# EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 14, 2014)

```
<p>We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D, a camera which I personally love for its size and simplicity. We’re told that the next iteration of the camera is likely to move upmarket in features and pricing. As it sits, there’s about a $1500 difference between the EOS 6D and the EOS 5D Mark III.</p>
<p>I think most people would rather see a $1499 full frame camera, but Canon seems to be marketing the EOS 7D Mark II on par with the 6D as far as image quality goes, so that might drive the 6D upwards, which in turn could also move the next EOS 5D body up as well. This is the opposite of where I saw things going, but increasing margins to offset decreasing sales numbers is good business.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/canonproducttree.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-17591" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/canonproducttree.jpg" alt="canonproducttree" width="570" height="367" /></a></p>
<p>Check out a four part interview with the developers of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II: <a href="http://www.canon-asia.com/snapshot/category/products-review/eos-7d-mark-ii-developers-interview/" target="_blank">Canon 7D Mark II Developer Interview</a></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## tomscott (Oct 14, 2014)

So basically making entry level FF in the canon camp less accessible… Yet you can buy FF mirrorless cameras for less than £1000… Should be coming down not up.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 14, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> I think most people would rather see a $1499 full frame camera, but Canon seems to be marketing the EOS 7D Mark II on par with the 6D as far as image quality goes, so that might drive the 6D upwards, which in turn could also move the next EOS 5D body up as well.



Agreed, that sounds just like Canon, they like to have a straight model lineup and an overlap crop/ff is bound to "confuse" customers and prevents them from being upsold to the next, "better" model. And if Canon are happy with the current 6d sales, it means less expensive Nikon/Sony models with more features don't hurt them.

This in itself doesn't mean anything about the 6d2 release though, I'd be surprised if they'd upgrade the 6d1 before releasing a 5d4.


----------



## janhalasa (Oct 14, 2014)

I think it's quite logical move - they will release 5Dmk4 and it will be easy to buy a 5Dmk3 for a good price. But Canon wants people to buy new cameras, not used ones. So they must make 6Dmk2 comparable with the current 5Dmk3. In the same was as the current 6D is comparable with 5Dmk2.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 14, 2014)

The problem the 6D has had (in my opinion) is that it's a reverted to a classic 5D formula. While the 5D went up in the specs, the 6D inherited the 5D's old formula. Top tier chip performance, slow fps and an old camera design with a really old AF specs. There's little on paper to wow a purchaser, although sadly it's far more capable that many have given credit for. 
When I heard the rumours for the 5DIII and 6D, I was expecting the 6D to be called the 5DIII and a direct replacement, ie cost conscious, low spec but great performance. While the other camera, a high spec mini 1Dx would have been called a 5Dx. But they didn't and we have what we have. The 5DIII is closer to a 1DX than it is to the 5DII or 6D.


----------



## gsealy (Oct 14, 2014)

Reading all the rumours here and thinking between the lines it seems as though Canon might move the 1D and 5D into the higher MP range, likely 35 MP and possibly 50 MP. Also it seems that on the video side of things that those cameras would support 4K. So we are talking around $4-4.5K for the 5D, and who knows for the 1D. This would create space between those cameras and the 7DII, which the 6D could fit into. 

Given the current feature set of the 7DII, I would definitely favor it over the 6D. The 7DII seems to be a very versatile, rugged camera and could be the staple, 'go-to' camera for anyone's bag. With a 200K shutter count you could take shots for a very long time.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 14, 2014)

If the 6D is a full-frame 60D, making the 6DII a full-frame 70D doesn't seem unreasonable, and that would be a pretty significant improvement. The 5DIV should then be a full-frame 7D2.


----------



## kphoto99 (Oct 14, 2014)

So basically Canon will tell it's crop users that want to move to FF to look at other brands (like the D750), since new lenses have to be bought anyways.
Great job Canon.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Oct 14, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> If the 6D is a full-frame 60D, making the 6DII a full-frame 70D doesn't seem unreasonable, and that would be a pretty significant improvement. The 5DIV should then be a full-frame 7D2.



This seems by far the most likely prospect, but personally I would prefer to see a 6DII with a 50D-style body. (And since the 50D worked just fine with no buttons on the left, it could have an articulated screen...)


----------



## WoodyWindy (Oct 14, 2014)

I don't think that chart represents a move upmarket, as much as it shows where Canon really thinks the 6D fits into the grand scheme of things. (as if the name didn't already say that...)

That said, it only makes sense that a 6D II would have improved specifications across the board. It would be silly if it didn't at least match the operational specifications of whatever xxxD camera happens to be current at the time. But probably no price increase at the MSRP level. (Street price would, of course, initially be higher...)


----------



## Coldhands (Oct 14, 2014)

kphoto99 said:


> So basically Canon will tell it's crop users that want to move to FF to look at other brands (like the D750)



How so? Are you already assuming that a future 6DII will be uncompetitive when it debuts?

Also, I know many users of APS-C bodies that own one or more EF lenses (myself included) which provides a good incentive to remain with Canon.


----------



## pierlux (Oct 14, 2014)

So, if the 6D moves upwards in specs and price, it is going to be positioned approximately where the 5D3 is now. Since the 7D2 will surely eat part of the current 5D3 market, and if the future 5D4 possibly goes Hi-MP, then there will be room for a new entry level FF... I mean, something equivalent to the Rebel line, but FF. What do you guys think, is it realistic a possible lineup with 4 FF and 4 APS-C dSLRs for all demands and all wallets?

edit: actually, there are 5 APS-C dSLRs currently available, I forgot the 100D.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 14, 2014)

I thought from the first that the crippled AF of the 6D made it a misfire. Despite the chorus of defenders, Canon agrees! Its AF was inferior to that of the 60D, for cryin' out loud.


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 14, 2014)

I would rather like to see 6D upgrade exactly where it was when it was launched. IQ is really good and but af system sucks big time. Maybe at next iteration Canon should add touch screen, dp af, wider af array and tilting screen.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 14, 2014)

Just come out with them already. I'd love to see both the 6D and 5DIII replacements announced by spring and available by summer.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 14, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> ...Canon seems to be marketing the EOS 7D Mark II on par with the 6D as far as image quality goes...



Where does it say anything about image quality on the chart? The 6D is obviously NOT marketed to be the same image quality as the 7DII or they'd have the same ISO range, which they don't.

The 6D has much better image quality than the 7DII when both can frame the same. The 7DII has far superior focusing performance in both stills and video, and a better body. Pick your poison.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 14, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D...


I seriously doubt if Canon has been disappointed with the sales of the 6D. The 6D is almost certainly the best-selling full frame camera on the market today. Certainly has outsold the D600/610. 

Either Canon has unrealistic expectations or whomever is "telling" CR guy that Canon is disappointed doesn't know what he or she is talking about.

That said, I can see Canon placing a new full-frame in the lineup between the current 6D and the 5DII. There is a lot of space in there for a D750 competitor. I wouldn't be surprised to see a 6DII that goes up in price, features and build to hit that $2,500 mark and then a new model that is closer in features to the original 6D (8D??) come in at around $1,500. 

Feature and price creep is always a dilemma for any manufacturer. Look at cars. Manufacturers always start out with a budget car and then, in order make it "new" each season they have to add features and cost. Eventually, the budget car become a mid-level car and they have to start over with a new budget model. 

The 6DII has to be better than the 6D, but that means it gets closer in features to the 5DIII. The 5DIV has to have better features than the 5DIII, but that encroaches on the 1DX. It's a never-ending battle to keep refreshing models while keeping the "budget" version available. It's further complicated now that the technology has matured and the pace of change is slowing down.

It's a myth to think that Canon would be concerned about a stripped-down full frame camera stealing sales from the 7DII (or a 7DII stealing sales from a stripped-down full frame camera). Two different cameras, two different markets and either way, Canon gets your money.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 14, 2014)

I personally think that the 6D is just fine where it is, the issue may be that consumers think there is something wrong because it sells for less. Bring the 5D III to $2500 and adding a 3D at $3600-$4000 makes more sense.

If I did not already have the 5D MK III, I'd probably have bought a 6D, since it does what I need. I bought a 5D Classic on a whim for $350 recently, it is a great camera too.

I had a D800, but my Dell i7 based pc could not reasonably handle the large noisy files. Now I'm a couple of generations newer, and the large files are not a issue, so I'll be looking at large MP cameras but really am not in need of one.


----------



## kphoto99 (Oct 14, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D...
> ...



As a counter argument, look at the Rebel (t2i->t5i), features have been going up (not for image quality improvements), but the price has been creeping down.


----------



## andrewflo (Oct 14, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> If the 6D is a full-frame 60D, making the 6DII a full-frame 70D doesn't seem unreasonable, and that would be a pretty significant improvement. The 5DIV should then be a full-frame 7D2.



This seems reasonable to me. I originally purchased my 6D because of the low-cost FF prospect. But I've grown to love the extra little features it has over the 5DIII, namely WiFi and -3EV center point focusing. Not that these features are "non-professional" but I think it's pretty clear the 6D was targeted at enthusiasts similar to the 70D. A full frame 70D would be even better in mind.

However, if the 5DIV shot 4K and the 6DII did not, I couldn't consider a 6DII.


----------



## kphoto99 (Oct 14, 2014)

Coldhands said:


> kphoto99 said:
> 
> 
> > So basically Canon will tell it's crop users that want to move to FF to look at other brands (like the D750)
> ...



It is a always a trade of. In my case I am looking at FF for improved IQ. Currently the 6D is the best balance of price/IQ. If the price of 6DII goes to the neighborhood of 5DIII then that is no longer a case. From what I have read the D750 has a better IQ then the 6D, currently 6D wins on price but looses on AF.
The few FF lenses that I have are more applicable to the 1.6 crop factor and they would not be so desirable on FF, this is why replacing them by changing brand would not be a big sacrifice.

The other part of my problem with Canon, and that has nothing to do with future price of 6D is why the control layout between different levels of cameras is so different. Somebody who starts with a xxxD and moves to xxD or xD will have to relearn muscle memory for controlling the camera. If you have to relearn all the layout then what is keeping you with a brand. I don't know if that is the same with other manufactures, but I think that is so stupid. 
The 7DII is virtually identical to the 5DIII and that makes a lot of sense.


----------



## RobertP (Oct 14, 2014)

I see space for 4 full frame cameras:

Budget i.e. 6D. Better IQ than than the 7D2 but stripped down feature set and no weatherproofing; retailing above the x0D but below the 7Dx

All rounder i.e 5Dx The general purpose professional model

High MP - new body priced above 5Dx

All weather - 1D - similar MP count to 5D body but highest quality build and feature set

The 7D2 may have comparable IQ to the current 6D but it does benefit from newer technology. I would probably be quite happy if the 6D2 was just an upscaled 70D. The weatherproofing; AF; and FPS of the 7Dx make it easy to market to a different user from those that are looking at an entry level full frame.


----------



## wsmith96 (Oct 14, 2014)

I could see them matching the features and AF of the 70D to the 6D's replacement. Maybe increasing the FPS a bit and adding a 19 pt auto focus and DPAF. Give it an articulated screen and you would have a very nice successor.


----------



## tayassu (Oct 14, 2014)

I think this makes perfect sense... The Nikon D750 made the D610 nearly obsolete, so why should Canon bother to bring a D6xx competitor instead of a similar priced D750 competitor?
I expect the 6DII to be specced similar to the 5DIII and the 5DIV probably to be high MP... would make sense to have the three important Nikons (D4s, D810, D750) covered. Df and D610 are nothing they have to care about


----------



## dadgummit (Oct 14, 2014)

Typical Canon response:

Person 1: We are not selling enough. 

Person 2: Well then raise the price.


----------



## dadgummit (Oct 14, 2014)

dilbert said:


> dadgummit said:
> 
> 
> > Typical Canon response:
> ...




The Economic LAW of supply and demand says when the price goes up the quantity demanded goes down... ;D


----------



## Famateur (Oct 14, 2014)

wsmith96 said:


> I could see them matching the features and AF of the 70D to the 6D's replacement. Maybe increasing the FPS a bit and adding a 19 pt auto focus and DPAF. Give it an articulated screen and you would have a very nice successor.



This is my hope. If they make the 6DII essentially a full frame 70D, I will immediately sell my 70D and buy the 6DII. 

When I chose the 70D, I would have saved up a few hundred dollars more and bought the 6D if it had DPAF and articulating touch screen. I just can't live without the articulating screen...


----------



## dstppy (Oct 14, 2014)

YuengLinger said:


> I thought from the first that the crippled AF of the 6D made it a misfire. Despite the chorus of defenders, Canon agrees! Its AF was inferior to that of the 60D, for cryin' out loud.



Citation required.


----------



## NancyP (Oct 14, 2014)

I like the 6D for what it is - a budget compact full frame DSLR with good image quality and not a lot of extras. I use it for landscape and macro and general purpose, not action, so it is just fine. AF is not worse than the 60D, that is my other camera, so I can compare. AF is slightly better than 60D.

I can see three or four full frame offerings:
basic (6D)
all-around enthusiast (5D3)
high MP camera
medium MP, high burst, rugged pro camera in 1DX shape

Nikon has the same tiering: 610, 750, 810, D4xs


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 14, 2014)

The 6D holds a critical position in the market and for Canon not to offer a basic entry level FF would not make sense. After all, an entry level full frame opens a door to buying full-frame lenses. That being said, the 6D Mark-II could well sell alongside the current 6D in exactly the same way that a Subaru WRX STI can sell alongside a WRX. There is no need to discontinue a product that caters to the needs of a specific part of the market if it still continues to sell profitably.


----------



## cosmopotter (Oct 14, 2014)

I like and intend to buy a 6D to add a nice full-frame to my 70D. It has some great features that top the D610 like low light AF performance, WiFi and GPS, and great sensitivity. I would like to see some incremental upgrades for a new version to keep ahead of Nikon (without a 5 year wait). I would be satisfied with a 19 point (all cross type) AF system like the 70D as I have no complaints with it and perhaps they could add a dual cross on the centre like the 7D MkII. Of course I wouldn't complain if they gave it the sensor and AF system from the 5D MkIII and upgraded the 5D MkIV. It should of course have Dual Pixel AF for video and preferably a flip/touchscreen like the 70D. Increase the FPS a little to get ahead of Nikon (7FPS would do) and 2 card slots would be nice.

One last thing. One of the new FF cameras next year will have to be first to add an RF flash transmitter built in. I don't know if it would fit in a 6D MkII considering there is WiFi and GPS in the dome of the current model but I think I'd rather have the transmitter than a built-in flash.


----------



## Woody (Oct 14, 2014)

As Thom Hogan says:

"if the camera makers are going to sell fewer things, they want to sell you more expensive things." - http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/camera-pricing-has-been.html


----------



## Steve (Oct 14, 2014)

dadgummit said:


> The Economic LAW of supply and demand says when the price goes up the quantity demanded goes down... ;D



I'm sure that Canon employs one or two people with economics degrees that can do a optimization calculation. If not, I'm sure they could check in with a high school calculus teacher.


----------



## infared (Oct 14, 2014)

Bad news for us! I agree...What would be good for me is a lower-priced FF body to have back-up for my 5DIII.
After I saw the price of the new 16-35mm f/4 IS (and purchased one)...I was hopeful that Canon wasn't still involved with the runaway pricing that we have seen ever since the Fukashima disaster.....


----------



## Famateur (Oct 14, 2014)

dadgummit said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > dadgummit said:
> ...



True, but both economics and mathematics also allow that maximization of the _revenue _curve might actually call for an increase of prices, even if units sold decrease.

We naturally want to increase units sold, but if carefully raising prices brings higher revenue with fewer units sold than with the current price and higher units sold, revenue wins.

Of course, this doesn't factor in lost lenses sold for the lost units sold...


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 14, 2014)

kphoto99 said:


> So basically Canon will tell it's crop users that want to move to FF to look at other brands (like the D750), since new lenses have to be bought anyways.
> Great job Canon.



I started on crop and the only EF-S lens I have is the kit lens.


I'm surprised that people are surprised.
6D=Plastic 5D2
6D2=Plastic 5D3
Why would it be surprising that this change would come with an increase in price? Same as 5D2-5D3.

I think the thing that people are missing is the probable (inevitable?) introduction of an even cheaper full frame body.


----------



## Woody (Oct 14, 2014)

If Canon is not happy with the sales figures of the G1X/G1X Mk 2/6D, they ought to read the reviews in DPReview.


----------



## bholliman (Oct 14, 2014)

StudentOfLight said:


> The 6D holds a critical position in the market and for Canon not to offer a basic entry level FF would not make sense. After all, an entry level full frame opens a door to buying full-frame lenses. That being said, the 6D Mark-II could well sell alongside the current 6D in exactly the same way that a Subaru WRX STI can sell alongside a WRX. There is no need to discontinue a product that caters to the needs of a specific part of the market if it still continues to sell profitably.


+1 An inexpensive, entry-level full frame body makes a great deal of business sense for Canon, as its a gateway to selling expensive full frame lenses.

The current 6D is great for my current uses. I expect Canon to replace it in 2016 and by then I might be ready for an upgrade.


----------



## CI (Oct 14, 2014)

I own two 6D Bodies and ABSOLUTELY love them. I rented a 5D mk iii before buying them. I don't shoot sports/action, so 6D serves the need perfectly. I think Canon could have charged more for this body


----------



## DogpackChris (Oct 14, 2014)

I am curious as to why some folks don't find the build very good. Just because it doesn't have a complete magnesium body doesn't mean that it isn't rugged. I just rented a 6D and thought that the build quality excellent. The image quality and low light performance with Canon lenses was outstanding(The Tokina 16-28 didn't AF as well as my 7D with the 10-22 in a real estate shoot that I did) I hope that they keep a low cost full frame stills camera body available. I am thinking of pairing up a 6D and a 7DmkII as my main kit. I have a bunch to sell first :'(


----------



## bchernicoff (Oct 14, 2014)

This real world review of the D750 shows what the spiritual successor to the 5D3 (whatever they name it) needs to target. http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/nikon-d750-review-nikon-youve-created-monster/

PS I'm not interested in a flamewar. Just adding a data point for what the competition's refreshed body is offering.


----------



## Coldhands (Oct 14, 2014)

kphoto99 said:


> Coldhands said:
> 
> 
> > kphoto99 said:
> ...



