# Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 8, 2013)

Many of you know that I recently acquired a Canon 6D, and I have been asked by multiple posters both in the forum and by email to give my reasons why I made the decision I did. I have wasted far too much time doing just that today ;D

Here is the link to my website where I shared my findings: http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/02/why-i-chose-a-canon-eos-6d-over-a-5d-mkiii/

Also, if any of you are interested in adapting old M42 lens to the new 6D, here are my findings with my little kit of vintage glass: http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/02/the-new-canon-eos-6d-and-classic-m42-lens/

*Disclaimer: I have no intention of starting a flame war. I believe that the 5D MK3 is overall the better camera and I intend to upgrade my MK2 to a MK3 down the road. I came to the conclusions that I share for myself and felt those conclusions and hands on experiences might help others making a similar type decision.*


----------



## titokane (Feb 8, 2013)

I have a 6D and a 5D2 in my kit right now as well. The photo quality on the 6D constantly astounds me, especially the noise performance like you mentioned on your site. It's also worth mentioning that the 6D has a much softer shutter sound than the 5D series. For a lot of people, the reduced shutter sound is very beneficial when shooting in quieter situations where you don't want to be a distraction.


----------



## Menace (Feb 8, 2013)

Hey, what matters is that you are happy with your choice and the 6d does what you need it for. 

Happy shooting


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 8, 2013)

Menace said:


> Hey, what matters is that you are happy with your choice and the 6d does what you need it for.
> 
> Happy shooting



Absolutely. But I also know that a lot of people like to know other people's opinions before investing their cash. I've simply offered mine.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 8, 2013)

titokane said:


> I have a 6D and a 5D2 in my kit right now as well. The photo quality on the 6D constantly astounds me, especially the noise performance like you mentioned on your site. It's also worth mentioning that the 6D has a much softer shutter sound than the 5D series. For a lot of people, the reduced shutter sound is very beneficial when shooting in quieter situations where you don't want to be a distraction.



The point about the silent shutter is a good one, and one that I neglected to share.


----------



## bseitz234 (Feb 8, 2013)

Wonderful review, Dustin. Thanks so much for taking the time to write up your thoughts! Much appreciated!!


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 8, 2013)

bseitz234 said:


> Wonderful review, Dustin. Thanks so much for taking the time to write up your thoughts! Much appreciated!!



Thanks. I am a writer, so it seems like a worthy blend of some of my talents. I haven't quite gotten to the place where manufacturers are sending my samples to test. Now that would be fun ;D


----------



## kbmelb (Feb 8, 2013)

The 6D sounds like a great camera and that is a great review, but I prefer the 5D3 for the AF points, larger body, dual cards, multi controller joystick (especially on the grip) and most ergonomics in general.

As far as the center focal point, I can't remember the last time I used the center focal point. The 5D3 with all the those cross types spread out is really sweet.

There's really only one thing I'm envious of on the 6D and that is built in wifi. I have to use and Eye-Fi card for that.
I've never really run into a situation where the 1/2 DR would have made a difference. Therefore the banding issues of the 5D3 aren't an issue either. During test I do know the banding is considerably better than the 5D2.


----------



## Dylan777 (Feb 8, 2013)

Without reading your review, the number one reason people pick 6D over 5D III is the PRICE TAG.

Samething for Tammy 24-70 f2.8 VC over Canon f2.8 II


----------



## toodamnice (Feb 8, 2013)

Thanks very much for your review Dustin! 

I am a storm chaser and I just upgraded from 2 550Ds to a 6D and a 550D for lightning/backup work. I have done some basic tests and have found the 6D IQ to be astounding. I tested at iso1250 and f8 on a dark, low contrast sky. I was amazed by the low noise and how well it cleaned up in post without losing any detail. I cannot wait to use this camera on chases. I will be using my new EF 16-35 f2.8 II and EF 50 f1.4 lenses with the 6D.


----------



## Dantana (Feb 8, 2013)

Thanks for the great review. When I have saved up enough I will have to make the decision myself.

I must say that you have some beautiful images on your site. Great stuff.


----------



## Trovador (Feb 8, 2013)

Awesome review, thanks. My situation was quite similar.


----------



## Ricku (Feb 8, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Without reading your review, the number one reason people pick 6D over 5D III is the PRICE TAG.
> 
> Samething for Tammy 24-70 f2.8 VC over Canon f2.8 II


Don't be so sure. I've seen many who picked the 6D because it has better IQ (dynamic range, high ISO noise) than the 5D3.

Think about it - not everyone is fond of shooting sports and weddings. If "super duper AF" and FPS is not important, then why pay 1000 bucks more for a bigger and heavier camera, with less IQ?  Yes, even if it is just marginally less.

To a lot of people (me included) IQ is the highest of all priorities.


----------



## Dylan777 (Feb 8, 2013)

Ricku said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Without reading your review, the number one reason people pick 6D over 5D III is the PRICE TAG.
> ...



Better IQ and higher ISO? that what current 6D owners want&wish to hear ;D


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 8, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Without reading your review, the number one reason people pick 6D over 5D III is the PRICE TAG.
> 
> Samething for Tammy 24-70 f2.8 VC over Canon f2.8 II



I'm sure you are right about that. It certainly was a factor for me, but I wouldn't have even considered the 6D if the other facts about image quality, etc... had not emerged.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 8, 2013)

kbmelb said:


> The 6D sounds like a great camera and that is a great review, but I prefer the 5D3 for the AF points, larger body, dual cards, multi controller joystick (especially on the grip) and most ergonomics in general.
> 
> As far as the center focal point, I can't remember the last time I used the center focal point. The 5D3 with all the those cross types spread out is really sweet.
> 
> ...



Good points, and I do think that the 5D3 is perhaps the best all around camera available. I suspect that most 5D3 users are quite happy with their purchase. I also think, however, that most 6D users will be happy with their purchase and will discover that they got far more camera than what most people have written the 6D off to be.


----------



## Ricku (Feb 8, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...


I see. Well then, I guess there is no point in arguing with you, since you obviously don't know the facts.

But perhaps it's for the best.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Feb 8, 2013)

Nice shots, great review. I can easily say I pretty much agree with everything you said. I have both bodies currently but actually may sell the 5D3 soon depending on how the next firmware update addresses the low light AF issue with the 5D3. The 6D is a great camera and is much more capable than the nay sayers claim. You simply have to use one to decide. You did. And everyone who either owns or has used one has come away satisfied AFAIK. Thanks for the great info!


----------



## Dylan777 (Feb 8, 2013)

Ricku said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Ricku said:
> ...



Since you said "you obviously don't know the facts", about you and I share some pictures from both cameras(6D Vs 5D III). In my comparsions, I DO NOT see 6D offers better DR than 5D III. Pictures were shots with 24-70 f2.8 II in mid afternoon, sunset, and some in extreme low light. 

Are you willing to share your own shots, 6D Vs 5D III comparions? I'm more than willing to show you mines.


----------



## bc29 (Feb 9, 2013)

How do you find the size of the 6D, coming from your 5D MkII? No stores have the 6D in stock where I live. Hoping to visit B&H and get a feel for one when I am in NY next month.

I have the 50D, and I find the ergonomics great. I held a 60D and found it smaller than my liking. Is the 6D closer to either in size, or in between? My other concern is the lack of a joystick! Mostly ergonomic questions, since I am confident in the 6D's image quality.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Feb 9, 2013)

bc29 said:


> How do you find the size of the 6D, coming from your 5D MkII? No stores have the 6D in stock where I live. Hoping to visit B&H and get a feel for one when I am in NY next month.
> 
> I have the 50D, and I find the ergonomics great. I held a 60D and found it smaller than my liking. Is the 6D closer to either in size, or in between? My other concern is the lack of a joystick! Mostly ergonomic questions, since I am confident in the 6D's image quality.


Hi, I used to have a 60D, sold it when I had bought my 5D3. I got the chance to play around with the 6D at my store. It felt small compared to the 5D3, but still very comfortable and I didn't have to move around my hand to get to the buttons because of the smaller housing. As I am new to the 5D3 I haven't really gotten used to the joystick, I mostly use the scrollers anyway.

In all, for the 6D I don't think you need to worry about ergonomics or build.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Feb 9, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Many of you know that I recently acquired a Canon 6D, and I have been asked by multiple posters both in the forum and by email to give my reasons why I made the decision I did. I have wasted far too much time doing just that today ;D
> 
> Here is the link to my website where I shared my findings: http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/02/why-i-chose-a-canon-eos-6d-over-a-5d-mkiii/
> 
> ...


No flame war here, I am a happy owner of the 5D3, I bought it in May last year. But having seen the 6D and played around with it together with reading the reviews, if I was to make the choice today I would have picked the 6D.


----------



## joshmurrah (Feb 9, 2013)

The 6D has better IQ/DR than a 5D3?? Citation?


----------



## robbymack (Feb 9, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



So much for not starting a flame war...lets all just agree to disagree.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 9, 2013)

joshmurrah said:


> The 6D has better IQ/DR than a 5D3?? Citation?



Here are a couple, although I have read this in many reviews: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1171136

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/836|0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28appareil2%29/795|0/%28brand2%29/Canon/%28appareil3%29/483|0/%28brand3%29/Canon

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

I have not owned or used a 5D3, so I can't speak from experience, but some pretty well established testing sites have come to the same conclusion regarding IQ and overall noise. I can certainly attest to significantly (noticeably) superior results to my 5D2, which I am very familiar with.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 9, 2013)

DXO actually benchmarked the 6D sensor as being (marginally) better than the 5D3 (an 82 as compared to an 81). This is the same score that they gave the 1Dx, so take that for what it is worth.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-The-best-value-for-money-in-the-EOS-range/Measurement

They measure the dynamic range as 12.1 as compared to 11.7 stops for the 5D3. 

That being said, they do fawn over the new Nikon sensors in a somewhat unrealistic fashion, so, again, take it for what it is worth. But these are real citations ;D


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Feb 9, 2013)

robbymack said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Ricku said:
> ...


Some people are more proned than others to start these wars pushing their opinions on people who haven't asked for them.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Feb 9, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> DXO actually benchmarked the 6D sensor as being (marginally) better than the 5D3 (an 82 as compared to an 81). This is the same score that they gave the 1Dx, so take that for what it is worth.
> 
> http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-The-best-value-for-money-in-the-EOS-range/Measurement
> 
> ...


I thought we didn't like DXO here 

Seriously, I'm sure most of us wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Feb 9, 2013)

Here's the thing. Everyone is coming into this thread already knowing that the 5D mark III is the better overall camera. But what I'm also seeing is people who need to justify their purchases again, and that's where all the flaming starts. The truth is, the 6D is a great full frame camera to build on, but it's not that far down below the 5D mark III, especially for normal use. The uneducated folks in this forum seem to use the word "rebelized" (a term which only applies to Americans, really) a lot, and probably never even used a rebel much less a 6D to actually feel and shoot photos with them to know the difference. Another misconception I notice is the justification of the 6D sensor being incrementally better. What is unknown to both DXO and someone who hasn't shot photos with both, is that the difference is barely if not at all seen in real world results. Fact is, the 5D mark III will always produce more keepers in some specific shooting conditions, and IQ is more than just nailing one good photo. IQ is also about nailing good photos all the time. And that's the main reason why people put the 6D down, not throwing into account that the 6D in general purpose will at least do more than half of the 5D mark III's job just as good. I.e if you're a landscape or macro/portrait shooter you will very rarely need the higher AF performance and will make up for it in a big way with its more robust, low noise, full frame sensor. That said, the 6D is doing quite well picking up from where the 5D mark II left off and the 5D mark III is a very good next generation camera.


----------



## Radiating (Feb 9, 2013)

Just noticed this in your review. You're perpetuating the myth that the 6D has less high ISO noise than the 5D3. This is simply not true. It's an optical illusion. The 6D has less color noise but more grain. Meaning that they actually will have identical levels of noise, as shown by tests, they just require different noise reduction settings. The 5D Mark III is just uglier unprocessed leading people to falsley conclude that it has less noise. 

Also the 6D at iso 102400 is actually iso 70000 while the 5D Mark III is iso 77000, and there are other discrepancies between the ISO ratings, so you need to correct both for wildly different noise charachter and wildly different ISO scales. When you do that, you'll find what every other qualified reviewer has said, the 6D has identical level of noise to the 5D Mark III. Anyone who claims otherwise is jumping to conclusions.


----------



## DocMo (Feb 9, 2013)

Chosenbydestiny said:


> Here's the thing. Everyone is coming into this thread already knowing that the 5D mark III is the better overall camera. But what I'm also seeing is people who need to justify their purchases again, and that's where all the flaming starts. The truth is, the 6D is a great full frame camera to build on, but it's not that far down below the 5D mark III, especially for normal use. The uneducated folks in this forum seem to use the word "rebelized" (a term which only applies to Americans, really) a lot, and probably never even used a rebel much less a 6D to actually feel and shoot photos with them to know the difference. Another misconception I notice is the justification of the 6D sensor being incrementally better. What is unknown to both DXO and someone who hasn't shot photos with both, is that the difference is barely if not at all seen in real world results. Fact is, the 5D mark III will always produce more keepers in some specific shooting conditions, and IQ is more than just nailing one good photo. IQ is also about nailing good photos all the time. And that's the main reason why people put the 6D down, not throwing into account that the 6D in general purpose will at least do more than half of the 5D mark III's job just as good. I.e if you're a landscape or macro/portrait shooter you will very rarely need the higher AF performance and will make up for it in a big way with its more robust, low noise, full frame sensor. That said, the 6D is doing quite well picking up from where the 5D mark II left off and the 5D mark III is a very good next generation camera.



Very well said. 

In thinking about it, I guess there's really just a few important questions (and these questions will change depending upon your personal use and need). Here's what I think (IMO) are a few of those questions...

1. Can I afford this camera? (And does it offer ME value?)
2. Will I use this camera? (And then, will I use it as the tool it's designed to be utilized as? )
3. Will I be pleased with the results that come from this camera? (Note that this is also a function of understanding your own skill level - lot's of people are perfectly pleased with P&S camera results).
4. If this is related to my work/business, can I make money with this camera's results?
5. And, probably my favorite question, Will I have fun shooting this thing?!

There may be more, but in essence, that's really what's important. I bet a lot of 6D, 5D III, and other model's owners can all answer a resounding YES to those questions. I ask myself these questions for my camera's, my A/V equipment, and my car. Gotta be fun though - that's a deal killer.


----------



## sdsr (Feb 9, 2013)

Radiating said:


> Just noticed this in your review. You're perpetuating the myth that the 6D has less high ISO noise than the 5D3. This is simply not true. It's an optical illusion. The 6D has less color noise but more grain. Meaning that they actually will have identical levels of noise, as shown by tests, they just require different noise reduction settings. The 5D Mark III is just uglier unprocessed leading people to falsley conclude that it has less noise.



If it's "an optical illusion" that the 6D has less noise, that means that photos taken with the 6D look as though they have less noise. Since noise is only a problem because of what it looks like, then....


