# 5d2 vs 6d



## leolol (Nov 18, 2012)

Dont want a general discussion for this topic but much more of a specific thing-

I´m mostly shooting landscapes, nature (no wildlife yet), studio (stock and people) and some high iso events. 
I dont need fast FPS but i need a good enough autofocus which can lock on in dark locations. Both the 6D and the 5d2 only have one crosstype so it would be a downgrade from my 40d, would it?

For stock 21 MP are better then 20 because they reach a bigger size to sell (2o MP are just under the edge), the 5d2 also has the PC-Sync port...

High ISO: I think we can all agree that the 6d will be better in those situations?

Money: I can get a new 5d2 for 1500€, or a slightly used one for 1300 with the BG and i wouldnt need new Cards because i got the CF Cards. 6D+BG+Cards would be over 2200€. Do you think it´s worth it for what i shoot? 

PS: Wlan and GPS are both interesting for me but i didnt miss them in the 40D.


----------



## steliosk (Nov 18, 2012)

Well you won't be needing high iso levels for landscape photography, but however both cameras would perform good IQ.

I'm facing the same question, and canon doesn't make it easy. After 4 years canon hasn't developed any better sensor in terms of IQ and many are still thinking to buy the 5D 2 over the 6D and 5D 3 which i can't say it performs any better until 6400 iso in RAW mode.

The 6D would probably perform better but don't forget it has 2mp less!!! why?

I'm seriously thinking of selling everything and change to nikon d600 which is a monster and provides a largest headroom for editing rather those canon craps which costs A lot of money.


----------



## Zv (Nov 18, 2012)

steliosk said:


> Well you won't be needing high iso levels for landscape photography, but however both cameras would perform good IQ.
> 
> I'm facing the same question, and canon doesn't make it easy. After 4 years canon hasn't developed any better sensor in terms of IQ and many are still thinking to buy the 5D 2 over the 6D and 5D 3 which i can't say it performs any better until 6400 iso in RAW mode.
> 
> ...



The 6D does have a completely new sensor btw. I would wait until some hands on reviews come out. Shouldn't be long, maybe another month or so. I think, IMHO, that the 6D is not designed to be a studio camera or a pro photographer's first choice body. It is rather aimed at the serious enthusiast looking to enter the FF world for the first time. The 5D II AF is limited, but the center AF point works well and really, if you're doing product and studio you'll mostly me using MF with live view. 

It's a tough decision, the 5D II is looking old but the 6D doesn't seem to be the replacement we were hoping for either. If low level light AF is a issue, you could use a speedlite with the AF assist to help out. 

I'm pretty happy with the 5D II AF, though I haven't had to use it in low light situations yet. I use my 7D if AF and low light are the order of the day!


----------



## leolol (Nov 18, 2012)

@steliosk
Yeah and that 1 MP is so shitty for me. on iStock i can go to XXL with 21 but only to XL with 20.

@ZV
Yeah new sensor.. but the 5d3 also ahs a new sensor and as long as they dont use the new making (180nm) in the 6d sensor i dont see a big possibility for an improvment.


----------



## Zv (Nov 18, 2012)

leolol said:


> @steliosk
> Yeah and that 1 MP is so shitty for me. on iStock i can go to XXL with 21 but only to XL with 20.
> 
> @ZV
> Yeah new sensor.. but the 5d3 also ahs a new sensor and as long as they dont use the new making (180nm) in the 6d sensor i dont see a big possibility for an improvment.



I take it the 5D III is out of your price range? Sounds like it would fit your needs though - 22mp, great high ISO, low light sensitivity and great AF. Plus CF cards. Could you stretch to a 5D III? It might be worth the investment. Sounds like your already making money from photography. That to me is justification for the price.


----------



## leolol (Nov 18, 2012)

Yeah.. it´s pretty hard. I can get a used ("used") 5d3 for 2500€. For that price i would have to sell the 40d (but i would keep the speed) and i wouldnt be able to get the battery grip. I have to think about that one.



Zv said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > @steliosk
> ...


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 18, 2012)

leolol said:


> I dont need fast FPS but i need a good enough autofocus which can lock on in dark locations. Both the 6D and the 5d2 only have one crosstype so it would be a downgrade from my 40d, would it?



The 6d center af will probably the best one in the whole Canon lineup for really low light af - the 5d2 is only -0.5ev and the 5d3 @-2ev has been reported to be very slow at it. So if you are ok with center point only, it'll be a big step forward from the 40d-type (and also my 60d).



leolol said:


> For stock 21 MP are better then 20 because they reach a bigger size to sell (2o MP are just under the edge)



That's interesting - is that for stock in general or just for your specific stock service? Thx.