That would make sense except for the fact that there's nothing to preclude the possibility of Canon introducing new nameplate for a camera that occupies the same market space as the current 6D does. Or, it could turn out to be a subtle repositioning of the 6D line at something similar to the current pricepoint. In any case, I highly doubt Canon is clueless enough to leave such a glaring hole in their lineup.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 14, 2014)

"The other part of my problem with Canon, and that has nothing to do with future price of 6D is why the control layout between different levels of cameras is so different. Somebody who starts with a xxxD and moves to xxD or xD will have to relearn muscle memory for controlling the camera. If you have to relearn all the layout then what is keeping you with a brand. I don't know if that is the same with other manufactures, but I think that is so stupid."

I typically carry the 6D with the 300 2.8 X2 and having one hand on the lens and being able to view shots using just the right hand is great. My 40D requires both hands on the camera body and is not nearly as convenient. The problem I have is that my finger sometimes is challenged with the select button within the L R U D selectors so when deleting a picture I sometimes end up forward or back. With some tweaking the 6D layout is superior IMHO.

Put a better AF as mentioned and a bit higher frame rate and I wouldn't even consider a crop second camera.

6D and me.   

Jack


----------



## Hannes (Oct 14, 2014)

I still believe there is a space in canon's line up for a small and light full format DSLR. Imagine a rebel but with the 6D sensor.

Why they didn't plonk the old 1Ds III AF system into the 6D from the start is beyond me though. Even if they removed all the assist points it would have been a whole lot better.


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 14, 2014)

Coldhands said:


> kphoto99 said:
> 
> 
> > So basically Canon will tell it's crop users that want to move to FF to look at other brands (like the D750)
> ...



There are two market segments for an entry level FF from any manufacturer:


1. Those moving up from APS-C
2. Those just getting into photography and want (and can afford) FF


For those who fall into #1 up-leveling the current 6D in both price and feature set will have little bearing on sales, other than those who may need to delay purchase for price drops. #2 is the sweet spot - new users. In this the competition will make a much larger impact on future roadmaps and pricing. Currently the 6D falls between Nikon and Sony in pricing, it can't leapfrog the competition by much and achieve its goal of increased sales, if in fact this was one of their concerns.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 14, 2014)

DogpackChris said:


> I am curious as to why some folks don't find the build very good. Just because it doesn't have a complete magnesium body doesn't mean that it isn't rugged. I just rented a 6D and thought that the build quality excellent. The image quality and low light performance with Canon lenses was outstanding(The Tokina 16-28 didn't AF as well as my 7D with the 10-22 in a real estate shoot that I did) I hope that they keep a low cost full frame stills camera body available. I am thinking of pairing up a 6D and a 7DmkII as my main kit. I have a bunch to sell first :'(


The body itself is quite rugged, although YMMV. Mine has fallen off a coffee table (onto a tiled floor) with Tamron 24-70 attached without any ill effect. Plastic (as used in the 6D and Tamron's lens hood) is quite shock-absorbing and so can help prevent damage to more brittle components. Integrating engineering plastics and rubber into a body in the correct places does not necessarily have a detrimental effect on a camera's impact resistance.

Onto the bad... the LCD is not as scratch resistant as my 5D and the EB eyecup can be dislodged relatively easily which irritates the crap out of me. The EG eyecup as used in the 5D-III, 1D cameras as well as the new 7D-II is so much better. Some people have also complained that they accumulate more sensor spots (due to dust ingress past the lens presumably) but I haven't noticed a difference yet. I might have a set of cameras that is the exception-to-the-rule. Either way I've given you at least a couple reasons why the 6D is not on the same level in terms of build quality compared to the 5D-III.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 14, 2014)

bchernicoff said:


> This real world review of the D750 shows what the spiritual successor to the 5D3 (whatever they name it) needs to target. http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/nikon-d750-review-nikon-youve-created-monster/
> 
> PS I'm not interested in a flamewar. Just adding a data point for what the competition's refreshed body is offering.



If you check other Nikon users input on the D750 they consider it to be a closer match to the the 6D from a feature set point of view. Many are still criticizing Nikon for failing to bring out a 'true' D700 replacement, the D700 is a 5D MkIII with 12MP.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 14, 2014)

bchernicoff said:


> This real world review of the D750 shows what the spiritual successor to the 5D3 (whatever they name it) needs to target. http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/nikon-d750-review-nikon-youve-created-monster/
> 
> PS I'm not interested in a flamewar. Just adding a data point for what the competition's refreshed body is offering.



To me, a 5DIV should be 6552x4368 (28.8MP - the short edge is the same pixel dimension as the 5D classic's long edge) dual-pixel with greatly reduced read and fixed pattern noise compared to the 5DIII. It should be 7fps (28.8*7 ~= 20.2*10 so the same pixel throughput as 7DII), and have a similar AF system as 7DII. Personally, I'd like the popup flash (the Nikon D750 and D810 have it so no whining from the "it would make the hump to big" or "it would be too fragile" crowd). Same video features as 7DII except include UHD as a 1:1 pixel (1.7x crop) option. This avoids any need to pixel bin or resample and so shouldn't be too difficult to implement (so, no whining from the Canon engineering crowd). While we're at it, add that same option to the 7DII through firmware (1.425x crop on that camera). I'd tolerate 24fps which would leave the pixel throughput the same as the stills burst rate, but 30fps would be better). It should also have the nifty 7DII features such as the strobe thing, the flexible viewfinder thing, and the focus mode lever thing.

Price it around $3k and it'll be a winner for sure.


----------



## Sporgon (Oct 14, 2014)

DogpackChris said:


> I am curious as to why some folks don't find the build very good. Just because it doesn't have a complete magnesium body doesn't mean that it isn't rugged. I just rented a 6D and thought that the build quality excellent. The image quality and low light performance with Canon lenses was outstanding(The Tokina 16-28 didn't AF as well as my 7D with the 10-22 in a real estate shoot that I did) I hope that they keep a low cost full frame stills camera body available. I am thinking of pairing up a 6D and a 7DmkII as my main kit. I have a bunch to sell first :'(



+1, you cannot tell that the 6D has a plastic top plate even when you have both 6D and 5D in hand and tap the top. It does scratch much more easily but that's about it. However the 6D does have much softer controls, and the rear command wheel is disappointing compared with a 5D. The eight way controller feels imprecise compared with the joystick nub but works well enough. 

It's inevitable that each model moves onwards and upwards, as unfocused pointed out. Given the price point of the new 7DII Canon must feel pretty secure with their full frame premium.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 14, 2014)

kphoto99 said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



Yes, I painted with an overly broad brush. There is always some counter-pressure to keep the next model in line with the previous model for pricing purposes (7DI vs. 7DII for example). 

The point that I probably didn't make clear enough is that I think there is plenty of room between the 6D and 5DIII price points for a third model. Whether the 6DII stays at the current price point and a new model moves in-between or whether the 6DII moves up in price and a new entry level model is created, really doesn't matter.


----------



## bcflood (Oct 14, 2014)

I was hoping that Canon would go the other route with the 6D or some other FF camera and give a cheaper option for those wanting to make the jump from crop. I would think this would be a good way to lure advanced amateurs in and sell some more lenses. Those who like FF and want to take it further could then jump to a 5D3(4) later. If they make the first step into FF too steep, most amateurs will consider it too pricy an option to experiment with.

If the 6Dmk2 does go higher end, I'd hope that a "lower-end" FF would be introduced, priced slightly higher than a 70D ($1,500ish).


----------



## JMZawodny (Oct 14, 2014)

We'll see what the 6D2 is when it comes out.

I wish Canon had a bit more clarity on their naming/numbering of products. I my opinion they screwed with the 6D and 7D. The odd numbers 1Dx, 3, 5D, 7D, ... should be full frame sensors and the even numbers 2, 4, 6D, ... should have been APS-C. That way you know from the name/number exactly where it fits in the line-up, features, and sensor size.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 14, 2014)

bchernicoff said:


> This real world review of the D750 shows what the spiritual successor to the 5D3 (whatever they name it) needs to target. http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/nikon-d750-review-nikon-youve-created-monster/
> 
> PS *I'm not interested in a flamewar.* Just adding a data point for what the competition's refreshed body is offering.



Perhaps not, but it may begin anyway. 

Seriously, I have a hard time understanding why the 5DIV would need to "target" the D750. It seems to me the D750 is targeting the 5DIII a few years late. Not seeing anything of significance in the D750 that isn't in the 5DIII and there are a number of things the 5DIII still does better. An "upgrade" of the 5D to that simply reflects the D750, would be very disappointing. 

I'd rather see a 5DIII that targets the 70D, 6D and 7DII (Dual pixel autofocus, wi-fi, touch screen, improved autofocus, greater frame rate, etc.) Improve upon the best features of those three cameras and you've got a winner.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 14, 2014)

JMZawodny said:


> ...I wish Canon had a bit more clarity on their naming/numbering of products...The odd numbers 1Dx, 3, 5D, 7D, ... should be full frame sensors and the even numbers 2, 4, 6D, ... should have been APS-C. That way you know from the name/number exactly where it fits in the line-up, features, and sensor size.



Maybe it is more about what numbers happened to be available? On the other hand, the 1D, 5D and 7D are all "professional" or top of the line cameras in terms of build quality. 6D build quality is much closer to the XXD family.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 14, 2014)

> "... but increasing margins to offset decreasing sales numbers is good business ..."



Unless the price increase causes your customers *not to buy*  Or maybe *switch brands*  That would be *extremely bad business*  

Canon, along with many other conservative Japanese companies, is having a hard time adapting to the present reality of a changing world. Sony is being killed by inexpensive *"good-enough"* televisions that cost-conscious consumers are buying. And expensive Full Frame DSLRs may kill CaNikon. Not everyone is a Very Serious Photography Enthusiast.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 14, 2014)

I don't know why everyone just ignored my earlier point. If a 6D mark-II comes to market *it doesn't mean the 6D needs to be discontinued immediately*. They could sell side by side, just as the 5D-II sold (for more than a year in some places) side-by-side with the 5D-III. 

Canon could later introduce a full frame mirrorless product (at an even lower price point than the 6D is at currently) when they want to withdraw the 6D, i.e. when the required technologies are in place. For those who are only interested in full frame from an IQ perspective that would be a viable upgrade path.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 14, 2014)

All the more reason to jump ship. Increasing the cost of new products based on archaic technology does not seem to be in the consumers best interests IMO. Perhaps if enough people leave their brand they will increase the price of their prosumer cameras to the 10K range to make up the difference?


----------



## bchernicoff (Oct 14, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Seriously, I have a hard time understanding why the 5DIV would need to "target" the D750. It seems to me the D750 is targeting the 5DIII a few years late.



It's fair to say the D750 targets the 5DMk3. Look, my progression with Canon bodies went 7D -> 5DM2 -> 5DM3 -> 6D. I loved the 5DM3 but realized the 6D was all I really needed. Canon had 30% off refurb 6D bodies, so I sold the 5DM3 and bought the 6D and a Fuji X-E1 kit with the extra money (studio camera, travel camera). I've never own ed a Nikon but looking at the 5 stop push of an underexposed image he did in that article and knowing how much more shadow detail there is in my Fuji RAW files is eye opening. I'm sure in a month we'll all be reading about all the quality issues with the D750 like all recent Nikon bodies. I'm not suggesting anyone switch. I'm suggesting that whatever Canon does sensor-wise, it needs to be as good as the D750's.


----------



## windsorc (Oct 14, 2014)

Neither Canon or Nikon want to make a budget FF camera. It's the same logic that stops them from successfully developing mirrorless cameras. 
Fear of losing sales to their other cameras, and it's not a good budget model. ideally I'd like to be able to step up from a beginners camera to either an advanced APS-C or a less advanced FF, and having a $1500 body would give me that option. I'm not sure that any of the camera companies have a well thought out upgrade plan as to where
customer can upgrade to, the option seems to be move from a $600 camera to FF, which is a huge leap in cost, or move from $600 to a more advanced APS-C and forego FF altogether, or at least for another few years.


----------



## quod (Oct 14, 2014)

Steve said:


> dadgummit said:
> 
> 
> > The Economic LAW of supply and demand says when the price goes up the quantity demanded goes down... ;D
> ...


You mean the same brainiacs that priced the EOS M at $800?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Oct 14, 2014)

Personally I think it's funny it took Nikon 4 cameras to compete with the 5d3.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 14, 2014)

bdunbar79 said:


> Personally I think it's funny it took Nikon 4 cameras to compete with the 5d3.



If it would be Canon, people would call it clever because Nikon managed to sell 4 models to their customers before they now all want to upgrade to the d750


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 14, 2014)

windsorc said:


> Neither Canon or Nikon want to make a budget FF camera. It's the same logic that stops them from successfully developing mirrorless cameras.
> Fear of losing sales to their other cameras, and it's not a good budget model. ideally I'd like to be able to step up from a beginners camera to either an advanced APS-C or a less advanced FF, and having a $1500 body would give me that option. I'm not sure that any of the camera companies have a well thought out upgrade plan as to where
> customer can upgrade to, the option seems to be move from a $600 camera to FF, which is a huge leap in cost, or move from $600 to a more advanced APS-C and forego FF altogether, or at least for another few years.



Ahh, but the real money is in lens sales. While there will always be throttled feature sets for up-sell within a brand, the real concern is to lose sales to other competitors. Canon knows this, and I don't believe there will be a significant premium in price for the next-gen 6D.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 14, 2014)

If it means natural and crisp 1080p and 4k video with the basic focusing and exposure aids for video and 6fps decently high MP for the 5D4 without crippling then it sounds all good to me.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 14, 2014)

If they want the FF stuff to sell in the future a lot, they maybe better get some new sensor fab though.
7D2 can away without that, not as sure about the FF stuff, maybe a budget 6D could but an upgraded 6D at more cost and 5 series not so sure.


----------



## Etienne (Oct 14, 2014)

Doesn't mean a thing. It will all depend on what the package offers.
If the 6DII has everything I want, and the 5D4 is too much$, I'll move up to a 6DII from the 5D3. I don't really care what model number they use.


----------



## mjbehnke (Oct 14, 2014)

Wonder if they will use the Foven (multi-layer) sensor in the new cameras like the 5Div and keep the current sensor for the 6DII? That might be the way they separate the features? 

Just jibbering....


----------



## docsmith (Oct 14, 2014)

Speculation is fun. ;D

Just one other variable I haven't seen mentioned yet is the potential for a new multi-layered sensor. Just one other feature Canon could distinguish between the different bodies. Something like:


1DXII: Multi layered
1DXIIs/3D/5DIVs: Multi layered-high MP 
5DIV: Multi layered
6D: Better AF, but FF CMOS sensor

Also, earlier I saw reference to that fact that computing power has caught up with to allow higher MP files. Perhaps, but my 5DIII files would routinely max out my quad core in LR. I just upgraded to an 8 core processor which now handles everything with ease. I have no interest in trying to max it out again. A modest bump in MP would be appreciated, say 24-28 MP...but more would actually deter me from upgrading. I would much prefer better high ISO performance.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 14, 2014)

Nethawk said:


> Ahh, but the real money is in lens sales. While there will always be throttled feature sets for up-sell within a brand, the real concern is to lose sales to other competitors. Canon knows this, and I don't believe there will be a significant premium in price for the next-gen 6D.



No the real money is in Rebel kits, and whilst I am no corporate adviser and I hate when people proclaim what Canon 'need' to do, I would venture that they do need to keep the Asian Rebel/entry market happy and buoyant with new and better mirrorless cameras. The USA and European market can be fobbed off with 6D/5D iterations for years, the Asian and expanding markets will not put up with sub par mirrorless cameras.


----------



## The Flasher (Oct 14, 2014)

Chaitanya said:


> I would rather like to see 6D upgrade exactly where it was when it was launched. IQ is really good and but af system sucks big time. Maybe at next iteration Canon should add touch screen, dp af, wider af array and tilting screen.



A second SD slot also a must.


----------



## Notorious (Oct 14, 2014)

It seems nobody is ever happy with a camera these days. The 6D is a solid camera! Remember it's competitor, the D600? The only reason the D610 and D810 exist right now is because the D600 and D800 had major issues with dust and oil spots. There was a class action lawsuit against Nikon because of it!

The 24-105mm is a great kit lens! I've loaned my 6D and 5DIII to Nikon users and they rave about the quality of that lens compared to theirs. I've already used the 7DII and it's incredible. It will sell very well for it's intended uses.

People always want more but then complain about price, storage space, etc. The truth is, if you can't take a good picture with a 6D you're not a good photographer.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 14, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> Nethawk said:
> 
> 
> > Ahh, but the real money is in lens sales. While there will always be throttled feature sets for up-sell within a brand, the real concern is to lose sales to other competitors. Canon knows this, and I don't believe there will be a significant premium in price for the next-gen 6D.
> ...



Maybe. But what no one knows is whether the Asian and expanding markets are "leading" or "trailing." People assume that the markets where mirrorless bodies are popular are on the front end of the technology trends. But, we don't know that. 

Trends and fashions change. It is very possible that after a few years of playing with small mirrorless cameras, Asian customers, especially in China where the economy and middle-class is still growing, will trade in their little mirrorless toys for "big boy and girl" DSLRs. Like customers in Europe and the Americas, they may find that if they want to shoot sports, wildlife and birds it's a lot easier to do that with a DSLR.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 14, 2014)

unfocused said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Nethawk said:
> ...



I doubt it, it ends up being about the tech you grow with and that gets the job done. Think India and mobile phones, they are vastly more ubiquitous and useful than landlines, thought the connection quality often isn't 'as good' that will change too. 

In truth there is no overriding reason to still be tied to the SLR design, especially for the introductory range and even above, and if you never used one the issues they present become glaring, as opposed to 'us' who started with the design and see mirrorless as the tech left wanting.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 14, 2014)

Notorious said:


> It seems nobody is ever happy with a camera these days. The 6D is a solid camera! Remember it's competitor, the D600? The only reason the D610 and D810 exist right now is because the D600 and D800 had major issues with dust and oil spots. There was a class action lawsuit against Nikon because of it!
> 
> The 24-105mm is a great kit lens! I've loaned my 6D and 5DIII to Nikon users and they rave about the quality of that lens compared to theirs. I've already used the 7DII and it's incredible. It will sell very well for it's intended uses.
> 
> People always want more but then complain about price, storage space, etc. The truth is, if you can't take a good picture with a 6D you're not a good photographer.


