# All is Quiet, but the Good Stuff is Coming



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 1, 2017)

```
Now that NAB is over (did anyone notice it was on?), we can get back to what’s coming next. Unfortunately we don’t really have too much new to report at this time. We know that’s going to be changing soon as this summer (northern hemisphere) should be a good one for a lot of Canon shooters.</p>
<p>We expect the EOS 6D Mark II, EF 85mm f/1.4L IS and EOS Rebel SL2 to be announced before September hits.</p>
<p>On the cinema side, we expect the Cinema EOS C200 body, a 4K little brother to the EOS C300 Mark II. We haven’t confirmed the name “EOS C200” yet, but all signs are pointing that way. We hope to confirm this soon.</p>
<p>We don’t know for certain what other EF lenses are coming in 2017 at this time, but we expect there will be at least one more after the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS.</p>
<p>We haven’t heard anything about new G series PowerShot cameras, but suspect there will be at least one coming before the end of the year.</p>
<p>We’re just reminding you of what’s coming as we continue to get questions from some very eager EOS 6D Mark II potential buyers.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## jebrady03 (May 1, 2017)

I literally have a stack of cash waiting for the 85mm f/1.4L IS. Seriously Canon, take my money...


----------



## CanonCams (May 1, 2017)

Ahhhh.. you guys are killing me.

Now the MK II is "before September", but before it was 'Late Q2 / Early Q3'.


----------



## RunAndGun (May 1, 2017)

I'm not in the market for it, but in the course of a quasi/semi post-NAB debrief/convo that I just had with a rep, they feel pretty confident that Canon has the rumored/fabled C100 MKIII/C200/whatever-you-wanna-call-it-below-the-C300 MKII is coming shortly.


----------



## Chaitanya (May 1, 2017)

If that C200 is just a 5D mk 4 with better codecs, 4k oriented sensor, and faster memory cards then it might sell well. I am looking forward to 6D mk2 and Sl2. Might choose between those two bodies depending much I can recover from selling my used cameras.


----------



## ethermine (May 1, 2017)

This year is going to be a welcome upgrade year for me. My current setup for international travel is 2 5D Mark IVs with 2 6Ds. I'm looking forward to selling off the two high milage 6Ds to replace with 2 6D Mark IIs. 

If the build quality, focusing speed and sharpness of the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS is anything like the 35 f/1.4L II, then I'll be getting one to replace the 85 f/1.2L II. For the type of work I do with traveling around the globe, I'm more interested in a lens that'll fire accurately when I need it to, take a beating, yet still allow me to produce beautiful imagery. I'm not going to get hung up on some barely discernible abstract psychological peculiarity that tethers me to f/1.2.

Bring it.


----------



## olix (May 1, 2017)

This is hilarious! I wonder If Canon hears what competitors are doing. I just realize that form the video perspective, Magic Lantern did the marketing for 5D Mark II, 7D and so on. So Canon's performance is not about Canon was listening it's users... is just about hackers that where listening Canon's clients.  Sony launched α7, α7R, α7S, α7II, α7RII, α7SII from 16 October 2013 to 11 September 2015. I mean, in two years they had so much improvement that makes Canon fade away. Canon launched a video camera XC10 (April 2015), one year later (September 2016) they released XC15... both had CFast cards for 4K recording. One month later I read an article that CFast cards are dumped: http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/10/the-cfast-vs-xqd-battle-is-already-over-stop-buying-cfast/68002/ Oh, Canon... 

CANON, WE CAN... BUT WE WON'T!


----------



## vscd (May 1, 2017)

olix said:


> This is hilarious! I wonder If Canon hears what competitors are doing. I just realize that form the video perspective, Magic Lantern did the marketing for 5D Mark II, 7D and so on. So Canon's performance is not about Canon was listening it's users... is just about hackers that where listening Canon's clients.  Sony launched α7, α7R, α7S, α7II, α7RII, α7SII from 16 October 2013 to 11 September 2015. I mean, in two years they had so much improvement that makes Canon fade away. Canon launched a video camera XC10 (April 2015), one year later (September 2016) they released XC15... both had CFast cards for 4K recording. One month later I read an article that CFast cards are dumped: http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/10/the-cfast-vs-xqd-battle-is-already-over-stop-buying-cfast/68002/ Oh, Canon...
> 
> CANON, WE CAN... BUT WE WON'T!



What are you waiting for? Go and get a Sony. Buying a Sony is easy, living with it is hard...


----------



## transpo1 (May 1, 2017)

Chaitanya said:


> If that C200 is just a 5D mk 4 with better codecs, 4k oriented sensor, and faster memory cards then it might sell well. I am looking forward to 6D mk2 and Sl2. Might choose between those two bodies depending much I can recover from selling my used cameras.



I sure hope that's what this C200 is. All they need to do is come out with a 5DC with those specs and charge $5k for it. Oh, and please add peaking because...it's 2017.


----------



## dak723 (May 1, 2017)

vscd said:


> olix said:
> 
> 
> > This is hilarious! I wonder If Canon hears what competitors are doing. I just realize that form the video perspective, Magic Lantern did the marketing for 5D Mark II, 7D and so on. So Canon's performance is not about Canon was listening it's users... is just about hackers that where listening Canon's clients.  Sony launched α7, α7R, α7S, α7II, α7RII, α7SII from 16 October 2013 to 11 September 2015. I mean, in two years they had so much improvement that makes Canon fade away. Canon launched a video camera XC10 (April 2015), one year later (September 2016) they released XC15... both had CFast cards for 4K recording. One month later I read an article that CFast cards are dumped: http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/10/the-cfast-vs-xqd-battle-is-already-over-stop-buying-cfast/68002/ Oh, Canon...
> ...



Amen to that!


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 1, 2017)

olix said:


> This is hilarious! I wonder If Canon hears what competitors are doing. I just realize that form the video perspective, Magic Lantern did the marketing for 5D Mark II, 7D and so on. So Canon's performance is not about Canon was listening it's users... is just about hackers that where listening Canon's clients.  Sony launched α7, α7R, α7S, α7II, α7RII, α7SII from 16 October 2013 to 11 September 2015. I mean, in two years they had so much improvement that makes Canon fade away. Canon launched a video camera XC10 (April 2015), one year later (September 2016) they released XC15... both had CFast cards for 4K recording. One month later I read an article that CFast cards are dumped: http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/10/the-cfast-vs-xqd-battle-is-already-over-stop-buying-cfast/68002/ Oh, Canon...
> 
> CANON, WE CAN... BUT WE WON'T!


Based on this article, the best-selling high-speed card is already *******, just as Canon has been ******* for many years ... But a new card format that does not yet exist in any camera, would already have won the war.

After all, Sony is a world leader in cameras and lenses, just as Betamax won the market just for him, right? ???


----------



## JoSto (May 1, 2017)

I think the delay of the 6DII was forseeable. If it will be an at least little upgrade compared to the original 6d it will be feature wise compareable to the 5dIII. As the 6d was to 5dII.

For the stills only crowed the only main benefits of the expensive 5d4 are
-better weathersealing
-ergonomics 
-higher Framerate. 

The 5d4 is currently 3500€ in Germany incl. taxes. If they want to release the 6dII at, I say, 2300€, there will be huge canibalising effects.

Right now, I can see Canon geting as much out of the 5d4 as possible. And I predict substancial Cashback-Programs once the 6d is out. I think the delay of the 6d2 indicates a camera which is very competable with the 5dIV.


----------



## Luds34 (May 1, 2017)

Wait, 6D2 now *announced* before September? When is it going to be available? I just put my 6D up for sale in anticipation of this camera arriving in the next month or so.

"You're killing me Smalls!"


----------



## NorbR (May 1, 2017)

jebrady03 said:


> I literally have a stack of cash waiting for the 85mm f/1.4L IS. Seriously Canon, take my money...



Same here. 

I had two lenses in the "purchase" column for 2017: the TS-E 17mm and this new 85mm. The tilt-shift came in last week, and the 85mm will hopefully be there some time this summer. 

Of course I'm still anxiously waiting to know if it will have the BR magic goo ... ???


----------



## peterzuehlke (May 1, 2017)

jebrady03 said:


> I literally have a stack of cash waiting for the 85mm f/1.4L IS. Seriously Canon, take my money...



I have a stack too, but i am afraid Canon is going to want two stacks.


----------



## LDS (May 1, 2017)

olix said:


> I read an article that CFast cards are dumped: http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/10/the-cfast-vs-xqd-battle-is-already-over-stop-buying-cfast/68002/ Oh, Canon...



The CF cards standards mirror the main disk technology available on computers (CF - IDE, CFast - SATA, CFExpress - NVMe), which greatly simplify interoperability, you don't need specific drivers to support a different protocol (which also makes car reader simpler, less expensive, and well supported).

Remember that CF cards, like SD, are not used only in (video)cameras, there are a lot of devices that use them, and especially boot from them (something camera don't), thereby a standard, broadly supported protocol by any OS is welcome.

XQD looks to be more a "camera only format" - let's see if it will survive or not, and if a niche market, what the prices will be.


----------



## ahsanford (May 1, 2017)

Apparently Canon hired someone to be their new PR point person...


----------



## bvukich (May 1, 2017)

LDS said:


> XQD looks to be more a "camera only format" - let's see if it will survive or not, and if a niche market, what the prices will be.



Sony embraced it, which is pretty much the kiss of death for any storage medium. It is based on a real standard and not Sony propitiatory though, so who knows.


----------



## bvukich (May 1, 2017)

bvukich said:


> LDS said:
> 
> 
> > XQD looks to be more a "camera only format" - let's see if it will survive or not, and if a niche market, what the prices will be.
> ...



Scratch that...

It's been out since 2012, only Sony and Lexar make cards, and the format has been superseded by CFExpress? It's dead Jim.


----------



## tcmatthews (May 2, 2017)

bvukich said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > LDS said:
> ...


XQD Version 2 is based on PCI Express 3.0 and CFExpress is based on PCI Express 3.0? Convergence, I suspect XQD will die or get a card converter.

Or exist in only very compact cameras in CFExpress does not fit. Personally I think that we could perhaps move away from cards all together and put a tray with a slot for a M.2 drive in the camera.


----------



## countofmc95 (May 2, 2017)

I had a 6D and SL1 combo as my only camera gear way back in 2013. I had a foray into mirrorless and right now am using Nikon, but honestly I think that initial combo of Canon gear was always the way to go. I'm hoping the Mark II versions of both are pretty good, and I think I'll jump back into Canon.


----------



## PhotographerJim (May 2, 2017)

jebrady03 said:


> I literally have a stack of cash waiting for the 85mm f/1.4L IS. Seriously Canon, take my money...



Same here. If it's anything like the new 35mm, I'll be preordering it for sure!


----------



## vangelismm (May 2, 2017)

No one complain about 50mm IS, yet?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 2, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> Wait, 6D2 now *announced* before September? When is it going to be available? I just put my 6D up for sale in anticipation of this camera arriving in the next month or so.
> 
> "You're killing me Smalls!"



Never sell your gear based on rumors. If you had done that with the 100-400mm L II, you would have been waiting 10 years. Even if a rumor is correct about a new model, there are many things that can delay new models. Earthquakes have shut down new models more than once in recent years, flooding in Thailand played havoc with Nikon cameras and lenses.

Don't even think about selling due to a rumor.


----------



## unfocused (May 2, 2017)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> olix said:
> 
> 
> > ... both had CFast cards for 4K recording. One month later I read an article that CFast cards are dumped: http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/10/the-cfast-vs-xqd-battle-is-already-over-stop-buying-cfast/68002/ Oh, Canon...
> ...



ajfotofilmagem, you pretty much too the words out of my mouth. The quoted article (now seven months old) is pure speculation that declares one format a winner based solely on what the author considers better technology. But, better technology is seldom the deciding factor in the marketplace.

I looked at that article and what struck me was that three major video camera makers in the professional market – Canon, ARRI and BlackMagic – all chose CFast. Market share almost always trumps technology, so I wouldn't bet on CFast going away any time soon.


----------



## Chaitanya (May 2, 2017)

LDS said:


> olix said:
> 
> 
> > I read an article that CFast cards are dumped: http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/10/the-cfast-vs-xqd-battle-is-already-over-stop-buying-cfast/68002/ Oh, Canon...
> ...


Camera market is just small fraction of CFast market, they are used a lot in industrial PCs as it uses Sata interface and its compatibility with other OS is great compared to proprietary XQD.


----------



## Luds34 (May 2, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Wait, 6D2 now *announced* before September? When is it going to be available? I just put my 6D up for sale in anticipation of this camera arriving in the next month or so.
> ...



Fair enough, and I agree... especially with lenses. With camera bodies... it's a bit different.

One, the 6D is going to lose a ton of value on the secondary market once the 6D2 is announced. One, because the next new big thing is out, but more so, because I think we'll see plenty of 6D owners putting their cameras up for sale and flooding the market.

Two, camera models NEED to be refreshed from time to time as the tech just keeps changing so fast. Not so much with lenses, aka 85mm f/1.8 or 70-200 f/2.8L (non IS) being from (guessing a bit here) 93ish and 95ish respectively? Aka both over 20 years old and still "current" models. While the 6D...? 5 years now almost?

In short I'm playing with a fire a bit, I agree... just trying to preserve some resale value though while I still can.

My joke is worse case I guess I pick up a 5D4.


----------



## Mac Duderson (May 2, 2017)

8) 28mm f1.2L IS BlueGoo ;D ;D ;D
You know it can be done


----------



## Ryananthony (May 2, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Luds34 said:
> ...



I thought the same when it came to selling my 5d3 when the 5div was rumored. I held off, and actually still own my 5d3. I can still currently sell it for a the same price I would have before the 5div was announced. With that said, location plays a big part. I live in a big city with a huge market for both buying and selling camera gear.


----------



## scrup (May 2, 2017)

Those waiting for a 6D2 will be disappointed. Get the 5D4 or just jump ship to Sony. Why wait for a let down.


----------



## Woody (May 2, 2017)

scrup said:


> Those waiting for a 6D2 will be disappointed. Get the 5D4 or just jump ship to Sony. Why wait for a let down.



My only wish for 6D2 is that it'll be as lightweight as the 77D.

If it's another minor update, I won't stray from the Canon camp, but may give up on FF altogether.


----------



## scrup (May 2, 2017)

Woody said:


> scrup said:
> 
> 
> > Those waiting for a 6D2 will be disappointed. Get the 5D4 or just jump ship to Sony. Why wait for a let down.
> ...



Tough ask for Canon to make a 6D much lighter, possible but it be probably be called another name.

SL1 upgrade and the full frame equivalent would be nice additions.

6D2 would be like 5D3 with 4k, slower framerate and lower build quality.


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

vangelismm said:


> No one complain about 50mm IS, yet?



I am holding my tongue as it's clear that wherever the 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM is in the new product pipeline, it's clearly behind the 6D2, 85 f/1.4L IS, etc.

So let's get those released so we can start talking about 50mm lenses. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

scrup said:


> Those waiting for a 6D2 will be disappointed. Get the 5D4 or just jump ship to Sony. Why wait for a let down.



Because it will cost more than $1000 less and come with a tilty-flippy screen (and possibly interchangeable focusing screens). No amount of the 'joy of having it now' with a 5D4 will put a tilty-flippy on it or give you manual focusing screens if that's what you've been waiting for.

Those are good reasons to wait for a lot of folks here -- and I'm a 5D owner saying that!

- A


----------



## xps (May 2, 2017)

Interestingly, other rumor pages - whose name is ***** .**** here - rumor, that there will be NO 6DII, but an MLS coming.


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

xps said:


> Interestingly, other rumor pages - whose name is ***** .**** here - rumor, that there will be NO 6DII, but an MLS coming.



Those sites are 99% likely wrong. All conventional wisdom says a 6D2 with a mirror and all is a 'this year' product.

FF mirrorless is certainly on the horizon for Canon, but surely it will not be within +/- 3 months of the 6D2 announcement. Canon prefers to give its FF launches an exclusive spotlight for a period of time.

- A


----------



## xps (May 2, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > Interestingly, other rumor pages - whose name is ***** .**** here - rumor, that there will be NO 6DII, but an MLS coming.
> ...


I hope so, as I need another body... And the 6DII will be the one...


----------



## tbrand (May 2, 2017)

Fingers crossed my 1DX II get C-Log to "keep up" with the 5D Mark IV.


----------



## CanonCams (May 2, 2017)

xps said:


> Interestingly, other rumor pages - whose name is ***** .**** here - rumor, that there will be NO 6DII, but an MLS coming.



Yeah, I saw that and cringed. lol


----------



## LDS (May 2, 2017)

tcmatthews said:


> Or exist in only very compact cameras in CFExpress does not fit. Personally I think that we could perhaps move away from cards all together and put a tray with a slot for a M.2 drive in the camera.



In some ways, CFExpress looks to be exactly that - but designed with the need of removable storage in mind (M.2 is mostly designed for fixed internal storage, although it can easily be replaced when needed). M.2 uses NVMe as the interface protocol as well. It looks CFExpress will allow to use up to 8 PCIe lanes (M.2 uses only four), and there will be different form factors depending on how many lanes are used - it looks it will start with two, using a package the same size of XQD, and using the same physical interface (it's not clear if XQD cards will work in a CFExpress device):

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170418005189/en/CompactFlash-Association-Announces-CFexpress*-1.0-Specification

http://www.compactflash.org/assets/docs/cfapress/cfexpress_family_pr_160907.pdf

Basically, CFExpress looks to be based on XQD - but adding protocols that became standard for SSD devices like NVMe, to ensure broad support and interoperability, and designed to add more features in the future.

In the same articles you'll see both Canon and Nikon are behind the standard, and because of that I'm quite sure it's XQD to be ******* - maybe like MiniDisc <G>

Being Canon in the CFA body, they knew where standards were going, and I guess they weren't in a hurry to use XQD when CFExpress was arriving - as long as the older standards were enough, and have more OEM making cards, why adopt another one which was going to be superseded?


----------



## mdflare (May 2, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> scrup said:
> 
> 
> > Those waiting for a 6D2 will be disappointed. Get the 5D4 or just jump ship to Sony. Why wait for a let down.
> ...



Absolutely. Coming from the 60D to the 6DI, the thing I am most annoyed about the lack of the articulated screen. If you are doing lots of macro and Landscape where you simply can´t put your face up behind the camera that fixed screen is annoying as hell. 
(Doing things through a WLAN Tablet isn´t helping a lot. It makes everything even more cumbersome)

I personally don´t want to pay for features in a camera like the 5D3+ line that I am simply not interested in. (sophisticated focusing, FPS, flash-cards) 
And it is a lot more if you are not earning bucks with it. 

I hope the 6D2 will have a weather sealing around the wheel on the back. From my experience there is simply no protection whatsoever on that thing in the 6D. It starts acting crazy with only a drop of water on it. Almost instantaneously disabling the usability of the camera.


----------



## eli452 (May 2, 2017)

Will it not be more sensible for Canon to stop the 6D line entirely and produce a mirrorless full-frame camera?


----------



## LesC (May 2, 2017)

eli452 said:


> Will it not be more sensible for Canon to stop the 6D line entirely and produce a mirrorless full-frame camera?



Not for me and many others I suspect. I'm happy with my 6D but would like a tilting screen. I don't need a 5D MKIV nor do I want to spend that much.

As to FF mirrorless, I have no interest in it. The body may be a bit smaller but L lenses will still be the same size plus i prefer an optical viewfinder.


----------



## Ed V (May 2, 2017)

Ok, I'll bite. 

Looks, I'm not one of those guys who has to have the latest and greatest of everything. I've been shooting with my 5D3 and 50 1.2 most of the time and sometimes wonder why I even have the other lenses listed in my signature.

What is really starting to irritate me is the seeming lack of attention given to the M-series. I bought the M5 to use as a lightweight backup. Right now I carry two lenses - the EOS-M 22mm and the EF 40mm pancake with adapter. I know rumors are just that but I read here back before I made the purchase that there would be another prime lens coming to the EOS-M line this year. There was no longer any mention of such lens in the original post here. Is the M5 going to become obsolete before the year ends? Come on guys!

All I hear is wishing for a FF mirrorless camera from Canon. And the expectation that it would have the EF mount. Is that happens it would be the final nail in the M coffin, in my humble opinion.


----------



## Crosswind (May 2, 2017)

I'm really curious if the SL2 will feature a tilting (or even fully articulating) screen. Then it might be a serious contender to the M5 for example, just with an OVF. This will be interesting.

And yes I'm also curious about the sensor of the 6DII, as this might be a first glimpse into the sensor performance of the fullframe EOS M (if it is ever going to happen).


----------



## Cory (May 2, 2017)

Sorry for the rookie question that's been asked a million times, but I'm thinking of simplifying/improving to a 6D (or II). For general everything except for wildlife (because the almost no times I would be shooting wildlife I'd rent a lens) would a 6D offer improved image quality all things being equal? I think my mix of lenses would be a 16-35 f/4, 40 STM and 135 f/2.
THANKS.
:-*


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

eli452 said:


> Will it not be more sensible for Canon to stop the 6D line entirely and produce a mirrorless full-frame camera?



Sensible? For forum-dwelling folks who believe Canon is ******* without a FF mirrorless setup, sure.

But...


----------



## jeffa4444 (May 2, 2017)

The Canon 5D MKIII was announced on 2nd March 2012, the 6D was announced on 17th September 2012 that's roughly 7.5 months apart. 

The Canon 5D MKIV was announced 25th August 2017 if the same logic had applied that would have put the 6D MKII in the first weeks of April but instead were still waiting. 

The 6D at Wex Photographic is £ 1,274 body only, the 5D MKIV is holding its launch price at £ 3,499 that's a whopping £ 2,225 difference is it really worth 2.8 times more for the 5D MKIV? Or looking at it another way Canon could be launching the 6D MKII at a significant price increase over the 6D. The 6D launched at £ 2,100 / $ 2,100 in 2012 so expect it to be north of that figure but it better well have improved in every area to justify the increase. 

Canon you've a huge price gap at least in Europe / UK. The 5D line expanded, the Rebel line expanded just below the 80D why not the 6D line, or maybe that's why we have a delay because its not one model but two!


----------



## amorse (May 2, 2017)

eli452 said:


> Will it not be more sensible for Canon to stop the 6D line entirely and produce a mirrorless full-frame camera?



Not that I'd have as much background as some of the other posters here, but I always thought the 6D line was created to entice users of Canon's upper-end APS-C line to jump up to full frame and start buying full-frame L lenses. It is what made me get on the 6D train, and for most people the 5Div is a pretty substantial financial jump from any of Canon's APS-C cameras. The 6D sits in a nice price range to get people from an xxD to full frame.

Canon ditching the 6D in favour of a full frame mirrorless may not achieve the same objective unless it would continue to use EF lenses, and still be seen as an entry point to full frame. At the end of the day, I am guessing that Canon wants to see its users move to cameras up market, and buying into the EF ecosystem since once a photographer has a lot of EF glass, it is more financially difficult the change systems. The 6D seems to bridge that gap quite nicely right now.


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> The Canon 5D MKIII was announced on 2nd March 2012, the 6D was announced on 17th September 2012 that's roughly 7.5 months apart.
> 
> The Canon 5D MKIV was announced 25th August 2017 if the same logic had applied that would have put the 6D MKII in the first weeks of April but instead were still waiting.



I hear you, but it doesn't quite work like a train schedule. Canon now has the 5DS/5DS R line. Canon now has the EOS M line. Canon now has the nutty 760D / 77D line. Canon now has the SL1 (and apparently an SL2 is on the way).

As a result, the 'cycle refresh' of cameras isn't carved in stone -- except for perhaps the money-printing Rebel line. See these two release timelines (one from NL and the other on Wikipedia) and you can broadly draw the following conclusions:


Canon is steadily expanding it's number of interchangeable lens camera lines. One might presume that this is clogging up their development pipeline.


'Cycle refresh' times can be roughly pegged from these timelines, but they never get shorter than the prior cycle. Often, they are getting a bit longer.

