# 6D Autofocus not impressive



## gimmeadeal19 (Mar 26, 2013)

I rented a 6D camera body to take helicopter skiing in Canada. I brought my 24-105 f/4, 40 f/2.8, and my 50 f/1.8 lenses. I found the autofocus to be slow with all 3 lenses, especially in lower light. I really experimented by changing many of the autofocus parameters and resetting the rental body to factory settings to make sure nothing was amiss. I found the 6D autofocus to be for the most part as good as my Rebel 550D with each of my lenses. I was really disappointed because a want a new body to replace my Rebel. Lensrentals.com checked the 6D and found it up to factory specs. Looks like I may have to pony up for the 5D m III. Does anyone think the climate and elevation had anything to do with the slow AF? Or does the 6D really have a mediocre AF?


----------



## Radiating (Mar 26, 2013)

gimmeadeal19 said:


> I rented a 6D camera body to take helicopter skiing in Canada. I brought my 24-105 f/4, 40 f/2.8, and my 50 f/1.8 lenses. I found the autofocus to be slow with all 3 lenses, especially in lower light. I really experimented by changing many of the autofocus parameters and resetting the rental body to factory settings to make sure nothing was amiss. I found the 6D autofocus to be for the most part as good as my Rebel 550D with each of my lenses. I was really disappointed because a want a new body to replace my Rebel. Lensrentals.com checked the 6D and found it up to factory specs. Looks like I may have to pony up for the 5D m III. Does anyone think the climate and elevation had anything to do with the slow AF? Or does the 6D really have a mediocre AF?



The 6D has nearly the exact same autofocus system as a newer Rebel so it's no surprise at all that it performed similarly. If you want better autofocus get a 5D3 or a 1DX, the purpose of the 6D is improved image quality and sensor size.


----------



## Nishi Drew (Mar 26, 2013)

gimmeadeal19 said:


> I rented a 6D camera body to take helicopter skiing in Canada. I brought my 24-105 f/4, 40 f/2.8, and my 50 f/1.8 lenses. I found the autofocus to be slow with all 3 lenses, especially in lower light. I really experimented by changing many of the autofocus parameters and resetting the rental body to factory settings to make sure nothing was amiss. I found the 6D autofocus to be for the most part as good as my Rebel 550D with each of my lenses. I was really disappointed because a want a new body to replace my Rebel. Lensrentals.com checked the 6D and found it up to factory specs. Looks like I may have to pony up for the 5D m III. Does anyone think the climate and elevation had anything to do with the slow AF? Or does the 6D really have a mediocre AF?



So, AF is slow to lock on or the lenses just slow to attain focus? Because focusing speed is based on the lens' focusing motor. I've only briefly tried the 6D at a store a couple times and the focus feels snappy and the outer points are accurate as well compared to my 5D2. The 6D may not have the greatest AF but certainly not from a rebel, it's claimed that the 6D's center point can focus in dark areas as low as -3EV and I can believe that, and the 5D3 nor 1DX AF are built for that, they are superior at obtaining and tracking the subject in general, and they're fast, but the 1DX is special with it's higher voltage that can possibly speed up the motor in certain lenses to actually achieve quicker AF lock. If you want to shoot sports then a 7D or 5D3 would be a lot more useful.


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 26, 2013)

To the original poster, did you really expect to be impressed by the 6D's autofocus? I considered renting one as well, but instead I just bought one, it will be here this week. But I'm not buying it because of its ability to AF at a world class level. However, I feel I can definitely make do with it. I tried a 6D in a store, and it had the 24-105 mounted to it. By comparison, I had rented a 1D Mark 4 last fall, along with a 24-105 lens (I also used the 1D4 with several of my other lenses). I found the focus speed to be slower than I thought it should be (but still faster than any rebel) with the 24-105, even on the 1D4. It didn't seem that much slower in the store on the 6D, if any. It even seemed at least adequate in servo mode, in the store. I was kind of surprised at that. 

The 24-105 is just not the fastest AF lens, and the 50 f/1.8 is extremely slow at AF. The 24-105's focal range is why you use that lens...not its autofocus speed. 

If you wanted to test ultimate AF speed of the 6D, you should at least try a really fast AF lens. MY 135 f/2 focuses about as fast as any lens I've ever tried or rented. Yet even it only focused barely faster on the 1D4, than on my 50D...and actually could not AF at all in low light on the 1D4, where my 50D actually could (at least with center point-only selected). I feel my 50D's ability to autofocus fast and accurate, just may be superior to all other Canon crop cameras and rebels, other than of course the 7D (and that especially includes the 60D).

I also agree with Nishi Drew above...but I'll take it one step farther. If you need the fastest AF speed, don't even get a 5D3. Pony up for the 1DX. In the future I will either buy one, or else its replacement. The 1DX is far superior in its ability to autofocus quickly and accurately, than every other camera on the planet, at least as of now.

The only thing I highly dislike about the 6D so far, just from trying it in the store, is the magnify button. I want to immediately zoom into 100% of the image to see if I got sharp focus, and not have to spin the top wheel. Hopefully there is a shortcut, or else someone will come up with one.


----------



## x-vision (Mar 26, 2013)

gimmeadeal19 said:


> Or does the 6D really have a mediocre AF?



Yes, it does ... but you are not supposed to be disappointed by it. 8)


----------



## Runibl (Mar 26, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> The only thing I highly dislike about the 6D so far, just from trying it in the store, is the magnify button. I want to immediately zoom into 100% of the image to see if I got sharp focus, and not have to spin the top wheel. Hopefully there is a shortcut, or else someone will come up with one.


You can customize it in the menu, so that it jumps straight to 100% when you press magnify.


----------



## verysimplejason (Mar 26, 2013)

6D isn't intended for sports or fast action. Why not try a 5D3? It's AF is a lot, lot better than 6D.


----------



## rifz (Mar 26, 2013)

How does the 6D compare to the 5DmkII? they are about the same price. Could someone who has used both give us their thoughts. thanks


----------



## timmy_650 (Mar 26, 2013)

Yes pony up the money for the 5D3. It is simple. You want a better AF the 5D3 has it.


----------



## MathieuB (Mar 26, 2013)

I bought the 6D in December and I knew what I was getting into, AF wise: Something similar to my previous Rebel T2i autofocus system.

For stills and low-light shooting, the 6D autofocus works perfectly fine. 

However, for action and moving objects, forget it, it's terrible. I took pictures of butterflies last week and my hit rate of butterflies in flight is abysmal, 10-15% at most, with the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8, a relatively fast lens when it comes to AF speed. 

On the good side, when they were not moving, the image quality of the shots I took was stunning, something I'd probably never see from a Rebel.


----------



## Sella174 (Mar 26, 2013)

The EOS 6D is in my opinion a "Rebel" in disguise ... it is an entry-level (full-frame) camera.



timmy_650 said:


> Yes pony up the money for the 5D3. It is simple. You want a better AF the 5D3 has it.



Exactly what Canon's Marketing Dept. wants you to do! Well, not exactly ... they will prefer you _buy_ the 6D first, get frustrated with the mediocre 11-point AF system, then sell it on and buy a 5D Mk.III ... where you end up using only the centre-AF point, as the camera has too many without any method of actually controlling them (like "Eye-Control").


----------



## sandymandy (Mar 26, 2013)

5diii got several modes for seelecting focus points. in groups for example. sure it wpuld be hell if the only possibility was choosing each point alone urself


----------



## Sella174 (Mar 26, 2013)

"Eye-Control" allows you to select the AF-point to use by simply looking through the viewfinder at that object which you want the camera to focus on ... no fiddling with menus, buttons or settings.

The way you can select the active AF-points in the 5D Mk.III (seems) great ... now why can't we do the same on the "lower"-grade cameras? The reason I only use the centre AF-point (out of 9) on my EOS 30D is because those two on the extreme outside are always getting in the way and there is no option to disable just them, but keep the other 7 in the centre-ish active. This is just sucky design.


----------



## learncanon (Mar 26, 2013)

gimmeadeal19 said:


> I rented a 6D camera body to take helicopter skiing in Canada. I brought my 24-105 f/4, 40 f/2.8, and my 50 f/1.8 lenses. I found the autofocus to be slow with all 3 lenses, especially in lower light. I really experimented by changing many of the autofocus parameters and resetting the rental body to factory settings to make sure nothing was amiss. I found the 6D autofocus to be for the most part as good as my Rebel 550D with each of my lenses. I was really disappointed because a want a new body to replace my Rebel. Lensrentals.com checked the 6D and found it up to factory specs. Looks like I may have to pony up for the 5D m III. Does anyone think the climate and elevation had anything to do with the slow AF? Or does the 6D really have a mediocre AF?



Of course it is NOT impressive. It is not meant to be. But it IS good enough for everyday shots. It's a travel camera as Canon calls it. You need to do your research before buying. You are not impressive.


----------



## gimmeadeal19 (Mar 26, 2013)

If you read my original post, I rented the 6D to try it out. I did not buy it. I was seeking other opinions because many have said the 6D's AF was in the same ballpark of the 5D m III. I found this not to be the case with the kit 24-105 f/4.


----------



## learncanon (Mar 26, 2013)

Freelancer said:


> well in case someone REALLY said such thing, he has no clue.
> 
> of course the 5D MK3 AF is much better then the 6D´s. especially for tracking.
> thought center AF performance is not so bad as some paint it.



yes u r right. Mk3 AF is better, more accurate, slightly faster and tracking is a lot better. but for $1000+ more, its down to the user how important the AF is. many would use that money to buy a new lens!
6D is still good and perfectly usable except for extreme sport.


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 26, 2013)

It's no surprise. It's the same regurgitated 20D AF with a new face and didnt impress me either.


----------



## MathieuB (Mar 26, 2013)

Freelancer said:


> MathieuB said:
> 
> 
> > last week and my hit rate of butterflies in flight is abysmal, 10-15% at most, with the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8, a relatively fast lens when it comes to AF speed.
> ...



Yes, thinking back on it, I could have done a few things differently and could have changed a few AF settings in the custom functions settings.

Then again, butterflies move fast and in a very unpredictable way, so keeping them in the center of the frame (on the central AF point) is quite a challenge to begin with.


----------



## kubelik (Mar 26, 2013)

as most people here have noted, everyone could pretty much see from the start that the 6D AF was a warmed-over 5D Mark II AF system. as a 5D Mark II owner, I have to agree that it is functional but really not "impressive", when it is pushed anywhere near its limits of low light or action (or heaven forbid, low light action) it really falls down flat. the other 90% of the time, it does it job fine.

whoever told you the 5D Mark III's AF system was hardly any different from the 6D was a total liar, they're really not in the same ballpark. if AF speed and accuracy matters to you, it's worth investing in the 5D III.


----------



## dswatson83 (Mar 26, 2013)

Yeah, the 6D is very underwhelming compared to the 5D3. After I saw this video, I knew there was just too much missing from the Canon 6D to make it worth while. 
Canon 6D Vs. 5D Mark III Hands On Review


----------



## robbymack (Mar 26, 2013)

i don't think anyone has said the 6d af is in the same ballpark as the 5diii. Center point only, its probably a tie, but everything else its not even close.


----------



## Robert Welch (Mar 26, 2013)

robbymack said:


> i don't think anyone has said the 6d af is in the same ballpark as the 5diii. Center point only, its probably a tie, but everything else its not even close.



I have both the 6D & 5DIII, and the center point only focus on the 6D is better, particularly in low light. The 5DIII will just stop working if the light get's too low, but the 6D remains accurate. In fact, in my use that center point on the 6D is the best AF sensor Canon has ever made. I have had a higher 'hit' rate of in focus photos with that camera than I have with any other, and that includes the 5DIII. Obviously, the AF isn't as versatile as the 5DIII, it wouldn't be very good for shooting butterflies, for instance. But for portrait work, and slow moving subjects, it does a fine job. I don't notice it particularly slow in focus either, I have used it at several weddings and have yet to find a situation where I felt I missed a shot because the camera wasn't fast enough to lock focus. In very dark situations, I have had that happen with the 5DIII, so in those situation I actually prefer the 6D AF, whether the subject is moving or not.


----------



## jocau (Mar 26, 2013)

Another scenario where the 6D will fail is this one:

Taking portraits at very large apertures ( F/1.2 - F/1.8 ) at close or minimum focus distance while following the rule of thirds without using liveview and without cropping the image in postprocessing. That's the reason why I'm preferring the 5D3 at the moment. I like to have points exactly located on the thirds of the image in the viewfinder.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 26, 2013)

gimmeadeal19 said:


> If you read my original post, I rented the 6D to try it out. I did not buy it. I was seeking other opinions because many have said the 6D's AF was in the same ballpark of the 5D m III.



Maybe bad communication? The 6d af is 99% the same as the older 5d2 (2!), except that Canon added two non-cross points and made the center point more light sensitive. There still is no (zero, 0) full cross point at all @f2.8 (only @f4+), so precision with fast lenses esp. on moving objects should be very bad.

The 6d is designed for low light shooting of nearly static scenes, for everything else the keeper rate will be very low and less than the 60d or 650d/700d.



MathieuB said:


> However, for action and moving objects, forget it, it's terrible. I took pictures of butterflies last week and my hit rate of butterflies in flight is abysmal, 10-15% at most



This is the worst-case scenario, same with my 60d, for these shots you have to get a 1d4 or 5d3/1dx.



rifz said:


> How does the 6D compare to the 5DmkII? they are about the same price. Could someone who has used both give us their thoughts. thanks



The advantages of the 6d over the 5d2 are (regressions: build quality, x-sync- shutter speed, joystick):


higher iso capability
less banding
higher dynamic range
center-point af up to -3lv
silent shutter
faster fps
longer battery life
shorter release time
better metering & auto-wb
hi-res lcd
small & light but good grip
top wheel lock
gps built-in
wifi built-in
newer firmware:
full support for rt flashes, 
in-camera multishot/hdr
in-camera ca correction
7x bracketing
dual afma for zooms
servo af customization
flexible min/max auto-iso
min shutter speed setting
orientation-linked af point


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 26, 2013)

Not expecting stellar af like the mk3, but, I am looking for a decent backup body to my mk3. Just placed my rental order for a 6d and will be shooting a wedding running with the combo this weekend. So we'll see what this thing can do...


----------



## Skirball (Mar 26, 2013)

gimmeadeal19 said:


> If you read my original post, I rented the 6D to try it out. I did not buy it. I was seeking other opinions because many have said the 6D's AF was in the same ballpark of the 5D m III. I found this not to be the case with the kit 24-105 f/4.



Ok, I went along with it for one page, but give me a break. Anyone who has read more than 2 threads on here would know about the AF differences between the 6D and 5d3. Admit it, this is a troll and you were just trying to get the 5d3 fan boys to circle jerk it one more time.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 26, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> So we'll see what this thing can do...



Please tell us your experiences, I'd be interested to hear from a pro if the 6d is able to do a wedding (I expect it does, after all the 5d2 was able to and the 6d center af is more precise and should be faster at lower light).


----------



## tomservo51 (Mar 26, 2013)

I rented on this past weekend for a wedding. My 2 cents:

IQ was great
Auto-focus was not great.
Silent shooting is awesome during the ceremony and makes people feel more comfortable!

I think it would be a good 2nd camera but not recommended for the high pressure moments, coming down the isle, kiss, etc!

*I am not a seasoned pro so take if for what it's worth.


----------



## dexstrose (Mar 26, 2013)

Since we all know that the 6d's AF points are not it's strong point (center point is pretty good in my opinion). Is there a way to maximize the AF with settings or tips?

Few things I tried to get a good understanding of the 6d AF and have more keepers. 
• I try to make sure that I am focusing on a contrast part of the subject for less error in focusing.
• I have been trying that AF-on button with my thumb while shooting, there is a thread on the technique.
• When on AI Servo, I wait a second and make sure its locked on before taking the shots.

I'm getting better and learning the 6d AF.

Anyone else have any tips?
How about the AF adjustments when tracking a subject, etc?


----------



## hsbn (Mar 26, 2013)

One thing I don't get is before the 5DMIII came out, people were doing fine with 5DMII. I did. I shot a lot of wedding with 5DMII. My clients are happy, and I'm proud of my work. It's still a great camera for me. I bet it is still an awesome camera for many working pro out there. Yet, the 6D is a little better overall but it seems like everyone is trying to bash the camera. If you could take great pictures with the 5DMII, you can take great picture with the 6D. I know its AF is not in the same league with the 5DMIII but it is still a great camera IMHO.
It has its limit, but I've seen many great bird in fly photos taken with the 5DMII. I don't see any reason why the 6D can be any worst than the 5DMII. Or suddenly, the 5DMII became a worth-less camera at the end of its cycle.


----------



## BrettS (Mar 26, 2013)

hsbn said:


> One thing I don't get is before the 5DMIII came out, people were doing fine with 5DMII. I did. I shot a lot of wedding with 5DMII. My clients are happy, and I'm proud of my work. It's still a great camera for me. I bet it is still an awesome camera for many working pro out there. Yet, the 6D is a little better overall but it seems like everyone is trying to bash the camera. If you could take great pictures with the 5DMII, you can take great picture with the 6D. I know its AF is not in the same league with the 5DMIII but it is still a great camera IMHO.
> It has its limit, but I've seen many great bird in fly photos taken with the 5DMII. I don't see any reason why the 6D can be any worst than the 5DMII. Or suddenly, the 5DMII became a worth-less camera at the end of its cycle.



This.


----------



## elflord (Mar 26, 2013)

gimmeadeal19 said:


> I rented a 6D camera body to take helicopter skiing in Canada. I brought my 24-105 f/4, 40 f/2.8, and my 50 f/1.8 lenses. I found the autofocus to be slow with all 3 lenses, especially in lower light. I really experimented by changing many of the autofocus parameters and resetting the rental body to factory settings to make sure nothing was amiss. I found the 6D autofocus to be for the most part as good as my Rebel 550D with each of my lenses. I was really disappointed because a want a new body to replace my Rebel. Lensrentals.com checked the 6D and found it up to factory specs. Looks like I may have to pony up for the 5D m III. Does anyone think the climate and elevation had anything to do with the slow AF? Or does the 6D really have a mediocre AF?



Can you provide more details ? How were you using it ? Green box mode ?


----------



## elflord (Mar 26, 2013)

gimmeadeal19 said:


> If you read my original post, I rented the 6D to try it out. I did not buy it. I was seeking other opinions because many have said the 6D's AF was in the same ballpark of the 5D m III. I found this not to be the case with the kit 24-105 f/4.



Have you also tried the 5DIII ?


----------



## Skirball (Mar 26, 2013)

I tried to use my 6D to take a picture of a moving subject and the AF motor spontaneously combusted. True story.


----------



## MintMark (Mar 26, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> There still is no (zero, 0) full cross point at all @f2.8 (only @f4+), so precision with fast lenses esp. on moving objects should be very bad.



I think that's a little harsh. With a faster lens you do still have the centre cross point... it's just no more accurate than with a slower lens. However, I understand that it is designed to calculate focus to within one depth of field. Since depth of field is shallower it means the focussing is more accurate in absolute terms. Also, the 6d centre point does become more accurate in one direction, so if your scene accommodates that then you get focus to within a third of the depth of field.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 26, 2013)

MintMark said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > There still is no (zero, 0) full cross point at all @f2.8 (only @f4+), so precision with fast lenses esp. on moving objects should be very bad.
> ...



I admit my annoyance with the 6d af means that I might be a bit simplistic - but in fact many people seem to think that the 6d has a xxd-style center cross point (extra sensitive for f2.8 lenses) while with the 6d the opposite is true (non-cross overlay). Then think of the 1dx/5d3 double-cross points - doh. But of course for years photogs managed to shoot with the 5d2 center af just fine, and the 6d has improved the accuracy a bit (see lensrentals).

The imho real unforgivable point is Canon porting the 5d2 outer points 1:1 to the 6d when as far as I researched it you should better not use these, not only in dim light but because their precision and pattern detection is so bad and just behind the times. That won't hinder me from buying a 6d, but just saying...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 26, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> I admit my annoyance with the 6d af means that I might be a bit simplistic - but in fact many people seem to think that the 6d has a xxd-style center cross point (extra sensitive for f2.8 lenses) while with the 6d the opposite is true (non-cross overlay). Then think of the 1dx/5d3 double-cross points - doh.



In fact, xxD bodies since the 40D have been 9 cross-type at f/5.6 with a dual-cross center point (f/2.8 'x' superimposed on the center f/5.6 '+'). Moreover, even the T4i/650D and T5i/700D now have that AF sensor. The 1D X/ 5DIII have a vertical row of five of those dual-crosses, not just one in the center. As you state, the 6D doesn't even have that. Just sayin'.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> As you state, the 6D doesn't even have that. Just sayin'.



As you're the expert on Canon gear: Are there any redeeming reasons for Canon implementing the 5d2 af in the first place and then copying it to the 6d (+2 non-cross points, +low light af)? Maybe designing an af array for ff is more complicated/expensive - even though the af spread on 5d2/6d isn't very large?


----------



## gimmeadeal19 (Mar 27, 2013)

No elflord, I strictly used it in a custom setting sarcastic mode. 

I was on a ski trip away from my kids so I had plenty of time to use the 6D. I shot it with several different modes and AF adjustments. Too many to list. I rented it for 10 days and did a variety of shooting. My point is for a current Canon model the AF was no improvement over my 550D.

I did rent a 5D m III on a trip to NYC last Thanksgiving and it was everything it was cracked up to be. My purpose for renting the 6D was to see if my needs could be met with a less expensive body. They were not.


----------



## weixing (Mar 27, 2013)

Hi,
When 6D is launch, Canon already mention that 6D AF system is design to be low-light AF priority rather than AF speed and they cannot put in more cross point due to the larger AF element require for good low-light AF performance.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/09/20/qa-with-canons-mike-owen-behind-the-scenes-in-developing-the-6D-and-whats

Have a nice day.


----------



## x-vision (Mar 27, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Maybe designing an af array for ff is more complicated/expensive - even though the af spread on 5d2/6d isn't very large?


If Canon wanted to invest in a new AF system, they would have done it.
But they obviously decided to reuse the 5D/5DII AF system. 

The savings for Canon here come from reusing a mature, fully tested AF module and mirror assembly.
This saves them a lot of money for R&D, testing/validation, and subsequent support. 

FYI, here are the 6D and 5DII AF sensors side by side. 
The 6D clearly has a new sensor ... but one with an identical floorplan as the 5DII sensor - presumably to fit in the existing AF module. 







Source: http://www.phreekz.de/wordpress/2012/09/canon-af-vergleich-2012/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > As you state, the 6D doesn't even have that. Just sayin'.
> ...