----------



## leolol (Nov 18, 2012)

@Marsu
Thats only for iStock, which is the only company where i´m selling. They made those new sizes with the introduction of the 5d2 so... you see where they come from 

I honestly think that the 6D is going to be great but the body is sooo tiny! 
5d3: It´s like Tofu. It isnt fish, it isnt meat. Great AF but not fast enough for sports or action (wildlife). Good build but not as sturdy as 1D. Good for landscapes and studio but not enough MP. Good for video but no clean hdmi out till next year.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 18, 2012)

leolol said:


> I honestly think that the 6D is going to be great but the body is sooo tiny!



I have the 60d, medium-large hands and when holding it for a prolonged time with a heavier lens it is a hassle - but the solution is to either get a battery grip to have something for the last finger to old onto or I just use a handstrap all the time which 99% compensates for the tinier grip size and is nice for walking around anyway.


----------



## leolol (Nov 18, 2012)

For me 40D without BG is a bit to small, with bg its perfect. 
6D is for sure better than the 5d2 but it is worth it?
Do you think Magic Lantern can bring clean hdmi to the 6d?


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 18, 2012)

leolol said:


> Do you think Magic Lantern can bring clean hdmi to the 6d?



We only will know for sure if the 6d will run ml *at_all* only after the first 6d firmware upgrade - and of course the ml dev (alex) needs a 6d sponsored. After the recent 1dx/1dc hassle Canon might be annoyed and disabled running ml :-o


----------



## K-amps (Nov 18, 2012)

I would suspect that unless Canon cripples the 6D, it should have better high ISO performance than the 5d3 but below the 1dx purely on the basis of the smaller pixel pitch it's sensor may have. Have there been any test done on proto-types yet.... we are a rumor site after all...


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 18, 2012)

K-amps said:


> Have there been any test done on proto-types yet.... we are a rumor site after all...


I haven't found anything, the only guy posting downsized 6d jpg shots w/o exif is here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fotois/collections/72157632030095841/

But I'm really keen on the first real review because I wonder why Canon is so shy about it - either the 6d sensor leaves a lot to be desired or it is even a little better than the 5d3 and Canon doesn't want to hurt their current sales.


----------



## leolol (Nov 18, 2012)

I can afford the used 5d3 but i would also need a new PC. I build this thing myself so it´s going to be around 500€. I cant do that with the 5d3, maybe possible with the 6d and i can shure do that with the 5d2.

But my main complain: Does the focus of the 5d2 really suck balls in low light (sorry for the words)? 
I know how good High-ISO is and i love the body and the button layout but i never handled one in low light.

@Marsu I hope the second thing is the truth


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 18, 2012)

leolol said:


> But my main complain: Does the focus of the 5d2 really suck balls in low light (sorry for the words)?
> I know how good High-ISO is and i love the body and the button layout but i never handled one in low light.


Up until the 5D MK III, the 5D MK II with center point was the best low light AF body Canon made. Its wonderful. This is a well known fact. its also well known that the 5D MK II does not do nearly as well with other than center points, don't even bother with them.
I loved the 40d, I had five of them, and have had two 5D MK II's, which are a much better camera. I also noticed that the 2nd 5D MK II had a much lower sensor noise than my first one, I think Canon's sensor manufacturing quality has improved over the 4 years its been out.
The 5D MK III is better. I have no issue with low light AF speed and the 5D MK III. 
We just do not know about the 6D yet, but Canon has cut some features to justify the lower price. I think you will be very happy with a 5D MK II. As they begin selling out, the price will rise, much as it did with the original 5d a few years ago.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 18, 2012)

leolol said:


> I can afford the used 5d3 but i would also need a new PC.



I'm deciding if the 5d3 is "worth it" to me - but going beyond your budget for a camera body imho is a very bad idea - try to do a "total cost of ownership" calculation" including what you expect to buy in the future like memory-cards, flashes, lenses, filters, tripods, a little saving for repairs because things break and then think again :-o

I don't have a 5d2 but what I've read in the "5d3 slow low light af" threads is that the 5d2 at least works good with an af assist beam if that's ok for your applications. The the 5d2 is rated up to -0.5lv, I don't know what your current body is - my 60d (up to 0lv) definitely struggles in dim light and low-contrast scenes w/o af assist, so I'd like a vast improvement like on the 6d.


----------



## leolol (Nov 18, 2012)

So you say it´s not bad. Thats good to hear 

@Marsu 40D has the same rating as the 5d2 -0,5LV. Yeah you are right i would never spend money which i currently dont have on gear. 5d2+PC+Accesories is the same price as 6D+Accesories.