So could Canon have pushed out the 6D2 a few months after the 5D4 release? Sure... _if 1-2 other product lines never happened._

- A


----------



## CanonCams (May 2, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > The Canon 5D MKIII was announced on 2nd March 2012, the 6D was announced on 17th September 2012 that's roughly 7.5 months apart.
> ...



So, maybe 2018 for the MK II?


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

amorse said:


> Canon ditching the 6D in favour of a full frame mirrorless may not achieve the same objective unless it would continue to use EF lenses, and still be seen as an entry point to full frame. At the end of the day, I am guessing that Canon wants to see its users move to cameras up market, and buying into the EF ecosystem since once a photographer has a lot of EF glass, it is more financially difficult the change systems. The 6D seems to bridge that gap quite nicely right now.



I think the 6D line is more about Canon's ability to deliver a less expensive version of a professional FF rig with a similar user experience, i.e. it has an OVF and good responsiveness.

But that said, I *do* see a future FF mirrorless seamlessly dropping into the EF ecosystem, either with a native full EF mount (mirrorless is *not* all about being small, people) or a skinny mount + EF adaptor. 

The problem is this: the first mirrorless FF rig Canon sells will ab-so-lutely cost more than the same-sensored / same-spec'd SLR they sell it alongside. Why? Because it's smaller/cooler/newer tech that folks will pay a premium for. And that takes such a camera -- even if it's a mirrorless clone of a 6D2 -- out of the price point Canon needs it to sit in. So the 6D2 must have a mirror and cost about X. That's that, IMHO.

FF mirrorless is 100% going to happen, but the idea that Canon will supplant an entire critical arm of the SLR portfolio with a non-mirrored replacement isn't happening. It didn't happen in crop, and it sure as hell won't happen in FF.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

CanonCams said:


> So, maybe 2018 for the MK II?



Don't know. I think it has to happen this year as the only FF announcement (plus the last gen's trend of clustering FF releases in relatively short gaps in between them) but when it happens this year is a huge TBD. 

- A


----------



## amorse (May 2, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> But that said, I *do* see a future FF mirrorless seamlessly dropping into the EF ecosystem, either with a native full EF mount (mirrorless is *not* all about being small, people) or a skinny mount + EF adaptor.
> 
> The problem is this: the first mirrorless FF rig Canon sells will ab-so-lutely cost more than the same-sensored / same-spec'd SLR they sell it alongside. Why? Because it's smaller/cooler/newer tech that folks will pay a premium for. And that takes such a camera -- even if it's a mirrorless clone of a 6D2 -- out of the price point Canon needs it to sit in. So the 6D2 must have a mirror and cost about X. That's that, IMHO.
> 
> ...



I think you're right in that they're going to make a full frame mirrorless, but I think the real question is where does Canon see that product's niche in the market at the moment and into the future as that may dictate how they wade into the market now. Would Canon make it because they think a mirrorless camera can offer a limited need that SLRs aren't providing right now (i.e. size, EVF, better potential focus point coverage, etc.), or do they think that mirrorless could eventually replace SLRs into the (maybe distant) future?

If they're going after a key need such as size, I could see them creating a new lens line - that's what they did with EF-M lenses after all. Had they used EF-s for their mirrorless cameras they would have been able to market their breadth of lenses available as a marketing tool, but they chose not to. Also, if they were to build a mirrorless full-frame lens line, they may hope that crop mirrorless users start buying full frame mirrorless lenses to help them move up-market.

However, if Canon sees full frame mirrorless as the future then the EF mount would make a lot of sense. In this case a new line of lenses for their full frame mirrorless would put them at a disadvantage against competitors who have already invested heavily in their mirrorless lens mount.

I would bet that Canon's first full frame mirrorless camera will be just testing the water, and whether or not it uses EF, EF-M or something else will tell us a lot about what they think of the potential for the mirrorless market. I would think that Canon is closely following the a9's reception with professional photographers to get an idea of whether or not those added benefits are truly that valuable. That may help answer the question of whether mirrorless is the future of photography or a niche product.


----------



## testthewest (May 2, 2017)

JoSto said:


> I think the delay of the 6DII was forseeable. If it will be an at least little upgrade compared to the original 6d it will be feature wise compareable to the 5dIII. As the 6d was to 5dII.
> 
> For the stills only crowed the only main benefits of the expensive 5d4 are
> -better weathersealing
> ...



I don't think that's true. Whoever wanted a 5d4 already has one, the release of the 6D2 is imminent. Why would anybody not wait the few months to save more than thousand € and buy the 5D4? Why could this hypothetical person wait all those months until now, but can't wait a bit longer for the product he actually wants (which you imply by saying the 6D2 will canibalize sales)?

No, the reasons are probably simpler: Canon simply isn't ready to release the camera. 
Judging by the amount of patches the 5D4 got, it probably was pushed out too soon without enough polish. Perhaps they don't want to repeat that mistake.


----------



## jmoya (May 2, 2017)

I wonder what the video specs will be? Will is shoot atleast 1080 at 60fps? I need a decent full-frame that will double for stills as well as for decent slow-mo video for my youtube vlogs. is that too much to ask?


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

amorse said:


> Would Canon make it because they think a mirrorless camera can offer a limited need that SLRs aren't providing right now (i.e. size, EVF, better potential focus point coverage, etc.), or do they think that mirrorless could eventually replace SLRs into the (maybe distant) future?



You're bounding the problem correctly. At first, it will be the former statement you made is likely where they will start. But if a rig like the A9 is possible (disregarding idiotic ergonomics, poor grip, etc.), anyone who doubts that FF mirrorless will replace just about every SLR someday needs a reality check. I'm not saying the A9 will outperform a 1DX2 in real world field use and become the preference of the most demanding professionals, but one could imagine a rig in 2-3 design next-generations that matches what just about all of what the SLRs do (except for battery life, which is simply the price of admission for mirrorless).



amorse said:


> If they're going after a key need such as size, I could see them creating a new lens line...
> 
> [truncated]
> 
> However, if Canon sees full frame mirrorless as the future then the EF mount would make a lot of sense...



This is about right. Despite all the reasons that an internet forum believes a full EF mirrorless product would be better (and they are good reasons), *we are not the market*, and I'm steadily leaning more and more to a thinner than EF + adaptor sort of offering being more likely, which would mandate a new line of lenses. I don't think it will be a full-blooded new lens portfolio whatsoever -- just a handful of shorter FL lenses that might help create a smaller overall rig than the FF SLR equivalent.

- A


----------



## Luds34 (May 2, 2017)

Cory said:


> Sorry for the rookie question that's been asked a million times, but I'm thinking of simplifying/improving to a 6D (or II). For general everything except for wildlife (because the almost no times I would be shooting wildlife I'd rent a lens) would a 6D offer improved image quality all things being equal? I think my mix of lenses would be a 16-35 f/4, 40 STM and 135 f/2.
> THANKS.
> :-*



I owned a 70D and than purchased a 6D. The 70D basically collected dust after that and I sold it. The 6D turned out to be a very nice improvement in IQ, especially at ISO 800 and higher. A little better dynamic range as well.

I own the 40mm pancake and 135 f/2L and they are both oustanding on the 6D. I had a 17-40 but sold that as I am looking to upgrade to the 16-35 you have.

Here's an ISO 12800 that I just couldn't imagine turning out nearly as well with my old 70D.



Sparklers! by Ryan Ludwig, on Flickr


----------



## PhotographerJim (May 2, 2017)

Cory said:


> Sorry for the rookie question that's been asked a million times, but I'm thinking of simplifying/improving to a 6D (or II). For general everything except for wildlife (because the almost no times I would be shooting wildlife I'd rent a lens) would a 6D offer improved image quality all things being equal? I think my mix of lenses would be a 16-35 f/4, 40 STM and 135 f/2.
> THANKS.
> :-*



I have a 7Dmk2 and a 6D, the 6D definitely produces cleaner images than the 7Dmk2, especially when using the same EF lenses.


----------



## Luds34 (May 2, 2017)

Well, if anyone is curious, I did sell my 6D. Took only a few days and I sold it for 100 bucks less than what I bought it for in 2015. So $100 to "rent" a camera for 25 months? Not too bad. My point being, the demand for the 6D seems to be quite high and I think Canon knows their market well enough that I expect a 6D2 is coming this year. In fact, I agree with those who think it might be slightly delayed as they finish things up. My guess is that ideally they would have wanted to have released it this spring, just in time for the summer season (in most of the populated world).

In any case, You can announce/release the 6D mark II any time now Canon! Pleeeeease, I need FF camera now.


----------



## Cory (May 2, 2017)

Thanks. I think I'm gonna do it (the current 6D). Seems like a full frame T1i which was my first camera and did really well with it.

8)


----------



## ahsanford (May 2, 2017)

Cory said:


> Thanks. I think I'm gonna do it (the current 6D). Seems like a full frame T1i which was my first camera and did really well with it.
> 
> 8)



The 6D1 has a fine sensor, but be advised two things if you are moving from the 70D to the 6D1:

1) The 6D1 AF is precise but simple/limited -- IMHO, it's the #1 thing they nerfed from threatening the 5D3's sales. If you need to work off-center with a large aperture lens, you will probably feel handcuffed by the AF points you do not have. And I would not recommend it for tracking anything moving in unpredictable ways. 

2) Leaving the 70D, you will lose the trifecta of DPAF + touchscreen + tilty-flippy. If you shoot video stills in LiveView and need to rely on the AF when you do that, this will be a considerable downgrade for you.

The 6D1 is a fine camera, but understand that the CR guy and most conventional wisdom would believe that the _6D2_ will address those two points above in a _resounding_ manner. So be advised that if you ever get buyers' remorse and if you care about the two items above, you _might_ want to wait for the 6D2 and pay the extra money. Your call.

- A


----------



## HarryFilm (May 2, 2017)

Actually, I can inform Canon Rumors fans that something
REALLY REALLY HUMONGOUS is coming from Canon in 2018
and I think I can get access to the proof within two weeks!

Elsewhere in these forums is a discussion on a Large Sensor size 
Medium-Format Canon Mirrorless camera that has been SPECIFICALLY 
DISPLAYED TO ME via a hard-copy printed photo shown to me via a Skype 
call from a Germany/Netherlands-based enthusiast camera group who have 
several engineering-oriented members, that while I am NOT personally affiliated
with AND NOT FRIENDS WITH on a personal level, I can disclose that said group 
seems to have enough PROFESSIONAL credentials that I am confident that the 
photo and accompanying specifications SEEM to be VERY REAL TO ME.

What has been shown to me is an oversize Canon 1Dx Mk2 style body with
what looks like an aperture opening that looks very much in size to the 
opening of an Arri Alexa-65 Cinema Camera. (Note: I guestimated the size
of the camera as it sat upon a what I believe is a typical A4 paper size
used in Europe which is 210 x 297mm or about 8.3 inches by 11.7 inches)

It's pretty simple math to do AND even from the Skype-Call photo, 
I can still deduce it's size as being LARGER THAN the 1dxMk2. From there
it's also easy math to figure out the lens opening size to be ABOUT 70mm
which is actually LARGER than the Arri Alexa 65's 64 mm diameter.
The lens displayed to me SEEMED to be an 85mm Prime lens that
was SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER than the current 85mm L-series
Canon prime lens!

AND I received OTHER documentation which specifies this is going
to be a 8192 by 6036 pixel camera (about 48 megapixels!) at
16-bits per colour channel (48 bit colour). It has ALSO been 
specified to me that NEW compression algorithms will be
embedded into the camera which will be the wavelet-based
4:4:4 JPEG-2000 48-bit colour format for stills and 4:4:4 Motion-Wavelet 
INTRAFRAME and H.265 4:2:2 INTERFRAME CODECs at 48 bit 
colour for the high-bandwidth video portions which will BOTH 
be 4k DCI format (4096x2160) scaled down from the FULL 
sensor size! THIS IS AMAZING IF TRUE !!!

For stills, I have been told it will be a 25 FPS (YES! 25 fps!!!)
full sensor-size burst shooting rate onto built-in (but still
user-changeable) SSD Hard drives.

I have cleared up recent confusion as to the amount of memory 
needed to hold such an enormous data rate for that many RAW 
size photos at 25 fps for 3 seconds! While there are CFAST style
card ports in evidence, it SEEMS the PRIMARY storage mediums 
are to be MULTIPLE SATA-based SSD hard Disks embedded into 
the lower portion of the camera grip and base assembly. 
I AM GOING TO ASSUME based upon the text i have received 
that some sort of INTERLEAVED frame writing will occur where 
Frame 1 will goto disk1 and frame 2 to disk 2, etc. to allow 
keep-up with the MASSIVE DATA RATE needed to keep a 
25 fps burst shooting rate!

The group I have been speaking with are ABSOLUTELY ADAMANT 
that the burst still photo shooting rate is 25 FPS Mirrorless with 
NO MECHANICAL SHUTTER BEING PRESENT AT ALL on said 
upcoming Canon Medium Format camera at 48+ megapixels!

I have been told the video files will be 4k DCI at up to 
50/60 fps with 100/120 fps 4k options POSSIBLY coming by 
the said sales date of very late 2018/early 2019.

A SECOND camera that has a 120 megapixel sensor 
for portraiture and landscape using the SAME sensor 
size and body-style will be introduced at the same time
with a burst shooting rate of 7-to-10 fps!

AND...it seems these camera(s) have been seen 
IN THE WILD as near-production ready working prototypes!

I PERSONALLY have not held the actual systems described
BUT due to the PHOTOS i have seen personally, I will give
said enthusiast camera group the benefit of the doubt!

I am ALSO saying that said group SEEMS to have video 
imagery and OTHER PROOF that such a camera exists 
and they have ACCESS to such material which they 
are willing to share with me within one to two weeks!

And FINALLY the camera group is ADAMANT the initial 
introductory pricing will be from 12 000 to 16 000 Euros
which is more than TWICE the 1Dx Mk2 price BUT much 
cheaper than any 50 megapixel Phase One or Leica or
Hasselblad medium format camera!

If the 25 fps burst frame rate is TRUE then it seems 
the recent Sony A9 introduction is to be NEGATED by Canon,
especially when the frame size will be almost 50 megapixels!
And with such a large sensor size the photos sites will STILL be
over 6 microns (6.82 which is what I have been told) which means
colour rendition and ISO sensitivity is going to be FANTASTIC!

I have ALSO cleared up confusion where this series of cameras
IS TO BE IN ADDITION to the current 1Dx mk2 series which will
STAY WITH the current sensor sizes. The 65mm/70mm MF 
48 megapixel sensor size SEEMS to be targeted to very very
high end sports/action photographers!

I will keep asked for the group to SEND ME MORE PROOF,
so wish me LUCK in getting it here faster for all you Canon fans!


----------



## FramerMCB (May 3, 2017)

scrup said:


> Those waiting for a 6D2 will be disappointed. Get the 5D4 or just jump ship to Sony. Why wait for a let down.



Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha...


----------



## FramerMCB (May 3, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> The Canon 5D MKIII was announced on 2nd March 2012, the 6D was announced on 17th September 2012 that's roughly 7.5 months apart.
> 
> The Canon 5D MKIV was announced 25th August 2017 if the same logic had applied that would have put the 6D MKII in the first weeks of April but instead were still waiting.
> 
> ...



Yes! A 6D Mk II and a 6Ds [Mk I]...?


----------



## FramerMCB (May 3, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> Well, if anyone is curious, I did sell my 6D. Took only a few days and I sold it for 100 bucks less than what I bought it for in 2015. So $100 to "rent" a camera for 25 months? Not too bad. My point being, the demand for the 6D seems to be quite high and I think Canon knows their market well enough that I expect a 6D2 is coming this year. In fact, I agree with those who think it might be slightly delayed as they finish things up. My guess is that ideally they would have wanted to have released it this spring, just in time for the summer season (in most of the populated world).
> 
> In any case, You can announce/release the 6D mark II any time now Canon! Pleeeeease, I need FF camera now.



I peg the announcement for early to mid-June! You all heard it hear first!!! 8)


----------



## FramerMCB (May 3, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > Interestingly, other rumor pages - whose name is ***** .**** here - rumor, that there will be NO 6DII, but an MLS coming.
> ...



WHEN Canon announces their Mirrorless entry finally it will be a Medium Format 120 mega-pixel monster announced with 4 new lenses at launch. Body will be similar shape to 1DX Mk II but slightly larger with a price tag of $5,499USD at launch for body only...


----------



## Ozarker (May 3, 2017)

Cory said:


> Thanks. I think I'm gonna do it (the current 6D). Seems like a full frame T1i which was my first camera and did really well with it.
> 
> 8)


The T1i was not full frame.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 3, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Cory said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks. I think I'm gonna do it (the current 6D). Seems like a full frame T1i which was my first camera and did really well with it.
> ...



Ah, yes, that'd be why he added that adjective. You know, to define the way in which is was different from a T1i, while also being similar.


----------



## dak723 (May 3, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Cory said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks. I think I'm gonna do it (the current 6D). Seems like a full frame T1i which was my first camera and did really well with it.
> ...



You might want to read the person's remarks more carefully before answering with a smart-ass remark. You might just end up looking like a fool.


----------



## Luds34 (May 3, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Well, if anyone is curious, I did sell my 6D. Took only a few days and I sold it for 100 bucks less than what I bought it for in 2015. So $100 to "rent" a camera for 25 months? Not too bad.
> ...



I'm a big believer in personal integrity. So therefore I don't appreciate being called a liar.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=25258.msg499737#msg499737


----------



## Luds34 (May 3, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Cory said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks. I think I'm gonna do it (the current 6D). Seems like a full frame T1i which was my first camera and did really well with it.
> ...



Good, fair points!

Point #2, while valid isn't all that applicable as I feel anyone who is serious about video isn't buying a 6D. Heck, anyone doing vlog or anything near that level will invest in a dedicated camera, a 2nd (or 3rd) body for shooting video. If you're buying a 6D you're buying it to shoot stills.

Point #1, Bingo! All the other limitations of the 6D are just minor annoyances or specmanship type stuff (1/4000 vs 1/8000) that don't really show up in real world use. But the AF points/spread is definitely the camera's biggest weakness, especially being all outer points are single cross. I'd disagree with you (respectfully of course) a bit on the tracking piece. Tracking with the center point is, "I'd say strong... to quite strong".  Of course this is the only point I'd ever recommend tracking with and can therefore limit one's composition a "tiny" bit.

Obviously we all have different needs, but the lack of focal points is the crutch of this camera in my opinion. Sure more features (DPAF, touch screen) and better specs (FPS, max shutter, max flash sync) will/would be great, but the AF is the big one and all the others are just icing on the cake.


----------



## canonographer (May 3, 2017)

There is absolutely no reason for a 6D II. What can a 6D II DSLR do better than a new enthusiast oriented FF mirrorless?

OVF? You may like looking through actual glass. That's fine, but you're missing out on so much more by making that choice. More and more people are trying out EVFs and realizing how much they add to the shooting experience, and as Sony has shown, it can be done without any of the drawbacks we've seen in the past.

Battery? Again, see the Sony A9. It may be rated at a lower shutter count than the 6D, but every review shows people getting well over 1,000 shots on a single charge. And that's on a body that is constrained to a small grip. Imagine what could be done with a normal sized grip.

Speed? Do you not think Canon can squeeze 6-8 fps out of a FF mirrorless when Sony can hit 20?

Lenses? Give us a well integrated adapter for EF lenses. Problem solved.

Given all the benefits to losing the mirror and perceived drawbacks evaporating like a fart in the wind, why on earth would Canon ever make an enthusiast oriented FF DSLR again?


----------



## Woody (May 3, 2017)

canonographer said:


> There is absolutely no reason for a 6D II. What can a 6D II DSLR do better than a new enthusiast oriented FF mirrorless?



If the weight of the 6DII can be reduced significantly, it may have wider appeal.



canonographer said:


> OVF? You may like looking through actual glass. That's fine, but you're missing out on so much more by making that choice. More and more people are trying out EVFs and realizing how much they add to the shooting experience, and as Sony has shown, it can be done without any of the drawbacks we've seen in the past.



But (i) Sony has only shown this on A9 which requires many other advanced components; the latter raise the price of the camera significantly (ii) it is possible to overlay info on OVF.

Do you think Sony will trickle down their A9 EVF (and other relevant technology) into lower end cameras without raising their prices?



canonographer said:


> Battery? Again, see the Sony A9. It may be rated at a lower shutter count than the 6D, but every review shows people getting well over 1,000 shots on a single charge. And that's on a body that is constrained to a small grip. Imagine what could be done with a normal sized grip.



Not a biggie.



canonographer said:


> Speed? Do you not think Canon can squeeze 6-8 fps out of a FF mirrorless when Sony can hit 20?



Not important to folks who are more conscientious about price than speed.



canonographer said:


> Lenses? Give us a well integrated adapter for EF lenses. Problem solved.


Hmmm... as many people have attested, adapters are still quirky and unreliable.



canonographer said:


> Given all the benefits to losing the mirror and perceived drawbacks evaporating like a fart in the wind, why on earth would Canon ever make an enthusiast oriented FF DSLR again?



Depends on which sells better at the end of the day. Keep in mind Canon has about 48% of the interchangeable lens camera market.


----------



## Mikehit (May 3, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> Actually, I can inform Canon Rumors fans that something
> REALLY REALLY HUMONGOUS is coming from Canon in 2018
> and I think I can get access to the proof within two weeks!
> 
> ...



So from announcement after NAB it is '..something in 2018....'? If the camera is due for release in 2018 I cannot see it being announced before start of Q4 2017.
This new behemoth will be larger than the 1DxII with onboard SSD, with a 70mm throat at a cost of >12,000 Euros? And you say that it will negate the A9???? (and for god measure, I will add another couple of ??) What lenses is it going to use?
So it seems that this wunder-lens is actually a totally new product line, with the price suggesting more in line with pro documentary photographer/video, than rather than a true DSLR alternative. And that is quite a different picture than you painted with your first 'announcement'.


----------



## Sabaki (May 3, 2017)

canonographer said:


> There is absolutely no reason for a 6D II. What can a 6D II DSLR do better than a new enthusiast oriented FF mirrorless?
> 
> OVF? You may like looking through actual glass. That's fine, but you're missing out on so much more by making that choice. More and more people are trying out EVFs and realizing how much they add to the shooting experience, and as Sony has shown, it can be done without any of the drawbacks we've seen in the past.
> 
> ...



Because some of us want the tried and tested DSLR experience. 

I'm not here not there regarding mirrorless but I really enjoy my DSLRs and if I do upgrade, I am not considering a mirrorless body just yet. 

Why? DSLRs are a complete system with lenses for every genre, flash systems, you name it. Once mirrorless is as complete a system as DSLRs currently are, I will then consider that Market. 

PS I do get how one could quantify the pros of mirrorless and the cons of DSLRs but that's where my thinking is at the moment and currently how I map my purchasss


----------



## Don Haines (May 3, 2017)

canonographer said:


> There is absolutely no reason for a 6D II. What can a 6D II DSLR do better than a new enthusiast oriented FF mirrorless?



People said the same about the 5D3 and the 5D2..... nothing that was significantly better than the previous model, but lots of incremental improvements made for a much better final product.... and don't forget that six years is an eternity for electronics..... it needs to be replaced just on the basis is of keeping its components current (still manufactured)



canonographer said:


> Speed? Do you not think Canon can squeeze 6-8 fps out of a FF mirrorless when Sony can hit 20?


Being as Canon can hit 14 fps on a FF camera with a mirror, 6-8 would be a terrible goal.... personally, I am surprised that Sony only hits 20..... I would have expected to see at least 30, plus a reduced resolution mode where you could hit 120....



canonographer said:


> Lenses? Give us a well integrated adapter for EF lenses. Problem solved.



Don't fall into the trap of thinking that a mirror less DSLR must be smaller. To go smaller means a lot of problems with ergonomics, plus the smaller flange distance causes a lot of problems with vignetting..... People go FF for image quality, if you are going to throw it away for smaller size, stick with crop cameras. 



canonographer said:


> Given all the benefits to losing the mirror and perceived drawbacks evaporating like a fart in the wind, why on earth would Canon ever make an enthusiast oriented FF DSLR again?



Because it sells well???