Well, first off there was no 'implemented AF' in the 5DII - Canon simply reused the AF sensor from the original 5D. Many people compare it to the 20D/30D AF, but of course the sizes are different so the design is different. The theory of the assist points was nice - 6 'invisible' points to help with servo tracking. But in practice, it didn't work well, I suspect in part because of a slow AF chip and weak algorithms - and I bet they reused the whole system (AF chip and code) from the 5D in the 5DII, meaning a really old AF system. For sure it couldn't track well, and enabling the assist points (which are off by default) didn't seem to help. As for why, reusing the 5D's AF saved development and production costs. Similarly, when the 40D got a new AF array, the 20D/30D's system went to the Rebel/xxxD line, and eventually the 40D/50D/60D's AF went to the T4i/650D (which I expect means we'll see something new in the 70D, my money is on 15 points, 9 crosses </speculation>). 

The 6D got a similar system, looks like a modification of the basic 5D design. No more assist points (too bad, IMO, because with a modern AF chip and current algorithms, those tightly-clustered points may have been effective. I'm not sure I buy the bit about needing 'elements of the AF system to be larger' to support -3 EV. AF point size and threshold determine micro lens size, low light is more about signal amplification, and given the density of the 5DIII/1D X AF sensor at -2 EV compared to other bodies at -0.5 EV, I don't see it. 

Why 11 points on the 6D? I'd say pure marketing. The spread is no greater than the 5DII, just two extra points stuck in there. But consider the 6D's market position - 'entry-level FF'. Targeted to Rebel/xxxD and xxD users looking to 'go FF'. So, the target upgrade audience all have bodies with 9 AF points (and 18 MP sensors). So, give them 11 AF points (and 20 MP). Canon's marketing department understands that for most consumers, quantity trumps quality - the former is a simple 'more is better' and can listed as a top-line spec and be printed on a display placard at Best Buy, the latter requires some technical understanding (e.g., why 9 cross-type points are better than 1 cross type plus 10 lines). </cynicism>


----------



## verysimplejason (Mar 27, 2013)

x-vision said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe designing an af array for ff is more complicated/expensive - even though the af spread on 5d2/6d isn't very large?
> ...



I'm sorry but they don't have identical floorplan. It might look as if the same but the there are definitely more connections inside the 6D. Notice the amount of lines in both the upper and lower portion. This means that something is different in their logic implementation.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> But consider the 6D's market position - 'entry-level FF'. Targeted to Rebel/xxxD and xxD users looking to 'go FF'. So, the target upgrade audience all have bodies with 9 AF points (and 18 MP sensors). So, give them 11 AF points (and 20 MP). Canon's marketing department understands that for most consumers, quantity trumps quality



Great, thanks for the conclusive information - this goes into my personal "sticky" posts, and coming from you I guess there really aren't any hidden or redeeming facts except the obvious about the 6d af system - it's really a quick/reused minimal r&d system (thanks, Canon).


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 30, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > So we'll see what this thing can do...
> ...



@Marsu

not wedding tested yet, and the wedding I am doing is going to be small, ceremony only and in buffalo's botanical gardens - I will be using it but it's not the fullest wedding test I can do. But, I've had the rental body now for a full day, and have been putting it through some tests in conditions I may find at a wedding. Daytime, midday, not the ideal time to be shooting, but, weddings don't occur in prime shooting hours, so I thought a good test was midday street style candids. Here are some results


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 30, 2013)

I also did some night tests with some other photographers (interesting because they were both nikon shooters, one on a d800, one on a d3). They both had their cameres with them so we did alot of matching our settings and comparing. The center point locked on in some pretty damn dark conditions.

both shots at ISO 25,600, 50mm 1.4 lens at 1.4. One was darker than I think I will ever really need to shoot in with no on cam light or off cam light - the other had the subject in deep shadows and the big street light heavily back lighting him, not exactly wedding lighting but I could see that kind of situation occurring. The focus locked pretty quick in the center. 

On camera back previews, the 6d's images looked pretty damn good next to the same settings and focal length nikon shots. The d800 did look nicer at higher ISO's than the d3. 6d looked better than the d3, and i'd say the d800 was pretty close to the 6d but there is a whole lot more room to crop on the d800. I'm waiting to see what the other guys posts are like (seen one from the d3 shooter and the 6d does blow the d3 out of the water at high ISO). We'll see what the d800 images are like.

All in all, I have a feeling that the 6d will in fact become my backup body. If i didn't already have a 5d3 then it would be a no brainer, but, are the things missing from the 6d enough to warrant shelling out an extra grand for a backup body? I'm leaning towards no as the answer. After the hands on with it, if I were to opt to not snag a 6d, the AF wouldn't be the deal breaker, it would be the lack of a sync port. I like to have the option of having a flash on cam for fill and have off cam lighting. Is that enough of an issue to warrant the extra cost? (I will be eyeing the used and refurb market!).


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Mar 31, 2013)

Have the 6D AF bashers actually used the camera extensively?  Otherwise it's more likely regurgitated talking points from the social media echo chamber that originated from the ID-10-T department.

From this scientific and repeatable test, it is blindingly evident that it has more consistent & precise AF than the D800, 5D2 & 7D:

http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/2012/12/af-consistency-comparison-nikon-canon-phase-detect-contrast-detect/


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 31, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> All in all, I have a feeling that the 6d will in fact become my backup body. If i didn't already have a 5d3 then it would be a no brainer, but, are the things missing from the 6d enough to warrant shelling out an extra grand for a backup body? I'm leaning towards no as the answer. After the hands on with it, if I were to opt to not snag a 6d, the AF wouldn't be the deal breaker, it would be the lack of a sync port. I like to have the option of having a flash on cam for fill and have off cam lighting. Is that enough of an issue to warrant the extra cost? (I will be eyeing the used and refurb market!).



Thanks for the review, I you have a 5d3 and don't think the less precise 6d af is a deal breaker (except for sports and so on) it certainly will do ok for me.

Btw in anticipation of my 6d purchase I have bought a pc sync hotshoe adapter with ettl passthrough from ebay/china, except for the added bulk I really don't see any problem with not having it in the camera - actually the other way around, I don't like sticking cables like mini-usb into my camera at all.



Mark D5 TEAM III said:


> From this scientific and repeatable test, it is blindingly evident that it has more consistent & precise AF than the D800, 5D2 & 7D



The "bashing" stems from the lack of advancement, the 5d2 & 7d are years old cameras, and even a recent Rebel has a better af system than the expensive 6d (except for low light & fw customizations).


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 31, 2013)

2 things I found out last night that are negatives --- one is odd - if you try to use the remote wifi ap with off cam lighting, it won't pop the flashes. It will pop the flash if the flash is on camera. Why would that be? 

The other thing, - if the camera goes into sleep mode, it disappears from the available networks on the phone, so there is no way to 'wake' the camera up. I had been envisioning setting up the 6d in spots I would not be able to access during wedding ceremonies. So I need to make sure there is a way to have the camera never go into sleep mode fort hat idea to work. Glad to find that out now and not in the middle of a ceremony - that would be a good way to not get a single shot!


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 31, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> 2 things I found out last night that are negatives --- one is odd - if you try to use the remote wifi ap with off cam lighting, it won't pop the flashes. It will pop the flash if the flash is on camera. Why would that be?



Probably because this is the 1.0 release of the app, Canon delivered that in the short dev timeframe for the 6d when panicking about the Nikon d600 release. Pray someone revers engineers the communication so that 3rd party apps are possible...



Chuck Alaimo said:


> The other thing, - if the camera goes into sleep mode, it disappears from the available networks on the phone, so there is no way to 'wake' the camera up.



I already read about that, it's most likely due to the 6d wifi position as an "amateur" travel cam where long battery life is important. But it's still completely idiotic because Canon also markets the wifi feature for wildlife, the only current workaround until a fw update is to do something with the app every now and then to prevent sleep mode. There are two things you can do:

1. Bug Canon with this bug, they acknowledge problems after many complaints in their official forum (like the 5d3 af assist bug): http://forums.usa.canon.com/t5/EOS/bd-p/eos

2. Use Magic Lantern, I just posted a feature request for an option to disable 6d sleep mode (can you please check if the problem description if accurate)? http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5008.msg29874#msg29874


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 31, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > 2 things I found out last night that are negatives --- one is odd - if you try to use the remote wifi ap with off cam lighting, it won't pop the flashes. It will pop the flash if the flash is on camera. Why would that be?
> ...



I could get the flash issue if it didn't trigger the on cam flash, why it ignores the trigger is a big I don't know or get it...i guess canon just assumed the people buying this body wouldn't be interested or even have the capability to do off camera lighting...

Oh, and I was digging around the menus - there is an option to disable the auto power off. gonna play around tonight and see if that fixes things (it should, as long as the cam is on and the phone is connected it should work!) I just don't want to end up buying this camera thinking i can set it up behind the alter to get shots of brides and grooms only to find that i can't activate the camera!


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 31, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Oh, and I was digging around the menus - there is an option to disable the auto power off. gonna play around tonight and see if that fixes things (it should, as long as the cam is on and the phone is connected it should work!)



Please do, because as I wrote I've read this before - there seems to be a hard limit to how long wifi can stay active, but maybe I'm mistaken (in this case, I'd remove the Magic Lantern feature request :-o).

Reason is: I also want to buy a 6d which for my budget is very expensive, so also don't want to end up with some hidden show stoppers (like the current 5d3 af assist bug - but Canon might fix that now 1+ years after camera release...)


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 31, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, and I was digging around the menus - there is an option to disable the auto power off. gonna play around tonight and see if that fixes things (it should, as long as the cam is on and the phone is connected it should work!)
> ...



similar here, my wedding biz is really just beginning and I am stepping up the ladder of probably not making as much as I could (I see my value, but I need a few more seasons to have perceived value). And I am getting married this year too, so, money is tight. Yes, the 6d has many little downsides. But are those downsides enough to warrant spending an extra 1K for a second 5d3? I'm still unsure. Next season I should be doing better and my expenses will be lower without a wedding to plan. If grab a 6d this season, I should be able to swap that out next year (and by next year there will be more used and refurb 5d3's kicking around). 

Here are a few more shots from my rental tests!


----------



## Skirball (Apr 1, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> 2 things I found out last night that are negatives --- one is odd - if you try to use the remote wifi ap with off cam lighting, it won't pop the flashes. It will pop the flash if the flash is on camera. Why would that be?



I assume you're using a radio trigger? It won't work if you're using the WiFi in Live View. If you "click" the little camera icon and shoot in normal view it works. At least on mine. I've never been able to get my off-camera flash to trigger (using YN RF-602s) in Live View. Seems to be related to the old issue of non-Canon flashes not working in Live View. No different than if I was tethered.

Edit: I haven't tried this yet, may poke around this evening. I never looked into it much because Live View doesn't do me any good if I'm mostly using flash.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/strobist/discuss/72157632313631392/


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 1, 2013)

X-vision, thanks for posting the excellent AF module picture comparison! 



Runibl said:


> You can customize it in the menu, so that it jumps straight to 100% when you press magnify.



Thanks, I discovered that without much time. Now my main ergonomic/control complaint, is that it doesn’t display file quality/resolution on the top screen (RAW or jpg), but I can live with that. It has a lot of nice customizable functions to the buttons. I was surprised at all the choices which can be assigned to the DOF preview button. The multi-control dial, is far easier to use than I feared. I don’t miss the thumb joystick too much at all. Obviously a joystick better, but it’s just not as big of a deal as I thought.

So far I am the opposite of a 6D cynic/nitpicker. I’m in love with the 6D, and can’t believe how well-designed and elegant the overall package is, and how light-weight the body is. It feels lighter than my 50D, is the same size, yet feels slightly more compact. The grip, the buttons, it all feels better than every other Canon body I’ve held in my hands (especially the 7D and the 5D3…their buttons are too mushy, their bodies too wide for their height…kind of like a kardashian). I’ve held them all (save for bodies older than the 1Ds Mk3). I foresee living with the 6D for 5 or 6 years, at least. I had thought of just keeping the 50D, but am beginning to think I don’t even need it, or any crop camera as a backup, or for birding (at least for now). I will take more time to consider, especially after getting the right TC to use on my long zoom lens…to compare to the crop body without the TC. Of course, it would help if future firmware allows AF at f/8, like it will do for the 5D3. Might not happen of course.

I also can’t believe the low noise of the 6D. With all NR disabled, the RAW files look to be cleaner than I thought they would be. ISO 20,000 is quite usable, 16,000 very usable, and 10,000 is as clean as my 50D at 1000 (all of these require a bit of NR in post, but less than I thought). By comparison, the 1D4 I rented last fall, of course was like a Formula 1 camera in its responsiveness and speed. But it is also obviously large and heavy (unlike an F1 car), and could not AF in low light. Its files at ISO 8000, were about the same noise content as the 6D at 20,000, or 25,600 (depending on exposure compensation amount). Really 10,000 on the 1D4, is about like 25,600 on the 6D.

As for how the noise directly compares to the 5D3, I haven’t done enough comparing, and don’t feel the need to. The luminance noise does seem less than the 5D3 files I’ve edited, around ISO 4000, and that was really my main concern. The AF and extra weather sealing are the reason to buy the 5D3, not the file quality, from where I sit. Both of those aspects are obviously a big deal to many of you, of course. I could just point out that you should sell your 5D3 and buy a 1DX, if those are your main concerns.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 1, 2013)

As for the low light AF ability of the 6D, all I can say is the reviews that have claimed it didn’t work, were either lying or propaganda. *It does indeed work quite accurately,* especially with center point only selected, as I am accustomed to doing on the 50D. I even got tack sharp focusing on dark chair legs set against medium-dark carpet, in a very dark room (lit by equivalent of a couple of candles on the opposite side of the room)…at night, with my 135 attached.

I have yet to try the 6D in servo mode with my “slower” long zoom. But with my 135 f/2, it’s as fast as the 1D Mark 4…obviously not as accurate (in good light, while far superior in low light)…but that’s really saying something. I can see getting a consistent 7 out of 10 keepers with very fast moving objects, where the 1D4 would be 8 to 10, out of 10….and a 1DX would essentially always be 10 out of 10…at least in the situations I would put them through. I can live with this. 

Yes, the frame rate is only 4.5. It should have been 5.5 like the D600. That, is really my main complaint about the 6D. But I can certainly live with 4.5, as I am used to mostly using my 50D in the slow 3 fps burst, rather than 6. Even 6, or 8…is quite slow compared to 10 or more. If I need more speed, there’s always the future 7D2, or a 1DX, or whatever else comes down the pike…

Will I replace it with a 5D3? I don’t foresee it. Yes the 5D3 AF is nice, but it’s a compromise, and I especially would want more than 6 fps with such nice AF. Is there that much difference between 6 fps and 4.5? Not really. Are all 6 going to be keepers via the 5D3? Maybe so, maybe not. Will 3 out of 4.5 be keepers via the 6D? It sure seems so. Would I prefer a 1 series body over the 5D3? Most assuredly, despite the added cost. I may wind up buying a 1DX before it gets replaced (after the price comes down a bit more), but at this time I just don’t need one. I have a feeling I will be making at least a bit more money now that I have the 6D.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 1, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> …their buttons are too mushy, their bodies too wide for their height…kind of like a kardashian). I’ve held them all...


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 1, 2013)

As for capturing butterflies in flight in servo mode…well that’s a fool’s errand with most any body, unless there is only sky or other featureless (or dark) background behind the butterfly as it flies along. With a featureless background, I have no doubt I could get plenty of keepers with the 6D in servo mode with my 135 f/2. Key is to select all AF points. Unlike the 6D detractor snobs on here, I suggest that these narrowly spaced points hand off to each other just fine in servo mode. However, if your background is difficult, use single shot mode and continuous-half press of the shutter, with center-point-only selected. Or even try manual focus. You can’t just expect the camera to do all the thinking for you. Even a 1DX needs good technique to get 10 out of 10 keepers. Just my two cents. 

Certainly the AF servo speed and other adjustments of the 6D’s AF are welcome. I have yet to fiddle with them much. They seem similar to the 1D4’s adjustments. Of course it had a lot of points to choose from, and faster processor control of its AF. But like the 6D, there were plenty of detractors of the 1D4’s AF performance as well. The interface was not user-friendly or intuitive enough, and ultimately it could not match that of the Nikon D3s. I bet most of those people who derided the 1D4, didn’t buy a 1DX, nor did they even own a 1D4. Most bought a 5D3, which is not a fast camera. 6 fps burst, is not fast. 10 is fast. 12 is faster. It makes me wonder just how awesome the 1DX successor will be. Of course it will have an initial street price in the $8499 range…so most will buy a future 5D4 for $4200, and claim it’s essentially as good for half the price. It won’t be. Snobs have to buy something, and have to have something to make fun of.


----------



## babiesphotos.ca (Apr 1, 2013)

Another 6D convert here. It's camera better than specs showcase it. 

I had 5d Mk III, sold it and replaced with 6D. Saved $1000, and have lost a touch in auto-focus capability. 

I used to get 6-6.5 good frames out of 10 with Mk III, now I get 5 with 6D. This is trying to capture very lively toddlers from close distance and shallow DOF. If I move further, results improve a lot with both cameras...


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 2, 2013)

Hey Marsu, here's one from the little mini wedding today. I haven't spent too much time with the files, but this one I liked enough to give it a quick post process...

Also, got to shoot an event with the 6d today - dyngus day...there was dancing..


----------



## siegsAR (Apr 2, 2013)

To those who had time fiddling with both, how does 6D's AF compares with the 7D's? What's faster?


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 2, 2013)

babiesphotos canada, why do you need shallow DOF when shooting lively toddlers from up close? That's just impossible to nail sharp focus on the eyes very often. I would close down to at least f/3.5 or something, when shooting near them. Pull back to 7 feet or so and then maybe try wide open, then crop later?

siegsAR, I'm sure the 7D's AF is faster than the 6D's. But again, I don't care. What we seem to have here with the 6D, is a supremely good file generator. Again, I am bumfuzzled that the luminance noise in the range between ISO 2000 and 10,000, seems to be far less than the 5D3's. I like to shoot in low light. In bright light, I certainly see no noise of any kind in the lower ISO range, but I guess technically there must be some. My hand hurts, I have shot 1000 pictures in less than a week...getting to know the camera and have become addicted.

I also bought the Canon 40mm pancake lens, and I just cannot believe how sharp to the corners it is, wide open on the 6D. The color is a bit subdued, not up to "L" standards...but certainly it seems to exceed all other "non L" Canon glass I have tried/owned. The contrast is fantastic. The AF is faster than I thought. But, I must agree with those who have said it is a tight fit on the body...be careful when mounting. The key is to slowly screw it on, don't force it quickly. This aspect does make me wonder why it needs to be that way, but optics wise, for $150 it's a long term keeper. I even like it far better than the "nifty fifty" f/1.8 I sold last year. It seems to AF faster, and I prefer the field of view of 40mm, to 50...for general shooting on a full frame. Barrel distortion also seems not too problematic.

Today I tried my Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 on the 6D. Its color, contrast, and sharpness, are truely world class. It and the 135 f/2L, are my sharpest lenses. I like its color better than the 135's, which can be on the cool-ish side. The 135 is better in all other aspects, though, with smoother bokeh than every other lens on earth, it seems to me (the 200 f/2L might be smoother still, is obviously more extreme...but there's that problem with the double images within the background bokeh). Being a fully manual Nikon-mount lens, the Voigtlander seems to light the AF points accurately, as it did on my 50D (via the adapter with "dragonfly" chip or whatever it is). Alas, the Nokton does vignette on the full frame, where it did not on the 50D. It goes away above f/2.5 or so, so nothing unusual. It also has what looks to be some spherical aberration at the full-frame corners, but it's not bad. I've seen far worse. It certainly has none of that within the crop frame, where other 50 primes have. I also managed to coax some rather unusual lens flare out of it, while pointed into the sun but at an angle. It goes away when the angle decreases (when the sun is more directly shining into the lens). Also problematic is getting remotely accurate metering once you start closing down the aperture...but then that's true of any manual-aperture lens. No lens is perfect I guess. If I had to rely on the 50mm range for busy event shooting, I would just decide between the Tamron and the Canon ii 24-70 zooms, and be done with it.


----------



## Albi86 (Apr 2, 2013)

Mark D5 TEAM II said:


> Have the 6D AF bashers actually used the camera extensively?  Otherwise it's more likely regurgitated talking points from the social media echo chamber that originated from the ID-10-T department.
> 
> From this scientific and repeatable test, it is blindingly evident that it has more consistent & precise AF than the D800, 5D2 & 7D:
> 
> http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/2012/12/af-consistency-comparison-nikon-canon-phase-detect-contrast-detect/



Very scientific.... :


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 2, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Also, got to shoot an event with the 6d today - dyngus day...there was dancing..



Thanks for the pics, but the most important information for me is to get real life impressions about how the 6d feels in real life, stress shooting conditions where different camera bodies do make a difference.

Some good or bad shots alone don't mean anything, you can get them out of any half-decent dlsr, though the keeper rate, constraints by limited fps/af system & the trust into the gear is much more important. But the 6d seems to do ok - and it should, in 2013 even @€1800 this is pretty damn expensive for what it is.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 2, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> babiesphotos canada, why do you need shallow DOF when shooting lively toddlers from up close? That's just impossible to nail sharp focus on the eyes very often. I would close down to at least f/3.5 or something, when shooting near them. Pull back to 7 feet or so and then maybe try wide open, then crop later?
> 
> siegsAR, I'm sure the 7D's AF is faster than the 6D's. But again, I don't care. What we seem to have here with the 6D, is a supremely good file generator. Again, I am bumfuzzled that the luminance noise in the range between ISO 2000 and 10,000, seems to be far less than the 5D3's. I like to shoot in low light. In bright light, I certainly see no noise of any kind in the lower ISO range, but I guess technically there must be some. My hand hurts, I have shot 1000 pictures in less than a week...getting to know the camera and have become addicted.
> 
> ...



Good points here, that in many ways mirror my feelings about the 6D. I love the camera, and actually somewhat dislike using my backup 5D2 when I need (I carry both bodies into some shoots). I plan to soon replace the 5D2 with either a 5D3 or perhaps another 6D. The 6D feels fabulous in my hands, and, above all, as Carl said, it just produces great images!


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Why would anyone buy a 6D when a refurb 5D3 is only a few bucks more?


----------



## J.R. (Apr 2, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> Mark D5 TEAM II said:
> 
> 
> > Have the 6D AF bashers actually used the camera extensively?  Otherwise it's more likely regurgitated talking points from the social media echo chamber that originated from the ID-10-T department.
> ...



If Rich doesn't know how to test AF scientifically, I dont know who would : :


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Why would anyone buy a 6D when a refurb 5D3 is only a few bucks more?



