# The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 3, 2013)

So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.

Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now). 

Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.


----------



## U-Type (Dec 3, 2013)

What was your reason for switching?


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 3, 2013)

U-Type said:


> What was your reason for switching?



Since I purchased my Fuji x100s, I have been using it about 90% of the time I need a camera (mostly because I always have it with me). When I first got my hands on the Fuji, I went for two whole weeks without touching my 5D3. So it was a lot of money just sitting on the shelf. Problem is, I still have a lot invested in EF glass that I want to continue using when I need them. 

I don't shoot sports or super dynamic action scenes (very often) and figured the body switch would put a little over a grand back in my pocket. After assessing all the different things I shoot, IQ, and what I actually need the Canon system for, I realized that I just couldn't justify having the 5D3 since the 6D offered me enough to get the job done at a reduced cost. 

Things I miss the most are CF slot and AF system from the 5D3. I recognize that moving up from one of the crop bodies (minus the 7D) or 5D2, the AF of the 6D will seem perfectly acceptable if not good. However, moving backwards from the 5D3 AF system, it leaves much to be desired. That being said, I am still able to get the job done with what the 6D has to offer.

Also, I have been selling things here and there and trying to build up a fund to purchase something else. My hope is that Canon puts outs a body aimed at absolute IQ like some are speculating they are working on which is what my piggy bank will be broken for. My interest is also piqued by the rumors of an interchangeable lens full frame Fuji in the works. The possibility of both of those things has led me to want to recoup as much cheese as reasonably possible into the camera fund in preparation.

At the core though, the simple explanation is that I was able to take a long hard look at what my needs are, realized I don't absolutely need the 5D3 and took the opportunity to put some money back in my pocket as the 6D is capable enough for my needs (and most importantly provides the same IQ).


----------



## papa-razzi (Dec 3, 2013)

I'm looking at doing just the opposite. I got a good deal on a Canon refurb 6D at $1,400 USD so I pulled the trigger, but I am seriously considering selling it and moving up to a 5DIII.

The 6D is great, but after having a 7D (still have) for 3 years I have a hard time getting adjusted to the AF system on th 6D. I have ended up using the center point and reframing most of the time, because the outer points don't seem to provide coverage or struggle in lower light.

I thought I would be fine with the AF system on the 6D, and although I can get by on it, I really do miss the 7D AF system.


----------



## arize84 (Dec 3, 2013)

I actually did the same thing and I have not looked back. If you don't need the AF for tracking objects, the 6D is actually a better camera than the 5D3. They are genuine uses for the Wifi, GPS, replaceable screen features of the 6D; and I swear the files the files coming from the 6D are also better; they are slightly cleaner and the shadows react better when pushed in post. I also prefer the smaller size of the camera; it's smaller and lighter but the grip size remains the same as the 5D3. 

I like the fact that it is a simpler camera with less buttons on the back. It took me just a day to learn each button on the back by feel. The 5D3 had a cluster of buttons for superfluous functions such as rating photos. Finally for reasons that I can't understand, I get more accurate focus confirmation using my 6D with manual lenses that are chipped; I have gotten so confident in the AF confirmation that I don't feel the need to chimp every shot using a manual lens.

To be honest the only thing I miss about the 5D3, are that the focus points more spread out than the 6D; but I have mostly been able to work around this. 

Below is an example of what I mean when I'm talking about pushing shadows. This type of shot would have produced a lot of banding in the black skin tone on a 5D2 and the 5D3 would have handled it slightly worse than the 6D.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 3, 2013)

I definitely miss the 5D3 AF. Not having the additional points has been somewhat of a thorn in my side. However, as stated before, it isn't the end of the world for me as I just have to get better with the 11 points.

As Arize stated, I have noticed the same thing regarding the files in post as far as shadow pushing goes.

Now that I have gone small with the Fuji as my primary, I definitely also appreciate the smaller/lighter form factor of the 6D (albeit not a huge difference). 

I don't care for the wifi functionality as I was using the Camranger on the 5D3 before which was much much better and more feature rich than the OEM wifi features. I also don't use GPS so that is a wash.

Overall though, the image quality is quite good and seemingly better in some instances which is enough for me to consider it a good move for the time being.

One other thing to note about my reasoning. I felt like 1-1.5 years from now, it would be easier for me to get rid of the 6D at a smaller loss (and more quickly) if I do decide to get whatever the new FF body from Canon is. 

Some samples so far. Sizes were reduced significantly from sending them on my phone. My apologies for the low res.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 3, 2013)

I hope is a right decision JohnDizzo 

As much as I enjoy X100s, I'm still looking at A7 + Zeiss FE 35mm and/or 55mm as my general camera due to FF.

Will wait out little for Rumor FF X series in 2014 :


----------



## drjlo (Dec 3, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> I hope is a right decision JohnDizzo
> 
> As much as I enjoy X100s, I'm still looking at A7 + Zeiss FE 35mm and/or 55mm as my general camera due to FF.



Have you looked into Sony A7 options for speedlite, wireless trigger (both manual and TTL), and studio strobe/strobist accessories? The options seem awfully restricted, and the latest Sony top-of-line speedlite Sony HVL F60M is reported often to have serious overheat issues.

Looking at my large collection of Canon-compatible speedlites/triggers/accessories and countless other options out there, this is the main thing that gives me pause when thinking about going the Sony A7/r route myself


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> I hope is a right decision JohnDizzo
> 
> As much as I enjoy X100s, I'm still looking at A7 + Zeiss FE 35mm and/or 55mm as my general camera due to FF.
> 
> Will wait out little for Rumor FF X series in 2014 :



Me too. For now, it seems like the right call. It gives me as much as I need out of any available canon body at the moment. I can deal with the AF and some of the other quirks. With this swap + selling a few lenses recently, my fund is already nearing 3k. Will be ready when the time comes. 

I would love to just have one of the Sony bodies right now. But it doesn't make sense for what I need. When I want small, I still think the Fuji is king. The Sony may give me more res, but that's where the advantage stops. More res and dr for me doesn't equate to getting better shots. The Fuji is smaller, ovf/evf, has leaf shutter, and built in nd. Those four things alone make it better for my needs already. The Sony may be smaller than a dslr. But with a fast lens on it (which I would want), it is no longer all that small. If I go big, I'm going with a dslr for faster AF, and compatibility with all my existing lighting equipment. 

These days, my philosophy is either go small (truly), or go big and don't worry about size at all. That being said though, if for some miraculous reason I can get either one of the Sony's at a large discount, I would still consider it. Lol


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

drjlo said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I hope is a right decision JohnDizzo
> ...



+1 I use speedlites and radio triggers a lot.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 4, 2013)

drjlo said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I hope is a right decision JohnDizzo
> ...



If you look at my signature, I doubt you will see any flashes. I like primes, therefore, A7 fits me better. I'm waiting for Zeiss 55mm to be avaiable at local Sony store, so I can hand-on it. If the combo works out as I planned, half of Canon will be gone.

I'm slowly switching over FF mirrorless due to body size. Will keep the monster 300mm + 70-200 + 135L around with 5D III


----------



## LostArk (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> drjlo said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Metz / Nissin / Phottix / Yongnuo speedlights are now so good that they actually outperform Canon/Nikon speedlight systems per dollar and in most cases outright. The new Yongnuo 600EX is going to be the Sigma 35 1.4 of speedlights - cheaper and better than the Canon equivalent. The best speedlight on the market today is the Mecablitz 58 AF-2, which is available in a native Sony configuration. So from a strobist perspective, there's no reason to avoid the A7/7r.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



Bravo! I took a less costly route and just bought the 6D to begin with, having tried my cousin's 5D3 a few times.

John, just keep in mind, that in the eyes of the 5D3 lovers, you are no longer a serious photographer. You have taken a step down in your photographic station in life!


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

LostArk said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > drjlo said:
> ...



Amendment. Compatibility with the lighting equipment I already own.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> ...



That's never meant much to me one way or the other. What matters to me is being able to make the images I want the way I want them (and more easily when possible). 

I will miss the 5D3, but the 6D is enough to get it done for the time being. One of the big motivations for this swap is to have more money ready in prep for canon's next potentially high end full frame offering.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> drjlo said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



I would be all for this same strategy except for the fact that the evf and af speed are still not where I need it to be on mirror less for me to do so. If only I had deeper pockets like yours Dylan, I would sport the Fuji for small, the canon for tele, and pick up the Sony for a trial run. 

Can't wait for you to get your a7/z55 combo so I can hear of your findings and see some images.


----------



## Woody (Dec 4, 2013)

Similar experience here. I used to own the 5D3 and Oly EM5. After 9 to 12 months of usage, I came to the following conclusions: (a) as much as the 5D3 AF impressed me, the camera was too heavy for me (b) even though the EM5 gave me some great images, I totally hated the EVF and ergonomics.

So, I dumped both cameras and replaced them with 6D and 70D. Couldn't be happier. Really enjoying my cameras again. I plan to use both cameras for the next 5 years at least. Will invest more in lenses. Hoping to see 50 f/1.8 IS and 16-50 f/4 IS from Canon soon.


----------



## Richard8971 (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



I haven't done exactly what you have done BUT I had the chance to shoot with a 5D3 for the day and now that I have, I won't buy one. I will keep my 7D.

The 5D3 is a great camera but not worth (at least to me) the $3400 price tag. After reading people's thoughts and reviews I was expecting a powerhouse of a camera, and it really wasn't. I just couldn't justify spending the money on it to upgrade. The 7D is a VERY fast camera and very hard to beat in that department. I shot BIF (birds, raptors exactly, in flight) with the 5D3 and got 10 times more blurry bird shots than I did with my 7D! (Yes I KNOW how to set up my camera for birds in flight, I am NOT new to this! Please don't waste your time telling me how I didn't know what I was doing... I always select the center point on AF and use AI Servo...) I was also using my own EF 70-300L on the 5D3. That lens is lighting fast on AF, so I know the fault wasn't with the lens.

I know a few people will say that I didn't give the 5D3 a chance to give it an honest opinion. Well, let me say this, I had (on loan) the 5D3 for a day and took well over 1000 photos AND was shooting with friends who OWNED the 5D3 and I was asking questions and they were gladly giving me pointers. By the time the day was over, I was so frustrated after shooting with it for a day and getting missed shot after missed shot. In contrast, when I upgraded from my 40D to my 7D, the transition was almost seamless. I had the 7D mostly figured out in just a few shots and was very happy with my decision. It was so much faster (in AF and fps) than my 40D that I was sorry I hadn't upgraded sooner! I learn more and more about it the more I shoot. Honestly? I had really been wanting a 5D3 so I know I was excited to give it a try. It just did not deliver enough goods to make me want to give up my 7D.

A few of my photography friends who upgraded to the 5D3 say that most of the time 5D2 did just as good of a job and in some cases the 5D2 was better. 

I spoke with a good photography friend of mine after I used the 5D3 and told him that I still preferred my 7D over it. Before I tell you what he said, let me say that my friend Kenny is a published and very respected photographer and has owned and/or shot with just about every camera body Canon has ever made, including the 1DX and the 5D3, for starters. He has many friends at Canon and I have learned to respect his words of wisdom. He said to me, "Well, what did you expect? The 7D was designed for speed and the 5D3 was designed mainly for studio work and weddings like the 5D2 was. The 5D3 is a little faster and has better video than the 5D2 but it wasn't designed around speed. You shoot wildlife so the 7D is going to be perfect for that at a fraction of the cost!" 

I couldn't argue with him...

The 5D3 may be a very fast full frame, but not as fast as the 7D. But again, that is my opinion. I used to own the 5D2 and let the ex-wife have it in the divorce, I wasn't super impressed with it either, outside of it's image quality. I shoot wildlife and the 7D is perfect for that. 

So, I respect your decision to sell the 5D3 and get the 6D. I probably would have done the same.

D


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



Yeah... Unthinkable... ;D Rented 5D3 for 1 day just to know if I'm choosing the right camera, I'd say that for around 90% of what I shoot, I find the 6D adequate enough. My only problem with the 6D is it's AF is a slower and I tend to crop more when I shoot moving subjects since I can't almost trust the outer points. The center point is good enough. Another gripe that I have is the maximum flash sync is only 1/180. I was hoping for a faster flash sync.

Here's a shot at around ISO 800 and was pleasantly surprised on the absence of noise (well, almost) even at 100%. Taken with 100mm macro USM non-L.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

@Jason - Definitely agree with you on your points about AF differences. I do realize the limitations relative to the 5D3. However, that is where the importance of self-assessment lies. I took a long, careful look at how often I was actually shooting in situations where I was tracking moving subjects and it was hardly ever. Most of the time, I am able to simply get away with following subjects on my own based on my shooting habits. 

I looked at the 6D not from the standpoint of being a superior/inferior tool when compared to the 5D3, but as a different tool with different things to offer. There are obviously pros and cons to both tools with the 5D3 offering some things that I definitely will miss. However, at this point in my photog life, I just don't need those differences to accomplish what I need to accomplish. With that in mind, I set out to take back $1100 into the fund and still have a very capable Canon body to do what I need to do. And when the time comes, I will be back on the horse for the next pro level ff body (assuming it will provide a marked increase in IQ relative to the current ff offerings).

Also, to detail the financial aspect of the decision. Based on the locale I'm in and the used gear CL market, I will be able to sell the 6D much more quickly simply due to the price range when the time does come to get a different updated body. For now though, suffice to say that I would rather have the money piled up in waiting and a 6D that will serve me well enough for my needs.

Also, re the flash sync speed. The 5D3 is not any better at 1/200 which is nothing in real world usage relative to 1/180. That is definitely something that I took note of as well. However, If I ever need anything in that range or above, I'm using HSS anyway so it was a wash in my view.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Oh I see. Well every little bit helps, but I have a feeling that beast is going to be $9000 or more. A few hundred, or even a thousand bucks, is not a lot of money by comparison. You're best off paying for it over time. The problem is, Adorama and B&H are fond of only giving you 6 months to pay, no interest. By contrast, Amazon will give you up to 24 months, or even more to pay (at least if it's a tv, haha!) Not sure how long they'll give you to pay for a 1 series body that costs that much, though. Might be difficult to get a line of credit large enough with the Amazon card, but I suppose it's possible. You might need over $200k in annual income or something, in which case just paying cash for it might make more sense.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



I anticipate that it will definitely be at least in the 6k range and would not be all that shocked if it were higher as you have stated. I'm already at roughly 3k with all the moves I have made recently. Looking at dumping three or four more lenses which should put me between 6-7k which will have me all set  Oh, not to mention I will also be dumping the 6D at that time for hopefully another thousand'ish.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



How many lenses do you have?


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> How many lenses do you have?



17 native EF mount lenses. 2 sold already. You forced me to think. Lol.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > How many lenses do you have?
> ...



That's impressive man! Got a mint 70-300L you would sell me for "the nice price"?


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Lol. Thanks. Though it would only be impressive if I actually ever used them all. No 70-300L in the closet. Can't help you there.


----------



## greger (Dec 4, 2013)

Up until I finished reading all the responses to your change, I would have thought it was unthinkable and not a good choice. I'm sure you may never look back and regret your decision especially since you now have cash in your camera account for the 5D IV or 7D II. Whatever it is you will be ready. You will advance your skills with the 6D and take some really nice pics in the mean time. Who knows - Maybe the replacement for the 1DX? Keep saving. LOL


----------



## spinworkxroy (Dec 4, 2013)

i don't doubt your decision. The 5D3 is a great camera for what it is..but it is also not a fantastic camera for everything.
For sports and birding, i still think the7D is hard to beat if you can't afford a 1DX.
For portraiture, the 5D3 is not bad but the 6D can do better.
For a regular walkabout, the 5D3 is too heavy.
To me, the 5D3 is a fantastic wedding camera and that's what it was made to do if you ask me.
The downside of the 6D is the AF points, there's just not enough.
But it is also not always that you will need those AF points like the 5D3..
Prices of 5D3 are falling as we speak so it's a good time to sell now before they fall too low..That's why i yself juped at the chance of selling away mine.
It was really a jack of all trades but master of none (other than weddings) and it was just too darn heavy to carry around daily or even on vacations.


----------



## Aglet (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).



good move
I bet you'll likely buy another Fuji before another Canon. 
-


----------



## MLfan3 (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



great then, I did something similar sold my D800 and D800E and got 6D + A7R.

PS. the tiny Sony is a great camera and can even take my NEX7 glass albeit the 1.5x crop mode.
it also takes all my Canon Nikon lenses via adapters, I use SB s3 and that actually even allows my A7R to AF with my EF lenses.
That said , as already a few people pointed out the flash system of this system is really bad ,I often use my old Sony FM43a flash but it does not work on this one very well.
And the 36mp sensor is good in very good light or on tripod but not good at all for lowlight handheld work , so I might downgrade it to the A7.
finally, the Sony 35mm f2.8ZA is an amazing lens , sharp across the FF but it is a bit too dim for walk around at night.
the 55mm f1.8ZA is outstanding , but it is not my FL, so I will not get any more Sony native mount lenses but use my Leica R , Zeiss ZE /ZF and ZM mount lenses.

So, any of you really interested in downsizing your Canon FF5D ,just try Alpha 7 + Speed Booster S3 adapter first and if you like it , get a Sony native glass.


----------



## scottkinfw (Dec 4, 2013)

?


----------



## DaveMiko (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



 ??? You must have been through an episode of temporary insanity. ... Now that you've recovered your senses all you can do is cry out loud. :'( :'(


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

DaveMiko said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> ...



Haven't cried yet. lol. I think I'll survive 99% of most situations I'll run into in the next year with what I've got. 

Deciding what I actually need has always been the hardest thing to bear in mind when buying or keeping gear for me. I think this was one of those moments where I knew I had to make the hard call which was to give up something I didn't actually need all that badly for something that works well enough. That, in exchange for some money back to prepare for something else that I place more value in (i.e. a new ff body with higher IQ ability). 

For my purposes, there is nothing I can't accomplish with the 6D that I was doing with the 5D3. If the swap helps me create an opportunity down the line to get something bigger and better, then so be it.


----------



## DaveMiko (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> DaveMiko said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Well, unless you're shooting wildlife, sports and action, the 6D can serve you well. ... The 5D Mark III is excellent in what the 6D can't accomplish. ... Of course, the very best and the ultimate DSLR for "everything" (so far) is the mighty 1DX.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

DaveMiko said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > DaveMiko said:
> ...