----------



## pokerz (May 3, 2017)

EF mount FF mirrorless with compact prime and zero blackout EVF please


----------



## LDS (May 3, 2017)

Isn't time to open a specific forum section for the SLR vs. mirrorless debate, and move all threads that end in such way to it?


----------



## Sharlin (May 3, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Being as Canon can hit 14 fps on a FF camera with a mirror, 6-8 would be a terrible goal.... personally, I am surprised that Sony only hits 20..... I would have expected to see at least 30, plus a reduced resolution mode where you could hit 120....



To be fair, they do have to keep the thing from melting. And they do have a reduced resolution mode for 30, 60, and 120fps just like the 1DX2 has a reduced-resolution 30/60/120fps mode with electronic shutter, full live view without blackout, and full AF


----------



## Don Haines (May 3, 2017)

Sharlin said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Being as Canon can hit 14 fps on a FF camera with a mirror, 6-8 would be a terrible goal.... personally, I am surprised that Sony only hits 20..... I would have expected to see at least 30, plus a reduced resolution mode where you could hit 120....
> ...



Good to know! Thanks!

I have a three year old P/S that has a 100fps burst mode at reduced resolution.... I could not understand why a high end mirrorless could not do better....... Now I know it can.


----------



## jeffa4444 (May 3, 2017)

canonographer said:


> There is absolutely no reason for a 6D II. What can a 6D II DSLR do better than a new enthusiast oriented FF mirrorless?
> 
> OVF? You may like looking through actual glass. That's fine, but you're missing out on so much more by making that choice. More and more people are trying out EVFs and realizing how much they add to the shooting experience, and as Sony has shown, it can be done without any of the drawbacks we've seen in the past.
> 
> ...


Having owned the Canon 6D since 2013 and having Olympus 4/3rds and micro 4/3rds cameras all with EV finders I would say your farting in the wind. The 6D is the most underrated camera in Canon line-up most of the "horror" stories people say about the AF points or tracking are missing the point of the camera. It was and is primarily a travel / landscape camera that happens to do a darn good job at most other forms of photography (Ive used it for aerial photography, safari, motor racing, studio portraiture all with great results). 
A tool is only as good as the person using it and knowing the limitations and working within them, their is no "magic" in mirrorless it has some weight & size benefits but otherwise they basically have similar functions.


----------



## amorse (May 3, 2017)

canonographer said:


> There is absolutely no reason for a 6D II. What can a 6D II DSLR do better than a new enthusiast oriented FF mirrorless?



The 6D can allow a photographer to compose an image with the camera off. This does actually make a difference to some people (like me) who have to make a camera battery last as long as possible. I often go on hiking trips where I could be camping for a week without any way to recharge. In those scenarios I'm usually taking landscape photos where I can keep the camera off for my compositions and then turning it on only to take the photo. This has gotten me through low battery warnings more than once!

The 6DII doesn't need to be a better product than what's possible with a full frame mirrorless - it just needs to be better for Canon. The 6DII has a place in Canon's lineup I think - it helps people move from crop cameras into the full frame and EF lens market (read: gets people buying more expensive glass). In my case, I started with a Canon XSi, got a few EF-S and EF lenses, and when it came time to upgrade I chose the 6D because it was relatively affordable and I already had a few lenses that would work on it. No way was I jumping from an XSi to a 5Diii - I could barely justify the 6D price! If Canon replaced the 6D with a full frame mirrorless, it would likely need a new lens line to go with it, wouldn't convince *new* buyers to invest in EF lenses (they'd just get the new mirrorless lens line), current crop users of Canon cameras would have no entry level full frame camera to enter the full frame market with, and Canon would have to invest tremendously in engineering at least a hand full of key lenses for the mirrorless line. That seems like a huge risk for Canon - spending a lot of money to potentially cannibalize their future EF lens line sales.

With that said, I do think there is room for a FF mirrorless - I'd certainly be interested in the potential size/weight savings (IF the battery can be improved), but that would likely mean I would need new lenses since bringing any EF lenses would negate most of my size/weight savings. I'm also hesitant on current mirrorless offerings because of weather sealing - I think Canon could really fix that. 

In short, I think Canon will get into full frame mirrorless, but not to the detriment of their current offerings: replacing the 6D with a mirrorless line that doesn't take EF lenses without an adaptor would do just that. If they were willing to run the risk of damaging sales of their other lines, we may have seen a different 5D IV than we got :


----------



## Woody (May 3, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> A tool is only as good as the person using it and knowing the limitations and working within them, their is no "magic" in mirrorless it has some weight & size benefits but otherwise they basically have similar functions.



Having used the the Sony A7RII + FE 24-70 f/4 set-up in my company, I must also say the weight and size benefits for FF MILCs are not significant. If size and weight are of utmost importance, I'll recommend APS-C MILCs.


----------



## Sharlin (May 3, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> > To be fair, they do have to keep the thing from melting. And they do have a reduced resolution mode for 30, 60, and 120fps just like the 1DX2 has a reduced-resolution 30/60/120fps mode with electronic shutter, full live view without blackout, and full AF
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To clarify, I was of course referring to the video mode. The 1DX2 can shoot 8Mpix JPEGs at 60fps, it just stores them together in a "container" file. You can grab individual frames from the "container" in-camera or in post. It can also shoot 2Mpix photos at 120fps albeit in an even more compressed format. Similarly with Sony's offering, and your point-and-shoot as well, I suspect.


----------



## dak723 (May 4, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



I apologize for treating your remark as a "smart-ass" remark if it was not so intended. Apparently you were just trying to inform although the meaning of his sentence seems clear enough to me and other readers here.

Perhaps I was confused because I read your responses to two other posters in order:

In reply to testthewest: "You win the award for the silliest remark on this thread."

In reply to Luds34: "I'm always very suspicious of such claims. I call B.S."

Since you were rude to those posters, I took your response to the next thread in the same vein. Again, I apologize for doing so.


----------



## Cory (May 4, 2017)

All good. We're all friends. 
In the mean time I think I'm maybe leaning towards a 35 2.0 IS/135 2.0/current 6D combo; maybe (I think).


----------



## Luds34 (May 4, 2017)

Cory said:


> All good. We're all friends.
> In the mean time I think I'm maybe leaning towards a 35 2.0 IS/135 2.0/current 6D combo; maybe (I think).



Not being able to track outer focal points (very well) to allow a better composition was the one annoyance for me. Other than that I absolutely loved the camera. Like I said earlier, it tracks very well with the center point. And if you plan to spend little to no time in Ai servo, well than those limitations are not an issue at all.

I own the Sigma 35mm Art and absolutely love, love, love that lens on the 6D. I think your combo of a 35mm/135mm will serve you well. In short, I don't think you'll be too disappointed picking up a 6D. And at the "discounted" price they are at, you could probably turn around and sell it again in a year for minimal loss. If you shoot Canon (and this should remain true after the 6D2 is out) there just isn't a better option to jump into full frame at that $1k price point.


----------



## Cory (May 4, 2017)

Thanks. Whenever in AI Servo (running events, marching band, etc.) I think I always use the center point. Outer points are only used, off the top of my head, for portraits or other static objects. 
I currently have all of my crop items in a pile to put on ebay tomorrow.


----------



## Ozarker (May 4, 2017)

dak723 said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > dak723 said:
> ...



Saying "Everybody that wanted a 5D IV already has one" is silly (testthewest)

Saying one sold a 6D body close to 2 years old for just $100 less than the purchase price is a suspicious claim. (Luds34) Maybe his original purchase was a used model at a fire sale price. Who knows? Still sounds like b.s. to me.

Should I take every post you make in the same rude vein as the one you made to me? That would be silly of me. 

My posts didn't have a thing to do with you. There aren't any damsels in distress that need you to rescue them around here. Get lost.


----------



## ricky_005 (May 4, 2017)

off topic here but Curious has anyone compared shutter speed under low light conditions shooting the same scene between the 5diii vs 5div?


----------



## privatebydesign (May 4, 2017)

I don't understand why this story is being disputed it is the internet and there are no real consequences for anything said and no need to supply any kind of proof or confirmation of any claim.

Further, the claim isn't even particularly contentious, I did a similar thing with a 16-35 f4 IS, I 'made' a $50 profit from a CPW deal, I owned it for six months then bought an 11-24 also via a CPW and sold the older lens for more than I bought it for.

Many people on the used market don't have a clue about CPW deals etc, they just look up B&H and won't pay that price. The 17-40 is a perfect example of that, often used prices are higher than refurb or CPW prices, bodies do the same thing sometimes. The 5D was the best example of that, but have you seen the vast differences in 1DC used prices, you can get then on deals for $3,999 yet some used prices are over that!

P.S. I recently ordered two 1DXMkII's, looking on eBay there are several sold used sales higher than I am paying for new.


----------



## Cory (May 4, 2017)

One more obnoxiously brutal question - I've really mastered my 70D. Will I be able to jump right into the 6D or are there any differences with controls to note or any nuances unique to the 6D? I'm sure that touch-screen to non touch-screen will be seamless and obvious, but anything in particular to report?
I normally get the MichaelTheMentor.com training DVD for any new camera and wondering if that would be necessary. They're phenomenal, by the way, and have been essential so far.
Thanks.


----------



## ahsanford (May 4, 2017)

Cory said:


> One more obnoxiously brutal question - I've really mastered my 70D. Will I be able to jump right into the 6D or are there any differences with controls to note or any nuances unique to the 6D? I'm sure that touch-screen to non touch-screen will be seamless and obvious, but anything in particular to report?
> I normally get the MichaelTheMentor.com training DVD for any new camera and wondering if that would be necessary. They're phenomenal, by the way, and have been essential so far.
> Thanks.



Not obnoxious at all. Upgrading your gear because you mastered your current gear is something to be proud off. It's amazing how many people with GAS / boredom / etc. buy new gear for new's sake when they haven't pushed the limits of what they currently shoot with. 

I don't own either the 70D or 6D, but just off the top of my head:

1) No pop-up flash = you might need to buy a Speedlite if you don't own one. (Happened to me when I jumped from crop to my 5D3.) If you just need an optical trigger for off-camera work or have very modest unprofessional on-camera flash needs, believe it or not, the EOS M little guy actually is a lifesaver in a pinch. It's spectacularly underpowered, won't shoot over large zooms, etc. but it fits in your pocket and is a great little bridge to sort-of put a pop-up back on your rig.

2) If you use MF lenses a lot, you might read up on interchangeable focusing screen changeout.

3) This is more of a lens comment than a 6D migration comment, but if your migration to FF will see you picking up staple pro glass like the f/2.8L zooms or L primes (especially a 70-200 f/2.8L), you may need some ergonomic support for long shooting days. A BlackRapid (or similar) setup to offload your neck would be a very wise move.

I'm sure others here can get more into the weeds with you on the menus and controls if that's what you need.

- A


----------



## Luds34 (May 4, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> I don't understand why this story is being disputed it is the internet and there are no real consequences for anything said and no need to supply any kind of proof or confirmation of any claim.
> 
> Further, the claim isn't even particularly contentious, I did a similar thing with a 16-35 f4 IS, I 'made' a $50 profit from a CPW deal, I owned it for six months then bought an 11-24 also via a CPW and sold the older lens for more than I bought it for.
> 
> ...



Exactly, I agree. And if you throw in a little patience on both the buying and selling end, you'll come across some good deals when acquiring, and eventually find a buyer willing to pay on the selling end. And your point is valid that some potential buyers only look at the retail price (Amazon, BH Photo).

The deal that they had (for all of a day or so) to get the 6D for $1099 was pretty good opportunity that I fell into. Anyone who goes back and reads the post I referenced earlier will see a number of forum members jumping in on the 6D, 5DIII, etc. I've had a number of other decent "long term rentals". Sigma 50 EX brand new for $350, later sold for $325. The 17-40L, purchased for $425, sold for $420 two years later. EF-S 60mm? Bought $320, sold for $280. Again, just requires some patience.


----------



## Luds34 (May 4, 2017)

Cory said:


> One more obnoxiously brutal question - I've really mastered my 70D. Will I be able to jump right into the 6D or are there any differences with controls to note or any nuances unique to the 6D? I'm sure that touch-screen to non touch-screen will be seamless and obvious, but anything in particular to report?
> I normally get the MichaelTheMentor.com training DVD for any new camera and wondering if that would be necessary. They're phenomenal, by the way, and have been essential so far.
> Thanks.



They are nearly identical when it comes to ergonomics. Size, weight, feel, even button placement. They both follow the same "4 button layout" on the top (vs the 3 dual purpose 5D/7D button layout). Honestly the biggest difference was how you zoom in to review a photo. With the 70D I'd hit play and then just use the touch screen. With the 6D you have to hit the zoom icon (one of the few minor differences) and the top dial zooms in/out.


----------



## jolyonralph (May 5, 2017)

Everyone talks about the 'cannibalising effect' without really thinking about the business implications of this.


Let's say for argument sake that Canon makes a $1000 profit on each 5DIV sold (unlikely, but let's just use simple numbers)

And let's say that a 6D II at $2500 would make them $1000 profit, and a 6D II at $2000 would make them $500 profit.


So. If they were to sell 6D IIs at 2500 it makes no difference how many 5Ds they don't sell because they're making the same money.

And if they reduce the 6D II to 2000, then as long as less than 50% of 6DII buyers would have bought the 5DIV instead (and most wouldn't be able to afford it), they are again still at least as well off.

Add to this that people buying a cheaper body often have more money then to spend on lenses.

Long story short...

Those who need the 5DIV will continue to buy the 5DIV. Those who are happy to spend less on the 6DII probably wouldn't have bought the 5DIV to begin with.


----------



## MayaTlab (May 5, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Everyone talks about the 'cannibalising effect' without really thinking about the business implications of this.



I'm pretty certain that absolutely no one, including Canon, can rationally pretend to be able to demonstrate with a sound methodology the effect of "cannibalisation" on Canon's final balance sheet. There are simply way too many variables at play.

And, anyway, it's completely obvious that Canon's crippling isn't a question of business rational, it's just an irrational business culture that's never been questioned within the company. 

For example, that Canon's so called "expert" mirrorless offering, i.e. the M5, has a completely subpar fisher-price like auto ISO implementation that's even worse than Canon's latest powershots, protects strictly nothing, as there is nothing higher up to protect, and I doubt Canon has a strong preference for selling an 80D over an M5.


----------



## Mikehit (May 5, 2017)

MayaTlab said:


> And, anyway, it's completely obvious that Canon's crippling isn't a question of business rational, it's just an irrational business culture that's never been questioned within the company.



You know Canon that well??

They don't provide full 1Dx2 feature set in a 5DIV? Or won't provide full 5DIV feature set in the 6D2. What an appalling business model - fancy crippling cameras like that.


----------



## MayaTlab (May 5, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> MayaTlab said:
> 
> 
> > And, anyway, it's completely obvious that Canon's crippling isn't a question of business rational, it's just an irrational business culture that's never been questioned within the company.
> ...



Every time you talk about Canon crippling cameras you get this sort of "all or nothing" stupid answer. Of course Canon won't, and can't put every feature into every camera at every price point. 

But they sure go out of their ways to completely artificially segment or cripple their cameras in ways that make absolutely no rational sense whatsoever, such as the M5 example that I gave above.


----------



## Mikehit (May 5, 2017)

MayaTlab said:


> Every time you talk about Canon crippling cameras you get this sort of "all or nothing" stupid answer. Of course Canon won't, and can't put every feature into every camera at every price point.
> 
> But they sure go out of their ways to completely artificially segment or cripple their cameras in ways that make absolutely no rational sense whatsoever, such as the M5 example that I gave above.



So what do you mean by 'cripple'. 
What do you mean by 'artificially segment'.
These seem to be buzz words bandied around by people who want high performance products at low end prices. 
In the early days Canon produced cameras that were almost identical to cameras at the next 2 levels and deliberately programmed them so those functions were not available. That is what I would call 'crippling'.
But people also use the term to mean 'Canon did not put it in and they could have done at minimal cost without raising the price'.

Every manufacturer of technology (microwaves, cars, cameras, TVs etc) creates product lines at different price levels. The price differentiation is very little about what it costs to put technology in there but is the value perceived by the buyer. 

So no, my answer was not a 'stupid' all or nothing response. I typed it because it was as facile as complaints about 'crippling'.

As for 'no rational sense' - do you really believe a company like Canon has been #1 in the world for so many years by making random decisions? Jeez! Just because you do not understand or agree with their reasons does not mean there is not a reason behind it.


----------



## ricky_005 (May 5, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> MayaTlab said:
> 
> 
> > Every time you talk about Canon crippling cameras you get this sort of "all or nothing" stupid answer. Of course Canon won't, and can't put every feature into every camera at every price point.
> ...



All you Canon Fan boys need to grow a set ...... You should be thanking Sony for creating some competition in the camera arena. Canon has been feeding you fan boys dog food and they will contiuie as longs as they have fan boys .....sure they are still on top overall but they will be loosing market share over the coming years ..... and there crooked so called leadership will be the new idiots on the block for just setting there watching there market share be taken away ...... 

If Canon continues there same old school screw you over games they will turn into a use to be.....


----------



## Mikehit (May 5, 2017)

ricky_005 said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > MayaTlab said:
> ...



Wow! anyone who shows any understanding of product design and marketing is a Canon fanboy....for the record I own Canon DSLR s as well as Olympus and Panasonic mirrorless. 

I see you prefer tho throw insults rather thane explain in a rational fashion what you mean by 'crippled' and 'artificially segment'. As for Canon leadership being 'crooked'....

If Sony are so great why are they making cameras whose stills capacity are below those of Canon? Why do Sony make the A7rII and the A9 if not for 'artificial' market segmentation? They produce a camera that can shoot 20 fps but....at 12-bit not 14-bit...if you use lenses with the correct Sony native lens mount....All they need to do to keep you happy is throw video in there and 'presto!' they have you eating out of the palm of their hand.
Good luck!


----------



## dak723 (May 6, 2017)

ricky_005 said:


> All you Canon Fan boys need to grow a set ...... You should be thanking Sony for creating some competition in the camera arena. Canon has been feeding you fan boys dog food and they will contiuie as longs as they have fan boys .....sure they are still on top overall but they will be loosing market share over the coming years ..... and there crooked so called leadership will be the new idiots on the block for just setting there watching there market share be taken away ......
> 
> If Canon continues there same old school screw you over games they will turn into a use to be.....



Yes, I really want to thank Sony for giving us the A7 series! A camera that is fundamentally flawed due to a too-short flange distance that gives you very poor IQ away from the center, and the worst lenses I have ever owned. So, yes, thank you Sony for allowing me to realize how good my Canon 6D and Olympus E-M1 really are! Thank you, thank you!


----------



## Rockskipper (May 8, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Everyone talks about the 'cannibalising effect' without really thinking about the business implications of this.



There are people who will buy a 6D and a 7dM2 instead of a 5DM4 because they want a backup body and prefer to carry around cameras that are more tailored to their single needs (as in landscapes and BIF, no need to change lenses) and not have to worry about having their only camera stolen or broken. I know several enthusiasts who think this way, and a few have added the M5/6 to their bag also instead of buying the 5DM4. So Canon may come out ahead on profit w/o selling a single 5DM4.


----------



## peterzuehlke (May 30, 2017)

well, I hope good stuff is coming, and Canon doesn't break both its legs. I am afraid they will cripple the 6DII. probably still get one. Don't carry around one series anymore. Love my 6D but I think that they made the auto-focus really as bad as the 5DII, even though there was quite a bit of time interval there, to clear out any NOS 5Dii cameras. For a long time new 6D cameras were cheaper than used 5Dii cameras. And Sonys, for what you can shoot with their few reasonably priced native lenses work pretty well. (performance in small quiet rooms, for instance) Definately shooting two systems now, not including the occasional crazy 4x5 work.

and a side note, waiting for that 85mm IS too, but a friend of mine picked up the Sigma Art 85 (a friend who has 3 times the number of red stripe lenses that I do) on the weekend and the images look spectacular.


----------



## rrcphoto (May 30, 2017)

MayaTlab said:


> And, anyway, it's completely obvious that Canon's crippling isn't a question of business rational



you really don't know that.

you see it as one camera at a time. canon sees it as the m5 is coming out, the M5 Mark II is already through it's design phase and into prototype, and the Mark III is entering into specifications soon.

They may very well hold back a feature not to "protect" a current camera, but to leave them room on the next version for an upgraded model - especially on camera models that have a 1-2 year life span. that doesn't give them much time in between camera models to get done the actual real work. Not only that but canon has to plan that out what the M10 II, III will have, what the M6 II and III will have and how they all will fit in with each other.

*that* is a *very* common business decision.


----------



## Mikehit (May 30, 2017)

peterzuehlke said:


> I am afraid they will cripple the 6DII.



Please define 'cripple'


----------



## K (May 30, 2017)

It's very difficult to reason with Canon apologists or fan-boys.

It is very simple...you must ask simple questions.

*What should a consumer expect from a $2,000 body?*

To determine that, one should review the various offerings across the industry at that price point.

The best specs in this price range is currently Nikon with the D750. Thus, it is very fair to say that whatever specs it has, Canon should be able to implement 2 years later...

Yet, here we are - a month before announcement, hoping that Canon sells us a $2,000 body that we know with a lot of certainty will not have specs to match a 2 year old Nikon for $1,500.


But for some strange reason, people defend Canon for offering substantially less. All kinds of excuses are made such as "Canon makes a bajillion dollars, they don't have to" hmm whose side you on? Your own as a consumer or Canon's? "Canon users don't want those features" ..oh yeah sure I bet. I'm sure everyone would riot and throw their 6D cameras back at Canon if it had a 51 pt AF system... "If you want those features, get a 5D series" umm...the whole discussion is about the $2K price point, thanks for conceding that Canon is a lower value in bodies. 

It goes on and on. 

Why all the defensiveness? Easy answer. People are trapped in the Canon system. Trapped might be wrong word, they are "invested" in lots of glass. Same is true of Nikon users. Because of this, they just accept whatever the manufacturer offers and because these consumers lack MOBILITY in terms of being able to switch systems, they are captive consumers of sorts.

Thus, you have two companies - Canon and Nikon, with mostly captive consumers. The logical question then becomes - *why does Nikon offer more in their bodies to their users? And Canon, against all market trends and specs and standards - offers up CRIPPLED $2,000 body?
*
Hard to say. Apologists again will use the "Canon makes a bazillion dollars" argument to establish what is right. Maybe the glass-half-empty version of that is that Canon users are suckers? Maybe. Have to be fair here. 

I think the answer is that Nikon builds their bodies outside of Japan and can save money doing so and passes that savings to you (except the glass, which pro glass is made in Japan). Canon builds them in Japan, but they also have a philosophy of trying to force up-selling. As even with Japanese manufacturing costs, some of their decisions do not make any kind of economy-of-scale sense in favor of omitting features. It is intentional crippling. Just admit it.

To be fair, Nikon users have their gripes too. They are very happy with their bodies, but they do know that Canon has better glass on average in the professional realm and often for less money. See the price of the new 70-200 2.8? It's nearly $1,000 more than the Canon, and it was just released to finally match what Canon has had out since 2010. But to compare to introduction price, it's $400ish more - ouch!

Which is better to have updates on? Glass or bodies? Most keep screaming glass, glass, glass. I would argue the opposite. 

The fact is, Nikon pro glass is fantastic and offers more resolution than you can practically use for anything short of massive, gallery wall sized prints of landscapes. And even then, it's still OK. In other words, there's nothing about Nikon glass that hinders anyone.

Can the same be said of Canon bodies? Yes. But in the world of bodies, technical advancements lead to direct and significant improvements in IQ. 

One generation better glass does not lead to as big of an improvement in IQ as a generational leap in bodies. Can anyone argue that the 5D4 blows the 5D3 away in IQ? I'm not talking about a well lit studio shot. Anyone who has owned that generation of Canon knows shadow lifting was atrocious in the 5D3. It was pretty much garbage. Even a minor lift avoiding serious noise issues still led to extremely dull tones. Can anyone argue that the AF system from the 5D2 to the 5D3 wasn't revolutionary? I don't think they can. 

These specs and advancements absolutely do lead to a better ability to capture critical moments, nail focus, or improve the image captured. These things far outweight the relatively SMALL advantage in glass that Canon has. Contrary to the internet preaching glass, glass, glass. Yes, glass is more important versus a single body when deciding where to put your cash once brand is decided. But it does not become more important when comparing bodies of different brands both of whom have outstanding glass.