I see this is your first post, welcome to the forum.

Your last statement could come off sounding a bit incendiary. I hope you're not trolling. Anyway, in response to that...

The 6D, while completely capable of capturing beautiful images, has some serious limitations for certain types of photography. That is not to say it is a bad camera, just better suited to other types of photography. Where another camera is better suited to the situation, it is better to use the alternative rather than the 6D. When you use the right tool for the job, work tends to be a lot easier. e.g. Would you prefer to dig a 50 yard ditch with a spade or with a Caterpillar TLB. Both will get the job done but at a different cost.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 14, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Trends and fashions change. It is very possible that after a few years of playing with small mirrorless cameras, Asian customers, especially in China where the economy and middle-class is still growing, will trade in their little mirrorless toys for "big boy and girl" DSLRs. Like customers in Europe and the Americas, they may find that if they want to shoot sports, wildlife and birds it's a lot easier to do that with a DSLR.



How many people want to shoot *"sports, wildlife and birds."* I don't and none of my friends do. YMMV. 

The world is changing, and fewer and fewer people are impressed with the size of your lens.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 14, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Trends and fashions change. It is very possible that after a few years of playing with small mirrorless cameras, Asian customers, especially in China where the economy and middle-class is still growing, will trade in their little mirrorless toys for "big boy and girl" DSLRs. Like customers in Europe and the Americas, they may find that if they want to shoot sports, wildlife and birds it's a lot easier to do that with a DSLR.
> ...



I many people want to shoot landscapes and architecture? I don't and none of my friends do.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 14, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> I many people want to shoot landscapes and architecture? I don't and none of my friends do.



I don't shoot *"landscapes and architecture"* either. Neither do my friends. YMMV.


----------



## TeT (Oct 14, 2014)

Notorious said:


> ....The truth is, if you can't take a good picture with a 6D you're not a good photographer.



+1 ... BUT that statement might make you a DSLR snob unenlightened in the ways of mirrorless and possibly unsympathetic to those who cannot afford the 6D and/or somebody will retort that if you cannot take a good picture with a (pick any one pocket camera made in last 4 years) that you aren't a good photographer ...


----------



## Oneand0 (Oct 14, 2014)

I am not an expert in how many units Canon thinks it needs to sell on a particular model before it is successful. I'm not a pro making a living at photography. Apparently if that is what Canon is saying about their 6D, and they now plan on making an improved for more money, they will. They will, no matter how we feel they should go about that, or not go about it. It really would be nice if they read this and other forums to get an idea what to do next though!

In my personal opinion as a hobbyist, the Canon 6D is well worth the money for what it was intended to do, "entry level" full frame (not sports). I used a 7D for landscape photography for a couple of years, because that's all I had at the time (I originally bought it for action). The 7D worked for landscape, because I used it! When I saw the performance of the 6D for landscape photography and compared to the 5DIII, I immediately bought my 6D and have been over joyed by the performance. I was happy I didn't waste my money on the 5DIII, on features that wouldn't get me any better of an image my 6D would (of course if I was handed a 5DIII for same money I would take it over 6D).

This weekend I found myself wanting to shoot action for my growing old dog, in the water. All I had in my hands was my 6D, because I gave my 7D away to a relative. I used the 6D and it worked! I'm not saying it worked as well as I wanted it to, and I even cringed when I was about to try it out for action. But it's a camera and it could take a picture of an action shot with the right settings, lens, determination and patience. https://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/14908192883/in/photostream/

So what ever Canon decides to do next, keep, sell and buy, or buy the camera that best suites you for your needs. But don't let it stop you from using it for something you didn't think it was intended for, because you got stuck in a bracket of low end, or middle. You might be surprised at the end result  BTW I can't wait for my 7DII that is pre-ordered, and yes I wish it had 4K...


----------



## dgatwood (Oct 14, 2014)

StudentOfLight said:


> The 6D, while completely capable of capturing beautiful images, has some serious limitations for certain types of photography. That is not to say it is a bad camera, just better suited to other types of photography.



Sure, a better AF system would be better for sports, but I'd hardly call it seriously limited. I've used a 6D to shoot sports (basketball), birds in flight, landscapes, panos, portrait work, etc., and it did a reasonably good job at all of them.


----------



## dstppy (Oct 14, 2014)

TeT said:


> Notorious said:
> 
> 
> > ....The truth is, if you can't take a good picture with a 6D you're not a good photographer.
> ...



Agree: Most post-IS P&S were awesome, the HS ones are for sure, but honestly, once I start farking with the cameras like it's a DSLR (advanced mode etc.) I can't seem to get it right. No problem on DSLRs. 

I'm still surprised they do a new set of models every year . . . seems like they could easily skip a year and leapfrog features.


----------



## PureClassA (Oct 14, 2014)

I can't complain much, if at all, about my 6D. It's a stellar performer for what I need. Mostly portraiture and art. I have shot fast action with it, but I don't rely on tracking AF points. I love the fact at how well it grabs focus in obscenely low light. That's major for me at times.

The once per year I really need a high speed monster to shoot dance recitals I rent a 1DX. Easy.

I agree the 6D as it currently stands was over crippled. 11AF points. Ok. I use the center point and recompose. I've trained myself well enough to pull this off even at f1.4. 20ish would have been nicer (if spread out) and still far below the 6FPS and 61 AF points of the 5D3.

A 6D2 .. hmmm... the sensor of the current 5D3 or the same 20.2MP now but with DPAF and with 20 something plus AF points and maybe 5-6FPS (this of course predicated on the 5D4 maybe multilayer DPAF if even possible) with a small bump in price.

I agree it's critical Canon keep a healthy presence in the low cost FF market. Jumping the 6D up to 2500 would be unwise unless they keep something sub 2k as well. IF Canon is so dissatisfied with 6D sales I'd suggest making a firmware upgrade that can increase the FPS if possible or just slap themselves for deliberately offering a comparably pathetic 11AF points. I think THAT above all is what injured sales for this rig the most, because it seems that has been the biggest and most consistent complaint. Image quality and low light/high ISO performance seems to have been extremely well received


----------



## silat shooters (Oct 14, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > The 6D, while completely capable of capturing beautiful images, has some serious limitations for certain types of photography. That is not to say it is a bad camera, just better suited to other types of photography.
> ...



I may be late to this discussion, but I think what most users including myself have issues with the 6D is that as a consumer you feel Canon is NOT giving you "great value" for your money when they take the AF system back to one center cross-type, while Nikon doesn't seem to cripple their bodies in the same way. It was biggest the complaint about the 5D Mark II, and Canon addressed it well with the Mark III, only to revert back to it with the 6D. My memory is not that short term.

I have read that the 6D is a great low light shooter and that the Center AF point is really quite good. But having experienced the 5D Mark III AF points off-center, it's hard to go back to using center point and recomposing. I'd consider a 6D at under $1400 as a second body. But once the camera approaches $2K, it makes me want to consider other options, even another used 5D Mark III. 

What I find perplexing is in a shrinking market, why is Canon not doing more to revitalize Consumer demand/excitement? I go to social events, and in most cases I'm the only with a real camera. Everyone else is happy to be shooting with their phones. That has be an issue they are feeling! So why not make it more tempting for a consumer to desire and spring for one of their bodies and in turn more Canon lenses?


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 14, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > The 6D, while completely capable of capturing beautiful images, has some serious limitations for certain types of photography. That is not to say it is a bad camera, just better suited to other types of photography.
> ...


I didn't say the AF system was a serious limitation. Why would you interpreted my comment as referring to the AF system? Anyway, since you brought it up sports photography, why would a professional sports photographer choose the 1D-X to shoot at the Olympics rather than the 6D?


----------



## daniela (Oct 14, 2014)

I wrote some weeks ago, that this could come true. 
Friends in Japan see the 6D successor priced around 2000-2200€ and the 5DIII successor around 3500-4000€. The lower prices are the most named one, but the higher ones are rumored too...
Latest rumores for 6DII: Better AF system, more AF points, faster (1-2 fps), 1 double cross sensor, but no AF at f8.
MP count is just incremental increasing 20->22, 22-> 24(25) MP. No mention about stunning low light capability. 6DII with better video quality.

All rumors are still rumors, as my friends saw the 7DII with a 24MP sensor. But Canon decided to use the 20MP, not the other tested 24MP.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 14, 2014)

daniela said:


> I wrote some weeks ago, that this could come true.
> Friends in Japan see the 6D successor priced around 2000-2200€ and the 5DIII successor around 3500-4000€. The lower prices are the most named one, but the higher ones are rumored too...
> Latest rumores for 6DII: Better AF system, more AF points, faster (1-2 fps), 1 double cross sensor, but no AF at f8.
> MP count is just incremental increasing 20->22, 22-> 24(25) MP. No mention about stunning low light capability. 6DII with better video quality.
> ...



Any idea when?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 14, 2014)

Surely there is room for improvement in autofocus on a future 6D Mark ii. However, to increase its price point would be necessary to improve many other features.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 14, 2014)

The 6D doesn't need a complicated AF system like the 1D-X or 5D-III.... no complex tracking capabilities, no expanded AF-assist mode, no autofocus at f/8, just 15 cross-type AF points (see attached)


----------



## dufflover (Oct 14, 2014)

silat shooters said:


> I may be late to this discussion, but I think what most users including myself have issues with the 6D is that as a consumer you feel Canon is NOT giving you "great value" for your money when they take the AF system back to one center cross-type, while Nikon doesn't seem to cripple their bodies in the same way. It was biggest the complaint about the 5D Mark II, and Canon addressed it well with the Mark III, only to revert back to it with the 6D. My memory is not that short term.


Also late to the topic but this echoes my thoughts too.
Canon not happy with 6D sales? More like their deliberate gimping of the 6D has come back to bite them (FWIW the 6Ds seem to still be quite highly recommended, including excuses of "no body needs more than 3fps ).

So all I can really say is the same thing as before. If they made them all cross-type at say 5fps, it probably would've sold a lot more without costing 5D3 sales.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 14, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > I many people want to shoot landscapes and architecture? I don't and none of my friends do.
> ...



One of my friends doesn't shoot any of the above.... or anything else either ;D. He still has a 0 shutter count Canon 30D sitting on his shelf.

More seriously, although the above is a true story, I know a lot who shot sports, wildlife, landscapes and people.


----------



## brad-man (Oct 14, 2014)

dufflover said:


> silat shooters said:
> 
> 
> > I may be late to this discussion, but I think what most users including myself have issues with the 6D is that as a consumer you feel Canon is NOT giving you "great value" for your money when they take the AF system back to one center cross-type, while Nikon doesn't seem to cripple their bodies in the same way. It was biggest the complaint about the 5D Mark II, and Canon addressed it well with the Mark III, only to revert back to it with the 6D. My memory is not that short term.
> ...



I think this is the problem. Canon made the same mistake with the 6D as they did with the EOS M, a seriously underwhelming focus system. The cameras work well for portrait, landscape and architecture. For any other use, the photographer does the work. I say this as someone who owns both and likes both, but would have greatly enjoyed a focus system commensurate with the quality of the photos the cameras are able to produce.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 14, 2014)

silat shooters said:


> What I find perplexing is in a shrinking market, why is Canon not doing more to revitalize Consumer demand/excitement? I go to social events, and in most cases I'm the only with a real camera. Everyone else is happy to be shooting with their phones. That has be an issue they are feeling! So why not make it more tempting for a consumer to desire and spring for one of their bodies and in turn more Canon lenses?



As I've said before, times change and people change. Now-a-days not everyone wants/needs a "real camera." Many people wouldn't take a DSLR as a gift, because they don't want/need a DSLR. As you said: "Everyone else is happy to be shooting with their phones."

Some reasons.
1. A DSLR won't fit in your pocket/purse.
2. A DSLR won't post a photo to Instagram or Facebook.
3. A DSLR doesn't have apps like Snapseed or Perfectly Clear available.


----------



## dgatwood (Oct 14, 2014)

StudentOfLight said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > StudentOfLight said:
> ...



I can only think of two aspects of the 6D that qualify as limitations: the AF system and the frame rate. The frame rate might not be 1DX speed, but it is fast enough to be usable to get great shots, even for sports.




StudentOfLight said:


> Anyway, since you brought it up sports photography, why would a professional sports photographer choose the 1D-X to shoot at the Olympics rather than the 6D?



The question is not which one is better. There's no question that the 6D is outclassed by the 5D Mark III and the 1D X. The question was whether it has *serious* limitations—that is, if there are aspects of it that would prevent someone who knew how to use it from being able to get decent shots. Personally, I don't think so.


----------



## SummerAutism (Oct 14, 2014)

Since you all seem to complain about the 6D auto focus. I have shot a bunch of skateboard with mine. Sure it doesn't have the best auto focus system. But once you learn how it works and you don't make your living shooting sports or wildlife... It is fine. You shouldn't feel that you can't take pictures of your dog running or your kids playing sports.

Examples:
http://www.tuomistopictures.com/skate/


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 15, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> One of my friends doesn't shoot any of the above.... or anything else either ;D. He still has a 0 shutter count Canon 30D sitting on his shelf.



Does he have a camera phone ??? Or just no interest in photography 



> More seriously, although the above is a true story, I know a lot who shot sports, wildlife, landscapes and people.



This is the interesting part, *how much is a lot* ??? 1% 0f the photo population, 10% of the photo population ??? I have no idea. 

Below is the quote that started the conversation.



> Trends and fashions change. It is very possible that after a few years of playing with small mirrorless cameras, Asian customers, especially in China where the economy and middle-class is still growing, will trade in their little mirrorless toys for "big boy and girl" DSLRs. Like customers in Europe and the Americas, they may find that if they want to shoot sports, wildlife and birds it's a lot easier to do that with a DSLR.



Most people tend to stick with what they are familiar with. Few iPhoneographers will step-up to mirrorless. Few mirrorless users will step-up to DSLRs. There are people who successfully shoot sports, wildlife and birds with a mirrorless camera. I doubt that a lot of them will step-up to DSLRs.

His use of *" ... little mirrorless toys for "big boy and girl" DSLRs."* is telling


----------



## Joe M (Oct 15, 2014)

..... "but Canon seems to be marketing the EOS 7D Mark II on par with the 6D as far as image quality goes". 
Interesting. I don't own either but from what I've seen (such as on IR), I this doesn't quite fly. Yes it's peeping, yes I'm looking at iso over 100 and yes it's darn good (7D2) for a crop. But if Cannon wants to market the 7D image quality as on par with the 6D, they do realize they just kicked the 6D owners in the rear, don't they? Or they've stretched the truth a little. Now, if Canon wants to say that the 7D features balance against the 6D with it's lesser features but higher image quality, that's fine. One excels at one thing while the other at something else. That's nothing new. I just hope when the 6D2 comes out, they don't feel they need to increase the features of the 5D4 so much that a higher pixel count is one of them. I know a lot of people want more and some a lot more but I don't. Well, it doesn't matter what I want cause it's what Canon wants to give me.


----------



## dsut4392 (Oct 15, 2014)

As someone who upgraded from a 60D to a 6D, and from third party lenses to L series zooms, my opinion is that bumping the 6D up a price bracket would be a big mistake. Unless Canon maintains a FF body that is price-competitive, they will bleed sales to Nikon and even more to Sony. I had a few good EF mount primes and legacy Zuiko manual focus lenses that couldn't be adapted to Nikon, but these would worked OK on the Sony A7. The size/weight of the A7 was very tempting, it was mainly my dislike of EVF that pushed me to stick with Canon. 

The reality of a world with competition is that Canon can't expect to sit still on spec & pricepoint without losing market share. They either increase the spec at the same price point, or maintain the spec and reduce the price point...or they lose market share. The potential to maintain equal profitability while losing market share (by increasing price) is typically limited to companies/products with a significant 'intangible benefit', like the magic fairies that live inside the red dot and improve images in ways that can be neither measured nor articulated;-P. Although Canon has massive brand recognition that brings in sales at the lower end of the market, it doesn't have the 'exclusivity' at the upper end of the market to enable charging a luxury premium for FF bodies - it increasingly has to compete on features & measurable IQ. As long as investment in lenses was a barrier to switching, the loss in market share was mainly restricted to new customers, but now that deserters to Sony can keep using their Canon lenses the trend can only keep accelerating (unless Canon maintains a legitimately price & feature competitive lineup of bodies). Of the 4 friends I have who are avid photographers, three were long-time Canon shooters (with 5DII, 5DIII and 5DII & 6D respectively), and one Nikon shooter. The Nikon shooter has stayed loyal, the 5DII user now has dumped it for an A7s & Leica film body, the 5DIII user has added an A7r, the 5DII and 6D user has sold the 5DII and accidentally dropped and broken the 6D, and replaced it with an A7. None of them have bought any more L-series glass, but all of them have bought Zeiss, Sony/Zeiss and/or Sigma art (including the Nikon shooter).

When it's my time to upgrade in a few years, the FF camera I'm looking for will be at the same or lower price point, but with (in order of importance):
- a flip + tilt screen
- usable AF and MF focus peaking in live view (without having to run magic lantern!) Obviously this would come with no reduction in Ev for the centre focus point (one of the great things about the 6D)
- touch screen to select focus point in live view

It may also have:
- better DR
- better spread of usable AF points (having more doesn't really bother me, but putting some out a bit further where composition guidelines actually suggest we place the subject would be handy). 
- pop-up flash

An FF 70D would mostly cover these bases, but a Sony A8 might equally well, and with continued improvement in adapters the barrier of investing in new lenses is minimal.


----------



## BPLOL (Oct 15, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> I can only think of two aspects of the 6D that qualify as limitations: the AF system and the frame rate. The frame rate might not be 1DX speed, but it is fast enough to be usable to get great shots, even for sports.
> 
> The question is not which one is better. There's no question that the 6D is outclassed by the 5D Mark III and the 1D X. The question was whether it has *serious* limitations—that is, if there are aspects of it that would prevent someone who knew how to use it from being able to get decent shots. Personally, I don't think so.



+1


----------



## skoobey (Oct 15, 2014)

It's good business when you're a monopoly. lol

With advances from Sony and Nikon in pro and consumer markets, and Pentax in mid format market, they will find themselves chasing the customers away, and towards the competition.

Point and shoot is dead, but pro grade game is only beginning, starting with video, 3d, high ISO, wireless, rugged casings, resolution etc.