This isn't true at the moment, unfortunately. Canon's discount of the 5D3 refurbs is off at the moment. That being said, as I and others have documented, there are actually several things that the 6D does better than the 5D3, and it's lower weight is appealing to many people. The 6D is much more of a camera than the specs suggest. I have yet to find a person who has actually used one that strongly dislikes it.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 2, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> the trust into the gear is much more important.



Trust in gear is mental. Most everyone here made up their mind to not trust the 6D before even seeing one IRL. People associate big and heavy with sturdy and reliable.

Crash Test 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air VS. 2009 Chevrolet Malibu (Frontal Offset) IIHS 50th Anniversary


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Why would anyone buy a 6D when a refurb 5D3 is only a few bucks more?
> ...



I'm sure the 5d3 refurb sales will return but only issue is I found is the 6D bad value for $$$$.

Skirball (agreeing that 50's vehicles are steaming metal death traps) that malibu is front engine/trans/drive thus has more metal/weight in the front to crush the on-coming car. Just a note. ;D


----------



## Skirball (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Not everyone considers $500 - $600 to be "a few bucks".

And as many have said (with upturned nose), many buying 6Ds are coming from Rebels or xxD, and need a decent wide angle zoom to go with the jump to FF. If I was to buy a new 24-105 from a reputable dealer I'm looking at $1000. So I could say I picked up the 6D for $1400 in the kit. A grand less than a refurbished 5d3. I know you just can't seem to accept this, but not everyone feels they need to have a 5d3.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Skirball said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> ...



Your decision is fine. 6D is a good camera, but for 2000$? Eh, If I had to do it over again... I could see a 5D2 with some lenses or a 5Dc with alot of lenses and flashes or even a d700. 

6D for 2000$ new or a Canon 5d3 Refurb (Basically new) for 2379$? It's a few dollars more, for alot more camera.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



So.... you didn't read anything I wrote?


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Skirball said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Skirball said:
> ...



Sure I read it, did you understand mine?


----------



## Skirball (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



I did, and I understand that you're incorrect. It's not a few dollars more, it's anywhere from $600 - $1000, depending on your needs.

And it's only a lot more camera if it's something you're going to use; despite the mantra on here that you have to have the best. It's a lot more AF, the other points are debatable, again depending on your situation and needs (a concept you have a hard time understanding). I like the size/weight, I like using SD cards, I like and use the WiFi. I guess I'm just a Rebel user, so you can dismiss my opinion, but I like these things. And based off a review of what I've shot for the last two years, I'm not going to miss the advanced AF much. I think a lot of people on here are in denial about that.


----------



## babiesphotos.ca (Apr 2, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> babiesphotos canada, why do you need shallow DOF when shooting lively toddlers from up close? That's just impossible to nail sharp focus on the eyes very often. I would close down to at least f/3.5 or something, when shooting near them. Pull back to 7 feet or so and then maybe try wide open, then crop later?



Why? Well, at first I didn't know better, then, I LOVE shallow DOF look when I nail the focus, and finally, we have twins, so I'm often outnumbered, and my kids love camera (ok, boy does), and they came, reach for the camera, look at the pictures etc. Honestly, unless kids play with their mom, I can't keep the distance. Camera trumps any other toy, so they'll abandon whatever they were doing to be 'active participants'. I find that 40 2.8 works quite well in these circumstances.

And finally, I love 6D. As I said elsewhere, I sold 5D MKIII and bought 6D, so money had influence on my decision, but if I were silly rich and truly disinterested in monetary questions, I STILL MAY CHOOSE 6D over 5D Mk III, as long as it's not "one camera until the rest of your life". No, it's not better, but it's close enough for my needs, and it's lighter enough that it makes difference, and it fits better in my hand (I'm 5-7, so no giant for sure). My hand hurts less after wielding 24-70 for couple hours. And there is also GPS and WiFi, which I didn't care for initially, but I find them really interesting now.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Skirball said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Skirball said:
> ...



http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892349-REG/Canon_8035b002_EOS_6D_Digital_Camera.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892354-REG/Canon_8035b009_EOS_6D_Digital_Camera.html

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13301.0


6D KIT - 2700$
6D Body - 2100$
24-105L - From 750$-1100$ depending where you shop.

At best you get the 6D body for 1600$ in a kit, assuming someone will pay exact value for it (Which no-one will)

At worst, the 6D body will cost around 2000$, assuming someone will pay the average price of 750$ for the 24-105L.

I've seen deals on ebay & craigslist for mk2 @ 1200-1400$.

Budget - 2700$

5D2 - 1200$
24-105L - Bought from a 6D users kit - 750$
100mm F/2 - 450$
50mm F/1.8 - 100$
430EXII - 200$

Both 6D & 5D2 numbers can be cheaper depending on where you are. Overall, I'd choose the latter. Thats how I view the 6D for value per $$$.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Add it to the cart, the price drops.

Amazon:

Body: $1760 No Tax for most.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-20-2-Digital-Camera-3-0-Inch/dp/B009B0MZ8U/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1364921363&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+6D

Kit: $2350. No tax for many.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Digital-Camera-3-0-Inch-EF24-105mm/dp/B009B0MZG2/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1364921363&sr=8-2&keywords=canon+6D

As I said in my post, I needed to buy a 24-105. It's a matter of perspective, but in my situation it was another $1000 to add to the cost if I was to buy new.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 2, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> there are actually several things that the 6D does better than the 5D3, and it's lower weight is appealing to many people. The 6D is much more of a camera than the specs suggest. I have yet to find a person who has actually used one that strongly dislikes it.



+1 ... I "strongly" like my 6D  I think it'll be even better with the 17mm TSE, I plan to get next month ... The 5d3 won't matter


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Skirball said:


> As I said in my post, I needed to buy a 24-105. It's a matter of perspective, but in my situation it was another $1000 to add to the cost if I was to buy new.



24-105L's are dime a dozen now. Many people are stripping the kit lenses out and selling them second hand for 750-850$ brand new in box. Even the 2350$ kit from amazon, when selling the 24-105L for the market price, at best its 1600$ for the body, Minus the effort and time to sell the kit lens.

While If you purchase the 5D3, sure its a few more dollars but your getting alot more camera for not alot more monies. If you really want value per $$$, a used 5D2 is unbeatable. So, where does the 6D fall in? A market where users who NEED Wifi Controls and GPS built in camera. (Considering Eye-fi cards are a good compromise but don't allow control)

You situation also assumes that the person must buy a kit. What if they don't want the kit lens? 

I'm not knocking any 6D users, I just feel canon didn't do it justice.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> So, where does the 6D fall in? A market where users who NEED Wifi Controls and GPS built in camera. (Considering Eye-fi cards are a good compromise but don't allow control)



A market for users who want a $1600 camera, not a $2400 camera.

I'm happy for you and your financial situation that this is a few bucks for you, it's not for a lot of people. That's 50% more for an AF that I don't think I need. Evidently there's a lot of people that feel the same way. It's ok that you don't, now just try to open your mind a bit and accept that not everyone thinks the way you do.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Skirball said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > So, where does the 6D fall in? A market where users who NEED Wifi Controls and GPS built in camera. (Considering Eye-fi cards are a good compromise but don't allow control)
> ...



More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$.


----------



## Wildfire (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$.



Useable 12800 ISO is nothing to scoff at coming from a 5D2. The center AF point is fantastic in low light as well. If you need the low-light performance, the 6D is easily worth an extra $500 over the 5D2.

How do I know? I upgraded from a 5D2 to a 6D, and I will never go back!


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Wildfire said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > More like a market for a re-badged 1200$ 5d2 performing camera that costs 2000$.
> ...



Camera Performance is what this thread is about, Not IQ. My time with the 6D clearly demonstrated what the 6D really was, a Re-hashed 5d2 with marginally better IQ.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 2, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Also, got to shoot an event with the 6d today - dyngus day...there was dancing..
> ...



Marsu, here are some more thoughts on it. IT's really not a bad little camera. I did not find the limited AF to be much of an issue, at least in my situation (that's where my 5d3 shines). I don't think anybody would be able to look at my images and be able to say, oh that ones obviously from the 6d. Colors are good, detail is good. From an IQ standpoint, I see no red flags at all. It's in the little things that make me wonder what to do. If i buy one it will be a compromise.

Likes:

Weight - the 6d with 16-35 lens attached weighs about as much as my gripped 5d3 with no lens attached. I can see that being a huge plus for full day wedding coverage

IQ - the images do look pretty damn good. I can't say too much on keeper rates because I was overshooting with it (not because I didn't trust it - but because it was a retal body and i wanted to view as many images as i possibly could)

AF - that center point is pretty damn accurate and I couldn't find many lighting situations where the 6d said no, can't do it (without a flash attached!)

ISO - Very impressed with how well the 6d did at high ISO's. Files are very usable in the even at 12,800-25,600

Wifi- this is quite a neat feature. it may or may not be useful (doing some final tests on it today before packaging it up - actually right now I am doing it - with the camera set to never power off, just making sure i can still access the camera after my phone goes to sleep mode - also going to try the remote triggers again with the live view off) PS - tests done - the wifi does seem to just shut right off and you need to access both camera and phone to get it back going - so that limits what can be done a bit ---- and - if you turn the liveview off on the the phone ap, you can trigger off cam lights...)

Dislikes:

no sync port - this would be a deal breaker if it were to be my main body. 

AF - once the light gets dim the outer points become useless, not a deal breaker though because the center is solid

sync speed - I do wish it could sync at 1/200, but, I don't forsee this being too much of an issue

max shutter of 1/4000 - There will be situations where this will limit options, but again, not enough of an issue to be a deal breaker (this is another one of those if i didn't have a 5d3 as a primary body this would be a bigger issue)

read/write speeds - SD is slow!!!!! This may be the back breaker for me with it. At the small wedding yesterday, it was in big greenhouse and the light was shifting a lot, roaming clouds so it would get real bright real quick and if i fired a burst of 3-4 shots and went to get a quick preview to make sure i compensated, it would hang on the 'busy' screen for longer than I'd like.

battery life - battery does drain quite fast when wifi is enabled (note, I have no use for gps so i never tried using that). Battery life is fine without using wifi, but, with that on be careful!


Other thoughts. given the choice for backup bodies, at regular prices I can't see shelling out 3k when the 6d performs as well as I have witnessed. If i can find a used or refurb 5d3 for around $2500, then the choice becomes harder. this also depends on what deals pop up for either camera. If I see another deal for a 6d at $1800, it will be hard to say no



RLPhoto said:


> Why would anyone buy a 6D when a refurb 5D3 is only a few bucks more?



My answer - if you are on a 5d2 and looking to upgrade, yeah, snag the 5d3. I see the 6d as filling two niches - those looking to upgrade from crop to FF and those who are on a 5d3 and are looking to upgrade their backup. I would recommend the 6d for those running the 5d3 5d2 combo - IQ is just as good as mk2 but its high ISO abilities make the 6d a much better backup than a 5d2. 

As to whether the 6d is the right solution for you? It really depends on what you shoot. If your in lots of controlled light and shoot between ISO 100-800 mostly, then the 5d2 is probably the better value for you. If your shooting weddings though, the 6d performs really well at high ISO's, this beats out the 5d2 and then some. If you shoot sports, the 6d won't be what you need - FPS is not that high and the read/write speeds will leave you waiting more than shooting. 

back to the question of, is the 6d the answer? I am still debating this myself. Not sure which way I will go. It will depend on a lot of things like how many more weddings will I book this year, what happens with deals and rebates, and what happens with the used/refurb market. If i were to see a 5d3 refurb for $2400 and actually had the $2400 in my account, then there I go! But, I have noticed that those refurbs tend to sell quickly. And used ones are still pricey - B&H had one up a few weeks back for $2800. I will say this though, after a hands on with the 6d, it does make my decision harder because it is quite a capable little body.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Wildfire said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.


----------



## zim (Apr 2, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> The 5d2's ability in low light is much lesser than the 6d. If you are never in ISO 6400 and up situations there is no reason to choose a 6d over a 5d2, but if you shoot in low light the 6d is vastly improved over the 5d2.



I agree and surely these other improvements must carry some weight?

quiet mode
full support for rt flashes
faster FPS
7x bracketing
dual afma for zooms
flexible min/max auto-iso
min shutter speed setting

As has been said on this forum (correctly) a camera is so much more that a sensor. I really believe that if Canon had just put 11 good cross AF points in the 6D there wouldn’t be any arguments about 6D over 5D2 and that wouldn’t have taken anything away from the 5D3.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Wildfire said:
> ...



I never said the 6D is a bad camera, I just simply stated its a bad value currently.


----------



## Sporgon (Apr 2, 2013)

Crediting the mkii with ISO 3200 is being generous. I'd suggest if you want to shoot over ISO 800 you'd be ill-advised to choose it over the 6D.


----------



## Jason Borg (Apr 2, 2013)

I purchased the 6d over the 5d mark ii back in December. My primary reason for doing so was that I was upgrading from a canon 60d and the improvements in image quality in low light were a huge factor for us as wedding photographers. My wife used it last Saturday to do a newborn shoot in a living room with fairly low light, shot at iso 5000, and got great results. 

As far as the speed of SD cards go, I have not shot with a CF based camera, but I did make sure to by one of the new SD UHS-1 card since the 6d supports it. I don't shoot sports or other things that often require me to shoot more than 5 or 6 frames in rapid succession, but I did some of my own tests to see how fast it would write raw files in burst mode once the buffer filled up. From what I can tell it would clear an raw image and be ready to take another every .6 seconds (my card is rated at 45mbs). Since each image is around 20 Mb, that means I am getting write speeds of around 35 mbs. There are faster cards out there and I assume it would increase the write speed since the 6D is UHS-1 compatible. Here is someone else's take on UHS-1 vs CF
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11175.15 

So far the camera has proven to be a great buy for us because of the low light capabilities.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



It's funny, because back in September everyone thought that price was a great price for a 5d2. People were talking about it being a steal at $1700. You recommended some guy buy one for $1650 off Craig's List.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

Skirball said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Chuck Alaimo said:
> ...



It was a good deal at the time, now I would pay 1200-1400$ for a 5D2. It's the same good 'ol 5D2. Why pay 2000$ for 6D for what essentially is a 5D2?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Because it isn't! $1400 for a body that is only good up to ISO 3200, vs $2000 for a body that can produce clean files up to ISO 25,600???? That means a lot if you shoot in low light often


----------



## Skirball (Apr 2, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Skirball said:
> ...



Again, if we're going to quibble over numbers at least quote the right ones. It's under $1800 on Amazon, and has been that for over a month.

I like my 6D and all, but calling it clean at 25.6k is a stretch.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 2, 2013)

Skirball said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Ok, clean maybe not...usable though, yes...It is clean as hell though at 6400, and pretty damn good up through to 12,800. Either way, still a step up from the 5d2.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 2, 2013)

2000$ for 6D or 2375$ for a Refurbed MK3? You all are quibbling for the 500$ difference from the 5D2 to the 6D, which is minimal gains, while from the 6D to the 5D3 is day-night difference. ???


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 2, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> 2000$ for 6D or 2375$ for a Refurbed MK3? You all are quibbling for the 500$ difference from the 5D2 to the 6D, which is minimal gains, while from the 6D to the 5D3 is day-night difference. ???



agreed...5d3 is much better than the 6d. But, finding one at $2400 is a bit more difficult. Yes they do pop up (never when I actually have the $$$ to snag one!!!!), but it's not like refurb mk3's are flooding the market. They pop up and then they're gone real quick. I see more frequently used ones starting at $2750. B&H is still doing a deal on the 6d --- 6d +16 gig sd card + a little shoulder bag for $1899. So we're more realistically talking about a $1000 difference. And if we're talking brand new - $3150. 

All of this is very subjective --- what are your needs? Everyones are different. I have a mk3 and need a backup body. The 6d has many good selling points to me, unless it's timed right and I can find a refurb mk3. But in regards to that, I want this decision to be made by mid may. My side note is that I am trying to finance my own wedding, and yeah, that extra $1000 may make a big difference for me (and yeah, there are other buying decisions too, I have some glass in mind!).

Either way, I still feel that the 6d is better value than the mk2


----------



## BrettS (Apr 2, 2013)

I'd pay $1900 for a brand new 6D rather than $2300 for a refurb 5DIII.

In fact, I *did*...


----------



## Bosman (Apr 3, 2013)

I considered the 6D briefly. I have shot weddings for years with my 1dm3 and 5dc. Guess what if i took 200 images during a 10hr wedding i was surprised. The 1dm3 was my go to. There are too many situations where tracking and focus speed are absolutely necessary shooting weddings. I'd rather have the confidence i get the shot and in focus. Not to say the 5dc didn't take absolutely stellar images, its more that I didn't trust it or its surrounding points. Even though the images would be even better on the 6d, i still wouldn't have confidence in it so i decided to take a pass on it. Really i am holding out for a 7D2. If only it were available now like the 5dm3 was this time last year id have it now. I decided to get a 7d in the mean time. Now i won't worry about focus or taking many images with that camera in a wedding. I know its not a king in low light but i can work with it.


----------



## babiesphotos.ca (Apr 3, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > As I said in my post, I needed to buy a 24-105. It's a matter of perspective, but in my situation it was another $1000 to add to the cost if I was to buy new.
> ...



I sold my 24-105 brand new $900


----------



## babiesphotos.ca (Apr 3, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



I had all three: 5d mk ii, mk iii and 6D
Difference btw. mk III and 6D is lesser than difference between 6D and mk II, for my type of use.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 3, 2013)

Skirball said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > 2000$ for 6D or 2375$ for a Refurbed MK3? You all are quibbling for the 500$ difference from the 5D2 to the 6D, which is minimal gains, while from the 6D to the 5D3 is day-night difference. ???
> ...



It's an opinion based on a 6D rental and the numbers I've already posted. Here's a snap from CL for that lens price. 

If a friend said, "I'm going FF soon and ill be needing some glass too" I wouldn't recommend a 6D at the moment, perhaps if it was 1500$ body only brand new, but that make the excellent 5d2 around 1000-1200 at that point. 

It should have had all the points cross type. Even the rebel has that now.


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 3, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> no sync port - this would be a deal breaker if it were to be my main body.



What's wrong with a hotshoe pc-sync adapter?



Chuck Alaimo said:


> read/write speeds - SD is slow!!!!! This may be the back breaker for me with it.



You have to use a fast/new(!) uhs-1 card, then this should be absolutely no issue?



Chuck Alaimo said:


> battery life - battery does drain quite fast when wifi is enabled (note, I have no use for gps so i never tried using that). Battery life is fine without using wifi, but, with that on be careful!



Yes, known issue, time for a battery grip... with the added weight & bulk. On the bright side: gps doesn't seem to drain as much power as I first suspected, so that's actually usable if you need it.



RLPhoto said:


> Why would anyone buy a 6D when a refurb 5D3 is only a few bucks more?



Because in Germany there are only new cameras, and the price difference (esp. given the current € crisis): 5d3 €2800 vs. 6d €1800, the latter dropping in price while the 5d3 staying more or less stable.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 3, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > no sync port - this would be a deal breaker if it were to be my main body.
> ...


----------



## Skirball (Apr 3, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Skirball said:
> ...



I tried that with him a page back. He's just going to toss the price of a used 5d2 back at you, which seems to get $200 lower every time he reposts the price.

Based on the logic above. Canon essentially rebranded the 5d2, added in some extra features and minor performance enhancements, and offered it for less. Worst camera eva!


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 3, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Skirball said:
> ...



Because a 6D is a rebranded 5D2 with fluff performance wise. Why pay more for what essentially is a 5D2? Bad value.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 3, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Because I don't want to buy used, and I like some of the fluff. It wasn't a bad value when that was the only option, now it's slightly better and cheaper, and it (and the 5D3) created a large used market of 5d2. Sounds like a win all around to me.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 3, 2013)

Skirball said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Chuck Alaimo said:
> ...



You like some of the fluff, don't you recall one of the reasons I said a user would want a 6D? Are you understanding now?


----------



## Sporgon (Apr 3, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...




Just out of curiosity RLPhoto old chap, and asking without any sarcasm - I appreciate your work - how would you have spec'd a cheaper FF camera that was to sit below the 5D mk3 ?


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 3, 2013)

Give it atleast 60D 9 point all crosstype AF. A serious upgrade from the 5D2/5Dc/20D AF performance. That would have justified the price increase over the already decent 5D2.

It seems I stirred the pot with a pretty straightforward simplified opinion.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 3, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Because a 6D is a rebranded 5D2 with fluff performance wise. Why pay more for what essentially is a 5D2? Bad value.



Feel like I'm beating a dead horse here...I do not consider the ISO performance to be fluff. Why would I waste $1400 on a body that would only be used in outdoor ceremonies? A 6d is much more versatile than the 5d2 if you work in low light a lot.


----------



## pdirestajr (Apr 3, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Give it atleast 60D 9 point all crosstype AF. A serious upgrade from the 5D2/5Dc/20D AF performance. That would have justified the price increase over the already decent 5D2.
> 
> It seems I stirred the pot with a pretty straightforward simplified opinion.



It may look like a price increase now. But it is definitely a MUCH cheaper than the 5DII when comparing launch prices. In a year you'll be able to grab it on Canon's refurb store during one of their sales for like 1200. Then in a few years when the price drops a few hundo, it will trade close to what the 7D refurbs go for.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 3, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Because a 6D is a rebranded 5D2 with fluff performance wise. Why pay more for what essentially is a 5D2? Bad value.
> ...



The 5D2 was good in low-light from 3200-6400, and still is now. Not saying the 6D isn't better but once you downsize the NR-files to around 12mp print sizes, Its pretty close.

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/cameras/?camera=1113&perpage=12&iso_min=3200&iso_max=6400&exp_min=none&exp_max=none&res=3&digicam=0

Feel free to check those out. Plus, 6D's AF perfomance is nearly identical to the 5d2


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2013)

Why an 'all-new' AF sensor for the 6D? Here's my (admittedly cynical) hypothesis: the sensor was developed for the 5DIII - it's a nice, Canon-style incremental improvement in spec (good low light and 2 more selectable points, since no one counted the 6 invisible points anyway). Various reasons, including the decision to offer three FF bodies at different price points and competitive intelligence, pushed Canon to use the 1D X's sensor in the 5DIII, leaving this one for the 6D.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 3, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



I'd be on your bandwagon if the 6d capped out at 6400 and turned to mush above that. But, the 6d can do quite well at 12,800...that to me is worth the extra $300, and that to me says its not just a rebranded mk2...not saying its a mind blowing upgrade...its incremental...but still an upgrade nonetheless.


----------



## jon_charron (Apr 3, 2013)

My Girlfriend paid $2329 for her 6D with 24-105 kit lens. So figuring about $900 sale price for lens, that's only $1429 for the Canon 6D. The GPS stays on even if the camera is turned off, so it's a bit dangerous to use IMO unless you want your battery to be drained accidentally.

