# 6D logical upgrade from 7D?



## TDL2024 (Aug 14, 2013)

Hello all, I'm considering an upgrade to the 6D and I've scoured the web for info on the body but can't find solid info on what concerns me: the outer AF points. Everyone raves about the center being more sensitive than apparently any other Canon body (or other manufacturers too apparently), but no one ever comments on the outer points or compares them to anything else. I've checked about a dozen youtube reviews, and read a couple threads on this site as well as a pair of other photography forums....no info on anything other than the center point.

A little bit of background info:
I've been a Nikon user since '05 when I got my D50, progressed through a variety of bodies (D100, 200, 300, 7000) before my D7000 for whatever reason started backfocusing horribly out of the blue. Had a high shutter count (~170k) and was already tired of the wonky AF in low light so I figured I'd sell it and wait until something else came along (have a NEX6 I used for fun in the meantime). D600 seemed perfect, except it shared the same AF system as the D7K, so I decided to switch over to Canon (I've long been a fan of the lens lineup). I'm currently using a 7D I got a month ago for what I think was a pretty good deal ($700 for body, grip, 2 batteries, and friend gave me her 70-200 f4), but I've known for a while that I've wanted to go full frame for the low light benefits and of course wider FOV. Whatever decision I plan to keep the 7D as a backup/inclement weather/location/beater body.

The 5DIII seems amazing, but a bit out of my price range...and if I were to save up as much I'd probably be tempted to go back to Nikon for the DR and resolution of the D800. 

This leaves the 6D (or a 5DII, but from what I'm told and have read its AF outer points suck) so I'm wondering: while the center AF point is apparently amazing, can anyone compare the 6D to the 7D? I actually like the AF on the 7D, definite improvement over the Nikon D7K. I *rarely* ever use the center point, probably only 10% of the time at most. I tend to shoot in portrait orientation with the far right (outermost) point selected so that it lines up with the subjects eyes when in portrait. Does anyone have any insight as to the performance of these other points? Are they the same as the 5DII? Better? Same as the 7D? Better? Thanks for any insight!


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 14, 2013)

I have a 5D, 5D mkii, 6D and a 1100D. I've never owned a 7D but have used one.

The answer to your title question is it depends upon why you purchased the 7D. To pigeon hole the two cameras the 7D is first and foremost an action camera, the 6D is first and foremost an image quality camera. You state you purchased the 7D for its AF which was first rate for its day.

The 6D AF is much better than the 5Dmkii - much more reliable accuracy. However the best way to describe the outer points is that they are not fool proof. You're best to have an understanding of what you are aiming the AF point at. You need some contrast in the appropriate plane of the sensor to be reliable, but significantly less than the 5D.

Also bear in mind the design age of lenses with ultra accurate camera AF systems. Often the older lenses cant mechanically match the accuracy of the new cameras AF. Roger at Lens Rentals produced a series of very good articles on that subject.


----------



## TDL2024 (Aug 14, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> I have a 5D, 5D mkii, 6D and a 1100D. I've never owned a 7D but have used one.
> 
> The answer to your title question is it depends upon why you purchased the 7D. To pigeon hole the two cameras the 7D is first and foremost an action camera, the 6D is first and foremost an image quality camera. You state you purchased the 7D for its AF which was first rate for its day.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the quick reply. 

To be honest, I bought the 7D because it was cheap lol. I've always liked the out of camera colors of Canon's bodies, and also how they handled skin tones so I figured I'd give it a try with a budget-minded option. Now having played with the 7D I'm growing more comfortable with the handling/ergonomics (originally my biggest concern), layout, and menu to the point I'm willing to invest more into the system. That being said, if I had $4k to spend I probably would have gone another direction, but considering all the sub-$1000 options available to me at the time it seemed like a good value purchase. 

That being said, I'm aware that contrast is necessary for the points to lock focus...unfortunately I've experienced a variety of differences (albeit with Nikons) where the same type of lighting situations produce wildly varying degrees of focus with different bodies (most likely due to the corresponding focusing systems..ie. cam3500 vs cam4800). For the typical stuff I shoot, the 7D (and if anyone is familiar with Nikon, the D200/300/700 as well) focuses well enough for what I do, which is not necessarily low light, but usually open shade, windowlight, or on rare occasions backlit stuff. My former D7000, the D600, and to a lesser extent NEX6 are all subpar in the same lighting conditions. Two of my friends had the 5DII and they shoot similar stuff...they said the 5DII was almost unusable with any point other than the center point and to avoid it. 

As for lenses, I'm only using the 40mm 2.8 (I actually like the lens, and on FF I think would be my go to choice) and the 70-200 f4. The zoom will probably give way to the 100 f2, or 135 f2. Other than that, for my style of shooting I don't really _need_ or forsee getting any more lenses, so in theory if I were to stick with the 40mm and one of the f2 telephotos would that be enough to get the most out of the 6D's focusing system?

At the end of the day I'll probably rent the body before I make a decision; just want to know what I'm getting myself into before hand though and see if anyone has any insight


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 14, 2013)

From the standpoint of the off-center AF points, the 6D is _not_ a logical upgrade from the 7D, IMO. The 5DIII is the better choice.


----------



## bycostello (Aug 14, 2013)

sounds like you need a camera with good high iso.... i guess how good depends on how much u wanna spend...