I could do without all the bells and whistles at this point. If Canon released another 6D type ff body but geared it towards absolute IQ, I would be all for it even at a tag above 3k. I don't need high fps, gps, wifi, 100 AF points , etc. I just want a body that will help me get every last bit of IQ out of the existing glass I have. 6D AF + Top level IQ - everything else, if it allowed Canon to keep it at a mere mortal's price range would be ideal for me.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Dec 4, 2013)

I'll be waiting for the next post where you have sold the 6D with your L glass and bought into the Fuji X system.
Unless you concentrate on long telephotos, you may find that the X-Pro (or the shortly expected x-pro II) will
fulfill all your needs and expectations at about 1/3 the weight.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

dickgrafixstop said:


> I'll be waiting for the next post where you have sold the 6D with your L glass and bought into the Fuji X system.
> Unless you concentrate on long telephotos, you may find that the X-Pro (or the shortly expected x-pro II) will
> fulfill all your needs and expectations at about 1/3 the weight.



I would love to go all in on a smaller mirrorless rig. However, my personal opinion of the available systems is that they are not enough to cover all of my needs (along with some other shortcomings).

Although I love my x100s, it merely meets a day to day need where the shortcomings are only forgiven due to the convenience factor. I am able to produce images which I'm very happy with out of it. But it in no way replaces all the tools I need (as you've pointed out with re to tele). I feel the same even with the interchangeable lens models right now since AF is still not quite as fast as I need for certain situations and the ecosystem is still underdeveloped (lenses and flashes). 

Also, if I were to jump on an interchangeable lens Fuji body, I would hope that it is full frame. Considering there is still ambiguity as to whether the XF lenses would provide enough coverage (with the limited number of them), I am not convinced that it will be a developed system very quickly. That being said, I am rooting for them and hope that they continue to come out with innovative and awesome imaging tools.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 4, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I hope is a right decision JohnDizzo
> ...



I went to local Sony store today, test out the A7. For indoor shooting, I think the combo A7 + 28-70(kit lens) will out perform Fuji X100s in term of AF speed. I was testing at f5.6 from close-up to far way out. Will be interesting year for me


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Nice. Wish I had a local store that carried anything worth mentioning for me to even do tests with. If that combo does in fact outperform the Fuji in AF speed, then it must be very close to DSLRs. Although, I've never been much for f/4 max lenses. lol. It would be a dream come true to be able to mount Canon glass with the adapter and have it focus that fast. a7r + fast primes + same AF speed as the native lenses = me so happy


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 4, 2013)

FWIW, did some low light shooting last night with the 6D. The outer points (the few that are there) are pretty crappy compared to the 5D3 in low light. The center point was definitely way more awesome. Actually hit a lot faster and more consistently in similar lighting at the center than the 5D3 when I had it. Surprising difference actually. Those outer points may prove to be a thorn in my side in some situations. More to come....


----------



## lucuias (Dec 5, 2013)

for hobbies whom don't required tracking the subject or intensively use alot of outer focus point.I do think 6D is more than enough.The Wifi & gps thing is an interesting featured for travel especially with light prime lens.

However,as for myself ,I am a wedding photographer where I extensively use the outer focus point tracking movements.Oftenly,I do think 5Dmark III auto focus point isn't wide spread enough which I do even focus with the most outer focus point and recompose to the position I desire.






Tracking using outer focus point





Using outer focus point and recompose


----------



## Canon1 (Dec 5, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> The 5D3 is a great camera but not worth (at least to me) the $3400 price tag. After reading people's thoughts and reviews I was expecting a powerhouse of a camera, and it really wasn't. I just couldn't justify spending the money on it to upgrade. The 7D is a VERY fast camera and very hard to beat in that department. I shot BIF (birds, raptors exactly, in flight) with the 5D3 and got 10 times more blurry bird shots than I did with my 7D! (Yes I KNOW how to set up my camera for birds in flight, I am NOT new to this! Please don't waste your time telling me how I didn't know what I was doing... I always select the center point on AF and use AI Servo...) I was also using my own EF 70-300L on the 5D3. That lens is lighting fast on AF, so I know the fault wasn't with the lens.



Not trying to start a fight here but.... you definitely didn't have the 5DIII AF set up correctly for the type of shooting you were doing (or something else was going on). I have shot extensively with Rebels, 7D, 1DIV, 5DII and 5DIII for BIF... hands down the 5DIII is the best out of all of these regarding AF speed and accuracy. The 7D does have a very good AF system but once you get the setup right on the 5DIII it is nothing short of amazing.

Regarding the OP. Glad you sorted out your priorities. It sounds like you are looking for some justification for your decision from the forum and there are definitely a lot of people who think along similar lines. The 5DIII is a fully customizable workhorse and for many shooters it is certainly overkill. The cameras you are using are great and will not hold you back from making great images. Happy shooting.


----------



## babiesphotos.ca (Dec 5, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



I've done it in March. 
Got about $1130 diff in letting go off almost new 5D MK III for new 6D, after selling 24-105 lens, and it was the right decision for me.


----------



## Nishi Drew (Dec 5, 2013)

I'm still on a 5DII and need a reason to upgrade 8)


Ok seriously no, I do want a 5D3, I've missed many worthy shots with the AF, and I shoot too many indoor events/low light subjects and weddings to keep risking more with it. Cool thing is though, I bought my 5D used, and I've found the used value here hasn't dropped, and I will be able to sell it for next to no loss if I do it right~


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Dec 5, 2013)

Nishi Drew said:


> I'm still on a 5DII and need a reason to upgrade 8)
> 
> 
> Ok seriously no, I do want a 5D3, I've missed many worthy shots with the AF, and I shoot too many indoor events/low light subjects and weddings to keep risking more with it. Cool thing is though, I bought my 5D used, and I've found the used value here hasn't dropped, and I will be able to sell it for next to no loss if I do it right~



The 6D can out perform the 5D3 in low light.


----------



## GaryJ (Dec 5, 2013)

picked the 6D over 5DIII as I mostly shoot macro with the MP-E65,manual focus only on this lens,just wanted ff and have found the low light performance means I can shoot available light handheld without having to use MT-24,5DIII overkill for me.


----------



## Niki (Dec 5, 2013)

although I've been shooting a lot with my canon FILM camera…i kept my 5d m3…a good combo for me


----------



## jrista (Dec 5, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> ...



I wouldn't say this at all. Based on his explanation, it sounds like he made an ideal decision. The 5D III was sitting on a shelf, the Fuji was getting more use, but he had a big investment in EF glass. Sounds like John and the 6D are a match made in heaven...


----------



## jrista (Dec 5, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> ...



Actually, for BIF, single center point is not the best AF option. The ideal setup, on both the 5D III and 7D, is to use at the very least center point expansion, but small zone works just as well if not better in some cases. The reason for this is due to the fact that even with steady hands, at long focal lengths the subject moves around a little bit in the frame, which can make detection of contrasty regions by the AF unit difficult. Just going to expansion mode does wonders for BIF tracking accuracy on both cameras, but more so with the 5D III as it's AF points are smaller than the 7D points (which are actually rather huge relative to the frame). 

Small zone works even better on the 5D III, however it is less biased for the center points, which are more precise than the two columns of points on either side. On top of that, you need a slow to medium-slow tracking sensitivity (check custom functions), which will help mitigate focus jumping when momentary obstructions pass in front of the bird being tracked (the 7D and 5D III default to a moderately fast setting, meaning focus tends to jump off your subject to whatever is closer to the photographer...took me a bit to figure this out for the 7D when I first started BIF, and I kept getting clearly focused trees and telephone poles and the like in my continuous shooting of birds like raptors, pelicans, gulls, etc..) 



Richard8971 said:


> I know a few people will say that I didn't give the 5D3 a chance to give it an honest opinion. Well, let me say this, I had (on loan) the 5D3 for a day and took well over 1000 photos AND was shooting with friends who OWNED the 5D3 and I was asking questions and they were gladly giving me pointers. By the time the day was over, I was so frustrated after shooting with it for a day and getting missed shot after missed shot. In contrast, when I upgraded from my 40D to my 7D, the transition was almost seamless. I had the 7D mostly figured out in just a few shots and was very happy with my decision. It was so much faster (in AF and fps) than my 40D that I was sorry I hadn't upgraded sooner! I learn more and more about it the more I shoot. Honestly? I had really been wanting a 5D3 so I know I was excited to give it a try. It just did not deliver enough goods to make me want to give up my 7D.



First, a couple thousand shots, especially with BIF, is maybe an hour of shooting (average burst of 5-6 frames, every 15-30 seconds or so...which is a fairly conservative estimate given that you can easily burn through the whole buffer for one longish BIF sequence, and fill a 32gb card with over 1200 shots in an hour of active shooting). In a couple hours of AI Servo action tracking photography, I can fill up a few CF cards, with bursts between five to twenty shots each (which is only a second or two worth of actual shooting.) If you had said you took 5000-8000 shots over a few of days, it would seem like you had more experience with the camera. A thousand shots with BIF doesn't feel anywhere remotely close to enough experience to actually get the hang of using the 5D III (in one years time, I took almost 80,000 shots with my 7D, the very vast majority of which were birds and BIF). Given what you have described, if you really did have all that trouble after being experienced with the 7D, then it honestly sounds like you might have even had a bad copy. Assuming it was properly configured as I mentioned above, the 5D III should be nailing birds in flight with tack sharp results like clockwork...to have such consistent problems focusing indicates either operator error or a defective copy.

I'd also point out that world renown professional photographers like Art Morris use the 5D III on a daily basis for bird and BIF work. With the proper skill, the 5D III is an extremely powerful tool for capturing action...just as powerful as the 7D, but with the potential to pack more pixels on subject...23% more on average.

It's all fine and dandy if you prefer your 7D. Nothing wrong with that. It just sounds like you are on a crusade to demonize the 5D III based on a rather fleeting "1000+" shots experience with it. It is a far more capable and effective camera than you are giving it credit for.


----------



## Bruce 101 (Dec 5, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> Nishi Drew said:
> 
> 
> > I'm still on a 5DII and need a reason to upgrade 8)
> ...



Are you basing this statement on extensive experience with both cameras?

I took the 6D and the 5DIII to a one week dance recital. Swapping L lenses back and forth. About 12,000 shots between the two cameras. This was a low light venue. My keeper rate on the 5D III was about three times what it was on the 6D. How well or poorly the 6D handles low light has as much to do with AF as anything else. I would not think of using the 6D again for a low light venue where I am shooting a large number of shots. Can the 6D create incredible shots in low light venues? Yes. But not consistently. YMMV.


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 5, 2013)

Bruce 101 said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > Nishi Drew said:
> ...



I think he's talking of IQ here instead of AF. 6D does have a marginally better IQ (as proven in most popular reviews but not noticeable if you don't pixel peep) in higher ISOs than 5D3. Of course, 5D3 is much better for moving objects just like what you shoot, a dance recital. I had used in the past a 1DIV and AF performance wise, 6D won't be able to perform near it except maybe in very low light.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

Canon1 said:


> Richard8971 said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D3 is a great camera but not worth (at least to me) the $3400 price tag. After reading people's thoughts and reviews I was expecting a powerhouse of a camera, and it really wasn't. I just couldn't justify spending the money on it to upgrade. The 7D is a VERY fast camera and very hard to beat in that department. I shot BIF (birds, raptors exactly, in flight) with the 5D3 and got 10 times more blurry bird shots than I did with my 7D! (Yes I KNOW how to set up my camera for birds in flight, I am NOT new to this! Please don't waste your time telling me how I didn't know what I was doing... I always select the center point on AF and use AI Servo...) I was also using my own EF 70-300L on the 5D3. That lens is lighting fast on AF, so I know the fault wasn't with the lens.
> ...



Already had my justification as I wouldn't have pulled the trigger without it. Usually pretty thorough in my decision making process (at least with regard to gear). Just thought it would be an interesting conversation to strike up as I wanted to hear about other people's potentially similar experiences.

Definitely agree with you in that the 5D3 is a workhorse which I would have kept if I did this for a living. But since my only real concern at the moment is having merely a sufficient amount of usability + arguably the best (or equal to) IQ Canon has to offer at the moment, I could do without what the 5D3 offers and save some money until I can improve the latter criteria.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> Nishi Drew said:
> 
> 
> > I'm still on a 5DII and need a reason to upgrade 8)
> ...



Generally a horribly generalized statement. But I will say it does perform better in low light if you are only using the center point. That being said, every other aspect of the AF system is significantly weaker than the 5D3.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

jrista said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 5, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > Nishi Drew said:
> ...



I think you've nailed it here. There are two factors that do support the general statement, but others that don't. The two factors that support the statement are:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Center point on the 6D has the highest sensitivity of any Canon body (to -3EV).
6D has *slightly* better high ISO performance and is slightly cleaner in the shadow areas.
[*]
[/list]


But there the 6D's advantages end. If you are tracking moving subjects in low light, the far more robust AF of the 5DIII is going to produce a higher keeper rate.

My article on why I chose a 6D over a 5DIII has been the most popular I have ever written and has been viewed many tens of thousands of times. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence in this thread to support many of my conclusions, but my purpose is not to put down the 5DIII. It is, perhaps, the best all around camera that Canon has ever produced. But Canon made a curious decision when producing the 6D. There are areas where it is clearly the "lower rent" version of its big brother, and yet there are also areas where it excels and even surpasses the 5D3. Canon has not created a perfectly clear hierarchy of "good, better, best", but has rather produced camera options that are really more about WHAT you shoot or your style of shooting.

For some the 6D is a fabulous choice. For others the 5DIII is the only choice (unless you are willing to go into 1DX territory). It's all about your needs.


----------



## langdonb (Dec 5, 2013)

Canon1 said:


> Richard8971 said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D3 is a great camera but not worth (at least to me) the $3400 price tag. After reading people's thoughts and reviews I was expecting a powerhouse of a camera, and it really wasn't. I just couldn't justify spending the money on it to upgrade. The 7D is a VERY fast camera and very hard to beat in that department. I shot BIF (birds, raptors exactly, in flight) with the 5D3 and got 10 times more blurry bird shots than I did with my 7D! (Yes I KNOW how to set up my camera for birds in flight, I am NOT new to this! Please don't waste your time telling me how I didn't know what I was doing... I always select the center point on AF and use AI Servo...) I was also using my own EF 70-300L on the 5D3. That lens is lighting fast on AF, so I know the fault wasn't with the lens.
> ...



Canon1, would you please share your setup for the 5DIII? I have been shooting with the 6D and I am not happy with it's AF, particularly it's slow focus lock time using a 70-300Lens. My 60D is much better.

So I intend to sell the 6D and buy a III. I shot a lot of birds and think I will be much happier.


----------



## Artifex (Dec 5, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > Janbo Makimbo said:
> ...



Just out of curiosity, would there be any real benefit of using a 5DIII over if for someone who doesn't use AF?


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

Artifex said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Just depends on your usage/needs. Dual card slot, longer shutter life, faster max shutter speed/flash sync, just to quickly name a few off the top of my head (I'm sure there are some others I left out).


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 5, 2013)

Artifex said:


> Just out of curiosity, would there be any real benefit of using a 5DIII over if for someone who doesn't use AF?



No much. 5DIII still has a higher frame rate and a slightly higher sync speed. If you're giving up AF and using MF exclusively, then it might make more sense to get the Sony A7R over the 6D.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 5, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


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



Good points. Ultimately only you can answer that question for yourself. I personally find both the GPS and Wi-Fi functionality of the 6D very, very helpful. I just came home from traveling and had over 1300 images already geotagged. I will be writing on locations and even using some of the images in teaching, and having them placed on a map by the camera means that I had to take fewer notes. I can see where I was while taking the photo in LR. That is very nice.

I use the Wi-Fi both to remotely shoot (including sitting in the warmth of my car and shooting LE work in sub-zero temperatures) and to transfer images to my iPad when I need to immediately supply images at events. Those two things are more important to me *personally* than dual card slots or (slightly) higher sync speed.

The question I often ask people is whether the additional features of the 5DIII are worth more to them than the $1300 that they could spend on lenses or other gear by buying the 6D. That is the question you have to answer.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Good points. Ultimately only you can answer that question for yourself. I personally find both the GPS and Wi-Fi functionality of the 6D very, very helpful. I just came home from traveling and had over 1300 images already geotagged. I will be writing on locations and even using some of the images in teaching, and having them placed on a map by the camera means that I had to take fewer notes. I can see where I was while taking the photo in LR. That is very nice.
> 
> I use the Wi-Fi both to remotely shoot (including sitting in the warmth of my car and shooting LE work in sub-zero temperatures) and to transfer images to my iPad when I need to immediately supply images at events. Those two things are more important to me *personally* than dual card slots or (slightly) higher sync speed.
> 
> The question I often ask people is whether the additional features of the 5DIII are worth more to them than the $1300 that they could spend on lenses or other gear by buying the 6D. That is the question you have to answer.



Agreed re the wifi functionality except that I don't think it is as developed as the camranger UI and feature set. The only thing I like about the 6D wifi feature is that it is built in and I don't have to have an extra attachment. Otherwise, the camranger makes the oem wifi look like a beta version (albeit still very usable and perfectly sufficient). 

For me personally, the decision between the two ultimately falls on the price difference and the AF need for the individual. Although the other differences between the two play a role, the AF is where the core of the separation is in my opinion. 

Agreed re your earlier comment about ISO performance and shadow noise. Surprisingly enough, I on average prefer the files out of the 6D which was a surprise to me. 

If you are someone who is on the fence at the moment, I think the first question you should ask yourself is whether you will be able to consistently get the shots you need with the AF of the 6D. Second would be how badly you need the higher FPS. Then third would be card slots.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Dec 5, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > Nishi Drew said:
> ...


Its actually a statement of fact, although general it has been proved that the 6d CAN outperform the 5D3 in low light albeit with the centre point. Many pro photogs in a poorly lit church for example would use the centre point anyway which at -3 EV is clearly superior to the 5D3. Yes you do have squillions of focus points but that is not the point here!


----------



## bleephotography (Dec 5, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



I actually made the same moves as you John, and for the same reasons. However, after using my 6D for only a few months I soon realized that I sorely missed the more advanced AF system of the 5DIII and have since sold the 6D and bought a 5DIII...again. Although the 6D is truly a superb FF DSLR, I found myself (as an amateur) unable to get a sufficient keeper rate using fast glass and the outer AF points, therefore I would end up using only the center AF point and cropping in because focus-and-recompose at < f/1.4 is not especially effective. Although I do miss the aforementioned features of the 6D, including the -3EV center point, built-in Wi-Fi and that all of the buttons are located on the right side for easy, one-handed access, the 5DIII is in fact a better camera and is therefore priced accordingly.