As for the focus, I tried to take some surfing photos of my son yesterday, and the AF using AI Servo and the center point was horrible. It would not lock on and allow me to fully press the shutter all the way for multiple shots. I would get one shot, it would lag, then another one or two, then lag, etc. It was quite annoying. I'm coming from a 7D, so it is quite terrible. I'll have to play with settings, but this camera seems useless for any kind of action right out of the box.

Personally, I would rather do without the wifi and GPS and have at least a 7D equivalent AF system. The camera is far more expensive than the 7D even at launch, and the 7D is four years old. There is no reason to cripple the camera with poor AF. I'll try to adjust some settings and see what happens.


----------



## rizenphoenix (Apr 3, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Why would anyone buy a 6D when a refurb 5D3 is only a few bucks more?



New 6D = $1760US
Refurbed 5D Mark iii = $2850US

That's about $950 dollars more then "a few bucks"


----------



## J.R. (Apr 3, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Nah Marsu, you're just in complete denial, that's all. Sell your 5D2 and come join us in the real world. :
> ...



Plenty have benefitted from your research on the 6D. BTW, I do hope you finally take the plunge and get it before Canon releases a 6D Mark II


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 3, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Speaking of that...gotta wonder if the 6d will be like the other 'entry' level canons ---rebels get refreshed yearly, so will the 6d get refreshed yearly? bi-yearly?


----------



## J.R. (Apr 3, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



Canon could, in theory, massively improve this camera at zero cost. Whether their is a will to do it is another aspect altogether. I would surely hope that happens.


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 3, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Plenty have benefitted from your research on the 6D. BTW, I do hope you finally take the plunge and get it before Canon releases a 6D Mark II



I recently bought a lot of lighting accessories and books, so for the time being I am surprised how much better pictures I keep getting out of my 60d - so I'm not in a hurry, I'll wait until the 6d is @1500€ (currently €1700, dropping 20-30€ every week). And even then I'll probably buy some Yongnuo radio tiggers and flashes first - that doesn't exactly fix low light shooting, but is a real boost for creativity...



Chuck Alaimo said:


> Speaking of that...gotta wonder if the 6d will be like the other 'entry' level canons ---rebels get refreshed yearly, so will the 6d get refreshed yearly? bi-yearly?



... I don't think so, that's why I'm not in a hurry to buy a 6d. To me it seems Canon designed the 6d to stay awhile around, though they'll probably upgrade their more expensive models to a newer sensor soon. And when they have competitive sensors again, the pressure from Nikon will be lower, and Canon will try again to market a top aps-c model in the €2000 class, reserving full frame for the rich and famous.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 3, 2013)

Skirball said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > It funny you mention buying new, then 6D cost 2100$ at BHphoto, which generally most purchase from. Bad value.
> ...



Yes, It's 1800$. I must have viewed an old page. 

Not bad, but I can find mk2s locally for 1200$. Still A bad value.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 3, 2013)

Wow, this thread has gotten really inane. Everyone take a deep breath, back away, and move on...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 3, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Wow, this thread has gotten really inane. Everyone take a deep breath, back away, and move on...


 
+1, No intelligent life down here Scotty


----------



## Skirball (Apr 3, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Wow, this thread has gotten really inane. Everyone take a deep breath, back away, and move on...



In our defense, it didn't really start out all that great, and it was pretty much crap by page 2, so I wouldn't really say it went downhill as much as just, well, festered for a bit.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 4, 2013)

Skirball said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, this thread has gotten really inane. Everyone take a deep breath, back away, and move on...
> ...



LOL. Honesty is good for the soul, or the complexion, or the bowels, or something like that...


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 4, 2013)

<moderated>

Here is a shot via my new 6D, of a cheap tapestry...a test, *shot only as a jpg*, with my 135 f/2. It is hand-held, interior lighting (admittedly terrible...part of the challenge)...it's even cropped a little.

*The ISO is 20,000 (view it full size).* The luminance slider in ACR was at 43, while the chrominance slider was only at 24 (below the usual default for chrominance). I slightly boosted detail and sharpening with about 1.8 radius. Yes there's some of both types of noise left...but I'm just blown away by the quality and color here...and in such poor light. It is knocking on 1DX territory for noise (at least at this 20k level), in my opinion. The 5D3 would look about like this, at ISO 3200, but with even higher settings for both types of NR sliders...because its luminance noise in particular, is quite severe.

I will state again, and hopefully it won't get deleted again...that *the 6D is not a poor value after all.* I was skeptical about it as well, I even said so on here. Search and read for yourself if you doubt me. My concern was how much the price would drop on used units. Now I'm less concerned. It's possible the price will still drop down into the $1200 range on the used market, if not by summer 2013, then by the end of the year. But I hope to keep mine a few years anyway.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 4, 2013)

Oh, and I had all in-camera NR turned off.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 4, 2013)

The dead horse isn't anything but shell cordovan scraps at this point Carl. Nothing said is going to sway anyone at this point, and besides, nobody was debating the IQ it's all a cost/benefit analysis, which is different for everyone.


----------



## Wildfire (Apr 6, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Yes, It's 1800$. I must have viewed an old page.
> 
> Not bad, but I can find mk2s locally for 1200$. Still A bad value.



The 6D is not a bad value. As a matter of fact, the 5D2 is the bad value... allow me to explain:

If you care about high-ISO noise performance, then the 6D is an incredible value at $1800 because it provides the same high-ISO performance as a $2500* 5D3 or $6000 1DX.

If you don't care about high-ISO noise performance, a used 5D2 is a bad value because it costs $1200 and has crappy autofocus whereas a used 7D can be had for $900 and has superior autofocus.

*Please do not say that the 5D3 is easily available for $2375 or whatever refurbished. That price is only when you buy direct from Canon, and Canon adds sales tax and shipping which drives the price closer to or over $2500.


----------



## BrettS (Apr 6, 2013)

I think that in this context, value is a subjective term.

For me, the 6D provides good value. For someone else, it might not. Do your research, make your own decision.

IMHO absolute statements about value don't help the conversation.


----------



## randyg (Apr 6, 2013)

You guys seem to have lots of complaints. I just switched from a Nikon D90 to a 6D and I am thrilled with it. My first Canon.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 6, 2013)

Wildfire said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, It's 1800$. I must have viewed an old page.
> ...



I disagree, don't discount the MK3 sales price when the 6D sales price is 1800$. The 6D also has he equally crappy AF as the 5D2. Fell free to read my previous posts.


----------



## Wildfire (Apr 6, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> I disagree, don't discount the MK3 sales price when the 6D sales price is 1800$. The 6D also has he equally crappy AF as the 5D2. Fell free to read my previous posts.



I'm not going by a sale price, I'm going by the actual price at which you can easily acquire the camera. There is nowhere you can buy a brand new or refurbished 5D3 and only pay $2375. Nowhere. There is one place where they advertise $2375 as the price, but you are going to pay closer to $2500 after shipping and tax. On the other hand, the 6D is easily and readily available at many major online camera retailers, brand new for an ACTUAL price of $1800 (or less, see Amazon). That is how much you pay for the 6D in total, including shipping and tax.

The 6D AF is slightly improved over the 5D2. The extra two points are meaningless, but I've found that the center point focuses excellently in low light and all of the points in general are more accurate compared to the 5D2. Other than those 2 minor things, however, you're right: the 6D autofocus sucks and I wish I had a 5D3 because I rarely compose images with the subject directly in the center of the frame.

But that's not my point. My point is this that the 5D2 is a bad value and it has no place in the current Canon lineup. No matter what your priorities are, there is a camera out there that does what the 5D2 does but better. See here:
5D3: Great low-light performance. Excellent autofocus. $2500 (refurbished).
6D: Excellent low-light performance. Mediocre autofocus. $1800 (new).
7D: Bad low-light performance. Great autofocus. $900 (used).
5D2: Medicore low-light performance. Bad autofocus. $1200 (used).

Care about low-light performance AND autofocus? Get the 5D3, but pay a high price.
Care about low-light performance, but not autofocus? Get the 6D, lower price than 5D3 but low-light performance that is miles ahead of the 5D2.
Don't care about low-light performance, but do care about price? Get the 7D, for its superior autofocus over the 5D2, and yet an even lower price as well.

If you look this completely objectively, you can see that the 5D2 has the worst value of these four cameras. I'm not saying it's a bad camera. I'm not saying you should get rid of yours immediately if you still have one. I'm just saying if you're starting from scratch there's really no reason to get the 5D2. If your priority is low-light performance, the 5D3 and the 6D are better. If your priority is getting a good price, then the 7D is better. If your priority is getting a good autofocus, then the 5D3 and the 7D are better. There is no scenario in which the 5D2 is better.

I'm not saying you're wrong, RLPhoto. And I normally enjoy reading your posts as you usually make a great contribution to the threads here. But this time, I have a strong opinion that your logic is flawed. Why can't you just admit that there is NOTHING* the 5D2 can do better than the 6D but there are SOME THINGS that the 6D can do better than the 5D2?

*Except for price. But as I've stated, if price is your priority then the 7D with it's superior autofocus and high frame-rate is superior to the 5D2 and still available at a lower price. Better value than the 5D2, even with price as your priority.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 6, 2013)

Every point you've made, I've already discussed. I really don't feel posting anymore would make a difference.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 6, 2013)

@wildfire,

the only points I would contradict you on is needs --- if you shoot landscapes or shoot in the studio - where the light is controlled or a tripod is used often then high ISO is not a selling point, IQ is the only game changer for you. If your that shooter then there is no reason to use anything but a 5d2 because low ISO IQ is about the same between the 5d2, 5d3 and 6d. Also, most of the 6d deals I have seen are just shy of $1800, without tax/shipping. Most good retailers will have free shipping on an item like this (and being in NY state its rare that I have to have anything shipped from B&h expedited). 6d with tax is closer to $1925. Used mk3 is closer to $3k. New is closer to $3300.

@RLPhoto,

I don't get your insistence on this issue of bashing the 6d in all cases. You don't don't seem to take into account what eash shooter is looking for and what kind of budget threshold each of us have. Don't get me wrong, I am still considering another 5d3, but it is going to come down to cost. As another user pointed out, in my personal situation:

Dual 5d3's + current glass = good photos
5d3 +6d + better glass = better photos

That's my threshold - if I can find one of these refurbed mk3's for under $2500 I ca still make moves with glass. Over that and glass upgrades fade away until next year. Where a 6d means I can upgrade glass now and it still leaves me the option to snag a second mk3 next year.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 7, 2013)

FWIW the 6D is available for $ 1,629 ... I'd say, good value for the price

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=14040.0


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 7, 2013)

J.R. said:


> FWIW the 6D is available for $ 1,629 ... I'd say, good value for the price
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=14040.0



Just picked up a second 6D because of this sale. I am going to sell off my 5D2 and use two 6Ds for now.


----------



## hemidesign (Apr 10, 2013)

IMO, I prefer the 6D with his slow AF + great image accuracy... I don't care about speed, I do care about image quality (not having out of focus problems)


----------



## rizenphoenix (Apr 10, 2013)

I don't know what the fuss is over. I was nailing keeper after keeper today with my supposedly horrible 6D and my completely unusable Tamron 70-200.


----------



## siegsAR (Apr 10, 2013)

rizenphoenix said:


> I don't know what the fuss is over. I was nailing keeper after keeper today with my supposedly horrible 6D and my completely unusable Tamron 70-200.
> .....



That's nice, for a change. :


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 10, 2013)

rizenphoenix said:


> I don't know what the fuss is over. I was nailing keeper after keeper today with my supposedly horrible 6D and my completely unusable Tamron 70-200.



Which af points were you using?

All modern af system are usable, the differences should show a) when the tracked object is to the top/side (no af points on 6d), b) when the contrast/light is low (only up to 0.5lv and no outer cross on 6d), c) on difficult movement patterns (i.e. not simply something like a wave moving constantly in one direction).

However I expect the 6d to do just fine for me once I got it, I recently got frustrated by my 60d again because the af fields are just too far apart so it's center point only for tracking - which works, but at least on 6d the points are closer together so multipoint should be more usable.


----------



## rizenphoenix (Apr 10, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> rizenphoenix said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know what the fuss is over. I was nailing keeper after keeper today with my supposedly horrible 6D and my completely unusable Tamron 70-200.
> ...



Center Point only, continuous shutter mode, one shot AF mode(because the Tamron lens does not function well in the AI modes)


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 12, 2013)

rizenphoenix said:


> Center Point only, continuous shutter mode, one shot AF mode(because the Tamron lens does not function well in the AI modes)



Well, in that case the shot could have been taken with just about any dslr or p&s, esp. since the light was good and the aperture small


----------



## Skirball (Apr 12, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> rizenphoenix said:
> 
> 
> > Center Point only, continuous shutter mode, one shot AF mode(because the Tamron lens does not function well in the AI modes)
> ...



That could be said about a lot of the photos posted on here to show how great such and such a model is.


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 13, 2013)

Skirball said:


> That could be said about a lot of the photos posted on here to show how great such and such a model is.



Absolutely, that's why I personally never post pictures in a tech thread, it doesn't man anything most of the time except if the full picture series without postprocessing is given for "keeper" evaluation and maybe 6d and 5d3 are used in parallel or after another for the same scene.

You can post "negative" problem pictures to show what went wrong or where you think a camera fails, but except for high speed action scenes or very bad shooting conditions (af lock, dr, iso noise) any recent dslr is able to produce decent pictures - just not with the same reliability or usability.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 13, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> However I expect the 6d to do just fine for me once I got it, I recently got frustrated by my 60d again because the af fields are just too far apart so it's center point only for tracking - which works, but at least on 6d the points are closer together so multipoint should be more usable.



I haven't been using the multipoint AF on the 6D much ... It's been focus and recompose for most of the time. I decided to put it to test earlier this morning and was pleasantly surprised with the number of keepers I got - I have derided the AF of the 6D at times in the past but I must say, it's reasonably good and people with more skill than myself will definitely get more keepers out of the system. 

The multipoint AF works best in good light though. If the light is not good enough, it is difficult because the AF points other than the center AF point start to hunt back and forth and you lose possible shots in the process.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 13, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > However I expect the 6d to do just fine for me once I got it, I recently got frustrated by my 60d again because the af fields are just too far apart so it's center point only for tracking - which works, but at least on 6d the points are closer together so multipoint should be more usable.
> ...



That first image in particular is a very fine example of focus. Nicely done!


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 15, 2013)

All you need to do to increase your keeper rate with the 6D, is set "second image" to more accuracy rather than speed (in the autofocus menu). It will slow the frame rate down, but so what? Basically all the frames will be razor sharp. I admit I'd like to have really fast frame rate and accuracy sometimes, but most of the time I don't need a lot of fps.

If you need more responsiveness on the 6D, set "C.Fn II:Autofocus" under menu #1, all the way to the right, "responsive". I'm also using "accel/dec" tracking all the way to the right. First image priority is set to the middle, but second image priority is set to "focus", again all the way to the right. 

With these settings, and center point only selected, I was able to track my cat running at me in very low light with only an f/4 lens (ISO 25,600). My shutter speed was too slow (1/100), but in slightly better light, it would have nailed him.

Birds in flight are very difficult, but I've snapped quite a few. I congratulate those of you who do this! The smaller faster birds, are the difficult ones. Larger birds are easy. I've even snapped some bats in flight at dusk, with my 135 f/2...but the animal is not pleasant to look at. Of course it only works with sky as the background, unless they happen to come out early enough.


----------



## captainkanji (Jun 9, 2013)

Finally had a chance this weekend to test out the horrible AF of my 6D. Used AI Servo with back button focusing in single shot mode.
















The camera didn't have any issues taking these photos. The hard part was keeping the focus square in the right spot. Only issue with blur I have is shutter speed. I don't take pictures of this kind of activity very often anyway. The low light performance is why I bought this camera.


----------



## silvestography (Jun 10, 2013)

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


----------



## dgatwood (Jun 10, 2013)

silvestography said:


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



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


----------



## J.R. (Jun 10, 2013)

silvestography said:


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



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

I'd happily trade the WiFi in the 6D for a camranger. GPS is a bit iffy ... you may need it and you may not.


----------



## whothafunk (Jun 10, 2013)

most of sport pictures i've seen from a 6D is when subjects are going in a strafe line, and not towards/away from you. the problem with 6D is its not-so-quick *focus lock*, which becomes a bigger problem when subjects are running towards you (football, basketball, handball, etc). by the time you lock on a target, he's atleast 1m away from the point you locked on.


----------



## Kengur (Jun 10, 2013)

dgatwood said:


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



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


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 10, 2013)

J.R. said:


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



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


----------



## Skirball (Jun 10, 2013)

AcutancePhotography said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > I wish the 6D were available for $ 1,100 _*WITHOUT *_ the GPS and the WiFi. Not everyone wants these features built into the camera.
> ...



It's called a used 5d2.

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


----------



## tron (Jun 10, 2013)

Skirball said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > J.R. said:
> ...


True, but a used 5D2 is not much cheaper and it has worse high iso performance. But although I would like a stripped 6D I agree with you that it will not be in the interest of Canon to do so. With this reasoning someone would like to ask for an even more stripped 6D -one for stills only - which would be fine by me too. But this is simply NOT going to happen either.

Up to now I am used to the fact that there is no absolute superset in cameras. May be a camera is better that other in 90% or even 99% but it is never 100%. There is always something. We just choose the best we need and can afford.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 10, 2013)

tron said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > AcutancePhotography said:
> ...



That is so a never ending slippery slope...ohhh i don't need feature X and Y...make that for me for less $$$... So they strip that...what next...why don't they just make a $1300 one with no outer focus points (just the center point) ...or why not make one for $1500 with no gps, but keep the wifi...these things aren't custom made, they are mass produced. Like the comment said, find a used 5d2, ---but don't expect it to be much cheaper - expect to pay about $1500 used...if your looking for an $1100 camera you need to go a lot older or your looking at crop sensor bodies. FF and new at $1100 just isn't happening


----------



## silvestography (Jun 10, 2013)

dgatwood said:


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



Obviously manufacturing prices of these "amenities" isn't going to be that high, but if you're looking at the prices of canon's wireless file transfer grips and gps units, it does add to that. I was simply looking at it through the lens of "what if the 6d didn't have these things and I had to buy the accessories instead".


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 11, 2013)

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


----------



## dgatwood (Jun 11, 2013)

Kengur said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > silvestography said:
> ...



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

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

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

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


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 11, 2013)

bdunbar79 said:


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



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

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

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

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


----------



## J.R. (Jun 11, 2013)

Skirball said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > J.R. said:
> ...



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


----------



## eml58 (Jun 11, 2013)

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

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

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


----------



## J.R. (Jun 11, 2013)

eml58 said:


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



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


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 11, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe I'm reading the post wrong. But the OP's subject line says it's not impressive. Not that it doesn't work, or that it's not satisfactory, it states that it's not impressive. Well, it's not impressive. It works ok and can do its job but it's nothing outstanding. The 1Dx's AF on the other hand, is impressive.
> ...



Side issues again.


----------



## Skirball (Jun 11, 2013)

eml58 said:


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



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


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 11, 2013)

Skirball said:


> eml58 said:
> 
> 
> > I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)
> ...



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

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


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 11, 2013)

Skirball said:


> eml58 said:
> 
> 
> > I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)
> ...



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


----------



## J.R. (Jun 12, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > eml58 said:
> ...



+1


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 12, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> AF - that center point is pretty damn accurate and I couldn't find many lighting situations where the 6d said no, can't do it (without a flash attached!)



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

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

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


----------



## J.R. (Jun 12, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > AF - that center point is pretty damn accurate and I couldn't find many lighting situations where the 6d said no, can't do it (without a flash attached!)
> ...



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

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

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


----------



## StepBack (Jun 12, 2013)

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


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 12, 2013)

J.R. said:


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



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

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



J.R. said:


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



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


----------



## J.R. (Jun 12, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Simple ... use live view and focus manually if necessary
> ...



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


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 12, 2013)

J.R. said:


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



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


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 12, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


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



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

This is one example:




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


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 12, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


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



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



TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


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



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

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


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 14, 2013)

Skirball said:


> eml58 said:
> 
> 
> > I think mostly you get what you pay for, I'de be a little miffed if Canon sold the 6D for 2k and it performed exactly as a 5DMK III (3.4k) or a 1Dx. (7.5k)
> ...



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


----------



## Harry Muff (Jun 14, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > eml58 said:
> ...




The really sad thing is I have a feeling that someone, somewhere in the world has managed come up with an AF competition.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 14, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


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



When I first saw a diagram of the AF array for the 6D, before it came out, I would have agreed with you then. However, that diagram was inaccurate. There really isn't that much space outside the focus points on the 6D...so they're plenty useful. I generally don't want to put the plane of sharp focus only on a subject that is literally almost touching the frame's outside border...and that's the only situation I would say that the outer AF points would cause too much camera movement, if recomposing after focus.

If you need the best autofocus from Canon, buy a 1DX, or 5D3...or preferably...the 1DX's replacement. I had thought it would not get replaced until late 2015. But based on recent rumors, it now looks like it will be first or second quarter 2015, with announcement by mid to late 2014. That's an announcement only a year or so from now...

So that means to me, that if I need a 1DX before then, it would make more monetary sense to rent one...or else borrow my cousin's. One thing I don't want to do, is buy a $6700 camera that is soon to be replaced, and then wind up selling it a year later for $4500 or less. The time to buy a 1 series, is most definitely the first year it gets released.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 15, 2013)

CarlTN said:


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



The latest Rebel 700d has the 60d af system, actually even with a slight upgrade afaik - so I'd take that challenge anytime: When focusing & recomposing with thin dof for mid-frame to the edges I'd wager the guess that I'd get more into af with the 60d than the 6d... the 6d might be more precise, but that won't do you any good if that precision is lost while recomposing. 



CarlTN said:


> When I first saw a diagram of the AF array for the 6D, before it came out, I would have agreed with you then. However, that diagram was inaccurate. There really isn't that much space outside the focus points on the 6D...so they're plenty useful.



Hmmm, when I tried the 6d recently (they have them on live display, you can play around as long as you like) my feeling was otherwise, but it's great it's working for you.



CarlTN said:


> If you need the best autofocus from Canon, buy a 1DX, or 5D3.



Yeah, right, I'll just have to switch on my money printer  ... and I also think the current ff line is to be replaced rather sooner than later once Canon has new sensor tech which is overdue.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 15, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


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



If you are anywhere near Tennessee, you are welcome to come by and we'll have a little autofocus competition. :-D

I know they have the 6D on display everywhere...after having tried one at a display for 30 seconds, I knew it was time to forget 1.6x crop sensors forever! I love everything about it...weight...ergonomics, image quality, price to performance ratio. I admit I bought it from Adorama rather than from Best Buy, because they wanted the full $1999.99, plus tax, and I got mine for $1760 total. That's over $400 less than Best Buy...

