason being they were able to deliver world class image quality, and bring it to a price point that is very reasonable....as compared to most of their recent L lenses. Although they seem to be the best lenses in the world, the price reflects that. Certainly those lenses are worth owning, but they are an extreme luxury now.

 

[x-vision]

most complains are from people who have never touched it or pretend they have used it... but never have.
all 6D owners i know are very happy with it.

Those who bought the 6D were obviously OK with the modest 6D specs before their purchase.
Otherwise, they wouldn't think that the 6D was worth buying.

As for those complaining about the 6D:
I bet that most complaints are from people who are actually itching to spend $2000 on a FF camera - but are not happy with what the 6D is offering for the money.

 

[CarlTN]

most complains are from people who have never touched it or pretend they have used it... but never have.
all 6D owners i know are very happy with it.

Those who bought the 6D were obviously OK with the modest 6D specs before their purchase.
Otherwise, they wouldn't think that the 6D was worth buying.

As for those complaining about the 6D:
I bet that most complaints are from people who are actually itching to spend $2000 on a FF camera - but are not happy with what the 6D is offering for the money.

I disagree, because there is no other full frame camera which exceeds the 6D's overall performance and quality, for the money. And what's best about the money, is it's not $2000 anymore. Mine was $1760 three months ago, and apparently prices continue to fall. For the $1600 range, there just is nothing, and never will be anything else that can get close to the 6D's overall performance and image quality, in my opinion. Whatever else comes down the pike in the future, it won't cost $1600. It will have an intro price at least in the $3000 range, before falling to the mid $2000 range.

The D600 is fine if you like the Nikon system and ergonomics (which are absurd)...and if you only shoot below ISO 1600 or so...such as with flashgun or strobes, or long exposure tripod photography outdoors, etc. In other words, if you feel you absolutely must have those extra 200 or so pixels on each side of the width of the image, and the few extra along the height of the image (such as for low ISO landscape, etc.)...and you know how to make use of them. Then by all means, adopt the Nikon system and buy a D600, or else save some more money and buy the D800 or D800E.

Their sensors have more DR at low ISO. Most of the photography I do, even the professional part, is around ISO 1000 and above. The 6D needs no noise reduction of any kind at ISO 1000. At that level of "gain", it has about the same noise as my 50D had at ISO 200. And the 6D's processing of detail and contrast in the RAW files, is just outstanding. The detail belies the mere 20 MP of resolution.

 

[Andy_Hodapp]

Just went to Costco yesterday and got my hands on the 6D. While I would have loved to have its sensor instead of the one in my 5D MKII, the build quality just didn't feel nearly as good as the 5D. My 5D took a good 2-3 foot drop from my tripod onto rock with only a small scratch on the top plate, with the 6D's plastic top plate, I am pretty sure it would have just cracked. Also the 60D style buttons are terrible, after using the 5D's joystick and wheel, I can't imagine using that terrible system. Then again, I went for the 5D just as the 6D was coming out.

The top portion of the 6D is made from engineering plastic (very tough) instead of metal to allow the built in WiFi and GPS to function. Actually, the camera is very well built. A friend of mine who is a wedding photographer has two 6D's (and two 5D3's) and one of the 6D's was dropped by an assistant onto a concrete floor from a step ladder approximately 9 feet in the air and it came away with just a tiny dent in bottom corner - otherwise worked fine. The 24-70 lens that was attached didn't fare as well however...

Regarding the control layout, at first I didn't particularly like the 6D controls and missed the joystick from my 7D, but after some use, I came to prefer the 6D layout to the 7D. I can't comment on the control layout of the 6D compared to the 5D2 however, as I've only had limited experience with a 5D2. Each photographer will have their own preference in this area.

Good to know about the durability, I only had my hands on it for 5 minutes tops. Agreed about the ergonomics, if I had gone from my T1i to the 6D, I think it would be a different story on how I feel about them.