----------



## dsut4392 (Oct 15, 2014)

StudentOfLight said:


> I don't know why everyone just ignored my earlier point. If a 6D mark-II comes to market *it doesn't mean the 6D needs to be discontinued immediately*. They could sell side by side, just as the 5D-II sold (for more than a year in some places) side-by-side with the 5D-III.
> 
> Canon could later introduce a full frame mirrorless product (at an even lower price point than the 6D is at currently) when they want to withdraw the 6D, i.e. when the required technologies are in place. For those who are only interested in full frame from an IQ perspective that would be a viable upgrade path.



There are a few reasons. Marketing 101 will tell you nobody wants to buy a superseded model, even if there is nothing wrong with it. To sell a superseded model you have to drop the price, which is the opposite of what Canon wants. Even if the model is not superseded in name, and even if there is no competing product, we all expect prices to keep dropping as time since release increases. Canon is also faced with the reality that many of us (landscape shooters mainly) don't need anything more "pro" than the 'crippled' 6D - a full frame 70D is what I want, not a marginally cheaper 5DIII. The 6DII with AF & frame-rate of the 7DII, and priced between existing 6D & 5DIII would poach _far_ more users from 5DIII/5DIV than it would upsell from the 6D. FF mirrorless is dangerous territory for Canon. Unless they have dual-pixel pdaf completely sorted, full compatibility with EF lenses without compromise and can compete on features & price with Sony it wouldn't be a very tempting offer for many, even at a slightly lower price point. Canon may do this, but only if their analysis shows that they would lose these customers to another brand if they didn't - I believe it was Steve Jobs who said "if you don't cannibalize yourself, somebody else will".


----------



## kphoto99 (Oct 15, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> silat shooters said:
> 
> 
> > What I find perplexing is in a shrinking market, why is Canon not doing more to revitalize Consumer demand/excitement? I go to social events, and in most cases I'm the only with a real camera. Everyone else is happy to be shooting with their phones. That has be an issue they are feeling! So why not make it more tempting for a consumer to desire and spring for one of their bodies and in turn more Canon lenses?
> ...



Nothing can be done about 1, but there is no reason that a DSLR could not do 2 and 3.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 15, 2014)

kphoto99 said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > Some reasons.
> ...



A point I've been trying to make as well. Camera manufacturers are behaving like dinosaurs when it comes to social media and connectivity. 

Said it before and will say it again – it's pathetic that no manufacturer has produced a DSLR that gives the professional photographer a fighting chance to post pictures from the wedding before the guests do with their iPhones. 

We expect brides to pay thousands of dollars for a wedding photographer and then the pictures on her Facebook page are a bunch of shots from camera phones because they can be uploaded instantly. 

Until a paid photographer has the tools to post pictures straight to a customer's Facebook from the back of the camera, manufacturers are failing their customers.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 15, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Until a paid photographer has the tools to post pictures straight to a customer's Facebook from the back of the camera, manufacturers are failing their customers.



I wouldn't do that even if I had a tool that could do it. It's like saying a chef is a failure because they spent hours preparing a meal when they could have just served the guests some McNuggets in a few minutes.


----------



## Mr_Canuck (Oct 15, 2014)

Touched a nerve her, perhaps?

The 6D has been outgunned (and outpriced) by Nikon. If sales are slow – who said? – then it's because of direct comparisons on features but forgetting price point (ie. DPReview et al).

The 6D has a very rudimentary focus system. Probably a fatal flaw for marketing. In actual use I think it's a great camera, and I just use the centre point for everything. Coming from Pentax... it's a whole lot faster AF experience even with the 6D.

Everywhere else, the 6D is spot on for an enthusiast full-frame. I say, keep it cheap. Just upsize the AF a titch.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 15, 2014)

kphoto99 said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > As I've said before, times change and people change. Now-a-days not everyone wants/needs a "real camera." Many people wouldn't take a DSLR as a gift, because they don't want/need a DSLR. As you said: "Everyone else is happy to be shooting with their phones."
> ...



A DSLR would also have to be a *phone* to do #1. Not impossible, but also not likely. Canon could also use *near field communication (NFC)* to make it *easy* to connect your camera to your cell-phone (also not likely).

Nikon guru *Thom Hogan* has been talking about the need for camera companies to implement #3 for several years (maybe more). Only Sony has done anything http://discover.store.sony.com/playmemoriesapps/ Being easy seems to have nothing to do with why/how CaNikon does things.

BTW #1 is the main reason that camera-phones users will not step-up to "real" cameras.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 15, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



   Great story!! I had a cassette playing Walkman that became obsolete before I could wear-it-out  

Your friend sounds like an interesting person.


----------



## candyman (Oct 15, 2014)

Mr_Canuck said:


> ................
> Everywhere else, the 6D is spot on for an enthusiast full-frame. I say, keep it cheap. Just upsize the AF a titch.



+1
The 6D is a good FF camera. Canon should have an affordable FF camera so it isn't a giant step for APS-C users to go FF. The 6D makes a very good combination with a 7D MKII


----------



## canon1dxman (Oct 15, 2014)

Mr_Canuck said:


> Everywhere else, the 6D is spot on for an enthusiast full-frame. I say, keep it cheap. Just upsize the AF a titch.



Just picked one up at a steal of a price and agree totally. Cracking camera that would benefit from an improved AF


----------



## Chris Jankowski (Oct 15, 2014)

pierlux said:


> So, if the 6D moves upwards in specs and price, it is going to be positioned approximately where the 5D3 is now. Since the 7D2 will surely eat part of the current 5D3 market, and if the future 5D4 possibly goes Hi-MP, then there will be room for a new entry level FF... I mean, something equivalent to the Rebel line, but FF. What do you guys think, is it realistic a possible lineup with 4 FF and 4 APS-C dSLRs for all demands and all wallets?
> 
> edit: actually, there are 5 APS-C dSLRs currently available, I forgot the 100D.



I think that there is space for two more FF models below 6D or its successor. One would be simple FF - equivalent to 700D and the other would be small and simple FF - equivalent to 100D. Please note that previously the price and size of FF models was gated by the price of the sensor and the bulk of the electronics. With the cheap FF sensors and densely integrated electronics, we can have small DSLR cameras, but with FF sensor. It is only a matter of time before FF DSLRs bodies will be sold at $500 street price. Note that Canon would need to develop cheap kit zoom - 28-55 and cheap tele zoom 55-300 for these cameras.


----------



## Woody (Oct 15, 2014)

I'll appreciate having 6D M2 with 60D (not 70D/7D please) AF sensor.

Why can't Canon introduce their ancient 1D2 45pt AF sensor in their later camera bodies, now that the 5D3/1Dx/7D2 already have the best?


----------



## Woody (Oct 15, 2014)

Chris Jankowski said:


> Note that Canon would need to develop cheap kit zoom - 28-55 and cheap tele zoom 55-300 for these cameras.



Canon already has the newly introduced 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM as well as the aged 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS (non-L) cheap lenses.


----------



## x-vision (Oct 15, 2014)

silat shooters said:


> ... I think what most users including myself have issues with the 6D is that as a consumer you feel Canon is NOT giving you "great value" for your money when they take the AF system back to one center cross-type, while Nikon doesn't seem to cripple their bodies in the same way.



Exactly!

Despite the 'entry level' moniker, the 6D is still a $2K camera.
And at that price, I'm expecting a fully featured camera - not one with a single cross-type AF point.

I think Nikon nailed the formula for 'entry-level' FF with the D750.
Canon would be leaving money on the table if they don't have a competitor.

As for cheaper FF models: 
The problem is that it makes no business sense to offer FF for say $1200.
Thus, FF cameras can never be cheap enough to appeal to mass market.
They will remain premium models - and the D750 is now setting the standard for how 
a camera in this class needs to be spec'd and priced. 
I don't think we'll see new FF models introduced at lower prices than that.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 15, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I think it's funny it took Nikon 4 cameras to compete with the 5d3.
> ...



Errr, I'm not sure I follow your logic there bud! Nikon's sales figures for their attempt to take on the 5DII and 5DIII were very poor. 4 models of which none of them sold well. Canon knocked the ball out of the park with the sales for both the 5DII and 5DIII models. It's a pity they didn't quite get it right with the 6D. A great camera for sure, but not quite what the market wanted or needed.


----------



## lintoni (Oct 15, 2014)

I think people are mistaken if they think that Canon needs to expand their range of dSLRs. Given that the market for ILCs is in decline, I would expect their range to be simplified, but with the expansion of EOS-M - possibly including a full frame mirrorless, which would then be the entry point to full frame.


----------



## bf (Oct 15, 2014)

I don't compare a semi-pro APS-C with an entry level full-frame as they have completely different shooters. I am for entry level full-frame whether mirror-less or DSLR. An affordable kit option with valuable lens would be great. My guess is it's cheaper for canon to offer an entry level full-frame DSLR than a new line.


----------



## bf (Oct 15, 2014)

Comparing an entry level full-frame to a higher model I like to see the differences we see between 7d and 70d ... I mean sealing, construction, weight and so on ... focusing and shooting performance should not lag the cheaper APS-C models. They are not that expensive to include but can be deal breaker for several people.


----------



## drob (Oct 15, 2014)

All Canon would have to do to a 6DMKII for it to sell like hotcakes is to upgrade the AF system on it. The sensor is still competitive, the megapixels are still good. Keep all the other specs the same. Maybe improve weather sealing. Price it the same as the 7DMKII. I'd upgrade to the 6D in an instant but don't want a step back in AF performance.


----------



## pierlux (Oct 15, 2014)

Chris Jankowski said:


> pierlux said:
> 
> 
> > So, if the 6D moves upwards in specs and price, it is going to be positioned approximately where the 5D3 is now. Since the 7D2 will surely eat part of the current 5D3 market, and if the future 5D4 possibly goes Hi-MP, then there will be room for a new entry level FF... I mean, something equivalent to the Rebel line, but FF. What do you guys think, is it realistic a possible lineup with 4 FF and 4 APS-C dSLRs for all demands and all wallets?
> ...



Well, if we consider the near future and IF the rumor of the 6D2 moving upwards in specs is true, then one more... maybe, but hardly two, even in the long term. At this point, a FF mirrorless is more likely to happen than a cheap pentamirror FF. As you said, a cheap <1k$ FF would make sense along with cheap kit lenses, so why Canon shoud invest there when they know there's demand for a FF mirrorless? Just my thought, though.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 15, 2014)

dsut4392 said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know why everyone just ignored my earlier point. If a 6D mark-II comes to market *it doesn't mean the 6D needs to be discontinued immediately*. They could sell side by side, just as the 5D-II sold (for more than a year in some places) side-by-side with the 5D-III.
> ...


I previously worked in a marketing-driven business and we used to categorize the market into customers who are price-led, brand-led or value-led. A newer model will appeal more to the brand-led customer but the price-led and value-led customers can still be sold on an older model. The lower price appeals to the price-led customer and it can also appeal to the value-led customer if it offers the features & benefits which they most value.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 15, 2014)

drob said:


> All Canon would have to do to a 6DMKII for it to sell like hotcakes is to upgrade the AF system on it.



Of course Canon are aware of that - but why would they want to do such a thing? They'd rather have the more expensive 5d3/5d4 sell like hotcakes and leave the 6d1/6d2 for those who would otherwise switch brands w/o an "entry"-ff camera from Canon available.

If you look at the 6d1, it's not a camera born out of enthusiasm or pride to deliver the best product possible, but a pure necessity. Lucky us you can still take great shots with it once you manage to get something in focus.


----------



## dufflover (Oct 15, 2014)

Canon did exactly that though. They crippled as much as possible whilst still getting sales. It shoots slower than a Rebel FFS. Not sure where they get the 7D2 IQ is being pitched as similar either. A lot of people still reckon 6D smashes the 70D (I'd say about 1 to 1.5 stops in my usage) and 70D ~= 7D2 so ... it's not suddenly unappealing on the IQ front.

I'll echo the prev poster though; who is really saying the 6D's sales are crap? I mean you get people defending the fact it's non-cross AF and FPS are slower than a Rebel! Can't be doing too badly if people do that lol


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 15, 2014)

dufflover said:


> Canon did exactly that though. They crippled as much as possible whilst still getting sales.



I'm sure they'll learn from that experience and either cripple the 6d2 even more (like in now raw option?) or move both 6d2 and 5d4 up €1000 :->


----------



## x-vision (Oct 15, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> drob said:
> 
> 
> > All Canon would have to do to a 6DMKII for it to sell like hotcakes is to upgrade the AF system on it.
> ...



So that people buy the 6DII and not the D750 ??? ??


----------



## lopicma (Oct 15, 2014)

Wasn't there just an article posted on how Canon was disappointed with sales of the 6D? So... to combat this, they RAISE the price? Is this a marketing "reverse psychology" play?


----------



## dstppy (Oct 15, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> dufflover said:
> 
> 
> > Canon did exactly that though. They crippled as much as possible whilst still getting sales.
> ...


Like the 70D was crippled with no MFA (60D was a re-position to make room for the 7D)?

Are base BMWs crippled for having no leather seats?

Saying "no RAW option" is just foolish -- the S95 had RAW. Comments like these don't make sense at all.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 15, 2014)

dstppy said:


> Saying "no RAW option" is just foolish -- the S95 had RAW. Comments like these don't make sense at all.



Your sensible opinion is very much appreciated - I should have amended a  to the above comment. That doesn't affect the gist of my argument though, but please do feel free to elaborate your thoughts in your own, well placed words.



x-vision said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > drob said:
> ...



Won't happen, see the initial 5d3 pricing vs. the high-mp d800 and the d610 vs. the current 6d1. Except pros with special requirements few people are volatile enough to switch brands, meaning new usability and exchanging all brand gear for a lot of hassle and loss of money.

What people do is complain in the forums, but those who wanted to switch to exmor/high mp/d6x0 are already gone. The bulk of the Canon shooters left either doesn't know, doesn't care or will take a lot of punishment by crippled cameras or high prices.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 15, 2014)

dstppy said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > dufflover said:
> ...



You mean the 60D had no MFA. Feature returned in the 70D! (pg 377, user manual)


----------



## dstppy (Oct 15, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> dstppy said:
> 
> 
> > Saying "no RAW option" is just foolish -- the S95 had RAW. Comments like these don't make sense at all.
> ...



I see no crippling. I also see no mass-exodus, nor do I feel people using their (already very good) gear are uninformed about it. What's wrong with a 7D? A 5Dmk2 (slow AF obviously)? The 5Dmk3 was everything we wanted except price; I paid $500 more than for my mk2 and have been happy with it.

The lady I sold my 5Dmk2 to seemed exceptionally happy with it, and the price.



YuengLinger said:


> dstppy said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



That was my point, I don't see any intentional crippling. People griped about it and it got re-added.

When a new battery comes out, you see people immediately jump to the "They're screwing us on accessories" posts . . . except the existing battery had been used in tons of other cameras.

I see no conspiracy.


----------



## silat shooters (Oct 15, 2014)

dufflover said:


> Canon did exactly that though. They crippled as much as possible whilst still getting sales. It shoots slower than a Rebel FFS. Not sure where they get the 7D2 IQ is being pitched as similar either. A lot of people still reckon 6D smashes the 70D (I'd say about 1 to 1.5 stops in my usage) and 70D ~= 7D2 so ... it's not suddenly unappealing on the IQ front.
> 
> I'll echo the prev poster though; who is really saying the 6D's sales are crap? I mean you get people defending the fact it's non-cross AF and FPS are slower than a Rebel! Can't be doing too badly if people do that lol



Well Said!


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 15, 2014)

dstppy said:


> That was my point, I don't see any intentional crippling. People griped about it and it got re-added



People complaining had nothing to do with it, or they could have simply re-added it with a 60d firmware upgrade. But of course they didn't because they removed it to protect the 7d1 in the first place..

The reason why it has been re-added to the 70d would be because they added other crippling (removal of spot af from the 7d1->70d) and the 7d2 is so much better than the 70d that Canon seems to see no harm in giving afma to the 70d. Of course afma isn't in any Rebel, people griping or not...


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 15, 2014)

unfocused said:


> kphoto99 said:
> 
> 
> > c.d.embrey said:
> ...



Yeah, and a lens on the back for selfies too please?

I do hope this was a post made with sarcasm in mind, if not can I just say : ?


----------



## joelmeaders (Oct 15, 2014)

Lame. I own the 5D Mark III and the 6D. The 6D makes an amazing second camera. I generally use it with my Sigma 50mm 1.4 ART lens and only use the center point on that body so the lack of focusing features is fine by me.

If the 6D was more expensive I would have bought the 5D Mark II or another Mark III.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 15, 2014)

Nethawk said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > kphoto99 said:
> ...



Hardly.

Any photographer who hopes to make a living in the business needs to be mindful of what the customers want. Like it or not, many customers want and expect instant gratification. They have grown up with social media being the primary form for sharing photographs. 

If you have not met someone who carries their entire family album on their phone, you live a very sheltered life.

I'm merely suggesting that competitive photographers tend to be mindful of their customers desires, and camera manufacturers who hope to serve their customers (photographers) need to make that easier to do.

I used a wedding photographer as an example, but there are many others. A sports photographer shooting a high school game, a photographer covering a breaking news event, almost any situation where the photographer needs to get an image posted (which is today's equivalent of publication) quickly.

Let's imagine a little story: A state legislative committee is conducting a hearing on a controversial measure. The hearing room is packed. The "professional" photographer is clicking away at the person at the witness table. Someone else pulls out an iPhone and snaps a few pictures. The iPhone user then uploads the pictures to his Twitter feed. 

The "professional" photographer goes back to the office, where he is met by his editor who says, "never mind, we already posted a picture that some guy took at the hearing and put on his Twitter feed. Oh, and the publisher has decided that it will be cheaper to just give iPhones to the reporters covering these things in the future. That means we don't need the photo staff, so here's your two week's severance pay."

Perhaps you are so successful and confident that your customers will gladly and patiently wait for the pictures you shoot, but I strongly suspect that there are many photographers out there that need the competitive edge that having the ability to edit a few shots in camera and post them to a client's social media in real time would give them.

Obviously, there is nothing that compels anyone to use the features if they become available, but manufacturers are not serving their professional base if they can't offer this simple and ubiquitous technology to their customers.