----------



## sdsr (Feb 9, 2013)

bc29 said:


> How do you find the size of the 6D, coming from your 5D MkII? No stores have the 6D in stock where I live. Hoping to visit B&H and get a feel for one when I am in NY next month.
> 
> I have the 50D, and I find the ergonomics great. I held a 60D and found it smaller than my liking. Is the 6D closer to either in size, or in between? My other concern is the lack of a joystick! Mostly ergonomic questions, since I am confident in the 6D's image quality.



I get the impression that - as with so many other aspects of 6D comparisons - size differences are probably exaggerated. I have a 5DII and a 6D (and a Rebel) and the differences in external dimensions between the 5DII and 6D strike me as trivial (I've never so much as touched a 60D, so I can't compare that). The 5DII is c. a quarter of an inch wider, but in other dimensions the differences are less than that. They do feel different, though, partly because the 6D is lighter, and partly because its contours are a bit different - they taper differently and the grip on the 6D is deeper but narrower (for me that makes it even easier to carry by the grip than the 5DII). The 5DIII (I don't own one but have rented it) looks and feels much the same as the 5DII. Which - if any - feels better is, of course, entirely subjective; I like the feel of all of these FF contestants, but that's just me.


----------



## sdsr (Feb 9, 2013)

I thought we didn't like DXO here 

Seriously, I'm sure most of us wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them.
[/quote]

That's probably true (and it's also probably true if you toss the Nikon D600 into the mix as well). And because it's true, and because image quality is ultimately what matters most (well, to some of us, anyway), that says a lot for the 6D. If the images you end up with look essentially the same (though the 6D's may look slightly better at high ISOs and if you go berserk lightening shadows), the question becomes whether the additional features of the 5DIII are as significant as the difference in price; and whether they are depends on what you shoot and your preferences in doing so. They aren't for me - the superiority of the 6D's center focus point over the 5DIII's (not to mention the D600's) in very low light is something I often benefit from, whereas the superiority of the 5DIIIs peripheral focus points isn't something I would notice (and even on the 5DIII the focus points are still lumped together in a rather small proportion of the viewfinder). None of the 5DIII's other advantages matter to me at all. For others, though, the 5DIII would obviously be the better choice (and if I end up deciding I want to use a camera differently, it might well be better for me, too). We're lucky to have both to choose from, especially given the quality of the photos the cheaper one lets you make....


----------



## Radiating (Feb 9, 2013)

sdsr said:


> Radiating said:
> 
> 
> > Just noticed this in your review. You're perpetuating the myth that the 6D has less high ISO noise than the 5D3. This is simply not true. It's an optical illusion. The 6D has less color noise but more grain. Meaning that they actually will have identical levels of noise, as shown by tests, they just require different noise reduction settings. The 5D Mark III is just uglier unprocessed leading people to falsley conclude that it has less noise.
> ...



Not really, you can change the appearance of noise using noise reduction, what really matters is the underlying signal to noise ratio, which is all but identical between the two cameras.


----------



## ThuiQuaDayNe (Feb 9, 2013)

This thread reminds me of Porsche Boxster vs 911 owners:

Boxster Owner (6D):
1. It's lighter due to use of high grade polymers.
2. More nimble easier to handle
3. It's convertible so I see better, especially in the dark (high ISO)
4. Easier on the wallet, cost less, better value
5. This car fits ME perfectly! I love it!
6. Most important of them all, I don't need all that features

911 Owner (5D3):
1. "No comment"

911 Turbo (1DX) Owner:
1. While slapping his hand on the forehead: "Damn rookie, must be his first sports car (aka to FF)"


----------



## Robert Welch (Feb 9, 2013)

I have owned the 5D3 since it first came out (got the first one delivered to the local dealer), and recently acquired a 6D as a 2nd camera (well, actually as a 7th camera, as I also have 1D3, 2 @ 7D, 40D & 30D). I appreciate the 5D3 as the best Canon I've owned to date (though I still really love the 1D3, but it's just older tech at this point), but the 6D is an impressive camera, and I can tell that I will enjoy using it very much. I need more time with it to really determine when I will use it most, but there will be times I'll pick it up instead of the 5D3. There is something to be said for it's simplicity and compactness, these are 'features' that, though they are about things that are not there (extra weight & additional controls, etc.), are helpful in increased nimbleness and in some ways improved handling. Sure the 5D3 has more controls and features, but the 6D has a nice consolidation of features and controls that make it an efficient and effective tool for some photographic situations. It's not as versatile as the 5D3, but for a lot of photographers it will be just as effective. I'm not even taking the GPS & WiFi into consideration here, those are additional features that in my mind put an already good camera over the top into the category of excellent camera. Really, there are only a few features that I find make the 5D3 a truly superior camera, and at a $1k premium, it is debatable which is the better buy. It depends on if things like the AF flexibility and dual cards are worth the extra money for you. Beyond those two features, I find it largely a toss up between the two cameras, as the other differences are rather minor.


----------



## serendipidy (Feb 9, 2013)

ThuiQuaDayNe said:


> This thread reminds me of Porsche Boxster vs 911 owners:
> 
> Boxster Owner (6D):
> 1. It's lighter due to use of high grade polymers.
> ...



LOL...clever analogy


----------



## kbmelb (Feb 9, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> kbmelb said:
> 
> 
> > The 6D sounds like a great camera and that is a great review, but I prefer the 5D3 for the AF points, larger body, dual cards, multi controller joystick (especially on the grip) and most ergonomics in general.
> ...



No doubt. I considered a 6D when I upgraded my second camera. Unfortunately though I shoot a lot in a lot of dark club environments with colored LED lights. So I am usually underexposing backgrounds and need the flash to fire dead on every time. While doing this I am almost always using the outer AF points with spot metering. Since the 1Dx (would love to have) was well out of my range I chose to go with a 1Ds3. I picked it up for close to the $$ of a 6D. It is perfect since I'm underexposing backgrounds I'm usually under ISO 1600. For years a 1Ds2 was my go to in these environments (since the 5D2's AF and metering were so bad) so the mk3 is really kicking it.


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 9, 2013)

But I want to be a 911 GT3 RS owner, which camera do I choose? All of them, since I have loads of disposable income? A fireproof one to go along with my fireproof race suit? :


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 9, 2013)

6D ? 5D Mkiii ? 

Blah - they're both toys compared with a 1Dx.


----------



## pedro (Feb 9, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> kbmelb said:
> 
> 
> > The 6D sounds like a great camera and that is a great review, but I prefer the 5D3 for the AF points, larger body, dual cards, multi controller joystick (especially on the grip) and most ergonomics in general.
> ...



I purchased the 5D3 last August. Still paid the premium, but as it was a brick and mortar store I didn't mind to support them. Coming from a 30D it was worth even that. Definitely saving up for a 16-35 instead of waiting for the 14-24 fantomas ;-) Just tested the 5D3 one night this week with the 50 f/1.4 wide open @ ISO 20k out in a soft snow storm. AF (I am using center point only) was incredibely snappy and accurate. Although lights were blurred a bit due to aperture. In comparison to a 30D the high ISOs are all I ever dreamed of. And I dare to say at its price tag it is the most versatile all round cam for serious amateurs and pro's who do not go for the 1Dx.*As a high ISO geek I would have liked it to have the same MP count as the 6D or even as low as the 1Dx. But Canon won't eat into their PJ flagship.* Recently took a picture of my cat at ISO 51k in an almost dark room: 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guatitamasluz/8370478680/#in/photostream
and here's another low light pic at ISO 25k
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guatitamasluz/8418826633/#in/photostream
No NR applied.
*The 6D might even slightly surpass these in IQ due to the lower MP count and a new sensor.* 8)
Cheers, Pedro.


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 9, 2013)

Dustin, not read your review yet, but I will.

On lenses, have you ever tried the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8? In case you're not familiar, it's a full frame lens.


----------



## pedro (Feb 9, 2013)

CarlTN, Dustin: Here's a review of it at photozone.de (german site in english)
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/595-tokina162828eosff

*To make it short, here are their conclusions:*

*Verdict*

The Tokina AF 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro SD FX is a high-performance ultra-wide zoom lens that gives the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 USM L II a run for the money - but it's not a lens without flaws. Its primary weakness is corner softness at f/2.8 but that's not unheard of in this class anyway. However, the center quality is great and the borders are generally sharp as well. The corners start to catch up at f/4 and they're very good from f/5.6 onward. Vignetting is, of course, visible at f/2.8, specifically at 16mm but the issue is better controlled than average. Lateral CAs, an old Tokina disease actually, are modest and not overly field-relevant when stopped down a little bit. Typical for such lens it shows some barrel distortions but they're, again, comparatively moderate even at the very wide end of the range. Technically the Tokina is superior to the current Canon EF zoom lenses in basically all the analysed image aspects!

Unfortunately there may be a hair spoiling the (optical) soup here - quality control. As mentioned we purchased three lens samples for testing, two in Nikon and one in Canon mount, and all three showed some centering issues. The initial Nikon variant was so poor that we had to cancel the testing procedure. We'd like to urge the manufacturers to take lens centering (alignment) more seriously - just a good or possibly even great base-design is simply not enough without proper manufacturing. We are pretty sure that consumers, especially in the mid-to-high end market, would be happily willing to pay a little more for better quality control. Especially ultra-wide and standard lenses show more outliers than desirable - not only among Tokinas but across the manufacturers (e.g. recently we tested 3 (three!) Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 in Nikon mount without success). We are probably seeing negative outliers in excess of 25%(!) in this segment which is, frankly, embarrassing and unacceptable!

That all said we'd like to end this review with some more positive aspects. The (outer) build quality of the Tokina is on a very high level. The lens body is only based on tightly assembled, high quality plastics rather than the "duraluminium" finish used in previous AT-X lenses. However, the quality is still up to pro standards with the exception of the missing weather sealing. Tokina has improved the AF quite a bit - it doesn't really operate "silently" as promised but it's both fast and accurate in phase-detection AF mode. Some users may not like the huge, bulb-like front element which prohibits the use of front filters. However, it seems as if only this design approach solves the performance issues that are usually associated with ultra-wide angle lenses. So setting aside potential sample variations the Tokina is definitely worth a deeper look!


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 9, 2013)

Dustin, not trying to hijack your thread, honest! I just want to reply to Pedro, and elaborate a bit.

Pedro, thanks very much! I do like Photozone a lot. I presume you own the Tokina? 

Photozone's review convinced me to try the (Cosina) Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 (Nikon mount), about a year and a half ago. I bought a Canon adapter, and couldn't be happier (the adaptor's fit is of lesser quality but I made it work). I seriously think it is the sharpest 50mm lens in existence, although it has very noticeable longitudinal CA (bokeh fringing) at the wider f/stop end (which would likely count against its ultimate sharpness for many...not so much for me because I see what I see at 100% on the screen). Lateral CA is minimal, however. 

I just can't believe how sharp it is on my crop camera. I believe it's significantly sharper than the 85 f/1.2L toward the wider end (I rented one once), and falls to almost as sharp by f/5.6 (which is saying something). It retains the sharpness to the extreme corners...wide open (again, on my crop camera). The Voigtlander also has no vignetting on the crop camera, wide open (I'm sure it has some on a full frame). By stark contrast, the 85 f1/.2, had very severe vignetting wider than f/2, on my crop camera. The adapter has a focus-confirm chip, it lights up my AF, and not only does it work...but it's as accurate as it could be (a lot more accurate than my eye/viewfinder interface is).

The fit, feel, and metal finish, seem close if not identical to Zeiss. Zeiss are also made in Japan now, or at least the ones I've rented are (most of you probably know this, just stating it for clarification).

I have no idea if it is as sharp as the new Canon 24-70 f/2.8 ii zoom, at 50mm. (The Voigtlander is spec'd at 58mm, but in reality I think it's more like 54mm. It also effectively magnifies the image a lot at the closest focus distance, so it's more like a 65mm up close.) One thing is certain: No one in the world would ever test and compare them, and even if they did, they would never admit the Voigtlander has similar sharpness. (I mention the Canon zoom because recently it has been tested to exceed the sharpness of the Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro Planar...which previously was supposedly the sharpest 50mm lens.) If this Voigtlander had Canon's name on it and a red stripe, then maybe it would get compared in an honest way.

As for the bokeh, no it isn't perfect, a bit far from it. But it's also quite good...a bit of the ring-highlight effect, not all that noticable usually. It wouldn't compare to the 50 mm f/1.2L, but then, what does? Certainly the 50 1.2 is about as sharp as a baby's bottom...as in...it's soft.


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 9, 2013)

There is another reason for choosing the 6D over the 5D mkiii if you don't need AF and speed performance, and that's the screen used in the viewfinder.

With the 5D mkiii Canon moved to using a fixed screen with LCD overlay, similar to the 7D and what Nikon have been using for some time. For many photographic applications this just doesn't matter. The type of screen used - I think it was originally patented by Minolta - gives an artificially brighter image at 2.8 and brighter, so for many applications this is a benefit.

However for me, you can't beat the traditional ground glass type screen that get brighter with the faster lenses. It's brighter, crisper and depth of field is easier to read. The 6D uses the same interchangeable screens as the mkii, and has no LCD overlay. 

So you can fit a "manual focus" screen and see the view through your f2 - 1.2 lens as it really is. For me that is the reason that when I come to change the mkii I will probably go for the 6D - if I can cope this the aesthetics of the polymer top plate


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 9, 2013)

Radiating said:


> When you do that, you'll find what every other qualified reviewer has said, the 6D has identical level of noise to the 5D Mark III. Anyone who claims otherwise is jumping to conclusions.



So reviewers saying otherwise aren't qualified :-> ?

Personally I downloaded multiple 5d3/6d raw samples and had a look in LR, and imho like the recent traumflieger.de review the 6d has less chroma noise (i.e. more forced nr) but a little less sharpness, both facts probably are connected. So after downsizing the 5d3 images it's basically a wash, tough the 6d at original res maybe has up 1/3 stop less iso noise simply due to lower pixel density and Canon might have done some other minor tweaks.



TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Here is the link to my website where I shared my findings: http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/02/why-i-chose-a-canon-eos-6d-over-a-5d-mkiii/



Thanks for all your posts and the blog, this is really helpful  ... for people deciding between the similar priced 5d2 & 6d here's the list of improvements (also see http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11309.45 for a more general comparison):


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


----------



## pedro (Feb 9, 2013)

@Carl, Dustin: Don't want to hijack that thread either. 
But no, I don't have the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8. The risk of getting a "lemon" according to photozone kept from buying. Therefore I'll go for a 16-35 classic WA. Although, it doesn't get the best verdict quality/pricewise by photozone. 