 

[Etienne]

Having gone back and forth between options, I am thinking a 6D is my most practical choice. ($$$). Of course, I would rather have a 5D Mk III. But that being said, what do you 6D owners find you don't like about the 6D? I really want a full frame and an upgrade to better low light...... Focus points.... well, I guess I can be OK with the few that I would get..... But day to day, in hand, what don't you like about the camera? And what do you like better than your previous camera? Is the joystick too far away for easy point selections? Etc..Currently shooting a 20D and a 40D. Want to put my 17-40 and my 100 to work for me on a full frame body.

I have questions for you, rather than the other way around. Why would you rather have a 5D3? Have you tried one? What type of photography do you do, and how much of it is professional? How much of it is with a flashgun? How often do you shoot above ISO 1000, and how critical is that to you? Do you like grain (luminance noise) in your photographs?

In my opinion, the only reason to have a 5D3, is to make full use of it's autofocus sensor and the extra 2 frames per second over the 6D (which is not all that much difference alone, but the 5D3's autofocus sensor's ability is certainly stellar compared to all other Canon bodies other than of course the 1DX).

So if you mostly shoot on a supertelephoto lens, and you are shooting sporting events professionally and critically...then the 5D3 is an inexpensive alternative to the 1DX, and should be bought instead of the 6D.

If however, you don't really fit into the above criteria, and you are just wanting the 5D3 for the bling factor of having one, then don't waste your money. Put that money toward more and better lenses.

To answer your thread title's question...the only things I don't like about the 6D, are the inferior (perhaps intentially handicapped) video ability due to moire (compared to the 5D3), and the single card slot only using an SDHC card.

That said, I don't think the 6D really needs a CF card slot, unless you are mostly shooting video with it (and especially if ML ever hacks the 6D to enable RAW video capability...which they just might not ever do.)

I do like most everything about the 6D. The grip and ergonomics are better than my 50D (which I promptly sold), and the body is also lighter and every bit as rigid as the 50D. I don't miss the joy stick at all, nor having most of the buttons on the left (on the 50D they were along the bottom). I also prefer the 6D to the feel and ergonomics of all other Canon and Nikon cameras, all of which I have at least played with in a store, if not rented, or tried those of my relative. The 1DX is a fantastic camera, but it is very heavy. If you ever got used to holding it, everything else would feel too small and light like a toy.

There are those who don't like the ergonomics or various other aspects of the 6D. As others have said, that's fine...then don't buy one, or sell it and buy something else.

I feel the 6D is the best overall camera Canon has ever made. The main reason being they were able to deliver world class image quality, and bring it to a price point that is very reasonable....as compared to most of their recent L lenses. Although they seem to be the best lenses in the world, the price reflects that. Certainly those lenses are worth owning, but they are an extreme luxury now.

I bought the 5DIII, my buddy bought the 6D. The 6D seems like a good camera, and I have used it a bit, but the 5DIII is worth the extra money.
The 5DIII ergonomics are much better, the menus are easier to navigate, there's more customizability, the camera is built like a tank. The AF rocks, dual cards is great (both CF and SD), and the video is far superior to the 6D. There are more exceptional points.
The 5DIII is the best value all-around FF camera made to date, in my opinion.

That doesn't mean the 6D is a bad camera, and I would consider buying one. But, with the exception of ultra-low-light auto-focus, it just can't compete with the 5DIII on any playing field.

 

[viclewchenko]

A friend of mine has the 6D. The battery drains overnight even with the power off. He sent it to Canon and they upgraded the firmware and then said that they could not reproduce the problem.

It worked properly for a couple of weeks, but now it's doing it again. He can't leave the battery in the camera without it draining in a day or two, even with the power switch shut off.

Has anyone else heard of this problem?

PS... too late to return it.

GPS on?

otherwise no.. never heard of that problem.

GPS and wireless is off. Even the main power switch is off, so it shouldn't matter what the GPS and wireless are doing.