Overall, I did lose a couple hundred bucks by selling the 5DIII to pick up a 6D, and then selling the 6D to pick up a 5DIII, so if I can give any suggestions from my experience it would be to first and foremost go with the one you can afford and if that is either of them, then go with the 5DIII. The only reason I can see someone _downgrading_ from a 5DIII to a 6D is for cost reasons (as is the case with the OP and me), whereas many 6D users perceive the 5DIII as the next step in the _upgrade_ path due to the more professional features (AF system, dual cards, robust body, etc.), hence the cost difference. Either way, both are excellent bodies and offer some noteworthy features over one another, but if both cameras were priced the same I'd be willing to bet that nearly all of those saying that the 6D is a better camera would end up purchasing the 5DIII or eventually exchanging for it because overall, it is a better camera (although from a $/performance standpoint the 6D clearly wins). Just thought I'd share my experiences ;D


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 5, 2013)

I've been shooting wildlife and landscape in Montana for two months. I had the 6D and 5D III shipped to the hotel. I ended up keeping the 6D, even for wildlife. It just has less noise and a nicer looking image when lifting shadows. Also, the center point autofocus was superior to the 5D III when the wildlife comes out most(dawn and dusk). The 5D III build was nicer.


--------------

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/


----------



## mwh1964 (Dec 5, 2013)

For me the build of the 5D3 felt so much better over the 6D that there was no question about what to choose. Could I live with the 6D? O yea. And even a P&S, but such logical thinking does not apply in this case.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 5, 2013)

bleephotography said:


> I actually made the same moves as you John, and for the same reasons. However, after using my 6D for only a few months I soon realized that I sorely missed the more advanced AF system of the 5DIII and have since sold the 6D and bought a 5DIII...again. Although the 6D is truly a superb FF DSLR, I found myself (as an amateur) unable to get a sufficient keeper rate using fast glass and the outer AF points, therefore I would end up using only the center AF point and cropping in because focus-and-recompose at < f/1.4 is not especially effective. Although I do miss the aforementioned features of the 6D, including the -3EV center point, built-in Wi-Fi and that all of the buttons are located on the right side for easy, one-handed access, the 5DIII is in fact a better camera and is therefore priced accordingly.
> 
> Overall, I did lose a couple hundred bucks by selling the 5DIII to pick up a 6D, and then selling the 6D to pick up a 5DIII, so if I can give any suggestions from my experience it would be to first and foremost go with the one you can afford and if that is either of them, then go with the 5DIII. The only reason I can see someone _downgrading_ from a 5DIII to a 6D is for cost reasons (as is the case with the OP and me), whereas many 6D users perceive the 5DIII as the next step in the _upgrade_ path due to the more professional features (AF system, dual cards, robust body, etc.), hence the cost difference. Either way, both are excellent bodies and offer some noteworthy features over one another, but if both cameras were priced the same I'd be willing to bet that nearly all of those saying that the 6D is a better camera would end up purchasing the 5DIII or eventually exchanging for it because overall, it is a better camera (although from a $/performance standpoint the 6D clearly wins). Just thought I'd share my experiences ;D



What's the light condition looks like at -3EV? Who photograph at -3EV?

6D might have the advantage with -3EV(on paper speaking), however, will it focus accurate under that light condition or even under -2EV?

To me, having 41 cross-type AF points and 5 *dual* diagonal AF points are MUST better than 1 AF point camera. 

OP will miss his 5D III when he needs to shoot something like this: http://albums.phanfare.com/isolated/t302HPVC/1/6306064


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

mwh1964 said:


> For me the build of the 5D3 felt so much better over the 6D that there was no question about what to choose. Could I live with the 6D? O yea. And even a P&S, but such logical thinking does not apply in this case.



Agree with you re the build. But my reasoning isn't as simple as whether the 5D3 is a better camera overall or worth the difference in price. My main personal conclusion was that I could get away with the 6D feature set and continue to make the same images I was making with my 5D3 albeit with less ease. Either way though, I got what I felt to be a significant amount of money back, equal to or slightly better files for post, and am now well on my way towards building the fund for a body with a price tag of 5k or more.

Putting all that aside, I also had to bear in mind that I have only minimally used the Canon rig since buying the Fuji.

Much like Dustin has stated, the decision is tough for many simply due to the mindset or thinking that one has to be ultimately be seen as being better than the other. I firmly believe that they are two very different tools with distinct differences which meet varying needs. The key here being variances of need. In this moment in time, the 6D is enough for me based on the collection of circumstances.


----------



## DaveMiko (Dec 5, 2013)

What does the light condition look like at -3EV? Who takes pics at -3EV? Are those pics usable without flash? The 6D has only a very slim theoretical advantage (if one may call it that) over the 5D Mark III. In real terms, there's no reason why anyone would choose the 6D, with its primitive AF system, over the 5D Mark III. The only fact that makes sense is if you can't afford the 5D Mark III. That's the only, true reason here. Period!


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> bleephotography said:
> 
> 
> > I actually made the same moves as you John, and for the same reasons. However, after using my 6D for only a few months I soon realized that I sorely missed the more advanced AF system of the 5DIII and have since sold the 6D and bought a 5DIII...again. Although the 6D is truly a superb FF DSLR, I found myself (as an amateur) unable to get a sufficient keeper rate using fast glass and the outer AF points, therefore I would end up using only the center AF point and cropping in because focus-and-recompose at < f/1.4 is not especially effective. Although I do miss the aforementioned features of the 6D, including the -3EV center point, built-in Wi-Fi and that all of the buttons are located on the right side for easy, one-handed access, the 5DIII is in fact a better camera and is therefore priced accordingly.
> ...



Indeed I will. You are absolutely correct in that assessment, Dylan. However, at this point in time, I rarely encounter these types of situations where the dynamics are such that I could not follow something on my own and get it done anyway. 

I recognize that there are definite needs for the focus system of the 5D3, but I can only imagine having that need about 1-2 times in the next year. I have been getting away with using the x100s most days for the last month. Because of that, I think I can survive with the 6D until the new Canon FF bodies come out at which time, I won't like trying to get rid of the 5D3 locally. When I do decide I need to sell the 6D to recoup funds, I don't doubt that I could quickly get at least 1k for it anytime within the next year and a half. The key here is that one of the factors for me was the ability to resell later in an expeditious fashion and be able to sustain only a small loss. I have a wife that doesn't greenlight anything, so this is important.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

DaveMiko said:


> How does the light condition look like at -3EV? Who photographs at -3EV? Are those pics usable without flash? The 6D has only a very slim theoretical advantage (if one may call it that) over the 5D Mark III. In real terms, there's no reason why anyone would choose the 6D, with its primitive AF system, over the 5D Mark III. The only fact that makes sense is if you can't afford the 5D Mark III. That's the only, true reason here. Period!



I shoot at -3EV more than I would like to. But I do it. I have a baby and another young child in the house. There are also plenty of times when we are out at night and I don't have my flash with me. This weekend alone, we are going on a carriage ride at 8pm through a decorated neighborhood where there will be -3EV conditions a lot. 

Again though, the center point of the 6D was not my motivation for making the swap. Just making a point.

Your assessment of why anyone would choose a 6D over a 5D3 is quite flawed and already proven to be so based on several users here in this thread alone. I already owned a 5D3 (two of them at one point). Furthermore, I'm pretty sure my glass collection alone covers the value of everything you have in your signature (if we want to get into being able to afford things). ;D


----------



## DaveMiko (Dec 5, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> DaveMiko said:
> 
> 
> > How does the light condition look like at -3EV? Who photographs at -3EV? Are those pics usable without flash? The 6D has only a very slim theoretical advantage (if one may call it that) over the 5D Mark III. In real terms, there's no reason why anyone would choose the 6D, with its primitive AF system, over the 5D Mark III. The only fact that makes sense is if you can't afford the 5D Mark III. That's the only, true reason here. Period!
> ...



I don't want to get into that (because I haven't listed in my signature everything I own 8) ). ... Unless you're using a 1DX, pics snapped at very high ISOs aren't usable.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 5, 2013)

For those of you who do night sky stuff, the 6D smokes the 5D III (another reason why I picked it instead):

http://petapixel.com/2012/12/13/canon-6d-and-5dmk3-noise-comparison-for-high-iso-long-exposures/


----------



## Sporgon (Dec 5, 2013)

DaveMiko said:


> The only fact that makes sense is if you can't afford the 5D Mark III. That's the only, true reason here. Period!



That isn't strictly true. You're assuming that sophisticated AF is important to everyone, and that is not the case. 

At Building Panoramics we could have afforded a 5D III but chose the 6D because of it's smaller size, lighter weight and interchangeable screens. 

The 6D AF is superior to the 5D & 5DII despite 'looking' the same.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

DaveMiko said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > DaveMiko said:
> ...



I certainly also do not want to get into that. Hence my lack of a signature line or comments/assessments about whether others buy something because they can't afford the other. ;D

Unusable for whom though? I get ISO 6400 files out of my Fuji x100s that are technically "usable" for some purposes. Different strokes for different folks. I won't be using high ISO files for large prints for paid gigs. I am also not a pro. As such, my photos are seldom paid for. When they are, I will certainly not be shooting at >3200 if I can help it.

Again, the core of the issue here is that I don't believe the 6D is a more usable or better camera than the 5D3. I made the decision based on the fact that I could get the things I need done with it. That is a personal choice which I in no way believe is applicable for all situations for all shooters. But it certainly bears no reflection on whether I can afford a 5D3. 

BTW, I was one of the immediate adopters of the 5D3 (early enough that I had to have the tape fix from Canon). No qualms about spending money when I deem fit. There are also a few others in the thread that have made the same switch downward. Not always a matter of whether or not someone can afford something as some of us have owned the more expensive item first.


----------



## bleephotography (Dec 5, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> bleephotography said:
> 
> 
> > I actually made the same moves as you John, and for the same reasons. However, after using my 6D for only a few months I soon realized that I sorely missed the more advanced AF system of the 5DIII and have since sold the 6D and bought a 5DIII...again. Although the 6D is truly a superb FF DSLR, I found myself (as an amateur) unable to get a sufficient keeper rate using fast glass and the outer AF points, therefore I would end up using only the center AF point and cropping in because focus-and-recompose at < f/1.4 is not especially effective. Although I do miss the aforementioned features of the 6D, including the -3EV center point, built-in Wi-Fi and that all of the buttons are located on the right side for easy, one-handed access, the 5DIII is in fact a better camera and is therefore priced accordingly.
> ...





DaveMiko said:


> What does the light condition look like at -3EV? Who takes pics at -3EV? Are those pics usable without flash? The 6D has only a very slim theoretical advantage (if one may call it that) over the 5D Mark III. In real terms, there's no reason why anyone would choose the 6D, with its primitive AF system, over the 5D Mark III. The only fact that makes sense is if you can't afford the 5D Mark III. That's the only, true reason here. Period!



To give you an idea, -3EV is comparable to shooting under moonlight, which is pretty significant if you ask me. You might wonder who would shoot under such conditions on a regular basis, but I say every little bit helps 

Nonetheless, I have no regrets in re-purchasing a 5D III and I may even get a 6DII as a backup body when it's announced (assuming it has a significantly better AF system). Sure the 5DIII may be an overall better camera, but it doesn't make any sense for the OP to keep it if he doesn't really _need_ the added benefits and he can use the funds for something else. The IQ differences between the two are fairly negligible, therefore choosing one over the other should be based on their static features or lack thereof (as Sporgon mentioned, size, interchangeable screens, AF system, etc.) and one's needs and affordability. Sometimes an overall "better" camera isn't better for everyone.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 5, 2013)

bleephotography said:


> To give you an idea, -3EV is comparable to shooting under moonlight, which is pretty significant if you ask me. You might wonder who would shoot under such conditions on a regular basis, but I say every little bit helps
> 
> Nonetheless, I have no regrets in re-purchasing a 5D III and I may even get a 6DII as a backup body when it's announced (assuming it has a significantly better AF system). Sure the 5DIII may be an overall better camera, but it doesn't make any sense for the OP to keep it if he doesn't really _need_ the added benefits and he can use the funds for something else. The IQ differences between the two are fairly negligible, therefore choosing one over the other should be based on their static features or lack thereof (as Sporgon mentioned, size, interchangeable screens, AF system, etc.) and one's needs and affordability. Sometimes an overall "better" camera isn't better for everyone.



Exactly.

Also, to give you an idea, I have captured many images of my 13 month old daughter while she was asleep at night without turning the lights on merely because I wanted to capture her the way she was at that exact moment without disturbing her. I did the same with my son when he was younger and occasionally still do today as he is quite the peculiar sleeper. Again, I won't be selling those images or doing the same ones for a client. But they are definitely important to myself and my family/friends. Regardless, although I find the added sensitivity of the center point useful at times, it was not a significant factor in my decision.

With regard to the financial aspect of the decision. You are absolutely right about being able to spend it on other things. In this case, I am saving up for what will probably be a much more expensive body than the 5d3. 

@DaveMiko - God forbid I get the next 6k-8k price tagged body before you do. And if it happens to be a 1 series body, I will try my best not to assume that you don't have it because you can't afford it and are content with using a lowly 1Dx ;D


----------



## DaveMiko (Dec 5, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> @DaveMiko - God forbid I get the next 6k-8k price tagged body before you do. And if it happens to be a 1 series body, I will try my best not to assume that you don't have it because you can't afford it and are content with using a lowly 1Dx ;D



;D The bottom line is: If you have the money and you want it, you will get the best that there is out there. ... Currently, that is the mighty 1DX! 8)


----------



## jrista (Dec 5, 2013)

langdonb said:


> Canon1 said:
> 
> 
> > Richard8971 said:
> ...



How do you have your 6D focus set up? Are you using AI Servo? 

For tracking moving subjects, such as birds in flight, you want to tune the AF system for AI Servo tracking of a locked on subject, with continuous AF search. You also want to make sure that the AF system is tuned to ensure focus is locked before releasing the shutter. These are all options in your 6D custom functions. Pull out your manual and read up on them, so you understand what each setting does. It only takes a minute to set it all up, then you are ready to go.

It also helps to decouple the AF-ON function from the shutter button. I usually configure the * button on the back of the camera as my AF-ON button, and the shutter button as meter on (half pressed) and activate shutter when fully pressed. This gives you FAR more control over AF, and gives you the ability to explicitly refocus on a different subject or retry focus when it stops just by releasing and pressing the * button again.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 5, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> bleephotography said:
> 
> 
> > I actually made the same moves as you John, and for the same reasons. However, after using my 6D for only a few months I soon realized that I sorely missed the more advanced AF system of the 5DIII and have since sold the 6D and bought a 5DIII...again. Although the 6D is truly a superb FF DSLR, I found myself (as an amateur) unable to get a sufficient keeper rate using fast glass and the outer AF points, therefore I would end up using only the center AF point and cropping in because focus-and-recompose at < f/1.4 is not especially effective. Although I do miss the aforementioned features of the 6D, including the -3EV center point, built-in Wi-Fi and that all of the buttons are located on the right side for easy, one-handed access, the 5DIII is in fact a better camera and is therefore priced accordingly.
> ...



Interestingly, one of my primary uses for that is when using a heavy ND filter (10 stop). Traditional focusing is almost impossible (viewfinder is dark and even live view only shows so much). When I used a 5DII I often would have to mount the ND filter after focusing, running the risk of slightly affecting focus. The 6D can focus just fine with my ND filter attached.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 5, 2013)

DaveMiko said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > DaveMiko said:
> ...



Wow, that is simply not a tenable statement.

ISO 20,000 from the 6D, no additional noise reduction:




ISO 25,600 (6D) - this one is licensed through Getty, has been purchased for commercial use, and I have directly sold art prints of it.




ISO 25,600 (6D) - taken at an event I was there to shoot professionally - client was very happy.




My point? These are just a few examples of images that I have personally taken at very high ISOs with 6Ds that have had critical and commercial success. As long as you nail exposure, images even at ISO 25,600 are often very usable. It has been further noted that the noise from the 6D renders much more like film grain, superior even to the 5DIII in that regard.


----------



## papaxyang (Dec 5, 2013)

tough decision to make, i can't live without my 5DIII, the AF is what I need on my shots, and also the higher dynamic range for the HDRs. but hey, everyone has different needs =]


----------



## jrista (Dec 5, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> DaveMiko said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Just to be fair, you DID apply noise reduction...by downsampling. Those are all downsampled by a fairly significant degree, and the filtering algorithm (usually BiCubic) applied during downsampling averages pixels together, which reduces noise. So, it really isn't fair to say there was no NR whatsoever. Even if you didn't use an explicit noise reduction tool, the downsampling itself is a form of NR. 

That said, I totally agree...very high ISO settings are indeed usable on the 6D, 5D III, and 1D X. I've seen some bird photographs taken at ISO 51200 that had a minor amount of NR applied, and they looked as good or better than ISO 3200 from my 7D!!


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 5, 2013)

jrista said:


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



Your point is true only for the way they are shared here. The commercial use of these images are full size, without downsizing...and those images are still remarkably clean, even at pixel level.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 6, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > bleephotography said:
> ...



My 5D III focus just fine with 10stop ND @ f9 TWI by Dustin Abbott  

My 2cents: There is nothing that 6D can do that 5D III can't - except wifi + GPS feature. Same thing to 1D x, there is nothing 5D III can do that 1D X can't - except better.

I do look forward to be an owner of 1D someday : and I'm sure we all look forward to that day - to shoot with better and faster camera


----------



## Wildfire (Dec 6, 2013)

Funny that you post this thread, JohnDizzo15. I recently did something even _*unthinkabler*_!

I "upgraded" from full frame to crop. Sold my 6D/24-105 and purchased 60D from Canon for about $475 (refurbished) and a 17-55 f2.8 for $520 (LensAuthority Black Friday doorbuster!)

Really happy with the 60D so far. Being able to use the outer points in all situations is great! Though I have to be much more careful when selecting an ISO, the 18mp RAWs are the same fantastic, sharp, Canon images I am used to. 6.5 frames per second is incredibly fun!

The only thing I don't really like about the 60D is that it doesn't work as well with my 600EX-RTs as the 6D did, but that's just giving me an excuse to sell them and pick up the studio strobes I've been wanting instead. And I haven't even touched the 17-55 yet, it barely came in the mail.

I suspect my images with the new setup will be just as good as they were with the full frame combo, yet I am more than a thousand bucks richer. 8)

(yes, I have officially become one of _those_ togs... you know the ones, who say that taking great images doesn't mean having expensive gear)


----------



## Canon1 (Dec 6, 2013)

langdonb said:


> Canon1 said:
> 
> 
> > Richard8971 said:
> ...



