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

[peter_j2]

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe the only problem with this camera is it's name.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Then there is the jump from the Canon PowerShot G12 to the Canon PowerShot G15. Must be the generally accepted unlucky <strong>13</strong> and the Chinese dreaded <strong>14</strong>.</p>

<p><em><strong>:p</strong></em></p>

[ljwest]

 

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe the only problem with this camera is it's name. I guess Canon didn't want to name it 70D because it would end being a full frame camera with a crop name. Then they had two options, a new series, like X5D, beginning with the 15D, or placing it in the XD series, which then started a new problem, is this a bottom of the line XD series, to be named 9D, under a crop sensor camera, or what they just did, place an advanced amateur camera over the so called professional series crop 7D camera.<br>

What you guys would do in this situation?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It seems to me that the 6D name is very appropriate for the camera, and the market "niche" it is creating/adding to/whatever.</p>

<p>Historically, it appears that the EOS1 moniker is reserved for the best of the best from Canon. The rest of the xD series is apparently for premium (I'll not use pro/amateur...) cameras that will be with us for a long time, but may see revisions (II, III, IV, etc.) from time to time, such as we've seen with the 1D, 1Ds, and the 5D (and I really hope, the 7D). The xxD series are really aimed at the higher-end consumer market, with a new name/number every iteration, and really built to a price point. As for the "6D" being used because it's related to the "60D", I don't buy that for a minute. I'm sure Canon will continue the xxD line at some point with the 70D, and 80D, etc. Not sure what comes after 90D, though...</p>

<p>6D is appropriate because it isn't really a high-end consumer camera, but more of a premium camera, and is better aligned with the premium cameras, the 5D and 7D. Numerically it needed to have a lower number than the 7D (well, full frame has to be 'better' than crop, right?), but it could not have a lower number than the 5D, as it's not up to that standard.</p>

<p>So we have:</p>

<ul>

<li>1D-series: the best-of-the-best (regardless of format)</li>

<li>5D: the best full-frame camera in a non-pro body</li>

<li>6D: The full-framer for the online set, or the connected pro</li>

<li>and 7D: the premium crop sensor camera.</li>

</ul>

<p>All in all, not too bad a lineup, that leaves room for a couple other items like a high-megapixel full framer...</p>

<p>I was kinda ambivalent about the 6D when I first read the spec sheet, but the more I read, the more I see stuff that would be nice to have. Not necessarily needed, but nice to have. Features I hope to see in any 7DMk II Canon may release down the road. And the 6Ds price point hopefully points to a 7DII that won't break the bank!</p>

 

[allan_beaudette]

<p>Another specification that raises an eyebrow is the cycle times for the shutter rated at 100, 000 actuations, a bit of a step back from the 150,000 for the 5D and 7D bodies.</p>

[ruben leal]

<p>Larry, I agree with you, but I believe the "only" (and this is a big only) better spec in the 6D compared to the 7D is that it is a full frame sensor, but build in a lesser body with lesser specs in almost every field, including AF system and, perhaps, viewfinder.<br>

If I were to upgrade from a 7D, I really find it hard to consider a 6D, specially if I had a hard time considering the older 5D Mk II because of the camera handling (the 5D Mk II is a better photographic instrument without a doubt, but in an older body). I would miss the all cross-type AF system, the superimposed LCD display in the viewfinder, the two axis level, and maybe the 150,000 cycles shutter (on the other hand, being the 7D more of a sports camera it really needs 50% more shutter life than a landscape/portrait camera like the 6D, where you are supposed to spend more time composing for one shot than using the spray-and-pray sports technique).</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<blockquote>

<ul>

<li>5D: the best full-frame camera in a non-pro body</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>This attempt at categorizing such cameras as "pro" and "non-pro" is altogether meaningless, given the number of wealthy hobbyists buying 1-series bodies and the number of professional photographers shooting non-1-series bodies, including the 5D series and many others.</p>

<p>I think the 6D is likely a fine camera within its own context. However, at $2000+ is is certainly not a remarkable camera, especially given how rapidly the technology is evolving once again.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[mecarter]

<p>I find a lot of reasons not to buy the new 6D, but one of the biggest is the SD only card slot. After spending a considerable amount on large capacity, extremely fast CF cards, I will not be purchasing SD cards to make a new body run.</p>

[dan_south]

+1 G Dan Mitchell

 

Countess professional photographers use 5D cameras. Countless video and movie production pros use them, too. A camera body isn't

pro or non pro; the person who uses it is.