*Verdict*

The Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 USM L II may not be the greatest lens around in absolute terms but it delivers regarding its primary purpose - a very good performance at its ultra-wide to wide settings (16-26mm) from about f/4 onwards. This isn't all that simple as we've seen during the test of the EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L. On the downside the lens is rather mediocre at 35mm although still perfectly fine at medium apertures. A major weakness is the amount of vignetting at f/2.8 especially at 16mm but to be fair this is a general problem in this lens class when using a full format DSLR. The Canon lens suffers also from a typical degree of barrel distortions at 16mm whereas it's only a minor problem from 20-35mm. Lateral CAs are very well controlled throughout the range. The bokeh (the quality of the out-of-focus blur) could be better but, again, few ultra-wides are really good here anyway. Flare wasn't a big issue during our field tests. The build quality of the lens is exceptional and the AF speed and accuracy is on a very high level. All-in-all a good offer although it will not knock your socks off.


http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/435-canon_1635_28_5d

BUT: you are able to mount a 10 ND filter to it and that is the icing on the cake for me. And yes, you'll get a 16-35 at a decent aperture, all in all as up to "five" lenses in one: 16, 20, 24, 28, 35. That's not bad, even at f/2.8 8) Online pice tag over here: US $ 1400.00

*Whatever may happen to Canons body line up related to a rumored high MP 5DX, I could imagine to opt for a 6D II in case they screw the 5Ds towards 36+MP !*


----------



## bholliman (Feb 9, 2013)

Great review Dustin. You effectively articulated the reasons why the 6D is excellent purchase option for many photographers.


----------



## Tara Copp (Feb 9, 2013)

Dustin, 
I just wanted to say thank you for writing such a comprehensive review. I have been overthinking which body to purchase. I hunted around for a review like yours to help me get more context. I actually sold my 5DM2 & 5D to make room for Canon's 2012 bodies for a couple of additional reasons - I sometimes feel like all these technological advances actually get in the way of composing a beautiful shot, because the process of capture can be affected by so many more variables than whether you have composed and lit the shot correctly -- i.e., did you hit the right sequence of buttons on each different camera body/strobe set up, and make sure you did not accidentally switch your 600rts to optical from radio, etc  So the idea of getting to control all my strobes in group mode from the back of my camera, and possibly having two identical bodies, is really attractive. Second, I was dismayed that my keeper rate with the 5DM2 actually got worse, when I expected/hoped for the opposite. In shallow DOF, low light situations, (using Canon's 50 mm 1.4) no tripod, real-world moving subjects, the M2 missed more often than I thought was acceptable. 
So .. enter the MKIII/6D debate. I wondered if getting Canon's additional AF points in the MkIII would improve my keeper rate. At weddings, I like to drag the shutter and freeze action with a reduced power flash to keep everything natural, and keep the camera on center AF, although lately I've been experimenting with the "all/any" AF points option to see if that would make a difference. Based on your experience (and asking for input from any other 6D users out there) is the improved center AF point enough on the 6D enough to make up for the gap in other cross sensor points compared to the MKIII? I primarily shoot weddings and events. 
Thank you! Tara


----------



## tphillips63 (Feb 9, 2013)

Dustin,

Another thanks for a review with real world implications. I wanted a FF and at the time it was only 5D Mk II or III, so I bought the Mk III, simply because there was no other choice I felt would fit my wants list. I have no regrets on the Mk III but I feel reviews like yours will help others make a better informed decision.

PS.
I really like the flying superman shots, it came across immediately what your vision was. A friend of mine is also a semi-pro, he has the eye, like you do, and I always encourage him to do more. Thankfully he has is getting more and more paid opportunities.


----------



## zim (Feb 9, 2013)

Thank you for the review Dustin I'm struggling to disagree with any of that and to quote Tara I too _"have been over thinking which body to purchase."_

Anyone familiar with this set of comparisons? I’m looking at differences between the 5D3 and 6D and would like to know if these pics are valid i.e. not processed in some way or fixed to benefit one over the other.

http://www.etherpilot.com/photo/test/misc/6d_5d3_d600_colfix.jpg


----------



## Dylan777 (Feb 9, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> 6D ? 5D Mkiii ?
> 
> Blah - they're both toys compared with a 1Dx.



The tittle of this topic is "Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII"


----------



## TonyMM (Feb 9, 2013)

I recently pulled the plug and bought a 6D - entering the FF world for the first time from Rebel Land. I had the cash to buy either the 6D or MK3 and spent quite a bit of time evaluating and researching both. Since all my glass is Canon (50/50 L/nonL), I didn't consider Nikon. I'm an advanced hobbyist (being generous ?) and don't play for pay or do fast action sports or birding. I enjoy using Lightroom and OnOne software on Raw photos to satisfy my desire for images that represent what I was feeling and seeing when I took the shots.

My primary decision triggers for the 6D were the lighter weight, familiar control set, ergonomics, simpler set of functionality (I don't need many of the higher end functions and liked the Q button) and the high ISO performance with arguably equivalent IQ. The GPS and WiFi functionality were bonus features I will use. With this set of Pluses, it was a no-brainer for me - I couldn't justify the extra $$ for the MK3 (the Boxster will suit me just fine for now, thank you !). I'm enjoying shooting with this camera and haven't looked back.

Tony M


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 9, 2013)

Thanks to all of you who have given the nice comments regarding the review/analysis. And thank you to all the others who may not agree with my conclusions that have taken them in the spirit they were given and not turned this thread into a war. I try to be careful with my money, and I know that many of you are the same. I do believe that for many people who do not need the advanced functionality of the 5D3 they will find the 6D to be an excellent, competent camera. I have not heard of many disappointed users yet.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 9, 2013)

Tara Copp said:


> Dustin,
> I just wanted to say thank you for writing such a comprehensive review. I have been overthinking which body to purchase. I hunted around for a review like yours to help me get more context. I actually sold my 5DM2 & 5D to make room for Canon's 2012 bodies for a couple of additional reasons - I sometimes feel like all these technological advances actually get in the way of composing a beautiful shot, because the process of capture can be affected by so many more variables than whether you have composed and lit the shot correctly -- i.e., did you hit the right sequence of buttons on each different camera body/strobe set up, and make sure you did not accidentally switch your 600rts to optical from radio, etc  So the idea of getting to control all my strobes in group mode from the back of my camera, and possibly having two identical bodies, is really attractive. Second, I was dismayed that my keeper rate with the 5DM2 actually got worse, when I expected/hoped for the opposite. In shallow DOF, low light situations, (using Canon's 50 mm 1.4) no tripod, real-world moving subjects, the M2 missed more often than I thought was acceptable.
> So .. enter the MKIII/6D debate. I wondered if getting Canon's additional AF points in the MkIII would improve my keeper rate. At weddings, I like to drag the shutter and freeze action with a reduced power flash to keep everything natural, and keep the camera on center AF, although lately I've been experimenting with the "all/any" AF points option to see if that would make a difference. Based on your experience (and asking for input from any other 6D users out there) is the improved center AF point enough on the 6D enough to make up for the gap in other cross sensor points compared to the MKIII? I primarily shoot weddings and events.
> Thank you! Tara



Tara, the 5D3 has one of the best AF systems on the market. Will it improve your accuracy over the 5D2? Without question. Will the 6D? I have found the answer to be yes. I guess the bigger question has to do with how much time you spend on the outer points in your normal workflow. If you are doing a lot of outer point work, while the 6D is better than the 5D2 in that regard, the 5D3 will be better


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 9, 2013)

tphillips63 said:


> Dustin,
> 
> Another thanks for a review with real world implications. I wanted a FF and at the time it was only 5D Mk II or III, so I bought the Mk III, simply because there was no other choice I felt would fit my wants list. I have no regrets on the Mk III but I feel reviews like yours will help others make a better informed decision.
> 
> ...



Thanks a lot. I doubt that many 5D3 users will be selling their 5D3's to buy a 6D ;D But, I do think that there will be those who are looking for a camera body that will find reviews like this helpful in feeling a little more informed about making a decision.

P.S. Thanks for the kind words about the "superman" takes. I had been wanting to do a levitation theme, and started getting this concept in mind with the split lighting to make it a more cinematic/dramatic piece.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 9, 2013)

zim said:


> Thank you for the review Dustin I'm struggling to disagree with any of that and to quote Tara I too _"have been over thinking which body to purchase."_
> 
> Anyone familiar with this set of comparisons? I’m looking at differences between the 5D3 and 6D and would like to know if these pics are valid i.e. not processed in some way or fixed to benefit one over the other.
> 
> http://www.etherpilot.com/photo/test/misc/6d_5d3_d600_colfix.jpg



I don't think that I would make the decision based on image quality - either of these will produce stunning images. Part of the point that I am making is that spending the extra money will not improve your still image quality. The more advanced AF of the 5D3 might improve the KIND of images you can make (if you are shooting sports or birds), but, like some of the images I submitted, the 6D might also give you some other creative options because of being able to control the camera remotely. I got the 6D the day after I had been out shooting long exposures in -35F/-37C weather with my 5D2. I realized that if I had the 6D, I could have controlled those same exposures from my iPad while sitting in the car. Now that didn't sound so bad!!

I think I would make the decision based more on the feature set. What kind of photography are you going to do? Which camera offers the feature set that you need?


----------



## reliable.guy (Feb 9, 2013)

Thanks for the great review. Your post has helped me make my mind on buying the 6D. I've been waiting and hoping too long that the 7DII would be announced soon (I currently own a 7D), but that doesn't look likely. Not that I intend on using the 6D for shots that I take with the 7D, but I've been using my 7D for 3 years and need an "upgrade" .


----------



## Tara Copp (Feb 9, 2013)

I'm happy to report that this afternoon I got the 6D  Found a great Craigslist seller, and purchased it for $1700 .. Looking forward to learning it and linking up my 600 RTs!


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 9, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > 6D ? 5D Mkiii ?
> ...



Oooops, someone doesn't have my sense of irony  My point is that the 6 and 5D are actually much closer to each other than many people would like to believe, and Dustin has given a hands on summary of the 6D's strengths. 

For myself, if the 6D was identical to the 5D Mkiii but retained the 6D sensor, AF, size and speed, and they were exactly the same price, I would buy the 6D. I've mentioned in an earlier post much preferring the non LCD overlay screen. 

When you look at it this way the price of the 6D makes it better value - for me.


----------



## zim (Feb 10, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > Thank you for the review Dustin I'm struggling to disagree with any of that and to quote Tara I too _"have been over thinking which body to purchase."_
> ...



I agree Dustin the 5d3 is a fantastic camera but totalling up the features *I* would like with my photo needs especially for this year (special year) I'm pretty well settled on the 6D feature list it also gives me much more head room to get a couple of L lenses. Your review really did help to consolidate this though so thanks again. The question about the link was a throw away really after all if the 6D does actually have measurably better performance like that page suggests then all the better! Of course it doesn't mean that the 5D3 isn't a better overall camera.

Regards


----------



## joshmurrah (Feb 11, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> joshmurrah said:
> 
> 
> > The 6D has better IQ/DR than a 5D3?? Citation?
> ...



Man it's been a day or two and these various threads have BLOWN UP since then.

Just wanted to say thanks for the citations, and the petapixel article was especially illuminating (pun)... the PP article really shows how much we're splitting hairs versus the 5D2 tho. 

I believe, as I have seen it said elsewhere, that there's a LOT more than the sensor when choosing the camera, and the 5D3 is still worth the $1k premium for me, especially since I'm replacing a 7D (higher FPS, more/better AF points).


----------



## john27rg (Feb 11, 2013)

For me it's simple. Price. I'm a hobbyist and I'm not (yet??) good enough to exploit any technical differences between 5DIII & 6D. I wanted to move to Full Frame from an entry level 1000D that'd I've had for 4 years and learnt a lot with. The GPS & Wifi work for me and are useful, I don't care about a second card slot.

As Helen Sotiriadis (who's a far better photographer than I'll ever be) says in her review of her new 6D:
_this camera has only one card slot but, in all honesty, i don’t miss the second slot. i’ve never had a card fail on me (and i don’t treat them very well) and i’m conscientious about backing up my files as soon as possible, so the probability of losing a shoot is minimal. i also speak from the perspective of not having to shoot once-in-a-lifetime events. i don’t do weddings or christenings to be too nervous about it... still, in previous years, nobody had double slots and they shot these events just fine. if i were to shoot a wedding, i’d span the day’s events over more cards so as not to risk losing too much if a card failed. _


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 11, 2013)

joshmurrah said:


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



I think you will be pleased with the 5D3 - it is the more feature rich camera and does have a superior AF system. As you will find from others that responded in this thread (and to me personally), the thought of getting equal or marginally superior image quality from a camera with a much lower price tag edges them towards the 6D. I think that we are fortunate as Canon users to have two very competent models to choose from.


----------



## joshmurrah (Feb 12, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I think that we are fortunate as Canon users to have two very competent models to choose from.



Truer words have never spoken, it's good times.

If Japan is successful in deflating the Yen, it'll be even better!!


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 15, 2013)

I'm really enjoying the 6D as a landscape model. The dynamic range and slightly smoother color have given me a lot of options in shooting. I've been uploading a series to Flickr all from the 6D. Here's the one I put up today:




Winter's Splendor #5 - Frosted by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 16, 2013)

Here's another:




Winter's Splendor #6 - Sculpted by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 17, 2013)

Here's another winter landscape from the 6D:




Winter's Splendor #7 - Time by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


----------



## insanitybeard (Feb 18, 2013)

Dustin, some fantastic images there! Thanks for posting. Inspirational stuff! What part of the world do you live in?


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 18, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> Dustin, some fantastic images there! Thanks for posting. Inspirational stuff! What part of the world do you live in?



Ontario, Canada

Here's a shot I took this week of a Grey Owl in the woods (6D, 70-300L):




The Grey Owl by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 18, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Ontario, Canada



You're really lucky to have real snowy landscapes there, in Germany (Berlin) most of the winter is rather dull and I'm very hard pressed to find anything remotely interesting that is not grey :-\ ... but nice landscape shots there, though for my personal taste some are a bit too hdr'ish/"postcard"-colorful.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 18, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Ontario, Canada
> ...



We certainly have our grey moments, too. I do a variety of styles, and my personal preference is vivid but realistic. The first one in this series above is almost straight out of camera - it was just a vivid morning. The last one above is about heavy handed as I go with color.


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 18, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I do a variety of styles, and my personal preference is vivid but realistic.



Right, I have my experiences with "realistic" too - esp. if it's an exotic setting back @home nobody will believe you it *really* looked like that, and the blue color in your first shot falls in the category "nearly too nice to be true" - I guess that's what digital signatures on CR2 files are for


----------



## Dylan777 (Feb 18, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Here's another:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



BEAUTIFUL picture


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 18, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another:
> ...



Thank you


----------



## lonelywhitelights (Feb 18, 2013)

The only reason I don't have a 6D right now is because of it's size and weight. Comfort is a big thing for me when shooting and the overall feel of the 6D just doesn't do it for me. Loved your review, though! and some great images. Thanks for sharing! =)


----------



## perperub (Feb 23, 2013)

Excellent review Dustin! Only thing stopping me from getting a 6D is a price drop *hoping* 

Pär


----------



## babiesphotos.ca (Feb 23, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I'm really enjoying the 6D as a landscape model. The dynamic range and slightly smoother color have given me a lot of options in shooting. I've been uploading a series to Flickr all from the 6D. Here's the one I put up today:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dude, I want to be you when I grow up.
Or neuro...
Mind you, I may very well be older


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 23, 2013)

perperub said:


> Only thing stopping me from getting a 6D is a price drop *hoping*



Would you people stop recommending the 6d and resume bashing it again - this way the price will never go down  ... or only at a rate of 5€/week like now, I hope 6d will reach market saturation in the next time so that there'll be a bigger jump.