----------



## Standard (Nov 18, 2012)

> But my main complain: Does the focus of the 5d2 really suck balls in low light (sorry for the words)?
> I know how good High-ISO is and i love the body and the button layout but i never handled one in low light.



No. Not at all.

Sure. It may not be as good as the Mark III but I've gotten plenty of great captures in extreme lowlight with it. Honestly, I don't know what all the gripes about the Mark II's AF being slow are all about. Take a look at either my Website or my Flickr stream and you will find plenty of good examples. I think too many photographers these days rely too much on technology and less on common sense and technique.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 18, 2012)

Standard said:


> Honestly, I don't know what all the gripes about the Mark II's AF being slow are all about.


Most of those comments come from those who do not own one. 
The low light AF with the 5D MK III requires you to read the manual. Many users turn on spot AF which reduces low light AF sensitivity considerably. Use the center point without spot for the best sensitivity just as in any camera. 

I also note that if I wait for the AF indicator to flash in the viewfinder, there is a delay before it lights. AF is actually achieved much sooner. just hold down the shutter button while in one shot mode, and the shutter opens as soon as AF is achived, which in near darkness is remarkably fast and accurate. Its the same story with the AF assist beam, just take the photo, don't wait for the AF confirm to flash.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 18, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Most of those comments come from those who do not own one.



Well, my gear is in my tag and I tried to point to and quote what multiple 5d3 users wrote in the "af assist lag" threads, so I hope I am not spreading FUD :-o



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> just hold down the shutter button while in one shot mode, and the shutter opens as soon as AF is achived, which in near darkness is remarkably fast and accurate. Its the same story with the AF assist beam, just take the photo, don't wait for the AF confirm to flash.



But that technique makes focus & recompose impossible, and the af points of the 5d3 are not all over the viewfinder ... so in low light, you're actually always picking the exact af point you want to use before pressing the shutter?


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 18, 2012)

leolol said:


> Dont want a general discussion for this topic but much more of a specific thing-
> 
> I´m mostly shooting landscapes, nature (no wildlife yet), studio (stock and people) and some high iso events.
> I dont need fast FPS but i need a good enough autofocus which can lock on in dark locations. Both the 6D and the 5d2 only have one crosstype so it would be a downgrade from my 40d, would it?
> ...



You should repost this topic when there are enough 6D in user hands. Otherwise, it will remain as general discussion based on Canon spec.


----------



## epsiloneri (Nov 18, 2012)

Standard said:


> Honestly, I don't know what all the gripes about the Mark II's AF being slow are all about.


I found the 5D2 to be inadequate when it came track moving objects. The 7D and 5D3 do that much better. Otherwise the center-point speed/accuracy/sensitivity is fine on the 5D2.


----------



## Zv (Nov 19, 2012)

Question - if you're going to be shooting at -0.5EV or lower then wouldn't you be using a tripod and or flash? Those low levels of light require long shutter speeds unless you use very high ISO? Correct? Why not use MF with live view? Is AF really necessary? Are you trying to capture candid shots of people? 

Sure it would be awesome to use AF in low light but photographers have been capturing images for years without that ability. 

I'm just curious.


----------



## leolol (Nov 19, 2012)

Nope, can neither use a tripod nor slow shutter speed. I'm mostly photographing theater stuff or other not very bright events.


----------



## nicku (Nov 19, 2012)

leolol said:


> Dont want a general discussion for this topic but much more of a specific thing-
> 
> I´m mostly shooting landscapes, nature (no wildlife yet), studio (stock and people) and some high iso events.
> I dont need fast FPS but i need a good enough autofocus which can lock on in dark locations. Both the 6D and the 5d2 only have one crosstype so it would be a downgrade from my 40d, would it?
> ...



I use the camera exactly like you (mainly stock and some outdoor and landscapes). my advice ( in case you don't have many Canon lenses) go for Nikon D600, more resolution , better ISO performance ( compared with 5D3) faaaar better AF ( compared with 6D) and the nikon 85mm f/1.8G lens (witch is NOT expensive) is descended from Haven... incredible camera.


----------



## CharlieB (Nov 19, 2012)

Zv said:


> I think, IMHO, that the 6D is not designed to be a studio camera or a pro photographer's first choice body. It is rather aimed at the serious enthusiast looking to enter the FF world for the first time.



Not sure if you can categorize the market quite like that... but... maybe. :

The question of who Canon is "marketing to" always is (or should be) a matter of what their market research has revealed... which these days has in itself been very questionable! ;D

I see it more like testing the waters... and bowing to competition from other brands (like "N"). 

Canon took the market at the bottom with the first "sub-$1000" Rebel. They owned that segment for a decent amount of time too. I'm not sure if the competition is going to be as lax going forward... recent history (last few years) has shown they're not, and are likely to become even greater competitors.