Anyway, once you remove the brand-loyalty and also separate out being trapped in a system and make it a simple question about specs and value - then yes, Canon shamefully cripples some cameras. It really is a middle finger to their buyers. Unfortunately they won't stop - not with hordes of fanboys taking the slap to the face, and then asking for more. Not only do they ask for more, but they defend it like zealots. 


I should make a Canon fan-boy quick start manual for online defense:


_Undecided consumer: Canon should have ________ specs on the 6D
Fan Boy Response: Get a 5D4 if you want that.

Undecided consumer: But $3,300 is too much for that spec
Fan Boy Response: You want everything for free - you want a 1DX2 for the price of a Rebel. Some nerve.

Undecided consumer: Wow, um no - I didn't say I wanted anything unrealistic like that. Other brands offer this spec at a lower price
Fan Boy Response: Canon is market leader, so their decisions are the best and right - you can't argue with that. 

Undecided consumer: Their decisions might be good for themselves and their shareholders, but maybe not for me the consumer...
Fan Boy Response: Nikon is trash. Canon glass rulez. Good luck over there.

Undecided consumer: Ooookaay. 
Fan Boy Response: I wish Canon would give us a full-frame Rebel..._


----------



## K (May 30, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> peterzuehlke said:
> 
> 
> > I am afraid they will cripple the 6DII.
> ...




6D


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> It's very difficult to reason with Canon apologists or fan-boys.



It's very difficult to reason with Canon bashers and DRones. People want different things and have different needs, but the simple minded often assume everyone wants the same things they want. 

I'm sorry it seems to bother you so much that far more people choose to buy Canon ILCs than the other brands which you seem to prefer. You can try and find a way to deal with it, or you can keep coming here and complaining. Good luck with your decision.


----------



## Mikehit (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > peterzuehlke said:
> ...



I'm guessing you don't understand English very well....or do smart alec comments pass for intellectual discussion in your neck of the woods?


----------



## K (May 30, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



I'm guessing you won't take off the blinders so I have to spell it out.


6D had and has a lousy 11 pt AF system. That was a blatant, middle finger to the consumer crippling of the camera to protect the 5D3. In 2013 when the 6D was released, an 11pt system was already ancient by DSLR standards.

It was basically a 2008 era 5D2 AF system but with -3ev center point. Fan boys make such a big deal out of the -3ev center point that they think it makes up for the fact it has a lousy 11 points total.

Also, the other points are not cross type!!! It has one single cross type point in the middle. In a $2,000 FF body? Seriously? In 2013? That year Nikon had 39pt and 51pt AF in cameras costing the same or less (with dual slots mind you)


So the 6D was a $2000+ FF body with what basically amounts to a single focus point. Excellent! Great for focus and recomposers. Apologists will say "blah blah blah - pro work was done with the 5D2" which is a retarded argument since we can argue that pro work was done with 3MP cameras that couldn't get past ISO 1600...The excuse making is ridiculous to say the least.

Here we are in 2017, and the 6D is still Canon's entry FF camera...sporting what is essentially a 1 decade old AF system.. LOL.

As to the 6D2, even with a 45pt system - it still isn't up to date or on par with the competition. The whole reason Canon pulled that 45pt system out of its dustbin closet was to avoid having to provide the 61pt system of the 1D and 5D. Nikon offers the 51pt system of the D4S on the D810 and D750 and it works great. 


Honestly, for the 6D2 to be on par with the industry and to do things right by what is available in technology and for the price, it should have the 61pt system. Nikon does it, why can't Canon. <--real question. Let the excuse making begin.


----------



## ahsanford (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> Honestly, for the 6D2 to be on par with the industry and to do things right by what is available in technology and for the price, it should have the 61pt system. *Nikon does it, why can't Canon.* <--real question. Let the excuse making begin.



Yes, the 6D's AF was highly likely nerfed to protect 5D3 sales and (presumably) keep the production cost down to maintain margins for Canon. I don't know how one does not come to that conclusion.

But I do need to correct you: Nikon did not put flagship AF in their D600/D610 rigs -- everyone was so enamored with the D750 that folks forgot that rig was a mid-level FF setup vs. the true entry-level setup of the D610. Nikon put a 'nice but not as good as the best' AF system in the D610. I believe it was 39 points or so vs. the 51 points of D810. But as we all know, point count is not remotely reflective of the performance of the AF system in real use -- I'm confident the D750/D810 setup would comprehensively outfperform the D610 setup once subjects were moving at any speed.

But I think that's besides the point. *Canon did it because it could *-- it's brand reputation and pent-up demand for a reasonably priced FF rig was such that they gambled folks wouldn't care. And most would argue that gamble paid off -- the 6D sold very well despite a very simple AF setup. That's not Canon apologism at work here, it's just the facts. The brand's overall strength allowed them to get away with a sub-market-level AF feature set.

- A


----------



## K (May 30, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > It's very difficult to reason with Canon apologists or fan-boys.
> ...




Well, the DRones as you call them are low ISO, high DR monkeys that worship DXO. They are trolls and know nothings. I'm a Canon user and prefer Canon, and would like to see a little more value in a FF body.




> People want different things and have different needs, but the simple minded often assume everyone wants the same things they want.




At this price point, Canon isn't offering up all that they could or should. Certainly, you can find some caveman who wants 3MP and ISO 800 max with a single AF point. I'm sure you can find several on this forum. That doesn't justify Canon appealing to the modest requirements of a few in order to neuter a camera body. This is more apologetics at work.

I said clearly, even the cavemen - if you gave them a better AF would they reject it in outrage? I don't think so. There's no reason Canon can't offer better AF and dual slot at the price it sells that body for.

So sorry that I'm hitting this forum with a reality check. Really hits a nerve with some users here when it is pointed out with very sound, logical and factual arguments what Canon's faults are.

It's like the DR nonsense. Now that Canon has 13ish stops on their new sensors -- users are enjoying it and talking about it. Amazed by how much they can cleanly recover now. Whohooo! Welcome to 2013. Give a decent AF system to the 6D2, and users will praise it. Deny it, and users will make excuses and justifications for why their old, obsolete system is "good enough" for them. These are all characteristics of brand worship.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> I'm a Canon user and prefer Canon



Good Lord, man...why? It's clear that Canon is personally screwing you over by crippling their cameras. They're screwing us all over. What would possess you to ever buy a product from such a company, knowing as you must that every time you buy a product from them, you send a clear, wallet-driven message that they're doing exactly the right thing?


----------



## K (May 30, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Honestly, for the 6D2 to be on par with the industry and to do things right by what is available in technology and for the price, it should have the 61pt system. *Nikon does it, why can't Canon.* <--real question. Let the excuse making begin.
> ...




This is a fair analysis. But I think it falls short in that it doesn't address the mechanism at play here is the fact that users of these cameras are for the most part, stuck in a system due to glass purchases. I do agree there is brand strength and support for the system overall. But the biggest factor is being committed to a system.

So why short change your customer base just because you know it isn't easy for them to jump the fence?

I would wager that only a small percentage change systems because of the costs involved. Sure glass holds value better than bodies, but it is always a loss. That is enough to deter the vast majority of users.

And, given that -- the source for the tolerance, the "putting up with it" and "not caring" and other disappointments is not motivation, but rather deterrence because of the financial consequences of switching.

Users DO care. But when up against liquidating a whole system - they don't care THAT much...But this is a separate issue. On body lone, for value alone - they lose bigtime. 

Because people are so brand loyal or always have to make excuses for what they spend thousands of dollars on -- they create all kinds of absurd excuses, justifications and apologies ...many of which we see in these threads.

As I've said before, who's f'ing side are these people on? Are they paid by Canon? They think and act like shills. Really bizarre.


----------



## ahsanford (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> So why short change your customer base just because you know it isn't easy for them to jump the fence?



Because the goal of the business is to make money, and market leaders with entrenched competitive advantages don't have to go hog wild with feature-based value propositions to get that money. Pentax does. Sony does. Nikon does (to some extent). They are all chasing Canon for units, share, etc. and have to offer more at the same price point. 

Should Canon (someday) fall to 2nd place, they will need to offer more-per-dollar than the market leader to gain those units back.

As for your other comments, though I'm often pegged as an apologist in this forum, I just see a company playing it's hand well here. But I am also a grownup who doesn't buy a new rig / migrate systems every 18 months because it gains me a stop of base ISO DR or has more AF points. I don't say that as a fist-shake at those who do -- I'm just saying that there's less drama in my head about feature sets / keeping up with the Joneses as many others here.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> There's no reason Canon can't offer better AF and dual slot at the price it sells that body for.
> 
> So sorry that I'm hitting this forum with a reality check. Really hits a nerve with some users here when it is pointed out with very sound, logical and factual arguments what Canon's faults are.



I rather think you're the one in need of a reality check. There are plenty of reasons for Canon not to add the features you keep insisting they should. The main reason is that it's their choice, not yours. The fact that the 6D sold like f*cking hotcakes inspite of being 'crippled' is pretty good evidence they didn't need to give it the 1-series AF system, a 1/250 s Xsync, dual card slots, a popup flash, an articulating LCD, a coffee maker, a hotshoe-mounted philosopher's stone to transmute lead into gold, or any of the other things you wanted in the camera. 

It's not hard to understand, for most people. Canon's goal is not your goal. Canon is not your friend, guy. They're not your buddy, pal. The one shared philosophy is that both you and Canon want more for less. The difference is that Canon holds all the cards here. Well...most of them. You can choose not to give them your business. But you haven't. Heard the phrase, 'put up or shut up'? Well, no need to shut up...Canon couldn't care less.

Reality: Canon is ILC market leader, has been so for >14 years, and sells more ILCs than any other manufacturer, many of whom include more 'features' on their cameras at a given price point.

Fantasy: Canon needs to do ______ because I say so, or else. Or else what? Exactly.

Reality. Check and mate.


----------



## K (May 30, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a Canon user and prefer Canon
> ...




Look, all fanaticism aside, the clear truth is that Canon cripples some cameras. No getting around that. 6D is low value. 6D2 is shaping up to be low-value also. 

What is wrong with stating that? 


***

You lash out against anyone who says anything against Canon which questions your ability to have a balanced perspective.

I'm much more balanced since I think like a consumer, not a Canon representative. I will state clearly that the 7D2 is a great value and a good camera. Sure, the only gripe is the old-tech sensor in it compare to the competition. But all the rest is excellent. The price is right too. Given it is APS-C, that weaker sensor is less of a factor since all crop is crap. Splitting hairs at that point.

5D4, decent value. Sure, the critics can find cameras that beat it at any spec. But there's no camera that does it ALL and pretty well. Jack of all trades, master of none.

80D is a fantastic enthusiast camera. Tons of features for the money. Priced right.

I've said this before on this forum. So your accusation that I'm a basher is worthless. 

6D / 6D2 is crippled crap to try and upsell people to 5D4.


----------



## ahsanford (May 30, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon's goal is not your goal.



+1

Neuro's comment above + the realities/circumstances of Canon's leadership position = things won't change until some *major* things happen from Canon's FF competition:

1) Nikon can re-focus it's business sufficiently to get volume levels in critical market segments to start undercutting Canon where it hurts (Rebel level rigs). Hard to see that coming from a company that seems too busy offering neat things for very specific people right now (105 f/1.4 now out, 28mm f/1.4 reportedly coming soon... why?) and poor investments being made elsewhere (compacts, CX mirrorless, etc.).

2) Sony starts caring about a host of user considerations (ergonomics, handling, grip-size, better menus, etc.) and piles up a _staggering_ number of new first-party lenses at a number of price points. (I think this one might eventually happen someday, btw, but it will take some years to get there.)

3) Sony and Nikon merge into Voltron (somehow) and mesh/focus/streamline/execute like champs for a period of many years. Not seeing it.

4) Pentax = a dead man walking. Great tech, tons of value per dollar, unique/quirky design decisions, and horribly underweight to compete comprehensively in the long-term. (The Amiga of camera makers?)

5) Leica = staying exactly where they are. Premium / niche only. 

- A


----------



## K (May 30, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > There's no reason Canon can't offer better AF and dual slot at the price it sells that body for.
> ...




All you did is regurgitate all the same old, tired, boring, debunked Canon fan-boy apologetics that I destroyed in an earlier post. Again, you read like a paid Canon rep. Let it go already. It's weak. You don't see anyone proclaiming the fuel in their tank is better because Exxon/Mobil is the biggest.

Truth is they are on top of the market. But that doesn't mean they are the best value, it only means more people are buying Canon. OMG!!! Did you ever realize that consumers are absolutely capable of purchasing lower value and sometimes even inferior products? Yes. It is true. 

There's more to what sells than the specs. There's marketing. There's brand perception in the industry. Thus your straw man argument is gone.


I think a big part of why Canon has big support is their glass. And a big reason why their glass gets so much hype is from some very popular, but highly questionable comparison sites that do side by sides with Nikon. These are pro-Canon propaganda sites as the various examples of Nikon glass are not THAT bad compared to Canon.

Much the same way the Nikon sites talk about nothing but lame 5-stop exposure lifts and DR, as if that's all photography is. 

Fair is fair, which is why I bring up both.

I believe many people make buying decisions based on the results of these fraudulent results on these sites. We all know there is an obsession with sharpness and resolution...this is what is behind much of the glass hype.

I suggest renting the gear and testing. If people did that, they'd realize that Canon glass superiority is truth - but not an advantage worth committing to a system and sacrificing on bodies. It's a little better, but not a lot.


----------



## ahsanford (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> Look, all fanaticism aside, the clear truth is that Canon cripples some cameras. No getting around that. 6D is low value. 6D2 is shaping up to be low-value also.
> 
> What is wrong with stating that?



Low feature-per-dollar ratio on the 6D? Sure. 

But low _value_ implies the EF portfolio, Canon ergonomics, color, and service do not exist, and that a camera is only of the value it's own spec sheet generates. In that, we disagree.

But yes, you can argue Canon could offer more for the dollar, certainly -- you'll get no argument from me on that. But to _then_ assert that this is not fair, Canon should do more, 'this will end up haunting Canon', etc. is myopic, honestly. Canon leadership isn't hiding in a bunker in denial, cuddling its EF lenses and saying 'we'll survive this nuclear winter of competition'. Far from it.

- A


----------



## K (May 30, 2017)

From the 7D3 thread to debunk the accusation that I'm some basher ...




K said:


> Unlike all the crippling and nonsense in other lines, *the 7D2 is very well specced*.
> 
> All a 7D3 would need is ---
> 
> ...


----------



## chrysoberyl (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> 6D / 6D2 is crippled crap to try and upsell people to 5D4.



Oh, dear. I have been wallowing in denial when I thought I was enjoying my 6D!


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 30, 2017)

K said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



Nothing is wrong with you stating your opinion. But when you make blanket value judgments and expect them not to be challenged, that's naïve to the point of a handicap.

If the 6D was 'crippled crap' to try and upsell people to a 5-series camera, how come the 6D was such a popular camera? Well, it could be that people are just idiots who will buy any old piece of worthless plastic as long as it has the Canon logo on it. It says a lot about you that you think of people that way.

You are 'balanced' because you think like a consumer? Or perhaps, you're myopic and self-centered because you can _only_ think like a consumer. 

I am a consumer. I can think like one. Elsewhere on this forum, I've stated things I'd like from Canon, and things I think they've screwed up. But I can also understand these issues from Canon's side. You can stand on a cliff and void your bladder. If you don't understand that the wind doesn't care about you, you're going to get splattered. You can complain about that, but it's just more piss into the wind.

Why doesn't Canon do _________? Because they don't have to. Why does Canon do _________? Because they can.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 30, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > 6D / 6D2 is crippled crap to try and upsell people to 5D4.
> ...



Yeah, you poor sop. You've been hoodwinked by Canon, sold a pig in a poke. You bought a crippled piece of crap and you actually like it? How sad for you. Stop apologizing for Canon. Stop being happy with your 6D. Don't buy a 6DII, it'll suck even worse that your current turd-camera.

Sorry, I was channeling K there for a minute. It won't happen again.


----------



## Ozarker (May 30, 2017)

A priest, a rabbi, and a duck walk into a bar...


----------



## BeenThere (May 30, 2017)

This discussion is rather like supporting your local sports team no matter their record, or dissing the rival team, especially if they are doing well. Everyone knows how rational that can be.


----------



## Don Haines (May 30, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> A priest, a rabbi, and a duck walk into a bar...


And none of them shoot Sony.......


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 30, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> This discussion is rather like supporting your local sports team no matter their record, or dissing the rival team, especially if they are doing well. Everyone knows how rational that can be.



It's rather like stating all the things a particular team is doing wrong, and predicting that team will lose all next season's games if they don't make the changes you recommend...when that team has been the world champion for the past 14 years and counting. Yeah, that's rational. :


----------



## Don Haines (May 31, 2017)

What really gets me is when people start talking about crippling cameras and protecting the higher models. 

The HUGE! flaw in that logic is that the vast bulk of sales and profits are with the lower end models..... and not just with Canon.... Same for Nikon, same for Sony, same for Olympus, etc, etc..... The lower models are refreshed more often.... new features usually appear first on the lower models... and most of the reason for that is BECAUSE THEY GET REFRESHED MORE OFTEN!!!!!

Remember dual pixel auto focus? Remember flicker detection? Remember video? Remember WiFi? Remember touchscreens? Remember Digic 5, 6, and 7? None of these made their debut in a 1 or 5 series camera....

People shell out the extra money for higher end cameras to get more speed and reliability, and the best AF system. New features? HA! NOT A CHANCE! Not until they have been thoroughly debugged on a lower end camera because on a high end camera, reliability trumps new features every time!


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Remember dual pixel auto focus? Remember flicker detection? Remember video? Remember WiFi? Remember touchscreens? Remember Digic 5, 6, and 7? None of these made their debut in a 1 or 5 series camera....
> 
> People shell out the extra money for higher end cameras to get more speed and reliability, and the best AF system. New features? HA! NOT A CHANCE! Not until they have been thoroughly debugged on a lower end camera because on a high end camera, reliability trumps new features every time!



Sure, because the 1-series and 5-series _never_ offered exclusive features first. Spot metering at any AF point... started with the Rebel line, did it? :

And cameras are ab-so-lutely nerfed in small but critical areas to protect the price of higher end models. 

Consider: Where is the spot metering at any AF point on the 5D4? That's a feature we all enjoy on our cell phones today, let alone a purpose-built camera. Why was it capped at 7 fps when similarly priced 5DS rigs were given more MP x fps throughput? Does the shutter or mirror assembly magically cost 2x to make once you cross 'the perilous 8 fps barrier'? 

Sure, you could flip the argument and say that we only got 11 AF points with the 6D because Canon had to strip _something_ out to get the price down to the desired price point while still maintaining their desired margins. But I argue that what they chose to leave out of the 6D was carefully and deliberately chosen to not undermine the price of the 5D line. 

Let's consider another way Canon could have brought a $2k FF rig to market in 2012. Let's say the 6D was instead a straight 5D3 in a cheaper plasticky body but with no video capabilities whatsoever. If Canon did that, a huge portion of the 5D3 market that had no interest in video would have opted for the cheaper product and 5D3 sales would plummet. 

There is an art to what we _don't_ get in a new rig so that some of us will pay more to get it. 

- A


----------



## Don Haines (May 31, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Remember dual pixel auto focus? Remember flicker detection? Remember video? Remember WiFi? Remember touchscreens? Remember Digic 5, 6, and 7? None of these made their debut in a 1 or 5 series camera....
> ...



I think it goes without saying that they carefully choose which features to include or exclude, but I don't think that it is about protecting the higher end cameras, it is about enticing people away from the lower end cameras....

Remember, the bulk of profits and sales are Rebels.... no matter what they do with more advanced cameras, that will never change and the Rebels will remain the bulk of sales on profits.... So how do you entice people to upgrade from a Rebel to an 80D? What extra capacity will make it sell enough to be profitable? What beyond that will entice them to a 7D2? What will entice them to a 6D, or one of the various 5 series cameras? or all the way to a 1DX?

Canon seems to be the master of figuring this out. We can make all the noise we want to, but we have neither the data to properly understand what is happening now, nor do we have the data as to what is coming in the future..... but it is a safe bet that Canon already knows what features and specs will be included in cameras for at least the next five years...

It is not about crippling to protect the high end cameras, it is about adding features/capabilities to entice people up from lower levels.


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> It is not about crippling to protect the high end cameras, it is about adding features/capabilities to entice people up from lower levels.



I hear you, Don, but I think it's happening both ways, surely. It's not just to migrate fish up the feeding chain.

Consider my 5D4 7 fps example -- who is that enticing _up_? A 6D1 owner in 2016 who has blinders to the fact that a likely much-more-on-target-for-them 6D2 is coming? A 5D3 owner who needs a little something-something to feel good about upgrading to a 5D4? Doubt it on both counts. Given that the latest rumors called out a 6 fps 6D2 coming, 7 fps does not entice me one bit to climb up to a 5D4 if I was choosing between the two. To me, the 7 fps spec is a clear case of nerfing the 5D4.

Also in the shamefully obvious nerfing bucket: spot metering at any AF point, no headphone jack on the 6D while the 5D3 got one, the 6D AF setup, etc.

But, in fairness to your point, there are a boatload of lower lines getting sexy new stuff to pull people up as well: you mentioned DPAF and anti-flicker, but also tilty-flippy screens, -3 EV AF points, more f/8 AF points, top LCD, 1/8000 shutters, etc.

Shake the tree and see where the feature/spec-levels are and I think you'll see quite a blend of things deliberately withheld _and_ sexy new stuff to get you to plunk down X% more money.

- A


----------



## Don Haines (May 31, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Also in the shamefully obvious nerfing bucket: spot metering at any AF point, no headphone jack on the 6D while the 5D3 got one, the 6D AF setup, etc.



The 6D is the Rebel of FF cameras, so I can see it with a minimum specs setup and no headphone jack.... but I can certainly see the 6D2 having a Bluetooth headphone and significantly more AF points...... I just got back from a Kayak trip and due to potential for dropping/soaking, brought along my 60D as a sacrificial camera. 9AF points SUCKS! You might as well just have the centre point because it was more useful than the pathetic coverage (without metering!) of the other 8 points. Canon really missed the boat on that one.... but in all fairness, the AF system of the 60D provided great incentive to upgrade to a 7D2....

I agree on the spot metering on AF points. I don't understand why the 5 series cameras and the 7D2 don't have it. Perhaps, with a bit of the competition having it, will further down the line finally make Canon see the light.... but then again, if that's my only complaint then Canon has hit the nail on the head almost every time.


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Sure, you could flip the argument and say that we only got 11 AF points with the 6D because Canon had to strip _something_ out to get the price down to the desired price point while still maintaining their desired margins. But I argue that what they chose to leave out of the 6D was carefully and deliberately chosen to not undermine the price of the 5D line.



I agree with that. But consider the outcome - Canon's approach for all its flaws has resulted in a stable company that has products among the best in class across the board, that meet the requirements of the most demanding professionals as well as amateurs, with a first class after sales service. The alternative is to have a company chasing the spec sheet, with likely lower profits and when it comes to the old trope of 'quality, price, features - pick 2 from three' which one would you give up?

The fact is most people needed either a 6D or a 5D3 - they didn't need a cheap end 5D3. The success of any market research is shown by sales, and the success of the 6D _and_ the 5D3 suggests they got it right. Your argument seems to be 'it may have been a success, but they could have done even better'. I recall an anecdote by Warren Buffet who explained his cautious approach to investing and people criticised him for getting out of soem stocks too early; they said he could have made millions more, to which his response is to the effect of 'maybe, but I am still in business' 

There is also a case for saying that if they made the 5DIV and sold it at the price of a 7D2 they would sell so many they would clean the market - low profits but high volume. I wonder why no-one does that sort of thing. In any market.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

So, Canon should just include all features on all cameras, right? The 6DII must have a 61-pt AF system for K, AF point-linked spot metering for ahsanford, a 1/250 s Xsync for my friend Sarah, 8 fps for Dave in Des Moines, 24 MP for Angelo, 28 MP for Anne, 36 MP for Alvin, an articulating screen for Artie, a joystick for Jehoshaphat, a...well, I could go on and on, but why? The point is obvious – different people have different priorities. For every individual who wants 'just that one feature' there are hundreds who don't care about that feature and want something else. Canon picks the feature set they think will most entice buyers while maintaining profit and product differentiation. 