I absolutely hate the feel of the 60D, and also could never stand the flip out screen, or the lack of autofocus microadjustment. My 50D at least had that. Its body was also a lot more rigid...being a solid magnesium subframe, rather than partially plastic. To each their own though. The 6D's frame is supposed to not be all magnesium either, but it feels plenty rigid to me.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 15, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> I absolutely hate the feel of the 60D, and also could never stand the flip out screen, or the lack of autofocus microadjustment. My 50D at least had that. Its body was also a lot more rigid...being a solid magnesium subframe, rather than partially plastic. To each their own though. The 6D's frame is supposed to not be all magnesium either, but it feels plenty rigid to me.



Then Canon hit the spot for you with the 6d, consider yourself lucky, and I understand if you had a 50d. For me with the 60d as my first dlsr, it'´s the other way around:

Just now I really like it because I often use the swivel screen for odd angle shots (with Magic Lantern focus peaking) and tripod macro (with Magic Lantern focus stacking). If I drop the camera, the lens or flash will break, but the non-mag camera is rather bound to bounce than break (there recently was a thread of metal vs plastic body). Plus most of my shots with crop right now are @iso100-400 and 300mm, some with higher fps then 6d...

I'd buy the 6d for the US price as my *other* dslr body, but in Germany maybe I'll wait some more until autumn because the price is dropping, of course it's a good camera, it's simply severs completely other purpose than the 60d.

Btw one really good feature of the digic5 6d over the digic4 cameras (60d, 5d2) is that there are better Magic Lantern features - raw video, high-res silent pics w/o moving the mirror, ...


----------



## mwh1964 (Jun 16, 2013)

The 6D is 80 percent of the 5D3. But those 20 percent counts for me enough to get the latter.


----------



## sdsr (Jun 16, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> This thread is getting a bit long and random, but I have a new & real question here. Today I had a test with the 6d (again ) with the 70-300L and while I still feel the 6d is overpriced (Germany: 1700€) for various reasons I ran into a real issue:
> 
> *How do you manage to get something in focus in the corners?*
> 
> Obviously it's me because people have been shooting with the 5d2 and thin dof lenses for years, but I cannot seem to manage - on my 60d the outer af points are further from the center, but on the 6d once I focus and recompose the focus is off most of the time. Are there any tutorials how to do it? How do you do it - trial and error, then take the in focus shots?



I understand your concern, but is there such a thing as a FF camera with autofocus points in the corners? Every one I've tried has them all lumped together in a similar area to the 6D's - the main difference with, say, the 5DIII or Nikon D600 in that regard is density of focus points; there's still a large amount of the viewfinder that has none, including the corners. It's not much of a problem for me with my 6D and 5DII as I hardly ever want something in a corner to be the focal point, but if it really matters to you, try an Olympus OM-D (for all I know the same is true of other mirrorless cameras) - the focus points cover the entire viewfinder, including the far corners, and are all equally accurate; I sometimes find myself using them just because I can!


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 16, 2013)

sdsr said:


> I understand your concern, but is there such a thing as a FF camera with autofocus points in the corners?



I know, but at least the 5d3 has the af points not as much in the center as 5d2/5d3, so it's probably less way to move the camera to focus & recompose. Nikon d600 isn't any better in this matter afaik btw.

I just wanted to ask around here for experiences when recomposing with a small dof on ff because with the 6d I found it much harder than with my 60d, of course /me lacking the proper technique.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 17, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> sdsr said:
> 
> 
> > I understand your concern, but is there such a thing as a FF camera with autofocus points in the corners?
> ...




an idea or 2 --- try stepping back, and framing the shot wider when you are working with extreme DOF - then crop to get the composition you want. The AF point spread on the 5d3 is good I think, remember that on most lenses if you push your focus to far to the corners your getting the softest part of the lens (depending on what lens your using of course. Most lenses though are sharpest in the areas where most camera have their main focus points, so, consider either shooting wider, or putting more space between you and the subject then cropping...

Got to give my new 6d a hard working test this weekend, a good old wedding. It didn't skip a beat. As the dance floor got a bit more active, I did switch to the 5d3 because the servo mode is much better, but even with that said the 6d performed pretty damn good. I I felt confident with it, which was something I worried about when considering the purchase. It does make a real nice partner for the mk3.

Here's a few from the reception ---unedited (I haven't even transfered images to hard drive - these are the jpeg rendered via the wifi ap and emailed to myself!). I am going to give them a nice polish, but, still not fricken bad!!!


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 17, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> an idea or 2 --- try stepping back, and framing the shot wider when you are working with extreme DOF - then crop to get the composition you want.



Looking at your shots, I see what you mean - it's just I'm not overly happy that the most practical solution to the "thin dof and soft edges" problem is less recomposing but more cropping - if I plan to regularly crop from the 20mp ff sensor I could just keep shooting with a real 18mp crop sensor 

Disclaimer (again): The 6d is a good/ok (depending on what value you see for the price) camera, my question here is about specific shooting situations.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 17, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > an idea or 2 --- try stepping back, and framing the shot wider when you are working with extreme DOF - then crop to get the composition you want.
> ...



how often do you do shots like this? and, at what time of day? There is the option of using a less shallow DOF. Even on the 7d which had a fairly wide spread of AF points, it wasn't like you had corner to corner coverage. If you wanted to your subject at the far left, or the far right you still had to focus recompose, crop it in post, or stop it down to f4-f8. I don't think there is any SLR out there that has a wide enough point spread for all situations...and the farthest to the right or left will only be on the center line of the frame.

The only advantage staying on a crop sensor might give you is that due to the crop your not using the softer portions of the lens, but DOF will still be an issue as the same OOF areas will be OFF if the shot is framed in the same way.

Also, DOF and OOF areas --- one of the reasons I say frame it wider is - the further back you get from the subject, more of your subject will be in the plane of focus so less of them will be OOF. 

Either way, if your doing extreme corner focusing, nothing out there other than shooting in live view and manual focusing will get you there because as far as I know, there is no such camera that has AF points in the extreme corners--


----------



## Skirball (Jun 17, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


>



That 6D image isn't remotely close to the actual spread on the camera. It's far tighter and more centered than that.


----------



## Wildfire (Jun 17, 2013)

Skirball said:


> That 6D image isn't remotely close to the actual spread on the camera. It's far tighter and more centered than that.



Agreed.

The 5D3 image shows the entire frame, the 6D one is just the AF points in a box smaller than the actual frame.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 17, 2013)

Wildfire said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > That 6D image isn't remotely close to the actual spread on the camera. It's far tighter and more centered than that.
> ...



it was the best image of the spread i could find in a 2 min search...sorry...either way, the point is that your still not getting corner to corner coverage with any of these AF systems


----------



## Hannes (Jun 17, 2013)

What the 40/50D does well at least is how the middle points on the diagonals are located spot on in the intersections for rule of thirds and that is after all where a good amount of shots will want the focus


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 17, 2013)

Skirball said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


True.

Here is the 6D AF point array set within the entire frame.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 17, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > Chuck Alaimo said:
> ...



TY Neuro...I knew the image i found was off...shouldn't have even posted it. 

Either way - as with all things in photography there is a give and take, you give up this and gain that.

I very much enjoy shots where the subject is set to the far left or right, and depending on the DOF i want, I focus recompose or shoot wider and crop.

I have worked with the little XSI, the 7d, the 5d2, 6d, and 5d3. And in post process, my second shooters have used all of what I have and - a 5d Classic, a 1d3s, a t series, and I am just starting to take a look at files from a nikon d3 and a d4. Give and take, above 1600 ISO the 6d, 5d3, d3 and d4 take the cake! The 1d3s files were gorgeous! But, the best that I saw from that body was at the ceremony and the formals. At the reception, good but he had to use heavy flash to get the shots so while they are good, the ambient light is pretty much lost. And as to the 7d - I used that body for 2 years, but after picking up the 5d3, even the extra range didn't matter because at the ISO ranges I typically work in (above 1600), the 5d files cropped looked better than the 7d's uncropped. So far what I see from the 6d is pretty awesome, the files are on par with the mk3. Give and take, I'll gladly give up a few points of AF for that!


----------



## ashmadux (Jun 17, 2013)

For portrait work, the 6d focus points absolutely stinks. The grouping is far tighter than the range of crops ive used over the years. 

I tried REALLY hard to like that camera...but i just couldn't do it. To much to give up on a 1500 dollar body to feel comfortable. The lack of a proper joystick is also a terrible loss, as the directional pad is mushy as all hell and imprecise.

And look at the 7100..totally embarrasses the 6d. Not trying to get into that debate, but seriously, F canon for that nonsense. Yup, if i wanted to shoot landscapes only, it would be hog heaven.

And yet i wait for a 7d2 / 70d.

Beyond Ridiculous.


----------



## bholliman (Jun 17, 2013)

ashmadux said:


> For portrait work, the 6d focus points absolutely stinks. The grouping is far tighter than the range of crops ive used over the years.
> 
> I tried REALLY hard to like that camera...but i just couldn't do it. To much to give up on a 1500 dollar body to feel comfortable. The lack of a proper joystick is also a terrible loss, as the directional pad is mushy as all hell and imprecise.
> 
> ...



We all have different priorities and preferences. For me the 6D has proven to be an excellent camera. After some use, I don't miss the joystick and find the directional pad easy and intuitive to use. I do wish it had more AF points and/or they were spread out more, but have found it still works well for portrait work since I frequently focus and recompose using the center point. I use the outer points when taking really shallow DOF shots and have found this works out well in all but really poor light.

Not sure what you mean by the D7100 embarrassing the 6D... The 6D is full format and the 7100 a DX or 1.5 crop, so the 6D has a much larger (FF) sensor so IQ is of course better. I agree the D7100 tops any of Canons current crop sensor bodies - it's newer! But, only until the 7DII or 70D is released.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 17, 2013)

bholliman said:


> ashmadux said:
> 
> 
> > For portrait work, the 6d focus points absolutely stinks. The grouping is far tighter than the range of crops ive used over the years.
> ...



I agree with the latter, and in the former it just sounds like nikonenvy...the grass is always greener on the other side where nikons poop gold and pee diamonds...lol


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 18, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> how often do you do shots like this? and, at what time of day? There is the option of using a less shallow DOF.



Well, yes, but one point of putting 1700€ (€!) into a ff and a f2.8 lens is to shoot with shallow dof, if I need to crop for that or revert to a smaller aperture one ff advantage is lost.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> Either way, if your doing extreme corner focusing, nothing out there other than shooting in live view and manual focusing will get you there because as far as I know, there is no such camera that has AF points in the extreme corners--



Please not: I wasn't talking of the extreme corners, of course not, but simple *near* the edge of the frame, say 3/4 to the side or corners... and here the real 5d2/6d vs 5d3 af spread tells the whole story. I suppose the crammed af points are good for tracking though, that's when the 40d/50d/60d-style compeletely fails vs. 7d.



ashmadux said:


> The lack of a proper joystick is also a terrible loss, as the directional pad is mushy as all hell and imprecise.



My 2ct: You don't need a joystick for 9 or 11 af points, you can easily select them with the multicontroller.



Hannes said:


> What the 40/50D does well at least is how the middle points on the diagonals are located spot on in the intersections for rule of thirds and that is after all where a good amount of shots will want the focus



+1, that's one thing I like about my 60d's af points, I often use the diagonals for macro shooting.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 18, 2013)

Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.


----------



## Skirball (Jun 18, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.



I dunno, looks reasonably close to me; closer than the former anyway. And for the record, I'm a proud 6D owner. I love the camera and after several months of ownership I'm positive it was the right choice for me (over a 5d3). I just wish the spread was larger. In fact, while we're all bitching about what we want, just give me this:


----------



## J.R. (Jun 18, 2013)

Skirball said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.
> ...



+1 ... My thoughts exactly about the placement of the AF points.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 18, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.



The one thing I've learnt with photography is that close is never close enough. The spread of the array is not that small but not particularly larger either. 

Carl ... how are you getting on with the outer focus points in_ low light_. Mine just seem to go bonkers so I'm left to focus recompose using the center focus point.


----------



## comsense (Jun 18, 2013)

14 pages......
Let me try my way:
1) Honda civic is a great car
2) In heavy bumper to bumper traffic civic moves as fast as Ferrari
3) Civic has state of the art fuel efficient engine
3) Civic has more boot space than Ferrari
4) You can commute to work with civic happily without a hitch
5) Ferrari is traffic ticket magnet, civic gets by without attracting attention 
Logical conclusion on lines of arguments here: I am proud owner of Civic and its far better car than Ferrari

Plenty of people were happy and have got by with even manual focusing or 5DII autofocus.......


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 18, 2013)

Skirball said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.
> ...




If you put the outer points there is would give new meaning to the phrase:

"My outer focus points are useless in low light"


----------



## Skirball (Jun 18, 2013)

comsense said:


> 3) Civic has state of the art fuel efficient engine



I’m sure there’s an analogy in there somewhere between Civic owners who think something on their car is state of the art, and camera owners who frequent camera forums.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 18, 2013)

Maybe I am just thinking about the 6d's AF from a different place, because I also have a 5d3 - I can use the 6d up to the point where the mk3 has to take over (my 6d can be the machete and the mk3 is the scalpel!)

Either way, I am happy with the purchase!


----------



## comsense (Jun 18, 2013)

Skirball said:


> comsense said:
> 
> 
> > 3) Civic has state of the art fuel efficient engine
> ...


Pls don't be confused with power (aka muscle), torque or acceleration,. Most entry level cars these days (if not all) have advanced design and technology for basic engine fuel efficiency. You can ask Prof. Google if you want to know more...


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 18, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.
> ...



I never use the outer points in low light. I thought according to Canon, it was the center point that was meant for low light. So that's what I use. It seems to do at least as well as my cousin's 1DX, in low dusk light outdoors on relatively still subjects...center point only selected. 

The only problem I have with the 6D's autofocus, is that it will choose the brighter, more contrasty subject matter (usually behind a bird on a limb or something)...rather than the darker less contrasty subject. I am of course using only center point in this situation too...because I want the bird's eye to be in sharpest focus, etc. It's possible the 5D3 and 1DX would have a slight issue in such a situation also, but no doubt they would be better.

J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.

Are you in shutter or aperture priority, or manual? I assume you're at some event or wedding with a wider angle lens or something?

To all those who are happy to bash the 6D, you are ignorant, that's all. To say that the D7100 "kills the 6D", that's wrong. The D7100 is killed by the 6D starting around ISO 1250. The D7100 is only a crop camera, and thus has extremely limited light falling on its sensor to begin with. 

If you don't like the 6D, don't buy it. It's not meant for you. It's meant for people who know how to make use of a camera's strengths and compensate for its limitations, like me. It's not meant for people who like to pick a certain weakness and harp on it, or who expect the camera to do the thinking for them.

I will state again, the 6D has superior image quality to all other Canons and Nikons currently in production..._within a narrow ISO range from the mid 1000's up to 8 to 10,000_...which is where I often like to use it. This range is where all low light, sports and wildlife "available light" photography lives. Above that, the D4 and 1DX are superior, but not the 5D3...it's still inferior. The only thing better about the 5D3 is the autofocus and the fps. Both the D800 and D600 have worse noise above ISO 2000 than even the 5D3, let alone the 6D. They still deliver more resolution up to a point, of course.

As for landscape-only (low ISO, under 1000) photography (perhaps on a tripod...or else studio photography with flashgun or strobes)...yes the D800E is your best choice for a few more months or so, and certainly the best choice under $4000. I suspect Canon's big MP body will be priced well above $4000.

For available light photography between ISO 1600 and 8000, the 6D produces the best image with the most detail, the least noise, and similar if not superior dynamic range (in RAW anyway, but the jpegs are decent too). Perhaps it's not pulling ahead in resolution of the D800 series until ISO 6400 or so, and the D600 at ISO 4000 or so....but the 6D is way ahead regarding both luminance and chrominance noise _at the native pixel level_, as in viewed at 100%...and not tipping the scales by downsampling all comparisons to 8MP, or whatever bullcrap DXOmark does. I could downsample smartphone pictures by that much of a percentage from their native, and get decent noise performance too, but so what?

I am astonished that my shots done from ISO 1000 to 1600, need no noise reduction in post of any kind. I'm also astonished that the 1DX's files have a similar large grain luminance noise structure like the 5D3's. I can understand why some I have read on here, don't want to shoot the 5D3 above ISO 1000.

The 6D has autofocus that is plenty responsive, depending on just how good and fast the lens's autofocus system and motors are. Most of the reviews I've read of the D600 say it's autofocus is not noticeably superior to the 6D's. So I don't see it as "the better camera" at all. But if you have a lot of Nikon glass, then by all means, buy a Nikon. You'll help them stay independent a while longer...delaying the inevitable.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 19, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.
> 
> Are you in shutter or aperture priority, or manual? I assume you're at some event or wedding with a wider angle lens or something?



The biggest trouble I face is when I'm shooting at wide open apertures. In low light you need those wide open apertures and I find too many of my shots out of focus with using the center point focus and recompose - kills the fun of it. 

As Chuck mentioned, one can always crop later to get the composition right but it lessens the fun a bit so I am predominantly use WA on the 6D and wide aperture lenses on the 5D3. 

I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 19, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.
> ...



I'm not convinced the 6D's AF is not improved over the 5D2. I've not compared them side by side. But Canon has said the center point has more sensitivity than all other AF systems they have produced, and I see no reason to doubt it. Did the 5D2 allow so many different levels of customization via the menu, in servo mode, etc? My cousin owned a 5D2 a while back, but I never played with the menus on it. He even bought the original 5D when it first came out.

My 6D certainly can AF in very low light, even with a 70-200 f/4...in fact it seemed to AF in a very, very dark candle lit room with it...on something on the opposite side of the room, that even ISO 100k was too dim for, at like 1/2 second exposure at f/4. It was kind of troubling that it would AF as good or better in this dark room with that lens, than with my favorite...the 135 f/2. Kind of defies physics, but then sheer amount of light apparently is not the only factor in the equation, I guess. There are electronics there in the lens too (obviously haha).

All I know is, I need more info to take me into the situation where you're having trouble with the 6D's autofocus in low light, and having to recompose. What is the subject matter, what's the distance, what's the focal length of the lens? Are you really close to the subject? Are you saying it's a 50mm f/1.4 or something? Seated head and shoulders portraiture? (In that situation I don't really see a problem if you need to use the center point and then recompose, even at f/1.4. If it's just the head and no neck, maybe I could see a problem.) Or is it longer focal length than that, or is it shorter? Is it available light, or is it with flashgun or strobes placed somewhere? (Must not be, because they usually have a focus assist beam or "modeling light"...in which case there's ample light for focusing with any of the points).

Unless both you and the subject are extremely still, have you tried using servo mode, and perhaps setting it for a slow response?


----------



## J.R. (Jun 19, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Shooting indoors without flash, child sitting on sofa, shooting wide open with the 50mm f/1.4 - no option but to focus and recompose.

I agree that the center point of the 6D is very good, but there are times when you need those outer focus points.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 19, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Shooting indoors without flash, child sitting on sofa, shooting wide open with the 50mm f/1.4 - no option but to focus and recompose.
> 
> I agree that the center point of the 6D is very good, but there are times when you need those outer focus points.



Interesting. I've done this, but not with a 50 that autofocuses. My Voigtlander is manual. I will try it in low light on my nephews with the 40 f/2.8 pancake, and try the outer points, and see what happens. Will try to do it Thursday or Friday. The hardest part is making them do what I want to get a nice picture. I'm not good at portraiture! I can make wildlife do what I want via sheer mental telepathy from 50 yards away, easier than I can make a kid smile without smirking or sticking his tongue out! It sounds ridiculous but I have no other explanation! Haha...


----------



## Sam18 (Jun 19, 2013)

I am very pleased with the 6D's available-light performance even on my slow Tamron 70-300 VC USD (and on my almost-as-slow 24-105L). My backup camera is a 50D.

I just photographed an event, no flash. The indoor shots ranged from ISO 1,000 up to ISO 10,000.
In my opinion, the pictures are quite usable.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 19, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.
> ...



TY J.R. - but, that advice is only for the pinch. Hell, even on the mk3 I encounter situations when I can only use the centerpoint or use on camera flash (i tend to prefer off cam flash). You do what you got to do to get the shot. 

As to your other statement -- "I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better." If they had slapped a more robust AF in there, then what makes it different enough from the mk3? Honestly, if you want uncrippled AF, then save the extra $$$ for the 5d3. As a few others have said, the high ISO performance alone makes up for the lackings in AF. 

As to the example of the child on a sofa, there are ways, why not slap a flash on there, the AF beam may be enough?

anywho, here is a shot from an engagement shoot I did tonight - 6d, 70-200 2.8 (yup, the discontinued non IS version, ISO 400 --- using the far left AF point! cheers!


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 19, 2013)

and another, again using the points to the edge - this time

ISO 1600
85mm 1.8 at 1.8
1/160th


----------



## J.R. (Jun 19, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> As to your other statement -- "I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better." If they had slapped a more robust AF in there, then what makes it different enough from the mk3? Honestly, if you want uncrippled AF, then save the extra $$$ for the 5d3. As a few others have said, the high ISO performance alone makes up for the lackings in AF.



Only 1 x type AF point ... c'mon. They could have done it a wee bit better with the than what they have without impacting the sales of the 5D3 - a few more x type AF points couldn't have seriously impacted the sales of the 5D3? 

I do have the 5D3 and the 6D is only a backup / second body. I feel shortchanged by Canon with the AF performance of the 6D, which otherwise is a very good camera with excellent IQ. 

I guess it all depends on what one's definition of "good" AF is - the center point in low light might be "impressive" but the overall AF performance makes me cringe sometimes (as mentioned in my earlier posts).

Regarding your comment of High ISO performance making up for the lacking AF, it all depends on perspective. For me, high ISO performance is useless if the shot is out of focus. The only reason I bought the 6D over a second 5D3 was because I didn't want to put in too much money on a second body. Did I compromise - Yes, and with full knowledge of what I was getting into. 

It's not that you can't get good sharp shots with the 6D, its only that it's damn difficult at wide open apertures.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 19, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> and another, again using the points to the edge - this time
> 
> ISO 1600
> 85mm 1.8 at 1.8
> 1/160th



Very nice ... what was the ambient light? Did you use flash assist for focusing?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 19, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > and another, again using the points to the edge - this time
> ...



no flash, just ambient light. That was at about 8:15 PM... sunset, but of course, taken under a canopy of trees. 