We've gone from sub-$1000 DSLR to the sub $500 DSLR with lens of course. Look at what you get in that price range compared to what was available at sub $1000 back in... what was it.... fall 2003. Nearly ten years, yes, but the technology has moved in leaps and bounds. 

Think of this - what would a 6D capable camera have been worth to the photographic buying public (all segments) in fall of 2003? At least double is my guess. 

I'll also guess, the best is yet to come....


----------



## weixing (Nov 19, 2012)

Zv said:


> Question - if you're going to be shooting at -0.5EV or lower then wouldn't you be using a tripod and or flash? Those low levels of light require long shutter speeds unless you use very high ISO? Correct? Why not use MF with live view? Is AF really necessary? Are you trying to capture candid shots of people?
> 
> Sure it would be awesome to use AF in low light but photographers have been capturing images for years without that ability.
> 
> I'm just curious.


Hi,
For example, you want to capture the children blowing the candles in a birthday party with only the light from the candle or may be event or performance at the night where flash are not allow and light is low. With low light AF capability, the success rate will be a lot higher.

IMHO, if the low light AF work as advertise and high ISO as good as the 5DIII (which I expect it will as it's had a large pixel size), I think this camera will sell very well... IMHO, a lot of people don't need that many AF points, just one super AF center point will be enough for many.

Have a nice day.


----------



## Leon (Nov 19, 2012)

leolol said:


> @steliosk
> Yeah and that 1 MP is so shitty for me. on iStock i can go to XXL with 21 but only to XL with 20.



You realize photoshop has a resizing tool?

BTW I don't see the 6D as a serious tool for a pro photographer, it's more like a 60D with a larger sensor. So I'd really go with the 5D2, it just seems to offer a lot for the money, and the AF being its only real drawback probably isn't a lot better on the 6D either. Also since the noise performance in RAW mode hasn't improved that much from 5D2 to 5D3 I wouldn't really expect a big difference between these two either. But since you're gonna have to buy new glass when switching to a FF camera anyway, it might be worth looking into another brand too (not gonna say the n-word here).


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Nov 19, 2012)

nicku said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > Dont want a general discussion for this topic but much more of a specific thing-
> ...


Oh dear, you must have tried all of these cameras in a number of different conditions. Especially judging the 5D3's ISO performance and the 6D's AF, have you even tried them?


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 19, 2012)

Leon said:


> BTW I don't see the 6D as a serious tool for a pro photographer



I probably wouldn't go as far as Ken Rockwell (see below on 5d3 vs 6d), but imho a pro photog uses the tools that are appropriate for the job and/or can adapt to the tools at hand - and if starting in the business or shooting in low light that might be very well the 6d *because you cannot be pro and broke at the same time*.



> _there are many minor differences in the sensors and shutters as I'll outline below, but these are designed merely to help upsell innocent rich amateurs to the 5D Mark III; they aren't different enough for a real photographer or someone without a spare $1,400 lying around to blow on camera bodies to worry about._


----------



## leolol (Nov 19, 2012)

@Leon 
Upresing isnt allowed for stock. that would be unfair for the customer (they can do that themselfs) and iStock notices that. 
I dont have to buy new glas, i bought mine for FF because i knew that i was going to upgrade.

@HobbyShooter
We all know that the AF is better than the 6D, just look at the specs. We all know that Nikon is on 180nm and Canon on 500nm so they have better high iso.

@Nicku 
Not gonna switch, i love my Canon ergonomics and i have spent a bit in glass 

@Marsu i´d say you cannot start out and not be broke


----------



## K-amps (Nov 19, 2012)

leolol said:


> @HobbyShooter
> We all know that the AF is better than the 6D, just look at the specs. We all know that Nikon is on 180nm and Canon on 500nm so they have better high iso.



Really... using older (read inefficient) process yields better High ISO?


----------



## Hesbehindyou (Nov 19, 2012)

K-amps said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > @HobbyShooter
> ...



I'll re-write it for him with context added:
"We all know that the D600's AF is better than the 6D, just look at the specs. We all know that Nikon is on 180nm and Canon on 500nm so they [Nikon] have better high iso."


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2012)

leolol said:


> We all know that the AF is better than the 6D, just look at the specs.



Which specs are those? Number of points, or EV sensitivity of the center point? How many high-precision f/2.8-sensitive AF points does the D600 have?


----------



## ishdakuteb (Nov 19, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > We all know that the AF is better than the 6D, just look at the specs.
> ...



based on: with nikon d600, you can clearly see that dust being captured in images while canon lacks of this ability. in short, nikon focusing system is awsome and tack sharp... dust can be seen on images too LOL

i am just kidding...


----------

