Canon 6D - Full-frame body, $2100 at launch

<p><em>> pushing DSLRs into a niche</em><br>

SLR has always been a niche product. Always! Wanna bet? In the film times all kinds of non-SLR cameras, from Instamatics to RF rigs, dominated the amateur market. The rest was "niche." By "niche" I mean confined to pretty much pro and "advanced amateur" market: NO DIFFERENT now with DSLRs (perhaps even more so.) Most (as in "a crushing majority") of camera owneres shoot a P&S or cellular phone cameras and pretty much anything costing over $400 is niche. Mirrorless/MTF/etc. may be a rage in Japan but so was the Mini Disc :-)</p>

<p>There seems to be a lot of complaining about the wi-fi being a useless feature. This is very much an amateur's point of view. It's a little unusual that it is introduced on this camera, but it may just be a timing issue for availability of the right chip. (Wi-fi chips tended to be power-hungry until recently.) Anyone who has worked a major sports event has seen runners that take chips back to someone with a computer. Even at the fights, I have had to pop chips in and out constantly in order to get the images into a computer that can be used (with a cellular card) so they can be uploaded. I have seen photographers standing in a parking lot juggling cards and computer. </p>

<p>And the Facebook thing isn't as trivial as people make it here. I shoot a lot of events where the photos get posted to Facebook as soon as I have them. A week ago Saturday, I shot an outdoor event. At the end of the event, it was a half hour walk to my car. Since I don't like to leave a laptop in my car, I had to drive home, which took an hour. Then I had to unload the photos and finally could upload them to Facebook. If I could upload them in real-time, people could follow the event as it went along, which is something they would like to do.</p>

<p>Once again, the views here seem to be amateurs who really don't want to understand how pros, or anyone except themselves, shoot.</p>

<p>I'd complain that the Canon model numbering system is all out of whack, if it weren't the case that the numbering system (if there is one) hasn't made much sense since day 2.<br /> Here, just to make the point, is a list of the EOS film camera designations over the years in chronological order, (please don't write and try to point out that it is perfectly simple, I've been there and know all the "rationalizations") :</p>

<table width="471" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><colgroup><col span="2" width="45" /> <col span="3" width="114" /> </colgroup>

<tbody>

<tr>

<td width="45" height="25"> </td>

<td width="45">Release date</td>

<td width="114">Model (US)</td>

<td width="114">Model (Europe/International)</td>

<td width="114">Model (Japan)</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-87</td>

<td>EOS 650</td>

<td>EOS 650</td>

<td>EOS 650</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>May-87</td>

<td>EOS 620</td>

<td>EOS 620</td>

<td>EOS 620</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Oct-88</td>

<td>EOS 750</td>

<td>EOS 750</td>

<td>EOS 750</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Oct-88</td>

<td>EOS 850</td>

<td>EOS 850</td>

<td>EOS 850</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Apr-89</td>

<td>EOS 630</td>

<td>EOS 600</td>

<td>EOS 630 QD</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Sep-89</td>

<td>EOS-1</td>

<td>EOS-1</td>

<td>EOS-1</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Oct-89</td>

<td>EOS RT</td>

<td>EOS RT</td>

<td>EOS RT</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-90</td>

<td>EOS 10S</td>

<td>EOS 10</td>

<td>EOS 10 QD</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-90</td>

<td>EOS 700</td>

<td>EOS 700</td>

<td>EOS 700 QD</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Oct-90</td>

<td>EOS Rebel/Rebel S</td>

<td>EOS 1000F QD</td>

<td>EOS 1000 QD</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Aug-91</td>

<td>EOS 10S commemorative kit</td>

<td>EOS 10</td>

<td>EOS 10 QD</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Aug-91</td>

<td>EOS Elan</td>

<td>EOS 100</td>

<td>EOS 100 QD</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-92</td>

<td>EOS Rebel II/SII</td>

<td>EOS 1000FN QD</td>

<td>EOS 1000S QD</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Nov-92</td>

<td>EOS A2/A2e</td>

<td>EOS 5</td>

<td>EOS 5 QD</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Sep-93</td>

<td>EOS Rebel XS</td>

<td>EOS 500</td>

<td>EOS Kiss</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Nov-93</td>

<td>EOS Rebel X</td>

<td>-</td>

<td>EOS Rebel X US only</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Nov-94</td>

<td>EOS-1N</td>

<td>EOS-1N/1N HS/1N DP</td>

<td>EOS-1N/1N HS/1N DP</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Jan-95</td>