While an individual knows what they want and perhaps what a few others want, Canon asks thousand of customers, along with many other data sources. Hint: AF point-linked spot metering probably isn't topping any lists. 

Canon's goal isn't to make everyone happy, they want to sell cameras to make a profit. If people buy a 5DIV because the 6D is 'crippled', Canon wins. If people buy a 6D because it costs 40% of a 5DIV, Canon wins. If people buy a 5DIV because the 1D X II is crippled by the lack of in-camera HDR, Canon still wins.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 31, 2017)

Neuro being the sad Canon apologist as always, we have already decided 8fps is an entirely artificial bullsh!t 'limit', all bodies should get 10fps as a minimum.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

Don't blame me because Dave in Des Moines wants 8 fps. If Canon is going to make it 10 fps, they must also include a customization feature so users can select their desired frame rate. Or else.


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Neuro being the sad Canon apologist as always, we have already decided 8fps is an entirely artificial bullsh!t 'limit', all bodies should get 10fps as a minimum.



At what point do you need to 'beef up' the shutter for the added workload? 7fps? 8fps? 10fps? 
how many people someone buying a 6D need 10fps?
Why not add 10fps to the 1200D lest they need it? Or 80D?

I am not apologising for Canon at all, just putting into context what you think a camera should have


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

Please don't mistake my comments -- I fully respect Canon's gamesmanship here. There is a craft to nerfing to protect high priced items just as there is to putting something juicy into a midline product to pull someone up, and Canon is terrific at it.

I just think a _few_ of their nerfing calls are a little giggleworthy. It's not about claiming the company is unfair and throwing a YAPODFC tantrum nearly so much as rolling my eyes publicly amongst those who understand.

And that's one of many reasons why I come here, folks. 

- A


----------



## hbr (May 31, 2017)

I am not buying all this talk about "crippled" Canon cameras. It's just a load of BS. Canon has several target audiences with price points that Canon believes that people will purchase. When the 6D was introduced, it was an attempt to get enthusiasts and amateurs to upgrade to a Full Frame camera who otherwise could not afford or would not buy the 5D III and at the same time sell a lot more EF lenses. This was a gamble for Canon that worked out quite well for them. It surely worked for me. I have purchased quite a lot of "L" lenses after purchasing my 6D that I never would have bought if I had stayed with my Rebels. A lot of people purchased the 6D as a second body for their 5d IIIs. The 11 point AF system was indeed the 6D's weakness, but remember that it was released in 2012. The 9 point and 19 point AF systems were in most of Canon's cameras at the time, even the 5D II had a 9 point AF system.
The term, "crippled" only works from a top down view vs a bottom up view point. In other words, I want all the features of the latest and greatest at half the price. That makes no business sense. But if I own a $1,000 Rebel, would I spend double that to get a much better camera? I did. Would I spend 4x the price to get a few extra features that I would never or seldom use. In my case, no, I would not.
If Canon made their design decisions solely based on the comments of this forum, the engineers would all go insane and quit trying. I guess what is needed to satisfy us is a modular body. Want 2 card slots? Have the salesman add one. Don't want a tilty / flippy screen. Have the salesman pull it out, etc.
I don't believe that Canon intentionally withholds features to protect another, more expensive camera, but rather makes good business decisions to offer the features at a specific price point that they believe will sell and make profits for them.


----------



## rrcphoto (May 31, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Please don't mistake my comments -- I fully respect Canon's gamesmanship here. There is a craft to nerfing to protect high priced items just as there is to putting something juicy into a midline product to pull someone up, and Canon is terrific at it.



it's more than that, they also have the protect the 6D Mark III in this case and segment the profitability of the camera over it's lifecycle. 

can't really expect that canon doesn't create camera bodies in a vacuum and hopes like hell they'll have something okay in 3-5 years to update it with.

obviously firmware changes wouldn't "cost money" but the rest .. we have seen with the 5D Mark IV that nearly half of the cost of the camera goes to the distributers (Canon USA and retailers), and Canon Japan only gets around 50% of the value. So when you're talking about a $2000 camera, canon japan has to roll a profit on that at around $1000, all of a sudden every dollar counts especially when we certainly don't know how much a full frame DPAF sensor is "costing" canon to shove into the camera body.


----------



## rrcphoto (May 31, 2017)

hbr said:


> I don't believe that Canon intentionally withholds features to protect another, more expensive camera, but rather makes good business decisions to offer the features at a specific price point that they believe will sell and make profits for them.



common sense and logic have no bearing in here


----------



## Keith_Reeder (May 31, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Neuro being the sad Canon apologist as always



Assuming that you're not missing a smiley in there somewhere - taking over from Dilbert and AvTvM, are you?

This "anyone not b1tching about Canon _all the time about everything they do_ is an easily-pleased fanboy/shill..." schtick is cheap, and old.

It is actually quite possible to be perfectly happy with Canon's offerings without being any of the above...


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

Keith_Reeder said:


> It is actually quite possible to be perfectly happy with Canon's offerings without being any of the above...



But how on earth can you find happiness in life when other companies' spec sheets have bigger numbers and more stuff? 

- A


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> So, Canon should just include all features on all cameras, right?




This is the straw man argument most apologists work off of. I'm not suggesting that in the slightest. 

Instead, I observe what is reasonable implementation and expectation in a price range. Nikon has no problemo putting their 51pt system in the D750 which for that generation was a flagship level AF. Same with the dual slots. 

For a $2,000 body, it isn't unreasonable to expect at the very least, a 45pt AF system, dual slots and 6 fps. It's 1/2 through 2017 already....

If Canon can't deliver on those specs at a minimum - wow. That is pretty sad. Will it sell? Oh sure. It will sell great. Thanks to so many people committed to the Canon system with NO choice. If they want a newer FF sensor on the cheap, this is it. Oh what? going to liquidate thousands of dollars in glass to switch? Nope. Suckas. Canon says eat it. And they'll go for it, even with 2010 or worse specs elsewhere...Meanwhile, the rest of the industry will laugh.

This is giving Canon a big break too. In reality, they should meet or beat all specs of the D750 from 2014. Not even asking for that - yet taking heat by the fan boys. Insanity.

*But we know the reason why...a 6D2 that meets or beats a D750 will cannibalize the 5D4 easily. You know it, I know it. *

Therefore, in reality - on specs, the D750 is more of a competitor to the 5D4. This is proof positive that Canon is not giving its users the value it should. This is regardless of profits, and all the other red herrings and irrelevant statements.

It's not equal to the 5D4, but it is closer to it than it is to the speculated 6D2, and miles away from the 6D. It's not far back at all from the 5D4. But a normal person (not an zealot Canon fanboy) would then wonder why does a $1,500 - $1,800 Nikon nearly match a $3,300 one from Canon? Meanwhile, the D750 is on backorder it is selling like crazy at the price of $1,500. 



My goal as a consumer is to get the most for my money, not to needlessly enrich a corporation for shorting me on value. Nor is it to come to a forum, and act as a Canon rep and defend them against all reason, fact and logic - most of the time against my own best interests. 

Complete and total defense of Canon and all out apologetics is self defeating. Remember, extremists who show high degrees of bias self-marginalize themselves. Level headed folks see through it and the message is lost.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 31, 2017)

I don't know how else to put this. But NO, Canon should not do what you are saying. Nikon and Sony should NOT have made those cameras so feature-rich, because...it didn't work out for them. Instead of gaining popularity and market share, they actually lost market share. I think that is the major point you are missing badly. You think because two companies foolishly make their cameras overly feature-rich then they should. No, they shouldn't and it is Canon laughing all the way to the bank, yes. If you want the specs you say in a 6D2 body for that price point, then yes you had better switch brands.

Do I wish the 1Dx sometimes hit focus better than it already does? Or the DR were better at high ISO sometimes? Or there was more resolution than 18 MP? Heck yes. But I'm also not an idiot.


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> *But we know the reason why...a 6D2 that meets or beats a D750 will cannibalize the 5D4 easily. You know it, I know it. *
> 
> [truncated]
> 
> My goal as a consumer is to get the most for my money



'Better than D750' is not the bar the 6D2 needs to clear to threatens 5D4 sales. _Prospective 5D4 buyers are overwhelmingly already in the Canon fold and don't give a whip about Nikon offerings_. So I see this more as a topline simple read of the speclist: 

30, 7, 61. Those are the 'horsepower specs' for stills. 30 MP, 7 fps, 61 AF points.

We all know there's a ton more to a rig than that, but Canon will make sure the 6D2 does not match/surpass any of those three metrics and the 5D4 will remain at a higher perch prestige-wise, and that will protect its sales, price, etc. (They'll take other things away from the 6D2, of course.)

As for your second point (quote above), I'll stop you right there. Besides Leica, I can't think of a worse brand to pray at the altar of from a 'bang for your buck' perspective than Canon. If that is your goal, you need to leave the brand immediately. Sony, Pentax, and even Nikon are better 'camera spec sheet value proposition' companies than Canon, and that will stay that way until the market turns dramatically in the ways I enumerated previously.

- A


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

bdunbar79 said:


> I don't know how else to put this. But NO, Canon should not do what you are saying. Nikon and Sony should NOT have made those cameras so feature-rich, because...it didn't work out for them. Instead of gaining popularity and market share, they actually lost market share. I think that is the major point you are missing badly.




I think you should familiarize yourself with the statement: Correlation does not imply Causation.

This is just a derivative of the "canon makes a bajillion dollars, they are right" argument. It comes in various forms.

No one argues Canon isn't the market leader. No one argues that Canon isn't profitable. These are all other topics.

You guys are something else. I'm trying to wrap my mind around your defense of Canon, and agreement with holding back features for their profitability against your own consumer interests.

This same phenomenon in other industries would lead to this:


"I'm happy that Toyota left out bluetooth enabled sound system and power windows, yet sell their cars for the same money - I want them to be more profitable at my expense, I don't need bluetooth and I can roll up windows manually"

"Intel should keep the price of their i7 CPU's at $300 starting, but lock the multiplier and clock them down 1ghz. This will lower their waste for CPU's that don't test reliable at high clock speeds and they'll make more money off of me. I can just wait longer for things to get done on my computer, no biggie"


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> My goal as a consumer is to get the most for my money,



Strange. My goal is to get a camera that does what I need it to. 




K said:


> Nor is it to come to a forum, and act as a Canon rep and defend them against all reason, fact and logic - most of the time against my own best interests.



Nor is mine. But at the same time I can see why Canon do what they do and I know I have a choice. 



K said:


> Complete and total defense of Canon and all out apologetics is self defeating.


You are making a classic mistake - you are assuming that people who take time to understand why Canon (or any company, or any individual person) do something is tantamount to complicity. It is a facile argument, as bad as blind obeisance. 



K said:


> Remember, extremists who show high degrees of bias self-marginalize themselves. Level headed folks see through it and the message is lost.


Level headed folks have no problem understanding what is going on and understand the options. 


The 6D was an experiment for Canon and it was remarkably successful. At the time it gave users or the xxxD and xxD lines an option: go for the 7D for a cut-price sports camera or go for the 6D for a cut-price landscape/studio camera. Market differentiation - something Canon is being panned for seemingly.
Technology has moved on and now both lines are converging again. 

Time and again a Canon model comes out and people are underwhelmed with the spec sheet...then people start using them and the mood changes significantly. Some look at their success and call it marketing hype - well marketing hype only lasts so long so Canon must be doing something right in terms of providing the needs of the market. Something that passes you by. Which brings us back to the start of the quotes in this post...


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> "I'm happy that Toyota left out bluetooth enabled sound system and power windows, yet sell their cars for the same money - I want them to be more profitable at my expense, I don't need bluetooth and I can roll up windows manually"



Straw man. 
People care about bluetooth for communicating. People care about automatic windows because they are so easy to instal and all decent cars have them. Ditto central locking. Then again there are dozens of car manufacturers out there to force them to do it. 
From the trinkets you describe in your list of wants,none (and I mean none) are a deal breaker for me. Tilty-flippy is nice to have. More AF points on my 6D are nice to have (I have the 7D2 for when I need more AF points). 
What I do have are access to an unparalleled range of lenses - you know, the things that define image quality.


In DSLR there are Canon, Nikon and Pentax. Where is the pressure for those trinkets you want?
In cameras in general add: Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji. None of them have the kudos of Canon. None of them make 'pro-looking' DSLRs. All of them are relatively new to the scene and not built up a power base yet. 

So is Canon abusing its position? That is one (equally valid) way of looking at it. Are their products any more expensive for what I want them to do? Nope. I have access to models that allow me to do what I want and the occasional inconvenience for the things I do occasionally do not matter to me enough. And, from speaking to non-enthusiast photographer friends and family it doesn't matter to them either.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

Keith_Reeder said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Neuro being the sad Canon apologist as always
> ...



Suggesting he's in the league of dilbert and AvTvM is really hitting below the belt. Except that belts aren't needed in dilbertland or the AvTvM Universe, because they use Canon camera straps to hold up their pants there, those being the only useful items in the boxes after discarding the useless chunks of metal and plastic in there for shipping ballast. 

If PBD wants to borrow my Big Animated Winky Emoticon, all he has to do is ask...


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> The 6D was an experiment for Canon and it was remarkably successful. At the time it gave users or the xxxD and xxD lines an option: go for the 7D for a cut-price sports camera or go for the 6D for a cut-price landscape/studio camera.



This. Canon isn't directly competing against anyone other than themselves right now. When you lead the market, gaining share is less important than mix-shift of existing customers to higher priced items, which is exactly what Canon is doing. Forget the 6D line vs. D610 or D750 -- it's about getting an 80D user to jump to a 6D2.



K said:


> This same phenomenon in other industries would lead to this:
> 
> "I'm happy that Toyota left out bluetooth enabled sound system and power windows, yet sell their cars for the same money - I want them to be more profitable at my expense, I don't need bluetooth and I can roll up windows manually"



If Canon was in a pure value-proposition business like automotive, yes, this would make sense. But a car is standalone purchase that has everything onboard. Effectively, buying a new car is not unlike a complete camera system migration to a new system with a single purchase. _But buying a camera body is not._

That distinction is critical here. The unwritten dagger on all Canon spec lists is that *it works natively and flawlessly with the EF portfolio*, something no other manufacturer can claim. That's a massive, entrenched competitive advantage that allows Canon to not give two effs about keeping up with the body specs of Sony, Nikon, etc.

- A


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know how else to put this. But NO, Canon should not do what you are saying. Nikon and Sony should NOT have made those cameras so feature-rich, because...it didn't work out for them. Instead of gaining popularity and market share, they actually lost market share. I think that is the major point you are missing badly.
> ...



I'm not defending Canon. It's just hard to read through your posts, proclaiming that "because Nikon did it, because Sony did it." What you don't understand is that Nikon and Sony consistently offer whatever "features" you are complaining about, over Canon, time and time again, and yet, for some odd reason, they are not making anywhere near the money Canon is. They have nowhere near the market-share Canon does. Maybe they're doing something wrong? Hmmm, there's a concept. Besides, did you decide that Nikon or Sony have the "golden standards" of what should go in a camera? I'm not going to do anything the same that a company is doing that is also losing in the market. Personally, I think the D750 is a good camera. It's asinine to think that is some standard all should follow as an example. 

Maybe...there's...something...wrong...

Canon could easily offer those "features" for much cheaper and make razor-thin margins. But why would they?

"Correlation does not imply Causation."

Who cares? Nikon and Canon have common goals. According to you, Nikon provides better value for the consumer's money. Their cameras have much better specs and they sell for less. Nikon is losing and the margin gets worse every year. There's not really much else to conclude other than nobody gives a crap about any of the specs you complain about. And further, nobody cares that you are complaining. Nikon and Canon have common goals and one is meeting those goals and one is not. I'd love a 1Dx-performing MILC FF rig to shoot sports events but I'm not so ignorant to think that Canon owes me that. I'm a consumer. If I want that and some other company offers that then I am free to sell all my Canon gear and switch brands.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> That distinction is critical here. The unwritten dagger on all Canon spec lists is that *it works natively and flawlessly with the EF portfolio*, something no other manufacturer can claim. That's a massive, entrenched competitive advantage that allows Canon to not give two effs about keeping up with the body specs of Sony, Nikon, etc.
> 
> - A




No doubt the EOS system is great. But is anyone still buying EOS lenses from 1987 through the 1990's? Canon has updated just about all of them in the last 15 years...makes the compatibility advantage moot.

Nikon has backward and forwards compatibility issues. But we're talking using ancient glass with newest bodies, or ancient bodies with the newest glass. 

Who buys a $2,000 DSLR to then use their 1970's lens? LOL. Or worse, who is using a 1st gen DSLR with a $2,500 lens?

Maybe someone, but there's zero value in that. If anything, they are losing value in either the body or the lens when the potential can't be reached.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > The 6D was an experiment for Canon and it was remarkably successful. At the time it gave users or the xxxD and xxD lines an option: go for the 7D for a cut-price sports camera or go for the 6D for a cut-price landscape/studio camera.
> ...




On this, we agree. But I would say that it isn't only because they are market leader - but because people are stuck in a system. Captive consumers.

Not a nice way to treat them, given that other companies like Nikon offer much better values for upgrading to their existing customers.


A D7200 owner does *NOT* give up their AF performance to go to a D750.

Why does an 70D or 7D owner give it up to go to a 6D ? (keeping generations equal here)


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> No doubt the EOS system is great. But is anyone still buying EOS lenses from 1987 through the 1990's? Canon has updated just about all of them in the last 15 years...makes the compatibility advantage moot.



Off the top of my head, EF lenses released in the 90s that are still in production include the 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135 f/2L, 400 f/5.6L, the 70-200 f/4L. 

You're right, _no one buys those anymore._ :

- A


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Not a nice way to treat them, ...



Sorry - are you trying to bring some sense of ethics into a marketing decision? If canon are not being 'nice', where are the complaints from the general public? 
A car manufacturer produces cars with poor quality engine and complaints are rife on the internet
An airline treats its passengers badly and it hits the headlines

A camera manufacturer does not put 45-point AF in their newest camera, or does a poor imitation of 4K....and who gives a crap apart from someone who likes to think they are getting value for money? Until that changes, until you (and thousand s like you) tell Canon you are changing brands because they are not giving you what you think you deserve, they will keep doing what they have been doing.

Have you ever considered that by staying within the Canon environment, by buying more bodies and more lenses you are as much an apologist as anyone else who buys their stuff. You are telling their marketing guys 'Hey, you did not put 4K and 45-point AF in your next camera but I don't care'. It is telling them that despite their technological shortfalls, the are doing other things that make up for it. Which is precisely my view. 

I have no problem with you saying what you would like, but don't complain about Canon's approach and then keep buying their stuff.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 31, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Not a nice way to treat them, ...
> ...



He's captive though. It's Canon's fault he bought their stuff. Now he's stuck.


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Have you ever considered that by staying within the Canon environment, by buying more bodies and more lenses you are as much an apologist as anyone else who buys their stuff. You are telling their marketing guys 'Hey, you did not put 4K and 45-point AF in your next camera but I don't care'. It is telling them that despite their technological shortfalls, the are doing other things that make up for it. Which is precisely my view.
> 
> I have no problem with you saying what you would like, but don't complain about Canon's approach and then keep buying their stuff.



Good point. The analogy of staying with an abusive partner or continuing to buy products from a company with a bad human rights record are there. You are enabling a power that is not looking out for you, your views or your sensibilities.

Canon does bad things to you. Yet you are still here. Why not take the empowered consumer route and take your dollars elsewhere? You won't lose that much flipping your gear, and then you'll be in a different ecosystem that more directly supports your needs and sensibilities.

I don't say that snarkily, I say it honestly. Why continue to throw money at a company that causes you this grief?

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Why continue to throw money at a company that causes you this grief?



A point I raised earlier, which K ignored. His keyboard says no, his wallet says yes. Canon cares a lot more about one of those than the other.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> You guys are something else. I'm trying to wrap my mind around your defense of Canon, and agreement with holding back features for their profitability against your own consumer interests.



I'm trying to wrap my mind around why you think we *agree* with this. I understand why there is war in the Middle East and famine in sub-Saharan Africa. So you somehow think that means I am in favor of people dying in war and starving to death? Get a grip. Where have I said I applaud Canon for not giving the 6D a 95-point AF system or think it's great that they don't put AF point-linked spot metering in the 5DIV? Understanding ≠ agreement. Understanding ≠ support. 

You are the one claiming Canon should have added this feature or that feature to the 6D, and claiming they must do so to the 6DII...but, other than 'I wants it precious' you can't come up with bona fide reasons why they should do so. In particular, reasons why they should have done so for the 6D, which was an exceptionally popular camera in spite of your viewpoint that it's 'crippled'. 

If you want to argue against a viewpoint or practice, you should at least make the attempt to understand the rationale behind that viewpoint or practice. You seem to prefer arguing your points from a position of ignorance. Good luck with that.


----------



## Don Haines (May 31, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > You guys are something else. I'm trying to wrap my mind around your defense of Canon, and agreement with holding back features for their profitability against your own consumer interests.
> ...


Give up Neuro.... he does not get it....

It is not about crippling lower cameras, it's about adding to higher cameras to entice them upwards.......

It's like Mazda putting a better engine and trim in a 6 to lure them upwards from a 3.......

It's like Microsoft putting more memory and disk into a "better" tablet to lure the customers up.....

It's like the guy down the street putting a better finish and materials into his expensive canoe to lure people up from the intro model.....

The more you pay, the better features you get. Period! Game over! End of discussion!


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> A D7200 owner does *NOT* give up their AF performance to go to a D750.
> 
> Why does an 70D or 7D owner give it up to go to a 6D ? (keeping generations equal here)


----------



## Don Haines (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > A D7200 owner does *NOT* give up their AF performance to go to a D750.
> ...



Because they value the image quality of FF more than they value the better AF system of the 70D, or the superior ergonomics and ruggedness of the 7D...... but remember, they now have both, and Canon sold two cameras and is even happier.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > A D7200 owner does *NOT* give up their AF performance to go to a D750.
> ...



You really don't know why? How about you think about money and business? It costs more money to put the same AF system as in the D7200 in the D750 and likewise for 70D/7D to the 6D. Nikon was willing to take that margin hit by doing so in the D750 whereas Canon was not willing to do so in the 6D. Does that answer your question/pondering?


----------



## ahsanford (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> A D7200 owner does *NOT* give up their AF performance to go to a D750.
> 
> Why does an 70D or 7D owner give it up to go to a 6D ? (keeping generations equal here)



Nikon has a generalists' pyramid-like approach to broadly getting a little more in every area when you move up the ladder. Good-better-best is the approach.

Canon (rather famously) doesn't do this. They tend to have a 'type of shooter' based model to their portfolio.

The 70D line was aimed at hybrid shooters who frequently pivot from stills to video: hockey dads and soccer moms, vloggers and gadgety-gearheads.

The 6D was squarely aimed to deliver higher quality output with less creature comforts -- think landscapers, dedicated portraiture folks, university art students, etc.

Those are _wildly_ different use-cases, and they have different needs. It stands to reason they'd pack different stuff on board. 

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


>



Nikon and Sony know that *it's not easy being green* from the envy of losing market share to Canon.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> It is not about crippling lower cameras, it's about adding to higher cameras to entice them upwards.......



Glass half full, half empty? 

You can say it that way. I'm comparing across brands. 

Someone else mentioned that the 6D is an upgrade from a crop and this is the attraction. Really? 19pt AF down to 11pt - this is an upgrade worthy of a FF rig?




> It's like Microsoft putting more memory and disk into a "better" tablet to lure the customers up.....




Actually, the very best example of how Canon and parts of the camera industry go against normal market behaviors (thanks to the protectionist factor of being committed to a system) is the tech industry. The very best, bleeding edge technology is always released as soon as possible and for the best price possible vs the competition. The SECOND someone holds back, they are in serious trouble. Specs, speeds and prices are extremely competitive. No one makes money hold back speed or specs on graphics cards, CPU's, etcetera.

This is why innovation in DSLR's is pathetic to say the least and awful in cameras in general. These brands have their clientele and don't worry much. 



> The more you pay, the better features you get. Period! Game over! End of discussion!





More I pay hmmm...

Canon 6D $1400

11 PT AF from 2008. 
4.5 FPS
1 Card Slot

D750 $1,500

51pt AF
6 FPS
2 Slots
Tilt Screen

You're so right. $100 more, gets you better features! Even at release price, the difference between the two was small, but the feature set difference is not small. What is really sad is the 6D2 is about to be released with specs that I don't believe will even match the D750 from 2014, and yet will be $2000+.