J.R. said:


> Only 1 x type AF point ... c'mon. They could have done it a wee bit better with the than what they have without impacting the sales of the 5D3 - a few more x type AF points couldn't have seriously impacted the sales of the 5D3?
> 
> I do have the 5D3 and the 6D is only a backup / second body. I feel shortchanged by Canon with the AF performance of the 6D, which otherwise is a very good camera with excellent IQ.
> 
> ...



Just tossing it out there ---but --- it isn't easy getting good sharp shots at wide apertures in general, you have to be very careful and pick and choose your battles. 

Like you, i struggled with the idea of pouring that much dough into a second mk3. I rented the 6d to see for myself just how good/bad it is. And I was pleasantly surprised. Is the mk3 the better camera? Hell yes. But as a backup body, the 6d fits in quite nicely. So far, it has handled every situation I have put it in admirably! The little things I miss aren't even in the AF -- sync port for remote flashes! Now that I do miss - at Weddings I will often have off camera lights, and one on cam set low to give a little fill on the faces - no sync port means i can't do that. No worries though, I can let the mk3 take that roll on (I may actually grab a video light anyways, that could sit atop the trigger and issue solved). 

I have yet to shoot in a situation where I have hit the 1/4000th limit, and if i do, well ,the then mk3 can jump in. 

Back to the point, so far I have not felt too limited by the AF on the 6d. in lower light, if i want the far ppoints for specific, precise framing, there's the mk3. the wide angle can go on the 6d and center point is just fine for that kind of stuff.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 19, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Back to the point, so far I have not felt too limited by the AF on the 6d. in lower light, if i want the far ppoints for specific, precise framing, there's the mk3. the wide angle can go on the 6d and center point is just fine for that kind of stuff.



+1. That's how I use the combination of the 5D3 and 6D - Tele's and/or wide aperture lenses on the 5D3 the the WA on the 6D so that the DOF is not a concern. 

Cheers ... J.R.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 19, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Back to the point, so far I have not felt too limited by the AF on the 6d. in lower light, if i want the far ppoints for specific, precise framing, there's the mk3. the wide angle can go on the 6d and center point is just fine for that kind of stuff.
> ...



With that said though, it all depends on the light. Like last evening, had no issue shooting wide open on my 1.8 or on my 50 1.4... or at full zoom on the 70-200 at 2.8, but we finished shooting at right around 9PM. If we had kept going, no doubt I'd be in center point only territory on the 6d...

I am sure at some point down the road the AF will bug me, I mean hell, I have found situations during receptions where the dance floor is dark but the dinner area is bright enough to make the mk3 hunt for focus. 

Either way, compared to my old backup (7d), even with the more robust AF I'd rather be on the 6d because ---the files from the 6d look pretty much just like files from my mk3. The 7d files, while good at lower ISO's, above 1600 they do fall apart (and yeah, when all I had was the 7d I did work in the 1600-4000 range and made it work - with the 6d it just works!).


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 19, 2013)

J.R., it could very well be that there is an AFMA or focus shift phenomenon going on with your 50mm on the 6D. It just sounds to me like you're complaining about not getting sharp focus, rather than the side points not achieving focus lock. I had thought you meant those points refused to ever focus at all in your low light situation. And are these children on the sofa, part of a paying gig, or are they just casual shots of your own kids? If they're just casual shots, then is it really such a big issue? 

I mean, let's face it, there are types of focus shift even when you focus a fast lens manually, let alone with autofocus. 

As for complaining that Canon "hobbled the 6D"...if they did, it was not for fear of impacting sales of the 5D3. It was to ensure that the Nikon D600 could never be offered at a lower street price than the 6D (because Canon's frontend cost on the 6D is lower than the Nikon's for the D600). I thought this was common knowledge? The 6D's feature set has nothing at all to do with the 5D3...think about it.

It just seems like your point in this thread, is to complain about the 6D. You admit you bought it as your backup camera. Perhaps you should sell it, and let someone have it who likes it more...and just buy another used or new 5D3? With the amount of time you've spent complaining about the 6D in this thread, you could have gotten some more photo jobs to pay for the extra 5D3, since you love it so much. No offense of course, I'm here to help :-D ... 

It seems to me, that the value of used 5D3's has gone up, since ML have hacked it for RAW video. So that's a good thing for 5D3 owners. 

I frankly detest the 5D3, and I currently have no need to do serious video. The next Canon body I buy, will likely be the replacement for the 1DX. Because the 1DX is almost right...


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 19, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> As for complaining that Canon "hobbled the 6D"...if they did, it was not for fear of impacting sales of the 5D3. It was to ensure that the Nikon D600 could never be offered at a lower street price than the 6D (because Canon's frontend cost on the 6D is lower than the Nikon's for the D600). I thought this was common knowledge? The 6D's feature set has nothing at all to do with the 5D3...think about it.



I thought about it and you're wrong: the d600 costs nearly €200 less than the 6d, and it has been this way from the start. Canon probably figures that €200 will make nobody jump ship.

The reason why Canon did the 6d as it is was ...
* save research time after the Nikon d600 release, i.e. recycle as much as they had (6d = 6ßd+5d2+5d3),
* to sidestep Nikon d600 (gps, wifi, low-light af but less af points) while at the same time
* protecting the 5d3 sales (af precision, af spread, fps, ...) and most of all to 
* generate profits: I'm sure the 6d is cheap to produce.

Disclaimer: The 6d is a good camera, esp. over the 5d2 (see my positive fact list: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11309.0) but if you want to shoot af shallow dof in non-center you might be less than happy if you want to stay with Canon but not pay €3000 for a camera body that probably also won't last as long as the successor due to the legacy sensor tech.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 20, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > As for complaining that Canon "hobbled the 6D"...if they did, it was not for fear of impacting sales of the 5D3. It was to ensure that the Nikon D600 could never be offered at a lower street price than the 6D (because Canon's frontend cost on the 6D is lower than the Nikon's for the D600). I thought this was common knowledge? The 6D's feature set has nothing at all to do with the 5D3...think about it.
> ...



Your argument is unique to your market; the D600 is $100+ more than the 6D in the North American market. He wasn't wrong by the market standard that he lives in, your market is obviously different.


----------



## wilddreamer (Jun 20, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > As for complaining that Canon "hobbled the 6D"...if they did, it was not for fear of impacting sales of the 5D3. It was to ensure that the Nikon D600 could never be offered at a lower street price than the 6D (because Canon's frontend cost on the 6D is lower than the Nikon's for the D600). I thought this was common knowledge? The 6D's feature set has nothing at all to do with the 5D3...think about it.
> ...



well i believe that you are never check on real life and only read on website. even you check on bnh store: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Digital-Cameras/ci/9811/N/4288586282 u can see that nikon D600 is 100usd more expensive that canon 6D. so do your homework or reality check


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> J.R., it could very well be that there is an AFMA or focus shift phenomenon going on with your 50mm on the 6D. It just sounds to me like you're complaining about not getting sharp focus, rather than the side points not achieving focus lock. I had thought you meant those points refused to ever focus at all in your low light situation. And are these children on the sofa, part of a paying gig, or are they just casual shots of your own kids? If they're just casual shots, then is it really such a big issue?
> 
> I mean, let's face it, there are types of focus shift even when you focus a fast lens manually, let alone with autofocus.
> 
> ...



I use FoCal for AFMA so that is not really the issue. There is no focus shift because it should show up on the 5D3 as well - only that it doesn't. The sensitivity of the outer focus points is insufficient indoors and that is the point I was making. This basically results in using the center point only in low light and hence the darned focus - recompose - shoot. 

Not getting sharp shots is an issue even if they are casual shots. Do you not want the best IQ if you are taking pics of your kids?  

I might appear to be complaining about the 6D but that's really not the case. The thread is on the issue of the AF of the 6D and not the IQ of the 6D. I'm just saying the way it is. Maybe you don't want better AF but not everyone has the same expectations / usage.

I wish I was getting paid for my photos. I do this as a hobby and have no time to turn it into a career. I do agree with your advice and intend to sell the 6D sometime next year and get a 1DX. Thanks!


----------



## x-vision (Jun 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> As for complaining that Canon "hobbled the 6D"...if they did, it was not for fear of impacting sales of the 5D3. It was to ensure that the Nikon D600 could never be offered at a lower street price than the 6D ...


Hmm. Just consider the lower x-sync and max-shutter speeds on the 6D vs the 5DIII. 
These do not lower cost in any way, as they are implemented in firmware.

Also consider the right-hand-only button placement on the back of the 6D. 
Look for yourself [here]. The back of the camera is a self-contained, independent module.
Any technical person will tell you that the cost of this module will not be any different if it had
buttons on the left-hand side as well - like on the 50D, 7D, 5DIII, or the 1DX, for example.

Canon did not implement these particular 'features' to ensure that the 6D is cheaper than the D600.
You can be sure about that.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 20, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Your argument is unique to your market; the D600 is $100+ more than the 6D in the North American market. He wasn't wrong by the market standard that he lives in, your market is obviously different.



I know :-> - but I couldn't help but to make the point that Canon's strategy, i.e. a Japanese company selling in *all* countries, cannot be judged by looking at US-$ prices alone. If someone says the d6 will *always* be less expensive than d600 which is an absolute theory it can be contradicted by one different example from another large market, even if the US might be the biggest (as things should be ).



wilddreamer said:


> well i believe that you are never check on real life and only read on website. even you check on bnh store: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Digital-Cameras/ci/9811/N/4288586282 u can see that nikon D600 is 100usd more expensive that canon 6D. so do your homework or reality check



Well, your homework consists of finding a globe and trying to find the US. Got it (it might say "Center of the world" on your version)? Good. Then look at all the other countries, amazing, isn't it? Well, and Canon sells dlsr everywhere, that's why I quoted the € (that's "Euro") prices, and even if you don't care about that in an English-written forum there are always the Brits and the Ozzies who don't pay in US-$.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> wilddreamer said:
> 
> 
> > well i believe that you are never check on real life and only read on website. even you check on bnh store: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Digital-Cameras/ci/9811/N/4288586282 u can see that nikon D600 is 100usd more expensive that canon 6D. so do your homework or reality check
> ...



Well there are some Indians as well who don't pay in US$. We have to pay in Indian Rupees. 

FWIW, the situation is much the same in India with the D600 is priced at INR 120,120 while the 6D is priced at INR 124,995. Translating into US$, a price difference of approximately US$ 82.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Thank you Dustin, as always you make a great point!


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

wilddreamer said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



+1


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > J.R., it could very well be that there is an AFMA or focus shift phenomenon going on with your 50mm on the 6D. It just sounds to me like you're complaining about not getting sharp focus, rather than the side points not achieving focus lock. I had thought you meant those points refused to ever focus at all in your low light situation. And are these children on the sofa, part of a paying gig, or are they just casual shots of your own kids? If they're just casual shots, then is it really such a big issue?
> ...



You're welcome. As I have so far not had the AF issue you have had, I will attempt to cause it when I get a chance, and see what happens. AFMA can be different from one camera to the next, and there is focus shift with fast lenses. I'm not convinced your comparison has ruled these out as a factor.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

x-vision said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > As for complaining that Canon "hobbled the 6D"...if they did, it was not for fear of impacting sales of the 5D3. It was to ensure that the Nikon D600 could never be offered at a lower street price than the 6D ...
> ...



When did I say that? Don't put words in my mouth. I was referring to the other features of the D600, such as the higher pixel density, the much more AF points in its array, the slightly higher fps, etc. Sorry if I'm not enough of a technical person for you, but apparently you're not technical enough either, because you skipped right over the obvious features I just now mentioned. Who cares how many buttons are on the camera, or where they're located? Buttons don't cost very much. So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Your argument is unique to your market; the D600 is $100+ more than the 6D in the North American market. He wasn't wrong by the market standard that he lives in, your market is obviously different.
> ...



The USA is the largest DSLR camera market in the world, period. Europe is not 1 country, and thus their prices vary. You're welcome to attempt to poke holes in my little theory, but I still stand by it. How many Canon DSLR's are sold in both UK and Australia? Not as many as in the USA, by a mile. Enough said.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> ...



You can come up with whatever theory you can make up with your myopic view of the world. The demographics of Canon's sales is such that only 27 per cent of its global sales come from the US. Americas ... North as well as South America.


----------



## Wildfire (Jun 20, 2013)

I just wanted to say that with a 600EX-RT on top providing the red AF assist grid, the outer points on the 6D work fantastic in any lighting conditions, from bright sunlight to a pitch black room.

Now that I've moved to the Canon RT system I have absolutely no problems with the 6D's autofocus, when before I would use all points in good light and switch to center only whenever there were problems focusing in darker areas.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

Wildfire said:


> I just wanted to say that with a 600EX-RT on top providing the red AF assist grid, the outer points on the 6D work fantastic in any lighting conditions, from bright sunlight to a pitch black room.
> 
> Now that I've moved to the Canon RT system I have absolutely no problems with the 6D's autofocus, when before I would use all points in good light and switch to center only whenever there were problems focusing in darker areas.



Thanks wildfire ... I think I'll give it a spin with the AF assist with the speedlite. I'm sure it will help!


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



"The Americas" would also include Central America and Mexico, if you want to get technical. Obviously you do.

Oceana, Europe...those aren't countries with a single currency. But then neither are the Americas. Japan is the only "area" on the chart with a single currency...so their market share is huge in comparison to all other countries. What is the current price in yen of a D600 vs. a 6D?

I was also speaking of DSLR sales, because we are talking about a price comparison between two DSLR's, a Nikon and a Canon...and not overall sales.

You really have no point to make here, do you? Other than you dislike the USA, or you think we don't realize there are other people in the world? Sorry to disappoint you, but I do very much realize it. 

In any case, if you like the Nikon D600, or otherwise think it's a better value than the 6D, you should buy that as your backup camera, and some Nikon glass. That would be a lot less costly than buying a 1DX as your backup camera, as you seem to imply in a previous post.


----------



## x-vision (Jun 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> When did I say that? Don't put words in my mouth.



Here's what you said: 


> As for complaining that Canon "hobbled the 6D"...if they did, *it was not for fear of impacting sales of the 5D3. It was to ensure that the Nikon D600 could never be offered at a lower street price than the 6D* ...



To summarize this quote: 
Canon did not "hobble" the 6D to protect 5DIII sales. 
What they did was ensure that the 6D is cheaper than the D600.

That's what you said, no?

To that I replied that 'features' like the lower x-sync and max-stutter speed, as well as the 6D consumer ergonomics (all back buttons are on the right side, as on consumer cameras like the Rebels) have nothing to do with lowering cost.

In case it's not clear to you, Canon did these particular 'features' in order protect 5DIII sales. 
As I said, these have nothing to do with reducing costs. 
These are conscious decisions on Canon's part to (artificially) differentiate the 6D from the 5DIII.
Sorry if that's not clear to you.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

x-vision said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > When did I say that? Don't put words in my mouth.
> ...



Well, it's not. Again, the 6D's choice of features, or lack thereof, has everything to do with its competition in the marketplace with other brands, and nothing to do with protecting sales of their own camera model that is not in the same price class or feature set. The 5D3 has the best AF sensor Canon knows how to make. That feature, along with a larger more robust body, and with higher processing capacity and shooting speed than the 6D...are what set the 5D3 apart from a camera that is intentionally downmarket from it. Downmarket products are not meant to "protect" sales of upmarket products. You're implying Canon thinks the 5D3 needs protecting. I disagree. 

You don't work for Canon, you are voicing your own opinion and stating it as fact. Your opinion does not disprove my opinion. Clear?


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> You really have no point to make here, do you? Other than you dislike the USA, or you think we don't realize there are other people in the world? Sorry to disappoint you, but I do very much realize it.
> 
> In any case, if you like the Nikon D600, or otherwise think it's a better value than the 6D, you should buy that as your backup camera, and some Nikon glass. That would be a lot less costly than buying a 1DX as your backup camera, as you seem to imply in a previous post.



I don't dislike the US but I do dislike the people who don't seem to realise that there is a world outside of the US. I think its too presumptuous to say that Canon prices its products taking only the US market into consideration.  

BTW, did I say that I "liked" the Nikon D600? We were only referring to the price here and all you can deduce from the information that has been provided by myself and another poster here is to arrive at the conclusion that I like the Nikon D600 and should buy it instead of the 1DX!  That said, if Nikon suited my shooting requirements, I would have shifted already. 

Did I say that the 6D is a bad camera? I have a few gripes with the autofocus that Canon has put out on it. My points are relevant to "this" thread that is the only reason I have posted here. The thread refers to "6D Autofocus not impressive" - well it's not impressive IMHO and if one would consider the AF systems in Canon's other models (even crop cameras), I would say that the AF system on the 6D is not impressive at all. Simply because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm wrong - you are satisfied with the 6D's AF and I am not. Is it so difficult to understand? 

If the best you can do is come up with irrational conclusions then I rest my case. There is no point in trying to get into a reasoned debate and end up getting rude and nasty replies. I hope you are not this obtuse in real life.

Cheers ... J.R.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 20, 2013)

D4 > 1Dx

D800 > 5D3

D600 > 6D

:| <----------------------- *poker face.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> D4 > 1Dx
> 
> D800 > 5D3
> 
> ...



In what sense? Price, DR or trolls of the Nikon bandwagon?


----------



## x-vision (Jun 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> You don't work for Canon, you are voicing your own opinion and stating it as fact.


You are doing the exact same thing. 



> Your opinion does not disprove my opinion. Clear?


Well, it does 8).

Downmarket products are _typically_ not meant to "protect" sales upmarket products ... unless they are obviously designed to do so.

You see, there's *absolutely* no need for the right-hand-only button placement on the back of the 6D.

Before articulating LCDs, even the Rebels had buttons on the left side. 
So, having buttons only on the right side is not some novel ergonomics idea.

Canon did it so that the 6D has a consumer feel to it and is different from the pro-oriented 5DIII.
This is so-o-o obvious that mine opinion really disproves yours in this case - based on the obviousness criteria. 
And btw, you should be worried that such an obvious thing escapes you.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 20, 2013)

J.R. said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > D4 > 1Dx
> ...



:|

:|

:|

I'll never tell.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Damn! That's convenient ;D I'll make my best guess ... Thank you!


----------



## ahab1372 (Jun 20, 2013)

buttons left, buttons right, better or lesser AF, a few dollars or Euros more here or less there or the other ways round - and you all know why Canon did what they did? Geez, how do you know all this? Have you been drinking sake with what-was-his-name-again?


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

ahab1372 said:


> buttons left, buttons right, better or lesser AF, a few dollars or Euros more here or less there or the other ways round - and you all know why Canon did what they did? Geez, how do you know all this? Have you been drinking sake with what-was-his-name-again?



He who must not be named!


----------



## sdsr (Jun 20, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Shooting indoors without flash, child sitting on sofa, shooting wide open with the 50mm f/1.4 - no option but to focus and recompose.
> 
> I agree that the center point of the 6D is very good, but there are times when you need those outer focus points.



I wonder if your 6D is defective. I frequently test new lenses around our apartment at night in low light without flash and never have a problem using the outer focus points (at least on the lenses I have) unless there's not enough contrast where I'm trying to focus. Perhaps it's just the sort of things I photograph, but such situations in my experience are rare (e.g. I like taking shallow-focus photos of a shelf inside a cabinet covered in glasses; clear glass is difficult to focus on at the best of times...); the 5DIII may handle them better, of course.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

J.R. said:


> I don't dislike the US but I do dislike the people who don't seem to realise that there is a world outside of the US. I think its too presumptuous to say that Canon prices its products taking only the US market into consideration.
> 
> BTW, did I say that I "liked" the Nikon D600? We were only referring to the price here and all you can deduce from the information that has been provided by myself and another poster here is to arrive at the conclusion that I like the Nikon D600 and should buy it instead of the 1DX!  That said, if Nikon suited my shooting requirements, I would have shifted already.
> 
> ...



Huh? I'm not being any more rude than you are here. You're the one implying I think the USA is the only market. I don't, and never said it was. However, you seem to be implying the UK's market is what counts, since somehow the price is less there for the D600 than the 6D...and that because of this, I was wrong in my assertion that Canon wanted to keep the price of the 6D lower than that of the D600. Well, I still feel that was their strategy, and you can't disprove it. Your market is not representative of the world market, despite your implication that it is...and somehow the US market is the outlier that is not representative of the price.

I don't care if you think the 6D's autofocus is impressive or not. My point still is, that it need not be "impressive", it simply needs to function well, _which it does._ You are finding fault with it unfairly, and if you spent a bit more time with it, you might change your mind. 

Really, you should chill out a little bit. You are taking this way too personally, for no reason.


----------



## sdsr (Jun 20, 2013)

x-vision said:


> You see, there's *absolutely* no need for the right-hand-only button placement on the back of the 6D.
> 
> Before articulating LCDs, even the Rebels had buttons on the left side.
> So, having buttons only on the right side is not some novel ergonomics idea.
> ...



What escapes me is why having buttons on both sides is more upmarket than having them all on the right. I've been using my 5DII and 6D interchangeably a lot during the past week and - perhaps because I'm a mere "consumer" - have no hesitation in preferring the layout on the 6D (dare I even say I don't much like the joystick). But it's easy enough to get used to either (one could even, I suppose, get used to Nikon's horrible ergonomics).


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > I don't dislike the US but I do dislike the people who don't seem to realise that there is a world outside of the US. I think its too presumptuous to say that Canon prices its products taking only the US market into consideration.
> ...



No problem Carl. I'm ok with a difference of opinion and I don't take it personally. What really got me wound up was the reference to the Nikon D600 for no apparent reason. 

BTW, I didn't make a reference to the UK market so I don't know where you are coming from. I was simply mentioning that the price of the two cameras is more or less the same, give or take a few. The difference in prices could not have been the main consideration for Canon or Nikon. I have my opinion and you have yours and we can agree to disagree and move on. 

Cheers ... &J


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

sdsr said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Shooting indoors without flash, child sitting on sofa, shooting wide open with the 50mm f/1.4 - no option but to focus and recompose.
> ...



I don't think that my 6D is defective but I guess I'll check out by borrowing another 6D from a friend and test them side by side.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

sdsr said:


> x-vision said:
> 
> 
> > You see, there's *absolutely* no need for the right-hand-only button placement on the back of the 6D.
> ...



+1 million! I agree wholeheartedly (obviously). Nikon has terrible ergonomics, and coming from a XXD body that had buttons on both sides, I got used to the ergonomics of the 6D in about 1 minute. And at that time, I decided to sell my XXD body, because even though I had loved it for 4 years, I suddenly felt no need for it anymore. 

Using the 6D feels like an extension of me, and that didn't take long.

I frankly don't wish the 6D had anything different than it does. I am mostly a stills shooter. If video was important to me, I would certainly own the 5D3 and install the ML RAW video hack...