Which lens do you have attached? I've had my 6D since December and only saw this problem twice, recently after purchasing a Tamron 24-70 2.8 (power was switched off). Both times I had the Tamron lens attached and found the battery completely drained in the morning. I have never seen this with any other lens attached (Canon 24-105, 70 - 200)

 

[Etienne]

A friend of mine has the 6D. The battery drains overnight even with the power off. He sent it to Canon and they upgraded the firmware and then said that they could not reproduce the problem.

It worked properly for a couple of weeks, but now it's doing it again. He can't leave the battery in the camera without it draining in a day or two, even with the power switch shut off.

Has anyone else heard of this problem?

PS... too late to return it.

GPS on?

otherwise no.. never heard of that problem.

GPS and wireless is off. Even the main power switch is off, so it shouldn't matter what the GPS and wireless are doing.

Which lens do you have attached? I've had my 6D since December and only saw this problem twice, recently after purchasing a Tamron 24-70 2.8 (power was switched off). Both times I had the Tamron lens attached and found the battery completely drained in the morning. I have never seen this with any other lens attached (Canon 24-105, 70 - 200)

Thanks for the tip!
He does use the Tamron 24-70 2.8 IS. I asked him to try different lenses, as well as leaving it with no lens attached. He is away for another week or so, but I'll pass on your experience. The lens may well be the problem!

 

[CarlTN]

Having gone back and forth between options, I am thinking a 6D is my most practical choice. ($$$). Of course, I would rather have a 5D Mk III. But that being said, what do you 6D owners find you don't like about the 6D? I really want a full frame and an upgrade to better low light...... Focus points.... well, I guess I can be OK with the few that I would get..... But day to day, in hand, what don't you like about the camera? And what do you like better than your previous camera? Is the joystick too far away for easy point selections? Etc..Currently shooting a 20D and a 40D. Want to put my 17-40 and my 100 to work for me on a full frame body.

I have questions for you, rather than the other way around. Why would you rather have a 5D3? Have you tried one? What type of photography do you do, and how much of it is professional? How much of it is with a flashgun? How often do you shoot above ISO 1000, and how critical is that to you? Do you like grain (luminance noise) in your photographs?

In my opinion, the only reason to have a 5D3, is to make full use of it's autofocus sensor and the extra 2 frames per second over the 6D (which is not all that much difference alone, but the 5D3's autofocus sensor's ability is certainly stellar compared to all other Canon bodies other than of course the 1DX).

So if you mostly shoot on a supertelephoto lens, and you are shooting sporting events professionally and critically...then the 5D3 is an inexpensive alternative to the 1DX, and should be bought instead of the 6D.

If however, you don't really fit into the above criteria, and you are just wanting the 5D3 for the bling factor of having one, then don't waste your money. Put that money toward more and better lenses.

To answer your thread title's question...the only things I don't like about the 6D, are the inferior (perhaps intentially handicapped) video ability due to moire (compared to the 5D3), and the single card slot only using an SDHC card.

That said, I don't think the 6D really needs a CF card slot, unless you are mostly shooting video with it (and especially if ML ever hacks the 6D to enable RAW video capability...which they just might not ever do.)

I do like most everything about the 6D. The grip and ergonomics are better than my 50D (which I promptly sold), and the body is also lighter and every bit as rigid as the 50D. I don't miss the joy stick at all, nor having most of the buttons on the left (on the 50D they were along the bottom). I also prefer the 6D to the feel and ergonomics of all other Canon and Nikon cameras, all of which I have at least played with in a store, if not rented, or tried those of my relative. The 1DX is a fantastic camera, but it is very heavy. If you ever got used to holding it, everything else would feel too small and light like a toy.

There are those who don't like the ergonomics or various other aspects of the 6D. As others have said, that's fine...then don't buy one, or sell it and buy something else.

I feel the 6D is the best overall camera Canon has ever made. The main reason being they were able to deliver world class image quality, and bring it to a price point that is very reasonable....as compared to most of their recent L lenses. Although they seem to be the best lenses in the world, the price reflects that. Certainly those lenses are worth owning, but they are an extreme luxury now.