Someone tell Canon right now, to UP the price of their 6D2 by $100, and give it D750 specs or better (it is 2017 afterall).

I'll pay the extra.


Thanks Don, you've helped us determine the truth in all this. $100 is what is holding us all Canon consumers back. Because we want to spend $2,000 instead of $2,100, Canon is forced to nerf the camera out of necessity.


It's all our fault. 


LOL.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

Talk about moving the goal posts.

What is the 6D?

An entry level FF?
An camera for a specific shooter?
An enticing upgrade for crop users?

Its amazing the extent to which people will go to defend the indefensible. 11pt AF from 2008. Digest that. 

I guess when you starve someone nearly to death for long enough, then offer them dirt to eat - they'll like the taste. That's Canon's business model. Here's your 45 pt AF recycled from years ago...

Heck, the 45pt is still a rumor. There's still a possibility Canon does something extra insulting and gives us 19pt.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> What is the 6D?
> 
> An entry level FF?
> An camera for a specific shooter?
> ...



It is a top-selling full frame camera. Digest that.

In fact, right now it's *the* top-selling FF camera on Amazon. That probably gives you indigestion.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > A D7200 owner does *NOT* give up their AF performance to go to a D750.
> ...




This is a very fair, reasoned response and I can agree with it to an extent. It also doesn't reek of fanboyism. 

I subscribe to the PRICE & PERFORMANCE measure. All other industries compare in price ranges. No one makes the argument that a Hyundai is better than a Lexus or equal just because it is "different" and aimed for a "specific driver" ...it might be better on the wallet yes, but aha - there's the KEY. Canon isn't priced in a budget fashion. They charging as much as Nikon and giving less.

At the $2000 - $2300 range at release date - Canon for FF is way, way lower value than Nikon. For $3,300 range semi-pro bodies, they are both equal value. This shows Canon isn't interested in offering much in the entry realm.

A first time buyer not committed to a system would have to be insane or ignorant of the details to go with Canon.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



True, but why should they have to sacrifice anything for their money? Nikon users don't. They get the D750 which is better in every single way.





> or the superior ergonomics and ruggedness of the 7D...... but remember, they now have both, and Canon sold two cameras and is even happier.




That's great for Canon and their shareholders, but now the buyer has to sacrifice image quality when shooting action, or can have image quality, and miss focus and shots. No having the cake and eating it. The D750 shooter has cake and eats it for his money spent.

Remember, equal dollars spent.

Oh, and the Nikon owner gets to keep his D7200 also...


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> **snipped out the Canon fanboyism***




A time old classic, the Amazon best seller list. Does best seller mean better specs?

I'm thinking some cell phones have outsold the 6D....


When this argument comes out on this forum, you know their digging deep.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> A first time buyer not committed to a system would have to be insane or ignorant of the details to go with Canon.



A person would have to be insane or ignorant to suggest that a first time buyer not committed to a system would buy a camera without a lens.

6D + 24-105mm variable aperture zoom: $1800
D610 + 24-85mm variable aperture zoom: $2000

6D + 24-105mm f/4: $2000
D750 + 24-120mm f/4: $2150

Now, tell us again which is the better value? Oh yeah, the Nikon because the 6D is crippled. :


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> A time old classic, the Amazon best seller list. Does best seller mean better specs?
> 
> I'm thinking some cell phones have outsold the 6D....
> 
> When this argument comes out on this forum, you know their digging deep.



Silly me for bringing data into a discussion. It's really pointless to do so when someone's opinion is crashing around so loudly in their head that they can't hear anything.


----------



## Don Haines (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > It is not about crippling lower cameras, it's about adding to higher cameras to entice them upwards.......
> ...


I was referring to with the same brand... Canon, Nikon, whatever.... pay more and get more features....

As to comparing between brands, that is a lot more difficult and how old the release is has a major effect on what features you get at a particular level... but what I have noticed through the years is that at a given price point, a Nikon body tends to have better specs/more features than a Canon, and that Olympus beats them both. With lenses, it's a different story and the equivalent Canon lens seems better than the equivalent Nikon lens....

That said, when Canon introduces the 6D2, it should be better speced than the D750, and when the replacement for the D750 comes out, I have no doubts that it will be better than the 6D2.... This is the problem with comparing cameras at a snapshot in time..... whoever has the latest release wins the spec battle.


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > **snipped out the Canon fanboyism***
> ...



Let's look at it another way.
You are saying people would have to be stupid to buy the 6D over the Nikon.
So tell me why people are buying more 6D than more D750? That is irrefutable. Not a defence of Canon, but a statement of fact. Why does 'the market' prefer 6D to D750? If you want to say 'the D750 is superior' then surely, with Canon having been behind on technology for at least 5 years, then by now Nikoon should have taken a significant market share from Canon. Surely it would be a case of 'if the D750 is superior, more people will buy the D750 than buy the 6D'. But they don't. You can't explain it so instead you claim that: 


"...they are buying more 6D than D750 because they are locked into the Canon system"
So tell me why are they buying more Canon at entry level which locks them in later? You claim...


"...they are getting into the Canon system because they don't know 'the full story' when they buy the lower models'
So who is not telling them 'the full story'? What facts are not available to them, when even at entry level Nikon is supposedly superior to Canon.


If someone makes a superior car, even at base level, word will get round and it will become a better selling product. Market forces. 
You quoted tech industries. If someone makes a superior computer, or a superior phone, or a superior tablet, word gets round very quickly and it becomes a top seller and that is obvious on Amazon or any other tech magazine that reflects the market. 

Yet it seems, according to you, sales are no indication of a superior product. According to you people are being duped from the very moment they walk into a shop to buy their first camera. That the data is not available to enable them to select the best product. That the data is not available to them to see a superior development path in their new hobby. 

So tell me - why did you buy into Canon. Because you were clearly duped.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

You people are taking this personally and to a different level.

I didn't' say there wasn't anything positive about Canon, or that their system sucks. 

In fact, Canon has tons of positives and is overall the best system, but at a price. Nikon is close enough that their value in the entry and mid level FF range is far better.

Unfortunately, even a great company be guilty of some crap - which in the Canon world is the 6D. We wait to see if they can redeem themselves with the 6D2. 

I'm not hopeful.

They'll give the suckers exactly what they asked for, a FF Rebel. LOL.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

42.

The Great Wall of China.

Just keeping with K's theme of giving responses that don't actually address the question. :


----------



## BillB (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Talk about moving the goal posts.
> 
> What is the 6D?
> 
> ...



At this point, the 6D is history, except maybe for someone looking for a very cheap FF body. In a few weeks we will know what Canon is going to replace it with. Nobody is defending 11 point AF. Canon is about to replace it.

If you are talking the 45 pt AF, all cross, with a dual cross f8 center point, my recollection is that was first on the 80D, and that wasn't exactly years ago.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > A first time buyer not committed to a system would have to be insane or ignorant of the details to go with Canon.
> ...



I'm comparing bodies, if you want to muddle that up with kits and lenses in an attempt to salvage your failed attempt to justify the 6D...then

Thanks for sharing the kit prices, this further helps illustrate the bad value that the 6D is. For $150 - $200 more, you're getting a significantly better body. 

I'm sure someone who can spend $2000 on a body can cough up another $150. $100 more for bodies only. What do they get? Well, like I wrote to Don about, they get:

51 pt flagship level AF vs, 2008 era crippled 11 pt crap (but hey, it's -3ev centerpoint!!! yay)
24 MP vs 20 MP
Vastly more DR on the Nikon.
Dual Card Slots vs Single Card 
Tilt screen vs no Tilt
Partial touch vs no Touch
1/200 Sync vs 1/180


The list goes on. You know it already.


There's no comparison. For $100 more, you literally get a camera that is a whole class higher. The D750 is more of a competitor in specs not price to the 5D4 than it is to Canon's pathetic entry level FF lineup of the 6D and the speculated 6D2 with already behind-the-times rumored specs before it is even announced.

6D2 will have only one advantage. DPAF. That's it.

Want DPAF in a DSLR to shoot 1080 with low noise? - 6D2 will be your ticket. Go for it have at it...for $2k lol.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



Oh, sorry. When you stated "a system" I didn't understand that to mean just a camera body. But then, I'm not an idiot.

By the way, why do you keep insisting I'm trying to 'defend' or 'justify' the 6D? I'm merely stating that it's a very popular camera, which means that many (many!!) buyers chose it. You can't seem to come to terms with the implications of that fact when stacked up against your claim that it's crippled. That's your problem, not mine.


----------



## BillB (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



I seem to recollect you said that you would get a 6DII if it had two card slots. Change your mind?

You also said that Canon has the better lens system. Now you are saying that the only advantage to a 6DII will be DPAF. Which statement is right?


----------



## unfocused (May 31, 2017)

Canon generally produces cameras that perform above their spec sheets. The 6D was a classic example. When it was released, forum dwellers and many reviewers whined about its weak autofocus specifications. Yet, it quickly became the best selling full-frame camera on the market and apparently continues to hold that title. 

Also, as the camera moved into the field, it gained a huge fan base among photographers -- you know, people who actually take pictures. That's because it outperformed its specs. The autofocus turned out to be better than expected and the quality of images was excellent. It also was the most affordable full-frame camera available, which didn't hurt sales.

I fully expect a similar reaction to the 6DII. People like "K" will whine and insult, but the market will drown them out. They will dismiss the facts and opt instead for "alternative facts" and "fake news" about the failures of Canon. Yet, Canon will continue to outsell its competitors and thousands of buyers will end up as happy customers, because the camera will outperform its specs and customer expectations. That's been the case with the 1DX, the 5D, the 7D, the XXDs and the Rebels.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

Canon glass is better. I've said it many times. However, it isn't so much better as to trump the advantages of having a 51pt AF system versus some ancient 11 pt nonsense which was old even when it was released (for those of you with amnesia). 

I'll take 2% or less quality loss in the corners to be able to actually focus on subjects and capture more photos any day.

Dual slots will go a LONG way toward make this camera more viable for a lot of users. Even with the 45 pt system being sub-par in comparison to how Nikon offers higher level AF across many models, it would be a huge step forward (for Canon), and will not serve as a middle finger to users like a 19pt system would.

Like I said, starve them first, then anything will taste good.

Obviously, this equation changes if you compare different levels. I've said it over and over, at the entry FF - Canon is awful with what they do.

But in this realm of Canon fanatics, no criticism of Canon is accepted no matter how valid or warranted. We can conclude that Canon is the perfect company with perfect camera offerings and perfect value. 

I hope this makes you all feel better about how you spent your money. Reassurance! Feels good.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Dual slots will go a LONG way toward make this camera more viable for a lot of users.



Seriously? What's the rationale for this? Because memory cards fail so frequently? Because the 10 seconds needed to change cards always occurs when bigfoot is traipsing along in front of people? Because two cards are needed to capture more photos or video, since getting a larger card just isn't possible? 

Dude, we know that dual slots gives you a big woody and all, but 'more viable for a lot of users'? Got any evidence for that? There are probably a significant fraction of 5DIII/5DIV users who have only CF or only SD cards and thus use only one slot. You're channeling AvTvM, claiming that a feature you personally want is critical for millions of users, and Canon must include it or else. 

Trust me, the 6DII will be plenty viable for millions of users even if it's 'crippled' with just one pathetic, lonely card slot. Fine, it won't be viable for you. Guess what? Canon doesn't gove a crap about you.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Dual slots will go a LONG way toward make this camera more viable for a lot of users.
> ...




I never saw you petitioning Canon to remove the 2nd card slot from the 1DX or 1DX2...


Hypocrisy.


----------



## BillB (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Canon glass is better. I've said it many times. However, it isn't so much better as to trump the advantages of having a 51pt AF system versus some ancient 11 pt nonsense which was old even when it was released (for those of you with amnesia).
> 
> I'll take 2% or less quality loss in the corners to be able to actually focus on subjects and capture more photos any day.
> 
> ...



So, Canon has a slight edge on glass, and we don't know how the D750 and 6DII sensors or AF will compare, or how many cardslots the 6DII will have. We shall see.

I agree with you that the D750 is a much better spec'd camera than the soon to be superseded 6D classic, by the way. For what that is worth. A lot of good pictures have been taken with that funky old 11 point AF, though.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> I never saw you petitioning Canon to remove the 2nd card slot from the 1DX or 1DX2...
> 
> Hypocrisy.



Sure, I have cards in both slots and write to both (in duplicate). But...I have not ever had a card fail or missed a shot when switching out a card. In other words, my 1D X would be just as viable with one slot. 

ASSumption. 

Why would a second card slot, "...go a LONG way toward make this camera more viable for a lot of users," exactly? Seems you're afraid or unable to actually respond to the issue at hand. Deflection and tangents are a go-to move for people unable to back up their claims and unwilling to admit that they are wrong. 

Weakness.


----------



## dak723 (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> You people are taking this personally and to a different level.
> 
> I didn't' say there wasn't anything positive about Canon, or that their system sucks.
> 
> ...



Every time you say something like the 6D is crap, you lose all credibility. When you say a first time buyer would have to be insane or ignorant to buy Canon, you lose all credibility.

When I bought my 6D, it was replacing a Canon 300D, but I had no FF lenses, so I looked at other brands. I chose Canon because:

I like Canon color better than Nikon or Sony. The tonal curves are also different and again I prefer Canon. I determined this by actually using a Nikon and buying (for a short time) a Sony. I would not say that putting a lot of emphasis on a camera's color and contrast shows that I am ignorant or insane.

I like Canon reliability. At the time, Nikon was having issues with oil on the sensors, I believe. And my 300D lasted 8 years with not one issue. So I chose Canon. I would not say that caring about reliability shows that I am ignorant or insane.

I like Canon ergonomics. Compared to the Sony A7, Canon is well designed and the Sony is certainly "crippled!" So ergonomics is one reason I chose the 6D and I would not say that this shows that I am ignorant or insane.

I believe I read an article that said that most pro sports photographers were still using center point for focus. Perhaps I am wrong, or the article was a too small sample, but I would guess that the majority of users who are not shooting action, do not need or want 45 AF points. The 6D is generally considered a non-action camera. For general photography - even some close up photography ( I shoot flowers), I need maybe 12 AF points at the most, in my experience. In 4 years of using the 6D, I did not miss many (if any) shots due to the AF system. Yes, it is not for everyone, but for many of us, the 6D's AF system works perfectly. I would not say that being satisfied with a limited number of AF points shows that I am ignorant or insane. 

Not everyone wants more specs. I prefer smaller files to work with, don't print over 12" x 18", prefer better low light IQ over more resolution, so 20 MP is more than enough. I never shoot video with my camera, or shoot with manual focus, so if Canon has no zebras and no focus peaking it wouldn't deter me from choosing them and would not show that I am ignorant or insane.

Every person should choose the camera that is best for them. And every FF and crop camera made today is capable of taking great pictures, has AF systems that are a dream compared to years ago, and can shoot in lower light than ever possible. To say that any one of them is "crap" is ridiculous.


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Thanks for sharing the kit prices, this further helps illustrate the bad value that the 6D is. For $150 - $200 more, you're getting a significantly better body.
> 
> I'm sure someone who can spend $2000 on a body can cough up another $150. $100 more for bodies only. What do they get? Well, like I wrote to Don about, they get:



So answer one question - if the benefits are so great, why do Canon cameras outsell Nikon. 
Please answer that one question with no diversions.


----------



## Ivar (May 31, 2017)

-> All is Quiet, but the Good Stuff is Coming

This reminds me why I left Canon, the eternal promise that never got fulfilled over the years. 
Yes, I absolutely do agree that Canon has maturity in terms of lenses and professionalism. For serious pro stuff, you can't go wrong choosing Canon. 
But it lacks any aspiration, for poor amateurs, looking at the competition. There is no strecth at all, no sign of trying, just a slow adaption. Then again, the marketing is so well balanced, the white lenses shining which makes the shareholders happy, no denial on that. 

This overly precise balancing is what gets on the nerves of many.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > I never saw you petitioning Canon to remove the 2nd card slot from the 1DX or 1DX2...
> ...




Hypocrisy says the person with dual slot camera, downplaying it others...


D750, $1500. Dual Slot
D610, $1500. Dual Slot

Value value value. This is a valuable feature, especially one that enables commercial application. Your downplaying of it is irrelevant and not a justified argument. 

Here let me sell someone a 1-focus point camera. Just 1. When they ask, need or expect more, I'll just tell them it isn't that important, doesn't cause issues never had a problem....and, if they need more, pay $3000+ for a body that has more AF points. Even though the competition doesn't charge that much for the same thing.


Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge again -- no one can address this simple fact. No one. Not a single post. I'm criticized for not answering the tsunami of strawmen arguments and other nonsense, but no one answers or fesses up to this one. Instead, I hear bizarre nonsensical tangents discussing other matters entirely.


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Hypocrisy says the person with dual slot camera, downplaying it others...
> 
> 
> D750, $1500. Dual Slot
> ...



I am not downplaying anything. I am not calling it irrelevant. But I accept two facts: the Nikons you mention are better spec, the Canon outsells them both. 
What you seem unable to accept is that maybe they sell more 6D than Nikons because most people do not consider two slots to be as important as you do. 

Why do YOU think the Canon outsells the Nikons? 




K said:


> Here let me sell someone a 1-focus point camera. Just 1. When they ask, need or expect more, I'll just tell them it isn't that important, doesn't cause issues never had a problem....and, if they need more, pay $3000+ for a body that has more AF points. Even though the competition doesn't charge that much for the same thing.



Straw man.




K said:


> Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge again -- no one can address this simple fact. No one. Not a single post. I'm criticized for not answering the tsunami of strawmen arguments and other nonsense, but no one answers or fesses up to this one. Instead, I hear bizarre nonsensical tangents discussing other matters entirely.



What simple fact are we not answering?
I don't think anyone has said the Nikons are not better spec - if I am wrong please quote the statement.
What we are saying is that it seems the general public do not think those features are as important as you claim they are.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge again



Well, at least you're good at something. 

Question: how does feature X make a camera more viable for a lot of users? 
Answer: value value value. 

LOL.


----------



## zim (May 31, 2017)

FWIW here’s my experience of why an entry level camera with lesser spec can be preferred.

My first digital camera was got as a shared camera with my daughter. I did the usual guy thing and researched the thing to death. Walking into the shop for my price range the Nikon body I had in mind was my choice. Now as my daughter was quite young I was conscious of not railroading her into my preference so after playing with various makes and models I asked her which one? She chose the Canon. The reasons, simply that it felt better, handled better in her hands, the controls made more sense, the menus were simpler, the focusing was better because it wasn’t complicated, resolution did not matter a jot all were huge step ups.

I then questioned her choice by pointing out obvious spec differences and benefits, none of that mattered and she surprised me how adamant she was about that, she was confident she could and would enjoy using the Canon to take photos. Turns out she was correct she can and does still enjoy photography.

There is more to selling a camera than spec sheets, especially entry level cameras and I suspect Canon realise that.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Here let me sell someone a 1-focus point camera. Just 1. When they ask, need or expect more, I'll just tell them it isn't that important, doesn't cause issues never had a problem....and, if they need more, pay $3000+ for a body that has more AF points. Even though the competition doesn't charge that much for the same thing.
> ...



Now _that's_ hypocrisy.


----------



## K (May 31, 2017)

Ivar said:


> But it lacks any aspiration, for poor amateurs, looking at the competition.




We can only speculate based on what we see Canon do. And as you can tell from this forum, there's about as many interpretations and theories as there are people.

The way it looks to me, Canon has no interest whatsoever in giving up any kind of professional capability for a penny under the 5D4. Period. 

Their omission of features and nerfing of others is very carefully done to target (deter) a specific group of users which are the amateurs and upstart pros. 

Canon is pay to play. As in, pay $3,300 as an entry point for FF pro use. 

Nikon on the other hand, has an entry point of $1,500 right now. 

That's significant. No one in their right mind will think a Canon body is $1,800 better than the Nikon FF.

Nikon doesn't mind that a lower tier camera is used commercially. Canon sees that as a lost sale for a higher up pro body. The assumption here is that the consumer had the cash to go higher, but saved it as their needs were met at a lower price point. Maybe some. But for those who don't have the cash? Guess what, they aren't going to be choosing Canon unless they want to accept a significantly weaker camera capabilities...

Purely anecdotal and only my experience, but Nikon is used like 10:1 ratio against Canon in the entry pro realm. Canon is making big money, it's not on those folks - it's got to be all Rebel soccer dads and big time sports photography. Look at the sidelines of any major event. All 1D series. Most have dual 1D's with big white lenses on there. You'll see like maybe 1 Nikon in a sea of Canon.

These entry level pros, they add up. They are all over the place. Not sure why Canon ignores that market.


----------



## Don Haines (May 31, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > I never saw you petitioning Canon to remove the 2nd card slot from the 1DX or 1DX2...
> ...



I have fire insurance, but my house has never burned down.....
I have life insurance, but I am still alive.....
I have 2 slots, and I have had a card fail on me.....

The second slot is insurance....odds are that you will never need it, but if you ever do it is great to have.... when you are being paid for a job, and particularly one that you can't re-stage in case of image loss or mistakes, it gets to be a lot more important. An interesting question to ask is how long before the standard "backup" becomes a WiFi link to the cloud....


----------



## BillB (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Ivar said:
> 
> 
> > But it lacks any aspiration, for poor amateurs, looking at the competition.
> ...


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> No one in their right mind will think a Canon body is $1,800 better than the Nikon FF.



Thousands of people disagree with you.
Does this mean the D810 or D4 are not thousands of $ better than the D750? Well, Nikon sure screwed that one up. And all those dumb Nikon pros buying the pro models....



K said:


> Nikon doesn't mind that a lower tier camera is used commercially.


Who said Canon did? 



K said:


> Guess what, they aren't going to be choosing Canon unless they want to accept a significantly weaker camera capabilities...


And we come back to the same two possibilities:
- people are being duped
- The things you think are important are in fact trivial in terms of the market


----------



## Mikehit (May 31, 2017)

K said:


> Ivar said:
> 
> 
> > But it lacks any aspiration, for poor amateurs, looking at the competition.
> ...




I note you still have not replied to my request as to why YOU think the 6D outsells the D750.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> I note you still have not replied to my request as to why YOU think the 6D outsells the D750.



Yeah, well...he just ignores questions that upset his myopic little world view.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 1, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Ivar said:
> ...



to be fair, the D750 sold REALLY well against all full frame cameras for the majority of it's time.

however - the D750 was in response to the 5D Mark III and 6D completely outselling the D800 and D600 with their associated problems and the D610 even being DOA.

for whatever reason, the combination of what the 6D had to offer hit a home run. whether it was the size of the camera, the way canon sold it cheaply after a while, or the inclusion of half decent wifi / GPS which no nikon had / has .. who knows.

To think though that anyone here really knows the global market which canon is selling into and their requirements though (like some with single letter names) and knows it better, I just don't know. Good for them I guess.

One thing we do know from Sony's idiotic PR campaign is that canon is firmly in #1 for full frame cameras, even in dog months of jan - feb.

To suggest that canon isn't doing something right seems a little idiotic.


----------



## IglooEater (Jun 1, 2017)

Oh my, this has been quite the read. 

Maybe the older methods were the best... anyone care for a dual? Either pistols or ottoman scimitars.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> Purely anecdotal and only my experience, but Nikon is used like 10:1 ratio against Canon in the entry pro realm. Canon is making big money, it's not on those folks - it's got to be all Rebel soccer dads and big time sports photography. Look at the sidelines of any major event. All 1D series. Most have dual 1D's with big white lenses on there. You'll see like maybe 1 Nikon in a sea of Canon.
> 
> These entry level pros, they add up. They are all over the place. Not sure why Canon ignores that market.



Given the relative sales and profits, apparently Canon has figured out that "entry level pros" are a cheap, whiny, and demanding bunch and that soccer dads and big time sports photographers are much better customers.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



A very reasonable response. Beyond 'K', apparently. 

'Insurance' is why I have a second card in use, and write RAWs in duplicate. It's also why I back up my SSD routinely to multiple HDDs in different geographic locations. 

I still question the idea that a second slot would make an entry level FF camera 'more viable for a lot of people'. What did pros do before digital? Were there dual film roll cameras? What did 5D/5DII and D700 users do? Oh, my!