Sure. This is what works for me:

*Tracking sensitivity set to "-2"*: I use this setting most of the time. Once I acquire focus on a BIF this setting helps to keep it locked on despite whether the focus point moves off the bird for a moment or another bird passes between the desired subject (or a tree passes between as the bird flies by, etc...) This can slow down the initial acquisition s tiny bit but is un-noticable on ast primes. If using a slower AF lens like 100-400 then you can bump this setting to "-1"

*Accel/decel tracking set to "+2":* Many birds are erratic in flight, this helps keep lock on. (not as big a deal with slow subjects like geese but this really helps with fishing terns, etc...

*Af Point autoswitching:* I dont care about this setting. I don't use 61 pt AF Auto selection...

I also very frequently use 4 point AF Expansion. When shooting BIF that don't fill much of the frame it can be difficult to get the center point over the BIF to acquire intitial lock. Using 4 Point expansion really helps especially when shooting handheld and not from a gimball head. 

Should go without saying that camera is also in AI Servo and high speed burst and all lenses calibrated with focal pro....

Hope this info helps.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


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



They will only be as clean as physics allows, because the physical nature of light completely dominates at high ISO. There is a few percent improvement with the 6D and 5D III over prior Canon cameras, but the margin isn't nearly as significant as the sizes here or the default sizes on Flickr would indicate. In explicit terms, the 1024x682 pixel max size photo on Flickr is a mere 3.5% of the total area of the native 6D 5472x3648 image (an area of 698,368 vs. 19,961,856 pixels). The Flickr image looks really good, but a hell of a lot of original information was factored into its creation.

Again, this is just to be fair and honest with the evaluation of the results. Yes, the 6D performs very well at high ISO, however that isn't really due to the fact that it has low noise. The 6D performs better than the 5D III because it has better color noise characteristics...noise-wise, there is less than a percent difference in actual noise vs. the 5D III, or for that matter the 5D II. It fares better than Canon 18mp sensors when downsampling due to the fact that there are more total pixels, and larger pixels with greater native SNR to factor into the final results than something like the 7D.

All I am saying is that using heavily downsampled images to demonstrate noise levels or noise quality is a rather unfair approach. The only way to truly demonstrate differences in noise is to use identical pictures taken with different cameras and compare (preferably, both at 100% and at a normalized size.)


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 6, 2013)

Canon1 said:


> langdonb said:
> 
> 
> > Canon1 said:
> ...



Hi Canon1,
Looks like you and I have same setting here 

AI servo, case# 2, 4-8points expansion.

Keeper rate is high, as you can see here: http://albums.phanfare.com/isolated/t302HPVC/1/6306064 

Out of 61 AF points, I only activate 41 cross type AF points and 5 dual cross type AF points on both of my 5D III.


----------



## Grumbaki (Dec 6, 2013)

Went from 60D to 5d3 when 6d was already out. Just because focus recompose is a pain. 85L confirmed.


----------



## Richard8971 (Dec 6, 2013)

jrista said:


> to have such consistent problems focusing indicates either operator error or a defective copy.



Well considering that honestly out of 1000+ shots I only got 3 or 4 (the rest were out of focus) I was happy with I would say that it is possible I got a bad copy, but who knows, maybe I'm just a shaky idiot. Canon had done a workshop and brought equipment to borrow so I got the 5D3 for the day. I stuck my 7D is my camera vest and slapped on my EF 70-300L.

I was shooting with 2 friends who had already owned the 5D3 for quite a while and I was shooting with all kinds of different settings throughout the day. I was asking tons of questions about the camera and I was gladly listening to their advice. Center point, AF expansion, aperture priority, whatever. I wanted to give the camera an honest try because I was getting ready to shell out the $3400 to buy one. Wildlife and raptors in flight are nothing new for me so I figured it would be the best way to give the camera a good workout.

And for the record I am not on a crusade to prove anything. $3400 is a ton of money and you know what they say about 1st impressions. I gave the camera an honest try and walked away disappointed.

May or may not try another 5D3. My 7D works just fine, I'll just stick with it.

D


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > to have such consistent problems focusing indicates either operator error or a defective copy.
> ...



True, $3400 is a lot of money. No question there...although lately I've seen it less than $3000 on average (I've gotten quite a few email updates from CanonPriceWatch showing the camera as low as $2850 a couple times over the last few months.) Still, ~$3000 is a lot of money. That said, it has maintained a rough parity with the D800 price for quite a while, and the "advertised" prices are usually $3400 due to Canon's new MAP rules...you usually have to actually put it in your cart to see the true selling price. 

I would give it another try. LensRentals has an excellent track record with shipping out quality gear, because they test everything upon return, so you should get a better copy. Make sure, if you are doing BIF, you configure the necessary AF custom functions to support continuous AF at all times, slow subject switching, AF drive vs. shutter activate priority, etc. to make sure you get consistent AF behavior. Try using one of the expansion modes as well, because the 5D III AF points are smaller than the 7D points, which makes it a lot harder to use just the single center point (which would be almost like trying to use the 7D's center spot AF, which is almost impossible for BIF.)


----------



## Richard8971 (Dec 6, 2013)

jrista said:


> Richard8971 said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



I had written more to my post. CR for some reason slows down and locks up when I try and type a reply. I can only get a few sentences before I have to post and go back and modify so I can finish what I was typing. 

And I don't just use "spot AF" for BIF. I usually use just the center point or mainly the very center ones. (like center AF expansion) I don't use "full auto AF" so that the camera just randomly picks what it thinks I want. I put the bird in the center and that way I know I have the best chance of it locking on to it and nothing else.

I know I can get the 5D3 cheaper than $3400 but I would only shell out that kind of money through B&H or Adorama, but I have only seen it a couple of hundred cheaper.

D


----------



## bleephotography (Dec 6, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Richard8971 said:
> ...



Amazon is also a highly reputable seller and their return policy is one of the best of any retailers, photographic equipment or non-. Currently, they have the 5DIII selling for $2899 although it has been fluctuating this holiday season as low as $2699 (w/ a free SD card, bag and genuine LP-E6), which is what I picked mine up for before they implemented sales tax requirements. I say give it another shot, what do you have to lose (besides thousands of dollars)?  You can always return it for a full refund and Amazon will even pay for return shipping if it's defective.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007FGYZFI/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Richard8971 said:
> ...



Oh, sure. I wasn't saying you used spot AF. I was saying that using a single center point on the 5D III is almost like using center spot AF on the 7D, as the 5D III's AF points, being part of a very dense reticular grid, are a little smaller. Using 4 or 8 point expansion makes 5D III center point AF VERY good.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 6, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Here are some photos taken with my 5D III at my house today. California time 9:30ish PM. All lights were off. The only light source was from single wood log, burning in the fireplace.

1. First photo - just to show you the lighting around the fireplace - almost no light. There is a Christmas tree on the right hand side of fireplace. The tree is about 5-6ft away from the fireplace. - *NO PROBLEM FOCUS ON THE FIREPLACE GRILL/DOOR*

2. Second photo - taken with 5D III @ 12800ISO - *NO ISSUE FOCUS ON THE ORNAMENT*

3. 3rd photo - taken with 5D III @ much slower shutter speed - *NO ISSUE FOCUS ON THE ORNAMENT
*
Again, I don't understand *WHY* people complaining about 5D III can't focus in the dark.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 6, 2013)

With regards those three images, the first is, if you honour iso in EV calculations (which is debatable but consistent) EV+3, this is well within the AF speces, in the order of 32 times more light than minimum, it also has a very strong bar of contrast through it, this image is no test of AF. 

The second image is, obviously, underexposed, but is exposed at around EV+0.5, again, well within Canon's stated AF specs.

The third image is impressive, if it is 1.3 seconds as the EXIF indicates that makes that an exposure in the order of EV-3 that is half the light that the specs list, EV-2. It looks like an accurate representation of the scene, though again, there is some good contrast areas of the subject. But it is impressive.


----------



## grahamclarkphoto (Dec 6, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



nice! I have both and since the 6D was released nearly one year ago, I've shot with the 6D consistently. 

i've put on well over the rated 150,000 shutter actuations and it still performs as it should.

Graham

grahamclarkphoto.com


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 6, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Again, I don't understand *WHY* people complaining about 5D III can't focus in the dark.



The difference between -3LV and -2LV isn't a big issue, it's a bit of marketing as the one advantage 6d>5d3 and my observation is people gladly take this to rationalize their 6d purchase when in all honesty the 5d3 is the better camera hands down. In a real world side-by-side comparison the 5d3 might even win in lower light because the center 6d point is non-cross for f2.8+ lenses, and dim light tends to make the camera miss more (my observation with my 100L/2.8 & 6d).

Both 5d3 & 6df will fail in complete darkness, and both will be much quicker using af assist ... for what I shoot probably -1LV would be enough, but +0.5LV (like 6d outer points or all of my 60d) is definitely not enough with a f2.8-f4 lens because it starts to fail in reasonably dim light.



grahamclarkphoto said:


> i've put on well over the rated 150,000 shutter actuations and it still performs as it should.



It's only rated for 100k shutter  but it's good to hear you're encountering no problems, that might mean that the lack of 1/8000s is really marketing and not shutter protection because the part is so cheap. But of course it's a lot of luck, and it also matters if you shoot at fast shutter speeds a lot as this tends to kill it faster afaik.


----------



## Canon1 (Dec 6, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Canon1 said:
> 
> 
> > langdonb said:
> ...



I don't use case #2. I manually override the settings. Case 2 is "-1,0,0". I use "-2,+2". None of the preset cases quite nail it.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 6, 2013)

The 5th isn't worth 3499$. More like 2499$.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 6, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> With regards those three images,
> The second image is, obviously, underexposed, but is exposed at around EV+0.5, again, well within Canon's stated AF specs.the first is, if you honour iso in EV calculations (which is debatable but consistent) EV+3, this is well within the AF speces, in the order of 32 times more light than minimum, it also has a very strong bar of contrast through it, this image is no test of AF.
> 
> 
> The third image is impressive, if it is 1.3 seconds as the EXIF indicates that makes that an exposure in the order of EV-3 that is half the light that the specs list, EV-2. It looks like an accurate representation of the scene, though again, there is some good contrast areas of the subject. But it is impressive.



The 1st photo is just to show everyone here the light condition around fireplace - plenty of light when aiming at the fire.

Yes - 2nd photo was handheld. Shooting @ 1/80 and I believed my camera was set ISO limit at 12800ISO, therefore, it caused under exp

The 3rd one taken from the side. The camera was set on the tripod to shoot at slower shutter.

The point here is, I found 5D III -2EV is adequate for most low light situation.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 6, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > With regards those three images,
> ...



Agreed re the adequacy of the 5D3 in lowlight conditions. I think the point people make about the slight increase in sensitivity is basically moot although there is a difference. It is much like the point people make about the flash sync speed being faster on the 5D3. Those comparisons are minutia at this point and really shouldn't be a major factor in the decision making process.


----------



## J.R. (Dec 6, 2013)

Well all this talk about the 6D AF in extreme low light... What the hell are you guys shooting that requires AF?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Dec 6, 2013)

said it before and will say it again --the 6d is a great 'buddy' to my mk3. Would i sell the mk3? No, in wedding work you need the 2 bodies, even if you treat one purely as a backup. So no way would i sell. And at this point, I wouldn't even sell for a second mk3 - because the 6d does perform very well! 

When i first snagged the 6d I had thought it to be for sure the lesser body. Originally I saw it as the body i'd mount the wide lenses on (the 6d would be like a machete and the mk3 would be like the scalpel). But that was mostly because i had read too much on CR ---and determined that the outer points were useless (not from use, but from reading) ---well you know what, the outer points do work! They focus just fine in decent to ok light. Even in a reception hall for the first dance, with a 50mm 1.4, it works (ok, yes, sometimes you do need AF assist from flash).

Either way, i like the 6d. Does it replace the mk3, nope. Is it a great companion for the mk3...yes


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 6, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> said it before and will say it again --the 6d is a great 'buddy' to my mk3. Would i sell the mk3? No, in wedding work you need the 2 bodies, even if you treat one purely as a backup. So no way would i sell. And at this point, I wouldn't even sell for a second mk3 - because the 6d does perform very well!
> 
> When i first snagged the 6d I had thought it to be for sure the lesser body. Originally I saw it as the body i'd mount the wide lenses on (the 6d would be like a machete and the mk3 would be like the scalpel). But that was mostly because i had read too much on CR ---and determined that the outer points were useless (not from use, but from reading) ---well you know what, the outer points do work! They focus just fine in decent to ok light. Even in a reception hall for the first dance, with a 50mm 1.4, it works (ok, yes, sometimes you do need AF assist from flash).
> 
> Either way, i like the 6d. Does it replace the mk3, nope. Is it a great companion for the mk3...yes



Well said!


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 6, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Well apparently it's just me who isn't a serious photographer then...


----------



## ishdakuteb (Dec 6, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Again, I don't understand *WHY* people complaining about 5D III can't focus in the dark.



dylan, that is not strange at all though. there are some using it in the wrong way and think that it cannot focus in the dark. well, i have to say that i have not used my canon 5d mark iii much in the complete dim lit situation. however, i still confidently say that i will not have any problem with using my 5d mark iii in the dim lit situation based on following image...

candid shot with canon 30d with 50mm f/1.4 at f/2, iso 800, available light, outer focus point, light in the room was all out, subject (my daughter) was lit by just the candle light (note: this image was post on fb and took down for post process with noise was added to the image a while ago.)


----------



## Robert Welch (Dec 6, 2013)

I don't see a problem with going from a 5Dmk3 to a 6D. I own both, and they both have great features.

If you don't need the sturdier build, the more versatile AF, the dual card slots and slightly better flash sync speed, then by all means save the money and use the 6D. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a snob, IMO.

In truth, I can take a photo with either camera, and without knowing which one was used I'd defy anyone to be able to guess.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 6, 2013)

The controversy is kept alive because the 6D just has the better sensor, period. And these days, "better camera" IMHO means "better sensor". You can add all the peripheral items, but in the end that's what counts.


And in terms of lowlight performance, the 6D *smacks* down the 5D III:

http://petapixel.com/2012/12/13/canon-6d-and-5dmk3-noise-comparison-for-high-iso-long-exposures/


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 6, 2013)

Putting aside all the battling about which one is better than the other in which way...

At the end of the day, I think the biggest takeaway from the whole experience for me was the self-assessment aspect. I think that many of us suffer from a compulsion centered on acquiring more and/or better gear which is what has led me to owning as much as I do. Going through the thought process and truly evaluating what my needs are was really eye-opening and valuable. I think it will be easier for me to let go of some of the gear that I kept around merely because I thought there "may be" a chance I'll need it. Coming to grips with need vs. want or potential need will ultimately help me to triage what will remain in the collection. Consolidating and downsizing not only lets me get rid of the unnecessary stuff, but will allow me to save up money for a single high dollar item that I'll use all the time i.e. the new ff body/bodies to come.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

@MichaelHodges: I wouldn't say the 6D smacks down the 5D III. It's better, but not massively better. 

Here are some visual comparisons of the 1D X vs. 5D III noise levels at each ISO setting. At higher ISO, it is clear the 1D X has much better noise performance:

http://clarkvision.com/articles/evaluation-canon-1dx/index.html
http://clarkvision.com/articles/evaluation-canon-5diii/index.html

From ISO 1600 on, the 1DX has a much smoother noise, a lower STDev. This makes hot pixels stand out a little more, but hot pixels are easy to eliminate. The 6D sits somewhere between these two cameras (sadly, Roger Clark hasn't tested the 6D yet.)


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 6, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Putting aside all the battling about which one is better than the other in which way...
> 
> At the end of the day, I think the biggest takeaway from the whole experience for me was the self-assessment aspect. I think that many of us suffer from a compulsion centered on acquiring more and/or better gear which is what has led me to owning as much as I do. Going through the thought process and truly evaluating what my needs are was really eye-opening and valuable. I think it will be easier for me to let go of some of the gear that I kept around merely because I thought there "may be" a chance I'll need it. Coming to grips with need vs. want or potential need will ultimately help me to triage what will remain in the collection. Consolidating and downsizing not only lets me get rid of the unnecessary stuff, but will allow me to save up money for a single high dollar item that I'll use all the time i.e. the new ff body/bodies to come.



That's a great point, John. Ego is undoubtedly a part of our profession/hobby. I have learned the hard way that I don't have to have everything, and I have reached a point where I don't add anything to my kit without subtracting something. I'm in the process of selling one of my cheapest pieces (85mm f/1.8) and am replacing it in my bag with the new 35mm f/2 IS. I have a great zoom covering the focal length (70-300L), and I also have the 100L and the 135L. I decided that I don't really need the 85mm, and a friend is very happily buying it off me.

P.S. I've also learned that there are some very good lenses out there that don't have a red ring on them. I've actually replaced two red rings with other branded lenses.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > Putting aside all the battling about which one is better than the other in which way...
> ...



Good points, true.

However, it isn't necessarily all about ego. I spent over ten grand on a lens this year, a $12,800 lens to be exact. While I believe there may be a very few people who have egos so large that they might actually drop that kind of money on a lens "just to have it so they can brag it"...I think such individuals are VERY, VERY few and far between.

I bought the EF 600mm f/4 L IS II lens because I needed it. I'd been shooting with the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L lens for a while. The 100-400 is an excellent lens, it produces wonderful shots that can be very sharp. Don't get me wrong, I love my 100-400. That said, it wasn't letting me realize the kind of results I really wanted. A 71mm entrance pupil at 400mm just wasn't large enough to produce the kind of soft, creamy boke that I felt was necessary for my work. Not only that, the lens only performed ideally when stopped down to f/7.1...anything wider and the image softened, visibly (even with AFMA and a trip to Canon for calibration.)

The 600/4 L lens has a 150mm entrance pupil, which does WONDERS for background boke. The lens is razor sharp wide open, so I can get more light and use lower ISO settings. Combined with a TC, it gets me 840mm of significantly greater reach (subject size in the frame is relative to the ratio of focal lengths squared...(840/400)^2...my subjects increased in the frame by a factor of 4.4x!) Overall, between brighter and larger subjects with blurrier backgrounds, I have more detailed photos with more isolated birds and wildlife. I'm able to start realizing the kind of results in my work that I have worked for for years.

I currently own a 7D. The 7D is a great camera. I got it for an incredible deal ($1200 in 2011!) It has a fast frame rate, and does reasonably well at high ISO. However, similar to my 100-400mm lens, it has become the primary limiting factor. It does not do all that well, relatively speaking, at any ISO above 1600. Even ISO 1600 is lacking by todays standards, and can be too noisy in sunrise or sunset light (even with an f/4 lens). The AF system, while certainly better than the 9pt systems I started out with, has it's issues (namely, the constant inter-frame jitter that results in some frames being tack sharp and others being just the smallest degree too much out of focus that they can't be keepers.) 