----------



## Wildfire (Aug 14, 2013)

As a 6D owner I will tell you this: the outer points are accurate and reliable in good light. In low light, they start to struggle with both time to achieve focus and accuracy of focus.

My solution is to keep a 600EX-RT mounted on the 6D in low-light situations, which has an AF assist beam. The 600EX-RT is big and heavy, but I often have one on the body to control my off-camera flashes anyway, so it doesn't bother me.

If you find you will be using the outer points in dark situations, and mounting a flash with AF assist to the body would add an unacceptable amount of weight (or stop you from using Pocket Wizard, etc.), and you have an extra $1000 to spend, then you are better off with the 5D Mark III.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Aug 14, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> From the standpoint of the off-center AF points, the 6D is _not_ a logical upgrade from the 7D, IMO. The 5DIII is the better choice.



+1, and you'll miss the 7D's build if you get the 6D instead of the 5DIII.


----------



## Trovador (Aug 14, 2013)

Since you plan to keep the 7D, the 6D is a perfect combo with it. It's what I did. I keep my 7D for any action shots, wildlife, etc. For everything else I use my 6D.

If you want to get rid of the 7D and upgrade to one single camera, then the 5D MkIII is a better choice. It is also a better choice if budget is not an issue.


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 14, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> I have a 5D, 5D mkii, 6D and a 1100D. I've never owned a 7D but have used one.
> 
> The answer to your title question is it depends upon why you purchased the 7D. To pigeon hole the two cameras the 7D is first and foremost an action camera, the 6D is first and foremost an image quality camera. You state you purchased the 7D for its AF which was first rate for its day.
> 
> ...



Well said! +1


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 14, 2013)

TDL2024 said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > I have a 5D, 5D mkii, 6D and a 1100D. I've never owned a 7D but have used one.
> ...



I own the 6D with around 8k shutter cycles so far, also own both the 40 pancake and the 70-200 f/4 (non-is). That 70-200 focuses the most quickly and accurately with the camera of all my lenses, even the 135 f/2L. Even in very low light.

However, if you are wanting to buy a camera for its autofocus ability alone, you will be disappointed with the 6D. I make it work for me, but if all I did was fast sports action in decent light, I would buy a 5D3 or 1DX.

The outer points are not very reliable in servo mode, but the center point can be. The problem with leaving all points active, is the camera seems to want to use the weaker outer points more often than the center point...so focus accuracy in servo mode can suffer. This is the basis of all the 6D haters out there who usually own 7D's, 5D3's, etc. Why the camera attempts to lock focus with the outer points more often than the center point, I can't say. When using a telephoto lens it's become very easy for me to just leave center point selected, and deal with framing/cropping in post. To each their own, though...for the 6D haters who think the camera is a sensor only without a camera around it...nothing will be good enough for them other than to buy a different camera.


----------



## bholliman (Aug 14, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> The answer to your title question is it depends upon why you purchased the 7D.



+1

The 6D has excellent iQ, but its AF system isn't the best choice for action or sports photography, so it depends on what you shoot.




mrsfotografie said:


> you'll miss the 7D's build if you get the 6D instead of the 5DIII.



I own both a 6D and 7D and haven't noticed much difference in build quality. The 6D has an plastic upper body so the WiFi and GPS can function, but its a well built camera.


----------



## TDL2024 (Aug 14, 2013)

Interesting responses....sounds like it _might_ be sufficient. To answer the question of what I shoot: I don't shoot sports, so a 1D series AF system probably isn't necessary. I shoot editorial fashion, and from time to time shoot low(ish) light stuff. The models aren't static, but they're not moving around that much either. I'm just wary after my recent Nikon experiences with focus in general using outer points. To be honest I've never had a camera that the center point wasn't the bee's knees....the only problem is I rarely use those points. 

I think I'll have to rent one in the next couple weeks and put it through it's paces, probably after I get a faster telephoto though. Will also look into the 5dII if I can find one locally for rent, since I am quite fond of that joystick on the 7D.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 15, 2013)

I upgraded from a 7D to a 6D.... the improvement in picture quality is amazing, very little noise. The low light focussing albeit from the only the centre point has to be seen to be believed!!

I don't miss the 7D at all!!


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 15, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> I upgrade from a 7D to a 6D.... the improvement in picture quality is amazing, very little noise. The low light focussing albeit from the only the centre point has to be seen to be believed!!
> 
> I don't miss the 7D at all!!



Nice to see posts like this!


----------



## Wildfire (Aug 15, 2013)

bholliman said:


> mrsfotografie said:
> 
> 
> > you'll miss the 7D's build if you get the 6D instead of the 5DIII.
> ...



Agree. The 6D is built tough just like the 7D, 5D Mark II, and 5D Mark III. No concerns with the build quality of mine whatsoever.