Yes, times have changed. But card failures are rare (certainly much more rare than accidentally opening the back before rewinding the film!). If a dual slot is a requirement for someone, they pay more for a 5-series or buy a different brand. Clearly, the 6D sold well despite its 'handicap'.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 1, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ...card failures are rare (certainly much more rare than accidentally opening the back before rewinding the film!)...



Or having the film slip off the take up spool...Or forgetting to check the rewind handle to make sure there is film in the camera...or forgetting if you have Tri-X or Kodachrome in the camera...or forgetting to change the ISO dial from 64 to 400...or having the film canister pop open...or having the film stick together on the developing reel... or accidentally pouring fixer in the film developing tank instead of developer...

Man, so many ways to ruin a shoot. No wonder I don't worry about card failures. By comparison, the odds must be like 1 million to one.


----------



## tj (Jun 1, 2017)

IglooEater said:


> Oh my, this has been quite the read.
> 
> Maybe the older methods were the best... anyone care for a dual? Either pistols or ottoman scimitars.



Just enrolled, and I agree, a fascinating read. I thought everyone was entitled to an opinion however right or wrong it may be. A certain amount of bullying by a select few here, I'm sure they know who I am referring to.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

tj said:


> I thought everyone was entitled to an opinion however right or wrong it may be.



Welcome!

Certainly, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and encouraged to state it. But if you expect that opinions won't be challenged, then with respect, you've come to the wrong place. 

For example, someone may hold the opinion that the earth is flat. They are free to express that opinion, but shouldn't be surprised when their opinion is challenged and contrary facts are presented. If their opinion is patently ridiculous, a certain amount of ridicule is likely to be thrown at them.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 1, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yes, times have changed. But card failures are rare (certainly much more rare than accidentally opening the back before rewinding the film!).



never did that..... but I have had the film improperly threaded and not realized it until the exposure count got to 38 on a roll of 36....... There are lots of ways to screw up and we will find them...

Honestly, the biggest advantage of dual slot for me is when I take the card out to download to the computer, forget to put it back in, and go somewhere with the camera and find out once I got there that the card is missing... with a dual card I can still shoot.....


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 1, 2017)

unfocused said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ...card failures are rare (certainly much more rare than accidentally opening the back before rewinding the film!)...
> ...



There's an old AE-1 with whatever the kit lens was back then in the house I grew up in. Occasionally I get the notion to get it and shoot some film... until I think about the hassle of film that you just described. And the fact that for literally everything I want to do with it, my first step would be to run the film through a film scanner to get it digitized so I can put it online where everything is, because I don't want a massive album of prints or actual film. So I cut out the middleman and keep shooting digital.

Might get it this next time I go home just to have it, but I can't imagine why I'd actually shoot it.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 1, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> tj said:
> 
> 
> > I thought everyone was entitled to an opinion however right or wrong it may be.
> ...



Such as when satellite images are presented. Or they are personally taken to space to observe the Earth's spherical nature.

After all that, still arguing the Earth is flat.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Honestly, the biggest advantage of dual slot for me is when I take the card out to download to the computer, forget to put it back in, and go somewhere with the camera and find out once I got there that the card is missing... with a dual card I can still shoot.....



Haven't done that, probably never will. But it's simpler for me because both slots take CF. I have three cards of the same size, slot 1 is the 'primary' card and slot 2 is the backup. When I finish a shooting session, I take out the card in slot 1, and put the extra card in and format it, and I'm ready for next time. The pics are transferred to my computer, and that card becomes the 'extra' one. When the backup is getting full, I swap that one for the extra card.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 1, 2017)

tj said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > Oh my, this has been quite the read.
> ...



Stating (for example) you would like dual card slots is a statement of preference. Stating that dual card slots are a feature essential to everyone (as K has done), or stating that with the 6D Canon got it badly wrong (which K has done) is an opinion that people are free to challenge. Especially when there is evidence to show it. If he keeps restating the same comments he will get the same responses.
The fact he keeps restating them, does that make K the 'bully'?


----------



## tj (Jun 1, 2017)

G'day, and thank you to those who welcomed me, I guessed 2 out of the 3. Opinions. Yes it is healthy to challenge our differences, very healthy and enjoyable, it is how we progress. It is the nature of _how_ we debate that determines 'what' we are.
Should someone believe 2+2 = 5 for example, do we try to change their view reasonably and calmly? over and over again sometimes; or do we shout at them, ridicule, humiliate them into submission? - net result, they may be too intimidated to ever ask a question again.
On that note, I'll leave the debate to get back to the number of card slots.


----------



## K (Jun 1, 2017)

The regulars have determined that dual card slot has no value.

Therefore, we ask Canon to remove it from the 5D4, 5DS/R, 7D2 and 1DX2.

They all agree.

While we wait 5 years for updates to the above cameras, Canon can disable such feature via firmware update. Canon, please eliminate this frivolous capability. The members of Canonrumors have spoken.


----------



## BillB (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> The regulars have determined that dual card slot has no value.
> 
> Therefore, we ask Canon to remove it from the 5D4, 5DS/R, 7D2 and 1DX2.
> 
> ...



And your point would be... ?


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> The regulars have determined that dual card slot has no value.
> 
> Therefore, we ask Canon to remove it from the 5D4, 5DS/R, 7D2 and 1DX2.
> 
> ...



Jeez, How many more straw men are you going to build. NO-ONE said dual card slots did not have a use, nor did we say that some people want it. What we contended was your assertion that card slots were essential to the target market for whom the 6D was designed (hint: 'target market' is more than just a few people who have specific needs).
And if dual card slots are so essential, surely it would be a factor that would mean people avoided the 6D. 

So...again...given that in your view dual card slots are essential to the general public, why does the 6D outsell competitors who have dual card slots?

I think TJ is right. Your continued insistence on repeating unsubstantiated claims, and your repeated use of sarcasm is tantamount to bullying. Naughty boy.


----------



## BillB (Jun 1, 2017)

tj said:


> G'day, and thank you to those who welcomed me, I guessed 2 out of the 3. Opinions. Yes it is healthy to challenge our differences, very healthy and enjoyable, it is how we progress. It is the nature of _how_ we debate that determines 'what' we are.
> Should someone believe 2+2 = 5 for example, do we try to change their view reasonably and calmly? over and over again sometimes; or do we shout at them, ridicule, humiliate them into submission? - net result, they may be too intimidated to ever ask a question again.
> On that note, I'll leave the debate to get back to the number of card slots.


----------



## hbr (Jun 1, 2017)

Welcome to CR, tj.

When someone shares an opinion people here usually respond by sharing their opinions either agreeing or disagreeing with the original poster. Sometimes it can get quite heated. But, when one joins a discussion or starts a thread by slinging sh_t all over the place, one should expect to get some thrown back at him. Calling other people names and saying their opinions are worthless is not the proper way to get a civil discussion. Another way to get a heated debate going is by saying that Canon is ******* just because Canon does not offer the subset of features that you want, or saying that Canon is ******* every time a competitor comes out with a new device that appears to have higher specs than the Canon devices.

There are a lot of fantastic photographers in this forum who are very kind and will freely give you advice or help you with a problem.

Cheers, 
Brian


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

tj said:


> Should someone believe 2+2 = 5 for example, do we try to change their view reasonably and calmly? over and over again sometimes; or do we shout at them, ridicule, humiliate them into submission? - net result, they may be too intimidated to ever ask a question again.



Should someone state, 2+2 = 5, a calm correction would be reasonable. Should someone state, 2+2 = 5 and anyone who doesn't think so is crap at math or a shill on the payroll of Casio's calculator department, and repeat that assertion ad infinitum, a calm correction isn't going to happen...it's the Internet, after all.


----------



## BillB (Jun 1, 2017)

BillB said:


> tj said:
> 
> 
> > G'day, and thank you to those who welcomed me, I guessed 2 out of the 3. Opinions. Yes it is healthy to challenge our differences, very healthy and enjoyable, it is how we progress. It is the nature of _how_ we debate that determines 'what' we are.
> ...



Apologies for previous post. Hit the post button by mistake. I haven't been posting here until recently, but I have been following the forum for several years. 

As in many forums, some people are playing wierd head games, and some people have unusual ways of trying to make a point. Also you have found yourself in a strange but not unusual exchange between the canon bashers and the canon fanboys, to use terms sometimes used by posters to refer to people who do not agree with them. 

When the canon bashers and the canon fanboys get going, a silly game develops, and one should not take this game too seriously, if one feels the need to follow the game at all. There are posters called trolls who try to provoke these games. 

A lot of people on this forum know a lot about photography, and you can get information that is very useful and interesting, and learn things that are very difficult to find anywhere else. You will find that you usually get clear and understandable answers when you ask questions, but as you have already seen, opinions are not always treated with respect and understanding by all those who feel the need to reply.


----------



## K (Jun 1, 2017)

And so the Canon apologists bring out the canned excuse that - the "6D's target market is not _________"

This is their way of defending the 6D's lack of specs for its price range. Come up in every thread, sometimes many times, like clockwork.

I should compile of catalog of all the BS excuses, logical fallacies and apologetics made by the fan boys here. I did a tiny snip of that earlier in this thread - and it illustrates how ludicrous they sound.

Whomever on Earth this camera was designed for, it was priced a certain way - and whether you like it or not, the competition priced a far superior specced camera the same, which gives up NOTHING to the 6D and likely the 6D2 - for which suits the needs even of the specific target market the 6D was allegedly created to target via its price and lack of features. Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.


The fact that excuses are made ad nauseam shows that this simple point and truth cannot be refuted. 


It's ok guys. Really, it's OK to admit that one camera in the Canon lineup doesn't live up to what it should be. This isn't a throw the baby out with the bathwater situation here. Canon is still a great company. Your massive investment in glass and bodies was a good decision. This shouldn't impact your pride. Don't be insecure. It's ok. Deep breath. Inhale. Exhale.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 1, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Should someone state, 2+2 = 5, a calm correction would be reasonable. Should someone state, 2+2 = 5 and anyone who doesn't think so is crap at math or a shill on the payroll of Casio's calculator department, and repeat that assertion ad infinitum, a calm correction isn't going to happen...it's the Internet, after all.



Didn't you hear? We're in a post-truth, 'alternative facts' world. 

Those casio calculator bemoaners _wield nuclear weapons these days_.

- A


----------



## unfocused (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> ...Whomever on Earth this camera was designed for, it was priced a certain way - and whether you like it or not, the competition priced a far superior specced camera the same, which gives up NOTHING to the 6D and likely the 6D2 - for which suits the needs even of the specific target market the 6D was allegedly created to target via its price and lack of features. Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.
> 
> The fact that excuses are made ad nauseam shows that this simple point and truth cannot be refuted...



Except that your "truth" really isn't true.

"Value" is determined by the market. It is not determined by you...it is not determined by me...it is not determined by Neuro or anyone else on this forum. "Value" is not something that is determined by spec lists. 

Individuals have individual definitions of "value" and they can legitimately vary. But the beauty of the marketplace is that, collectively, the market determines value. And in the case of the Canon 6D, the market determined it to be the best value in full frame cameras -- what determines that is the fact that it outsold and continues to outsell its competitors.

I don't know if you read much, but if you do, you may be aware of numerous studies that show that crowds tend to get things right, even though individuals often get things very wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_the_crowd That's why polling works. As individuals, we are all wrong about a lot of things, but in a large group, we tend to get things right. 

So, while you are welcome to have your own standards for what constitutes a good value, it is delusional to expect that others should judge a product by your standards. 

You are certainly allowed to have a different opinion on what constitutes the best value for you. In fact, the 6D was not the best value for me. 

What cannot be disputed is that the market has chosen Canon to be the leading camera brand and among individual full frame cameras, the market chose the 6D. I fail to understand why that concept is so difficult for some people to accept.


----------



## BillB (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> And so the Canon apologists bring out the canned excuse that - the "6D's target market is not _________"
> 
> This is their way of defending the 6D's lack of specs for its price range. Come up in every thread, sometimes many times, like clockwork.
> 
> ...



I do not understand what point you are trying to make. Of course the 6D is underspec'd by today's standards. Canon will announce it's replacement in a few weeks. Why do you keep flogging this dead horse and try to browbeat us into agreeing with you when pretty much all agree on the limitations of the 6D? (Although some of us have managed to take some pretty good photographs with it.)

You have reached some conclusions about what the 6DII specifications will be, which you insist on repeating over and over again, with more and more exagerration and ridicule. You have also continually used exagerration and ridicule to attack anyone who might choose a 6DII over a D750, which you continually tell us is on sale for $1500. It seems to me that the sensible thing to do would be to wait on Canon's announcement of the 6DII to see what the specs actually are before getting completely wrapped around the axle about its anticipated shortcomings.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.



So why does it outsell the competitors?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Those casio calculator bemoaners _wield nuclear weapons these days_.



Well, not directly. They have to go through the guy carrying the nucular* football golf bag.

*intentional misspelling



unfocused said:


> As individuals, we are all wrong about a lot of things, but in a large group, we tend to get things right.



The key is a 'large' group. For example, millions versus, say...538.


----------



## K (Jun 1, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.
> ...



Stop being lazy and read the thread. We've been through this 10x.

Canon is market leader, has the most users. Users who've bought lenses cannot easily and freely just up and buy a competitor camera, or maintain two incompatible systems simultaneously. Therefore, users "put up with" lesser offering because it is economically worse to make a switch than to tolerate lower value. Plus it is a hassle.

Again, the fact that it sells well, partially because it has been out longer, secondly because there's more Canon users (commited/stuck whatever you want to call it to the system) -- has ZERO impact on the fact that it, as a body is lower value and underspecced compared to what the competition is offering.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> Stop being lazy and read the thread. We've been through this 10x.
> 
> Canon is market leader, has the most users. Users who've bought lenses cannot easily and freely just up and buy a competitor camera, or maintain two incompatible systems simultaneously. Therefore, users "put up with" lesser offering because it is economically worse to make a switch than to tolerate lower value. Plus it is a hassle.
> 
> Again, the fact that it sells well, partially because it has been out longer, secondly because there's more Canon users (commited/stuck whatever you want to call it to the system) -- has ZERO impact on the fact that it, as a body is lower value and underspecced compared to what the competition is offering.



Stop being lazy and read other threads. Saying the earth is flat or 2+2=5 ten times doesn't make it correct. 

It has been claimed countless times on this forum that all anyone has to do is buy a Sony FF MILC and a metabones adapter, and they can continue happily using their full complement of Canon lenses. 

As has also been pointed out many times, those moving from APS-C to FF will, in many cases, have few or no FF lenses (and unlike Nikon and Sony, crop lenses cannot be used on Canon FF bodies to 'ease the transition'). 

The fact that it's been out longer and _still_ outsells the competition says exactly the opposite of what you are claiming.

As unfocused pointed out, the market determines value...not you. The market has determined the 6D has ample value.

Come back when you have an argument that isn't so full of holes it leaks like a sieve.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> Stop being lazy and read the thread. We've been through this 10x.
> 
> Canon is market leader, has the most users. Users who've bought lenses cannot easily and freely just up and buy a competitor camera, or maintain two incompatible systems simultaneously. Therefore, users "put up with" lesser offering because it is economically worse to make a switch than to tolerate lower value. Plus it is a hassle.
> 
> Again, the fact that it sells well, partially because it has been out longer, secondly because there's more Canon users (commited/stuck whatever you want to call it to the system) -- has ZERO impact on the fact that it, as a body is lower value and underspecced compared to what the competition is offering.



Yet you continue to drive past the point that _*things outside of the body itself offer value*_. In your eyes, the mount ecosystem is some ponderous anchor or prison that holds people back from migrating towards higher value bodies, while others consider the EF portfolio to be the brand's greatest strength!

This isn't Stockholm Syndrome, or fear of the pain/cost/annoyance of leaving the mothership for another offering. We are prisoners to nothing. We just have a different set of priorities than yours. You apparently value body features (AF points, tilty-flippy, card slots) more than you value the lens portfolio. In that set of priorities, the 6D will always be underwater to you. 

To the rest of us, and apparently to the rest of the market, lenses/quality/color/service/reliability matter more than body features do.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> We just have a different set of priorities than yours. You apparently value body features (AF points, tilty-flippy, card slots) more than you value the lens portfolio. In that set of priorities, the 6D will always be underwater to you.
> 
> To the rest of us, and apparently to the rest of the market, lenses/quality/color/service/reliability matter more than body features do.



If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? Well, yes. But if a feature is present in a camera and a buyer doesn't care about that feature, does it add value for that buyer? No.

My 1D X has a LAN port, and I couldn't care less about it. For me, it adds no value. For sports shooters who need to connect to a support van at venue, it may be a critical feature. It's Canon's job to determine which features will be perceived as vaulable to the majority of the target market for a particular model. In the case of the 6D, they determined that a second card slot would not add value for their user base to the extent that it would outweigh the tradeoffs needed to implement that feature (in terms of body size, cost, etc.). But 'K' wants a dual slot, precious. He wants it and he must have it. Thus, the 6D is low value crap, and if the 6DII comes out with just one slot, it, too, will be low value crap. To him. BFD. :


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> Stop being lazy and read the thread. We've been through this 10x.
> 
> Canon is market leader, has the most users. Users who've bought lenses cannot easily and freely just up and buy a competitor camera, or maintain two incompatible systems simultaneously. Therefore, users "put up with" lesser offering because it is economically worse to make a switch than to tolerate lower value. Plus it is a hassle.
> 
> Again, the fact that it sells well, partially because it has been out longer, secondly because there's more Canon users (commited/stuck whatever you want to call it to the system) -- has ZERO impact on the fact that it, as a body is lower value and underspecced compared to what the competition is offering.



All you are doing is illustrating what even you admit in your times of lucidity. People do not buy into a camera they buy into a system and for majority the advantage of the system outweighs the lack of dual card slots. That means for me, dual card slots are way down the list of priorities when I buy a camera. At one time I used the dual card slots on the 7D so I do not have to change cards so easily - now I don't care. 
But you see you also have stymied your own claims - if dual card slots are 'essential' (your word, not mine) then surely it would be worth the aggravation of changing brands?

If Canon are demonstrating they are 5 years behind everyone else in the technology they use - if that technology was so vital, they would forego the aggravation and switch. But not even you think those specs are worth the hassle. 
Doesn't that put into perspective your claims as to how 'poorly' spec the Canon cameras are? 

I can buy a higher spec car for the same money as the Qashqui I have. But I know and trust the reliability of Nissan, so I don't really care about what anyone else offers me. Same with my TV and my other tech gear. I keep aware of developments, sure I do, but that does not drive me to switch brands.


----------



## K (Jun 1, 2017)

We wait and see the specs of the 6D2 and whether Canon lays an egg.

It stands to reason based on past trends, that is what will happen - since Canon will not provide 5D4 AF in the 6D2 the same way Nikon provides their top AF in lower bodies. (let alone the dual card slot).

The irony. Canon built their whole rep on their AF. They were the AF kings, but Nikon has the edge on AF in two ways. First, it works better - secondly, they offer higher level AF across their lineup.


6D2 will sell wonderfully, thanks the the larger Canon user base. This will suffice as evidence to the fanatics here that it represents a great value compared to the competition. They'll reassure themselves to prevent any insecurities from creeping into their brand loyalty and buying decisions.

I never accused anyone here of actually being on the Canon payroll. I only accused many of sounding like they are. Which is even WORSE, because they are worshiping a brand and defending it for free. 


This is the Canon Cult. A sure sign of a cult is the inability for members to speak negatively on any aspect whatsoever. Reading their rhetoric and propaganda - it is always positive, never a criticism. This implies Canon is perfection. Notice how the cultists refuse to ever say anything bad about Canon regardless of the thread or topic, no matter how warranted and truthful it might be. It is full on, complete denial all the time, always. And full on apologetics. Overall, I've said mostly positive things about Canon as they create mostly great products. But as soon as one product is called out for being weaksauce and poor value for dollars spent -- the CULT goes into overtime and swarms.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> We wait and see the specs of the 6D2 and whether Canon lays an egg.
> 
> It stands to reason based on past trends, that is what will happen - since Canon will not provide 5D4 AF in the 6D2 the same way Nikon provides their top AF in lower bodies. (let alone the dual card slot).
> 
> ...



Admit it. You are Sean Spicer, really, aren't you....


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 1, 2017)

So in just about every level of DSLR from introductory Rebel up to the 1DX2, Canon releases a camera and (in general) the specs are better than the equivalent Nikon.... The Nikon releases a camera and it is better (in general) than the corresponding Canon..... and Canon releases on better than Nikon, and the pattern repeats forever......

So here we are, arguing about one feature on a camera due to be replaced.....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> We wait and see the specs of the 6D2 and whether Canon lays an egg.
> 
> 6D2 will sell wonderfully



So, it will be a *golden* egg. 




K said:


> This is the Canon Cult. A sure sign of a cult is the inability for members to speak negatively on any aspect whatsoever. Reading their rhetoric and propaganda - it is always positive, never a criticism. This implies Canon is perfection. Notice how the cultists refuse to ever say anything bad about Canon regardless of the thread or topic, no matter how warranted and truthful it might be. It is full on, complete denial all the time, always. And full on apologetics. Overall, I've said mostly positive things about Canon as they create mostly great products. But as soon as one product is called out for being weaksauce and poor value for dollars spent -- the CULT goes into overtime and swarms.



Evidently you need remedial studies in reading and comprehension.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> This is the Canon Cult. A sure sign of a cult is the inability for members to speak negatively on any aspect whatsoever. Reading their rhetoric and propaganda - it is always positive, never a criticism. This implies Canon is perfection.



Stop for a moment and go back and read the very thread we are on. Canon is far from perfect, and we fully recognize that they could easily put more tech/features in their rigs to line up closer to the competition. No one is refuting that! 

What's more cult-like and out of touch with reality is how far you want to make a point about AF points and card slots. You made that point. We heard you. We agree on the facts (Canon offers less in these areas) but we disagree on their impact to our buying decisions because -- for the thousandth time -- we value different aspects of a overall camera ecosystem than you do.

That's not apologism or delusional behavior. People have different sensibilities than you, and that is not a personal attack. That's just reality. How you choose to either accept that people value different things than you do or declare all of us as being insane for not seeing it your way says _much_ more about you than it does us, but feel free to keep on keeping on.

- A


----------



## unfocused (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> This is the Canon Cult. A sure sign of a cult is the inability for members to speak negatively on any aspect whatsoever...And full on apologetics.



Hmm...I wasn't familiar with the term "apologetics." It turns out that it is "the religious discipline of defending or proving the truth of religious doctrines through systematic argumentation and discourse."

That doesn't fit with your description of a cult, but it might be an accurate description since the majority of those who disagree with you are using systematic argumentation and discourse to expose the fallacies in your rants. I may disagree with the religious analogy, but I kind of take it as a compliment that you recognize our systematic argumentation and discourse. You might want to try it sometime yourself.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 1, 2017)

K said:


> We wait and see the specs of the 6D2 and whether Canon lays an egg.
> 
> It stands to reason based on past trends, that is what will happen - since Canon will not provide 5D4 AF in the 6D2 the same way Nikon provides their top AF in lower bodies. (let alone the dual card slot).
> 
> ...



So, serious question: why do you care? If Nikon is better and cheaper, why are you hanging out here? I'm not telling you not to, but it's not like I go hang out at rumor sites for Nikon or Sony; I have way too few effs to give about what other people are shooting. If Nikon makes you happier, why do you care what Canon does? The only answer I can think of is that you really _do_ prefer Canon, probably for the ecosystem, and wish their bodies had all the features of Nikon's. That ecosystem is why they're able to stratify the line and do the very effective upsell to get the features you feel are necessary. Nikon, lacking that ecosystem, has no choice but to put as much as they can into every body they make, because otherwise no one would have any reason to buy them whatsoever. They're giving away the farm to try to stay afloat, and it shows in their earnings.


----------



## hbr (Jun 1, 2017)

K,
Do you actually own a Nikon D750? If so, then why are you anxiously awaiting the release of the 6D? If not, then why not?


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 2, 2017)

K said:


> the competition priced a far superior specced camera the same, which gives up NOTHING to the 6D and likely the 6D2
> 
> ...
> 
> It's ok guys. Really, it's OK to admit that one camera in the Canon lineup doesn't live up to what it should be.