My only two options, given the expenditure of thousands of dollars on the 600mm lens, are the 1D X and 5D III. The 1D X would certainly be my ideal choice...but the 5D III is absolutely no slouch. It's AF system is blazing fast and extremely consistent compared to the 7D, and it supports f/8 AF, meaning I don't necessarily have to give up my reach (1200mm f/8 vs. an effective 1344 f/5.6...given equivalence, the f/8 on a FF sensor is actually just as good, from a total light gathering standpoint, as f/5.6 on APS-C). If I had the money, I'd buy the 1D X. It has absolutely amazing quality at unheard of ISO settings, and at every ISO setting from 400 up, it performs visibly better than any other camera I know of, including the 6D. Since I cannot afford the 1D X, the 5D III is my choice. 

My desire to own the 5D III and 600mm f/4 L II lens has nothing to do with ego. It has everything to do with achieving my goals in my work. I am fairly humble about my work as well...personally, I am never quite satisfied with it...there is ALWAYS something I can do better, something I can improve. I hope someday I'll have developed the skill to achieve exactly what I want when I point my lens and press the shutter button, but I know quite thouroughly that day hasn't arrived yet, and won't arrive for some time still. 

@John, I applaud your decision to step down to the 6D. For your needs and goals, it sounded like the ideal decision. It got rid of a camera you were rarely using, replaced it with a camera you use more, allowed you to continue to gain value from your collection of EF lenses, and gave you some extra funds to put towards a future camera that you will use even more. I can't think of a better reason to make the decision you did.

That said, @TWI, not everyone who uses or wants something better than the 6D is only out for an ego trip. There are legitimate reasons to NEED the 5D III, to even NEED something much better than the 5D III. Sometimes debating the minutia of technical details helps people figure out what they truly need, and make the appropriate decisions to buy the gear that best fits their goals. I need the 1D X for my birds and wildlife photography, and I'll "settle" for the 5D III. For my astrophotography, the 6D's lower high ISO noise levels actually make it the better camera, and a lens like the new Samyang 10mm f/2.8 manual focus lens would be ideal.

Different needs demand different things. It's ok if all you need is a 6D. I think where the debate enters in is when you get people saying the 6D is a superior camera to the 5D III, simply because it has a "better" sensor. While it may have some superior _attributes_, it is by no means a superior _camera_.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 6, 2013)

jrista said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Well said. 

It was like going through rehab to come to realizations about what is needed to "get it done." There are countless variances in need. The difficulty lies in drawing that line between want and what is necessary to get your job done. I wish all here the best of luck in finding the strength to make the decisions that serve them best. I know I needed it.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 6, 2013)

MichaelHodges said:


> The controversy is kept alive because the 6D just has the better sensor, period. And these days, "better camera" IMHO means "better sensor". You can add all the peripheral items, but in the end that's what counts.
> 
> 
> And in terms of lowlight performance, the 6D *smacks* down the 5D III:
> ...



Agree, but I also agree with those who hound me whenever I speak of liking the 6D and what it can do...the image has to be in relatively sharp focus for the IQ to be as good or "better". In the end its due to technique, patience, ability, and choice. The outer AF points hold the 6D back, and generally the whole AF sensor and computing power hold it back. But then, that's by design. Right now it's less than half the cost of the 5D3 (but I've seen the D800 at a lower new price than the 5D3 discounted price also). At $1415, the 6D is simply a screaming bargain if there ever was one (at least for stills photography...the 70D seems like a bargain for video). If money is no object, the 1DX is the first choice, and the 5D3 is the price cutting compromise. But the smart money would wait to see what 2014 or 2015 have in store, where 1 series bodies are concerned.

As for ego, well...I will try to keep my fingers from typing anything further on that. 

There was a similar link on canonwatch.com a couple of days ago, but this one is also interesting, thanks Michael for posting it.


----------



## Etienne (Dec 6, 2013)

I have the 5DIII and have used the 6D.

The only thing I prefer about the 6D is the weight and size. The 5DIII has better ergonomics, better button implementation, better menu structure, better HDR implementation (RAWs + HDR saved), better AF, far superior video performance, ... basically better everything.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 6, 2013)

Etienne said:


> I have the 5DIII and have used the 6D.
> 
> The only thing I prefer about the 6D is the weight and size. The 5DIII has better ergonomics, better button implementation, better menu structure, better HDR implementation (RAWs + HDR saved), better AF, far superior video performance, ... basically better everything.



Not better everything, but I'll concede most of what you mention. I prefer the ergonomics of the 6D, myself. It could use a few more buttons, but definitely the shutter button has a better feel on the 6D, than the 5D3 to me...it's mushy and vague.

However, again...the 6D is now half the cost of a 5D3. The sheer fact that they're mentioned in the same sentence, says a lot about what you get for the money spent on a 6D. To compare them as if they're in the same category by presuming that $1400 and $2800 are basically similar sums invested (because lenses and everything else cost so much anyway), is wrong.


----------



## Etienne (Dec 6, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > I have the 5DIII and have used the 6D.
> ...



I agree the 5DIII shutter button feel could be better. I found it odd at first but I guess I've gotten used to it. No question the 6D can take every bit as good a photo in many situations, especially portrait and landscape. But I use my camera as a general purpose everything machine, including some sports and video. 

The 6D video performance is the fatal flaw for me. I hated the moire and aliasing on the 5DII. The 6D performs about the same as the 5DII in video, but on the 5DIII Moire is almost completely absent, and that is a big deal! There's also audio in and headphones out and audio levels while recording, soft shutter, silent mode for video, and quite a few other nice touches.

If I only wanted landscape and portraits I would get the 6D and save some money for sure. But the 5DIII is a pretty awesome general purpose tool, with no major shortcomings.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 6, 2013)

jrista said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



I think you may have missed my point. I certainly think that in many cases high end gear is needed, and I can see perfectly where you are coming from. I was simply commending John for having the maturity to take assessment of his needs and adjusting his kit accordingly. I don't think the 6D is a better camera than the 5DIII. I do think for certain applications the 6D is better, and for other applications the 5DIII is far superior.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 6, 2013)

Etienne said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



At its pricepoint the 6D is, I would argue a better general purpose tool. The 5D3 is really more of a specialized , or rather "enhanced and advanced" tool, specifically because of its computing power, AF sensor, speed, (and obviously video as you mention) etc. It does sound like you made the right choice with the 5D3, without a doubt.

However, I've done plenty of wildlife shots with my 6D. I could do sports work with it too, but haven't needed to do any sports photography lately. Not saying it's comparable to the 5D3 in that category, but it can be used for it. Several other people have posted sports shots done with the 6D, in the "anything shot with a 6D" thread.

As for the "soft shutter" that you say is lacking in the 6D...if you mean "silent shutter"...you're in error, the 6D definitely has it and it works great.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 6, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


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



+1...the 6D is definitely not a "better camera" than the 5D3, although no doubt Jrista didn't mean to imply that's what you were meaning. We all know the 5D3 has all the bells and whistles, it's the more advanced camera...and it's meant to be. In my opinion (and for my needs) it will be more interesting to see what the future holds for the next version, and whatever else Canon have up their sleeves...rather than buy the 5D3 now.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 7, 2013)

I use to feel this way, too. "Man, this camera has all these cool gadgets. Certainly it must be the better camera?" The 5D III I had and my 7D (which I still have) blow away the 6D in features save for the wifi and GPS (which are sort of cool I have to admit).

But in the end, my 6D produces cleaner, sharper images than either. And honestly, that's the ultimate criteria for deciding which camera is better.


----------



## jrista (Dec 7, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I think you may have missed my point. I certainly think that in many cases high end gear is needed, and I can see perfectly where you are coming from. I was simply commending John for having the maturity to take assessment of his needs and adjusting his kit accordingly. I don't think the 6D is a better camera than the 5DIII. I do think for certain applications the 6D is better, and for other applications the 5DIII is far superior.



We are in agreement. The thing that set me off was the ego thing, which I don't think is very often the case when people get into buying the more costly gear. It really is a LOT of money, a scary lot of money sometimes, and you have to really weigh the options, the longevity, how that all fits in with your goals, etc. I spent a very long time, well over a year, debating whether to buy the 300/2.8 II or the 600/4 II. I rented both, and other lenses like the 500/4 II, 300/4, 400/5.6, etc., gave all a very thorough try, evaluated the options, my primary goals vs. my secondary goals. Then I waited. I couldn't really justify $13,000, but when I saw it for $10,860 on a Canon store...I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to buy the 600/4, which was really, truly, what I had decided I NEEDED to help move my photography in the direction I wanted...long term. (Very long term...25-30 years long term, really. )

I also did not mean to imply you personally stated the 6D was better. Simply that it has been stated that the 6D is better, even matter-of-factly, simply because its sensor produces less color noise and slightly less luma noise at high ISO. I think it is those kinds of statements that turn a healthy debate into one of reality vs. dreamworld, and things get more heated.


----------



## tron (Dec 7, 2013)

jrista said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > I think you may have missed my point. I certainly think that in many cases high end gear is needed, and I can see perfectly where you are coming from. I was simply commending John for having the maturity to take assessment of his needs and adjusting his kit accordingly. I don't think the 6D is a better camera than the 5DIII. I do think for certain applications the 6D is better, and for other applications the 5DIII is far superior.
> ...


hello both (and to the rest of the community).
I would like to take advantage of your experience regarding a 6D related decision I have to make (in order to avoid opening a new thread)
UP to now I have 5D2 and 5D3. I may have the opportunity to get a cheap 6D (I will have it on my hands in a few months actually but the decision has to be mad this ... cyber week!)
I plan to put 5D2 on sale. Being an amateur I can afford to have one body (my 5D3) for a few months.

Now I am a little sentimental in letting my 5D2 go and at the same time I am a little put off but the different (and worse in my opinion) 6D layout.

But a second 5D3 would cost 1000 euros more! 

I use my 5D2 mostly for landscape work and my 5D3 mostly for portraits (where the AF points of 5D3 come very handy) and astrophotography. But when I need all of the above (like 2 weeks ago) it's 5D3 of course.

To sum up I consider 3 options:
1. Keep them as is (5D3,5D2) (Simplest I do nothing, this is also the sentimental choice)
2. Get 6D and sell 5D2.
3. Get a second 5D3. 

I believe the best solution (if price stays the same for tomorrow) is number 2 but I am a little sentimental regarding my 5D2 so solution 1 seems second best.

Thanks for your time and I hope this post is not considered off topic.


----------



## jrista (Dec 7, 2013)

tron said:


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



Given that you have some trepidation about spending that extra 1000 euro, and the fact that you do astrophotography, I'd get the 6D. For both landscapes and astro, the 6D is the better performer. It has lower read noise at ISO 100 ('scapes), and cleaner and slightly lower noise overall at high ISO (astro). The 6D is probably the best camera for astrophotography until you jump into dedicated (and even actively cooled) monochrome CCD cameras, per-frame color/Halpha filtration, etc. 

So, I'd concurr...#2.


----------



## tron (Dec 7, 2013)

jrista said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...


Thank's. Actually I tend to prefer landscape astrophotography. In this case I cannot use a tracking device so it's high or very high ISO => 6D although my 5D3 was very good at it (ISO 10000). In addition the fact that 6D is cheaper may help to:
1. Decide to send it for modification (make it Ha sensitive).
2. Put Magic Lantern. (ML for now cannot be uninstalled from 5D3 so another point for 6D).


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 7, 2013)

tron said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



You could use a tracking device if you combined a stationary ground shot with a tracked sky shot. Of course it's more trouble and more editing, and mounting and dismounting the camera (unless you used two cameras). Interesting about ML not being able to be uninstalled on the 5D3...


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 8, 2013)

First paid outing with the 6D. Brought the x100s along to test the waters. Unfortunately, trying to have a yongnuo 622 radio trigger on both bodies on the same frequency going to the same flash did not work so the Fuji got no prime time usage.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 8, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Interesting about ML not being able to be uninstalled on the 5D3...



I'm positive this will be solved - actually the uninstallation (i.e. removal of the in-camera boot flag) in 99% likelihood works the same as on every other camera like the 6d, it's just that the 5d3 is the most expensive one and no one wanted to try it yet.


----------



## tron (Dec 9, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting about ML not being able to be uninstalled on the 5D3...
> ...


Alex has said that it cannot be done in a 100% safe way. I too truly hope that it will be solved (and that ML would be updated to support the 1.2.3 firmware release).


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 9, 2013)

tron said:


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



Thanks for the correction, I admit I didn't read all of the 5d3 thread since I don't own one and was more interested in "payment for features". For everyone else, read further in this 5d3 bootflag thread: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=9274.0


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 10, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> First paid outing with the 6D. Brought the x100s along to test the waters. Unfortunately, trying to have a yongnuo 622 radio trigger on both bodies on the same frequency going to the same flash did not work so the Fuji got no prime time usage.



You got paid to shoot the 991 Turbo? How did you get that gig? Life's not fair!!


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 10, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > First paid outing with the 6D. Brought the x100s along to test the waters. Unfortunately, trying to have a yongnuo 622 radio trigger on both bodies on the same frequency going to the same flash did not work so the Fuji got no prime time usage.
> ...



LOL. I was referred for a previous red carpet event at that dealership for the unveiling of the new Panamera a couple months back. They liked my work enough that they asked me back for this one. Primary goal of the shoot was more for the red carpet and festivities. Just didn't want to post any of the people shots since they hadn't posted any themselves yet. The 911 Turbo S is a thing of beauty. But I only took a handful of car shots.

You aren't the first person to tell me that "life's not fair." LOL. Life works in odd ways cause the random gigs come easier now that I don't need the money (and am not seeking them out). Back in my early 20's (pre-career), I couldn't land a decent gig to save my life when I was searching all the time.

Anyhow, the 6D performed well enough. I did miss the extra focus points when I was on the red carpet since I was basically stationary as the attendees passed by the backdrop. Composing was a pain compared to my last shoot there which was when I still had the 5D3. There were varying numbers in arriving groups and no one seemed to want to stand in the same place relative to the backdrop. I found that I had to crop a lot in post as a result. Regardless, I got the job done and everyone was happy.


----------



## Canon1 (Dec 11, 2013)

Love the fact that the dSLR's these days are so awesome (And that even entry level and pro-sumer level cameras perform so well) that people can spend page after page debating which one is a split hair better.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 11, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Glad to hear it was a success for you. And in case you are thinking I am in my 20's...well thanks, I think. I'm not! I hope they paid you a ton of money, because they are absolutely raking it in!! You should have the terms of your photography as follows: For just the basic shots, that's your flat rate. But if they actually want the shots, that's a pricey option. If they actually want to be allowed to view those shots whenever they want...well that's the "S" option, and it costs triple...hahaha.

Yea I was just reading in "Car" about the new Turbo S...they kind of slammed it while also complimenting it. Compared it to what else, the Nissan GTR, hahaha. Basically the Turbo S is over-refined, moreso than the previous 997 Turbo S. No surprise there...the one to get is still the GT3. Perhaps "the last gunfighter"...before they all become solar powered bicycles!

One thing Porsche learned from the last Turbo rollout though, was to _do the opposite_, and introduce the S model first, then the standard Turbo model later. That better suits the type of buyer who buys them (as in somebody who only wants the bragging rights and rarely dips into the power...a lawyer, a doctor...an overpaid sports player or actor...etc.) From what the article said, the 997 Turbo early adopters resented that the S model came out 6 months later...apparently there was not firm word that it would appear in the US market, or something (I think that was 2009 or 2010).

Another thing I read in that mag, was how you can say goodbye to the flat six in the Boxster and Cayman. They're going to smaller turbo 4 cylinders to cut CO2 emissions. Don't you love environmentalism?


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 11, 2013)

Canon1 said:


> Love the fact that the dSLR's these days are so awesome (And that even entry level and pro-sumer level cameras perform so well) that people can spend page after page debating which one is a split hair better.



Nobody said you had to read any of this...


----------



## AprilForever (Dec 11, 2013)

I would have swapped the 5d III for a 7D, but, to each his own...


----------



## Canon1 (Dec 11, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Canon1 said:
> 
> 
> > Love the fact that the dSLR's these days are so awesome (And that even entry level and pro-sumer level cameras perform so well) that people can spend page after page debating which one is a split hair better.
> ...



I was not picking on anyone here. Just commenting how we live at an exciting time for camera tech. These cameras are truly awesome and it is great that spirited discussions like this are able to happen when comparing one great camera to another. 

In other words... What the hell is your problem?


----------



## iron-t (Dec 11, 2013)

I upgraded to FF earlier this year. It was between 6D plus some nice glass or 5D3 and live with existing glass. I went with the 5D3 and have been very happy with it. But I know I also would have been happy with a 6D and a lens or two. It does seem that you get what you pay for with most Canon bodies and lenses.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 11, 2013)

iron-t said:


> I upgraded to FF earlier this year. It was between 6D plus some nice glass or 5D3 and live with existing glass. I went with the 5D3 and have been very happy with it. But I know I also would have been happy with a 6D and a lens or two. It does seem that you get what you pay for with most Canon bodies and lenses.



Agreed. The problem a lot of times for people is that we have a tendency to judge the values of things based on our own subset of needs/desires. 

I loved my 5D3 but felt like I could get away with using the 6D and refilling the fund a bit more. So far so good.

@ Canon1 - Yes, we have reached a point where we have many awesome products to choose from. However, there are still major differentiating factors with each that are better tailored for different uses. So I wouldn't necessarily say we are splitting hairs on which one is better than the other. Rather, I would say that many of us here are merely conversing about what each has to offer and how they respectively better fits our individuals needs.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 11, 2013)

BTW, was fortunate enough to have another paid gig land on my lap for this Friday. Will be the second pro outing with the 6D. This one should be a bit more dynamic as there will be more festivities and varying shooting scenarios. Fingers crossed in hopes that I won't encounter any situations where I miss the old cam too much. More to come....


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 11, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> 
> Some things I'm struggling with, some not so much. Either way, I think the decision was the right one for me (for now).
> 
> Wondering if anyone else has given the same move some thought.



John,
I have an opposite offer. I have four friends(high school buds, now wedding pro). One of them offered me his 5 months old 1D X - purchased from BH, still under Canon warranty, 87,000ish clicks - for $4700 cash. 

I still have few more days to think about this before he puts it on CL : : :

If I wasn't thinking about the Canon 600mm....uhmmmmmm


----------



## DaveMiko (Dec 12, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> ...



By all means get the 1DX!!!! ... But, beware: After that, you would only want to shoot with 1D bodies!!!!