----------



## captainkanji (Aug 15, 2013)

I upgraded to the 6D from the 7D. I wanted the fantastic low light performance and didn't have over $3000. I was very happy with the 7D, but I've been shooting mostly in light challenged situations. I wish I could have kept both. I use a battery grip and can shoot all day with 2 cheap Chinese batteries and gps. If you shoot wifi and gps, you will kill the batteries fast. If you need to be stealthy, take off the grip and put a shorty forty on it and it looks like a rebel. That center point is amazing, but in really low light, all of the other points are useless. It makes composition difficult in low light sometimes. I'll shoot wide and crop in LR in these situations. Get a 5DIII if you need better AF. None of my 3rd party batteries charge in the 6D OEM charger. I bought 2 cheap charger on eBay and they charge fine. When you put 3rd party batteries in the 6D, you get a "Communication Irregularity" error. Just select the "OK" option and the camera will work fine. You just won't get a charge level indicator. I'm very happy with the images and the 6D in general. If you get one, buy the kit. You will get the 24-105 for like half price and can always sell it for a hefty profit. $2000 is a lot, so rent one if you are on the fence.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 15, 2013)

I have used 'coded' batteries from Ebay, $10 a go and communicate with 6D fine and even shows up in battery menu


----------



## dgatwood (Aug 15, 2013)

Yes, good third-party batteries should work fine, but they do have to be batteries specifically built for the 6D.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 15, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> Yes, good third-party batteries should work fine, but they do have to be batteries specifically built for the 6D.



I don't trust 3rd party batteries. I wouldn't even trust it if it said Energizer on the side. That's just me... I'll pay the extra 20 bucks and know that oem will be the right ohms, wattage, volts, etc. I hated all of that in physics... and I'm still not fond of electricity.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Aug 15, 2013)

Wildfire said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > mrsfotografie said:
> ...



"Construction is solid, if perhaps not offering quite the same bullet-proof feel as the EOS 5D Mark III or EOS 7D. In part this is because the 6D has a plastic top plate, which according to Canon is necessary to allow the Wi-Fi and GPS to work. The rest of the body uses a magnesium alloy shell, and Canon describes it as 'dust and drip-proof'." - http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-6d/3

I handled the 6D - its body is nice and of decent build but not to the level of the 5DIII, 7D or 5DII for that matter. It's also noticeably smaller if you care about such things.


----------



## dgatwood (Aug 15, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, good third-party batteries should work fine, but they do have to be batteries specifically built for the 6D.
> ...



The thing is, any piece of modern electronics is going to use a voltage regulator on the output of the battery to stabilize the output. It's just assumed. So any voltage within a pretty wide tolerance should work. Wattage is irrelevant to resistive loads (which electronics largely are) as long as it is high enough. Ohms are basically irrelevant except when you're charging it. 

I recommend the Watson third-party battery that B&H carries. It seems to work well. The second set of batteries that came with my third-party battery grip also seem to work well. (The first were incorrectly chipped and failed to communicate with the camera after one charge cycle.) The high-capacity batteries seem to have a much high rate of problems. I'm not sure why. I ran down a pair of them overnight (at least to the point where they showed one bar) in my 6D, which is an order of magnitude faster fall-off than with proper batteries. Or maybe the level indicators are lying and need to be calibrated by a proper charge-discharge cycle with a genuine Canon charger instead of the third-party charger that I used. Dunno.


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 15, 2013)

mrsfotografie said:


> Wildfire said:
> 
> 
> > bholliman said:
> ...



The 5D3 is simply heavier, it's not any more rigid than the 6D (other than of course the top cover). It's weather sealed far more, so that's the only real advantage in the body itself. But it's not as if you can submerge the 5D3...If you like the wider, heavier form factor, then the 5D3 is great. I don't find that I need that form factor. I also, like a few others on here, love the buttons, layout, and feel of the 6D. The buttons on the 7D are too mushy, and the control wheels too stiff. The grip of the 7D is just plain weird, with its "palm bump" that is too narrow, sticks out too much. The shutter release on the 5D3 is way too soft and has no tactile feel.


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 15, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > dgatwood said:
> ...



I recall a sign on a recording studio door that said "Danger 1 million ohms!"...I laughed hard!!


----------



## TDL2024 (Aug 15, 2013)

captainkanji said:


> I upgraded to the 6D from the 7D. I wanted the fantastic low light performance and didn't have over $3000. I was very happy with the 7D, but I've been shooting mostly in light challenged situations. I wish I could have kept both. I use a battery grip and can shoot all day with 2 cheap Chinese batteries and gps. If you shoot wifi and gps, you will kill the batteries fast. If you need to be stealthy, take off the grip and put a shorty forty on it and it looks like a rebel. *That center point is amazing, but in really low light, all of the other points are useless.* It makes composition difficult in low light sometimes. I'll shoot wide and crop in LR in these situations. Get a 5DIII if you need better AF. None of my 3rd party batteries charge in the 6D OEM charger. I bought 2 cheap charger on eBay and they charge fine. When you put 3rd party batteries in the 6D, you get a "Communication Irregularity" error. Just select the "OK" option and the camera will work fine. You just won't get a charge level indicator. I'm very happy with the images and the 6D in general. If you get one, buy the kit. You will get the 24-105 for like half price and can always sell it for a hefty profit. $2000 is a lot, so rent one if you are on the fence.