OK, I agree with you: the Nikon has better specs at the price. Now, what should I do with that?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 2, 2017)

K said:


> This is the Canon Cult. A sure sign of a cult is the inability for members to speak negatively on any aspect whatsoever. Reading their rhetoric and propaganda - it is always positive, never a criticism. This implies Canon is perfection.



What a cynical and dishonest misrepresentation of what's actually been said...

_Again_: it is perfectly possible to be satisfied with Canon - warts and all - without any of the drivel you've written being true. That's all you're seeing here, despite your glib attempt to characterise it as something else entirely.

You are actively ignoring salient facts relating to the success of the 6D (which will _surely_ be built upon by its successor) in your attempt at smug, disingenuous dismissiveness.

Assuming you don't actually _believe_ what you've written (JRR Tolkien would be proud of a work of fiction like that) what are you trying to achieve here? That you've got a politician's knack for word-twisting and obfuscation of facts?

And if you _do_ believe it - you really need to reset your way of looking at the world...

Oh - and only a fool judges the worth of a camera purely by the spec sheet.


----------



## hbr (Jun 2, 2017)

K said:


> This is the Canon Cult. A sure sign of a cult is the inability for members to speak negatively on any aspect whatsoever. Reading their rhetoric and propaganda - it is always positive, never a criticism. This implies Canon is perfection.



No. We all have complaints and wishes but I think it shows that people are quite happy with their Canon equipment and for a couple of better specs don't see the need to switch to Nikon. Nikon isn't perfect either. But if you should decide to switch to Nikon and Nikon fits your photography needs better than Canon, then good for you. No one here will criticize you for that. Nikon makes great cameras also.


----------



## hbr (Jun 2, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > the competition priced a far superior specced camera the same, which gives up NOTHING to the 6D and likely the 6D2
> ...



You must immediately sell all your Canon gear and replace it all with Nikon! Canon is ******* anyway. ;D


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 2, 2017)

hbr said:


> Canon is ******* anyway. ;D



Yeah - I heard that too!

8)


----------



## hbr (Jun 2, 2017)

Keith_Reeder said:


> hbr said:
> 
> 
> > Canon is ******* anyway. ;D
> ...



Then it must not be a rumor. I keep hearing this from everyone. The world is coming to an end!
LOL


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 2, 2017)

The Canon 6D has consistently out sold the D610 and the D750 even though on paper its an inferior camera to some. 
Spec. sheets only tell part of the story, actual picture tell a whole lot more.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 2, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> The Canon 6D has consistently out sold the D610 and the D750 even though on paper its an inferior camera to some.
> Spec. sheets only tell part of the story, actual picture tell a whole lot more.



I'm curious how much of that is 6D sales dominance versus Nikon simply having two offerings where we only had one. 

Though the D750 is the 'porridge is just right' blend of the D610 and D810, we never had such a purpose-built middle price point rig. Sure, the 5D3 fell into that segment in the last 12 months or so, but we didn't exactly price it that way for a very long time.

I'm guessing the 6D outsold the D610 + D750 combined, but I have no data to back that up.

- A


----------



## K (Jun 3, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> If a dual slot is a requirement for someone, they *pay more for a 5-series *or buy a different brand.



(emphasis above mine)


Finally, he spits it out. Someone is made to say it. Rather than argue and defend the indefensible. They say it.

This is exactly my point. For this feature, Canon expects users to pay over $3,000 in a FF body. 

Nikon? $1,500.


This debunks the BS that it's to save money.


There's no justification other than the fact that Canon wants to deter pro use under $3,000, because they know, I know, we know, you know - that cards fail, and jobs and reputation can be ruined. Dual cards is important for this. But I would argue, even a hobbyist or traveler has as much need. Traveling isn't cheap and time and opportunity is limited to visit certain places. Losing once in a lifetime photos on a trip can be just as bad as botching a job.

GG


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 3, 2017)

K said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > If a dual slot is a requirement for someone, they *pay more for a 5-series *or buy a different brand.
> ...


Almost, see below.



> There's no justification other than the fact that Canon wants to deter pro use under $3,000



I would phrase it differently: it's the fact that Canon wants to make money, and they know that people, like you, with the passion for the safety of 2 cards will pay more for a 2-card body. When I say they "know" this, I mean they've almost certainly done market research. This results in higher profit for Canon which, of course, is exactly what successful corporations do.

I think most of us agree that Canon withholds dual slot from less expensive cameras in some part to get people to buy more expensive gear. The difference is our interpretation: you see this as manipulative and nefarious; I see this as typical behavior of successful corporations. I don't like it, I don't approve of it, but it's reality in a capitalist system. 

It would definitely be nefarious if Canon tweaked their firmware to make it appear that single-card was less reliable so people would buy the more expensive body. This is why the diesel emissions cheats by VW, et al were a legitimate scandal. I've shot nearly 100K frames on single-card bodies, and never had a card fail. Bear in mind that I used to work in I.T., so I'm particularly careful about buying, testing and using my cards.

K, it's no scandal -- it's just business: they make a product and set the price; then you get to decide whether to buy it. It's really that simple. Your desire for dual-slot on lower-end bodies is legitimate; your indignation is not. 

By the way, you have not replied to my previous post: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=32501.msg666897#msg666897


----------



## K (Jun 3, 2017)

No one said it was a scandal or a conspiracy.

I absolutely agree that dual card slot may not be for every camera. For a very tiny DSLR, there may be no room. Or at a certain price point, it actually does become about manufacturing costs.

However, for a freaking *$2,000 full frame body*, to not include it is total BS. Again, $2,000 dollars. I don't care if you are a Rebel owner or a 1DX2 owner with radically different perspectives on budget, for $2,000 on a FF body, in the year 2017, there ought to be a 2nd card slot.

And I can make that statement without someone arguing by giving Canon the benefit of the doubt on the economics angle, because I have the real world example that Nikon puts this in 2 FF camera bodies for the same money or less (more often less).


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 3, 2017)

K said:


> No one said it was a scandal or a conspiracy.
> 
> I absolutely agree that dual card slot may not be for every camera. For a very tiny DSLR, there may be no room. Or at a certain price point, it actually does become about manufacturing costs.
> 
> ...


I'm not saying they can't "afford" to do so, I'm saying "business is business:" they do because they can, and that's just business. I agree that the extra size and $50 (or whatever) needed to add a second slot would be great for a 6D2 -- no argument there. In the end, they get to put a product on the market, and I get to decide whether to buy it, and that's all there is to that story.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 4, 2017)

K said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > If a dual slot is a requirement for someone, they *pay more for a 5-series *or buy a different brand.
> ...



The earth revolves around the sun. 

The North Pole is within the Arctic Circle. 

Oh, sorry...I thought we were playing State the Obvious. 

It's not indefensible, no defense of Canon is required. 


Canon decided not to put a second card slot in the 6D.
The 6D was and still remains a best-selling and very popular camera.
You think the 6D is low value and crap.

Two of those three points are facts. The remaining point is your personal opinion. Clearly, your opinion isn't shared by the multitudes who bought a 6D. Deal with it.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 4, 2017)

K said:


> There's no justification other than the fact that Canon wants to deter pro use under $3,000, because they know, I know, we know, you know - that cards fail, and jobs and reputation can be ruined. Dual cards is important for this. But I would argue, even a hobbyist or traveler has as much need. Traveling isn't cheap and time and opportunity is limited to visit certain places. Losing once in a lifetime photos on a trip can be just as bad as botching a job.
> 
> GG



Would I want to have dual ard slots in the 6D. Yep. Would I want 61-point f8 AF in the 6D? You betcha. 

Canon make a single-slot DSLR. For the same price, Nikon include it. 
Canon make more profit from the camera than Nikon does.
Canon are financially healthy. Nikon are not. 

Is that justification enough?
I want my manufacturer to be financially savvy enough to be around when my camera needs fixing. I want my manfacturer's products to do what I want them to do and anything other than that is an 'nice to have'.
For me (and for obviously countless thousands of other purchasers) dual card slots are 'nice to have'.
Canon cameras do what I want them to do in a way like them to work. I am happy with Canon. You clearly are not. 
Yet we both still buy Canon. Go figure.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 4, 2017)

This dual card slot argument really is rediculous. There seem to be so many prepositions to it I am amazed that nobody has seen it for what it, at its core, really is, a marketing device. 

Hasselblad's don't have two card slots yet are used untethered on location all the time. The assumption that two card slots is a 'pro' feature assumes pros value the feature, I have yet to meet one with as sound a multiple card stratergy as many here (Neuro!). In general they just don't care like the posters here do.

Canon multiple card slots as a feature is comparatively weak anyway, mixing card types means for true duplicate writing your camera slows to the slower slot. The presumption that dual cards is the best way to 'backup' images is also fallacious, when I shoot in the studio I tether, to do this Canon cameras are much better than Nikon, I can save a RAW file to the computer and to a card at the same time, Nikon can't.

So, if I shoot outdoors untethered I need to use Nikon for full functionality and speed, if I shoot tethered Canon give me better options. If I shoot wirelessly tethered Canon give me better options. If I want..... blah blah blah.

Two card slots are primarily a marketing device and any Canon user that needs or aspires to them need spend no more than $1,000 to get a secondhand 1DS MkIII.


----------



## dak723 (Jun 4, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> This dual card slot argument really is rediculous. There seem to be so many prepositions to it I am amazed that nobody has seen it for what it, at its core, really is, a marketing device.



If it were a marketing device, it would be on the cheaper cameras, not the pro models.

It is quite amazing that - in order to argue a particular point of view (on both sides of the argument, of course) - even smart people can turn unbelievably dumb. One purpose of dual card slots is protection against card failure. Simple as that.


----------



## K (Jun 4, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > No one said it was a scandal or a conspiracy.
> ...




We agree for the most part. You see it as business (which I agree also), difference is I take it a step further and think they are D-bags for doing that to their customers at that price point. 

For the record, I don't think the 6D is crap. It's a great camera. But it has specs fitting of last decade...which makes it a poor value in my opinion. I don't recommend it to anyone buying their first FF.

I saw others regurgitating the 'it's a best seller' nonsense. Again and again and again, more Canon users, market leader , only budget FF option...stands to reason it would sell great. It's a best seller that isn't the full value it ought to be.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 4, 2017)

dak723 said:


> One purpose of dual card slots is protection against card failure. Simple as that.



No one is arguing that point. 

The original 1D and 1Ds had only a single card slot. Starting with the MkII 1-series cameras, they've had two. In 2012, Canon brought the feature to the 5-series, which differentiated the 5DIII from the 6D. From that perspective, it's a marketing device. 

That being true, does it mean a camera with a single card slot is 'crippled' or 'crap'? Well, as PBD points out, by the logic of 'K', the Hasselblad is H5D is crippled crap because it has only one card slot. I mean, for a $30,000 camera you'd think they could have put in a second slot, after all Nikon has them in $1500 cameras. They're just trying to screw over their customers. But 'K' should be happy that Hasselblad has seen the light, and now offers dual card slots on the H6D... and even in their low-end X1D cameras costing only $9000. So maybe there's hope for the 6DII, after all...


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 4, 2017)

K said:


> I saw others regurgitating the 'it's a best seller' nonsense. Again and again and again, more Canon users, market leader , only budget FF option...stands to reason it would sell great. It's a best seller that isn't the full value it ought to be.


No-one is doubting that. What we disputed was your claim that dual slots is 'essential'. The sales figures show that for many, many people dual card slots are not 'essential' (if it was 'essential' they would not have bought the camera in the numbers they did - marketing facts). Nice to have, yes. Useful? Probably. Essential? Definitely not. 
It is when you use words like 'essential' (meaning 'I want it') that your other claims lose credibility.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 4, 2017)

dak723 said:


> One purpose of dual card slots is protection against card failure.



Yeah, thanks for that insight.

Given that the 6D isn't aimed at pros, and given that cards are really reliable these days anyway, dual card slots _in the 6D_ isn't a paid shoot-saving necessity - it's easy to argue the logic of a single card slot in the 6D, regardless of how supposedly easily or cheaply Canon could choose to go another way.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 4, 2017)

K said:


> I saw others regurgitating the 'it's a best seller' nonsense. Again and again and again



It's regurgitated again and again and again because either you seem incapable of understanding the significance of the point, or you're wilfully ignoring it - which is precisely what trolls do.



> more Canon users, market leader, only budget FF option...stands to reason it would sell great.



So in other words - _again_ - Canon is clearly making the right decisions for its bottom line.



> It's a best seller *that isn't the full value it ought to be*.



_In your opinion_.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 4, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> It is when you use words like 'essential' (meaning 'I want it') that your other claims lose credibility.



And "I want it" isn't the same as "I _need_ it": personally I've never had a single card fail for me in the 12 years since I bought my first DSLR, and I bet that's true of many (most?) of us.

Including K, probably...


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 4, 2017)

K said:


> difference is I take it a step further and think they are D-bags for doing that to their customers at that price point.


Oh, I thought being a d-bag was normal for big a corporation...and I'm only partially joking. With our current hyper-competitive corporate culture, large corporations always walk that line. You could pick any deficient feature of any manufacturer and make the same comment: Sony regarding quality assurance and customer service, Nikon for too-rapid refresh cycle and lens selection, other brands for their reasons. I don't expect every vendor to match feature-for-feature with the competition in its market segment, though it would be nice if they did; and I see no reason to single-out dual card slots for special attention because they are not essential to everyone.



> It's a best seller that isn't the full value it ought to be.


I guess that's another point on which we disagree: I don't believe any particular product "ought" to be anything particular. It is what it is, and I can buy it or not.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 4, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> I don't believe any particular product "ought" to be anything particular. It is what it is, and I can buy it or not.



To suggest that a given item _ought to be a certain way because I say so_ implies an inflated sense of self-entitlement on the part of the person declaring how things "should" be...


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 5, 2017)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > I don't believe any particular product "ought" to be anything particular. It is what it is, and I can buy it or not.
> ...



It's not entitlement, it's a 'cherry-pick all the best things I like into one camera' dreamland that is never going to happen.

Just imagine the flipped scenario in which K actually gets a D750. He/she gets so much of what they want -- two cards, great sensor, lots of AF points, etc.

_...and loses DPAF, the EF portfolio, Canon's great color, reliability, resale value, etc. :
_
- A


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 5, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> It's not entitlement, it's a 'cherry-pick all the best things I like into one camera' dreamland that is never going to happen.



It's that too - but the idea that he considers himself to be the self-appointed arbiter of worth/value/sufficiency/adequacy/acceptability, in a camera (and he clearly does), is much more besides.


----------



## BillB (Jun 5, 2017)

Keith_Reeder said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > It's not entitlement, it's a 'cherry-pick all the best things I like into one camera' dreamland that is never going to happen.
> ...



Could be anticipatory ranting too--triggered by the chance that the 6DII might be announced with one card slot, and by Nikon's blowout sale of the D750 at $1500. There also seems to be a conviction that exagerration, repetition and ridicule together are an effective strategy for persuasion.


----------



## K (Jun 5, 2017)

I'm going to try to fit in more around here, be like the guys.

What I really want is a full frame Rebel for $2,500.

Canon will make me happy either way.


----------



## K (Jun 5, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> _...and loses DPAF, the EF portfolio, Canon's great color, reliability, resale value, etc. :
> _
> - A




DPAF, don't need. It's nice to have. I have a dedicated Canon video camera (with DUAL SD slots!). DSLR's for me are for stills. 

L glass, color, reliability and resale all overrated. Canon has edge on some of these, but nothing game changing in the slightest. 

All of the above does not make up for an 11pt system vs 51pt. Nor does it make up for 4.5 fps vs 6. Nor does it make up for 24mp with 2 more stops of DR. Or the dual card slots. 

We still don't know if Canon is going to implement the 45pt system. Might give us 19pt for all we know.

It's ok. So Nikon has an edge in the entry FF offerings. It's not the end of the world. I'm not trolling anyone here - but the brand loyalty and fanaticism some show is pretty extreme. They have no room for reason.


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 5, 2017)

K said:


> but the brand loyalty and fanaticism some show is pretty extreme. They have no room for reason.



I appreciate your viewpoints, but I just don't see that fanaticism. I see practicality: everyone here can compare specs, but we all know that there's nothing we can do to convince Canon (or any other manufacturer) to make exactly the thing we want. So when someone says "wow, I can't believe model Y doesn't have this feature!" we shrug and go back to shooting. The only time comparing specs and ecosystems is important is when it's time to buy. That's when we have influence, and at no other time (unless Canon sends us a survey or we choose to write a letter to Canon corporate headquarters). It's unlikely that vendors pay much attention to forums like CR.

Regards,

O


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 5, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > but the brand loyalty and fanaticism some show is pretty extreme. They have no room for reason.
> ...



Importantly, when it comes time to buy, the 6D remains a very popular choice...and the 6DII will be, as well. 

Overall, Nikon and Sony have generally better specs in many areas. In aggregate, buyers consistently choose Canon. But people will continue to believe that the spec sheet is what matters most, and claim that Canon is ******* becuase Models S and N have this or that feature and that Model C is 'crippled' by the lack thereof. Well, that's what 'no room for reason' looks like, in practice.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 5, 2017)

K said:


> DPAF, don't need. It's nice to have.



A bit like dual card slots, then...


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 5, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> I just don't see that fanaticism. I see practicality



Yep, this - no more, no less.

Everyone does his own cost/benefit analysis before buying a camera, and it's clear enough that for many, this analysis comes out solidly in favour of the 6D. 

That Canon has decided to "skimp" by withholding a card slot is _self-evidently_ not a _bad_ decision - not for the umpteen users who bought a 6D in the knowledge that it's deficient in the card slot department to the tune of one; and not for Canon.

So it _really is_ hard to see what the problem is...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 5, 2017)

Keith_Reeder said:


> So it _really is_ hard to see what the problem is...



Not really. But, the problem is neither with the 6D nor with Canon...


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 5, 2017)

Touché!


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 5, 2017)

K said:


> but the brand loyalty and fanaticism some show is pretty extreme. They have no room for reason.



The lack of room for reason hits both sides here.....

The 6D is a 5 year old camera.....
The D750 is a 3 year old camera....

They both are targeted (approximately) at the same audience. Of course the 3 year old camera is better. I fully expect the 6D2 to be a better camera than the Nikon, and then in a few years, when Nikon introduces the next one in line, I expect it to be better than the Canon. You can not compare cameras of different vintages and use that to make valid comparisons between companies....

The reality is that the new camera is almost always the best overall. Getting all upset over it is a waste of everyone's time. Features will improve from model to model, and here we are lamenting that, based on the specs of a 6D), a 6D2 has some specs that are not superior to the competition's 3 year old camera when we don't even know what those specs are yet!

Everyone chill out! Wait until you actually know what the specs are, and then you can have the discussion.....


----------



## BillB (Jun 5, 2017)

K said:


> I'm going to try to fit in more around here, be like the guys.
> 
> What I really want is a full frame Rebel for $2,500.
> 
> Canon will make me happy either way.



Then you should prepare for disappointment. The 6DII is not going to be a full frame Rebel and it is not going to costs $2500.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 5, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> The lack of room for reason hits both sides here.....
> 
> The 6D is a 5 year old camera.....
> The D750 is a 3 year old camera....
> ...



Respectfully disagree on that front, Don. The D600/D610 was the 6D equivalent while the D750 was a new price point Nikon was trying create in 2014 between the 'entry' (6D/D610) and 'pro' (5D3/D810). 
_
(Yes, I recognize the 5DS/5D# vs. the D810 does not line up classically to the same user groups, but pro is pro in that these were both $3k+ rigs -- you get my point.)_

The D750 is only the same bucket as a 6D now because Nikon has inexplicably made the D750 the same price as the D610, around $1,500 new. I still don't get why the D750 is being sold so low at the same time as wondering why the D610 cannot possibly be sold under $1500 for some reason. There's really no point to buying a D610 any longer unless you truly hate tilty-flippy screens so badly as to get a worse camera for the same price.

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 5, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > The lack of room for reason hits both sides here.....
> ...



OK...

I was under the impression that Nikon had the following structure:
D600, D610 as entry... (6 series competitor)
B810, D810A as intermediate.... (5 series competitor)
D4, D5 as "pro"..... (1 series competitor)

Then they introduced the D750 between the D610 and D810 with prices and specs accordingly...... The sales of both the D610and D750 were poor compared to the 6D, so rather than wait till the next D610 refresh cycle, they slashed the price on the D750 to the same price as the D610, effectively making the D750 the "intro" model and the D610 a lame duck and essentially non-existent.... and the sales of the D750 took off and it became their best selling FF camera... All in all, a smart marketing move....


----------



## unfocused (Jun 5, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> ...Wait until you actually know what the specs are, and then you can have the discussion.....



What fun is that?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 6, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> All in all, a smart marketing move...



Or a panic move to shift product at any cost? It's not a good sign when a company has to undercut its own cameras in order keep the cash coming in.


----------



## BeenThere (Jun 8, 2017)

So, we are a month or so from the alleged 6D2 announcement and still no leaks of the detailed specs. Canon is playing their cards close to the vest on this one.

On The Who has the mojo discussion, I chose Canon many years ago based on best in class AF (at the time) and best selection of glass (still is in my opinion). I've always been able to find a Canon body that meets my needs. Maybe not best in class in some particular feature at all times, but that honor see-saws back and forth in the fullness of time. I've never regretted going with Canon. If others have made different decisions and are happy with their choices then good for them. Competition is good for everyone and pushes the technology forward.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 8, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> If others have made different decisions and are happy with their choices then good for them.



Indeed - and it would be nice if they viewed our choices with the same degree of open-mindedness...


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 8, 2017)

A watching paint dry week. Nothing on the 6D MKII, 85mm f1.4L IS, a replacement 50mm f1.4. I'm trying to convince a friend to wait for the two lenses but he seems hell bent on buying the 85mm & 50mm Art Sigma lenses (lost sales for Canon).


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 8, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> A watching paint dry week. Nothing on the 6D MKII, 85mm f1.4L IS, a replacement 50mm f1.4. I'm trying to convince a friend to wait for the two lenses but he seems hell bent on buying the 85mm & 50mm Art Sigma lenses (lost sales for Canon).



http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-coming-july-20-2017-cr1/

- A


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 9, 2017)

I know there are people happy to see the camera announcements. I'm just ready to see some L lens announcements.

It is going to be a long year.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 9, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It is going to be a long year.



That's not a bad thing. If they're short, you end up not living as long...


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 9, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Importantly, when it comes time to buy, the 6D remains a very popular choice...and the 6DII will be, as well.
> 
> Overall, Nikon and Sony have generally better specs in many areas. In aggregate, buyers consistently choose Canon. But people will continue to believe that the spec sheet is what matters most, and claim that Canon is ******* becuase Models S and N have this or that feature and that Model C is 'crippled' by the lack thereof. Well, that's what 'no room for reason' looks like, in practice.



It's a constant that internet discussions of anything with a spec sheet will almost always come down to massive arguments about the spec sheet vs preference. It happens in cars (a Corvette is much faster than a Cayman, but a lot of people would rather have the Cayman), it happens with computers and phones (not even getting close to going into detail for fear of derailing the discussion), and it certainly happens here with cameras. The spec sheet brigade insists that the fattest spec sheet, or fastest car, is clearly best, and anyone who prefers another is a badwrong fanboy.

Meanwhile, off-forum, people seem a lot more reasonably. I know Nikon shooters and we've never once gotten snotty about each other's gear. Car guys tend to appreciate each other's cars. Spec sheets are only part of the ownership experience of a product, but it's harder to demonstrate "this feels better in my hands" online, while it's very easy to show a spec sheet comparison.

Or for a personal example, a decade ago or so I bought a GTI instead of a Mazdaspeed3. Yes, the Mazdaspeed was faster. For actually getting to work and doing errands, the GTI felt much better. If someone else preferred the Mazdaspeed, great for them! It's nice that people with different desires can purchase different products.

The strange thing is the insistence that Canon must make the product that these people want, and they don't seem actually interested in the Nikon they keep claiming is clearly superior. My assumption is that these people also actually prefer Canon, no matter what they say about Nikon (or Sony), and they want the best overall package _with_ the best spec sheet, which almost never happens. This is why I keep asking certain people why they'd rather complain about Canon instead of switching to Nikon, because I think if they really explored that in their heads they'd come to the same conclusion, but they've never once answered me.


----------