I bought the 5DIII, my buddy bought the 6D. The 6D seems like a good camera, and I have used it a bit, but the 5DIII is worth the extra money.
The 5DIII ergonomics are much better, the menus are easier to navigate, there's more customizability, the camera is built like a tank. The AF rocks, dual cards is great (both CF and SD), and the video is far superior to the 6D. There are more exceptional points.
The 5DIII is the best value all-around FF camera made to date, in my opinion.

That doesn't mean the 6D is a bad camera, and I would consider buying one. But, with the exception of ultra-low-light auto-focus, it just can't compete with the 5DIII on any playing field.

I hope we can agree to disagree, because I disagree with most everything you said. I have certainly tried the 5D3. The feel, the width, the balance...it just feels off compared to the 6D. The 6D can certainly compete with the 5D3 in every regard...very closely. The video from the 6D is certainly nice enough to use, but not in a setting where textures would upset the moire.

I agree the 5D3 is probably worth most of the extra money in its price. But only if you are truly going to make use of the AF sensor. The 6D has superior image quality above ISO 1600 or so.

The AF ability of the 6D in servo mode, gives up very little to the 5D3 in most situations. You really need a supertelephoto lens in a fast professional sports situation, to realize the extra speed and focus ability of the 5D3. And even then, you will not get but maybe 20% more of the total shots in focus, than the 6D would. It's just that you are getting an extra 30% shots in the time frame to begin with.

In practical terms though, 6 fps is not that much faster than 4.5. It really starts to make a difference when the fps goes to 8, or especially 10.

The faster flash sync of the 5D3, besides the AF sensor, are really the reason to buy the 5D3. Anyone who shoots a lot of flashgun images or with strobes in a professional setting, should certainly buy the 5D3.

 

[Etienne]

Having gone back and forth between options, I am thinking a 6D is my most practical choice. ($$$). Of course, I would rather have a 5D Mk III. But that being said, what do you 6D owners find you don't like about the 6D? I really want a full frame and an upgrade to better low light...... Focus points.... well, I guess I can be OK with the few that I would get..... But day to day, in hand, what don't you like about the camera? And what do you like better than your previous camera? Is the joystick too far away for easy point selections? Etc..Currently shooting a 20D and a 40D. Want to put my 17-40 and my 100 to work for me on a full frame body.

I have questions for you, rather than the other way around. Why would you rather have a 5D3? Have you tried one? What type of photography do you do, and how much of it is professional? How much of it is with a flashgun? How often do you shoot above ISO 1000, and how critical is that to you? Do you like grain (luminance noise) in your photographs?

In my opinion, the only reason to have a 5D3, is to make full use of it's autofocus sensor and the extra 2 frames per second over the 6D (which is not all that much difference alone, but the 5D3's autofocus sensor's ability is certainly stellar compared to all other Canon bodies other than of course the 1DX).

So if you mostly shoot on a supertelephoto lens, and you are shooting sporting events professionally and critically...then the 5D3 is an inexpensive alternative to the 1DX, and should be bought instead of the 6D.

If however, you don't really fit into the above criteria, and you are just wanting the 5D3 for the bling factor of having one, then don't waste your money. Put that money toward more and better lenses.

To answer your thread title's question...the only things I don't like about the 6D, are the inferior (perhaps intentially handicapped) video ability due to moire (compared to the 5D3), and the single card slot only using an SDHC card.

That said, I don't think the 6D really needs a CF card slot, unless you are mostly shooting video with it (and especially if ML ever hacks the 6D to enable RAW video capability...which they just might not ever do.)

I do like most everything about the 6D. The grip and ergonomics are better than my 50D (which I promptly sold), and the body is also lighter and every bit as rigid as the 50D. I don't miss the joy stick at all, nor having most of the buttons on the left (on the 50D they were along the bottom). I also prefer the 6D to the feel and ergonomics of all other Canon and Nikon cameras, all of which I have at least played with in a store, if not rented, or tried those of my relative. The 1DX is a fantastic camera, but it is very heavy. If you ever got used to holding it, everything else would feel too small and light like a toy.