<td>-</td>

<td>EOS 5000</td>

<td>EOS 888</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-95</td>

<td>EOS-1N RS</td>

<td>EOS-1N RS</td>

<td>EOS-1N RS</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Sep-95</td>

<td>EOS Elan II/IIe</td>

<td>EOS 50/50e</td>

<td>EOS 55</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Sep-96</td>

<td>EOS Rebel G</td>

<td>EOS 500N</td>

<td>New EOS Kiss</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Oct-96</td>

<td>EOS IX</td>

<td>EOS IX</td>

<td>EOS IX E</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-98</td>

<td>EOS IX Lite</td>

<td>EOS IX 7</td>

<td>EOS IX 50</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Nov-98</td>

<td>EOS-3</td>

<td>EOS-3</td>

<td>EOS-3</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-99</td>

<td>-</td>

<td>EOS 3000</td>

<td>EOS 88</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Apr-99</td>

<td>EOS Rebel 2000</td>

<td>EOS 300</td>

<td>EOS Kiss III</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-00</td>

<td>EOS-1v</td>

<td>EOS-1v</td>

<td>EOS-1v</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Oct-00</td>

<td>EOS Elan 7/7e</td>

<td>EOS 33/30</td>

<td>EOS 7</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Nov-01</td>

<td>-</td>

<td>-</td>

<td>EOS Kiss III L</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Feb-02</td>

<td>EOS Rebel XS N</td>

<td>EOS 3000N</td>

<td>Canon EOS 66</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Sep-02</td>

<td>EOS Rebel Ti</td>

<td>EOS 300V</td>

<td>EOS Kiss 5</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Mar-03</td>

<td>EOS Rebel GII</td>

<td>-</td>

<td>-</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Sep-03</td>

<td>EOS Rebel K2</td>

<td>EOS 3000V</td>

<td>EOS Kiss Lite</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Apr-04</td>

<td>EOS Elan 7N/7NE</td>

<td>EOS 33V/30V</td>

<td>EOS 7s</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td height="12"> </td>

<td>Sep-04</td>

<td>EOS Rebel T2</td>

<td>EOS 300X</td>

<td>EOS Kiss 7</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

<p>JDM:<br>

Got an alternative? :-) 1D/1Ds/1Dx should be perhaps named "Compensator", the Rebel "I'm secure in my masculinity" and 6D "Me, too", or "Me2" for TwitFaces :-)<br>

Chevy once made a car named "Nova" which didn't sell well in Mexico (="no va") There is always a pitfall in naming.</p>

<p>[[Chevy once made a car named "Nova" which didn't sell well in Mexico (="no va") There is always a pitfall in naming.]]</p>

<p>Urban Myth.<br>

http://www.snopes.com/business/misxlate/nova.asp</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>There seems to be a lot of complaining about the wi-fi being a useless feature. This is very much an amateur's point of view. It's a little unusual that it is introduced on this camera, but it may just be a timing issue for availability of the right chip. (Wi-fi chips tended to be power-hungry until recently.) Anyone who has worked a major sports event has seen runners that take chips back to someone with a computer. Even at the fights, I have had to pop chips in and out constantly in order to get the images into a computer that can be used (with a cellular card) so they can be uploaded. I have seen photographers standing in a parking lot juggling cards and computer.<br>

And the Facebook thing isn't as trivial as people make it here. I shoot a lot of events where the photos get posted to Facebook as soon as I have them. A week ago Saturday, I shot an outdoor event. At the end of the event, it was a half hour walk to my car. Since I don't like to leave a laptop in my car, I had to drive home, which took an hour. Then I had to unload the photos and finally could upload them to Facebook. If I could upload them in real-time, people could follow the event as it went along, which is something they would like to do.<br>

Once again, the views here seem to be amateurs who really don't want to understand how pros, or anyone except themselves, shoot.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I really like your post! I think about watching wedding photographers. Sometimes they have the images from the ceremony playing at the reception - it seemed odd to me at first - but that photographer was smart. People value good photos. But it would seem the majority also values seeing them quickly. They don't seem to be as worried about quality - especially when seeing them quickly. Maybe that isn't "art" but it sure seems strongly directly related to $$$, reputation, references, etc.</p>

<p>I think the 6D would be a great all around camera. Who knows, maybe the noise at iso6400 will be a bit better than 5DIII given slightly bigger pixels. Maybe it will have an extra stop of dynamic range. I figured it would be a bit more advanced in the focusing department but oh well. If it's decent at video (moire, good compression and a clean HDMI out) it will be even more popular. One day this camera new will be $1800 and those with nice crop bodies will find a way financially to move into a FF camera. I think Canon's marketing is doing what it needs to do.</p>

<p>One thing I found interesting. Canon went with the 6D and Nikon went with the D600 - all about the 6's I guess!. And the timing of their releases were so close. The Nikon D600 looks a bit better on paper (given the same price) so it will be interesting to see the hands on reviews come in.</p>

<p> </p>

Maybe it is not significant but 35 mm lens production has grown from about 2.1 million units per month in 2001 to 3 million

in July 2012 but 35mm format lenses have fallen from 90% of this total to only 22% of the total. That means we make only

1/3 of the full frame lenses we did a decade ago. Similarly SLR sales were 7.5 million in 1980, 18.5 million in 1995 and

will be about 18-19 million this year. However, since full frame is only around 5% of volume this means only about 1

million full frame cameras will be made in 2012 - compared to 18.5 million in 1995.