----------



## fonts (Feb 23, 2013)

You are making me cry :'( I thought life would be easier by just getting the 5D MIII, but here you go with the review >.< I wanted the better AF but im coming to realize that I will either start practicing landscapes or do portraits and I think the AF is sufficient, plus I can get a nice lens with it too, and better tripod. Sigh, decisions, decisions.


----------



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

babiesphotos.ca said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > I'm really enjoying the 6D as a landscape model. The dynamic range and slightly smoother color have given me a lot of options in shooting. I've been uploading a series to Flickr all from the 6D. Here's the one I put up today:
> ...



LOL! For the record, I'm 36


----------



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

lonelywhitelights said:


> The only reason I don't have a 6D right now is because of it's size and weight. Comfort is a big thing for me when shooting and the overall feel of the 6D just doesn't do it for me. Loved your review, though! and some great images. Thanks for sharing! =)



Interesting. Size and weight as in you want larger, I'm assuming, as they don't really come lighter in a FF DSLR. The feel of a camera in your hands is a big deal, for sure - I find that is a real plus for me personally with the 6D. I love the grip. Way beyond my 5DMKII. But, I don't have huge hands - somewhere between M and L glove size. Someone with larger hands wouldn't potentially have my comfort level with the 6D.


----------



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

perperub said:


> Excellent review Dustin! Only thing stopping me from getting a 6D is a price drop *hoping*
> 
> Pär



I'm sure it will happen at some point, but I do doubt it will be significant before holiday 2013. Dropping the price too low on the 6D might have the unintended effect of cannibalizing 5DIII sales.


----------



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

fonts said:


> You are making me cry :'( I thought life would be easier by just getting the 5D MIII, but here you go with the review >.< I wanted the better AF but im coming to realize that I will either start practicing landscapes or do portraits and I think the AF is sufficient, plus I can get a nice lens with it too, and better tripod. Sigh, decisions, decisions.



Sorry to muddy the waters. I think it really comes down to two things: 1) your style of photography and whether or not you actually need the better AF of the 5DIII and 2) how much money you want to spend, or, rather, if you want to spend it all on a camera body or get a body and lens or two.


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 23, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> fonts said:
> 
> 
> > I wanted the better AF but im coming to realize that I will either start practicing landscapes or do portraits and I think the AF is sufficient, plus I can get a nice lens with it too, and better tripod. Sigh, decisions, decisions.
> ...



Esp. reading Dustin's real world review and posts here I came the conclusion that I'll go with better/more non-body gear, I've put the 6d->5d3 difference in a 17-40L, books, large cpl/nd filters and flash accessories like diffusers and a bracket.

The 5d3 is very nice and the af enables shooting my 60d or 6d cannot do, but it's also only a camera after all and for most shooting styles the photog and the lenses make the difference. Plus I've seen how much value a camera body like the 5d looses quckly, so I'm definitely not willing to pay €3000 for a camera unless I would have full amortization with more/better paid contracts.


----------



## perperub (Feb 23, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> perperub said:
> 
> 
> > Excellent review Dustin! Only thing stopping me from getting a 6D is a price drop *hoping*
> ...


I see. What holiday? What does your "holiday" mean for us non - North Americans?


----------



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

perperub said:


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



Sorry - I was referring to the traditional end of the year holiday season for North Americans - essentially November and December.


----------



## perperub (Feb 23, 2013)

No worries Dustin! I hope you are wrong!


----------



## perperub (Feb 25, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> perperub said:
> 
> 
> > Excellent review Dustin! Only thing stopping me from getting a 6D is a price drop *hoping*
> ...


I might just got lucky!  The price here in Sweden just went down to equivalent of $2.471 tonight at one of the retailer. The offer is valid throughout this week. I might take the chance and pull the trigger...

Pär


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 26, 2013)

perperub said:


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



Good for you! I hope it works out. I am attaching a shot I took today at ISO 4000. I shot RAW, but have added no noise reduction. This is straight out of camera through my standard profile for the 70-300L. I don't think my 60D looked this good at ISO 800. The attachment is 2000px on the long end so that those of you who want to examine it a little closer.

P.S. I finally have my 70-300L dialed in where I am happy with it at infinity. I found that AFMA at normal distance didn't work for past 40 feet to my standard. I am happy that a close shot like this at 300mm still looks sharp, as I am optimized at the tele end for longer range.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Feb 26, 2013)

Here's a 30 second long exposure shot (some of the first LE that I have done with the 6D). It has a texture layer added, obviously:




Northern Desert by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


----------



## brattymesler (Mar 11, 2013)

One of the other things I love about this camera is just how much detail the sensor can resolve with the right lens. This is a 100% crop at 70mm from the new 24-70 (and at f/2.8! which speaks to the lens). I know that the lens plays a part in it, but the way the camera puts it together is astounding. 

By the way, this is shot from 1.2 miles away. It's an incredibly smooth and detailed rendering by the sensor to the point where you can almost see the individual bricks. It's a brilliant sensor.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Mar 11, 2013)

brattymesler said:


> One of the other things I love about this camera is just how much detail the sensor can resolve with the right lens. This is a 100% crop at 70mm from the new 24-70 (and at f/2.8! which speaks to the lens). I know that the lens plays a part in it, but the way the camera puts it together is astounding.
> 
> By the way, this is shot from 1.2 miles away. It's an incredibly smooth and detailed rendering by the sensor to the point where you can almost see the individual bricks. It's a brilliant sensor.



I'm sure that is a great lens/camera combo. I'm currently on vacation carrying the 6D with the Tamron 24-70 VC and the Canon 70-300L in a medium sling bag. So far it (along with a few polarizing filters) seems to be a great travel combination. I haven't review images on a screen yet, but I'm very pleased with my IQ from the back LCD. I'll post a few once I have returned


----------



## grahamclarkphoto (Mar 12, 2013)

I have both the Canon EOS 5D Mark III and the Canon EOS 6D, in addition to a Nikon D700 and D800. 

It's different for everyone of course, however this is my experience (and review) with the Canon EOS 6D

















Graham


----------



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

Excellent review, Graham. I enjoyed reading it and you had some great images there. I was particularly pleased to read your conclusions regarding weathersealing - some have tried to suggest that the 6D was underpowered in that area, but that is not my impression. Keep up the good work!


----------



## grahamclarkphoto (Mar 12, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Excellent review, Graham. I enjoyed reading it and you had some great images there. I was particularly pleased to read your conclusions regarding weathersealing - some have tried to suggest that the 6D was underpowered in that area, but that is not my impression. Keep up the good work!



Hello Dustin,

The 6D certainly has a small size and lightness, which gives the impression of a lack of weathersealing, but on close inspection the sponge material appears the same as the rest!

Graham


----------



## RGF (Mar 22, 2013)

Menace said:


> Hey, what matters is that you are happy with your choice and the 6d does what you need it for.
> 
> Happy shooting



Since the price is not the same, then each person needs to decide the "value" of the lens. I think of value as what you get divided by what you pay. Since everyone values features differently (at over time will change their importance) and cost is total person, value is an individual decision.

Glad you like the camera. I bought my 5D M3 shortly after it was introduced. If I had a choice of the 5D M3 or 6D not sure how I would have decided.


----------



## CarlTN (May 8, 2013)

To all those who bought a 6D and enjoy it, congratulations, I do as well!

Apologies to Dustin, still have not read your review, but plan to. No doubt you could have reached similar conclusions.

Now that I have around 3500 shutter actuations on my 6D, I will just state simply, the reasons I chose a 6D over 5D3:

1) Price.

2) I decided even if the resale value of the 6D declined more of a percentage than the 5D3, relative to their lowest street prices for new units (which may or may not ever be the case, time will tell)...that it would still be almost inconsequential, given the extra $1k or so needed to buy the 5D3. If there is a point in the future where you would lose more dollars in buying a 6D and holding/using it for say 2 or 3 years...than the dollars you would lose over that time if buying a 5D3...I can't see it. The difference isn't all that much, but the advantage may be with the 6D here. From a dollars and cents standpoint, I suppose the more difficult choice, would be between buying a used 5D3, or a new 6D...if you are inclined to buy a used body. Refurb camera body prices are usually a bit too close to the new price, for my taste. But not always.

3) The reviews looked like the image quality between the two, was very similar at all ISO's.

4) So I tried my cousin's 5D3, and then edited several of his RAW files, both on his computer, and on mine. He even produced a large print of one of his landscapes, that I edited on my computer, shot at low ISO. However, I found that the 5D3 has very strong, very large grain luminance noise which shows prominently by ISO 4000. I found an adjustment of the luminance NR slider in LR4, needed to be high up at 80, to have any effect on this noise. And when it did, of course huge amounts of detail were erased along with it. So, despite what several reviewers and members on here may have said...at higher ISO, I'm sorry but there IS NO resolution advantage of the 5D3, over the 6D. There might even be a tie...or the 6D might even get the nod...in specific situations. Certainly I will admit that below ISO 2500 or so, the 5D3's resolution advantage becomes easily noticeable. But that resolution, for me is certainly not worth an extra $1k.

By contrast, my 6D doesn't have luminance noise that strong with its grain that large, until ISO 16,000. 4000 vs. 16,000. That's quite a difference! They both have similar amounts of chrominance noise throughout the range, and it is easily managed with noise reduction, until ISO 12,800...where it starts to get more blotchy on both cameras. Basically, when you get in this amount of gain, you learn to do without the nicest color rendition.

5) The 4.5 fps vs 6 fps is not enough of a difference for me, even when shooting sporting or other action situations. The real difference is when you go above 8 fps, in such situations (having rented a 1D4). The 5D3's higher buffer storage would be an advantage, but again…not worth the price difference for most of my usage. Certainly the extra card slot is a 5D3 advantage, as well as its usage of CF cards in the main slot.

6) Yes, the AF of the 5D3, is definitely worth the price difference, but only IF you feel you really need it. I do not. Just some minor tweaks of the 6D's servo AF via the menu, have made the camera responsive enough...that only a handful of my multi-shots have ever come up slightly out of focus. I've even tracked bats in flight at dusk (obviously more than a handful of those wind up a tad soft!). If sports photography is where I made my living...then of course I would buy a 1DX, and have a 5D3 or two as my backup. It's not my primary work. A 5D3, also is definitely not a precursor for birding. The 6D has done a fine job of tracking birds in flight with a 70-200 f/4, as well as my other "non-super-teles". As for tracking things as slow as people walking...it just feels like the 6D is not even under a strain....like it's idling...even in low light in servo mode with either an f/4, or faster lens. Granted, if the people are wearing dark, low contrast clothes, and the lighting is dark...and you don't put an AF point on their face...then that might be asking for trouble. But it would be the same for the 5D3. Its wider AF array with more points, would give it an advantage, but in very low light, that advantage is probably gone.

I guess my main conclusion, is that I can't understand why a wedding photographer (I am not one, but I know there are tons of you on here), would feel the need to use a 5D3 for shooting still shots, over the 6D. Even tracking a bridal bouquet in flight, would be child's play for the 6D's autofocus. If you feel you need the slight pixel resolution advantage at lower ISO, I guess I can understand. If the 5D3 makes better use of a flashgun's focus assist beam in such a situation...in servo AF...than does the 6D...I guess I could also certainly understand that. I have no idea if this is the case, though. Most of what I have seen at weddings, they're using off camera flash with box or diffusor...so not sure if AF assist beam firing even works in that situation (I admit it seems like it might be possible, I just don't know).

So, the only real and practical advantage I see with a 5D3, over the 6D, in a wedding situation…would be the ability to shoot superior video, without the moiré. But for still shots, I fail to see how you’re going to make full use of the 5D3’s AF system, at a wedding. Unless, during a wide angle shot, there is some kind of elaborate group dancing situation, where people are running across in front of the camera from left to right at unpredictable times, while at the same time moving fore and aft (to use the wider AF point array, with all its points activated, and try to lock onto the unpredictable action as it swishes about.) But then, in that situation…you might have the aperture closed enough that it wouldn't matter...the zone technique. Or even more likely, you might just be shooting video with the 5D3, instead of stills. Still shots don’t usually convey dancing as well as video...with sound...


----------



## bholliman (May 8, 2013)

Thanks for sharing your experience and observations Carl. I have never used a 5D3, so can't compare.

I still love my 6D after using it almost daily use for the past six months. My 7D rarely gets out of the camera bag these days. I use the 6D for everything including indoor sports, as its high ISO capabilities outweigh the 7D's AF advantage for me.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 8, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> However, I found that the 5D3 has very strong, very large grain luminance noise which shows prominently by ISO 4000. I found an adjustment of the luminance NR slider in LR4, needed to be high up at 80, to have any effect on this noise. And when it did, of course huge amounts of detail were erased along with it.



Luma NR 80 is indeed absolute overkill, even on very noisy sources I seldom use more than global 30 or any detail is lost - you can apply more nr locally with the brush for gradients.

But to the point: From everything I've read (and that's a lot when deciding what ff to get) the 5d3 and 6d sensors are very similar. The 5d3 has a bit more noise, maybe 1/3 stop, but it has a bit higher resolution and some more sharpness (even better: 5d2...) so if you tune that down to 6d level the differences should be much more minor than what you describe - but feel free to prove different by posting your sample shots.


----------



## crasher8 (May 8, 2013)

I held a 6D, a friends, in my hands for the first time yesterday. Nice but a bit small for my hands. I did like how it was pretty much exactly like a 5D3 and if I didn't have such big mitts I would have gone for one.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 9, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > However, I found that the 5D3 has very strong, very large grain luminance noise which shows prominently by ISO 4000. I found an adjustment of the luminance NR slider in LR4, needed to be high up at 80, to have any effect on this noise. And when it did, of course huge amounts of detail were erased along with it.
> ...



agreed 80 is an insane amount I never use anything like this but at high iso i leave a little noise in anyway since it's more grain like I would guess at iso 4000 i'd only be adding in 30 to 40 luma NR maybe i'd go to 60 at iso 16,000


----------



## CarlTN (May 9, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


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



That was kind of my point. At ISO 4000 on the 6D, 30 to 40 on the luminance slider, essentially gets rid of its luminance noise...at a loss of a very tiny percentage of "resolution". Where with the 5D3's noise, I had to push to 80 to attempt a similar amount of luminance NR. So basically, at 30 to 40 on the slider with the 5D3's file, you still have large coarse grain, which looks the same as it did with the slider at zero. Where the 6D's grain is much smaller and less hard-edged (perhaps less than half the size of the 5D3's), less coarse, and does not interfere with resolution. Then it disappears with the slider at 40, and often is gone enough around 33 that you don't need to go to 40. The grain of the 5D3, is just very large, coarse...and dare I say ugly. 

In addition, I always pay attention to the luminance detail and contrast sliders. If you don't get a good combination of them, then there's no point in using the top luminance NR slider at all. To get maximum detail, the luminance contrast slider needs to never go below 60 (and preferably stay above 80), and the luminance detail slider needs to be between 40 and 70. I've found this to be true no matter what camera the file came from. However, with compact cameras (I've had a few), too often the luminance detail slider needs to be near zero. So there goes all that supposed "detail" from a compact camera and its high megapixels.

Of course in the above, I am editing for detail and noise, with the file viewed at 1:1, or 100%. 