----------



## libertyranger (Dec 12, 2013)

Had a 5D Mark III for most of this year, but had to sell it for some unforseen medical expenses. I've been using my old T3i for some time, but greatly missed the full frame. With all the holiday sales going on, I bought a 6D with a 24-70 mark ii. It will be in on Monday, so I'll be interested in seeing how much of the features from the 5D I'll miss. Will post an update soon


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 12, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > So over the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally gathered the nerve to just let go of my 5D3 as I was offered a fair price for it. That, in conjunction with the deal for the 6D at $1400 pushed me into pulling the trigger on the swap out. Done and done.
> ...



LOL, this guy. Quite the luxury to have such choices to make. My question is, are you shooting enough stuff from distance that would make the 600 earn it's keep? I say hold onto the money and then we can have a conversation in 1-2 years about our new ff bodies that cost an arm and a leg. ;D


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 12, 2013)

libertyranger said:


> Had a 5D Mark III for most of this year, but had to sell it for some unforseen medical expenses. I've been using my old T3i for some time, but greatly missed the full frame. With all the holiday sales going on, I bought a 6D with a 24-70 mark ii. It will be in on Monday, so I'll be interested in seeing how much of the features from the 5D I'll miss. Will post an update soon



Just depends on what you shoot and what your habits are. My hunch is that you'll probably be quite pleased if you are okay with the AF system difference (which using the rebel for a while should soften the shock of ;D).


----------



## jeffa4444 (Dec 12, 2013)

I cannont comment on the 5DMKIII but I do have the 7D and I find the 6D strenghs far out weight any weaknesses. 
I use mine mainly to shoot landscape (stills I never shoot video on DSLRs) and regardless of bright sun light, darkened woodland, sunrise / sunset etc. it produces great shots with accurate colours & sharp in the right places depending on lens & aperture etc. The quality over the 7D is truely evident (I will keep my 7D for sports & wildlife) and I dont feel second class to 5DMKIII owners its about the photgraphs you produce from your tools.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 12, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



The cost renting this lens is $200-$300 each time. If you go out and shoot 5-6 times a year, I think owning the lens is a better option. Bodies will come and go away


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 12, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



True. Pretty good price on the body though.


----------



## tron (Dec 12, 2013)

I too believe that since you have 5D3 cameras you should proceed with the 600mm 4L IS II first. Glass before body especially since you own the second best. Now if you just had a Rebel that would be a totally different matter...


----------



## libertyranger (Dec 13, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> libertyranger said:
> 
> 
> > Had a 5D Mark III for most of this year, but had to sell it for some unforseen medical expenses. I've been using my old T3i for some time, but greatly missed the full frame. With all the holiday sales going on, I bought a 6D with a 24-70 mark ii. It will be in on Monday, so I'll be interested in seeing how much of the features from the 5D I'll miss. Will post an update soon
> ...



I'm thinking so. I mainly shoot family portraits and photos of my family. I just hope I didn't spoil myself with that 5D autofocus. If I miss it terribly, I'm sure I'll upgrade one day. But I was able to get the new 24-70 with the price difference in bodies.


----------



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

libertyranger said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > libertyranger said:
> ...



Gulp! Wow! That is pretty huge. I should pause and ask, "which new 24-70"? The f/4L IS, I say, "nice". If you are talking the 24-70LII, that is a big "Wow!"


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 15, 2013)

Canon1 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Canon1 said:
> ...



I don't have a problem, but I fail to see that you have a point to make.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 15, 2013)

libertyranger said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > libertyranger said:
> ...



If all you shoot is your family and it's still portraiture, the 6D will be SUPERIOR to the 5D3 for most scenarios. Not all, but most. If you mostly shoot portraits of your family as they are racing cars or riding rollercoasters, then you might miss the 5D3. If they're sitting still...then if you do miss the 5D3, you might just be doing something wrong. If you shoot these portraits with an array of strobes in a dimly lit room with low continuous light on the subjects, and you're constantly moving in and out (fashion photog style) with a 50 or 85mm f/1.2, and you always use the outer AF points...and you never manually focus an f/1.4 or f/1.2 lens...then you might miss the 5D3.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 15, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> If all you shoot is your family and it's still portraiture, the 6D will be SUPERIOR to the 5D3 for most scenarios. Not all, but most.



Oh my, I won't get into an argument with you, but this is sooooo unreasonable - with a faster lens like f2.8 which you'll often use for portraiture, the 6d's center point is non-cross, meaning you carefully have to focus on an appropriate contrast part or you'll get af (micro)-misses. The bit of 6d less noise (if any) certainly doesn't compensate for that.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 15, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > If all you shoot is your family and it's still portraiture, the 6D will be SUPERIOR to the 5D3 for most scenarios. Not all, but most.
> ...



The only time I got center point misses in any light, was in servo mode with my 135 f/2. In single shot mode, no misses with center point, and few with all points active. Are you shooting portaits in servo mode?


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 15, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> In single shot mode, no misses with center point, and few with all points active.



Well, I admit it, you're a photo wiz because from what I read generations of 5d2 shooters had the same problem I'm experiencing ... note that I'm talking about micro-misses with a f2.8 lens here like on the eyes, not about "well, this looks fine" zoomed out on the camera display.



CarlTN said:


> Are you shooting portaits in servo mode?



Hey, that's certainly a novel idea, I should try it some time :->


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 15, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > In single shot mode, no misses with center point, and few with all points active.
> ...



I know that you know, that I'm not talking "hey it's ok when viewed at display sizes".

Like I said, it's either you, or your lens...or both (or perhaps the AF sensor, some seem to have been faulty in the 6D). Certainly specific lenses can have issues with the 6D, no doubt about that. I just received my new 70-300L, and it seems to autofocus slower than my good old 70-200 f/4 (non IS). Of course it doesn't have a focus range limiter like the 70-200, so that's a factor. In low light though, the 70-300 has a definite problem hitting focus at all (with single shot center point), at least at 300mm. By comparison, the 70-200, even at 200mm (of course it's f/4 vs f/5.0)...it can autofocus better than anything else I've tried. Even with my Sigma 120-400, the 6D can autofocus with center point/single shot, on things I couldn't even see with my eyes through the viewfinder...Of course it didn't do it fast, it took a second or so. But that was at 400mm and f/5.6...and that lens is quite un-contrasty at the long end. At under 250mm it's got quite a bit of contrast.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 15, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Certainly specific lenses can have issues with the 6D, no doubt about that. I just received my new 70-300L, and it seems to autofocus slower than my good old 70-200 f/4 (non IS).



No, it's not me, it's the camera not having a full cross point @f2.8 which produces micro-misses on low-contrast targets if the camera has to fall back of the f5.6 cross lines.

But if you talk about the 70-300L/4-5.6 or 70-200L/4 you don't seem to know or recognize at all what I'm talking about, I've also got the 70-300L and of course it works fine on the 6d as it's using the center point as cross... I also cannot say I find it slow on the 6D as others have reported, but I admit I didn't do any real tests on this.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 15, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Certainly specific lenses can have issues with the 6D, no doubt about that. I just received my new 70-300L, and it seems to autofocus slower than my good old 70-200 f/4 (non IS).
> ...



You're right then, I don't see why the center point isn't a "full cross point" at f/2.8. I thought it was. Or do you mean it's not a "double cross" point? The 5D2 didn't have any double cross points either, did it? The AF sensor in the 6D is an evolution of the 5D2's AF sensor...with a superior light sensitive center point. It's not a double cross...Are you saying somehow the 5D2's AF sensor had several f/2.8 cross points, or that any of them were double crosses? If true, I did not know that...


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 15, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> You're right then, I don't see why the center point isn't a "full cross point" at f/2.8. I thought it was.



Bin-go! The 6d af is about the same as 5d2 with some of the "invisible" points converted to selectable points and some other points dropped. Both cameras do. not. have. a. full. center. cross. point... it's just an overlay line @f2.8, and when this fails to lock it falls back to the cross point at only f5.6 precision, meaning you will get micro-misses with a fast lens.

Unfortunately, the strange 5d2/6d af idea is *not* a double cross (cross f2.8, 45-degree cross overlay f5.6) as just about on every other camera, Rebels to 5d3. If the 6d *would* have just *one* double cross, I'd be completely sold and never complain again ... but with a f2.8 lens you realize there is an actual problem.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 15, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > You're right then, I don't see why the center point isn't a "full cross point" at f/2.8. I thought it was.
> ...



What's the difference between an "overlay line" and a "cross"? You're saying one of the lines of the cross is larger than the other? One is an f/2.8 line, the other an f/5.6 line? And they're at 90 degrees from each other, and cross at a point?


----------



## jrista (Dec 15, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > If all you shoot is your family and it's still portraiture, the 6D will be SUPERIOR to the 5D3 for most scenarios. Not all, but most.
> ...



Agreed. It is these kinds of comments, that the 6D is superior to the 5D III "for most scenarios", that is so wrong. The 6D is superior "technically, in a FEW areas", but in EVERY respect and in every scenario, the 5D III is the superior camera that will perform superiorly and produce better images.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 15, 2013)

jrista said:


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



Definitely agreed regarding actually making images. I loved my 5d3 for the fact that it made getting the shot easier for me. I am definitely getting more misses and need to be much more mindful of the AF. Did a 4 hour shoot on Friday that would have definitely been easier with the 5D. 

Results based on glass used:

24II was off a lot. Not completely. But definitely was not focusing critically most of the time. Yes, it has been run through FoCal with the new body. 

24-70II was having a hard time capturing focus at all but was decent when it finally hit. 

70-200II worked perfectly. But it was also solely used in the outdoor portion of the event

50L was performed on par with how it was on the 5D just based on memory (surprisingly). 

8-15 fine as expected just due to the type of lens


----------



## tron (Dec 15, 2013)

Yesterday night I was able to take some pictures at a bar with almost no light. I had my 5D3 with 35mm 1.4L.
I was using an off center point and I was amazed that it was able to focus 80% of the time when I couldn't almost see anything with my eyes! I understand that I wasn't close to EV0 but still I was impressed (ISO was either 25K or 50K , f was set to 1.4, speed 80 to 100 and compensation was at +2/3 stop) OK I wasn't going for a masterpiece but for snapshots with lots of noise. The camera/lens combination delivered. I do not know if 6D could do that (off-center focus under these conditions)...


----------



## bdunbar79 (Dec 15, 2013)

Part of producing great IQ is auto focus accuracy. The 5D3's AF accuracy is overall, superior. The 6D is also worse in flash sync speed. The 6D's IQ is not better than the 5D3's by any measureable amount. So... 

I cannot think of any reason that if you already had a 5D3, you'd gain anything by selling that, and getting a 6D. Starting with the 6D is a great decision, because it's a great camera. But even for things that are great, there is always something better. Going from a 5D3 to a 6D would be a net loss.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 15, 2013)

bdunbar79 said:


> Part of producing great IQ is auto focus accuracy. The 5D3's AF accuracy is overall, superior. The 6D is also worse in flash sync speed. The 6D's IQ is not better than the 5D3's by any measureable amount. So...
> 
> I cannot think of any reason that if you already had a 5D3, you'd gain anything by selling that, and getting a 6D. Starting with the 6D is a great decision, because it's a great camera. But even for things that are great, there is always something better. Going from a 5D3 to a 6D would be a net loss.



My ability to get it done was definitely made easier with the 5D. I also agree that the 5D taken as a whole is a better camera. The AF system is head and shoulders above the 6D. However, as discussed before, it was move which allowed me to maintain similar IQ and put money back in my pocket. I didn't feel like I needed everything the 5D had to offer at the moment. And doing plenty of work with the 6D since has proven that to be generally true (albeit with less ease). 

Some say the IQ of the 6D is better. I cannot agree with that. What I can say though is that I do prefer the raw files in post. 

Flash sync speed difference is a non point as the difference is beyond negligible in real world use. I'd say the max shutter speed difference would be more of an issue to mention that the sync speed. 

Yes, the 6D has been a downgrade. But it has been one that has worked for me regardless. Definitely looking forward to the day the new pro ff bodies are out though. 

Again, the reasons I made the move has been documented extensively in this thread along with all my other discoveries. And at this point, I still believe I made the right call. 

Again, I do not believe the 6D is > 5D3. In case anyone is unsure of my view on that comparison alone.


----------



## jrista (Dec 15, 2013)

bdunbar79 said:


> Part of producing great IQ is auto focus accuracy. The 5D3's AF accuracy is overall, superior. The 6D is also worse in flash sync speed. The 6D's IQ is not better than the 5D3's by any measureable amount. So...
> 
> I cannot think of any reason that if you already had a 5D3, you'd gain anything by selling that, and getting a 6D. Starting with the 6D is a great decision, because it's a great camera. But even for things that are great, there is always something better. Going from a 5D3 to a 6D would be a net loss.



At high ISO, the 6D does have a measurable improvement over the 5D III. It isn't huge, we aren't talking about anything along the lines of the D800's ISO 100 gap, by any means. But in the cases where clean high ISO performance is useful, such as astrophotography, I would pick the 6D over the 5D III any day (assuming, that is, that I picked a DSLR...for truly serious astrophotography, I'd probably get something like this: QHY11 11mp FF Monochrome CCD  ;D)


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 16, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...


My focus point was the last girl on the right. With 5D III + 70-200 f2.8 IS II, I took almost 200 photos with outer AF point, because I wanted to frame the group & stage. Didn't even miss a single shot. 1st photo at f3.2 and 2nd at f2.8

Not to mention, I was about 150' or more away from stage.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Dec 16, 2013)

I am assuming you are happy with these ?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Dec 16, 2013)

John,

I was not disagreeing with you in regards to the fact that the 6D may have better features for you over the 5D3. Having read what you wrote, I do truly believe that the 6D is a better camera for you. I was more or less arguing against those other posters who were taking it further. Of course, all opinions anyways.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 16, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> I am assuming you are happy with these ?



Was that a statement or question? Yes, I'm happy with those photos


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 16, 2013)

bdunbar79 said:


> John,
> 
> I was not disagreeing with you in regards to the fact that the 6D may have better features for you over the 5D3. Having read what you wrote, I do truly believe that the 6D is a better camera for you. I was more or less arguing against those other posters who were taking it further. Of course, all opinions anyways.



Ahh. Understood. As it stands, the only two features/differences from the 5D I've truly appreciated are the shadows and darks of the raw files and the wifi file viewing option. The wifi controller sucks compared to camranger and the GPS is moot for me as I have no use for it. Otherwise, the AF is my biggie and it is no bueno comparatively (but enough for my needs at the moment). So for now, it will continue to merely good enough.

In re to the "opinions," they are like rectums, we all have one ;D (many of which translate into overreaching blanket statements). But that is the nature of the interwebs I suppose.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 16, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > I am assuming you are happy with these ?
> ...



I am leaning toward a little bit of both? lol

I would be happy with them as well. And I will have to say that framing for me in situations like that will require a little more work or cropping on my part with my new body. I will also probably have to fire off a bunch if I'm using the edge points to make sure I get at least one good hit


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 16, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> 24-70II was having a hard time capturing focus at all but was decent when it finally hit.



That's certainly as disappointment and suggests that this lens is wasted on the 6d as only the 1dx/5d3 can use the new lens af system (lensrentals tested it with this result)... a Tamron with a mediocre af should be a better and less expensive match for the equally mediocre 6d af.



JohnDizzo15 said:


> I am definitely getting more misses and need to be much more mindful of the AF.



This would sum up the difference in one sentence, but I do understand everyone "downgrading" or going for the 6d as I did because I'd also feel that the 5d3 is wasted if it either lies on a shelf for most of the week or the superior af capability isn't used in a good portion of the shots.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 16, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > 24-70II was having a hard time capturing focus at all but was decent when it finally hit.
> ...



I didn't realize lensrentals had similar findings with the 24-70ii. Will have to look that up. I was shocked to find that it was having trouble at all considering the lighting was not dim.

RE it sitting on the shelf. The 5d was definitely doing exactly that for what seemed like long stretches here and there considering I shoot with the Fuji basically everyday. And for some reason, I've already done three shoots (two of which were rather extensive) since making the swap which caused me to feel the pain of losing the 5d AF even more already. I normally don't do that much paid work in such a short period of time and I probably would have held onto the 5d for just a little bit longer had I known. Too bad I can't see into the future.

But again, jobs were still completed and clients were still pleased which is all I really needed at this point.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 16, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> I didn't realize lensrentals had similar findings with the 24-70ii. Will have to look that up.



They didn't say the lens isn't good on 5d2/6d, but that the recent "closed loop" speed & precision improvement of the latest lenses (24-70ii, 70-300L) are currently only used by the 1dx & 5d3 af system... with other cameras you might as well grab a 24-70 mk1 as far as precision goes.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Dec 16, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > I am assuming you are happy with these ?
> ...



I was wondering why you posted them in this thread..... shots like these could have been taken with a 6D you decided to use an outer focus point which is fine but you could have quite easily used the centre point either with BBF or not!!


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 16, 2013)

jrista said:


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



To be fair to myself (unlike what you all are doing), I did cite where the 5D3 would be superior. Then Marsu quoted it out of context subsequently, and left off the qualifier...attempting to change the meaning of what I said to suit his own ends.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 16, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



The 5D? You mean the 5D classic? I find that difficult to believe.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 16, 2013)

tron said:


> Yesterday night I was able to take some pictures at a bar with almost no light. I had my 5D3 with 35mm 1.4L.
> I was using an off center point and I was amazed that it was able to focus 80% of the time when I couldn't almost see anything with my eyes! I understand that I wasn't close to EV0 but still I was impressed (ISO was either 25K or 50K , f was set to 1.4, speed 80 to 100 and compensation was at +2/3 stop) OK I wasn't going for a masterpiece but for snapshots with lots of noise. The camera/lens combination delivered. I do not know if 6D could do that (off-center focus under these conditions)...



Frankly I don't believe off center focus was vital in your scenario. Post some of the pictures, to help prove otherwise. Focusing at a distance of 5 feet or more, is not going to make a big difference if you focus then recompose. If the focal plane is less than 5 feet (with the 35mm lens), then I could see requiring the off center focus points. But focusing accurately 80% of the time, is not as good as focusing accurately in low light 100% of the time with the 6D's center point, then recomposing.* And don't quote the above out of context without this part: *For that particular lens, it's likely the 5D3 is a better overall match, especially if you must use AF points outside the center. But as you said, in low light, the 5D3 has some trouble...missing focus for 20% of the shots.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 16, 2013)

bdunbar79 said:


> Part of producing great IQ is auto focus accuracy. The 5D3's AF accuracy is overall, superior. The 6D is also worse in flash sync speed. The 6D's IQ is not better than the 5D3's by any measureable amount. So...
> 
> I cannot think of any reason that if you already had a 5D3, you'd gain anything by selling that, and getting a 6D. Starting with the 6D is a great decision, because it's a great camera. But even for things that are great, there is always something better. Going from a 5D3 to a 6D would be a net loss.