There are those who don't like the ergonomics or various other aspects of the 6D. As others have said, that's fine...then don't buy one, or sell it and buy something else.

I feel the 6D is the best overall camera Canon has ever made. The main reason being they were able to deliver world class image quality, and bring it to a price point that is very reasonable....as compared to most of their recent L lenses. Although they seem to be the best lenses in the world, the price reflects that. Certainly those lenses are worth owning, but they are an extreme luxury now.

I bought the 5DIII, my buddy bought the 6D. The 6D seems like a good camera, and I have used it a bit, but the 5DIII is worth the extra money.
The 5DIII ergonomics are much better, the menus are easier to navigate, there's more customizability, the camera is built like a tank. The AF rocks, dual cards is great (both CF and SD), and the video is far superior to the 6D. There are more exceptional points.
The 5DIII is the best value all-around FF camera made to date, in my opinion.

That doesn't mean the 6D is a bad camera, and I would consider buying one. But, with the exception of ultra-low-light auto-focus, it just can't compete with the 5DIII on any playing field.

I hope we can agree to disagree, because I disagree with most everything you said. I have certainly tried the 5D3. The feel, the width, the balance...it just feels off compared to the 6D. The 6D can certainly compete with the 5D3 in very regard...very closely. The video from the 6D is certainly nice enough to use, but not in a setting where textures would upset the moire.

I agree the 5D3 is probably worth most of the extra money in its price. But only if you are truly going to make use of the AF sensor. The 6D has superior image quality above ISO 1600 or so.

The AF ability of the 6D in servo mode, gives up very little to the 5D3 in most situations. You really need a supertelephoto lens in a fast professional sports situation, to realize the extra speed and focus ability of the 5D3. And even then, you will not get but maybe 20% more of the total shots in focus, than the 6D would. It's just that you are getting an extra 30% shots in the time frame to begin with.

In practical terms though, 6 fps is not that much faster than 4.5. It really starts to make a difference when the fps goes to 8, or especially 10.

The faster flash sync of the 5D3, besides the AF sensor, are really the reason to buy the 5D3. Anyone who shoots a lot of flashgun images or with strobes in a professional setting, should certainly buy the 5D3.

Of course it comes down to personal preferences, and I think the 6D is a good value camera, but for me the 5DIII is worth the extra. There are many reasons in my opinion. I had a 5DII before the 5DIII, and I came to loath moire, which is the same on the 6D, and almost totally absent on the 5DIII (what a relief!). The video implementation is also great. The video switch is really useful, the 3 Custom functions allow easy full-auto setup to full manual video readiness. Switching between photography and video (with all the right settings ready to go) is actually nearly effortless with the 5DIII, whereas the 5DII (and 6D) it is not so easy. There's an audio out for headphones, and even soft-touch audio change and other settings for silent adjustments while filming. The list of differences between the 6D and 5DIII is quite long. If I wasn't interested in video, action/sports shots, and very high ruggedness, I probably would consider the 6D.

I must emphasize that I don't think the 6D is a bad choice at all. It's just that you do get your money's worth with the 5DIII ... if you use and appreciate the extra features of course.

 

[CarlTN]

Having gone back and forth between options, I am thinking a 6D is my most practical choice. ($$$). Of course, I would rather have a 5D Mk III. But that being said, what do you 6D owners find you don't like about the 6D? I really want a full frame and an upgrade to better low light...... Focus points.... well, I guess I can be OK with the few that I would get..... But day to day, in hand, what don't you like about the camera? And what do you like better than your previous camera? Is the joystick too far away for easy point selections? Etc..Currently shooting a 20D and a 40D. Want to put my 17-40 and my 100 to work for me on a full frame body.

I have questions for you, rather than the other way around. Why would you rather have a 5D3? Have you tried one? What type of photography do you do, and how much of it is professional? How much of it is with a flashgun? How often do you shoot above ISO 1000, and how critical is that to you? Do you like grain (luminance noise) in your photographs?