As for what reviews say...I mean, I just read a "review" in one of the British photo magazines (there are a lot of them, big and brash...they all look alike...but they have some nice pictures!)...that matter-of-factly stated that the D600 had less of both types of noise, than the 6D, throughout the range all the way to ISO 25,600. _And yet the sample photos they printed with the article, of a test chart...clearly show the OPPOSITE._ The D600 has MORE of both types...not less...and starting from the middle of the ISO range. Whether or not the D600 resolved more detail, or lines on a chart, at high ISO, is irrelevant...*if those black lines on a white chart....are covered with digital pink puke and grain that looks like dirty clods of hair. * Nobody is going to print a picture like that without reducing the noise...and when you do that...there goes any "resolution" advantage of the D600.

As for resolution...in common practice there just is not much of an advantage, between 5D3 and 6D. Certainly there's more resolution from the D600 at the lower ISO settings. So if resolution at low ISO is all you care about, by all means get a D600 or D800. They blow away the 5D3. Just make sure you are accomplished at achieving high sharpness, and you have the Nikon glass to get there (less of it can than Canon glass). Also, make sure your prints are quite large. If we aren't talking prints larger than 20x30 inches, then a high megapixel camera is absolutely unnecessary...unless all you do is crop your shots to 90%.

So, again, I still say the only reasons to buy the 5D3 over the 6D, are video capability, and the bling factor of a detuned and de-balled 1DX autofocus system. Certainly it has its vital uses, not saying it doesn't. But there is little to no resolution advantage, nor is 4.5 vs 6 fps enough of a multi shot speed advantage...over the 6D.

As for the size of the 6D being too small...my hands are a size 10 glove. I assume this is average manhands. My fingers aren't long enough to feel comfortable on any Nikon f/f body. The shutter release feels like it's 3 inches out in front of the front element of, say a 50mm lens. Of course in reality it is not, it just feels that way. My pinkie to thumb reach, is 9.25 inches. Maybe this is smaller than average hands for a man, I just don't know. When I shake hands with other men, I rarely feel my hands are smaller than theirs. Theirs are usually greasier, haha.

I notice the light weight of the 6D, more than the small size. Even the 70-200 f/4 (non IS) feels front heavy on it, where it felt more balanced on my 50D. But this really can only be an advantage. If you need to balance lenses and/or flash better, you are compelled to use a battery grip (which you should be using anyway...for event-type work). Even though the specs say the 6D is only an ounce or two lighter than the 50D I just sold...it feels even lighter than that. I do prefer the ergonomic feel of the 6D to all other Canon bodies. The buttons feel a tad less mushy than the 7D's and the 5D3's. 

The smaller size than the 5D3, feels just right to me. I can certainly understand if you have large hands, it would be unusable. And again, in my opinion..."Nikon hands" are connected to women with very long, pointy fingers...the Nikon body just does not fit a man's thicker more muscular palms and fingers. So the perfect Nikon shooter would be a slender woman about 6'1 in height...


----------



## CarlTN (May 9, 2013)

One more brief point...regarding video capability. If you need a DSLR to shoot both stills and video, then that's fine. A 5D3 should work well. However, if you're buying a DSLR to give the "videographer" on your team something to use...and few if any still shots are done with it...consider a cinema camera, such as Black Magic. Its price has fallen to around or below the price of the 5D3. Its video capability is far superior. However...if you need the "full frame look" when shooting a video with a fast lens, and you need the widest angle of view from that lens...then again...it looks to me like the 5D3 is your best choice on a cost basis, as of now. I could be wrong.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (May 9, 2013)

I've now sold my 5DII and bought a second 6D. I love the image quality and the operation of the camera. I like the thought of being able to have two identical, responsive bodies when shooting events.


----------



## Sporgon (May 9, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I've now sold my 5DII and bought a second 6D. I love the image quality and the operation of the camera. I like the thought of being able to have two identical, responsive bodies when shooting events.




Well we have now purchased a 6D for Building Panoramics after reading Dustin's ( and others) reviews. Our reasons for choosing it over the 5D mk3 are pretty simple; the stuff we shoot doesn't move ! We were using a mark 1 and 2 previously, and the faithful old mark 1 has gone, so we're now going to be 6D/5D mk2 users. 

We'll post the first proper picture we produce from it on the 6D thread. 

We've also got a deal on the 24-70 f4 IS, after colleagues in the States have been waxing lyrical about it, so we'll soon find out for ourselves if it does out perform the 24-105 in practice.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (May 15, 2013)

Just as a point of information for those who have recently got a 6D or are considering one. One significant difference from the 5D line in terms of operation is the zoom functionality. I found it a little difficult at first, and still on occasion lapse into the other way of trying to magnify. The 6D actually has a good, logical system after you make the mental switch. To magnify, hit the zoom button and then you can use the scroll wheel near the shutter to zoom in and out. It actually is smoother than button mashing, but it is very different from other bodies and takes some mental adjustment.


----------



## BrettS (May 30, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> We've also got a deal on the 24-70 f4 IS, after colleagues in the States have been waxing lyrical about it, so we'll soon find out for ourselves if it does out perform the 24-105 in practice.



Very interested to hear your thoughts on that!


----------



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

How amazing is the High ISO performance on this camera? I love the retention of detail, and the fine, grain-like noise that in many shots is actually an ASSET.

Here's two examples of ISO 25,600. I was shocked to find that I loved the results!




Grandma's Piano by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr




ISO 25600 - No Noise Reduction by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


----------



## CTJohn (Jun 5, 2013)

I'm loving the first month with my 6D, but have one question. Does anyone else think the 6D underexposes more than your previous Canon DSLR? In full daylight, the 6D is awesome, but on extreme closeups (flowers for example) and some indoor shooting, it seems to underexpose more than my several year experience with my 7D.


----------



## tapanit (Jun 5, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Just as a point of information for those who have recently got a 6D or are considering one. One significant difference from the 5D line in terms of operation is the zoom functionality. I found it a little difficult at first, and still on occasion lapse into the other way of trying to magnify. The 6D actually has a good, logical system after you make the mental switch. To magnify, hit the zoom button and then you can use the scroll wheel near the shutter to zoom in and out. It actually is smoother than button mashing, but it is very different from other bodies and takes some mental adjustment.


That's exactly like the way 5Dmk3 behaves, too. The difference isn't between 5D series and 6D but between earlier models vs. both 6D and 5Dmk3.


----------



## bradfordswood (Jun 5, 2013)

Dustin, those last two shots are really great! Do you always set your ISO manually?

I'd be interested to find out what folks are using as the high threshold for Auto ISO on the 6D. I am on a 60D now, and use 800 as my high threshold. Would love a camera I could set to 3200 or 6400 as my high threshold with low noise!


----------



## cayenne (Jun 5, 2013)

bradfordswood said:


> Dustin, those last two shots are really great! Do you always set your ISO manually?
> 
> I'd be interested to find out what folks are using as the high threshold for Auto ISO on the 6D. I am on a 60D now, and use 800 as my high threshold. Would love a camera I could set to 3200 or 6400 as my high threshold with low noise!



Don't *most *people set their ISO manually?

C


----------



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

cayenne said:


> bradfordswood said:
> 
> 
> > Dustin, those last two shots are really great! Do you always set your ISO manually?
> ...



I almost always set ISO manually, but the 6D is the first body that I sometimes set AUTO ISO (I shoot manual almost exclusively). Two reasons: 1) the 6D almost always gets it right, and I do this when I want to hold a certain shutter speed (wildlife or event shooting) and 2) the high ISO performance of the 6D means that I'm not scared to shooting anything up to its normal limit (ISO 25,600) as these shots I posted today show.


----------



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

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > bradfordswood said:
> ...


----------



## MathieuB (Jun 5, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> How amazing is the High ISO performance on this camera? I love the retention of detail, and the fine, grain-like noise that in many shots is actually an ASSET.
> 
> Here's two examples of ISO 25,600. I was shocked to find that I loved the results!
> 
> ...



Those are incredibly clean for ISO 25600, wow. Are these out of camera uncropped or have you done any post-processing to them?


----------



## rh18 (Jun 5, 2013)

Dustin,
I currently have a 60D and would someday like to go full frame but the 5DMIII is way out of my price range. So the 6D is definitely appealing from a price perspective but I have the same list of concerns you mentioned in you blog post - so it was nice to read your views and see the wonderful images you've captured with the 6D. Anyway, since you have (had) a 60D also, can you compare the OUTER points of the 60D to the 6D. I frequently use the outer points and that is a concern to me. Are the 60D outer AF points better since they're cross type?


----------



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

rh18 said:


> Dustin,
> I currently have a 60D and would someday like to go full frame but the 5DMIII is way out of my price range. So the 6D is definitely appealing from a price perspective but I have the same list of concerns you mentioned in you blog post - so it was nice to read your views and see the wonderful images you've captured with the 6D. Anyway, since you have (had) a 60D also, can you compare the OUTER points of the 60D to the 6D. I frequently use the outer points and that is a concern to me. Are the 60D outer AF points better since they're cross type?



I don't recall the outer points working better on the 60D, but I haven't compared them head to head, either. I can say that I use the outer points on the 6D without hesitation. Under most conditions they work perfectly well.


----------



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

MathieuB said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > How amazing is the High ISO performance on this camera? I love the retention of detail, and the fine, grain-like noise that in many shots is actually an ASSET.
> ...



The first shot has had about 1/8th cropped off to give a more flattering perspective. It also has a one click color preset applied in LR, but that affects color only. I have done no additional noise reduction to it. The second shot is uncropped and is only processed by a one click B&W conversion in LR as well as a slight reduction in exposure and highlights. I exposed for his skin, so I needed to lower everything else a hair. Again, no additional noise reduction done. My standard import settings are about an 8 luminance noise and 25 color noise slider in LR. I don't try to eliminate the "grain" because it is nicely uniform and adds to the image. Too much noise reduction comes at the price of a loss of sharpness. I actually think the final look of these images is really clean without noise reduction.


----------



## cayenne (Jun 5, 2013)

rh18 said:


> Dustin,
> I currently have a 60D and would someday like to go full frame but the 5DMIII is way out of my price range. So the 6D is definitely appealing from a price perspective but I have the same list of concerns you mentioned in you blog post - so it was nice to read your views and see the wonderful images you've captured with the 6D. Anyway, since you have (had) a 60D also, can you compare the OUTER points of the 60D to the 6D. I frequently use the outer points and that is a concern to me. Are the 60D outer AF points better since they're cross type?



With the recent price drops...is the 5D3 really that much more expensive these days than the next model down (6D)?

C


----------



## Fotofanten (Jun 5, 2013)

I sold my 5D III and bought a 6D today  I've been using the 5d III for about a year. Here is the reasoning behind my choice:

1. I've been using centre point on the mk III for 95% of the time. Old habits die hard i guess. My previous camera was the original 5D. 
2. I really care about weight and size, as I shoot street, social events and hike a lot in the mountains.
3. Image quality is pretty much the same.
4. I plan to really use the wifi-capabilities (live images on Nexus 10 at weddings + the possibility of staying in the car when shooting auroras + tripping the shutter with my phone for long exposure work).
5. When using flashes, I often use the 622c in combination with HSS. Therefore the 180/th sync speed should not really affect me. 
6. I've growing older and more fond of a slow paced approach to photography.

Time will tell if I made the right choice. I sure hope so!


----------



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

cayenne said:


> rh18 said:
> 
> 
> > Dustin,
> ...



That depends on which zone of the world, but even in North America, even excluding the difference in tax the current price on Amazon is $3299 for the MKIII and $1899 for the 6D, so, yeah, that's about as big a difference as there has always been. That is $1400 (not including the tax difference).


----------



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

Fotofanten said:


> I sold my 5D III and bought a 6D today  I've been using the 5d III for about a year. Here is the reasoning behind my choice:
> 
> 1. I've been using centre point on the mk III for 95% of the time. Old habits die hard i guess. My previous camera was the original 5D.
> 2. I really care about weight and size, as I shoot street, social events and hike a lot in the mountains.
> ...



I haven't heard of a lot of "downgraders". I hope it works out well for you. I am very pleased with my 6D bodies, but I have also not owned a MKIII.


----------



## Fotofanten (Jun 5, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Fotofanten said:
> 
> 
> > I sold my 5D III and bought a 6D today  I've been using the 5d III for about a year. Here is the reasoning behind my choice:
> ...



Thanks Dustin. Had the 6D been announced before I got the mk III then I'm sure I would have waited for the 6D, simply because of how pleased I was with the original 5D. I would be happy to provide an update and share my experiences once I've used the 6D for a few weeks.


----------



## pensive tomato (Jun 5, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I almost always set ISO manually, but the 6D is the first body that I sometimes set AUTO ISO (I shoot manual almost exclusively). Two reasons: 1) the 6D almost always gets it right, and I do this when I want to hold a certain shutter speed (wildlife or event shooting) and 2) the high ISO performance of the 6D means that I'm not scared to shooting anything up to its normal limit (ISO 25,600) as these shots I posted today show.



Dustin,

Thanks for your review back in February, as it was instrumental in my decision to buy a 6D. I'm still astounded by the results I see with high ISO performance coming from a 7D. But I wonder, what settings do you use in your 6Ds regarding long exposure NR and high ISO speed NR?

Thanks again for sharing your views, they've been quite informative!


----------



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

pensive tomato said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > I almost always set ISO manually, but the 6D is the first body that I sometimes set AUTO ISO (I shoot manual almost exclusively). Two reasons: 1) the 6D almost always gets it right, and I do this when I want to hold a certain shutter speed (wildlife or event shooting) and 2) the high ISO performance of the 6D means that I'm not scared to shooting anything up to its normal limit (ISO 25,600) as these shots I posted today show.
> ...



To be honest, neither of those features mean much to me because (if I understand correctly) they are native to JPEG output (the onboard JPEG engine) and have no real bearing on RAW output, which is what I shoot exclusively. But, just for the fun of it, I looked at my settings. I have Long Exp. Noise... turned off. High ISO speed NR is currently on the middle setting.

BTW, I also keep the camera picture style set on "Faithful". It doesn't really affect my still image output (because I shoot RAW). I use the Adobe RGB color space. Why do I even bother to set it on "Faithful"? Short answer is video. I get a nice, neutral look to start with that gives me better latitude for tweaking in post.


----------



## pensive tomato (Jun 5, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> pensive tomato said:
> 
> 
> > Dustin,
> ...



Thanks for sharing your settings. For some reason, I thought long exp. NR affected both JPEGs and RAW files. I went to the manual, but couldn't find a direct answer. Not that it matters in your case, as you set it off in the first place.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 10, 2013)

Here's another High ISO shot. This is 12,800.




Bull Moose Portrait by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr


----------



## wsheldon (Jun 10, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> To be honest, neither of those features mean much to me because (if I understand correctly) they are native to JPEG output (the onboard JPEG engine) and have no real bearing on RAW output, which is what I shoot exclusively. But, just for the fun of it, I looked at my settings. I have Long Exp. Noise... turned off. High ISO speed NR is currently on the middle setting.



I think you're right about High ISO NR, but Long Exp. Noise Reduction is different. The camera records a second dark field image for removing hot pixels before saving the raw.

That said, there are reports that the overall effect is not great, potentially even adding more fine-scale noise in the process (see http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13876.0). I'd leave it off too unless doing astro-photography.