I've never had a real problem with any aspect of the 6D's autofocus. And it's not like I don't have experience with bigger bodies. I have used the 1D4, the 5D3, and the 1DX (hope to use it more). Also, I fail to see the logic in owning a "backup body" for someone who is not doing professional (event) photography. I mean, I do pro work on occasion, but even I don't currently own a "backup body". I don't feel the need for one. I use other compact cameras at times (decent ones, not cheap ones), but I honestly don't feel out in the cold having just the 6D as my only DSLR body. If I had a team of other photographers working with me or for me, that would be different. Or if I was making say $1k a day, 3 or more days a week, that would also be very different.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 20, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > J.R. said:
> ...



That's fine with me. My point was and is, that the D600 is the 6D's competition, which is why I brought it into the conversation. The 5D3, is not the 6D's competition (to you or anyone else who keeps harping on that).


----------



## J.R. (Jun 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> That's fine with me. My point was and is, that the D600 is the 6D's competition, which is why I brought it into the conversation. The 5D3, is not the 6D's competition (to you or anyone else who keeps harping on that).



you mentioned that I "liked" the D600 and should buy that. And why the hell would I say that the 5D3 is competition to the 6D - i never said that and if you presume so, it's not really my problem. Enuf said!


----------



## Trovador (Jun 20, 2013)

Too bad the 6D's buttons weren't placed a couple centimeters more to the right, that would've knocked at least US$500 to it's price. Bummer. ???


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 21, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > That's fine with me. My point was and is, that the D600 is the 6D's competition, which is why I brought it into the conversation. The 5D3, is not the 6D's competition (to you or anyone else who keeps harping on that).
> ...



I never said you liked the D600, I said something to the effect of "if you think the D600 is a better value than the 6D, you should buy one" (since you're the one saying the D600 costs less than the 6D, rather than more, which was my observation). Is it not you who has complained about the 6D, and admitted you might sell it? I mean sheesh! I must point out, it is you who is using swear words here, and yet I'm the one who gets complained about to the mods. How is that fair?

I am not here to lambast or attack you. I'm merely defending what I said initially, and it is you who had the problem with it. Or maybe you're going to suddenly forget that happened too? Chill out, no reason to get upset.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 21, 2013)

Trovador said:


> Too bad the 6D's buttons weren't placed a couple centimeters more to the right, that would've knocked at least US$500 to it's price. Bummer. ???



Would that place the buttons out in the air beside the grip? Good one!


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 22, 2013)

Wildfire said:


> I just wanted to say that with a 600EX-RT on top providing the red AF assist grid, the outer points on the 6D work fantastic in any lighting conditions, from bright sunlight to a pitch black room. Now that I've moved to the Canon RT system I have absolutely no problems with the 6D's autofocus



Just two points (though of course it's great you're happy with the combination):

1. You wouldn't have needed the expensive 600rt for that, the larger spread of the newest flash is made for the 1dx/5d3 af array - for the 5d2/6d af a 580ex/430ex/3rdparty-something would be sufficient.

2. Of course you can af in pitch blackness with af assist, same goes for my 60d, but one main advantage of the 6d is to focus w/o beam distraction & shoot in available light (high iso capability) - so fixing the outer af point light sensitivity with af assist doesn't entirely satisfy me.


----------



## wilddreamer (Jun 22, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > wilddreamer said:
> ...



Well i am from indonesia(itson southeast asia in case u dont know). In my country canon 6D is rp.16.500.000 ($1650) and nikon 600D rp.19.000.000 ($1900). And canon so much better in service after sales. I pick canon over nikon anytime anyprice.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 22, 2013)

With a properly calibrated lens/camera combination (AFMA, everyone, and do it right!), I have absolutely no qualms about using outer points on my 6D(s).

This is straight out of camera, taken today, the farthest left focus point, handheld, focused in a split second (previous shot was of the front petal), using the 100L Macro lens. 100% crop included. Depth of field at this distance is .07 of an inch by my calculator (not exactly a lot of room for error), and yet this image is focused perfectly where I want it to be focused.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 22, 2013)

P.S. Not trying to be disrespectful, but it seems to me that the primary posters that keep questioning the AF system on the 6D are those that don't actually own the body. Testing one in shop or using a friends' is not really a substitute for having the camera, calibrating a lens, and becoming familiar with using it. I'm not saying that you can have no knowledge, but you certainly don't have the knowledge that I have acquired by owning two the cameras and taking thousands upon thousands of photos with them in a variety of conditions. I have multiple wide aperture primes and zooms, and I have no focusing problems with my 6D. I don't shoot sports, but I do shot lots of events, and have no problems. *If you don't think the AF system is adequate for your needs, then by all means, buy another camera.*


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 22, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> With a properly calibrated lens/camera combination (AFMA, everyone, and do it right!), I have absolutely no qualms about using outer points on my 6D(s).
> 
> This is straight out of camera, taken today, the farthest left focus point, handheld, focused in a split second (previous shot was of the front petal), using the 100L Macro lens. 100% crop included. Depth of field at this distance is .07 of an inch by my calculator (not exactly a lot of room for error), and yet this image is focused perfectly where I want it to be focused.




And your outer AF point is horizontal line detecting whereas the stamens of the flower are vertical, so not the easiest target. I have to say that if you know what you're doing the single line sensors are just fine. 

+1 on the comments you've made. The 6D AF is actually very good for it's intended purpose. If someone wants to shoot action 'on a budget' you'd be much better served by a 7D anyway.


----------



## jrista (Jun 22, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> With a properly calibrated lens/camera combination (AFMA, everyone, and do it right!), I have absolutely no qualms about using outer points on my 6D(s).
> 
> This is straight out of camera, taken today, the farthest left focus point, handheld, focused in a split second (previous shot was of the front petal), using the 100L Macro lens. 100% crop included. Depth of field at this distance is .07 of an inch by my calculator (not exactly a lot of room for error), and yet this image is focused perfectly where I want it to be focused.



Thanks for the examples. Great stuff. I am not sure what anyone is complaining about...Canon's 9-pt AF system, while certainly not "professional quality", has long been proven to be extremely effective. I can't figure how an 11-pt version with improved center point could be any worse. I think part of the problem may be that people are classifying the 6D as a professional grade camera...when in reality, it is at best a prosumer FF. One shouldn't expect high end, high speed, superior-in-all-respects AF like you get in the 1D X on a prosumer anything.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 23, 2013)

J.R. said:


> sdsr said:
> 
> 
> > J.R. said:
> ...



I checked and there is a BIG difference in the AF performance of my friend's 6D as compared to mine. His 6D's outer focus points lock on quite well but mine don't seem to be anywhere as good. I'm packing my 6D off to Canon service center tomorrow - it's under warranty.

Thanks sdsr!


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 23, 2013)

^
Are you sure it's not dust specks on the AF sensor causing problems ? I have this on and off all the time. Sometimes an outer point will cease to be able to lock but a clean fixes it. My cameras do get contaminated quickly, but I guess your 6D isn't old enough to have a serious problem.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 23, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> P.S. Not trying to be disrespectful, but it seems to me that the primary posters that keep questioning the AF system on the 6D are those that don't actually own the body.



That would be me? The general problem as I see it is that people who have shelled out a lot of $$$ for a dslr might have a bias toward liking the camera, as of course it's a good camera, as is any current dlsr. Fortunately have a very matter-of-fact approach and seem to have a lot of experience with the 6d, but in general I'd be hesitant to prefer any given "owner" opinion over a few hours of "non-owner" testing, esp. if people don't also own the competition (7d, 5d3).



TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Testing one in shop or using a friends' is not really a substitute for having the camera, calibrating a lens, and becoming familiar with using it. I'm not saying that you can have no knowledge, but you certainly don't have the knowledge that I have acquired by owning two the cameras and taking thousands upon thousands of photos with them in a variety of conditions.



My contribution to this thread was that the af point spread is far smaller than on the crop cameras, and thus focusing & recomposing might get trickier with a small dof, lowering the keeper rate with spot-on af @100% crop. I explicitly suspected that my problems when trying the 6d also have to do with a lack of experience/technique - but even your two cameras are bound to have the af points in the same place as all the other 5d2/6d. So I really appreciate your great input and reviews, but in this case I don't see how extended usage of a camera changes the position of the af points :-o


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 23, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > P.S. Not trying to be disrespectful, but it seems to me that the primary posters that keep questioning the AF system on the 6D are those that don't actually own the body.
> ...



Here is my one issue with your contribution to this thread: I think you are very knowledgeable and well informed (that isn't the problem). My problem is that you while you say you are planning to get the 6D, I read you doing little other than continually criticizing it. If you really want the camera, fine, then buy it. If you don't really want it, then buy another a different camera...and that's also fine.

And, with all due respect, the implication that owner's bias trumps the experience they have through ownership is fallacious. If I own something that isn't actually good, I quickly sell it and replace it with something that is. It's that simple.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 23, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> My problem is that you while you say you are planning to get the 6D, I read you doing little other than continually criticizing it.



In this case, you really might want to try to read again, I even often put a disclaimer under my posts to prevent just what you implied now. - I went out of my way writing about the 6d being a good camera over crop or 5d2, even topping the 5d3 in some things: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11309.0



TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> If you really want the camera, fine, then buy it. If you don't really want it, then buy another a different camera...and that's also fine.



Or if I simply want to wait some for the prices in Germany to drop (€100 in the last *week*, here it's still *more* expensive than the d600), that's also fine. While I'm doing that, I feel free to contribute to any threads here from people wondering about the same thing I wondered about, often pointing to my positive 6d fact list mentioned above. In fact, I'd feel free to post even if I'd decide never to buy a 6d because I'd think crop is sufficient for me and let other people know about my decision making process 



TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> And, with all due respect, the implication that owner's bias trumps the experience they have through ownership is fallacious. If I own something that isn't actually good, I quickly sell it and replace it with something that is. It's that simple.



Without putting too fine a point on it, in my very humble opinion you are mistaken because there is no alternative to the 6d with Canon and in this price range except for the outdated 5d2. So what would someone who's unhappy with the 6d replace it with? Sell all glass and buy Nikon? Spend €1000 + 6d loss more and get a 5d3? See - it isn't that simple. Plus many people are simply attached to things once they bought it, I know I am.

As for what trumps what - I'd take my privilege to evaluate this on a case by case basis. In your case, experience certainly trumps owner's bias (if there is any at all). In other cases where someone does low light photography, then reads about lacking servo af performance, goes outside, snaps something and posts the (one?) keeper saying "it's just fine" I'm not so sure.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 23, 2013)

Fine. I stand by my points and opinion, and you are equally entitled to yours. I will argue no more - I've got better things to to do 8)


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 23, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Fine. I stand by my points and opinion, and you are equally entitled to yours. I will argue no more - I've got better things to to do 8)



Actually, I also have  (not that I'd think you'd wanted to imply otherwise), I just felt the need to reply to your criticism since I value your contributions to CR, have fun shooting!


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 23, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Fine. I stand by my points and opinion, and you are equally entitled to yours. I will argue no more - I've got better things to to do 8)
> ...



Agreed!


----------



## robbinzo (Jun 23, 2013)

I've had a play with the 6D and it seems reasonable. Just playing with it in the shop, I did manage to get a 24-105 lens to hunt for focus using the centre point when I aimed it at a black poorly lit cupboard door. However, I doubt that I will be taking many shots of black poorly lit cupboard doors in my life.
I also realise that lenses make a big difference to the autofocus. On my current 550D for example, the 100L macro focuses in an instant whereas the 50 f/1.4 is relatively slothful.
I've been humming and hawing over the 5D III and the 6D for a while and I will probably go for the 6D just for the wifi capabilities. Sometimes I don't have time to faff about with RAW images and it would be nice just to be able to send some jpegs direct to my tab.
What has been putting me off the 6D is the autofocus. I was not expecting the 5D III autofocus system but I do think that cross type points should be standard - like on the latest rebel body. 11 cross type autofocus points would have been perfect for this camera and would have quietened down the nay-sayers. And yes in some situations the 6D autofocus system is just fine but in others it is wanting. I have small children. They rarely sit still. My 550D rarely copes with them running towards me when I think I'm sneakily photographing them. My Samsung smart phone compares favourably with my 550D in terms of nailing focus. Think about that. Granted, image quality is nowhere near but the best camera is the one you have with you and frankly carrying around a 5D III just on the off chance of getting a snap of my son on a swing in the park is not going to happen.
For me as a non-pro, I want one body. I also would like full frame so I won't be getting the 7D. 
For us lowly amateurs, a camera needs to be a bit of a jack of all trades because we just can't be spending thousands on gear when it doesn't get used enough to justify having it (read: the missus would kill me). 
Therefore, it is my humble opinion that Canon could have tweaked the autofocus system for the 6D to be just a little bit better. 
Let's not forget that the 6D is an expensive camera. At £1500 in the UK, that to most people is a very expensive camera.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 23, 2013)

robbinzo said:


> I've had a play with the 6D and it seems reasonable. Just playing with it in the shop, I did manage to get a 24-105 lens to hunt for focus using the centre point when I aimed it at a black poorly lit cupboard door. However, I doubt that I will be taking many shots of black poorly lit cupboard doors in my life.
> I also realise that lenses make a big difference to the autofocus. On my current 550D for example, the 100L macro focuses in an instant whereas the 50 f/1.4 is relatively slothful.
> I've been humming and hawing over the 5D III and the 6D for a while and I will probably go for the 6D just for the wifi capabilities. Sometimes I don't have time to faff about with RAW images and it would be nice just to be able to send some jpegs direct to my tab.
> What has been putting me off the 6D is the autofocus. I was not expecting the 5D III autofocus system but I do think that cross type points should be standard - like on the latest rebel body. 11 cross type autofocus points would have been perfect for this camera and would have quietened down the nay-sayers. And yes in some situations the 6D autofocus system is just fine but in others it is wanting. I have small children. They rarely sit still. My 550D rarely copes with them running towards me when I think I'm sneakily photographing them. My Samsung smart phone compares favourably with my 550D in terms of nailing focus. Think about that. Granted, image quality is nowhere near but the best camera is the one you have with you and frankly carrying around a 5D III just on the off chance of getting a snap of my son on a swing in the park is not going to happen.
> ...



There's a reason why the smart phone copes 'reasonably well' in your situation. The tiny format has massive depth of field.

I know you were joking about focusing on a black door, but try manually focusing on something with no definition; it's all but impossible. A cameras 'range finder' style AF is no different, whether it be x type or not.

I agree this you that the 6D is, in its own right, an expensive camera.

It's also a damn fine one. And there's no 'owners pride' with me. I don't actually buy or own the gear I use.


----------



## Wildfire (Jun 23, 2013)

robbinzo said:


> What has been putting me off the 6D is the autofocus. I was not expecting the 5D III autofocus system but I do think that cross type points should be standard - like on the latest rebel body. 11 cross type autofocus points would have been perfect for this camera and would have quietened down the nay-sayers.



I agree with you on this, however I will say that all points work great in good light. It's only when things get darker do I start to rely on the center point only. I recently got a few 600EX-RTs and the AF assist grid really makes focusing in the dark with the outer points no problem at all now.

I believe that Canon made the decision to leave out the cross-type AF points to make room for the WiFi and GPS. Unfortunately, I don't use either of those features often so I would have preferred the superior autofocus instead.


----------



## robbinzo (Jun 23, 2013)

Sporgon, I agree that the 6D is a lovely camera. That's not in doubt. I have almost made up my mind to buy one. For me IQ, ISO performance and wifi are all excellent 6D features.
I should have also said that the focus seemed quite snappy to me indoors in average shop lighting. I only managed to get the focus to hunt on something, like you say, that is very difficult (and frankly pointless). 
All the AF points seemed pretty good to me. But then again the autofocus on my 550D has mostly worked well, except in low light.
Personally my own opinion (opinions are like belly buttons - everyone has one but they don't hold much water) is that the 6D should have a better AF system. If it did I'd already own one.


----------



## robbinzo (Jun 23, 2013)

Wildfire said:


> I believe that Canon made the decision to leave out the cross-type AF points to make room for the WiFi and GPS. Unfortunately, I don't use either of those features often so I would have preferred the superior autofocus instead.



+1


----------



## brad-man (Jun 23, 2013)

FWIW, I picked up a 6D from _GetItDigital_ on ebay for $1542 during a recent price war. USA warranty already registered with Canon. I already owned a 5Dll, a 7D and a few older bodies. I have only shot with it a few days now, in fact I haven't even gotten around to doing AFMA with FoCal yet. It is a great camera ergonomically and in low light. While the AF is not _overly_ impressive, it is plenty good enough for me. I will be selling the 5Dll (hopefully for more than I paid for the 6D).


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 24, 2013)

Wildfire said:


> I believe that Canon made the decision to leave out the cross-type AF points to make room for the WiFi and GPS.



I hope I'll not be reprimanded for mentioning this, _but the af array is on the *bottom* of the camera_- afaik major space (and production costs) saving only occur due to making the af array smaller, i.e. like 5d2 and not like 5d3 ... here's good article on this by our very own Dr. Neuro: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/photography-tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx

As for the top: Canon didn't include a flash (like in the Nikon d600) because that's where the gps/wifi antennas are, for the same reason the casing is not full metal unlike the other Canon ff cameras.


----------



## dgatwood (Jun 24, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> As for the top: Canon didn't include a flash (like in the Nikon d600) because that's where the gps/wifi antennas are, for the same reason the casing is not full metal unlike the other Canon ff cameras.



Other way around. They put the GPS and Wi-Fi antennas there because they didn't include a flash. I work for a company that builds devices that include GPS and Wi-Fi in them. Although it is true that you can't place the antennas just anywhere, for the most part, it really doesn't matter much where you put GPS or Wi-Fi antennas so long as it isn't wrapped in a Faraday cage (metal case) on all six sides. They certainly don't need to be on top for any particular reason.

Similarly the case is plastic because Canon was trying to hit a price point. There's no real problem with putting antennas inside a partially metal case. Look at an iPhone 5 or any model of MacBook Pro for great examples of this—metal back, glass front. Wi-Fi and (on the iPhone) GPS work just fine, and GPS does not stop working if you hold the thing vertically, i.e. there's no need for the GPS antenna to be on top.

Canon could have just as easily put the antennas under a slightly enlarged plastic display bezel on the back face like Apple does, and they could have made the body out of metal, and they could have included a flash. They didn't bother to do so because they were making it out of plastic to hit a price point anyway, and they had all that extra body real estate where the flash would have been had they decided to include one.

I would assume that a non-full-frame DSLR with GPS would not make the same tradeoff with regards to the flash. However, I would expect such devices to still be made of plastic, not because of the antennas, but because it is the difference between ten or twelve cents of moulded ABS plastic and tens of dollars worth of milled magnesium alloy.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 24, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> I would assume that a non-full-frame DSLR with GPS would not make the same tradeoff with regards to the flash. However, I would expect such devices to still be made of plastic, not because of the antennas, but because it is the difference between ten or twelve cents of moulded ABS plastic and tens of dollars worth of milled magnesium alloy.



Great information, thanks! Though for my 2ct you are putting too much weight into production costs: how much metal there is in this price class is mainly marketing because it's the perceived "sturdiness" of the camera, even if this probably isn't backed by reality. And the primary reason for Canon leaving out the flash out of their ff cameras will be that's it's their tradition and thus they can get away with it: it's generating even more profit to make users buy a €300-€500 unit just to serve as a flash master than to leave out some metal. For this reason, I'm not so sure they won't add a pop-up flash in the 70d/7d2 if it's possible to include it alongside gps/wifi with no (big?) loss of signal strength.


----------



## dgatwood (Jun 25, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Great information, thanks! Though for my 2ct you are putting too much weight into production costs: how much metal there is in this price class is mainly marketing because it's the perceived "sturdiness" of the camera, even if this probably isn't backed by reality.



Fair point. There's certainly a prestige factor.

That said, I wouldn't underestimate the additional manufacturing costs. I haven't actually seen any of the metal cameras personally, but I'm assuming that a single piece of metal makes up the entire shell or very nearly so. If so, then in addition to the manufacturing cost, you also have the cost of assembling the guts inside a one-piece case instead of being able to assemble the case in pieces around the guts. Depending on what their manufacturing processes look like, the additional costs could be considerable (or not), particularly if the milled design requires a lot of hand assembly where the plastic design does not. Obviously I don't know whether that's an issue or not.

That said, there's a pretty easy way to know with some degree of certainty. Compare price points and sales volume. If price differences map neatly onto materials differences, it is probably almost pure marketing. If volume differences map neatly onto materials differences, it is probably a manufacturing constraint. If price and volume map neatly onto one another, guess, and you'll be right about half the time. 




Marsu42 said:


> And the primary reason for Canon leaving out the flash out of their ff cameras will be that's it's their tradition and thus they can get away with it: it's generating even more profit to make users buy a €300-€500 unit just to serve as a flash master than to leave out some metal. For this reason, I'm not so sure they won't add a pop-up flash in the 70d/7d2 if it's possible to include it alongside gps/wifi with no (big?) loss of signal strength.



Quite true, hence my comment to the effect of "They didn't think the target market cared". 

Edit: Hmm. It looks like I actually deleted that comment in the midst of rewriting that previous post. Oh well. But yes, that's almost certainly exactly the reason they didn't include a flash.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 25, 2013)

J.R. said:


> I checked and there is a BIG difference in the AF performance of my friend's 6D as compared to mine. His 6D's outer focus points lock on quite well but mine don't seem to be anywhere as good. I'm packing my 6D off to Canon service center tomorrow - it's under warranty.



Just a quick update ... I got a call from the Canon service center. My 6D AF sensor is malfunctioning and they are going to replace it. 

My problems with the AF were unique after all. 

Cheers ... J.R.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 25, 2013)

J.R. said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > I checked and there is a BIG difference in the AF performance of my friend's 6D as compared to mine. His 6D's outer focus points lock on quite well but mine don't seem to be anywhere as good. I'm packing my 6D off to Canon service center tomorrow - it's under warranty.
> ...



I'm glad your problem was fixable. As I have demonstrated, I don't have any real issues with the outer points. I suspect you will be pleasantly surprised when your camera returns.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 25, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> If so, then in addition to the manufacturing cost, you also have the cost of assembling the guts inside a one-piece case instead of being able to assemble the case in pieces around the guts. Depending on what their manufacturing processes look like, the additional costs could be considerable (or not), particularly if the milled design requires a lot of hand assembly where the plastic design does not. Obviously I don't know whether that's an issue or not.



This is ot, but I guess the af issue has been discussed to death...

.. so concerning the metal framing: Good point, and it might be an issue for production because manufacturers seem to tend to leave the front open. With Nikon d7000, this is nearly a scam because they announce the camera as metal but show only top & back diagrams, and for a reason - the front is plastic. I don't know how much metal there is in the 6d except for the plastic top, I cannot see it from the Canon sealing schematics.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 25, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > And, with all due respect, the implication that owner's bias trumps the experience they have through ownership is fallacious. If I own something that isn't actually good, I quickly sell it and replace it with something that is. It's that simple.
> ...