----------



## dufflover (Oct 16, 2014)

I think people need to take their brand-glasses off if they can't see how the 6D was intentionally crippled.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 16, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Any photographer who hopes to make a living in the business needs to be mindful of what the customers want. Like it or not, many customers want and expect instant gratification. They have grown up with social media being the primary form for sharing photographs.
> 
> If you have not met someone who carries their entire family album on their phone, you live a very sheltered life.



I don't know which is worse - that you think this is true, or that you might be right for some customers.


----------



## BozillaNZ (Oct 16, 2014)

dufflover said:


> I think people need to take their brand-glasses off if they can't see how the 6D was intentionally crippled.



Exactly, if they didn't put the old ass 1 cross point AF in 6D, the sales wouldn't be so bad. Even the AF from 600D where you can rely on a outer cross point is far better.

Canon should learn from Nikon in this aspect. Put the 61-pt AF on next 6D and 65-pt all cross AF on next 5D, you will sell more and there is nothing to cannibalize.

If next round of FF from Canon still has the lame 11-bit DR sensors and 11-pt AF for entry models, consider me a goner. My faith in Canon is at 15% now.


----------



## Khalai (Oct 16, 2014)

dufflover said:


> I think people need to take their brand-glasses off if they can't see how the 6D was intentionally crippled.



It was crippled, no doubt about that. But it's AF is actually not so bad, yes the point are rather clustered in the middle (like 5D or 5D2), but they are actually quite reliable in normal light conditions and center point is just simply awesome, superfast and very accurate. If you don't shoot action too much, it can suffice (this sold me 6D, I couldn't justify another 1500 USD for better AF alone, also WiFi and GPS are nice bonuses).

So 6D would be just fine if it was alone in the market, it is not alas.

(BTW, Nikon D6xx have very similar AF array, basically same spread (i.e. very clustered) and X-type only in the middle of the frame, they are just dense, that's all, but apart from that, quite comparable, it just seems better on paper, 39 vs. 11)


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Oct 16, 2014)

x-vision said:


> Despite the 'entry level' moniker, the 6D is still a $2K camera.
> And at that price, I'm expecting a fully featured camera - not one with a single cross-type AF point.



The not-low-enough cost of the 6D is entirely due to the cost of the sensor, though how much is manufacturing cost and how much is a marketing-driven differential I'm not sure. The 6D is perfect for people who would be happy with a 60D (which is a fine camera) but who for whatever reason want a full-frame sensor. If you then start adding/upgrading other features you defeat the object.

But this is Canon's dilemma - if you pare back the specification to 'entry level' almost everyone will want something which has been left out. For me, I'd want a swivel screen which would be perfect for use with a TS-E lens. I'd also prefer a return to a 50D-style body. But I don't want to pay any more!


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 16, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Nethawk said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...





> Hardly.
> 
> Any photographer who hopes to make a living in the business needs to be mindful of what the customers want. Like it or not, many customers want and expect instant gratification. They have grown up with social media being the primary form for sharing photographs.



I suspect that when customers hire professional photographers they want something slightly better than shoot and post, just a bit more than what guests are going to be doing with their iPhones (ok, maybe not Apple fanboys). Despite all those great shots on Facebook, people still hire photographers. Imagine that. 

I don't have any thoughts either way, other than being grateful that my own wedding photos were not done by a hack who presumes because of social media I might accept mediocrity.



> If you have not met someone who carries their entire family album on their phone, you live a very sheltered life.



Sure, I have lots of 14 year old friends. I'm not sure why this is relevant though.



> I'm merely suggesting that competitive photographers tend to be mindful of their customers desires, and camera manufacturers who hope to serve their customers (photographers) need to make that easier to do.
> 
> I used a wedding photographer as an example, but there are many others. A sports photographer shooting a high school game, a photographer covering a breaking news event, almost any situation where the photographer needs to get an image posted (which is today's equivalent of publication) quickly.



It's already easier. Do you remember that stuff we once called film? There are multiple methods of getting photography to print that work today. More on this later, when I try to get just what it is you want camera manufacturers to do.



> Let's imagine a little story: A state legislative committee is conducting a hearing on a controversial measure. The hearing room is packed. The "professional" photographer is clicking away at the person at the witness table. Someone else pulls out an iPhone and snaps a few pictures. The iPhone user then uploads the pictures to his Twitter feed.
> 
> The "professional" photographer goes back to the office, where he is met by his editor who says, "never mind, we already posted a picture that some guy took at the hearing and put on his Twitter feed. Oh, and the publisher has decided that it will be cheaper to just give iPhones to the reporters covering these things in the future. That means we don't need the photo staff, so here's your two week's severance pay."



That was a fun little trip down fantasy lane, now back to reality. What you describe is illegal, not to mention ridiculously melodramatic.



> Perhaps you are so successful and confident that your customers will gladly and patiently wait for the pictures you shoot, but I strongly suspect that there are many photographers out there that need the competitive edge that having the ability to edit a few shots in camera and post them to a client's social media in real time would give them.



Oh, wait just a minute! Edit a few shots? But, but, the twitter guy could beat me to the punch! Your real time argument just went to hell, just sayin' 

I suspect you suspect correctly, but if those photographers haven't figured it out yet without overburdening our camera bodies then they should probably just get an iPhone and an Instagram account.



> Obviously, there is nothing that compels anyone to use the features if they become available, but manufacturers are not serving their professional base if they can't offer this simple and ubiquitous technology to their customers.



So what is it exactly that you want, what needs to be added to a camera to compete with Hello Kitty? A cellular 4G radio? Should it also make phone calls, perhaps to call our editors and beg forgiveness for the few minutes delay? Instant cloud upload? A Facebook, Twitter, Instagram app, a contacts list complete with social media addresses of all customers? Once we stuff all of that into our cameras, will it still be simple and ubiquitous? 

Maybe you should think this one through, and get back to us just how this instant social media gratification can become reality for the Facebook age. Personally, I'm really hoping your vision also includes the aforementioned selfie cam.

I'd much rather manufacturers continue to stay focused on the photograph and not the business of photography.


----------



## dstppy (Oct 16, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> dstppy said:
> 
> 
> > That was my point, I don't see any intentional crippling. People griped about it and it got re-added
> ...



Two completely different animals. The only people that cross-shopped these two (after trying them) were those that needed a 60D and had way too much money on their hands.

If you think that adding MFA would have endangered the 7D sales . . . I think you've made my point.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 16, 2014)

Nethawk said:


> _*I'd much rather manufacturers continue to stay focused on the photograph and not the business of photography.*_



I'm not particularly interested in extending this debate. Especially since your response is so filled with sarcasm in an effort to mask the lack of substance.

But, I will say your last comment really gets to the heart of the matter. First off, camera manufacturers who survive have never remained content to focus on the photograph and ignore the business of photography. My criticism is that they are failing to recognize the changing nature how photographs are used today.

I happen to think that any camera manufacturer and any photographer who sticks their head in the sand and pretends that social media is some passing fancy that is only for the "Hello Kitty" crowd, as you so disparagingly refer to it, is just asking to be put out of business. 



Nethawk said:


> So what is it exactly that you want, what needs to be added to a camera to compete with Hello Kitty? A cellular 4G radio? Should it also make phone calls, perhaps to call our editors and beg forgiveness for the few minutes delay? Instant cloud upload? A Facebook, Twitter, Instagram app, a contacts list complete with social media addresses of all customers?



That's a pretty good start. I've crossed out the phone, because I'm not sure that's necessary, but I would entertain it. But, certainly a usable wifi interface and the ability to do some quick edits in-camera at a minimum. 



Nethawk said:


> Once we stuff all of that into our cameras, will it still be simple and ubiquitous?



I don't know. Have you ever used a smart phone? They seem to be quite a bit smaller and most people seem able to manage the apps on the phone. I guess I assume photographers aren't any less smart than the average phone user. Perhaps you disagree. (BTW, I don't think ubiquitous means what you think it does.)


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 16, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Nethawk said:
> 
> 
> > So what is it exactly that you want, what needs to be added to a camera to compete with Hello Kitty? A cellular 4G radio? Should it also make phone calls, perhaps to call our editors and beg forgiveness for the few minutes delay? Instant cloud upload? A Facebook, Twitter, Instagram app, a contacts list complete with social media addresses of all customers?
> ...



That gets the heart of the question -- doesn't it? People pay a lot of money for cell phone network/data access. I can't see many people paying a similar fee for a camera in addition to the cell phone that they already have...


----------



## unfocused (Oct 16, 2014)

Random Orbits said:


> That gets the heart of the question -- doesn't it? People pay a lot of money for cell phone network/data access. I can't see many people paying a similar fee for a camera in addition to the cell phone that they already have...



Well, I don't pay extra for my iPad. It's included in my data plan. No reason why a camera couldn't be as well. 
But really my main point is quite simple- there are a lot of things camera makers could do to help their professional customers gain an edge in today's highly competitive and interconnected world. 

I'm not saying it's for everybody but I don't get why some folks feel threatened by it. Well maybe I do...keeping up with fast changing customer demands means you have to work harder and those who cling to the old ways risk becoming obsolete.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 16, 2014)

unfocused said:


> I happen to think that any camera manufacturer and any photographer who sticks their head in the sand and pretends that social media is some passing *fantasy* that is only for the "Hello Kitty" crowd, as you so disparagingly refer to it, is just asking to be put out of business.



I think you meant, "fancy" but the typo is appropriate.

I know a few people that "used to" be active on Facebook, and who now use it very rarely. I just skipped the intermediate step.


----------



## dstppy (Oct 16, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I happen to think that any camera manufacturer and any photographer who sticks their head in the sand and pretends that social media is some passing *fantasy* that is only for the "Hello Kitty" crowd, as you so disparagingly refer to it, is just asking to be put out of business.
> ...



+1 

I'm so cutting edge with my tech, I skipped Twitter/Facebook.

People constantly question me about crap that someone further up posted on facebook page but not on our homepage . . . makes my head hurt.


----------



## mkabi (Oct 16, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I happen to think that any camera manufacturer and any photographer who sticks their head in the sand and pretends that social media is some passing *fantasy* that is only for the "Hello Kitty" crowd, as you so disparagingly refer to it, is just asking to be put out of business.
> ...



I don't think social media is a fad, but its rapidly evolving to other forms.
Its gone from facebook to twitter/instagram to snapchat.
I honestly can't keep up... is it really socializing though? Or narcissism morphing to new levels?
You want to be popular, you want to show off that you've done this and been there?
In my opinion, its raking in a lot of evil eye 

But to answer unfocused innate question, may be someday... one day pictures taken from a cell phone will be just as good or better than DSLR/MILC, and when that day comes... no one will hire a photographer at a wedding and people will be able to pick and choose from the multitude of pictures taken from their relative's phones to create an album. 

Till that day comes, it doesn't matter if a DSLR/MILC can throw a picture on a social media site. I say this, because... pictures thrown on facebook is for the moment, a present day thing that is easily displaced and forgotten with a hundred other "Whats on your mind" pictures/videos/comments that come to you over the year. Pictures taken by a photographer at a wedding is forever, which if done artfully will be remembered forever especially when made into an album.


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 16, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > That gets the heart of the question -- doesn't it? People pay a lot of money for cell phone network/data access. I can't see many people paying a similar fee for a camera in addition to the cell phone that they already have...
> ...



Depends where you are. But right now when data plans are in the single to tens of GB and now you want to load raw files to the cloud for processing/social consumption... 22 to 40 MP files are going to eat into that capacity quickly and we're just not there yet where the infrastructure can support that at a reasonable cost. Stuff packaged for iPad/cell phone consumption are low res to save space.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 16, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I happen to think that any camera manufacturer and any photographer who sticks their head in the sand and pretends that social media is some passing *fantasy* that is only for the "Hello Kitty" crowd, as you so disparagingly refer to it, is just asking to be put out of business.
> ...



Ha! Thanks for catching that, I will correct it.

Facebook is fast becoming institutionalized and commercialized, no doubt about it. But, I study the trends pretty closely and it's definitely a medium that is here to stay. People have incorporated it into their daily lives and routines. Within a few years, it could supplant websites as the primary destination of people using the internet.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 16, 2014)

Random Orbits said:


> ...But right now when data plans are in the single to tens of GB and now you want to load raw files to the cloud for processing/social consumption... 22 to 40 MP files are going to eat into that capacity quickly and we're just not there yet where the infrastructure can support that at a reasonable cost. Stuff packaged for iPad/cell phone consumption are low res to save space.



Yeah, I don't see it as a replacement for how we process and save files today. I'm just suggesting that having the ability to edit and upload a few JPEGs in real time could give some photographers a competitive edge. 

I know many photographers dread the thought of having to worry about posting images while an event is still going on. But, I don't think the pressure is going to go away; I think it will only get stronger. It's nice to say that clients should just be patient and wait for our brilliantly composed and edited pictures, but the reality is they won't. 

All I'm suggesting is that camera manufacturers need to make it easier for photographers to deliver some of those brilliantly composed and edited pictures sooner.


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 17, 2014)

unfocused said:


> A point I've been trying to make as well. Camera manufacturers are behaving like dinosaurs when it comes to social media and connectivity.
> 
> Said it before and will say it again – *it's pathetic* that no manufacturer has produced a DSLR that gives the professional photographer a fighting chance to post pictures from the wedding before the guests do with their iPhones.
> 
> ...



Your original post, and why my sarcasm is warranted. All I can do is shake my head and LOL.

Carry on.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 17, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



You know, there are people around (like myself) that find the less socialization the better. There are also people around that just don't want to use computers or be slaves to the constant noise of communications.

I've never really figured out what facebook is for, since you can't "lurk". So I've never joined. From what I hear from those I know that use it, it's probably a good thing since the signal to noise ratio on facebook is rapidly approaching zero.

I'm not on twitter, google+, snapchat (whatever that is), instagram (whatever that is), reddit (not sure what that is, but I gather it's some sort of free-for-all forum), pinterest (some sort of bookmarking thing, I gather) or any other form of "social" media. I follow certain types of media quite actively, but none of it is what I would consider "social", including this site.


----------



## Old Sarge (Oct 17, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> You know, there are people around (like myself) that find the less socialization the better. There are also people around that just don't want to use computers or be slaves to the constant noise of communications.
> 
> I've never really figured out what facebook is for, since you can't "lurk". So I've never joined. From what I hear from those I know that use it, it's probably a good thing since the signal to noise ratio on facebook is rapidly approaching zero.
> 
> I'm not on twitter, google+, snapchat (whatever that is), instagram (whatever that is), reddit (not sure what that is, but I gather it's some sort of free-for-all forum), pinterest (some sort of bookmarking thing, I gather) or any other form of "social" media. I follow certain types of media quite actively, but none of it is what I would consider "social", including this site.


I am also a non-socialization types. But my wife likes to see pictures of the great-grand-kids so we have the grand-daughters log in info I have examined it carefully to see what we might be missing. I can tell you that you aren't missing a thing. The s/n ratio may have surpassed zero....if such is possible.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 17, 2014)

Nethawk said:


> All I can do is shake my head and LOL.
> 
> Carry on.



There is none so blind as those who will not see.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 17, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Until a paid photographer has the tools to post pictures straight to a customer's Facebook from the back of the camera, manufacturers are failing their customers.


How did they do things at the Winter Olympics earlier this year? There's a proven workflow if you are interested in minimum lead time to publishing of high quality images using equipment that's already available.


----------



## Good24 (Oct 17, 2014)

Interesting discussion. My two cents: wedding photographers already can upload photos quickly - if you do it right and probably spend more money. Photojournalists already get content to (for example) the front page of the NYT within 30 mins or so. You can hire a wedding photographer with 2 assistants (or 4 or 6), with laptops or ipads, you can circulate memory cards from the shooter to the ipad assistants and/or use WiFi at the wedding venue. The 6D and 70D already have WiFi. The technology DOES exist. It's just that like everything in life you have to pay more to make better things happen.

Also, one person who posts to Facebook or Instagram at a wedding from their iphone, while they are editing the shot, adding filters, tagging people -- they are missing lots of other great shots. Whether embedded in a DSLR or on an iphone you don't want your wedding photographer to be wasting time on uploads and cropping and miss great shots in the meantime. Again, the trick is to pay to have more people. And you can already do that. 

Yes, the dozens of people at the wedding all have their camera phones and collectively they won't miss much. But any one shooter will. No DSLR technology will stop a bunch of hacks from posting, you'll never stop that. But if you throw enough money at it you can have your pro pictures posted pretty dang quickly. It's not a technological problem.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 17, 2014)

I think this discussion has about run its course and I'm not interested in becoming the next variation of DRone.

But, just to add to the comments of Good24 and StudentofLight, I think you are actually making my point. Of course, with enough money and labor almost anything is possible. I'm simply suggesting that the camera manufacturers could do a better job of making it easier and much cheaper.

The local newspaper photographer does not have the resources available to those covering the Olympics and not every wedding photographer can hire one or two assistants to help them process and post pictures during a wedding. 

I'm not sure how many different ways one can say this, but it seems unfortunate to me that a photographer paying $1,500 to $3,000 for a camera body should not be able to have the same accessibility and usability that others get for a few hundred dollars (or even free with a two-year contract) from a cell phone. 

It all seems a bit absurd. Camera manufacturers have seen their market absolutely crushed by devices that offer instant editing and instant connectivity to the internet, yet they have almost universally been painfully slow on the uptake. It's as though they are incapable of comprehending that the features that have caused an exodus from their devices might actually be features they should consider improving upon.


----------



## quod (Oct 17, 2014)

unfocused said:


> It all seems a bit absurd. Camera manufacturers have seen their market absolutely crushed by devices that offer instant editing and instant connectivity to the internet, yet they have almost universally been painfully slow on the uptake. It's as though they are incapable of comprehending that the features that have caused an exodus from their devices might actually be features they should consider improving upon.


I think the interface between a non-phone camera and the Internet will occur, but it will be a mirrorless camera manufacturer (or a creative software developer), not Canon or Nikon, that does it. I keep thinking about Kelby blabbing on about how a DSLR like the 7D2 cannot do this. That's BS. It can be done.


----------



## mrcorsari (Oct 17, 2014)

tomscott said:


> So basically making entry level FF in the canon camp less accessible… Yet you can buy FF mirrorless cameras for less than £1000… Should be coming down not up.