Thanks, this is exactly what I was hoping to get some input on. Will still probably rent one though, as I'm not sure if my version of low light is the same as others. Maybe I get lucky and it's good enough for me lol


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 15, 2013)

TDL2024 said:


> captainkanji said:
> 
> 
> > I upgraded to the 6D from the 7D. I wanted the fantastic low light performance and didn't have over $3000. I was very happy with the 7D, but I've been shooting mostly in light challenged situations. I wish I could have kept both. I use a battery grip and can shoot all day with 2 cheap Chinese batteries and gps. If you shoot wifi and gps, you will kill the batteries fast. If you need to be stealthy, take off the grip and put a shorty forty on it and it looks like a rebel. *That center point is amazing, but in really low light, all of the other points are useless.* It makes composition difficult in low light sometimes. I'll shoot wide and crop in LR in these situations. Get a 5DIII if you need better AF. None of my 3rd party batteries charge in the 6D OEM charger. I bought 2 cheap charger on eBay and they charge fine. When you put 3rd party batteries in the 6D, you get a "Communication Irregularity" error. Just select the "OK" option and the camera will work fine. You just won't get a charge level indicator. I'm very happy with the images and the 6D in general. If you get one, buy the kit. You will get the 24-105 for like half price and can always sell it for a hefty profit. $2000 is a lot, so rent one if you are on the fence.
> ...



To reiterate what has been discussed many times since before the 6D's release...the outer points are not cross type (some sense vertical phase, some horizontal). This is very close to the 5D2's arrangement. Only the center point is cross type. This is the main reason the outer points have so much trouble. And again, the 6D seems to want to rely on those outer points as much or more than the center point, if you leave all points active...which only amplifies the problem. (This may or may not be addressed via a firmware or hardware update in the future.) Also, apparently there were several early production samples that featured a completely faulty AF sensor, garnering an even worse reputation for the 6D via word of mouth (and word of web). 

I am speaking from the standpoint of a true 6D fan here. Again I have about 8000 cycles on the shutter since March, and much of this was not in multi-shot mode.

So yes, this was an intentional hindering of the 6D's autofocus by Canon. If the 6D had even a slightly better AF system than it does, it certainly would cut into 5D3 sales more so than Canon would want. They wanted distinct product line differentiation. They also wanted (in my opinion) to be able to produce a full frame camera so inexpensively, that it could very often stay below the street price of its Nikon D600 competitor...besides the future 7D2.

Canon wanted to arm this "slow" entry level full frame camera with an image sensor that is truly second only to the 1DX. It even beats the 1DX in certain narrow respects...meaning that in a very narrow way this is the best sensor Canon currently makes....YES IN MY OPINION...having tried and edited all the other current full frame Canons. The 5D3 can possibly have lower chrominance noise at certain ISO's than the 6D, but both it and the 1DX have noticeably higher luminance noise than the 6D, at least up to ISO 12800, if not 16,000...in my experience. Above that things get dicey for all of them, with the 1DX's sensor being the clear winner in that noisy territory. 

So they gave the 6D a center point that can focus in (comparatively) near total darkness. They limited the fps to only 4.5, and gave it a puny SDHC card. For the most part the AF can keep up with that 4.5 fps in servo mode, in good light (the lens' ability to work quickly with the 6D is a huge factor here.) It's not a bad proposition...especially considering the 5D3 has sold for twice the price the 6D currently sells at (specifically at the BigValue-whoever-they-are on ebay). 

In practical usage, if you are used to a 7D or 5D3, you probably know exactly how to make a 6D misbehave if you get a hold of one...then blame the camera and call it a non-camera that only a "lesser photographer" would own. That still won't stop hordes of people from buying, using, and enjoying the 6D...and generating some of the best digital images ever. This was by design.


----------



## sarakoth (Aug 15, 2013)

What is wrong with using focus lock and recompose.. leave the camera on centre point and surely you are laughing.. the centre point focus will be much better than the 7D in low light regardless of which AF point you use on the 7D and the IQ from your low light shot will also be much better on FF, especially on the higher ISO settings? 

I think people go overboard with the whole must have gazillion focus points and groups. Unless you are Pro in which case you should (or can) cough up for the 5D3 or better.

I distinctly remember manual focus lens that only ever focused in the centre point and people somehow managed.


----------



## TDL2024 (Aug 15, 2013)

sarakoth said:


> What is wrong with using focus lock and recompose.. leave the camera on centre point and surely you are laughing.. the centre point focus will be much better than the 7D in low light regardless of which AF point you use on the 7D and the IQ from your low light shot will also be much better on FF, especially on the higher ISO settings?
> 
> I think people go overboard with the whole must have gazillion focus points and groups. Unless you are Pro in which case you should (or can) cough up for the 5D3 or better.
> 
> I distinctly remember manual focus lens that only ever focused in the centre point and people somehow managed.



Parallax and issues with using lenses wide open for starters, also there's time: the fact that if shooting a subject that is going through a range of movement and expressions, that split second of focus and recompose might cost you "the shot". 

And while the 5D3 is certainly a viable option....IF I were to go that route I'd simply go back to Nikon and go for the D800....but after reading IQ reviews (and watching a dozen or so videos) it seems like the 6D is more than capable IQ-wise. I'm just trying to get any info on whether the camera is directly comparable to the one I have now.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 15, 2013)

TDL2024 said:


> sarakoth said:
> 
> 
> > What is wrong with using focus lock and recompose.. leave the camera on centre point and surely you are laughing.. the centre point focus will be much better than the 7D in low light regardless of which AF point you use on the 7D and the IQ from your low light shot will also be much better on FF, especially on the higher ISO settings?
> ...



It's not comparable..... Its better...seriously better. I feel qualified to answer that as I made the very same move you are comtemplating and don't regret the move at all.


----------



## bholliman (Aug 15, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> It's not comparable..... Its better...seriously better. I feel qualified to answer that as I made the very same move you are comtemplating and don't regret the move at all.