 

Michael the DSLR is not a niche product - while it is only 25% of cameras sold it is over 50% of the market by value if we

add in lenses DSLRs and ILCs are 66% of the camera market revenue. Indeed the SLR has been the majority of industry

revenues since the mid 1980s so I would not agree that it is a niche product for the industry. Today it is estimated to

represent almost 90% of industry profits so I suspect that the manufacturers do not see it as a niche.

 

While I accept that Some people have uses for WiFi, touchscreens and GPS I think you are missing my point. These are

not photographic innovations. In addition they are not Cannon innovations and I suspect that they are components

bought in from Canon. If Canon Cannot give people compelling reasons to stay with SLRs then they will have long term

difficulties. People put up with the cost and weight of an SLR (my DSLRs and lenses are the size and weight of the

Medium Format cameras I started professional shooting with) for the flexibility, handling and most importantly image

quality. My initial assessment of this camera and some of the recent Canon launches is that they are incremental

improvements and therefore are unlikely to compell people to upgrade or move up to a DSLR in the way that the 5D, 5DII

and the 1Ds series did

<p>I think it was named the 6D because of it's obvious design and market connections to the 60D. Also Wi-Fi has been readily available to pros with special grips for the 7D and 5D3, and now hobbyists can have it without buying a pricy accessory. I won't be buying a 6D--no Wi-Fi where I shoot--as my ancient 5D2 seems to be doing fine and not too far behind the latest in terms of IQ.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>These are not photographic innovations.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

They are useful to many photographers. Cameras should be useful. Camera companies need to make products that do what people need, not constantly "innovate." Speaking as a photographer, I use a camera for photography, innovation is irrelevant.<br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If Canon Cannot give people compelling reasons to stay with SLRs then they will have long term difficulties.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Speaking as a photographer, corporate problems are not my concern, unless they are going out of business and I can't get service. </p>

<p>@<a href="../photodb/user?user_id=4435813">Philip Wilson</a>—Where are you getting those numbers from?</p>

<p>CIPA online and old CEA / CIPA reports</p>

<p>Until I see real images made with this camera, my main concern is that Canon limited the ISO option depending on the shoting mode (for example, ISO 400 is the only option in Bulb and Flash modes). My second concern is the apparently limited AF system, but will wait to see it in action to discuss over it.<br>

Why people reject a camera because it has additional features they don't need, assuming those aren't needed by anyone else? By the way, did any one noticed the lack of Direct-Print and Picture Style buttons? Not that I used any of those, but those were the focus for those who always said thah Canon made the wrong decisions while designin cameras, so I would expect someone to say this is the best design as there is no Direct-Print button.<br>

Also, did anyone saw the video mentioned in my last post regarding the EOS 4D?</p>

<p>I actually think this 6D thing is promising, provided that we'll see substantially improved dynamic range and shadow noise control (compared to the cameras from which we are supposed to upgrade, 60D first and foremost) and that the price drops 10 percent or so within a year. After all, this is not a new 5D so I'm not sure it makes sense to complain about specs. However, two items are conspicuously absent from this launch: a new 50mm lens (for instance a 50/1.8 USM) and a new 24-85/3.5-4.5 (not f/5.6 that is). Canon really should mimic Nikon here even though they don't otherwise.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I actually think this 6D thing is promising, provided that we'll see substantially improved dynamic range and shadow noise control</p>

</blockquote>

<p>... I recall thinking <em>exactly</em> the same thing about the 5D3... I was thinking that they didn't improve the resolution, so in three years <em>certainly</em> they'd have improved DR, or<em> at least</em> significantly improved noise. I was wrong on both counts... OTOH, we don't know yet what got mixed in the kool-aid with this new sensor, so it's certainly <em>possible</em> they've found a way to improve those aspects (DR and high ISO noise) ... gawd I hope so.</p>

 