BTW, I got a lot out of your review too -- thanks for sharing your perspective. I'm definitely enjoying my 6D so far.


----------



## Fotofanten (Jun 10, 2013)

^^ That moose shot is impressively clean for ISO 12800!

I have to say, after shooting a thousand frames or so, I am really enjoying my downgrade to the 6D so far. Of all the features they decided to omit, I do no miss a thing. Even the perfectly placed reprogrammable dof-preview button on the mk III which I really came to appreciate has its equivalent on the 6D, only now I have to use my left index finger instead of my right ring finger to push and hold it down for those occations where I need to quickly shift from One Shot to AI Servo. It is slightly more fiddly. I even gave birds in flight a go (gulls and ducks, more parallel to the camera than perpendicular), and AF was spot on using the 100L. I also have the 50L, the 40mm pancake and the 35L, all of which required a little higher AF adjust values than they did on the mk III, using the fully automatic feature in FoCal Plus, though no more than +10, which I find comforting. The centre AF point has been highly accurate and reliable so far, on par with the double cross point on the mk III I would say, at least for casual shooting. I haven't tried anything really fast paced like people running towards me, race cars or jet fighters, and to be honest I don't think I will anytime soon. GPS really does drain the battery, and it is not something I will leave activated just in case it comes in handy. The -3 EV ability is very useful, this camera is truly is a low light low weight monster. Coming from the mk III, the 50L almost feels unbalanced on the 6D. With the pancake attached it feels like the worlds most competent point-and-shoot. 

Wifi is proving useful, and the app is looking promising, though it is still extremely unpolished and needs a heck of a lot of work. I tried Chainfires DSLR Controller app which is far more sophisticated than Canons app offer, but I ran into some trouble and had to give it up temporarily. Using Canons app, I can make images pop up on the tablet 1-2 seconds after the shutter has closed (mind you it is a very reduced size, about 2 megapixels probably). I miss some more advanced options like a well made bulb mode and the ability to export images full size, amongst other things.


----------



## bholliman (Jun 10, 2013)

Funny how the perception of the 6D has changed over the 6 months since it was released. Back in November and December many were critisizing it (before actually using one) based on its specs, calling it a crippled version of the 5D3. And hammering the 6D for its autofocus system and slow frame rate.

Now it's widely regarded as an excellent camera. Perfect for those photographers looking for excellent image quality who don't need a high end AF system. The 6D fits nicely into Canon's DSLR lineup between the 5D3 and 7D.


----------



## leGreve (Jun 10, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Many of you know that I recently acquired a Canon 6D, and I have been asked by multiple posters both in the forum and by email to give my reasons why I made the decision I did. I have wasted far too much time doing just that today ;D
> 
> Here is the link to my website where I shared my findings: http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/02/why-i-chose-a-canon-eos-6d-over-a-5d-mkiii/
> 
> ...



Who are you?


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 10, 2013)

leGreve said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Many of you know that I recently acquired a Canon 6D, and I have been asked by multiple posters both in the forum and by email to give my reasons why I made the decision I did. I have wasted far too much time doing just that today ;D
> ...



Ummm, Dustin Abbott  No one more or less famous...


----------



## MLfan3 (Jun 10, 2013)

the 6D is really really impressive. imho, the 6D and the RX1 are the 2 best lowlight cameras available for now.
I had the D600 but I never liked its poor lowlight AF and terrible AWB , with lots of dust spots on the sensor.
so, while keeping my D800E and lenses , I decided to get a Canon6D with the new 24-70f4LISUSM and I did extensive comparison tests between the A99v(borrowed), the 5D2, the D600, D800E and the6D in extremely lowlight.
the 6D always comes out top in real life lowlight noise comparison and to my eye, the 6D is at least a full stop better than my D600 and 2 stops better than my D800, 5D2 and my friend's A99v, and probably as good as the Sony RX1.

as for the always bashed poor AF system of the 5D2 or the 6d ,I think the 6DAF is really good , more reliable than the AF of the D600 and obviously more efficient AF system than the AF in the 5D2.
it actually nails it every time even in extreme lowlight , where my D600 , 5D2 and my D800E ,etc definitely fail.
so it is not how many AF points it's got but how many usable AF points it's got or how low light it can go with it.

I do not know how good the 5D3 AF has to be but I think the 6D AF is quite good in real life, at least the center point is extremely reliable and sensitive as well.


----------



## bseitz234 (Jun 10, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


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



google must be hard for some, huh?


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 10, 2013)

bseitz234 said:


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



Well, in all fairness, I am in the "reputation building" stage, so I can understand some confusion. That being said, I am the top returns for the name in a typical Google search.


----------



## Shield (Aug 26, 2013)

For me, the choice for the 5d3 is pretty simple.
The CF card allows write speeds fast enough for raw 1920x1080 video.
The 6d has a moire / aliasing issue in video mode.
If I ever shot weddings I'd be too nervous not having dual slots.
6fps *does* make a difference shooting sports. So does the 5d3's larger buffer - I get 30 shots @ 6FPS with a 1000x card.
Little extra resolution can't hurt, and the 5d3's AF system is just ridiculously good.

Having said all that, I really like the 6d. If I didn't have kids in sports or care about video, I'd sell the 5d3 and get a 6d.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Aug 26, 2013)

Shield said:


> For me, the choice for the 5d3 is pretty simple.
> The CF card allows write speeds fast enough for raw 1920x1080 video.
> The 6d has a moire / aliasing issue in video mode.
> If I ever shot weddings I'd be too nervous not having dual slots.
> ...



That's a pretty fair assessment. I think it really boils down to one's shooting style/priorities.


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 26, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Shield said:
> 
> 
> > For me, the choice for the 5d3 is pretty simple.
> ...



Agreed, however, regarding video and the aliasing issue. It's possible ML could help alleviate some of it, if there is ever a RAW video hack for the 6D. Regarding the autofocus...the 6D's works well enough in good light, even for sports. Obviously you pay more for the 5D3's AF sensor and its fast processing. Regarding the 6 fps vs. 4.5....that's an extra 1.5 frames per second. Not much difference...the real advantage here is obviously the buffer (as was mentioned), and the ability to use those pricey 1000x CF cards. Fps differences are more noticeable when you jump to 8 or 10 fps...or 12+.

Regarding "extra resolution"...at higher ISO there is no real advantage here, because the 6D's luminance noise (or lack thereof) absolutely murders the 5D3's. Above ISO 12,800 or so, yes the 5D3 has slightly less chrominance noise...but this noise is still high on both cameras. Given my own experience editing the RAW files of the 5D2, 5D3, 1DX, and 6D....the 6D has the least luminance noise of all of them below ISO 12,800 or so. And luminance noise is what truly robs "detail resolution"...since at these boosted ISO levels, color resolution is already very compromised on all digital sensors (even on "Nikon's"). Fortunately reducing chrominance noise seems to destroy the least amount of detail, such as with Lightroom and Photoshop...at least up to a certain point. 

Canon didn't make the 6D to compete with the 5D3, though...so there really should not be any difficulty choosing between the two. They are clearly meant for different photo/video work, and the one that costs more to produce, and more oriented for pro use, is priced accordingly.


----------



## Shield (Aug 27, 2013)

CarlTN said:


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



How many shots can the 6d get in a burst? 1.5 FPS extra for 5 full seconds means I have at least 7-8 more shots to review and choose from assuming the 6d can do 4.5 for 5 seconds (which I doubt). The sweet thing about all those extra cross type focus points is shooting subjects that aren't dead center in the frame - one doesn't always have time to "focus and recompose". There is raw video for the 6d; you just can't get enough write speed currently to shoot anything near 1920x1080. Still moire and aliasing in video mode though, and I shoot a good deal of video.

It's not any single one reason for ME to choose the 5d3; it's the sum of the parts. I don't lust after other cameras anymore nor do I video (except maybe the Sony FS-700 due to the very high framerate for super slowmo). I don't want you to think I'm in any way putting down the 6d - I'd love to have some of its options as well.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 27, 2013)

Smaller
Lighter
Similar 'IQ'
Satisfactory build
Cheaper


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Aug 27, 2013)

Not a downgrader, but, agt the beginning of the summer I was in search of a backup/secondary body - something to compliment my 5d3. After lots of reading about the 6d, I rented one in April just to see if it could keep up with the mk3. As primarily a wedding shooter, I needed something that would produce good images in low light, I knew that technically the sensor in the 6d could kick butt, but, I was worried about the AF, particularly how the outer points would work. 

I have to say I have been pleasantly surprised by how well the 6d performs in the field. I use it without hesitation. And so far, my clients seem to like what the 6d can do as well. It';s about a 60/40 split in image picks (sometimes 70/30, depends on what lenses I mount and what the circumstances are, IE larger weddings both bodies get more use, smaller ones I favor the mk3 cause there is no need for using both bodies). 

Even in the low light of the reception, with a flash mounted the outer points lock on! (take the flash off and its center point only, so I end up having the 6d be my on cam flash body, and the mk3 handles the off camera flash work because the AF i much better across all the points). 

Yes, I do find situations where the 6d doesn't cut it without some assistance (external constant lighting, flash on camera). But I'd say for close to 85% of what I want to do on a wedding shoot, the 6d handles it quite admirably! 

With that said, I wouldn't downgrade. My mk3 is awesome and does serve me well. But, if the 6d had been released last spring, and I was facing this decision with only a 7d in my bag and a limited budget - I would have no issues making the 6d my main body (until I could snag a mk3). 

Different strokes for different folks though. If you need fps and shoot fast moving subjects, the 6d just isn't the right tool. For my needs though, I have been very impressed with what the 6d can do.


----------



## papa-razzi (Aug 27, 2013)

I just picked up a refurbished 6D direct from Canon for $1,600 USD (it arrives tomorrow). After starting my DSLR journey with an XSi about 5 1/2 years ago, (then traded up for the 7D about 3 years ago), I am finally getting the FF camera.

For me it was a no brainer - roughtly 1,000 reasons (the difference in cost of a 6D vs a 5DIII)

I already own and will keep a 7D, so I won't use the 6D for a sports/action camera. I don't do video, so none of those features matter to me.

I want to do portraits, indoor events (plays, etc.), landscapes, and explore some other creative stuff.

If I wasn't keeping the 7D, it would have been a more difficult decision, and I would have likely gone for the 5DIII (because I'm just not in a position to justify the cost of the 1Dx - but who wouldn't want that puppy)


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 27, 2013)

papa-razzi said:


> I just picked up a refurbished 6D direct from Canon for $1,600 USD (it arrives tomorrow). After starting my DSLR journey with an XSi about 5 1/2 years ago, (then traded up for the 7D about 3 years ago), I am finally getting the FF camera.
> 
> For me it was a no brainer - roughtly 1,000 reasons (the difference in cost of a 6D vs a 5DIII)
> 
> ...



The 1DX is great, but it's a beast. I too had the Xsi 5 years ago... 

Your post is well-reasoned, +1 !


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 27, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Smaller
> Lighter
> Similar 'IQ'
> Satisfactory build
> Cheaper



+1


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 27, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Not a downgrader, but, agt the beginning of the summer I was in search of a backup/secondary body - something to compliment my 5d3. After lots of reading about the 6d, I rented one in April just to see if it could keep up with the mk3. As primarily a wedding shooter, I needed something that would produce good images in low light, I knew that technically the sensor in the 6d could kick butt, but, I was worried about the AF, particularly how the outer points would work.
> 
> I have to say I have been pleasantly surprised by how well the 6d performs in the field. I use it without hesitation. And so far, my clients seem to like what the 6d can do as well. It';s about a 60/40 split in image picks (sometimes 70/30, depends on what lenses I mount and what the circumstances are, IE larger weddings both bodies get more use, smaller ones I favor the mk3 cause there is no need for using both bodies).
> 
> ...



Well said, and it seems to me that most wedding shooters would feel similarly.


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 27, 2013)

Shield said:


> How many shots can the 6d get in a burst? 1.5 FPS extra for 5 full seconds means I have at least 7-8 more shots to review and choose from assuming the 6d can do 4.5 for 5 seconds (which I doubt). The sweet thing about all those extra cross type focus points is shooting subjects that aren't dead center in the frame - one doesn't always have time to "focus and recompose". There is raw video for the 6d; you just can't get enough write speed currently to shoot anything near 1920x1080. Still moire and aliasing in video mode though, and I shoot a good deal of video.
> 
> It's not any single one reason for ME to choose the 5d3; it's the sum of the parts. I don't lust after other cameras anymore nor do I video (except maybe the Sony FS-700 due to the very high framerate for super slowmo). I don't want you to think I'm in any way putting down the 6d - I'd love to have some of its options as well.



Well said, I don't disagree with it (please provide a link of RAW video via the 6D with aliasing and moire...I want to know how bad it looks). "Sweet things" come at a price, and as you said, there are tradeoffs.

As for not being completely 1920x1080...unless the finished video is left unscaled and with a border around it (which it wouldn't be), I'm not sure the lower resolution would reveal itself that much (though obviously moire and aliasing _would be_ noticeable, and often times a deal-breaker...don't get me wrong). But just from the video resolution standpoint alone...I guess it depends on just how much below "full HD" it is. It's all relative. Are the bride and groom, or their family, watching the final resulting video on a front projection screen at least 100 inches diagonal? Or are they watching it on a tv that is 60 inches or smaller, from 10 feet away or more? The latter is the more likely scenario...and unless you shot everything closed to f/14 or smaller, there is a very shallow plane that is making use of that "full HD". That's why cinema cameras with their smaller "super 35" sensors, can generally have a resolution advantage that makes video look more detailed...partly because they aren't using the periphery of the lens' image circle, but mostly because it's easier to get deep focus with a smaller sensor and more moderate f/stops...

I don't know if you have seen the Samsung and Sony 4k video demos...but the Samsung's seems superior to me. Of course it is all shot at infinity focus...and is a time-lapse of cityscapes...to make use of that 4K resolution. If it was shot with the 1DC (or similar "full frame" 4k camera) and with fast aperture lenses, at a wedding...a few pores on people's faces would very momentarily make use of that 4K resolution...the rest of the image would not be focused. I.E., a wedding video is not necessarily a standard-bearer of high resolution video content.


----------



## Shield (Aug 27, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Not a downgrader, but, agt the beginning of the summer I was in search of a backup/secondary body - something to compliment my 5d3. After lots of reading about the 6d, I rented one in April just to see if it could keep up with the mk3. As primarily a wedding shooter, I needed something that would produce good images in low light, I knew that technically the sensor in the 6d could kick butt, but, I was worried about the AF, particularly how the outer points would work.
> 
> I have to say I have been pleasantly surprised by how well the 6d performs in the field. I use it without hesitation. And so far, my clients seem to like what the 6d can do as well. It';s about a 60/40 split in image picks (sometimes 70/30, depends on what lenses I mount and what the circumstances are, IE larger weddings both bodies get more use, smaller ones I favor the mk3 cause there is no need for using both bodies).
> 
> ...