In my opinion, the only reason to have a 5D3, is to make full use of it's autofocus sensor and the extra 2 frames per second over the 6D (which is not all that much difference alone, but the 5D3's autofocus sensor's ability is certainly stellar compared to all other Canon bodies other than of course the 1DX).

So if you mostly shoot on a supertelephoto lens, and you are shooting sporting events professionally and critically...then the 5D3 is an inexpensive alternative to the 1DX, and should be bought instead of the 6D.

If however, you don't really fit into the above criteria, and you are just wanting the 5D3 for the bling factor of having one, then don't waste your money. Put that money toward more and better lenses.

To answer your thread title's question...the only things I don't like about the 6D, are the inferior (perhaps intentially handicapped) video ability due to moire (compared to the 5D3), and the single card slot only using an SDHC card.

That said, I don't think the 6D really needs a CF card slot, unless you are mostly shooting video with it (and especially if ML ever hacks the 6D to enable RAW video capability...which they just might not ever do.)

I do like most everything about the 6D. The grip and ergonomics are better than my 50D (which I promptly sold), and the body is also lighter and every bit as rigid as the 50D. I don't miss the joy stick at all, nor having most of the buttons on the left (on the 50D they were along the bottom). I also prefer the 6D to the feel and ergonomics of all other Canon and Nikon cameras, all of which I have at least played with in a store, if not rented, or tried those of my relative. The 1DX is a fantastic camera, but it is very heavy. If you ever got used to holding it, everything else would feel too small and light like a toy.

There are those who don't like the ergonomics or various other aspects of the 6D. As others have said, that's fine...then don't buy one, or sell it and buy something else.

I feel the 6D is the best overall camera Canon has ever made. The main reason being they were able to deliver world class image quality, and bring it to a price point that is very reasonable....as compared to most of their recent L lenses. Although they seem to be the best lenses in the world, the price reflects that. Certainly those lenses are worth owning, but they are an extreme luxury now.

I bought the 5DIII, my buddy bought the 6D. The 6D seems like a good camera, and I have used it a bit, but the 5DIII is worth the extra money.
The 5DIII ergonomics are much better, the menus are easier to navigate, there's more customizability, the camera is built like a tank. The AF rocks, dual cards is great (both CF and SD), and the video is far superior to the 6D. There are more exceptional points.
The 5DIII is the best value all-around FF camera made to date, in my opinion.

That doesn't mean the 6D is a bad camera, and I would consider buying one. But, with the exception of ultra-low-light auto-focus, it just can't compete with the 5DIII on any playing field.

I hope we can agree to disagree, because I disagree with most everything you said. I have certainly tried the 5D3. The feel, the width, the balance...it just feels off compared to the 6D. The 6D can certainly compete with the 5D3 in very regard...very closely. The video from the 6D is certainly nice enough to use, but not in a setting where textures would upset the moire.

I agree the 5D3 is probably worth most of the extra money in its price. But only if you are truly going to make use of the AF sensor. The 6D has superior image quality above ISO 1600 or so.

The AF ability of the 6D in servo mode, gives up very little to the 5D3 in most situations. You really need a supertelephoto lens in a fast professional sports situation, to realize the extra speed and focus ability of the 5D3. And even then, you will not get but maybe 20% more of the total shots in focus, than the 6D would. It's just that you are getting an extra 30% shots in the time frame to begin with.

In practical terms though, 6 fps is not that much faster than 4.5. It really starts to make a difference when the fps goes to 8, or especially 10.

The faster flash sync of the 5D3, besides the AF sensor, are really the reason to buy the 5D3. Anyone who shoots a lot of flashgun images or with strobes in a professional setting, should certainly buy the 5D3.