I'm Canon enthusiast. I already own an old EOS 500D and want to move to FF. But I'm disappointed... I have EF-s and EF lenses. I know it is an investment so I will lose the EF-S lenses when I move to FF. But.. even 6D is good I have experience with 600€ Sony mirroless cameras. They are very good! Outstanding photos, 20 Mp, all cointrol features you can expect from a reflex.... The successor of 6D cannot be much expensive and must be far better compared to mirrorless. If they do not make the proper move, why should I be buying a very expensive FF canon? I'm just waiting to a reasonable price FF that it's much better than teh one they're offering?.
I know photo enthusiast that star feeling fine with small cameras, they are now cheap, and provide great photos...

Regards


----------



## dstppy (Oct 17, 2014)

quod said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > It all seems a bit absurd. Camera manufacturers have seen their market absolutely crushed by devices that offer instant editing and instant connectivity to the internet, yet they have almost universally been painfully slow on the uptake. It's as though they are incapable of comprehending that the features that have caused an exodus from their devices might actually be features they should consider improving upon.
> ...


Seems more a question of usability.

I'm by no means anywhere near a pro, but my pride won't let me release ANYTHING that hasn't been looked at up-close on a large monitor. Further, if I put up more than one shot of an event, it really needs to "tell a story", the pictures need to give each other context. Self-consciousness won't allow me to 'just put what you have up there' as I've been begged, because their perception of my photographic skills are really a combination of not just what I take and how I take it, but my post-processing skills and visualization of the event in my mind. 

If "the bride" desperately needs facebook photos ASAP, then what's to stop the photog putting up the same crappy pictures (somewhat less crappy) with their iPhone? That's not what he's there for. If that's what she wants, maybe "Uncle Bob" with the DSLR should have shot the wedding.

I just don't see the specific need in-camera. Like the people that don't want a touch screen or flip screen etc. to drive the price up, why do we need that?

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

Bit of a tech-rant here now, at least in the US, "Getting to the internet" isn't exactly as ubiquitous as it reportedly is:
Cellular companies are capping data/playing games with streaming and charge a lot, coverage isn't always great.
WiFi really depends on someone having a GOOD connection and then offering it to you. If it's free & open, it's usually slammed by tons of people connecting. Uploading any decent content is complicated.
Home/Business (non-peering) connections are starting to preference their traffic. If you download too much, you suddenly see yourself slowing down . . . sometimes you're told so overtly.

That aside, Cameras are hardware; most of us shoot RAW who are serious about what we take (professional or not) and don't even use the in-camera JPEG rendering. Why require a software solution in-camera?

MiFi Card or just a card Reader and a powerful laptop with your choice of softare, if you have an internet connection, you can do this.

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

In closing (maybe I should have led with this and skipped the rest), if "Pro"s are being 'crushed' by my iPhone 6+ (which could crush a squirrel if I dropped it!), then "Pro"s are not needed. Someone who wants a 'selfie wedding' shouldn't get a Photographer, and we should be grateful for that.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 17, 2014)

dstppy said:


> ...my pride won't let me release ANYTHING that hasn't been looked at up-close on a large monitor. Further, if I put up more than one shot of an event, it really needs to "tell a story", the pictures need to give each other context.



Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnd.............we have a winner!


----------



## duppencf (Oct 17, 2014)

wedding and social media stuff...that's nice.

So a 6D mk ii, slap a full frame dual pixel sensor in with moderate bumps in other specs, and you're going to have a winner already. 

Sure I'd like the wifi to be easy enough to post durring a wedding.
Sure I'd like slightly better autofocus
But what makes sense is video features to utilize dual pixel autofocus.

I'd definitely pay for a FF 70d. I'd pay a more for focus racking, headphone out, higher dynamic range, raw or high bitrate video, maybe 4k vid.


----------



## macogley (Oct 17, 2014)

I own a 6D and love it but if Canon are disappointed with it then they have only themselves to blame. I shoot with centre point focus which is good for me but they made a decision to severely limit the number of points and cross type points. They limited their market by doing this and I have no idea what they saved in manufacturing costs but I suspect it was minimal compared to the impact on sales that has been seen.

I'd also love to see some firmware updates to allow for quick access to off camera flash options - at the moment the method of getting to this menu is far too complex; especially when working on a wedding and trying to make adjustments fast on the fly.

Anyone any thoughts similar to this?...


----------



## Laslen (Oct 18, 2014)

macogley said:


> Anyone any thoughts similar to this?...


Canon is giving us less options and making FF less accessible... while Nikon has D610, D750, D810 currently, they want to make their FX format standard for everyone, and they've been discussing full-frame mirrorless.

And I'm not a Nikon troll. I've never even owned a Nikon (other than old film 35mm's). But still, I've been searching for a backup camera lately, and what I've been reading about Canon is really nonsensical. They used to be the innovators (remember the original 5D?). They seem to be squandering that now. I WANT to buy a 5D3, but I'm reluctant to invest more money in them for reasons like this.


----------



## coppec (Oct 18, 2014)

Laslen said:


> macogley said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone any thoughts similar to this?...
> ...



My thought was same as yours!

I have been a canonist since the 10D and when I saw the 6D specs I was like wtf Canon is thinking. Nikon and even Sony are making their FF bodies mainstream with plenty of features while Canon tried to milk people with a super basic FF body with crappy AF (compared to the competition).

The 6D mkII if it ever comes out should at least have 21 all cross typed AF points in rectangular shape + rotative screen + dual SD card slots + at least 1 eV of DR more than the current 6D at $2000 max .. to really compete with what Nikon or Sony are offering and to improves its sales.

Canon is no longer the leader of the market (image quality wise) as it used to be back then so they need to push hard to be in the game


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 18, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> dstppy said:
> 
> 
> > ...my pride won't let me release ANYTHING that hasn't been looked at up-close on a large monitor. Further, if I put up more than one shot of an event, it really needs to "tell a story", the pictures need to give each other context.
> ...



+1

That professional photographers might lose business to iPhone shooters due to the speed of posting on Facebook is just laughable. There's a reason pro photographers exist, and this is it.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 18, 2014)

Nethawk said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > dstppy said:
> ...



Resisting and denying change is such an effective business strategy.


----------



## PaulG (Oct 19, 2014)

I think everyone's looking at the 6D as some sort of crippled Mk3. They're missing the point: the 6D represents a stripped down approach to full frame. Its as though Canon looked at the Mk3 and said "What don't we need on this camera?" 

I'm a film-maker who uses cameras professionally. I don't shoot sports, weddings, fashion, or birds. I mostly use cameras for product work, animation, time-lapse and general use. I have owned Nikons throughout my life and switched to Canon when DSLRs got good video capabilities. ( I have since moved most of my fiim/video work to my Black Magic Cinema Cameras, which have better IQ and codecs)

At first, I had a Mk2 and a 7D and they complemented each other as an A-cam and B-cam. I then sold the Mk2 and bought a Mk3. I then returned the Mk3 a week later with a battery issue and decided to swap for a 6D instead.

Here's why:

1) 6D is quite a bit lighter than the Mk3. It makes an ideal street camera, especially with a light lens like the 40mm pancake 2.8

2) 6D has (to my mind) a better button layout and puts the zoom in back on the right where it belongs. Who needs a "rate" button. The 6D layout is much easier to one-hand than the Mk3.

3) IQ on the 6D is stellar and low light/high ISO works well.

4) The simpler focus system works just fine for my uses and function better in low light

5) Wifi and GPS.

6) Despite owning a lot of CF cards, I'm actually happier to use SD cards, which work directly with my Macbook and don't need an adapter.


A few gripes (compare to the mk3): I'd like another Custom setting (C3), I'd like PC sync port and headphone jack. ISO button on the top would be nice. None of these are deal breakers. 

As far as focus is concerned, I do a lot of manual focussing anyway, so I'm not that bothered and don't want to have a overly complex autofocus system.

Updates I'd like: 
1) USB 3.0 or Thunderbolt for fast tethering.
2) Better WIFI support
3) Higher res screen
4) Focus peaking (not just confirmation)
5) Even more bit-depth (but not necessarily higher res)


I've used the 6D in the rain and in the cold. It's plenty robust. To call this camera "entry-level" is nonsense. Yes, its simpler and has fewer features, but they kept the right ones in, especially if what you want is a full-frame camera that's a bit smaller and more portable. I know plenty of professionals who use this camera to make money. I think its a bargain compared to a Mk3 and I love full-frame shooting, so the new 7D doesn't thrill me anyway.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 19, 2014)

PaulG said:


> I think everyone's looking at the 6D as some sort of crippled Mk3. They're missing the point: the 6D represents a stripped down approach to full frame. Its as though Canon looked at the Mk3 and said "What don't we need on this camera?"



... in this case, they could just have added the full-blown firmware - why can I play audio files along side my in-camera slide show, but cannot save hdr source files or do raw hdr? This is software crippling by removal of features, just like removing 1/8000 shutter or 1/200 x-sync is on the hardware side. Beware, it's absolutely terrific you like the 6d just as it is.



PaulG said:


> 4) Focus peaking (not just confirmation)



You do know Magic Lantern has focus peaking and then some, right?



PaulG said:


> I've used the 6D in the rain and in the cold. It's plenty robust. To call this camera "entry-level" is nonsense.



Your opinion of other people's opinions is appreciated. However, one word of warning from bad experience - the 6d's sealing isn't as sturdy as (semi-)pro camera bodies like the 5d3 or 7d, using the 6d in rain w/o any damage basically comes down to even more luck than with other non-1d cameras.


----------



## Khalai (Oct 19, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> PaulG said:
> 
> 
> > I've used the 6D in the rain and in the cold. It's plenty robust. To call this camera "entry-level" is nonsense.
> ...



I was under the impression, that 6D equals 5D2 in terms of weather-sealing. However, since there are no measurable data about such sealings (IP xx comes to mind), you can only guesstimate, what a body can withstand. I have a quite positive experience with my 6D - several days of rather intense raining with 6D+16-35L on my neck all the time, wet all the time - still ticks like clockwork. So yes, it may not have the ruggedness of 5D3/7D2/1Dx, but it's quite durable and can withstand some abuse, no need to worry and treat it like some precious ornate glass...


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 19, 2014)

macogley said:


> I own a 6D and love it but if Canon are disappointed with it then they have only themselves to blame. I shoot with centre point focus which is good for me but they made a decision to severely limit the number of points and cross type points. They limited their market by doing this and I have no idea what they saved in manufacturing costs but I suspect it was minimal compared to the impact on sales that has been seen.
> 
> I'd also love to see some firmware updates to allow for quick access to off camera flash options - at the moment the method of getting to this menu is far too complex; especially when working on a wedding and trying to make adjustments fast on the fly.
> 
> Anyone any thoughts similar to this?...


Which off-camera flash options are you referring to? How would you want things to work?


----------



## wsheldon (Oct 19, 2014)

macogley said:


> I own a 6D and love it but if Canon are disappointed with it then they have only themselves to blame. I shoot with centre point focus which is good for me but they made a decision to severely limit the number of points and cross type points. They limited their market by doing this and I have no idea what they saved in manufacturing costs but I suspect it was minimal compared to the impact on sales that has been seen.
> 
> I'd also love to see some firmware updates to allow for quick access to off camera flash options - at the moment the method of getting to this menu is far too complex; especially when working on a wedding and trying to make adjustments fast on the fly.
> 
> Anyone any thoughts similar to this?...



Have you tried reprogramming the menus? I added "External Speedlite control" to the "My Menu", and reprogrammed the SET button to bring up the FEC settings and that really simplified things for me during lit shoots. I really wish you could break out the "Flash function" settings from the External Speedlite control menu and get to it with one touch, then it would be ideal when it's too fiddly to see/reach the ST-E3, but this is workable for me.


----------



## PaulG (Oct 19, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> ... in this case, they could just have added the full-blown firmware - why can I play audio files along side my in-camera slide show, but cannot save hdr source files or do raw hdr? This is software crippling by removal of features, just like removing 1/8000 shutter or 1/200 x-sync is on the hardware side. Beware, it's absolutely terrific you like the 6d just as it is.



Not to apologize for Canon, but based on a certain processor spec, they may not have designed the camera for 1/8000 or raw HDR, or other stuff only available through ML hacks. 



PaulG said:


> 4) Focus peaking (not just confirmation)





Marsu42 said:


> You do know Magic Lantern has focus peaking and then some, right?



Yes I'm familiar with ML and all its goodies. My feeling is that ML is really cool but not really a pro-option that I would rely on for paying work. And its true that there are ML features that have made their way into the main firmware including Audio Levels, which people were clamoring for. Raw video is something that I'm sure Canon avoided for too many compromises including very specific media cards which not everyone will have or afford. 

The one thing I left off my wish list, however, which they've finally included in the 7D mk II, is the built-in intervalometer, which I can only imagine is purely software based. Finally, I'll be able to throw out that over-priced cable release that Canon sells at a 5x premium over identical knock-offs to suckers like me who want the word Canon on their accessories.


----------



## x-vision (Oct 19, 2014)

PaulG said:


> To call this camera "entry-level" is nonsense. Yes, its simpler and has fewer features, but they kept the right ones in, especially if what you want is a full-frame camera that's a bit smaller and more portable. I know plenty of professionals who use this camera to make money. I think its a bargain compared to a Mk3 and I love full-frame shooting, so the new 7D doesn't thrill me anyway.



The irony is that Canon obviously designed the 6D to *not* be used by pros.
And yet, pros are the ones working around its limitations with the least complaints.
They love the results and find the 6D a bargain, considering how quickly the camera pays for itself.
And since the camera has paid for itself, pros are likely to quickly upgrade when a successor is announced.

For non-pros, it's a different story: for $2K, I'm expecting a full-featured camera, which I'll likely keep for years.
Thus, while others see the 6D as a bargain, I see it as a poor long-term purchase - due to its limited features
and poor overall value as a long-term purchase.

Note, though, that when Nikon hits the jackpot with a model (D3, D300, D750), Canon follows suit in a couple of years.
So, it can be fully expected that in (at most) two years, Canon will have a worthy competitor to the D750. 
And at that time, it won't be worth arguing whether the 6DII is crippled or not 8).


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 19, 2014)

Not much wrong with the 6D. Except pricing. It is basically a FF Rebel. It should come at 999 USD/Euro. It would have sold like hotcakes. Most basic, but lowest cost ff dslr. 

The way it is, i am not interested. Way to crippled for the price. And way bigger than similarly priced sony A7.


----------



## Laslen (Oct 19, 2014)

x-vision said:


> Note, though, that when Nikon hits the jackpot with a model (D3, D300, D750), Canon follows suit in a couple of years.
> So, it can be fully expected that in (at most) two years, Canon will have a worthy competitor to the D750.
> And at that time, it won't be worth arguing whether the 6DII is crippled or not 8).


Well, at least there are some optimists left. Personally, I'm part of the camp that believes we won't even be talking about DSLRs in two years. I think they'll be in the same category like Leica's digital cameras -- Overpriced, don't really do anything drastically different, but some people still buy them because; they're built like tanks, they like the brand name, and for the novelty of it. Of course, this is not something I want... but it's just a fact that DSLRs seem increasingly marginalized in the realm of newer technologies.

Not to stray too far off topic... I hope this rumor is incorrect. This would be a big mistake for the 6D2. As for Canon, don't you think the company that is 2 years behind should be #2 in the market, at best? If people keep buying them because "that's what the pros use" they will never feel the need to truly be innovative. I mean, if you're Canon, why spend extra money on competitive technologies? If you're going to sell the same amount of cameras anyway, and especially more than Nikon, it doesn't really make a difference.

I hope they pull ahead again soon -- in more than just market share.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 19, 2014)

I know this is the internet, people like to make things up and it's probably futile to try to correct the myths, but...

...it is absolutely wrong that the 6D has not been a good seller for Canon or that there is any way Canon could be disappointed in its sales. 

Until recent weeks, the 6D has consistently been the best selling full-frame DSLR on the Amazon best sellers ranking. Only in recent weeks, with the introduction of new full frame models from Nikon (which are likely selling as a result of pent-up demand from Nikon users), has the 6D dropped. But, it still sells very well (No. 12 as currently). Once the pent-up demand from Nikon users subsides, and holiday sales begin, it's very likely the 6D will again take over as the sales king of full frame DSLRs.

People can dispute the list, but I've yet to see any other independent ranking that shows the relative sales of camera models. 

You can complain all you want about the 6D and its features, but unless you can produce better numbers, don't think for a minute that it hasn't been a great success for Canon.


----------



## PaulG (Oct 19, 2014)

A couple of thoughts:

The "war" between Nikon and Canon (et. al.) may be interesting, comparing model-for-model differences, but at the upper end, it takes quite a bit for advanced DSLR users to switch willy-nilly and suffer the pain of a new lens eco-system and workflow change. As we know, the cost of camera bodies is trivial compared to the investment in lenses and accessories that most ardent photographers make.

It's the point-and-shoot crowd that are the quickest to switch sides for a perceived feature advantage. It took a major change, like full frame HD video support in the 5D Mk2, to make me switch from Nikon to Canon, and I don't see switching back any time soon.

Anyone who's ever tried to use an iPhone (or similar) to do anything beyond snap-shooting will tell you that a high-end DSLR with superior optics and controls is not even remotely comparable. iPhones are well designed and very convenient, but they have tiny crappy lenses that will never be the equal of Canon L glass. I agree that there's iPhone technology that the Canons and Nikons of the world need to take to heart, but for the upper end, its no comparison. 

And whenever I hear that another newspaper has fired its photo staff and given iPhones to its reporters, I get chills for all the hard working artists who spent years honing their craft to be told that the world can no longer "afford" competent photography.


----------



## dufflover (Oct 20, 2014)

unfocused said:


> You can complain all you want about the 6D and its features, but unless you can produce better numbers, don't think for a minute that it hasn't been a great success for Canon.



Well the rumour is that it's Canon themselves saying this about the sales not the CR complainers. We just offer up some simple explanations lol


----------



## jeffa4444 (Oct 20, 2014)

As a very happy 6D user (Landscape doesn't require fancy AF) I would be appaulled if Canon added a large increase on the 6D MKII without making an entry level camera in the FF sector their is no way I would pay £1,000 / $ 1600 more. 
Nikon offer two cameras in this sector the D610 & the D750 Canon would be insane to think the 7D MKII with a crop sensor will be a lanscape photographers choice it will not be. 
My 7D is used for wildlife & sports and that is where I will use the 7D MKII when I upgrade. I hope Canon staff watch this site because a camera in the FF £1350 / $ 1650 body only range will still have a significant market, if they dont then my next maybe a Sony.