Not true at all, it most definitely is better by the ISO noise performance standard I mention over and over. Pure opinion by a 5D3 fanboy...


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 16, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



My apologies for the ambiguity. I'm referring to the 5d3. For all future conversations, I will never be referring to prior iterations of the 5D unless specifically stated.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 16, 2013)

jrista said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Part of producing great IQ is auto focus accuracy. The 5D3's AF accuracy is overall, superior. The 6D is also worse in flash sync speed. The 6D's IQ is not better than the 5D3's by any measureable amount. So...
> ...



Thank you for at least clarifying this. However, you seem to disagree with it when I say it...


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 16, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Ok just refer to it as the 5D3. 

I'm not saying there won't be more misses with the 6D in good light vs. the 5D3, especially with certain lenses such as the 70-200 f/2.8 ii. But that's why the 5D3 costs more, because it is faster processing/shooting, has a superior AF system in good light, and that system is tuned for, and meant specifically to get the most focus accuracy for three of Canon's newest (and fastest AF'ing) lenses...the 24-70 f/2.8 ii, the 70-200 f/2.8 ii, and the 300mm f/2.8 ii (as well as the other series 2 big whites). However, for all other lenses, the precision advantage will be less so. *Still there, but less so.* _And that's in good light. I admit most professional application events are in good light. _ However, most low light wildlife shooting, low light people shooting, and of course landscape, are vastly better served by the 6D's center point, and its IQ specifically in the ISO range that these shots would employ.

So I state categorically NO, the 5D3 is NOT better in _"every scenario"_ than the 6D. Anyone who says otherwise is a biased 5D3 fanboy, in my book.


----------



## tron (Dec 16, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Yesterday night I was able to take some pictures at a bar with almost no light. I had my 5D3 with 35mm 1.4L.
> ...


80% = About 8 pictures out of 10 since I could not even see where I was focusing with my eyes! In these 2 attempts the camera had refused to focus, it didn't focus inaccurately. Simple as that. And yes I was that close. Plus there was movement in the dark.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 16, 2013)

tron said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



Gotcha...but if you need to focus on things you can't even see through the viewfinder, the 6D's center point is always going to achieve focus...usually quite accurate as long as you use multiple half press. If you're just swinging the camera around and running here or there or something, in the dark...and don't take the extra time to make sure the focus is right...then you should be glad you got any usable shots at all.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 16, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Janbo Makimbo said:
> ...



Really? Mind posting a few images?


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Dec 16, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Okay I was trying to be civil, I was wondering what point you were trying to make posting mediocre images in this thread!! Was it to illustrate how superior you think the 5D3 is because if it was i think you failed miserably!!


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 16, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Janbo Makimbo said:
> ...



XD that's cute, with your little tantrum. I'd re-read what you just wrote because its ludicrously funny.

Calling someone else's images mediocre while raising yourself with no images makes you look very bad and of sub-par IQ. ;D


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Dec 16, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...


I have posted superior images to those in the appropriate thread and they were taken with a 6D, I did not post them and try to make a silly point on someone elses post!! But hey if you are happy with them then good luck!!


----------



## jrista (Dec 17, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



I only disagree with you when you say the 6D is better overall than the 5D III...which I believe you have said a few times, in as many words. ;P


----------



## tron (Dec 17, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...


 I was pointing the outer focusing at the face towards the eye and even if I missed it by little it was much better than ruining the composition by trying to use the center focus point at the eye or keeping the composition and using the center point to focus somewhere else. 

You have such a strong opinion for a situation you weren't in front - and true I hadn't described 100% because I never thought I had to - that apart from a Canon super expert you seem to behave like a psychic or something :


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 17, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Janbo Makimbo said:
> ...


You haven't posted any photos on CR. Your attachments bin is empty. XD quite hilarious. perhaps we can see your photos because after all these photos are "mediocre" to your high standards. 

Please link us to the threads because perhaps you posted from flickr.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 17, 2013)

Just playing devils advocate here for a second, and I am not interested in a bitch slap contest. 

While there is absolutely nothing wrong with the images Dylan777 posted here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,18417.msg347711.html#msg347711 as an example of AF performance they are not particularly convincing images. The dancers are in white against dark green curtains, this provides very good contrast, an easy target for AF, also there is no depth of field at play here, the dancers are so far away and close enough together to be well covered even when shot at f2.8, certainly going by the sizes as displayed here. Indeed as displayed both the footlights and the curtains seem acceptably sharp.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 17, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> Just playing devils advocate here for a second, and I am not interested in a bitch slap contest.
> 
> While there is absolutely nothing wrong with the images Dylan777 posted here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,18417.msg347711.html#msg347711 as an example of AF performance they are not particularly convincing images. , also there is no depth of field at play here, the dancers are so far away and close enough together to be well covered even when shot at f2.8, certainly going by the sizes as displayed here. Indeed as displayed both the footlights and the curtains seem acceptably sharp.



The photos were resized to post here. 

I agree with you about distance and DOF. My point was - since 5D III has 41 AF points(dual cross & cross), why not frame and shoot with one of outer points especially I'm interested keeping the last girl on the right in focus.

In regard of - "The dancers are in white against dark green curtains, this provides very good contrast, an easy target for AF" - you think 6D outer AF point(s) be able deliver same sharpness?


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Dec 17, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...


 I went into the 6D Sample images post and type in my name, here is a link.... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,11600.msg301685/topicseen.html#msg301685


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 17, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Janbo Makimbo said:
> ...



You have any photos taken with 6D with subject moving around, exp. kids?


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 17, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> In regard of - "The dancers are in white against dark green curtains, this provides very good contrast, an easy target for AF" - you think 6D outer AF point(s) be able deliver same sharpness?



I'd expect my EOS-M with adapter and EF lens to lock focus on that kind of contrast. Seriously. This isn't a pissing contest, it is just a measure of contrast, there is a huge amount of contrast between the dancers in white with stage lights on them and the dark green light absorbing curtains, at iso 8,000 you have over 8 stops of dynamic range, some of the white dresses are blown and some of the footlights and orchestra pit black, that is a contrast ratio in the order of 300:1, an easy target for AF. By contrast (no pun intended) the 6D AF center point is rated down to -3EV, a contrast ratio in the low double digits.

Again, this is not a judgement of the images, purely a deconstruction of the task the AF was asked to perform. I am not suggesting for one second that the off center AF points in the 6D can come close to the performance of the 5D MkIII off center AF points, just that the two posted images are not good examples of where the differences would show up.


----------



## Janbo Makimbo (Dec 17, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Janbo Makimbo said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...


err no, I never said I did ?


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 17, 2013)

Janbo Makimbo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Janbo Makimbo said:
> ...



I saw nothing that couldn't be done on a Canon d30, why do you need the 6Ds superior AF system?


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 18, 2013)

jrista said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



No, don't think I have. I said I think it's an overall better value than the 5D3. I certainly like it better than the 5D3, so to me it's the better camera. That's my opinion. Someone else who makes more money from their photography than me, and who specifically needs the 5D3, might think of the 5D3 as a good value also. If all I did was brightly lit sports photography with a 300 f/2.8 ii, then certainly I would have to buy a 5D3, or 1DX. If I was a wedding photog, I would only use the 6D as my second body. But I would also kill myself pretty quick, because death would be better than that!!

I may rent that lens next, I don't know...I kind of want to try the 400 f/4 DO. I like the idea of handholding such a large lens that only weighs 4.3 pounds. Of course I'd probably still use it on my monopod more than hand-holding...and its IS is only 2 stops. I had wanted to try the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8...either way probably won't rent anything until the early spring.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 18, 2013)

tron said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



My mind can take me places, just tried to envision the situation. Not a psychic. I'll take you at your word...but unless you tried the 6D in the exact same situation, and focus-recomposed, how can you be so sure the focus would not have been as close as it otherwise was? Were the shots all at wide open, f/1.4? You realize there is a bit of focus shift with such lenses, if the aperture is not wide open...because those precious focus points are focusing while wide open. Were you able to get a fast shutter speed? Were the people moving or did they stand still and pose as you shot them?


----------



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

The 6D works fine with Focus-Recompose if you are shooting stopped down and you have sufficient DOF. When you want to use fast primes wide open, it turns into a serious enough problem. 

Consider this, you are shooting a subject at a distance of 5 feet with an 85mm lens at f/1.2. The DOF is 0.54 inches. The same shot taken at f/4 will give you a DOF of 1.81 inches. 

So basically you will get by with the slower lenses on a 6D using focus-recompose, shooting wide open won't be so forgiving and the shots will be rendered OOF. 

BTW, phase detect AF happens with the lenses wide open so focus shift when shooting wide open is a non-issue really.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 18, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Consider this, you are shooting a subject at a distance of 5 feet with an 85mm lens at f/1.2.



To be fair, the f1.2 dof is a challenge for any existing Canon af system because even the 5d3/1dx af points aren't spread far enough so there is no need to recompose, and this thin dof beats any phase af precision... learning to manually focus on the lens or moving the camera is a good idea, at least with macro shots I know it beats trying to phase af.


----------



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

Marsu42 said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Consider this, you are shooting a subject at a distance of 5 feet with an 85mm lens at f/1.2.
> ...



I've owned the 85L for a grand 3 days now and so far, I've found it to work pretty accurately on the 5D3. I'd guess the focusing would be even better on the 1DX. 

It's a challenge on the 6D though and I'd like to use a tripod and live view for shooting with this lens. 

I'll do some test shots with both bodies and post the results.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 19, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Consider this, you are shooting a subject at a distance of 5 feet with an 85mm lens at f/1.2.
> ...



Agree.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 19, 2013)

J.R. said:


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



I definitely would not want to depend on the 6D, especially its outer points, to make the 85L autofocus. It's an unusual lens. I've only tried that lens on my 50D three years ago, and it never autofocused accurately on it, no matter how I adjusted the AFMA, and that was with just center point. I always had to use live view and manual focus on that lens on the 50D. I tried it on my cousin/neighbor's 5D2 at the time, but just focused manually via the viewfinder...and it focused perfectly on it. On my 50D it wouldn't even focus accurately, manually through the viewfinder. My theory on this is that there is a phenomenon I have read about, that occurs because the viewfinder, mirror, and pentaprism are smaller, and the spacing of it all is different than in a full frame camera...I forget what it's called right now.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 19, 2013)

J.R. said:


> I've owned the 85L for a grand 3 days now and so far, I've found it to work pretty accurately on the 5D3. I'd guess the focusing would be even better on the 1DX.



Interesting - do you use af point expansion or single point af? Just looking at the specs, a 5d3/1dx center point shouldn't be better at af'ing than the 5d2/6d if the f2.8 line picks up, but on the other hand everybody states that f1.2 on 5d2/6d is horrible to use and that's why I've given up on the idea to buy such a fast lens... but mostly because focus & recompose from the center point is so tricky.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 19, 2013)

Marsu42: "You'd agree to just about anything that indicates that you can just get a 6d instead of a 5d3, don't you  ?"

Haha, not necessarily. I really am saying now I would not want to use the 85L on the 6D at all, other than perhaps manual focus. That lens in particular, is just slow to AF and a pain. I wish I would have had rented it when my cousin bought his 1DX, so I could see just what it could do. I sincerely doubt the 1DX can AF all that spectacularly with that lens. The 85L is kind of like trying to marry Lady Gaga, if you're a straight male...she just might be more trouble than she's worth, and I have the wrong plumbing for those times when she craves the other...um...faucet!!

Maybe by the time I can afford a 2DX or 5D5, Canon will introduce a new 85L. But by that time the price for both might be $30k...


----------



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

Marsu42 said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > I've owned the 85L for a grand 3 days now and so far, I've found it to work pretty accurately on the 5D3. I'd guess the focusing would be even better on the 1DX.
> ...



I use both AF point expansion as well as single point AF. I've taken a fair few shots of my daughters with the corner AF points with a pretty good hit rate. For the 5D3, the 85L falls in group-A where you have the additional 20 cross type AF points (f/4 vertical and f/5.6 horizontal) enabled (see blue focus points in below image). 

The images which were out of focus were more because of my poor technique than the gear. I've found rocking back or forward ever so slightly when shooting with very limited DOF will render the shot OOF. 

Same goes for situations where the subject is in motion. I had a hell of a time last night trying to shoot my 1 year old niece in very low light - she was seldom still and I got plenty of OOF shots shooting wide open - stopping down to f/2 and more increasing the DOF improved the images. 

As far as I am concerned, the 85L focuses excellently with the outer points on the 5D3 unless it is user error and/or subject is in motion. "Sincere" doubts over its focusing ability without having tested the combo are obviously unfounded. 

I've also heard (maybe someone can confirm if I am correct) that the 85L focuses faster on the 1DX. Supposedly, the 1DX supplies additional power to the lens motor which makes it faster.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 19, 2013)

Used the 85II on a portrait session yesterday and was getting a pretty high percentage of slight misses on a relatively static subject. I did pretty well with the same lens on my 5D3. Since switching over, the 85II has been pulled out twice for any significant amount of shooting and both times have been tough with regard to getting a lot of misses.


----------



## jrista (Dec 19, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Used the 85II on a portrait session yesterday and was getting a pretty high percentage of slight misses on a relatively static subject. I did pretty well with the same lens on my 5D3. Since switching over, the 85II has been pulled out twice for any significant amount of shooting and both times have been tough with regard to getting a lot of misses.



That was why a new AF system for the 5D III was such a highly requested thing. The 6D basically has the same thing as the 5D II, with some of the hidden assist points made visible and selectable. The slight jitter that causes those misses is also present in the 7D's 19pt AF system...it just doesn't sit still between shots...even if the subject is already locked, there is pretty much ALWAYS movement, ever so slight, between every frame. Drives me nuts, and one of the primary reasons a 5D III is at the top of my list for the next piece of gear I get.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 19, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Used the 85II on a portrait session yesterday and was getting a pretty high percentage of slight misses on a relatively static subject. I did pretty well with the same lens on my 5D3. Since switching over, the 85II has been pulled out twice for any significant amount of shooting and both times have been tough with regard to getting a lot of misses.



I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you have done a proper AFMA with the lens. I haven't used the 85II myself with a 6D or otherwise, but I don't have any issues with the 135L; I get consistent, repeatable results. The 85II should be usable on a 6D; plenty of people were shooting with it on a 5DII, which I can attest had a slightly inferior AF system to the 6D.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 19, 2013)

jrista said:


> The slight jitter that causes those misses is also present in the 7D's 19pt AF system...it just doesn't sit still between shots...even if the subject is already locked, there is pretty much ALWAYS movement, ever so slight, between every frame.



Of what mode are you talking about - servo af or one-shot with continuous fps?

What I experience on both the 6d and 60d with a thinner dof like on the 100L is that when you re-af at the same point w/o camera movement, the lens will often choose a slightly different focus... and lensrentals says it's even better to af somewhere completely else first as this gives more exact results than slight af corrections.


----------



## jrista (Dec 19, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > The slight jitter that causes those misses is also present in the 7D's 19pt AF system...it just doesn't sit still between shots...even if the subject is already locked, there is pretty much ALWAYS movement, ever so slight, between every frame.
> ...



Either, in the case of the 7D, but it is more pronounced with Servo. This isn't a DOF problem. It happens with all my lenses, wide open or stopped down considerably. I had the problem with my 600/4II when stopped down to f/8 just the other day. For such a long lens like that, DOF is pretty small when you get close enough to a bird to be "frame filling", and even at f/8, the jitter can still result in slight softening of detail that isn't exactly at the plane of focus. I like the 7D, but the AF jitter is the single largest IQ drawback of the camera. 

All of my lens are properly AFMAed as well. I've used manual techniques as well as FoCal to calibrate each of my lenses. Even shifting AFMA about 2-3 notches results in a visible change with the 600mm lens, so when the lens is that sharp, slight changes in the focal plane can mean visible changes elsewhere, unless you are downsampling by 2x or more. (When downsampling, it is never really a problem, but I generally print 24x36 and larger, so it really matters.)


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 20, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > Used the 85II on a portrait session yesterday and was getting a pretty high percentage of slight misses on a relatively static subject. I did pretty well with the same lens on my 5D3. Since switching over, the 85II has been pulled out twice for any significant amount of shooting and both times have been tough with regard to getting a lot of misses.
> ...



AFMA'd with Reikan FoCal three consecutive times yielding the same result. Figured it was good enough. I surprisingly have had the same findings as you regarding the 135 on the 6D. Seems to be just fine. But for some reason, the 85II on both occasions has been somewhat unreliable compared to when it was paired with my 5d3. The other ones that have given me the most problems is the 24II and the 24-70II. The zoom wasn't unreliable as far as AF goes, just seemed to hunt noticeably more in and in decent light which was odd. Most the other stuff has been fine.


----------



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

JohnDizzo15 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



That is interesting. I wonder if it due to the nature of the newer lenses being optimized for 1DX and 5III AF? I'm actually very surprised at more hunting with the center point, which has (on paper) greater sensitivity to anything else Canon has. I always use single point AF, myself, and in good light I don't have problems with any of my lenses on my 6Ds. And that center point can lock onto just about anything in any light.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 20, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> ...



This was actually during shoots so I was using all the points without paying too much attention to how often it was the center. Just based on feel/memory though, I don't believe I use the center point much more often than the outer points when composing if at all. I have definitely noticed that the center point has caught focus with a few of my lenses in very low light situations where I think I might have had a little more trouble previously. However, I am finding that doesn't help me all that much as I compose very frequently outside of the center which is probably more of an exhibition of how weak those outer non center points really are.


----------



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

JohnDizzo15 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



This little discussion may be key to at least some of the varying opinions on the AF of the 6D. I think it depends on one's shooting style. I tend to be a little more deliberate in my approach, and, frankly, the 6D works for me. I can't remember the last time I let a camera automatically select the AF point. I have had my most successful year commercially shooting 6D bodies exclusively. I don't have any problems at weddings and events, myself, but I do know my gear pretty well. IQ trumps all for me, and the 6D delivers as well or better than any other current Canon option.

But I have never recommended the 6D to those who shoot sports or a lot of action. They need a more robust AF. If they are a less deliberate shooter or prefer to use zones/auto AF the 6D may not serve them as well either because its AF points are not spread out super wide and there aren't that many of them.