Agreed. The 6D is a superior camera to the 7D for what the OP listed as intended uses.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 15, 2013)

bholliman said:


> The 6D is a superior camera to the 7D for what the OP listed as intended uses.



So far, the OP has asked:



TDL2024 said:


> Are they the same as the 5DII? Better? Same as the 7D? Better? Thanks for any insight!



and stated (bold added by OP),



TDL2024 said:


> captainkanji said:
> 
> 
> > *That center point is amazing, but in really low light, all of the other points are useless.* It makes composition difficult in low light sometimes. I'll shoot wide and crop in LR in these situations. Get a 5DIII if you need better AF. None of my 3rd party batteries charge in the 6D OEM charger.
> ...



...so, I'm not sure how the 6D qualifies as 'superior' for the intended use of shooting with the outer AF points in low light. Speaking from substantial experience with the 5DII's non-cross-type outer AF points, and limited experience with the 6D, I would not rely on the outer AF points in low light. The center point is a different story, but that's not what the OP is asking about.


----------



## papa-razzi (Aug 15, 2013)

The 6D is not an "upgrade" from the 7D. The cameras are designed for different purposes.

For Image Quality, FF sensor, low light shooting - the 6D is far superior.

For shooting action - FPS, Auto Focus - the 7D is far superior.

If you want both image quality and abiltiy to shoot action, then you must look at a 5D III or a 1Dx.

From what I have understood from the OP's post and responses in this thread, the 5D III is the camera that will satisfy. I suggest keeping a sharp eye out for sales on the 5D III and pulling the trigger when it gets around $2,600 USD. Save the money spent renting a 6D and put it toward a 5DIII.


----------



## PureShot (Aug 15, 2013)

:-[ Auto Focus - the 7D is far superior :-[
the 6D Auto focus is far superior, i worked last 3 years with 7D and 1 mount with 6D
only one place the 7D win is the fps speed for all other the 6D is so far better camera
don't waste your time to wait and take 6D !
look this photo at high iso, very low light on the pregnant girl
/0/]http://www.studio-photo.ca/galerie/photo-maternite-grossesse/#prettyPhoto[gallery-1]/0/
Pure Shot


----------



## bholliman (Aug 15, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > The 6D is a superior camera to the 7D for what the OP listed as intended uses.
> ...



Maybe I didn't ready TDL2024's post as thoroughly as I should have? I recalled this statement:



TDL2024 said:


> I don't shoot sports, so a 1D series AF system probably isn't necessary.



But must have missed his last phrase here:



TDL2024 said:


> I've never had a camera that the center point wasn't the bee's knees....the only problem is I rarely use those points.



So, if the OP almost always uses the outer AF points, the 6D's AF system with 1 (excellent) center cross-type point and 10 vertical or horizontal points will not perform as well 7D with its 19 cross-type points. The 6D's center point is better than any of the 7D's points, but the 6D's outer AF points are not as good.

If outer AF point performance is the primary criteria, the 5D3 (or 1DX) is really the only logical upgrade for the OP's 7D available now.


----------



## bholliman (Aug 15, 2013)

papa-razzi said:


> The 6D is not an "upgrade" from the 7D. The cameras are designed for different purposes.
> 
> For Image Quality, FF sensor, low light shooting - the 6D is far superior.
> 
> ...



+1


----------



## TDL2024 (Aug 15, 2013)

Well, the general consensus seems to be:

Center point on 6D - Blows away anything else
Outer points - iffy to downright bad

The unfortunate thing is I kinda _need_ those outer points (specifically just the two on the right) to be 7D-ish in speed (cross type I guess). I have a feeling I might end up looking for a deal on a 5DIII...

Thanks for the input guys!


----------



## Act444 (Aug 16, 2013)

You know what - the 6D's outer points are just fine - when you are in good light. I had no trouble with the outer points in a moderately-lit indoor venue. However, if you are trying to focus on anything plain, or you are in low light, they will struggle. Need to use center point in those situations. 

If you REALLY need solid, reliable performance from the outer points at all times, 6D is probably not your camera then.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 16, 2013)

papa-razzi said:


> The 6D is not an "upgrade" from the 7D. The cameras are designed for different purposes.
> 
> For Image Quality, FF sensor, low light shooting - the 6D is far superior.
> 
> ...



Yes it is....thats why I UPGRADED.... Image Quality, low light shooting (where it focuses much better than a 7D) are what is important.

I had the 7D since it came out, never ever used the high FPS.

Its a better camera than the 5D Mkii which was better than the 7D.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 16, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> Yes it is....thats why I UPGRADED.... Image Quality, low light shooting (where it focuses much better than a 7D) are what is important.



...what is important *to you*. I think you forgot to add that part. For someone with a 7D who shoots fast-moving sports, birds in flight, etc., would the 6D be an upgrade? No. A better sensor for low light doesn't help if the AF system can't track your subject...you'll just get low-noise blurry shots. 

As I asked elsewhere, is a Mercedes SL550 convertible an 'upgrade' to a Ford F150? Not for someone who needs to haul around loads of dirt or bricks every day...

Can you honestly say the outer AF points of the 6D perform better than those of the 7D?


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 16, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > Yes it is....thats why I UPGRADED.... Image Quality, low light shooting (where it focuses much better than a 7D) are what is important.
> ...