----------



## macogley (Oct 20, 2014)

wsheldon said:


> Have you tried reprogramming the menus? I added "External Speedlite control" to the "My Menu", and reprogrammed the SET button to bring up the FEC settings and that really simplified things for me during lit shoots. I really wish you could break out the "Flash function" settings from the External Speedlite control menu and get to it with one touch, then it would be ideal when it's too fiddly to see/reach the ST-E3, but this is workable for me.



Hi, yeah I have the menus set up like that right now but still find it clunkier than it needs to be. I use the Yongnuo triggers and would love to be able to shortcut a button to the Flash Function Settings.

As opposed to....
1. Menu (go to My Menu)
2. Scroll to External Speedlite Control 
3. Scroll to Flash function settings
4. Adjust the various settings

When I need to make a slight tweak it's the same again.

I totally agree that the FEC shortcut works great for on camera or single flash shoots but it would be so much easier if this was tidied up a bit.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 20, 2014)

macogley said:


> wsheldon said:
> 
> 
> > Have you tried reprogramming the menus? I added "External Speedlite control" to the "My Menu", and reprogrammed the SET button to bring up the FEC settings and that really simplified things for me during lit shoots. I really wish you could break out the "Flash function" settings from the External Speedlite control menu and get to it with one touch, then it would be ideal when it's too fiddly to see/reach the ST-E3, but this is workable for me.
> ...



This is one of the reasons why I advocate for touch-screen technology. It wouldn't be an ideal fix, but it would certainly make things faster if all you had to do was touch the screen to move through the menus.


----------



## lilmsmaggie (Oct 20, 2014)

IMHO, I think this is the crux of the" "Why did Canon position the 6D ..."

Not everyone is an enthusiast or professional photographer. Taking a page from the cell-phone camera explosion/usage, the average person just wants to take a photograph. They don't necessarily view the nuances of a camera designed for sports/action vs one that's designed for portraiture/landscape, etc. -- truth be told, in most likelihood, they just want a camera to do "Everything" they need it to do within their budget. Consumers don't always know what they need. I would argue that the average camera buyer isn't considering a 2nd camera body to do what the 1st camera body isn't quite designed to do well. I think this is key. In other words, one camera for sports/action, the other for everything else. They WANT the one camera to do EVERYTHING ! -- aka cell phone camera / P&S use aficionados. We see this all the time in the real world: Product X is designed to do a particular thing well; Consumer comes along, buys product X and proceeds to push its capabilities beyond what it was originally designed to do.

Some of you will respond by saying something along the lines of: "You buy the right tool to do the job." But there will be those who will purchase the the wrong tool, assuming it will be sufficient to meet the need (or convinced by some salesperson that "Oh Yeah, you can do that with this -- No problem."

Positioning the 6D at a price point ($1899) that Canon knew would be more than the 7D Mark II ($1799) - just confuses the choice. 

A lot of consumer buying decisions will come down to price over features. "Why buy that 6D when I can get that nice new 7D Mark II for less? Besides, doesn't it have newer technology ???."


For the professional, enthusiast and serious amateur its an easier decision. For Joe and Jane America that just wants to take pictures, IMHO Canon muddied the waters. 

And now Canon says its disappointed with 6D sales ??? -- Hey Canon! You set the stage.





Oneand0 said:


> In my personal opinion as a hobbyist, the Canon 6D is well worth the money for what it was intended to do, "entry level" full frame (not sports). I used a 7D for landscape photography for a couple of years, because that's all I had at the time (I originally bought it for action). The 7D worked for landscape, because I used it! When I saw the performance of the 6D for landscape photography and compared to the 5DIII, I immediately bought my 6D and have been over joyed by the performance. I was happy I didn't waste my money on the 5DIII, on features that wouldn't get me any better of an image my 6D would (of course if I was handed a 5DIII for same money I would take it over 6D).
> 
> This weekend *I found myself wanting to shoot action for my growing old dog, in the water. All I had in my hands was my 6D, because I gave my 7D away* to a relative. I used the 6D and it worked! I'm not saying it worked as well as I wanted it to, and I even cringed when I was about to try it out for action. *But it's a camera and it could take a picture of an action shot with the right settings, lens, determination and patience*. https://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/14908192883/in/photostream/
> 
> So what ever Canon decides to do next, keep, sell and buy, or buy the camera that best suites you for your needs. But don't let it stop you from using it for something you didn't think it was intended for, because you got stuck in a bracket of low end, or middle. You might be surprised at the end result  BTW I can't wait for my 7DII that is pre-ordered, and yes I wish it had 4K...


----------



## Sportsgal501 (Oct 20, 2014)

PaulG said:


> A couple of thoughts:
> 
> The "war" between Nikon and Canon (et. al.) may be interesting, comparing model-for-model differences, but at the upper end, it takes quite a bit for advanced DSLR users to switch willy-nilly and suffer the pain of a new lens eco-system and workflow change. As we know, the cost of camera bodies is trivial compared to the investment in lenses and accessories that most ardent photographers make.
> 
> ...



So true, a few months ago I was thinking about switching to the Nikon D7100 because Canon was dragging their feet with "rumors" of the 7D Mark II ,just the thought of re-purchasing new lens, speedlites, etc was very much on my mind. I'm very happy that I will get to stay with Canon.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 21, 2014)

dufflover said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > ...don't think for a minute that it hasn't been a great success for Canon.
> ...





lilmsmaggie said:


> And now Canon says its disappointed with 6D sales ??? -- Hey Canon! You set the stage.



Here we go again. Canon DID NOT say they were disappointed in 6D sales. Some random guy on the internet said Canon is disappointed in 6D sales. No sales numbers to back it up...no statement in Canon's investor briefing...no nothing with any credibility. Just some random guy making things up.

The 6D, for most of the past year, has dominated the Amazon sales ranking as the best selling full frame camera on the market. It's slipped only in the past few weeks due to Nikon's recent introduction of the D750 and the D810 – both of which are meeting pent up demand from Nikon users. 

The D610 BTW is at about #31 -- well under both the 7DI and the 60D (two cameras that have been replaced.) The 6D without lens is at #13 right now, and at #20 with lens.

Don't believe every random statement on the internet. Canon could not possibly be disappointed in 6D sales because the camera has been kicking butt since its release. People are simply projecting their own opinion, and then making things up.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Oct 21, 2014)

lilmsmaggie said:


> Not everyone is an enthusiast or professional photographer. Taking a page from the cell-phone camera explosion/usage, the average person just wants to take a photograph. They don't necessarily view the nuances of a camera designed for sports/action vs one that's designed for portraiture/landscape, etc. -- truth be told, in most likelihood, they just want a camera to do "Everything" they need it to do within their budget.



I completely agree with you. But - why would such a person want full frame? We know the advantages and disadvantages of full frame vs crop, but why would the person you describe not just want/need a 70D? 



lilmsmaggie said:


> Positioning the 6D at a price point ($1899) that Canon knew would be more than the 7D Mark II ($1799) - just confuses the choice.



I'm not sure I subscribe to the view that having a choice is bad because it's confusing!

Full frame sensors remain very expensive, but for some photographers (not the ones we refer to above) the sensor is what they crave, and performance features such as 10 fps and 65-point AF are simply not needed. It's great to be able to choose at a similar, affordable price point. Or if you need both in one body there's the 5D3, obviously for a higher price. The 5D is between generations at the moment so it doesn't directly compare, but I have no doubt that the 5D4 will match up to the 7D2 in every way.


----------



## lilmsmaggie (Oct 21, 2014)

That's just it Steve. For the average mom/pop, weekend, birthday, special event consumer, photograph the kids zooming around the room or backyard; a 5D Mark III may make sense depending on the perceived consumer need. But It's just a very expensive option for the non-professional, non-serious hobbyist The 6D fills the need (as long as the need is defined and understood), but then there's the 7D Mark II. 

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying having a choice is bad and I'm not bashing the 6D. It's the pricing of the 6D in light of Canon's planned APS-C body release (6D became available, Sept. 2012 -- 7D MK II avail Oct./Nov. 2014). Emphasis on planned. 

Some would say: "Well, if Canon had given the 6D the same 19 AF-points, etc., etc., that the original 7D had, it would take away from 5D III sales. Well, maybe - maybe not.

I'd argue that the same could be true of the 7D Mark II taking away sales from the current 6D. 

I've seen this phrase used quite a bit here on CR: "Why does Canon cripple its bodies ...?" A bit strong in terms of terminology. I don't believe Canon intentionally "cripples" its camera line but you have to wonder:

"What if Canon had given the 6D a comparable AF system similar to the original 7D?"

I mean try being that average Joe looking to upgrade and ask yourself these questions: 


Would I rather have a FF 61-point AF, 5D Mark III ($3399); or 
Would I rather have a FF 19-point AF, 6D ($1899 - if it had been available); or
Would I rather have an APS-C 65-point AF, 7D Mark II ($1799)

In the above scenario -- many of us wouldn't hesitate to spring for the 19-point AF 6D --IF, we were considering moving from a crop-body to FF or as back-up to our existing FF camera. 

Sure, you would loose the perceived reach the crop-body would give but man, a 19-point AF 6D would be sweet. 

It could be the camera that fits --"everything I need it to do" for the very consumer demographic Canon is attempting to entice or whatever it is Canon marketing is doing. But I agree, in light of the 7D Mark II's 65-point all cross-type dual pixel AF system, 10 FPS, the 5D Mark ??? will be one hella camera.






Steve Balcombe said:


> lilmsmaggie said:
> 
> 
> > Not everyone is an enthusiast or professional photographer. Taking a page from the cell-phone camera explosion/usage, the average person just wants to take a photograph. They don't necessarily view the nuances of a camera designed for sports/action vs one that's designed for portraiture/landscape, etc. -- truth be told, in most likelihood, they just want a camera to do "Everything" they need it to do within their budget.
> ...


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 21, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Here we go again. Canon DID NOT say they were disappointed in 6D sales. Some random guy on the internet said Canon is disappointed in 6D sales. No sales numbers to back it up...no statement in Canon's investor briefing...no nothing with any credibility. Just some random guy making things up.
> 
> The 6D, for most of the past year, has dominated the Amazon sales ranking as the best selling full frame camera on the market. It's slipped only in the past few weeks due to Nikon's recent introduction of the D750 and the D810 – both of which are meeting pent up demand from Nikon users.
> 
> ...



I refer you to the original message in this thread:



Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D, a camera which I personally love for its size and simplicity.



While I acknowledge that this is a site for rumors, if it's just a random guy on the internet making things up I just have to ask - why are you here?


----------



## jeffa4444 (Dec 1, 2014)

In the past week Ive played with a 7dMKII. No question its superior to the original 7d in IQ, but and its a slim but I prefer the images from the 6d when viewed full screen on my iMac for sharpness in every other manner they are virtually identical IQ wise. 
The in-built GPS for landscape also swings the 6d for me plus the lighter weight. 

Note to Canon - If and when the MKII 6d comes just improve two things to appease the douters a. AF points b. move to 7d toggle rather than d pad. Finally keep the price point in the same ballpark or Sony will eat you alive.


----------



## erjlphoto (Dec 23, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D, a camera which I personally love for its size and simplicity. We’re told that the next iteration of the camera is likely to move upmarket



Sounds like a good observation. I have had two 6D's (last one stolen) and love the IQ of this camera as well as it's size. However, I think that just the number of autofocus points causes many to look at other choices. Unfortunate, as I like many others only use the center point anyway.....

My best guess is a price point of 2295 body only for a 6D ii or whatever they call it.


----------



## ashmadux (Dec 23, 2014)

erjlphoto said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > <p>We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D, a camera which I personally love for its size and simplicity. We’re told that the next iteration of the camera is likely to move upmarket
> ...




Sounds like something that canon would do, afterwards they will probably try to sell the 5d3 for 3499. They can justify is by saying its half the price of a 1dxm2


Question- why 2 6d's?


----------



## tat3406 (Dec 24, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > ...But right now when data plans are in the single to tens of GB and now you want to load raw files to the cloud for processing/social consumption... 22 to 40 MP files are going to eat into that capacity quickly and we're just not there yet where the infrastructure can support that at a reasonable cost. Stuff packaged for iPad/cell phone consumption are low res to save space.
> ...



The original 6D already have wifi. I had shoot some picture for a food magazine, I am not a pro to do this. So I set up my camera(6D) and connect to my phone, shoot some picture and choose some best shoot and send to editor through my phone right away. The editor choose which photo they need or give opinion where to adjust accordingly. At the end, only transfer to my laptop and edit the picture picked by editor and send to them.

I also always download photo from my camera and upload to social media on the go, not convenient as smart phone, but 8)


----------



## Sabaki (Dec 24, 2014)

So the term used here is "6D Mark II To Move Upmarket"...I'm hoping for a bit more to be honest.

I want to be competitive in respect of the Nikon offering in the same segment and I want to it have a feature set that makes to worth every cent one will spend on it.

I want Canon to stop crippling their cameras as to protect their flagship models. If you want to protect your flagship models Canon, make their performance absolute.

I've decided not to buy the 6D as I'm hoping that 2015 is a year where Canon outdoes themselves and I'm hoping that this time next year, a 6D mkii is released and blows us all away


----------



## e17paul (Dec 24, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> As a very happy 6D user (Landscape doesn't require fancy AF) I would be appaulled if Canon added a large increase on the 6D MKII without making an entry level camera in the FF sector their is no way I would pay £1,000 / $ 1600 more.



+1, but we can expect launch prices of the 5D4 and 6D2 to be back up to the launch prices of the 5D3 and 6D.

The 6D is not a long way from the spec of the 5D2, and did not become available until most of the 5D2 stock had been cleared. I'm therefore expecting the 6D2 to ingerit features from the 5D3 (in addition to it's own unique features) a respectable period after launch of the higher spec 5D4.

Perhaps the current 6D feature set will find its way into a low end polycarbonate bodied camera, as full frame continues its slow and steady march down the price scale. First there was only the 1Ds, then there was the 5D, then there was also the 6D, then there was ....


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 24, 2014)

e17paul said:


> Perhaps the current 6D feature set will find its way into a low end polycarbonate bodied camera, as full frame continues its slow and steady march down the price scale. First there was only the 1Ds, then there was the 5D, then there was also the 6D, then there was ....



... then Canon had a problem, because too many "good enough" cameras are available on the market - either sensor or af system.

In the good ol' times, you needed a 1d4 to track anything reliably, but now there's the 70d with the 7d1 af system and the 7d2 which is comparable to a 1d4. In the good ol' times, you needed an expensive 5d2 to ff landscape joyfulness, but now there's the 6d with a better sensor.

Unless Canon comes up with something really new (and not just some goodies like dpaf for the video crowd), they cannot continue to trickle down features to less expensive/sturdy bodies, or their high-end sales will plummet. That's why I don't expect to see a 6d2 anytime soon.


----------



## drob (Dec 24, 2014)

Seriously, the only updates a Mark 2 would need to be competitive is DPAF/updated AF (maybe old 7d with dual pixel). 2 card slots, better weather sealing, digic 6. $1600.00 body only. Doesn't have to be revolutionary, just more competitive with Nikon and Sony offering. The "good glass" excuse only goes so far, Sony's A7ii looks rockin, great package and IQ at a great price and amazing size. Canon neededs to step up.


----------



## robbinzo (Dec 24, 2014)

I've been a Canon fanboy for some years, however...

I was excited about the 6D before it was announced. Then I realised that the 70D was adequate. Therefore Canon succeeded in down-selling to me (as opposed to up-selling).
Now I'm preparing to jump to the Sony A7 II. I can even keep my favorite Canon lenses. 
I don't care about Canons profit margins. I want the best quality product at the best price and I want genuine innovation, not some ancient AF system that is "good enough" or some lens that is adequate and just a little bit too expensive for what it is.
I have come to realise that I personally want small, light and full frame. That is the Sony A7. Canon do not have an answer to the Sony A7 series. Canon need to address this or they will fail in the "entry level" FF segment in my humble opinion. It seems to me that entry level FF is mirrorless, not DSLR. DSLR really is Dinosour Single Lens Reflex. Companies that fail to innovate eventually fail. This is true in all aspects of business, especially tech.

I am an "entry level" FF customer and I can tell you that I don't really want to carry around a DSLR any more, nor do I have to.

From my own perspective, Canon is stuck in the past. They will not allow 3rd party manufacturers to have the algorithms for the Canon AF system. Sony on the other hand have gone in entirely the opposite direction and are allowing 3rd party lens manufacturers to produce AF lenses for Sony cameras. Sony are not renowned for lenses like Canon - but this may turn Sony's disadvantage to their advantage by allowing the consumer unrivalled CHOICE of lenses.


----------



## Djaaf (Dec 24, 2014)

robbinzo said:


> They will not allow 3rd party manufacturers to have the algorithms for the Canon AF system. Sony on the other hand have gone in entirely the opposite direction and are allowing 3rd party lens manufacturers to produce AF lenses for Sony cameras. Sony are not renowned for lenses like Canon - but this may turn Sony's disadvantage to their advantage by allowing the consumer unrivalled CHOICE of lenses.



Yeah, well, unrivalled choice of lenses, ok. But at what price ? 
The metabones adapter are nice, but at 400+$ apiece, they better be (and you still have some issues with AF from what I read). 
If you want the "best there is" with a Sony A7II, you have to buy at least 2 adapters. That's 800$ more to add to the body price. 

And if you go for lenses with adapter, well... the advantage of the A7 II in size and weight is not that impressive anymore... 

So, yeah, the A7 II is really nice, and I'd love for Canon to come up with a line of FF-mirrorless with a set of pancake or very small primes, but for now, I'm staying with my 6D.  

Djaaf.


----------



## tcmatthews (Dec 24, 2014)

e17paul said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > As a very happy 6D user (Landscape doesn't require fancy AF) I would be appaulled if Canon added a large increase on the 6D MKII without making an entry level camera in the FF sector their is no way I would pay £1,000 / $ 1600 more.
> ...


The Rebel F. 

I fully think that this is Canons plan. I expect that we will see the 5D4 and a full frame rebel before the 6DII is released. The problem is the time table. If they are too slow in this trickle then they will loss the entry market completely. I think that the real trouble is in the Rebel market. 