----------



## bleephotography (Dec 20, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> ...



Excellent advice as always, Dustin. Have you, by chance, used any fast primes like the 85 f/1.2 or 35 f/1.4 with either of your 6D bodies? I had the 6D for a limited time and found the outer points regularly inconsistent with such a shallow DOF, which is one of the main reasons I reverted back to the 5D3 (aside from dual card slots). What are your overall thoughts on using fast glass with the 6D, as you obviously know how to use it well - your images speak for themselves!


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 20, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> This little discussion may be key to at least some of the varying opinions on the AF of the 6D. I think it depends on one's shooting style. I tend to be a little more deliberate in my approach, and, frankly, the 6D works for me. I can't remember the last time I let a camera automatically select the AF point. I have had my most successful year commercially shooting 6D bodies exclusively. I don't have any problems at weddings and events, myself, but I do know my gear pretty well. IQ trumps all for me, and the 6D delivers as well or better than any other current Canon option.
> 
> But I have never recommended the 6D to those who shoot sports or a lot of action. They need a more robust AF. If they are a less deliberate shooter or prefer to use zones/auto AF the 6D may not serve them as well either because its AF points are not spread out super wide and there aren't that many of them.



I never let the camera select the points for me either. I always select single points and it is simply having problems with static subjects on the outer points when using the lenses previously mentioned. Consistency and accuracy are just not there like they were when I was using the same lenses on the 5D3 and selecting the outer points respectively. 

I agree that the IQ is the number one factor for me. On that criteria alone, the 6D does as well as any other Canon body. But my issue is that even after calibration, several of my most often used lenses are not getting the same type of AF performance as before outside of the center point. Focus and recompose is something that also does not work for me with my fast lenses so it has been a bit of an adjustment.


----------



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

bleephotography said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



My fastest lens is currently only f/1.8. I have the new 35mm f/2 IS, 85mm f/1.8, 100L, and 135L primes. None of them are as wide as f/1.4, and certainly not f/1.2. I have owned and shot the 50mm f/1.4 but, frankly, it never did too much for me, and I ended up moving both copies I have owned within six months of ownership. That being said, it wasn't because I had focus issues. 

I recognize from others that lenses like the 85L and the 50L are more challenging to get consistent focus from, but that seems to be true on most bodies (particularly with the 50L). I don't know what to tell you on that.

I can tell you that I have used both the 135L and several 70-200 f/2.8 variants without any issue on the 6D, and the depth of field is just as small (smaller @200mm f/2.8) than either of the other primes. Those two just seem to be a little more finicky, and yet produce stunning results when they are on.

Proper AFMA is a big deal, and sometimes you don't get it right the first time. This becomes increasingly important the wider the aperture is. Technique is also a big part. I shoot events with a 6D/135L combo all the time (and sometimes with a 1.4x II on the 135L) and rarely miss focus.

I don't know what to tell for sure as I don't have experience with either of the lenses you are speaking of. All I know is that both pros and amateurs were getting stunning results with those lenses mounted on 5DIIs, and I know from experience that the 6D's AF is actually better/more accurate than the 5DIIs.


----------



## bleephotography (Dec 21, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


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



Good to know, thanks Dustin. I'm trying to talk myself out of getting a backup/travel body, but I think I might just get a 6D instead of another 5D3. Maybe I'll give it another shot.


----------



## bholliman (Dec 21, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> AFMA'd with Reikan FoCal three consecutive times yielding the same result. Figured it was good enough. I surprisingly have had the same findings as you regarding the 135 on the 6D. Seems to be just fine. But for some reason, the 85II on both occasions has been somewhat unreliable compared to when it was paired with my 5d3. The other ones that have given me the most problems is the 24II and the 24-70II. The zoom wasn't unreliable as far as AF goes, just seemed to hunt noticeably more in and in decent light which was odd. Most the other stuff has been fine.



The AF on my 24-70 2.8 II works great with my 6D, fast and accurate! I also have good luck with my 135L, 100L and 85 1.8 at wide apertures. My only lens that struggles to focus accurately at times is my 50 1.4, but that same lens didn't focus that well with my 7D or T2i either.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 21, 2013)

bholliman said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > AFMA'd with Reikan FoCal three consecutive times yielding the same result. Figured it was good enough. I surprisingly have had the same findings as you regarding the 135 on the 6D. Seems to be just fine. But for some reason, the 85II on both occasions has been somewhat unreliable compared to when it was paired with my 5d3. The other ones that have given me the most problems is the 24II and the 24-70II. The zoom wasn't unreliable as far as AF goes, just seemed to hunt noticeably more in and in decent light which was odd. Most the other stuff has been fine.
> ...



Good feedback. Thanks! Just a note for the OP regarding FoCal - be very careful to have the proper EV for running the tests. Slightly dim lighting produces a different result (sometimes consistently) than the tests run with properly bright EV. That may not have been your problem at all, but I wanted to throw that out as a possibility.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 23, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Just a note for the OP regarding FoCal - be very careful to have the proper EV for running the tests. Slightly dim lighting produces a different result (sometimes consistently) than the tests run with properly bright EV. That may not have been your problem at all, but I wanted to throw that out as a possibility.



Good point, Dustin. The thought had actually crossed my mind as well but haven't had the chance to redo the testing in a more ideal scenario. I actually performed the tests at my office during my break and it is not the same lighting that I normally use for FoCal. Will definitely be redoing them when I get some time at home.

I actually just ordered an EG-S focusing screen as well. Hopefully I will also be able to better see through the vf whether the AF is doing it's job properly on my faster lenses. Completely forgot that I could easily swap out the screen on the 6D since I had been used to the thought of not doing it with the 5D3 based on it's restrictions.


----------



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

JohnDizzo15 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Just a note for the OP regarding FoCal - be very careful to have the proper EV for running the tests. Slightly dim lighting produces a different result (sometimes consistently) than the tests run with properly bright EV. That may not have been your problem at all, but I wanted to throw that out as a possibility.
> ...



Since I had two 6D's, I may do the same on one of mine as I do have quite a few manual focus lenses. I would be particularly tempted if I picked up a Zeiss to add to the kit.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 23, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> ...



I was previously using an LCDVF to provide a 2.5x magnified view but the responsiveness is just not what I would like it to be when shooting in liveview on both the 6d and 5d3 (which caused me to rely on the focus confirmation most of the time). Looking forward to using the screen with the Zeiss 50/2 MP as the focus errors are even more pronounced with that lens.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 26, 2013)

jrista said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



For filling the frame with a bird at 600mm on the 7D, I could definitely see how even slightly closed to f/8, the plane of focus is extremely shallow, and thus your autofocus will vary on what it focuses on, and with the accuracy of that focus. You're usually trying to get the eye of the bird in sharpest focus, I assume? Plumage is important too, but less so than the eye, isn't it?

I had thought you already bought a 5D3 and were using it with your 600 ii. Would drive me nuts I think!

However, if you're not filling the frame with a bird...like say especially if the bird is 1/4 the width of the frame or smaller, then in my opinion most of any focus problem, however minute, is easier to deal with and identify the cause. I guess that's obvious.

In my opinion you can get pro quality images of birds by only filling the frame where the bird is a max of 1/3 the width (or height) of the image, but admittedly I'm not the birding expert. I've seen plenty of great images that were cropped about this much, though.


----------



## jrista (Dec 26, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> I had thought you already bought a 5D3 and were using it with your 600 ii. Would drive me nuts I think!



I have used "a" 5D III with my 600 II, but I have not yet purchased a 5D III of my own yet. I can only absorb so much outflow in a year, and the lens sucked me dry. So...5D III is on hold until I have more cash flow and savings.



CarlTN said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



An APS-C at f/8 will have a deeper DOF than FF at f/8, for an identically framed subject. So in that sense, APS-C is actually better for DOF. The problem is most definitely not the depth of field, though...the 7D AF system has an uncontrolled jitter, such that it always adjusts every inter-frame period, even if it does not need to. For a stationary subject at a good distance with plenty of DOF, the actual plane of focus WILL shift around your intended focus point if you simply hold the AF button down and let it do it's thing. After a while, it will settle, so long as you do not take a picture. When you are doing AI servo and tracking a subject or taking multiple frames in sequence, ever frame the camera will perform AF, and even if the subject has not moved, the plane of focus will change...ever so slightly, but often just enough to be noticeable and sometimes enough to kill that frame. 




CarlTN said:


> However, if you're not filling the frame with a bird...like say especially if the bird is 1/4 the width of the frame or smaller, then in my opinion most of any focus problem, however minute, is easier to deal with and identify the cause. I guess that's obvious.



Hmm, not sure I understand... The smaller the bird is in the frame, the more pronounced any issue is, including missfocus...the fewer pixels you have on subject, the more magnified things like missfocus, camera shake, optical aberrations, etc. will be, relative to the subject. 



CarlTN said:


> In my opinion you can get pro quality images of birds by only filling the frame where the bird is a max of 1/3 the width (or height) of the image, but admittedly I'm not the birding expert. I've seen plenty of great images that were cropped about this much, though.



It really depends on the number of pixels in the area of the frame filled. The pros I follow generally fill the frame exactly right, regardless of the sensor used.


----------



## sb in ak (Dec 27, 2013)

I just upgraded to the 5D3 from the 6D, mostly for the AF improvement. Seems worth it so far. However, if you aren't in need of demanding AF, the 6D is quite good, and the image quality does seem a smidgen better. (Mostly, no more banding when lifting shadows with the 6D!)


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 27, 2013)

jrista said:


> It really depends on the number of pixels in the area of the frame filled. The pros I follow generally fill the frame exactly right, regardless of the sensor used.



And what constitutes filling the frame "exactly right"? You mean filling the frame with 90% bird?

As for the full frame vs. crop sensor comparison of DOF, that's not really what I was discussing, as I know the DOF is shallower with a full frame. I just meant that if you filled the frame with the bird, the DOF is still pretty shallow at 600mm, even with a crop camera.

As for not understanding what I meant, I'll try to clarify (though I'm sure you'll find a way to say I'm wrong). As a bird becomes larger in the FOV, the accuracy of the focus needs to be that much finer, mostly due to the shallower plane of focus relative to the size of the FOV (besides the larger number of pixels that are defining what is sharp detail and what is out of focus). If there is a pronounced focus inaccuracy when the bird is small in the field of view, yes that's more annoying and really unusable autofocus. But correcting it to an adequate degree is easier to do, than to correct an autofocus issue that is effectively millimeters deep in the plane of focus...as I assume the problem you're describing is.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 28, 2013)

Focusing screen came and swap out has been completed for three days. Manual focus has been waaaaaay easier. Plus one in the positive column for the body. This might be cause to hold onto the body when the new ff big mp body comes out assuming it doesn't have a swappable screen.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 28, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> Focusing screen came and swap out has been completed for three days. Manual focus has been waaaaaay easier. Plus one in the positive column for the body. This might be cause to hold onto the body when the new ff big mp body comes out assuming it doesn't have a swappable screen.



This looks quite weird to me because the tree in the bottom center, in the background, also appears in focus...just as the closer one in the foreground does. This looks more like a toy lens, or else toy lens processing in post to me.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 28, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> JohnDizzo15 said:
> 
> 
> > Focusing screen came and swap out has been completed for three days. Manual focus has been waaaaaay easier. Plus one in the positive column for the body. This might be cause to hold onto the body when the new ff big mp body comes out assuming it doesn't have a swappable screen.
> ...



45 tse


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 28, 2013)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Ahhh that explains it.


----------



## jrista (Dec 28, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > It really depends on the number of pixels in the area of the frame filled. The pros I follow generally fill the frame exactly right, regardless of the sensor used.
> ...



It isn't so much a matter of percent. It is a matter of composition. Pros have the skill to utilize at least 90% of their frame, it not even 100%, for the composition they want. That does not necessarily mean the bird itself will be 90% of the frame. That doesn't really matter in the end. What matters in the end is that you utilize the majority of the pixels on the sensor. Then, pretty much regardless of output size, your image will have less noise/more DR.

Sometimes "filling the frame" means the bird fills 40%, and some negative space and maybe a counter object or two are included. You usually leave a little bit of space for cropping/straitening, but that isn't usually significant. Other times, "filling the frame" might mean the just bird's head is 80% of the frame, with the appropriate amount of negative space around it for appealing composition. Either way, there is little cropping, so your maximizing the potential of the sensor, minimizing noise, etc. 



CarlTN said:


> As for the full frame vs. crop sensor comparison of DOF, that's not really what I was discussing, as I know the DOF is shallower with a full frame. I just meant that if you filled the frame with the bird, the DOF is still pretty shallow at 600mm, even with a crop camera.



Yeah, generally true. 



CarlTN said:


> As for not understanding what I meant, I'll try to clarify (though I'm sure you'll find a way to say I'm wrong). As a bird becomes larger in the FOV, the accuracy of the focus needs to be that much finer, mostly due to the shallower plane of focus relative to the size of the FOV (besides the larger number of pixels that are defining what is sharp detail and what is out of focus). If there is a pronounced focus inaccuracy when the bird is small in the field of view, yes that's more annoying and really unusable autofocus. But correcting it to an adequate degree is easier to do, than to correct an autofocus issue that is effectively millimeters deep in the plane of focus...as I assume the problem you're describing is.



The increase in subject size in the frame is often offset by increased detail, which provides a greater potential that the AF unit will find the necessary contrast to operate well. The bigger issue with wide swings in subject distance is AFMA...bummer of it is, AFMA really works for the focal length you tune it at. Much closer or much farther, and the AFMA setting is not going to be ideal. Puts a lot of pressure to make sure you AFMA at the most ideal "happy medium" point somewhere between your average far distance and average near distance...but it will never be perfect for all photos. So, even if you do manage to maintain good focus with a nice contrasty area of the bird, doesn't necessarily mean it will be sharp as a brand new razor.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 28, 2013)

jrista said:


> The increase in subject size in the frame is often offset by increased detail, which provides a greater potential that the AF unit will find the necessary contrast to operate well. The bigger issue with wide swings in subject distance is AFMA...bummer of it is, AFMA really works for the focal length you tune it at. Much closer or much farther, and the AFMA setting is not going to be ideal. Puts a lot of pressure to make sure you AFMA at the most ideal "happy medium" point somewhere between your average far distance and average near distance...but it will never be perfect for all photos. So, even if you do manage to maintain good focus with a nice contrasty area of the bird, doesn't necessarily mean it will be sharp as a brand new razor.



I agree, and have found the same, and I didn't need to buy a shiny new 600mm ii like you did, to discover it. Obviously your new lens is so sharp that it simply helps highlight such problems.

Regarding what I highlighted in red, I assume you meant "fine tune AFMA to subject distance", or "focus distance", rather than "focal length". Obviously changing focal length is a whole other issue, such as with a zoom. Which is why cameras like the 6D and others, allow you to at least set AFMA at the long end and wide end independently. It's a shame they don't also just allow you to also set it relative to the focus (or subject) distance...besides letting you just vary the AFMA all over the place with a zoom, at perhaps 10 or more different focal lengths, at randomly customizable focal lengths for example. 

When lenses get as sharp as yours, or perhaps moreso one like the 300 f/2.8 ii, then such things become more noticeable. 

At some point though, you have to decide if you are more gearhead, or more photographer.


----------



## jrista (Dec 28, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > The increase in subject size in the frame is often offset by increased detail, which provides a greater potential that the AF unit will find the necessary contrast to operate well. The bigger issue with wide swings in subject distance is AFMA...bummer of it is, AFMA really works for the focal length you tune it at. Much closer or much farther, and the AFMA setting is not going to be ideal. Puts a lot of pressure to make sure you AFMA at the most ideal "happy medium" point somewhere between your average far distance and average near distance...but it will never be perfect for all photos. So, even if you do manage to maintain good focus with a nice contrasty area of the bird, doesn't necessarily mean it will be sharp as a brand new razor.
> ...



Yes, I mean focus distance...sorry.


----------



## Shield (Jan 14, 2014)

jrista said:


> Richard8971 said:
> 
> 
> > JohnDizzo15 said:
> ...



Agree completely. Not to mention the fact that with the 5d3 I can load Magic Lantern and shoot raw 1920x1080 video for extended periods of time. Flip the switch to stills and get 30 shot bursts (5 seconds @ 6FPS) with the same 1000x cards required for the raw video. The 5d3 is just an all-around beast; people in this thread saying it's only for weddings just aren't using it properly.


----------



## grahamclarkphoto (Jan 14, 2014)

bdunbar79 said:


> Part of producing great IQ is auto focus accuracy. The 5D3's AF accuracy is overall, superior. The 6D is also worse in flash sync speed. The 6D's IQ is not better than the 5D3's by any measureable amount. So...
> 
> I cannot think of any reason that if you already had a 5D3, you'd gain anything by selling that, and getting a 6D. Starting with the 6D is a great decision, because it's a great camera. But even for things that are great, there is always something better. Going from a 5D3 to a 6D would be a net loss.



I have both and use the 6D more often, about 90% of the time actually.

I just did a video review after 1+ year where I compare, and it's true that critically sharp images from AF for fast action depend on more points, but what you're shooting determines wether or not this is important, right?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19066

Graham


----------



## Canon1 (Jan 15, 2014)

John,

Now that you have had almost 2 months to shoot with your 6D do you feel that you ultimately made the right decision?


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Jan 15, 2014)

Canon1 said:


> John,
> 
> Now that you have had almost 2 months to shoot with your 6D do you feel that you ultimately made the right decision?



The simple answer would be yes....for now.

While I do miss the 5D3, the 6D has not stopped me from accomplishing the things I need to accomplish. There are definitely times when I do miss the AF system of the former, but not to the point where I'm going to lose any sleep over it. For the time being, I can get the job done with the 6D AF system which will suffice until Canon puts out another FF option that lures me into an upgrade.

I haven't really had any instances where I missed the other key downgraded features although I'm sure I will at some point. Although I will say there was one instance where I could have probably used the 1/8000th.

I still haven't really utilized the wifi features very much as I don't really like the UI vs the Camranger.

My initial impressions regarding image quality and workability of the RAW files in post still remain.

Other notes:
After replacing the focusing screen, I have been using my manual lenses a lot more. 
As minute as it is, I have noticed the drop in size/weight which inclined me to purchase a 40mm pancake. The combo is actually pretty compact considering what I used to carry around.

Also, my original intention was to start swapping stuff out and selling so that I could create a new 1Dwhatever fund. That has since been derailed as I just picked up a Fuji X-E2 with 35/1.4. Assuming this works out well, I suppose it will only further convince me that I made the right choice as I picked up the combo for basically the difference in price from the 5D3 to 6D plus a couple hundred bucks.

All in all, I still believe it was the right choice as I will now have a new toy that I will hopefully love without having spent anything,


----------