Chuck, a co-worker shot a close friend of his' wedding. He had a single card slot camera, and even remembered to switch memory cards during the middle of the event. When he got home one of the cards could not be read nor could it be recovered - this wasn't an el cheapo Microcenter brand card either; I think it was SandDisk. Anyway their was much anger from the bride's side and I swore that day I'd never shoot a wedding without and instant backup and a 2nd camera body with the same. Which to me makes the 6d a poor choice for a wedding.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Aug 27, 2013)

Shield said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Not a downgrader, but, agt the beginning of the summer I was in search of a backup/secondary body - something to compliment my 5d3. After lots of reading about the 6d, I rented one in April just to see if it could keep up with the mk3. As primarily a wedding shooter, I needed something that would produce good images in low light, I knew that technically the sensor in the 6d could kick butt, but, I was worried about the AF, particularly how the outer points would work.
> ...



That is a bummer. I would not want to be in that situation. Plan as you may, stuff happens. I know of one wedding photographer that had their memory cards from the day in a bag in her car ---guess what happened to that bag...stolen! I had another friend who missed a good portion of the day because she ended up getting into a car accident that day. I personally second shot a wedding for another beginner, and her camera died before the ceremony!!!! She had to use my main body for the day, luckily I had a backup body. So while I agree that you do havet o plan for the worst, you never know what the worst will be - and - at the time of the purchase I could not afford a second 5d3, so it was either grab a 6d or go with one body ---- which would you choose?


----------



## sarakoth (Aug 28, 2013)

What about using the wireless on the 6D to send/backup directly to tablet or PC instead of needing dual slots?

You can also then run cloning software on your laptop or even directly backup to the cloud (like dropbox) on the fly as well.


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 28, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


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



It makes economic sense no doubt, and if the event is so critical, it does look like it pays to have a main body and two backups.

I read, I think it was a review or blog...about the 200 f/2...was a pro sports shooter doing AMA motocross...and his lens was stolen!! Talk about hoping the insurance would pay! At some point it's time to hire bodyguards...


----------



## CarlTN (Aug 28, 2013)

sarakoth said:


> What about using the wireless on the 6D to send/backup directly to tablet or PC instead of needing dual slots?
> 
> You can also then run cloning software on your laptop or even directly backup to the cloud (like dropbox) on the fly as well.



An excellent idea whose time has come!


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Aug 28, 2013)

CarlTN said:


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



All I am trying to say on the matter really is that try as all of us may, you never know what could happen. A card could fail, yes, 2 slots is one way, lower capacity cards so one card loss doesn't kill the day is another - neither matter if they are stolen on the way home, or, instead of a car accident during the day, one at night on the way home, one that involves a drunk driver and not only is all your equipment lost, but your being med evacuated in a helicopter...no amount of dual slots saves that. Lots can happen (hell, I almost got run down in the middle of the street...by another wedding photographer!!!! LOL its a funny story!) and try as we may we can't plan for everything, we can just plan as good as we can with the resources we have. Of course, 2 5d3's would be utterly badass, but - with being very new in the business, and planning a wedding for my own damn self, and moving very soon...yeah, it was either grab a 6d as a backup, or a 5d2 which though it's CF, only has 1 slot, and a lot lesser low light capabilities and AF too...or just run with 1 camera body for more than half the season. It was what I could afford, and I may very well end up with a second mk3 next season, then the 6d could be a true backup. we'll see how things shake out. Either way, I have been eyeing the markets and when the second body was needs...sorry, $2999 +tax and shipping was the cheapest i could find for a mk3 --- that's used too...refurbs for $3100, and yeah the grey market deals pop up, butt hey pop up and disappear very quickly. so, the 6d was the reasonable choice, and it's really not the dog its made out to be.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Aug 28, 2013)

Having dual card slots for instant backup is great, of course, but before we go out of control with paranoia, remember that not much more than a year ago all of the wedding photographers shooting with 5DII (including myself) somehow survived.

The 6D (through wireless - as has been pointed on on this thread) actually has much more flexibility for backup than the 5DII. I shoot weddings with two 6D bodies and have not yet had an issue.


----------



## PVS (Aug 28, 2013)

Never had a CF card die on me, I could easily do just shooting on one CF card without a back-up SD/CF in the same camera.

On the other hand, I had couple of "pro" SD cards which just died for no apparent reason. I don't trust SD cards at all. It might be due to contacts, my guess is that you can easily destroy one with static electricity or some magnets.

Single SD card slot is my main drawback from getting 6D, I could easily do with other lack of features.


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 28, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


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



Not to make this thread longer than it should, in 10 years as a pro shooting for clients and such, i've only had 2 cards fail on me... one was a complete fail, but to my credit, that was like in 2004 and at that time, Compact Flash Drives were becoming popular and they fit in the CF card slots and it failed the 2nd time i used it... and the other one was the best buy brand card I bought, and it corrupted 1-2 images I think... The rest of the card was ok, but i haven't trusted that card since. I now have the 5d3 with 2 card slots and to be honest, I rarely use both slots at the same time. I tried it when I first got the camera, but it eventually became a hassle and I stopped.


----------



## wsheldon (Aug 28, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> sarakoth said:
> 
> 
> > What about using the wireless on the 6D to send/backup directly to tablet or PC instead of needing dual slots?
> ...



Absolutely! I just did that for a kiddie portrait shoot at a local zoo event last week, where I shot about 200 portraits in 2 hours. I configured the 6D to save RAW+JPEG on the SD, and set up the EOS Utility on a laptop to pull just the JPEGS automatically over WiFi to a laptop as I shot (for immediate 4x6 printing and backup), and it worked flawlessly. Pics arrived on the laptop and showed up in Lightroom within a few seconds (using Auto-import), and it never missed a beat.

You do need to watch your batteries when using WiFi, though, because I used up 1/2 of the capacity of an OEM battery within the 2 hour shoot, but I had spares just in case.

Great option to have, particularly if you want to hand out quick prints to participants (I used a Canon Selphy dye-sublimation printer for that purpose). Even better than dual slots for that particular scenario, because you don't have to keep pulling cards to print and worry about keeping track.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Aug 28, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Having dual card slots for instant backup is great, of course, but before we go out of control with paranoia, remember that not much more than a year ago all of the wedding photographers shooting with 5DII (including myself) somehow survived.
> 
> The 6D (through wireless - as has been pointed on on this thread) actually has much more flexibility for backup than the 5DII. I shoot weddings with two 6D bodies and have not yet had an issue.



Yup, dual card slots is one of those things that has only been around and affordable for a short while, but now that its here some act like it's always been here and your a fool to not use it. 

And yeah, after renting the 6d, my only concern/worry was the sd memory. My solution has been use nothing larger than a 16 gig card (i have mostly 8 gig ones), the best ones i can get (i favor the lexar cards for both SD and CF), and then just be really careful when dealing with them.

All that other stuff, not paranoia but just pointing out that lots can happen on a 12 hour day, yes one could be card failures, but other stuff can go down. I had it happen to me 3 weeks ago, had a saturday wedding, and shot an event friday night. Halfway through, my trusty used 580exII simply dies (af beam fired, all the back controls work, so i think its the flash tube, still have to call canon to see if its worth it to have it repaired.) So between the salon and picking up the second shooter i had to do the emergency run and spend way more than i wanted to that day on a 600rt (which i will say is a better flash than the 580, kind of glad the 580 died because if not for that i would not have been able to justify the upgrade). 

Either way, the point is that we try within the best of our capabilities to plan for the unexpected - which is worse, having a back up with sd memory, or no backup at all? Little things like - if i had ponied up for a second 5k3, then that would have meant no advertising in the local paper, and ---probably would not have had the extra cash kicking around to snag the replacement flash. Not to mention the evil eye i was getting from my fiancee when i'd bring up the second body issue. It took a lot of talks on the porch to convince her that the 6d even was a valid and needed purchase.


----------



## cayenne (Aug 28, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> <snip>
> Not to mention the evil eye i was getting from my fiancee when i'd bring up the second body issue. It took a lot of talks on the porch to convince her that the 6d even was a valid and needed purchase.



Hmm...hey, if you've not tied the knot yet, she has no say in how *you *spend *you're* money man....so, don't sweat that.



And man, just thinking...are you going to have to confer with her for everything you want or need to get for your business ? You might need to set some things straight before you actually make it legal...

Just sayin'...

C


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Aug 28, 2013)

cayenne said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > <snip>
> ...



That won't be an issue. She does give the evil eye whenever i say, look at what I just snagged.. (usually because i end up following that up with, maybe we should stay in tonight because I can't afford to go out...LOL)...it's just hard when your wedding is going to end up costing close to or more than I make in a year, hard to justify buying anything right now that isn't wedding related...add in coughing up first month, last month, and security deposit and yeah, you end up with money being very tight.


----------



## thgmuffin (Aug 29, 2013)

Auto-import in LR and wifi transfer with eos utility! Too bad you can't take pics when it is transferring. You can only do this when viewing on a device


----------



## wsheldon (Aug 29, 2013)

thgmuffin said:


> Auto-import in LR and wifi transfer with eos utility! Too bad you can't take pics when it is transferring. You can only do this when viewing on a device



No, that's not true. I just connected to my 6D from my laptop and fired off 10 quick shots on the camera (not using the computer), and they sync'd to Lightroom (via WFT and EOS Utility) over the next 20sec or so (JPEGs only, RAW take ~15sec each). The camera seems to send images to the laptop asynchronously from the buffer. Certainly fast enough for the studio-type shooting I've done, and you don't have to wait for the transfers to complete.

It's not clear from the user interface, but when you open the EOS Utility's Remote Shooting menu, you can interchangeably shoot from the computer *and* from the camera and the images still transfer via WFT. I just tried it to make sure.

Here's the tutorial I used to set up my system: http://www.p4pictures.com/2013/01/eos-6d-wifi-tethered-shooting-to-lightroom/. Pretty slick.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Aug 29, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> it's just hard when your wedding is going to end up costing close to or more than I make in a year



Not to hijack the thread, but this is very concerning. Good luck with this. Weddings don't have to cost that much.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Aug 29, 2013)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > it's just hard when your wedding is going to end up costing close to or more than I make in a year
> ...



We originally wanted to go small...but my fiancee's mom is like super into it, and willing to pay a good chunk of the cost...so what was gonna be around 50 people backyard reception is now 250 people at about $55 a head...

Note...when i say yearly income, this is only my second season doing this...so I'll probably cap out in the 20-30K range before all the cost of doing business stuff...wedding total is probably gonna land in the 20-25k range...her mom is gonna pick up the tab for the reception, and my parents are chipping in too...so out of pocket my fiancee and i will probably be dropping like 5-7k..then add honeymoon to that...relativly speaking its not so bad, but my income isn't what it should be yet...and see, it's not hijacking, because this is why the 6d made much more sense as a backup than a second 5d3!....lol


----------



## Jim O (Aug 30, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


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



Not to hijack the thread either, but whose wedding is it anyway?

I've been married over 25 years (only 20 to the current wife  ) and I can give you one piece of advice. Do not let your mother in law take charge of anything. It will set a bad precedent and it can become a slippery slope. I've seen it in too many of my friends to count. It's *your* wedding, and it's *your* marriage, not hers. It doesn't matter who's paying.

If there's time to get out of the big wedding, do it now! You two have the rest of your lives to do what the two of you want.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Aug 30, 2013)

Jim O said:


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



wow did I open a can of worms. Note, the REASON I was thinking small was mostly because my income. Once fiancee's mom said she wants to cover things that actually put me at ease. All I was really trying to say is that this was a big factor in making my backup body choice. There are other factors, like having the cash to get myself into bridal shows. The 2 I am currently enrolled in are $500 and $895 (that one may be cheaper if I decide to run an ad in the hosting companies bridal planner). Both together - that's $1395 ---very close to the difference in price between the 6d and the 5d3. How much income will I gain from either a owning a second mk3 or b, having a booth at a bridal show? My guess is that those bridal shows will pay for a second mk3 much faster thant the mk3 alone would earn me enough for bridals shows or lenses!!! 

That brings me to glass - been eyeing the 24mm 1.4, the 100 2.8 macro, and the 135mm 2.0. The 24 is just about the difference in price between a 5d3 and a 6d, the other 2 are a little cheaper but not exactly cheap! 

So my wedding isn't, and wasn't the only factor leading to the choice. It was made by reading a ton of reviews, looking at images, and evaluating the body via rental. Are there things that bug me about the 6d? For sure there are, but for the cost, I really enjoy what it brings to the table. And so far, my clients like what's coming out of it too, as client print selections are at about 65% 5d3, 35% 6d (only reason for that is because the mk3 does get more use, afterall it is the better camera so why wouldn't it!!!!)


----------



## Jim O (Aug 30, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> wow did I open a can of worms. Note, the REASON I was thinking small was mostly because my income. Once fiancee's mom said she wants to cover things that actually put me at ease. All I was really trying to say is that this was a big factor in making my backup body choice. There are other factors, like having the cash to get myself into bridal shows. The 2 I am currently enrolled in are $500 and $895 (that one may be cheaper if I decide to run an ad in the hosting companies bridal planner). Both together - that's $1395 ---very close to the difference in price between the 6d and the 5d3. How much income will I gain from either a owning a second mk3 or b, having a booth at a bridal show? My guess is that those bridal shows will pay for a second mk3 much faster thant the mk3 alone would earn me enough for bridals shows or lenses!!!
> 
> That brings me to glass - been eyeing the 24mm 1.4, the 100 2.8 macro, and the 135mm 2.0. The 24 is just about the difference in price between a 5d3 and a 6d, the other 2 are a little cheaper but not exactly cheap!
> 
> So my wedding isn't, and wasn't the only factor leading to the choice. It was made by reading a ton of reviews, looking at images, and evaluating the body via rental. Are there things that bug me about the 6d? For sure there are, but for the cost, I really enjoy what it brings to the table. And so far, my clients like what's coming out of it too, as client print selections are at about 65% 5d3, 35% 6d (only reason for that is because the mk3 does get more use, afterall it is the better camera so why wouldn't it!!!!)



You did open a can of worms. Haha! Still, remember what I said about mothers in law. Set boundaries early and stick to them. My two were both lovely ladies (well one was - she and I remained "friendly" until her recent death - and one is) but they both knew that my wife was *my* wife first and their daughter second. My current mother in law, whom I love, and I get along just fine as a result of having set boundaries early, and have for over 20 years.

Back to the situation. I agree wholeheartedly with your decisions. Getting better glass is likely to be more cost effective vis-a-vis getting a second 5D3.

Getting started is hard and choices need to be made. A 5D3/6D combination is very sensible and hardly a compromise. I agree that the client print selection is more about use and use case than it being the "better" camera. If you're shooting from the back of a dark church, something you may find yourself forced to do a time or two, that extra low light focusing may come in handy. On the other hand, faster action on the dance floor, or during bouquet toss, etc, is when you're likely to pick up the camera with the more sophisticated focus and more fps, unless it's _really_ dark. Having a backup card in the camera affords a nice bit of security as well...


----------



## wsgroves (Aug 30, 2013)

Do the small wedding my friend. Wife and I were going to do a huge one but sat down and though just how much it was not worth it to us (may be to you).
We do not yet have a house (3k sq foot apt), and that's a boat load of money that could be used for that.

We just went away to siesta key and took some friends...saved a boat load of cash and still had the time of our lives.

Sorry to derail the thread.