Well to be honest I did not buy the 6D for its outer points performance, no one would I read the specs and knew what I was getting. To date I have not had any major issues with the focusing points although I do concede that the 7D is far superior in most respects on focussing - apart from the killer 6D centre point 

I loved the 7D it was a very capable camera, its just that the 6D takes better pictures.

As I said I did not use the high FPS at all - how often do you use it ?

I take a range of pictures from Macro, portrait, landscape - although the &D was a great camera, top of the range APS-C camera, I do not believe that it is as good as the 6D - bottom of the range FF camera.

I use the 600ex-rt system - the 6D has additional features with the RT system that the 7D can't do - one of the reasons I bought it.

The WiFi is no gimmick and for remote untethered shooting and the ability to display images in the field on an iPad once again a feature I really wanted.

Lastly and most importantly I wanted to go to a FF sensor.... something the 7D is nt - I could not afford a Mark III which is far superior to the 6D.

So all in all the 6D afforded me the upgrade path I wanted!!


----------



## Skirball (Aug 16, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> As I said I did not use the high FPS at all - how often do you use it ?



There are people that use it quite often. There are people that use it less often, but when they do they need it.

He's not debating any of the points you made about the 6D. He’s simply pointing out that every point you made comparing the two are specific to your needs. Not everyone has the same needs.
For the record, I own and love my 6D. But I’d never compare it against a 7D for sports or fast moving subjects.


----------



## Jim O (Aug 16, 2013)

Skirball said:


> For the record, I own and love my 6D. But I’d never compare it against a 7D for sports or fast moving subjects.


+1

I love mine too. But I don't cover the Grand Prix, or even shoot indoor track events. I occasionally/rarely shoot birds, and the focus is fine, and the FPS is more than I need. Maybe I miss some shots, but not $1500 worth of shots. I used that money, and a bit more, to buy a 28-70 f/2.8L II. Better choice *for me*.


----------



## Act444 (Aug 16, 2013)

Just acquired a second-hand 7d for use for sports/backup/reach. IQ wise it does not hold up to the 6D or current-gen FF but I didn't expect it to. (I can handle more noise in my sports shots if it gets me more reach and more pixels on my subject.) 

To me, the 6D wins on IQ and versatility...the 7D wins on AF and speed. Different strengths and weaknesses...can't really say one camera is completely "better" than the other, but if I had to choose one, it would be 6D every time. Covers 80% of my needs (but completely inadequate for the other 20%, which is why I have both cameras)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 16, 2013)

Act444 said:


> To me, the 6D wins on IQ and versatility...the 7D wins on AF and speed. Different strengths and weaknesses...can't really say one camera is completely "better" than the other, but if I had to choose one, it would be 6D every time. Covers 80% of my needs (but completely inadequate for the other 20%, which is why I have both cameras)



That's really my main point, and it's why I had both a 5DII and a 7D, and why I now have a 1D X to replace both.


----------



## Act444 (Aug 16, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > To me, the 6D wins on IQ and versatility...the 7D wins on AF and speed. Different strengths and weaknesses...can't really say one camera is completely "better" than the other, but if I had to choose one, it would be 6D every time. Covers 80% of my needs (but completely inadequate for the other 20%, which is why I have both cameras)
> ...



Yeah...perhaps the new 7D can be 1.3x crop with improved high-ISO performance...the 1D X being FF kills it for me as a sports cam (price too). 

Actually, out of the cameras I have I'd choose the 5D3 over both the 6D and 7D if I was limited to just one. But all three serve a different purpose, even if just brief (as is the case of the 7D...)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 16, 2013)

Act444 said:


> Yeah...perhaps the new 7D can be 1.3x crop with improved high-ISO performance...the 1D X being FF kills it for me as a sports cam (price too).



APS-H is dead. 

I can see the price killing the 1D X as a sports cam, but not it being FF - the IQ of a 1D X image cropped to the 1DIV's FoV is as good or better than the 1DIV.


----------



## Act444 (Aug 16, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah...perhaps the new 7D can be 1.3x crop with improved high-ISO performance...the 1D X being FF kills it for me as a sports cam (price too).
> ...



I understand that...I was speaking more in relation to my own needs/desires though. That's the one time I really value the reach of 1.6x - the lenses you would need to get the same FOV on FF either don't exist or require one to sell his soul. When you can't get closer, the reach is nice to have- can put more pixels on subject/have additional cropping latitude. 

I found that most times I can get close enough to where I can benefit from FF, and the IQ is unbeatable. the few times I can't, however...


----------



## surapon (Aug 16, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > Yes it is....thats why I UPGRADED.... Image Quality, low light shooting (where it focuses much better than a 7D) are what is important.
> ...



Dear Sir, Mr. neuroanatomist----I love your Words/ Great Words for my whole week "As I asked elsewhere, is a Mercedes SL550 convertible an 'upgrade' to a Ford F150? Not for someone who needs to haul around loads of dirt or bricks every day..."----Yes, Sir, We need to ask our self " WHAT FOR" first, Before to buy the new equipment that We just buy and use 1-2 time and Put in the Box. Yes, I Have 2 Big MB, cars just use 1 or 2 times per Month ( to charge the Batteries) and Stay in Garage all the times, But I use my 2005 Acura MDX/ Medium size SUV in every days ( 160,000 + Miles) for carry my Professional Equipment for my work and The Hobby ( Photography) Equipment, for my FUN, in every day.
Thousand Thanks for your Great / Logic Words.
Surapon


----------



## papa-razzi (Aug 16, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> papa-razzi said:
> 
> 
> > The 6D is not an "upgrade" from the 7D. The cameras are designed for different purposes.
> ...