<p>Well, after reading 1000 posts in the Nikon forum with people lodging complaint after complaint about the newly announced D600 and many pronouncing that Nikon is done and has lost its way, it is somewhat gratifying and definitely humorous to pop in here and see Canon posters do the exact same thing. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I think it was named the 6D because of it's obvious design and market connections to the 60D.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I think so too and honestly, I am very sad to see it. Coming from 40D and 7D I think the ergonomics of the 60D is simply awful. It is <strong><em>not</em></strong> a camera that is comfortable to shoot with and for me this is inexcusable. YMMV of course....</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim. </p>

<p>For every one of us here posting, there's probably another 19,000 people out there who will buy either one (6D or D600) and love the images it takes. Canon and Nikon know what they are doing and they're doing it for a reason. Maybe Nikon out maneuvered them a bit in the last year - but after the mega success of the 5D2 (read: huge revenue, hype, etc) they had to and seemed to respond quite well.</p>

<p>If the D600 can match the noise of the 5D3 and match (or even best) the DR of the D800 I would think it will sell well for couple of years straight. But people fairly new to photography (think 1.6x Rebels) wanting to shift to FF probably don't know that much about dynamic range - Canon most definitely knows this and then elects to add features like Wifi instead.</p>

<p>Who knows, in a month or two we'll probably see some awesome iPad demonstrations with a 6D (or several!) doing stuff none of us have thought of yet. That in turn might shift the market a whole direction - perhaps by accident - perhaps not.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>A video taken with the Canon EOS 6D:</p>

<p>http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos6d/player_deepgreen/movie.html?high</p>

<p>The making of the above video:</p>

<p>http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos6d/player_deepgreen_making/movie.html?low</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Who knows, in a month or two we'll probably see some awesome iPad demonstrations with a 6D (or several!) doing stuff none of us have thought of yet. That in turn might shift the market a whole direction - perhaps by accident - perhaps not.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think you're on to something there. Earlier today I was skeptical at the inclusion of wifi and GPS. Then I read the following article about Canon's newly announced image cloud service and changed my mind: http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2206032/photokina-2012-canon-takes-to-the-cloud-unveils-project-1709</p>

<p>It is a fantastic idea and is certainly one I would find useful, especially if high resolution images taken with the 6D were automatically beamed to Project 1709 whenever a wireless connection became available. No more fumbling around with memory cards or having to carry a heavy laptop. If it's only for low resolution uploads then I won't be interested but I can see the future possibilities, especially as WIFI speeds increase to the point where full size RAW files can be beamed relatively quickly. </p>

<p>Curious bit of kit. It will be interesting to see how it positions itself in the market in the months and years to come. I guess it would perhaps most appeal to those looking to enter the FF market, as has been said, for circa 2 grand.</p>

<p>...certainly not up my street, this.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A lot of wedding photogs may have bought this as a second body or a second shooter camera, but no dual card slot is a deal breaker.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm curious about that line of reasoning. Dual card slots have only been available since 2004. Does this mean there were no wedding photographers before 2004?</p>

<p>To me the most remarkable aspect of the 6D is the sensor. It appears to be yet another new full frame sensor, the third announced this year. Canon has never reused a full frame sensor from one camera to another, even though for the last few years the resolution differences have been trivial - they're all 18 to 22 megapixels, which isn't really much difference. Compare to the crops, where the 7D, 60D, T2i, T3i, T4i, and EOS-M all appear to use the same sensor.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A lot of wedding photogs may have bought this as a second body or a second shooter camera, but no dual card slot is a deal breaker.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This issue won't be a deal breaker for me. The 6D will make a capable 2nd body to my 5D3. Even for weddings. Changing a 32 GB card is no big deal on a 2nd body and it is not the end of the world. I did it with the Rebel XT and 5D.</p>

<p>Very big yawn from me too! Who cares! Other than the D800, a very boring year for full frame aficiandos.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>For every one of us here posting, there's probably another 19,000 people out there who will buy either one (6D or D600) and love the images it takes.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't see any reason why forum posters would be unrepresentative of the broader enthusiast/pro camera market. People here are either enthusiasts or pros.<br>

Sure I expect this thing will take nice pictures. I think the dissappointment people are expressing stems from the fact that Nikon looks to be serving up Audis while Canon is serving up Volkswagons and asking the same price or more (5DIII vs D800).<br>

There seems to have been very little innovation in Canon bodies for 3 years and we will probably now have to wait another 3 years for an upgrade.</p>

<p><em>> the DSLR is not a niche product - while it is only 25% of cameras sold it is over 50% of the market by value if we add in lenses</em></p>

<p>The DSLR is not 25% of cameras sold, but I suppose it depends on the definition of a "camera." If every cellular phone with a camera counted, DSLRs would be almost invisible on the radar.<br>

And that cellular phone camera is often the only camera owned by a person and if there were no cellular phone cameras, many of these people would simply buy a P&S further dilluting the DSLR market penetration.</p>