Back on topic I have had my heart set on a 5d3 for a long time but am still considering the 6d.
Its anguish as I could get the 6d now or wait a few months (nov) and get the 5d3....problem is I have no patience.

Scott


----------



## Ripley (Aug 30, 2013)

Unfortunately there are no camera stores where I live that carry full frame cameras so I had to drive three hours to compare models before I made my purchase. I quickly discovered that the 7D is to the 60D what the 5Diii is to the 6D. I just want to point this out to those that may be in a similar situation I was. If you're standing at a counter and you pick up a 60D and a 7D and look them over for a few minutes, then set them down and go pick up a 5Diii and a 6D you'll get deja vu.

I had a 60D and eventually discovered it's limitations that made me wish I had the 7D. When it came time to upgrade to full frame, I went with the 5Diii. Not a day goes by that I regret my decision.


----------



## Jim O (Aug 30, 2013)

wsgroves said:


> Back on topic I have had my heart set on a 5d3 for a long time but am still considering the 6d.
> Its anguish as I could get the 6d now or wait a few months (nov) and get the 5d3....problem is I have no patience.



Sunday is the first of September. November is not _that_ far away. I love my 6D but if you have your heart set on a 5D3 it's likely that you will be disappointed, depending of course on what your planned uses are. You could wind up selling your 6D at a loss because it's "been driven out of the showroom" and then still buying the 5D3 having spent more in the process.


----------



## Joe M (Aug 30, 2013)

Jim O said:


> wsgroves said:
> 
> 
> > Back on topic I have had my heart set on a 5d3 for a long time but am still considering the 6d.
> ...



Agreed. You're far better off with a month of anguish than years of it when you have a 6D and lament the fact that you could have/should have gotten that 5D3. I've seen so many people on various forums wondering if the next model of whatever happens to be available will be better and I usually question how many photos they'll miss waiting for a year or more for that camera that may come. In your case, I hope that a month won't be a great lose photo-wise and think of how great you'll sleep knowing you got what you really wanted. Good luck.


----------



## wsgroves (Aug 30, 2013)

Thanks guys...you are right of course...I should just wait a little and get what I want. I still have the 7D in the mean time.


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 5, 2013)

wsheldon said:


> thgmuffin said:
> 
> 
> > Auto-import in LR and wifi transfer with eos utility! Too bad you can't take pics when it is transferring. You can only do this when viewing on a device
> ...



Thanks for the info. This is great especially when you want to show the client immediately what's been shot so far.


----------



## wsgroves (Sep 10, 2013)

As some of you know I was jonsing waiting to purchase my 5d3 and was considering a 6d but I got lucky and was able to order a 5d3 today thanks to some good luck, and also bigvalue's 5d3 sale today on ebay.
So excited!

Scott


----------



## Mort (Sep 14, 2013)

Just adding my 2 cents into this thread. I am a college student and therefore have a lot less money in the pot. So I had been wanting to upgrade for some time now and some very good friends let me borrow a 6D and a 70-200. After shooting an entire wedding, I felt completely confident that I did not need the 5DIII. Yes a couple of instances would be nice, but I found the super sensitive center point very helpful in the low-light conditions of the reception hall. Plus being able to use ISO 800 and 1600 without a single worry was nice. So I decided to buy a 6D and got it yesterday. I haven't been able to play too much with it, but I have already pushed the low-light during the wedding. I also used the extra $1000 to buy a Tamron 24-70 VC although the first copy was super soft and am in the process of exchanging for a second. 

So overall, I felt the advantages of the 5DIII didn't outweigh the cost benefit of getting a new lens and a new body for the same price as the 5DIII body only.


----------



## comsense (Sep 14, 2013)

Do we really need 12 pages for something as simple as this. 

If money is no issue 
-1DX is the best camera

If money is an issue, then you start asking whether 
-its worth paying for specific features 
-are those features important for type of photography it is being used for

Since both the answers are highly subjective, every answer is going to be the correct one
Even choosing 70D over 5DIII maybe a good decision for someone

Why should one seek forum approvals for these subjective decisions and/or try to convince others....


----------



## petach (Sep 16, 2013)

Jim O said:


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



Bad enough Mi-Law taking over wedding......even worse when (years later) you realise your wife has morphed into your Mi-Law.


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 16, 2013)

petach said:


> Jim O said:
> 
> 
> > Chuck Alaimo said:
> ...



Haha I'm watching my sis in law morph into her mom and it's not a pretty sight !!


----------



## Ripley (Sep 16, 2013)

wsgroves said:


> As some of you know I was jonsing waiting to purchase my 5d3 and was considering a 6d but I got lucky and was able to order a 5d3 today thanks to some good luck, and also bigvalue's 5d3 sale today on ebay.
> So excited!
> 
> Scott



Congratulations! You won't regret it. Enjoy!


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Sep 16, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> petach said:
> 
> 
> > Jim O said:
> ...



all this hate on weddings and mother in laws ---LOL --- all because I bought a 6d for a backup body instead of a second mk3 --- I would agree with ya if the 6d was a dog, if it sucked, if I was not confident in it, if the IQ was horrid...the IQ from it is pretty much exactly the same as my mk3 ---sometimes better even depending on the situation. As I grow with it, I find that i like it even more - instead of just going wide with it, all my lenses go on it, and now it's getting equal time at weddings to my mk3.


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 16, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > petach said:
> ...



Nice shots but I would have cloned out the tattoo...I feel like doing it right now, hahaha 

The reason people discuss in-laws is because many of us have them...and because many photographers like you are obsessed with discussing wedding photography...so invariably the subject matter gets discussed.

Certainly agree that the IQ of the 6D can be better than the 5D3. I saw this in the store when I tried one out (having previously edited some RAW files from my cousin's 5D3), and decided to order a 6D the next day.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 17, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > petach said:
> ...



Really like the first picture in the series, Chuck. Beautiful focus and PP. I shot a business event tonight. Headshots for all the staff and architecurals for their building. Funny, but no one mentioned that I was shooting with 6Ds instead of a 5DIII or 1DX


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Sep 17, 2013)

CarlTN said:


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



i was only second shooting the tattooed one, so I'm not going that far with it...this was just a quick edit cause i got to set up the shot ---

And to Carl...if i bride has a big arm tattoo like that, the last thing in the world she'll want is to have it cloned out. I know tat's aren't for everyone, but for those that do have them, they are generally proud of them, especially if they go that far to have a full arm sleeve done...


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 17, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


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



Chuck, I realize they're proud of them. I was just getting your gander up, which as you know is not hard to do! I have cloning on the brain because I had to clone out a lot of seaweed in shallow water around a boat dock, that belonged to one of the houses I shot aerial photos of lately. It was a nightmare...not to mention the idiot had just bush-hogged his "yard" in front of the house. So I had a yard and a lakefront that both looked like brown sewage from the air !! People are stupid, and try as they might, many times they can only make things look ugly without knowing or caring. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder though, but I draw the line at the "sewage" look...


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Sep 17, 2013)

CarlTN said:


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



That job does not sound fun!


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 17, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:
 

> That job does not sound fun!



It wasn't! Shooting it was fun but editing, not...


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 17, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > That job does not sound fun!
> ...


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 17, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> all this hate on weddings and mother in laws ---LOL ---



Do you know what the difference is between in-laws and out-laws?

Out-laws are wanted.

(rimshot)


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 17, 2013)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > all this hate on weddings and mother in laws ---LOL ---
> ...



Hahaha... +1 !!!


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 17, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> +1. It's fun till you get home and look at your pictures to edit. Even with all your presets and everything, it's still a boring work.



It can be boring but it's mostly just tedious...but worse than that it's time consuming and hurts my butt...and hand! Hahaha


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Sep 17, 2013)

damn both of you...lol!!!

changing subject...here a 6d with the 100 macro image...lol


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 17, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> damn both of you...lol!!!
> 
> changing subject...here a 6d with the 100 macro image...lol



Nice but um...what is that?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Sep 17, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > damn both of you...lol!!!
> ...



it's a metal tent post on top of a black metal grill top... we're getting those real chilly nights now so the dew has been prevalent. shot this real close to the spike, with a cheap LED light set right behind the post...just playing around really, I like the very surreal what is that feel. DOF is just sooooo freaking nutty with macro, hence why I do stuff like this, testing extremes.


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 17, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


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



Oh yes it's water droplets, my bad...they're so dark I wanted to see them as solid barnacles or something! 

This would have worked extremely well back in my photography class in college, where we did "closeup abstractions". Back then there was only film, and the class was only black and white...because you know, it's not cool or artsy unless it's in black and white! Also the color developing process was supposedly more involved (so that was an advanced class)...but I did it a lot in my parents' business back then anyway.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Sep 17, 2013)

CarlTN said:


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



Yeah, back in school when I learned all that stuff they wouldn't touch color - it was all black and white.

Oddly though ---this is a color image! But the top of the grill was black, the spike was silver, and the color temp of the LED light was very cool ----cool white light, black grill top...looks like a black and white image!


----------



## CarlTN (Sep 18, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


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



Yes it does almost look like a black and white image, but that's not what I was saying. I know it's a color image! I simply meant it would have worked well as a closeup abstraction...and that when I did it in my class, we had to use black and white film...and process and print it ourselves. It's easier to achieve abstraction in black and white anyway, because color allows you to recognize things either...unless of course your eyes never see any color.


----------



## erikefox (Jan 3, 2014)

Essential difference between the new full frame sensors is the pixel density.
18, 20, 22 mp. 
22 mp is sharper then 18 mp.18 mp is capturing more light, less noise. 18 mp clean up in post-work better than 22mp. 
It is a scientify information that everything has is limitation, read this as the sensor of canon at his limits. 
I got 3 x 40d, and in raw editing, with prime lenses, even at 1600, with good white balance and good exposure, i get more than excellent pictures.
The only problem is the print resolution.That is why i bought the 6d. Better iso, higher dynamic range, higher print resolution.
BUT DON'T FORGET: GETTING A GROUP OF 2 TO 4 PEOPLE SCHARP: crop sensor f5, 6; full sensor f8.0. VERY IMPORTANT!!!


----------



## Marsu42 (Jan 4, 2014)

erikefox said:


> Essential difference between the new full frame sensors is the pixel density. 18, 20, 22 mp.



Canon ff only have 21mp (5d2), 22mp (5d3) and 20mp (6d), the little difference is there to easily recognize which camera is "better" and more expensive 



erikefox said:


> 22 mp is sharper then 18 mp.18 mp is capturing more light, less noise. 18 mp clean up in post-work better than 22mp.



Ok, let's assume you're talking about 20mp vs 22mp full frame. Yes, each bigger *pixel* of 20mp captures a bit more light, but the *sensor* get the same, so you can just downsize a bit if you're very keen for a comparison. This tiny bit should be indistinguishable, other characteristics like banding are much more important.

As for more mp being less sharp: No, not if your top notch lens outresolves your sensor, I these things can easily handle 40mp. You're correct about old school lenses like the 50/1.8 at least wide open, I don't think adding more mp would improve the overall result so much it's worth it.[/quote]


----------



## Sporgon (Jan 4, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> erikefox said:
> 
> 
> > Essential difference between the new full frame sensors is the pixel density. 18, 20, 22 mp.
> ...



Are you cocking a snoop at the 18 mp 1Dx ?

Agree with your analyses of the prosumer line. Difference is just for marketing, but maybe 6D users gained a benefit.


----------



## erikefox (Jan 4, 2014)

NOISE
I am not resizing any of the files of the different FF cams. I see them on screen as they were made.
- Friend has 1DX = 18mp = capturing more light = less noise at higher iso
- Friend has 5d Mark III = 22mp = capturing less light = more noise at higher iso
- I have 6d = 20mp = capturing more light = less noise at higher iso
Classification from less to more noise: 1DX (18mp), 6d (20mp), 5d Mark III (22mp)

SHARPNESS @ iso 100:
Reference image size = 1DX = 5184 x 3456, resizing the others to that image size
Classification from less to more sharpness @ iso 100: 1DX (18mp), 6d (20mp), 5d Mark III (22mp)

SHARPNESS @ iso 6400:
Reference image size = 1DX = 5184 x 3456, resizing the others to that image size
Classification from less to more sharpness @ iso 6400: 5d Mark III (22mp), 6d (20mp), 1DX (18mp)
The problem with going in the higher iso's is that the higher pixel densy sensor is noisier at full resolution, and the lower pixel density sensor is noise cleaner (less muddy) = sharper image.

I'm taking pictures in mostly dark rooms (read: seminars, congresses, colloquiums, meetings on international and European level).

I won't buy the 1DX, because i am not a professional photographer (I don't make a living of it). But I got extra paid in money and spare time by my boss for the extra service of photographing and Raw development time which I do at home.

The 40D (3x), 6D with 24-105, and sharp primes, and Tripod deliver me the pictures that people want, that they can use in magazines and on their websites.

The only reason I bought the 6D (still use you my 40D's) is better usable higher iso, higher dynamic range, higher print resolution.
(BUT DON'T FORGET: GETTING A GROUP OF 2 TO 4 PEOPLE SCHARP: crop sensor f5, 6; full sensor f8.0. VERY IMPORTANT!!!)

One thing very essential, always shoot raw, get an ips monitor or for mac Retina display (non glossy and calibrate the displays) and develop a raw work flow with your image treatment application at different iso settings for every different cam you got.

I'm not looking for an endless discussing, only writing my experience. Just hoping that it has some value for the people that need some extra info.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jan 4, 2014)

erikefox said:


> I'm not looking for an endless discussing



You're in luck there, people WRITING IN CAPITALS usually are ignored sooner or later :->



Sporgon said:


> Are you cocking a snoop at the 18 mp 1Dx ?



Wupps, you got me there, putting "less" in a "more" camera is so Canon-unlike this information refuses to stick :-o


----------



## erikefox (Jan 4, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> erikefox said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not looking for an endless discussing
> ...


.

Sorry for the capitals. This is my first post ever on a forum. 
Had the chance to handle the 1dx and the 5d III, and compare the original raw files from a friend. I just thought i could publish my experience here. I work as IT and am quite good in photoshop and publishing media.
At our photo club, there is no place for the words "cocking" or "Snooping" at a specific cam. Only the final picture counts without judging the cam. We only judge a cam if we are in the need of bying a new cam thats suites the purpose for his shooting. Thank you for your understanding.


----------



## ClayStevens (Feb 20, 2014)

Want to upgrade my 600D to FF. This post helps me a lot. thanks


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 28, 2014)

erikefox said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > erikefox said:
> ...



You bought the right camera for the job it seems like.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 28, 2014)

We have a rental business where we have Canon 5dMKII, 5dMKIII, 1Dx and I have a 6d personally. There is no doubt that the 5dMKIII is a better overall package to the 6d its AF system is far superior as is its construction and user menus, the joypad & jog stick are also far better. What is not so clear cut using the same lens is the IQ and in every technical test we have performed they simply cannot be seperated apart from low light where the 6d actually pips the 5dMKIII. 
This is looking at both from a purely technical standpoint as each user will hold different views on ergonomics, weight etc. The 6d is not a camera for rental its simply not robust enough for everyday use or customisable enough but if this was a test simply about IQ they are equals but then why should that be an issue?


----------