You missed the point entirely. Granted the 6D is a better camera for your needs, and therefore was an upgrade - for you. But, in general, the 6D is not an upgrade to the 7D straight across. 

Let me ask you. Is a Porche 911 an upgrade to a Land-Rover Range Rover? Or to a Cadilac Escalade?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 16, 2013)

papa-razzi said:


> Is a Porche 911 an upgrade to a Land-Rover Range Rover? Or to a Cadilac Escalade?



That depends...can I put three child car seats in a Porsche 911?


----------



## Eldar (Aug 16, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> papa-razzi said:
> 
> 
> > Is a Porche 911 an upgrade to a Land-Rover Range Rover? Or to a Cadilac Escalade?
> ...



Yupp, you can. The only problem is that there is not room for the children


----------



## Skirball (Aug 16, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> As I asked elsewhere, is a Mercedes SL550 convertible an 'upgrade' to a Ford F150? Not for someone who needs to haul around loads of dirt or bricks every day...



I don't know, I see Mercedes convertibles hauling around big piles of shit every day.

*drum roll*


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 17, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> papa-razzi said:
> 
> 
> > Is a Porche 911 an upgrade to a Land-Rover Range Rover? Or to a Cadilac Escalade?
> ...


I've got a Mazda3. I can fit an 8' 2x4 inside it, regularly carries two canoes on the roof, and camping gear and food for two weeks inside.... can't do that in a Porsche 911  For me and my needs a Porsche 911 is a downgrade.

With cameras, since I value AF so highly, a 6D is a downgrade from a 7D.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 17, 2013)

When I had the 7D I knew it had a better focussing system than the 5D Mk II - I also new that the 5D Mk II was a better camera.

I had a 7D 'top of the range ' APS-C camera whereas the Mk II was the bottom of the range FF Canon Camera, I would have love to have UPGRADED to the FF but even then could not afford the difference.

Have a look where the 7D sits in the current Canon line up compared to the 6D - therefore the 6D is an upgrade to the 7D - I can't make it any simpler for you......


----------



## bholliman (Aug 17, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> Have a look where the 7D sits in the current Canon line up compared to the 6D - therefore the 6D is an upgrade to the 7D - I can't make it any simpler for you......



I certainly agree with you that overall the 6D is a better camera than the 7D. In most respects the 6D outperforms the 7D. But, the OP framed the question around outer AF point performance. In that context, the 7D is superior.


----------



## johnhenry (Aug 17, 2013)

I don't really see the upgrade path from 7D to the 6D.

The 7D has the higher frame rate for action, the AF seldom fails and the pixel count not all that different. I have absolutely no problem with the image quality, and that is using such greats lens as a 24-105L, a 28mm f2 Zeiss Distagon, a 35mm PC Distagon, an 85 f/1.2 Zeiss 50th Anniversary and a 200mm f/1.8 Canon USM

One place where the rubber meets the road in the superior build quality (seals, dial layout esp) over the 6D.

I viewed the 6D as a sort of inexpensive test camera for the FF market. and after handling it and using it for a day, my thoughts haven't changed in that regard. It felt sort of toyish, and the 20M pixel count was sort of underwhelming.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> Have a look where the 7D sits in the current Canon line up compared to the 6D - therefore the 6D is an upgrade to the 7D - I can't make it any simpler for you......



Then please, stop trying. 

Have a look at where Chevy's Silverado 3500 sits in their lineup - the cheapest Corvette costs more, so by your logic, the Corvette must be an upgrade from the Silverado. But if you need to haul 7,000 pounds of crap around on a daily basis, is the Corvette really an upgrade?

The only thing you've managed to make clear is that you don't understand the concept of 'fit for purpose'.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 17, 2013)

johnhenry said:


> I don't really see the upgrade path from 7D to the 6D.
> 
> The 7D has the higher frame rate for action, the AF seldom fails and the pixel count not all that different. I have absolutely no problem with the image quality, and that is using such greats lens as a 24-105L, a 28mm f2 Zeiss Distagon, a 35mm PC Distagon, an 85 f/1.2 Zeiss 50th Anniversary and a 200mm f/1.8 Canon USM
> 
> ...


Keep telling yourself that.... one day even you might believe it!!


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 17, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > Have a look where the 7D sits in the current Canon line up compared to the 6D - therefore the 6D is an upgrade to the 7D - I can't make it any simpler for you......
> ...



Oh well you have made it clear that at least you know a little something about cars!!


----------



## insanitybeard (Aug 17, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> When I had the 7D I knew it had a better focussing system than the 5D Mk II - I also new that the 5D Mk II was a better camera.
> 
> I had a 7D 'top of the range ' APS-C camera whereas the Mk II was the bottom of the range FF Canon Camera, I would have love to have UPGRADED to the FF but even then could not afford the difference.
> 
> Have a look where the 7D sits in the current Canon line up compared to the 6D - therefore the 6D is an upgrade to the 7D - I can't make it any simpler for you......



What point are you trying to make here? The 6D is an upgrade for IQ, no question, but not for framerate and AF coverage/customisation, they serve different purposes so the upgrade you speak of is not black and white. It depends on what your priorities are....