I have an issue with this, because, its not as if there is no alternative, just not in this price range. it's like that with all things, you get this for that, and if you want more you have to step it up to the next package. To use my own business as an analogy - my mid level package offers ceremony and full reception coverage, but if you want ceremony prep, you move to the next tier, you want a second shooter, you move to the next tier. Now I am not as stringent as canon, and, for me its not like i have to retool my whole factory just to offer a compromise in my packages, but either way - the analogy holds true. You can't act like there are no other options - because there are! Even in the 6d price range or less, you want FF but don't have the dough you can find product...i see the 1dmk2 and the 1ds at about $650 - 1dsmk2 for around $1500, and there are 1dsmk3 floating around the $2600 range.

So, you only option is far from selling you gear and moving to nikon, and real world ---the d600's only real 
AF advantage is in servo mode because of the extra points, but the spread of those points is about the same - so if your trying to shoot sports on a budget or wildlife and need tracking, then you want a 7d or a mk3 or a d600. But, the d600 offers no advantage for the "low light fast prime lens far corner composition and I don't want to focus and recompose or crop in post issue."

Back to my original issue with your comments though, it sounds like you just want a mk3 for the price of a 6d, and it also sounds like you think the d600 is more on par with the mk3 too, which isn't true. Many of the 6'd shortcoming are in the d600 too:

Max shutter speed - 1/4000
max sync speed - 1/200
memory cards - SD

And - native ISO on the d600 is 6400 ---you have to use the expansion to boost it to 25,600.

So, the d600, while yes it is a fine camera and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to any shooters who currently shoot with nikon gear, but ---I wouldn't recommend switching systems based on AF alone. 

Again, kind of sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. With all things in photography you have to make compromises unless you have an unlimited budget. Like when i made my 70-200 decision, I couldn't afford the IS version at the time ---compromise, the f4IS and the f2.8 non IS were right in the same ballpark - so I made the compromise of losing IS in favor of the 2.8 aperture. When I bought my 6d, I was looking for a backup body that could hold its own in most situations with my mk3. My budget just couldn't afford a second mk3, so I compromised and went with the 6d. This list can go on and on...we can't expect canon or nikon to tailor make our products to each of our personal needs and desires. So we balance the decision based on wants vs needs vs available budget.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jun 25, 2013)

Chuck couldn't have expressed this better! 

I chose the 6D anticipating an upgrade in the near future for the reasons cited relative to wildlife. The 6D will be an excellent second camera for those things it does exceedingly well and I'm waiting on Canon for a new body. No regrets not getting the 5D3 since it's heavier and bulkier and not what I want for the second camera which will be more scenic once I have a new body. 

I've lived my whole life repairing and fixing everything under the sun on a very tight budget (no holidays etc.) and now at 64 I'm loving the fact that I have been able to afford the 6D and a 300 II lens and extenders (light weight poor man's 600) and I'm thrilled to death with the results (simply accepting the AF). I came from Nikon believing that the Canon lenses have the edge and I won't be switching back. Canon's ergonomics are better as well. 

I never imagined that one day I'd have such amazing equipment!!

Jack


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 25, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > J.R. said:
> ...



So there was an issue after all, interesting. I'm glad mine works well. Buying electronics can always be hit or miss. I'm about to return a TV which evidently is designed to not work very well...because they don't think people will notice the flaw. Canon thankfully is known a bit better for excellence, than Samsung...


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 26, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> I have an issue with this, because, its not as if there is no alternative, just not in this price range.



Of course I was talking of the same price range, that's the whole point...



Chuck Alaimo said:


> Back to my original issue with your comments though, it sounds like you just want a mk3 for the price of a 6d, and it also sounds like you think the d600 is more on par with the mk3 too, which isn't true.



You've misunderstood me there, the d600 is a 6d competitor because of the price range alone, let alone the vastly different specs.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> max sync speed - 1/200
> memory cards - SD



6d only has 1/180s x-sync, d600 has *two* sd-card slots, the latter a decisive difference for business shoting.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> So, the d600, while yes it is a fine camera and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to any shooters who currently shoot with nikon gear, but ---I wouldn't recommend switching systems based on AF alone.



I wouldn't either, that's why I'll stay with Canon (and because of Magic Lantern), but it's an important difference nevertheless and the topic of this whole thread.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> Again, kind of sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. With all things in photography you have to make compromises unless you have an unlimited budget.



There's nothing wrong with wanting to have a cake and eat it at the same time  ...

... but I'm well aware of the need to compromise, that's why I've got my current equipment: 60d (instead of 7d2), 70-300L (instead of 70-200L+extenders), 17-40L (instead of 16-35L), 100 non-L macro (only recently upgraded it to the L), 430ex2 (only just bought a "big" flash). You see, I'm putting much though into what I really need and what can afford at a given time.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> This list can go on and on...we can't expect canon or nikon to tailor make our products to each of our personal needs and desires. So we balance the decision based on wants vs needs vs available budget.



As a second camera the 6d is just fine, and I'll be sure to keep my 60d along when I buy the 6d - but it is a rather specialized product, while the Nikon is a more "overall" competent model if you only have one camera body.

I feel Nikon has a more coherent setup here, the less expensive camera has cut specs across the board, while Canon chose to add some consumer features (gps, wifi), cut some things a lot (esp. af) while keeping other specs on par with the more expensive model. That's the cause of the whole 6d "value" discussion - if you happen to want/need what the 6d delivers you're happy, if you expect more of an upgrade over the 5d2 in this price range in other areas you might be a little set back and wait for the price to drop some.


----------



## jrista (Jun 26, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> There's nothing wrong with wanting to have a cake and eat it at the same time  ...



Other than the fact that it's a fun little paradox none has yet to solve... ;D


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 26, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > I have an issue with this, because, its not as if there is no alternative, just not in this price range.
> ...



see inside quote for replies...

And a PS...attached is one image that i do think is telling in regards to the 6d's AF ---I was shooting a comdey show, just waiting fort he headliner to come on and said lets see what happens. Settings --

ISO 25,600, f2.8, 1/40th ---no post processing (simply exporting the RAW to jpeg). It was dark as hell in there, yes it is center point...no flash for AF assist either. I was using my 70-200 which does not have IS so I couldn't go much below 1/40th, hence why its dark...the point is...the AF should have been hunting there, but it didn't!!!


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 26, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Chuck Alaimo said:
> ...



Nice shot, and I've gotten mine to lock center AF in a much darker environment than that, and with an f/4 70-200, no less. It actually was able to AF easier with the 70-200 in the same darkness, than with my 135 f/2...which I found troubling.

Basically, my 6D can center-AF on something (relatively stationary) that requires ISO 102,400 for a 1/10 second exposure with an f/4 lens. That center point far exceeds the noise performance of the sensor.

As for the D600 having a "better" AF than the 6D...I've not read any pro reviews that call it superior. The only thing they think is superior is the sensor...based on the s/n ratio below ISO 1000. (Then they turn around and claim it has a better s/n ratio all the way up to 25k, but in their own sample pics it clearly is far inferior to the 6D). 

But I say fine, if bright light, low ISO shooting is all you do (especially studio strobes), and you can tolerate the absurd Nikon ergonomics, you definitely should get the D600, or preferably D800, rather than the 6D, or the 5D3.

But if you shoot above ISO 1000 very often, forget Nikon altogether, unless you want to buy an older used D3S.

If you require the world's best autofocus, again, forget Nikon, and get a 1DX...just make sure you get a heavy discount, because it very well may be replaced in about 15 months or so.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 26, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> 1/180th vs 1/200th...that hardly makes a difference in real world shooting. 2 slots would have been nicer...but my point there was that neither of these bodies use CF cards. I'd rather have 1 CF slot..



I've got sd from the 60d, and I admit I don't see any inherent advantage of cf over sd, quite the other way around actually because of the size. 

As for x-sync: Currently I'm very often shooting handheld macro @1/250s x-sync with my 60d because of the faster recycle time & higher power over hss plus motion stopping capability. Yes, of course 1/180s is not much less than 1/200s, but the point is that even 1/200s is rather slow and everyting less hurts. But that's a budget decision on Canon's side, Magic Lantern has figured out you cannot force the 6d to do 1/200s because of the slower shutter.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> there is no 7d2!!!!



Typo on my side, I was talking of the 7d1 ... I meant to say that for a good all around combination you need two Canon cameras (except if you go for the 5d3): a 7d plus a 6d to have everything covered if you want low light capability and decent servo af.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> both of these camera have cut specs! They are both cheaper versions of their 2nd tier FF line. Compare the d600 to the d800, and then read the nikon forums and talk to nikon shooters and you definitely find that yes ---the grass is in fact always greener



I never read traitorous Nikon forums or touch Nikon gear ;-p but I guess you're correct. A good point is that the af spread of the d600 isn't (much) larger than the 6d, so they'll have the same recompose issues with thin dof.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> And a PS...attached is one image that i do think is telling in regards to the 6d's AF ---I was shooting a comdey show, just waiting fort he headliner to come on and said lets see what happens. Settings --



*Knock on wood* this thread has convinced me there are lots of happy 6d users out there and I'm sure I'll also be happy with the 6d if I wait until it has dropped to a decent price in Germany (currently much more expensive than in the US or the Nikon)... 

... but as famous last words and concerning the topic I'm personally "not impressed" by what I read about the 2013 6d af and have tried for myself, because of no x-sensor @f2.8 (only one @f4+), low af spread and inability to make use of the enhanced precision of the newest lenses I'd rather label it as "decent with low light specialization".


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 26, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> ISO 25,600, f2.8, 1/40th ---no post processing (simply exporting the RAW to jpeg).



Under those conditions, that is a pretty good picture.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 26, 2013)

I may have posted this a while back in another thread, can't recall. This is an early shot I did after buying the 6D...of a cheap tapestry, shot directly as a jpeg, at ISO 20,000, with my 135 f/2L, with no NR done in camera, and a little done in ACR. The white balance was auto if I remember correctly...which I also tried to correct in post. The available light is very far from white, very poor quality (the room lamp has an orange hood, and the bulb is a "warm fluorescent"). I was still amazed at the color I could extract from these conditions, at such a high ISO...with very little luminance noise in the final result...yet still plenty of detail. Chrominance noise is even easier to correct, but I may have left a bit to try to make the terribly dull color..."pop", such as it could...which wasn't much.

This 6D is never going to be the weak link in my kit. The weak link is me.


----------



## jocau (Jun 26, 2013)

I understand Marsu42. I've been following all the news/rumors about the 6D months before it got released. I have a 550D right now. I'd call its AF system a 4,5 point AF system i.e. I basically only use the 4 AF points that are located at the (vertical) thirds of the image and now and then I use the center AF point (that's why I call it a 4,5 and not a 4 point AF system). I've been wanting to upgrade to something better for a while now. I don't take many pictures but I'm a perfectionist, so I want better gear (less noise, better AF performance...).

I have fancied the 6D for a long time because of its superior noise performance compared to the 5D3 and because of its WiFi remote shooting capability. I've even tried one out at a local store. AF point spread on the 6D wasn't horrible at all, but not great either. And while non-crosstype AF points can work fine, I've regularly found them limiting (even in good light). 

I can justify the price of the 6D, but in my opinion the AF system of the 6D does not live up to its price unless you use the center AF point almost 90-95% of the time. I love the fact that the 5D3 has a lot of AF points located at the thirds of the image (horizontally and vertically), but I find it very hard to justify its price. I'm also afraid that Canon will release a "5D4" within the next 1-2 years with a lot more dynamic range at low ISO than the current 5D3.

That's why I'm not buying a new camera for now. However I'm keeping an eye out for the "to be announced" 70D and 7D2 though. And I'm also keeping the 5D3 and possibly the 6D in the back of my head.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 26, 2013)

jocau said:


> I can justify the price of the 6D, but in my opinion the AF system of the 6D does not live up to its price unless you use the center AF point almost 90-95% of the time. I love the fact that the 5D3 has a lot of AF points located at the thirds of the image (horizontally and vertically), but I find it very hard to justify its price. I'm also afraid that Canon will release a "5D4" within the next 1-2 years with a lot more dynamic range at low ISO than the current 5D3.
> 
> That's why I'm not buying a new camera for now. However I'm keeping an eye out for the "to be announced" 70D and 7D2 though. And I'm also keeping the 5D3 and possibly the 6D in the back of my head.



Just a friendly observation - Your not buying a camera for the AF system alone, your buying a camera for the overall package, AF is just a part of it. Not saying that I think you should or should not buy it - but - I highly advice making a decision on it based on AF alone. Do a google search on 5d2 images and you will see stunning images ---the 6d is capable of producing equally stunning images...

as to product cycle, 5d3 should still have at least 2 more years on it, more likely 3. I view it like this, theres lots of talk about canons directions, rumors of a new sensor process to boost DR and MP. It would make sense to me to see canon putting all effort towards low ISO performance (because thats where nikon has the edge). If that's what they are in fact, then I can see a very nice formula - the 6d and 5d3 stepped up the high ISO game at the expense of improvements in MP and DR. So the next models may very well be the exact opposite. Better DR, higher MP, but limited high ISO (if test bodies are in the wild, then this phase is done and its on to the next project. They will then shift the R&D towards perfecting the new sensors to deal with high ISO work. Thats when you get your 5d4! Just a guess, but I think its a good guess!

As to the 6d, that may have a quicker update as its considered an entry level camera. Maybe that's the plan, the 6d2 will arrive next summer with 11 points but more of them cross points...pure speculation, they may keep it on a 2 year cycle. who knows, for all we know the specs on the 6d are actually because canon got caught with their pants down with the d600 and had to release something quick. and yup, that leads to the other factor - nikon - how will they play out their upgrades? 

Either way, what I am ultimately trying to say -- with no announcement of a 7d2, its a rough gamble to wait to upgrade. The only other options seems to be a 70d, or whatever the big MP may bring. It would be silly of canon to not at least have the 70d ready to ship before the christmas season. I'd think that the 7d2 would be ready, but with no announcement or even real solid rumors, that may be a 2014 body. Same for big MP, who knows, 2014? 2015? So, keep that in mind. Waiting for the next big thing may be a dangerous game, especially because with the exception of the 70d, the price tags will be at least 2k


----------



## iKenndac (Jun 26, 2013)

I bought my 6D earlier this year, conscious of the fact that the AF being underwhelming on paper. I've been loosely following this thread and similar ones online, seeing people say the 6D's AF is anything from "completely useless" to "actually, pretty good!". Most photos I take are of stationary things, so it's no big deal.

This weekend, I visited a place called Go Ape — an obstacle course through the trees in a British forest. I was taking photos with my 6D and 70-200 f/4 (no IS) and was kinda worried since the weather was typically dark and grey, we were under tree cover and I had to take photos people people sliding down zip lines at fairly high speed.

Thankfully, my fears were unfounded. The AF in the 6D performed amazingly well and I was getting some superb shots! Sure, the AF isn't as good as the 5D3's, but it's _way_ better than a lot of posts and articles would lead you to believe.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 27, 2013)

jrista said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > There's nothing wrong with wanting to have a cake and eat it at the same time  ...
> ...



No paradox as long as you are willing to buy two cakes.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 27, 2013)

iKenndac said:


> I bought my 6D earlier this year, conscious of the fact that the AF being underwhelming on paper. I've been loosely following this thread and similar ones online, seeing people say the 6D's AF is anything from "completely useless" to "actually, pretty good!". Most photos I take are of stationary things, so it's no big deal.
> 
> This weekend, I visited a place called Go Ape — an obstacle course through the trees in a British forest. I was taking photos with my 6D and 70-200 f/4 (no IS) and was kinda worried since the weather was typically dark and grey, we were under tree cover and I had to take photos people people sliding down zip lines at fairly high speed.
> 
> Thankfully, my fears were unfounded. The AF in the 6D performed amazingly well and I was getting some superb shots! Sure, the AF isn't as good as the 5D3's, but it's _way_ better than a lot of posts and articles would lead you to believe.



Nice shot (would have preferred a female haha), and I agree with everything you said. I own that same lens, and find the AF ability with it to be astoundingly fast and accurate, in servo mode or single shot. I also feel that lens is the best lens value in the entire Canon line. I hope they never stop making it!


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Jul 1, 2013)

So, to summarize this thread, the body that costs $1500 more (comparing launch MSRPs) has better AF, more features, and is an overall better camera. What a shocker!


----------



## cookinghusband (Jul 2, 2013)

I will say 6D focus performance is as good or similar to 5D2. Is usable, sure you cannot expect canon will give you better performance then its flag ship or model selling at twice the price. Snow AF is not easy for the 1D


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jul 2, 2013)

Mark D5 TEAM II said:


> So, to summarize this thread, the body that costs $1500 more (comparing launch MSRPs) has better AF, more features, and is an overall better camera. What a shocker!



That's a pretty good summary.


----------



## manhattanboy (Mar 28, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> As for the D600 having a "better" AF than the 6D...I've not read any pro reviews that call it superior. The only thing they think is superior is the sensor...



I think the AI tracking is better on the D600. But neither the D600 or the 6D are good for sports.

I shoot both Nikon and Canon and can tell you that the contribution of_ the lens_ is often vastly under-appreciated compared to the focus system. Shooting with the 70-200 IS-II, I can get sharp BIF pictures using a non-center AF point. Shooting on the 6D, this lens is fast, locks, and for the most part is dead on. Compare that with a variable aperture zoom, which is slow and often needs a shot or two to focus in on a target, which ultimately may or may not be the "correct" thing. 

On Nikon, even having greater than 50 AF points is relatively meaningless. With good technique it is better to use the most accurate cross types as much as possible. The better Nikon sensor helps in that regard, as you can crop more in post to correct composition errors caused by aligning your target with the cross types.

Hope this helps!


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 28, 2014)

Wow some pretty hardened views on this thread especially from RLPhoto. 

As Ive said before we have a rental business where we rent Canon among others cameras both EOS and Cinema EOS cameras. Among those cameras we have the 1Dx, 1Dc, 5dMKIII and still the II plus the 6d, we only rent to professionals and the 6d utilisation is just as high as the 5dMKIII and is mainly rented to photographers owning their own 5dMKIII. Obviously the 6d is so bad that professionals want to rent it and risk their commissions. One of the customers who regularly rents does music gigs in small venues and likes it for its low light abilities, others rent for weddings and corporate parties. 
The video out of the 6d is awful but compared to the C300 or even better the C500 so is the 5dMKIII its only really the 1Dc that we would consider a professional tool. 
Given the price difference between the 5dMKIII and the 6d and there intended markets making comparisons between the two is fairly meaningless Canon themselves push the 6d as a travel / landscape camera both of which its perfect for they dont push it to the same target audiance as the 5dMKIII.


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 30, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> Wow some pretty hardened views on this thread especially from RLPhoto.
> 
> As Ive said before we have a rental business where we rent Canon among others cameras both EOS and Cinema EOS cameras. Among those cameras we have the 1Dx, 1Dc, 5dMKIII and still the II plus the 6d, we only rent to professionals and the 6d utilisation is just as high as the 5dMKIII and is mainly rented to photographers owning their own 5dMKIII. Obviously the 6d is so bad that professionals want to rent it and risk their commissions. One of the customers who regularly rents does music gigs in small venues and likes it for its low light abilities, others rent for weddings and corporate parties.
> The video out of the 6d is awful but compared to the C300 or even better the C500 so is the 5dMKIII its only really the 1Dc that we would consider a professional tool.
> Given the price difference between the 5dMKIII and the 6d and there intended markets making comparisons between the two is fairly meaningless Canon themselves push the 6d as a travel / landscape camera both of which its perfect for they dont push it to the same target audiance as the 5dMKIII.



Duh, but I'm a professional aerial photographer, so at infinity focus the 6D works as well as any camera, even the 1DX. The video out of the 6D is not "awful", and neither is its AF performance. It's quite usable, I shot a wedding (unprofessionally) with it and didn't have but a few shots that weren't razor sharp focus.


----------



## FreshPicsUK (Apr 8, 2014)

I have both a pair of 5D3's and a 6D as a backup and have found that the 6D focuses FAR faster than my well setup 5D3's when I'm in a dark ceremony room or during the first dance at a wedding. I only ever use the central focussing point on all of my cameras, so I can't comment on the outer points. I use the 6D with both a 35mm 1.4 and a 16-35 2.8 II depending on the place and the couple. The 5's seem to take longer and hunt a bit more, especially when using a 600exrt for some reason. I bought it as a backup for my main cameras but find I use the 6 and a 5 on the dance floor every time now. The high ISO is also slightly cleaner if I need to push things. I shoot weddings, commercial and helicopter based aerial full time and the 6 is a cracking bit of kit. Tried it out with the EOS remote app as well on a few landscapes and it worked flawlessly. If anyone is doubting the camera and it's focussing abilities then don't worry about it. For weddings and general shooting it is awesome. For sports or anything fast then I'd give it a miss.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 10, 2014)

CarlTN
I never said the AF on the 6d is awful if you look I own one myself. Compared to the C300 or C500 the video IS awful compared to most other DSLRs its not. 

The 6d has had a lot of very critical reviews most of them comparing it to the 5dMKIII why? The two are very different cameras and that was not a mistake of Canon it was addressing two different market segments and for its price the IQ of the Canon 6d is beyond reproach and comparable to the 5dMKIII in stills which is all Im interested in.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 11, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> CarlTN
> I never said the AF on the 6d is awful if you look I own one myself. Compared to the C300 or C500 the video IS awful compared to most other DSLRs its not.
> 
> The 6d has had a lot of very critical reviews most of them comparing it to the 5dMKIII why? The two are very different cameras and that was not a mistake of Canon it was addressing two different market segments and for its price the IQ of the Canon 6d is beyond reproach and comparable to the 5dMKIII in stills which is all Im interested in.



Fair enough, and I agree. Why does it get compared to the 5D3? Well, because it costs less, yet has less noise...and that drives some people nuts. It's kind of like if a Jetta gets better gas mileage than a Lambo Countach with malfunctioning Webber carburetors. The Lambo is still faster, has more flash and pizazz, costs a ton more...has more bragging rights. But if you're suddenly in a group of "greenies", the Lambo owner isn't going to like their criticism about its poor gas mileage...as he simply must be adored by EVERYONE in order to feel adequate. Similar to the "peacock" syndrome exhibited by country hicks who buy a new red pickup truck every six months, who enjoy tail-gaiting, but never quite having the cojones to attempt passing the traffic in front of them. When that traffic taps their brakes to say "step off my butt, follow at a safe distance"...well then it's on! I digress, but you get the point.


----------