The Sony A6000 is a better camera than any of the rebels except it does not naively take Canon glass. I dont own one but I expect the auto focus to also fail in low light before the Canon Rebel auto focus. The m43 cameras have improved greatly. Fujifilm makes good cameras. There are so many good cameras on the market that used to be dominated by Canon/Nikon. Low end Canon Rebels are excellent gateways into the Canon lens system. But you just want a camera dont already own Canon Lens, or your not a cannon fan boy there are better cameras on the market. 

Canon is sticking to their game plan. Nikon is throwing stuff at a wall and seeing what sticks. Sony cant sell a SLR to save their life but found people love these mirrorless things they keep putting out. So they are going to put them out as fast as possible until they get it right. 

The 6D2 will move up market in specks because it has to. But if they move it up market in price people will be screaming. I think that $2400 with a kit lens is a fair price for a 5D3.(At least that is what one is worth to me which I why I don't own one) If they can put a 6D2 with 5D3 specks at that price I will buy one. But for the love of god put a articulating screen on it. I am tire of crawling on the ground with my 6D.


----------



## tcmatthews (Dec 24, 2014)

Djaaf said:


> robbinzo said:
> 
> 
> > They will not allow 3rd party manufacturers to have the algorithms for the Canon AF system. Sony on the other hand have gone in entirely the opposite direction and are allowing 3rd party lens manufacturers to produce AF lenses for Sony cameras. Sony are not renowned for lenses like Canon - but this may turn Sony's disadvantage to their advantage by allowing the consumer unrivalled CHOICE of lenses.
> ...



The best use of an A7II is vintage glass found stuffed in a family members closet or bough off ebay. Especially with the addition of in body stabilization. The quality of the lens is not as good as modern lenses but they can have lots of character. They also tend to be smaller. You can also convert old rangefinder lens. There are converters for just about any lens ever made. I bough a Metabones adapter to fill in the holes Lens range and use the camera as a backup as need. But all my other adapters were cheep around $25. I was able to build up a complete set of primes from 24-135 fairly cheaply.

Canon fd 24mm f2.8 >$50
Vivitar fd 28mm f2.5 free in Dads closet
Canon fd 35f2 ~100 Ebay (got into bidding war payed to much but it is sharp
Canon fd 50 1.8 free Hate it as much as EF 50 1.8 there almost no improvement in quality between the two
Canon fdn 50 Macro free sharp but to slow I do not have life size converter
m42 Pancolar Zeiss Jena DDR 50f1.8 Love it It destroys the Canon 50f1.8 $100 
m42 Asahi Pentax Super-Takumar 50f1.4 $100
Canon fd 135f2.5 free

I bought the Canon EF85f1.8 to fill in the 85mm hole. It went on sale and was only $50 more than the going price on the of the fd 85f1.8 on ebay. 

I do not think you can have as much fun manual focusing on any other modern system. But I would not buy one for sports or birds. Auto focus with converted lens in my opinion is futile. I am still waiting to see what the rumored A9 brings. If it is to expensive I will just by the A7II. 

The truth is I had my heart set on buying a A7r before I found out they did not include first curtain electronic shutter. This was a deal beaker on the A7r for me. The original A7 did not offer enough features. There was not enough native lens. Not enough resolution over a Canon 6D. No native ultra wide. 35f2.8 are you kidding me that should be a 35f2 at least. In the end I felt that it would be foolish to buy a A7 and use it with a bunch of converted lens with out having a full frame camera for reference. The Tamron 28-75f2.8 does not auto focus at all with a Metabones adapter. This would leave me with out a general purpose zoom for the A7 so I would have to buy the kit. 

The only full frame lens range I am missing is Ultra wide so in the end I bough a 6D. I am very happy with it. My next lens purchase will be the Canon 16-35f4. I continue using the Nex6 for the vintage lenses. I am looking for a High MP camera.

An A7II is a good camera as long as you know what you are getting into.


----------



## Djaaf (Dec 24, 2014)

tcmatthews said:


> The best use of an A7II is vintage glass found stuffed in a family members closet or bough off ebay. Especially with the addition of in body stabilization. The quality of the lens is not as good as modern lenses but they can have lots of character. They also tend to be smaller. You can also convert old rangefinder lens. There are converters for just about any lens ever made. I bough a Metabones adapter to fill in the holes Lens range and use the camera as a backup as need. But all my other adapters were cheep around $25. I was able to build up a complete set of primes from 24-135 fairly cheaply.
> 
> Canon fd 24mm f2.8 >$50
> Vivitar fd 28mm f2.5 free in Dads closet
> ...



Pretty much my point and pretty much the reason why I have a 6D and an OM-D E-M10... 

If you want an A7 II, don't buy it thinking you'll be able to use every lens ever made at 0 cost and with full functionnality. Adapters for AF-lenses are not cheap and AF is not as good as on the original bodies it was made for. 
For vintage glass, it's really nice and cheap, though (but it's back to manual everything).


Djaaf.


----------



## RGF (Dec 24, 2014)

I think the entire market will move up and the 6D M2 will move with it. I don't expect it will be repositioned within the Canon line up.


----------



## CaptureWhatYouSee (Dec 24, 2014)

RickSpringfield said:


> Threads like this are why new photogs drop 8.5k on a 1DX and glass.
> 
> Everything else seems like a compromise.



I think that many people prefer the 6D because it's a reasonably sized FF. That is certainly the case with me. Even the 5DIII is unreasonably sized to me. By reasonably sized, I mean that it is totable for a day of hiking/walking.

I want a 6D that has a few more advanced features in the same body.


----------



## Spiros Zaharakis (Dec 24, 2014)

If the upcoming high megapixel camera is the replacement of the 5DmkIII then it will be more likely that the 6DmkII will move up with a 20-24mp sensor, better focusing system and dual cards to fill the gap and serve as a "pro" model as a competitor to the D750. With a starting MSRP of no more than $2000-2300 it will be a great deal.
That could lead to a lower end small FF camera with a size close to the 100D and a price tag closer to $1500.
That camera could compete with the A7II and the D610 successor.


----------



## Lee Jay (Dec 24, 2014)

Okay, so how about this. Canon likes to migrate things down (i.e. 7D AF to 70D).

How about 6DII = 5DIII focusing system and a dual-pixel version of the 6D sensor all in basically the same body as the 70D (touch screen, flip screen, popup flash, etc.) with an improved version of the 6D mirror box for slightly faster frame rates.

Then, the 5DIV could be the high megapixel camera or multi-layer sensor camera or whatever, and have a body like the 7DII (better weather sealing).


----------



## e17paul (Dec 24, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> e17paul said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps the current 6D feature set will find its way into a low end polycarbonate bodied camera, as full frame continues its slow and steady march down the price scale. First there was only the 1Ds, then there was the 5D, then there was also the 6D, then there was ....
> ...



If Canon don't produce more 'good enough' cameras for less money, then their competitors will. They have to in the long term. Maybe the high resolution camera confirmed today is the differentiator between the 5d4 and 6d2, along with dual card slots. 

There's always something we don't yet know about for the generation after next, but these become less important in the second decade of any technology. The heyday of the full frame DSLR as a high margin item is drawing to a close, it will soon be a choice based upon bulk and weight, not price.


----------



## JawZ (Dec 25, 2014)

Again, if you just read your own posts while taking an outsiders perspective you'll see one glaring trend...Canon doesn't make one camera to rule them all. Each camera is for a market or for a level. I've recently become more vocal as evidenced in my new membership here because it's time to finally react like a market. At any point in time, Canon or Nikon could easily slay the entire industry if they would just create one killer camera that is untouchable and price it to slay all others. Canon is too risk averse.


----------



## RGF (Dec 25, 2014)

RickSpringfield said:


> Threads like this are why new photogs drop 8.5k on a 1DX and glass.
> 
> Everything else seems like a compromise.



In a sense it is a compromise. But for most people the compromise, other than pride of ownership (i.e., ego), is too small to be measured. But the value of having the best, is immense. ;D


----------



## pedro (Dec 25, 2014)

Will the 6D move up to make room for the 5Dish high MP beast and serve as a revamped high sensitivity cheapo 5D?


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 6, 2015)

JawZ said:


> Again, if you just read your own posts while taking an outsiders perspective you'll see one glaring trend...Canon doesn't make one camera to rule them all. Each camera is for a market or for a level. I've recently become more vocal as evidenced in my new membership here because it's time to finally react like a market. At any point in time, Canon or Nikon could easily slay the entire industry if they would just create one killer camera that is untouchable and price it to slay all others. Canon is too risk averse.



Actually, I think that Canon makes the most versatile DSLR cameras than any other brand...the 7DII, 5DIII and 1DX are fine examples of this. There is nothing from Nikon or other brands which comes close to the versatility which these two cameras offer. They excel in pretty much every thing a photographer could need or want. But if you are looking for a 35+mp camera....sorry but you are in the minority and therefore a niche market. Sure other cameras may have a single spec which is more dominant....but again that's a single feature swing into niche land.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jan 6, 2015)

pedro said:


> Will the 6D move up to make room for the 5Dish high MP beast and serve as a revamped high sensitivity cheapo 5D?



Doubtful - they've already got the 7d2 for tracking and "ok" iq. Anyone wanting better sensitivity than that will still have to pay a lot of more than ~€2k, or accept crippling of some sort or the other. Just releasing a 6d2 = 6d1+5d3/1dx af system would endanger their premium camera sales.

I find it more likely that the 6d2 will move "upmarket" simply by better build quality and some more features (dual pixel af), but certainly not by being a re-incarnated 5d3.

And "upmarket" could also simply mean that Canon sees that customers are ready to pay more for a ff camera than the current 6d1's price tag is at least in the US, so they'll try to legitimize this somehow.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Jan 12, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Okay, so how about this. Canon likes to migrate things down (i.e. 7D AF to 70D).
> 
> How about 6DII = 5DIII focusing system and a dual-pixel version of the 6D sensor all in basically the same body as the 70D (touch screen, flip screen, popup flash, etc.) with an improved version of the 6D mirror box for slightly faster frame rates.


 
A 6D2 with a "70D body" and 5D3 autofocus? 
It makes sense: someone says that the first 6D was a 60D body (except articulating LCD) with basically a 5D2 autofocus, so the new 6D could inherit the body from the new 60D (=70D) and the AF from the new 5D2 (=5D3). Plus, the 6D IQ or slightly better. 

Too good to be true, for a non-professional user like me? Too similar to the present 5D3? 
I think that a 70D AF (19 cross-points) would be enough for photographers like me: I managed to survive the 5Dc and even the EOS M's AF systems  .

Let's hope that Canon makes room for that by putting in their 5D4 (and 1Dx2) an AF furtherly improved (better than 7D2).

If Canon doesn't deliver a current AF module on the 6D2... well, I'll have to stick with my 5D classic until the price of a used 5D3 gets close to 1000 Eur.


----------



## pdq5oh (Jan 15, 2015)

How about a 70D with a 6D FF sensor? I'd love that camera.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 25, 2015)

The Canon 6D MKII will sit in roughly the same place it is in now. The Sony A7 MKII is £ 1500 body only in the UK, the Sony A7R body only is £ 1349, the Nikon D610 body only is £ 1199, and the Nikon D750 body only is £ 1749 and will surely fall over the coming months. With this in mind its difficult to see Canon getting the 6D MKII any higher than the Nikon D750 is at launch and even more less likely if it doesnt want to lose sales to either Nikon or Sony.

The Canon 6D MKII as a minimum will need to have more AF points at least 19 and likely more all cross type, it will need class leading low light capabilities as the original did, the shutter life should move to 150,000 and it should adopt the toggle of the 7D not the slower D pad. In every other aspect the camera for its price is fine BUT staying true to its present market is a must or Canon will need another camera to fill the void.


----------



## K (Feb 27, 2015)

If a 5D Mark IV doesn't happen, then the 6D2 is going to be a 2nd generation 5D3. 

The only question is, what becomes of 4K video...

If Canon doesn't provide 4K at the 5D level...then the 6D moving up to replace the 5D3 is probably a sure thing.


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 27, 2015)

K said:


> If a 5D Mark IV doesn't happen, then the 6D2 is going to be a 2nd generation 5D3.



...and...



jeffa4444 said:


> The Canon 6D MKII as a minimum will need to have more AF points at least 19 and likely more all cross type, it will need class leading low light capabilities as the original did, the shutter life should move to 150,000



... no way! Canon will make sure there is a healthy difference between 5d and 6d and that the cheap model is *not* "good enough" for semi-pro shooting (i.e. shutter life) or tracking. Just putting 4k into the 5d4 won't manage that, they still have to down-cripple the 6d a lot either via hardware (af points) or firmware. Of course if the 5d4 has a serious sensor upgrade, they could be a bit more lenient with the 6d2.

For every customer that buys a €2000 6d2 instead of a €3500 5d4 Canon looses a lot of money (esp. if the 6d is cheap to produce with legacy parts). The 6d isn't there to because Canon intends to have a nice ff system option for the masses, but simply because they have to make sure people don't jump ship to the Nikon d6x0.

Personally, I don't see a 6d2 at all for some time as long as they make money from the 6d1 - question is how cheap to produce the 6d1 is and how long they can live with dropping prices.


----------



## K (Feb 27, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > If a 5D Mark IV doesn't happen, then the 6D2 is going to be a 2nd generation 5D3.
> ...




Interesting.


In my opinion, Canon is very, very lucky about 2 things:


1. Nikon has had quality control issues and recalls on their bodies - this has scared many users away.

2. Nikon has not updated their heavy hitter pro lenses in some time ( 24-70 and 70-200 ) as well as a few other key lenses.

As a system, Canon does have a clear edge on glass. Better pro lenses without question. Nikon might be a tad better on the consumer level lenses though. 

If Nikon puts out a 24-70 and 70-200 that are as sharp and as good as Canon's...I'll probably switch to Nikon. Sure, they have recalls and issues, but we know they take care of these issues. I can tolerate that. I prefer Canon controls, ergos, menus and all that - but I can tolerate Nikon. It isn't that bad.

What is very agitating about Canon is how they cripple their gear in such an insulting way to consumer's intelligence. Nikon, for whatever reason, is not scared to give their FF users:

1. 39 to 51 AF points in a good AF system
2. Dual card slots
3. A fully functional menu system with options
4. Better video features

That's just 4 off the top of my head. But there are a lot more.

Nikon doesn't feel that providing good AF and dual slots is a threat to their D810 or D4 line of Pro cameras.

What we're comparing here is the D610 and D750 to the 6D. Nikon isn't doing this very petty and intentional crippling. Sure, as you go up models, there's better features and quality. That is to be expected. But what shouldn't be on the table is using an AF system from 2007, or a single card slot. It is just a distasteful way to do it. 

I have a 6D. It has an awesome low light sensor. But the Nikon equivalents are much more feature rich. You get more for your money. The 6D's current prices are more accurate to its feature set. It isn't a $2K camera. Doesn't deserve to be.


All that said, GLASS trumps bodies. 

I eagerly await the Nikon updates to those two lenses. Hoping it happens in the next two years. It should, because with higher MP cameras being released, Nikon can really benefit from better glass.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Feb 27, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Canon will make sure there is a healthy difference between 5d and 6d and that the cheap model is *not* "good enough" for semi-pro shooting (i.e. shutter life) or tracking. Just putting 4k into the 5d4 won't manage that, they still have to down-cripple the 6d a lot either via hardware (af points) or firmware. Of course if the 5d4 has a serious sensor upgrade, they could be a bit more lenient with the 6d2.



There has to be a differential between the 6D2 and the 5D4, but I think you're overstating the difficulty of this. It's often said (and I fully agree) that the 6D2 just needs to be a "full frame 70D". The 5D3 is already well ahead of that in AF system, and in body features and handling. A 5D4 would be even further ahead obviously. There would be no need to make the 6D2 any less than the 70D, and a slightly upgraded AF system (a few more points and wider coverage) would be very welcome and would still not hurt 5D4 sales. Those who want and can afford a 5D4 wouldn't be interested in a "full frame 70D".


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 28, 2015)

If Canon do not upgrade the 6D then its sales will definitely decline. The recently announced 750D & 760D have 19 AF points 11 in the 6D is indefensible as is 100,000 shutter count when the 5DS and 5DS R have moved to 200,000.


----------



## Freddell (Feb 28, 2015)

robbinzo said:


> I've been a Canon fanboy for some years, however...
> 
> I was excited about the 6D before it was announced. Then I realised that the 70D was adequate. Therefore Canon succeeded in down-selling to me (as opposed to up-selling).
> Now I'm preparing to jump to the Sony A7 II. I can even keep my favorite Canon lenses...



I am curious as if your built your opinion on specifications rather than comparing the 6D the newer 70D in real life?? 

It took me one shot in the camera store with 6D and 24/105L to convince me that my 70D and Sigma 18-35 1.8 had to go right there and then. Sure I miss the tilting touch screen and dpaf, but eventually the 6D enabled me to take the pictures I wanted where I did not achieve the same success with 70D. And the larger and brighter viewfinder, GPS and Wifi was not too bad on 6D. 

Therefore the 6D has its place, for me it is close to perfect, although more robust auto focus would not hurt and even better ISO performance. Double card slots is not a selling point for me, but then I am not earning my living through photography. I rather have the lightness compared to 5D. 

I was even considering a Nikon Df as a walk around camera to replace my X100 after analyzing raw files from dpreview, but when I held it in my hand I could not stand it.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 1, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> The recently announced 750D & 760D have 19 AF points 11



A crop rebel is hardly a competition for a ff camera ...



jeffa4444 said:


> in the 6D is indefensible as is 100,000 shutter count when the 5DS and 5DS R have moved to 200,000.



... and this number has a lot of marketing to it, you only know how durable the shutter really is after years of usage by lots of people or getting inside knowledge from Canon r&d.



Freddell said:


> Double card slots is not a selling point for me, but then I am not earning my living through photography.



It's like an insurance, you only value it if you've lose one or several day's worth of great pictures, so imho it has its place in an "non-pro" camera, too, as the sd slot doesn't take a lot of space. But of course Canon did it to make the 6d more awkward to use for actual professionals having to explain to their customers why all shots went south.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 3, 2015)

Split models 6D MKII and 6DS, 6D MKII cheaper than 6DS the 6DS bridging the price divide between the 5D MKIII and the 6D in current line-up.


----------



## drob (Mar 4, 2015)

Put the 6D's current sensor into the new Rebel 6ts and rename the 6DS and increase price to $1500. Boom...no new sensor tech, jst upgrading features that should have been there in the first place.


----------