----------



## thgmuffin (Aug 17, 2013)

The best alternative to the 5D3 would be the 6D and 7D! 

6D for still imagery, low light af, full frame advantages. Basically the best all rounder. 
7D for sports, moving subjects, optical flash, crop factor.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 17, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > When I had the 7D I knew it had a better focussing system than the 5D Mk II - I also new that the 5D Mk II was a better camera.
> ...



I agree with you 100%


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 17, 2013)

thgmuffin said:


> The best alternative to the 5D3 would be the 6D and 7D!
> 
> 6D for still imagery, low light af, full frame advantages. Basically the best all rounder.
> 7D for sports, moving subjects, optical flash, crop factor.



Great idea!!


----------



## insanitybeard (Aug 17, 2013)

thgmuffin said:


> The best alternative to the 5D3 would be the 6D and 7D!
> 
> 6D for still imagery, low light af, full frame advantages. Basically the best all rounder.
> 7D for sports, moving subjects, optical flash, crop factor.



I have considered going this route, the only thing is I would prefer to have all the features in one body (obviously the 5D III does not have a built in flash), I prefer to keep weight and bulk down but it sure is an option!


----------



## thgmuffin (Aug 17, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> thgmuffin said:
> 
> 
> > The best alternative to the 5D3 would be the 6D and 7D!
> ...


Not being able to trigger slave flashes is also a pain... :-\ 7D can do it via onboard flash (optically) but 6D can't...

Anyway I still shoot with my T2i (almost identical in terms of image performance to 7D) when I need something lighter and that "extra reach" that APSC gives you. Plus I only own one telephoto lens (55-250).


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 17, 2013)

thgmuffin said:


> insanitybeard said:
> 
> 
> > thgmuffin said:
> ...



Good luck...... Canon do not put pop up flashes in any of their FF cameras, I use an ST-E3 to trigger my 600ex-rts and I also have a 550ex and a 580ex ii if I would ever need to do optical off camera flash.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > The only thing you've managed to make clear is that you don't understand the concept of 'fit for purpose'.
> ...



Not about Chevys, I had to Google that. But I do know a little something about cameras and their uses. Just a little. 



Janbo Makimbo said:


> insanitybeard said:
> 
> 
> > What point are you trying to make here? The 6D is an upgrade for IQ, no question, but not for framerate and AF coverage/customisation, they serve different purposes so the upgrade you speak of is not black and white. It depends on what your priorities are....
> ...



So it seems that you _do_ understand that the 6D is a downgrade from the 7D in terms of fps and AF performance excluding the center point's low light sensitivity. That's good. 

The 6D is a substantial upgrade to the 7D in terms of sensor IQ. 

But here's the thing - if the lesser AF of the 6D misses focus or the slower fps of the 6D misses the 'key moment' in a burst, the better sensor IQ of the 6D is useless. 

That's the point - the 6D and the 7D are different cameras, optimized for different uses. If your use case is not the one that camera is optimized for, it's not an upgrade...for you. 

Having both is certainly an option - that's why I had both the 7D and 5DII for quite a while. But carrying two cameras is not very convenient, so having great IQ and great AF in one body was the upgrade that I chose.


----------



## Pi (Aug 17, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> But here's the thing - if the lesser AF of the 6D misses focus [...]



I presume you are talking about shooting in burst mode only.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2013)

Pi said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > But here's the thing - if the lesser AF of the 6D misses focus [...]
> ...



Not necessarily. Shooting a moving subject, particularly toward/away movement, and especially that sort of subject with an outer AF point. The [not quoted] bit about missing a key moment was in reference to the faster burst rate of the 7D.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Aug 17, 2013)

You are correct... I do portrait, landscape and macro work....... Hence its a massive upgrade for me. One thing I do not miss with the 7D is that it handled noise poorly!


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 27, 2013)

The 6D can lose focus during servo tracking, when leaving all points active...because for some reason it wants to rely on the outer points more than the center point...even when the target object is right over the center point. In my opinion, this is a big part of the reason the 6D loses focus lock during servo tracking. It's not so much that it won't "hand off" between all the outer points...it's that they won't hand off to the center point (which is quite a capable point...admittedly the outer points are not very capable on their own.) 

If the 6D simply allowed the center point to dominate (when all points are active)...rather than get passed over, the camera would do much better. Certainly in good light with a decent telephoto lens, if you leave only the center point active, and keep that point over the object you're tracking...even especially when the object is moving toward you (less so when moving away)...well in this situation I get about 8 out of 10 shots in focus..._even in less than ideal light._ It's more like 9 to 10 out of 10 in focus, in bright outdoor light. Of course if the background or foreground is busy, or has more contrast than the object...and these subject matter are very close to the target object in the field of view...yes the 6D can lose lock that way as well. So in less than ideal light with all points active, while servo tracking...I agree the hit rate drops to anywhere from 6 to a terrible 3 out of 10...especially for a fairly fast moving subject. But then that's why you pay the extra $1100+/- for the 5D3...Again the two cameras weren't meant to compete with each other directly. It's just that in some aspects they do.


----------



## thgmuffin (Aug 29, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> thgmuffin said:
> 
> 
> > insanitybeard said:
> ...



Going to buy a RF603 and a few Yongnuo 560 III! Radio triggering FTW!


----------