Of course it comes down to personal preferences, and I think the 6D is a good value camera, but for me the 5DIII is worth the extra. There are many reasons in my opinion. I had a 5DII before the 5DIII, and I came to loath moire, which is the same on the 6D, and almost totally absent on the 5DIII (what a relief!). The video implementation is also great. The video switch is really useful, the 3 Custom functions allow easy full-auto setup to full manual video readiness. Switching between photography and video (with all the right settings ready to go) is actually nearly effortless with the 5DIII, whereas the 5DII (and 6D) it is not so easy. There's an audio out for headphones, and even soft-touch audio change and other settings for silent adjustments while filming. The list of differences between the 6D and 5DIII is quite long. If I wasn't interested in video, action/sports shots, and very high ruggedness, I probably would consider the 6D.

I must emphasize that I don't think the 6D is a bad choice at all. It's just that you do get your money's worth with the 5DIII ... if you use and appreciate the extra features of course.

My point was not that different from yours. But I don't have any problem going back and forth between shooting video and stills on the 6D. It's one switch, can do it in a fraction of a second. As for monitoring the levels, it's not all that necessary, the auto level works fine on my 6D.

But shooting video, is only of casual importance to me right now.

If video was my primary purpose, I would have a 5D3 and use the RAW video hack. I would also consider a cinema camera with EF mount. If the current lineup of cinema cameras does not fit the bill, the way things are going, there will certainly be a future cinema camera that can compete with, if not beat, the 5D3's RAW video ability for a similar price, or at least within 50% of the price. I am willing to bet there might even be a 4k cinema camera with superb performance for under $6.5k in the next year or so. Whether or not it's a Canon, is in doubt.

I had a look at a large 4K tv in a store last week. That's where the future is. Mind-blowing detail! Of course, if you don't shoot with closed down aperture, you could never produce such detail all over the field of view. Most of the best HD content, such as Discovery channel's best, is shot in this way (with only the wildlife high speed closeups showing shallow DOF due to the fast telephoto lenses necessary, or desired for the shot). Of course they are using the world's best cinema cameras...

 

[x-vision]

I disagree, because there is no other full frame camera which exceeds the 6D's overall performance and quality, for the money.

Well, the D600 exceeds it, of course 8).

FYI, not everyone is smitten like you by the 1-point AF system (effectively) on the 6D.
And not everyone is OK with a 1-point AF system (effectively) and consumer ergonomics on a $2K camera.
I know what good value is for me - and the 6D is not.

 

[Etienne]

"You really need a supertelephoto lens in a fast professional sports situation, to realize the extra speed and focus ability of the 5D3. "

This is really false. The AF is very important in just about anything that moves moderately quickly, using almost any focal length. Animals, boats, cars, runners, any sports, casual and pro birding, ... Kids ... ever try to capture kids at a birthday party? It's no easier than pro sports, maybe even harder.

 

[Loswr]

I think we're seeing the natural tendency of people who own a particular product to defend it's attributes, and minimize the importance of those features for which better models offer improvements.

You really need a supertelephoto lens in a fast professional sports situation, to realize the extra speed and focus ability of the 5D3.

This is really false. The AF is very important in just about anything that moves moderately quickly, using almost any focal length. Animals, boats, cars, runners, any sports, casual and pro birding, ... Kids ... ever try to capture kids at a birthday party? It's no easier than pro sports, maybe even harder.

+1 My 5DII could not keep up with my 3 year old running toward the camera, even with the DoF of an f/4 lens. I don't think the 6D would do a whole lot better.

In practical terms though, 6 fps is not that much faster than 4.5.

In mathematical terms, it's 33% faster. That's going to make a difference with many subjects.

 

[Wildfire]

I think we're seeing the natural tendency of people who own a particular product to defend it's attributes, and minimize the importance of those features for which better models offer improvements.

Or perhaps we're seeing the tendency that people purchase a particular product instead of a better model that offers improvements because the improvements weren't important to them?

I don't think anyone buys a 6D when their top priority is having quick and accurate autofocus on fast-moving subjects. I've said it many times: I wish my 6D had better autofocus. But since 90% of what I photograph doesn't really move it's not important enough for me to spend extra money on.