[KenPapai]

<p><strong>Built in Wi-Fi and GPS functions</strong> <br /> <br /> +1 == yippee!</p>

<p><br /> >> <em>This attempt at categorizing such cameras as "pro" and "non-pro" is altogether meaningless</em><br /> <br /> Agreed ... it is silly and rather newbie-like to think of an EOS XXD or XD camera as non-pro... as if!</p>

<p>>> ...<em>since when did GPS become more useful to photographers than a built in flash?</em></p>

<p>Since always for some, like me. Awesome. Built-in flash? I couldn't care less. Hate it.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>I find the destinction between pro photographers and amatuers a bit meaningless too. A photojounalist has different needs to a wedding shooter. A landscape and travel shooter can be either pro or amatuer and may have similar needs. A real estate agent may take photos for work needs but does that make him a pro? And it is not like pro's always demand either the best IQ from a camera or necessarily take the best photos or vice versa.</p>

[danny_wilson]

<p>Although the camera is an all-around bore, I bet we will see the wifi get used in really cool and creative ways that we cannot yet imagine. You could have cameras setup to take video or photos remotely, you could have clients see photos in real time on an iPad, you could stream live video of a special event, or perhaps even shoot without a memory card directly to a networked hard drive. All of that sounds pretty cool.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>>> There is no way they were aiming this turd at professionals. [Danny]</p>

<p>Dude -- you focus more on tech than photos then? As if. There MANY features of the 6D superior to 5D2.</p>

<p>Your WiFi stuff makes a lot of sense and pretty fun. From now on all EOS will have WiFi built in. Cool and finally. Same with the GPS.</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p> From now on all EOS will have WiFi built in.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I sure hope so. Then I won't have to shoot with a DSLR and constantly pull out my phone to take photos.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>and all they need to do now is put a phone into dslrs and no one will need to carry a phone anymore. I bet Apple is worried.<br>

Man am I looking forward to seeing someone talking into their 5D mark IV.</p>

[yakim_peled1]

<blockquote>

<p>There MANY features of the 6D superior to 5D2.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Apart from GPS and Wi-Fi support I struggle to find one. Yes, the central AF point is -3EV rather than -2EV but as both AF systems are very similar apart from this (9 vs. 11 AF sensors, only the central one is cross-type, all are clustered in the center) I find this improvement rather negligible.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim. </p>

[peter_j2]

<blockquote>

<p>Apart from GPS and Wi-Fi support I struggle to find one.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Life can be tough navigating the information, so, let me help you out. Silent shutter mode is one.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>and they lost the 6 "invisible" AF points clustered around the center that supposedly assisted with AF tracking. So it is a case of a small step forward and another one backwards.</p>

[yakim_peled1]

<blockquote>

<p>Life can be tough navigating the information,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Indeed.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>so, let me help you out.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> You are most kind. :-)</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Silent shutter mode is one.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is indeed useful feature but the 5D2 also have it. Are there any more features?</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

[dan_south]

<blockquote>

<p>A photojounalist has different needs to a wedding shooter. A landscape and travel shooter can be either pro or amatuer and may have similar needs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And all of the above have used 5D cameras extensively. It's a testament to the versatility and performance of the 5D design philosophy.</p>

<p>I'm sure that 6D's will be used for these applications, as well, in the coming months and years. Given the small size, the 6D might end up being an exceptional travel camera.</p>

[dogbert]

<blockquote>And all of the above have used 5D cameras extensively. It's a testament to the versatility and performance of the 5D design philosophy.</blockquote>

<p>They have also used 1 series and xxD series for those tasks too. The fact that people use it is because it is what Canon makes within that price bracket. It doesn't mean that it is the best camera that it could be for the price or that it is the best camera for the task.<br>

Sure the 6D and 5Ds are nice cameras but there are plenty of things Canon could have put in with little effort and little extra cost that would have made them better and not so far behind the competition.</p>

 

[francisco_salaquanda]

<p>Reading all of this....its so irrelevant. Its also invalid to brand one model of camera a Pro..Prosumer...learners DSLR etc.</p>

<p>If a photographer makes a good living as a professional, then what he or she uses is a pro body. Its a case of "use whatever works for you".<br>

I happen to know one of the most successful paps over the last few years, and guess what he uses? Two 40d's. On the other hand, the glass is worth $20k minimum. I once quizzed him on this and he said that what works for paps is a body that does not get in the way. There is no time to make adjustments to settings, doing live view, or scrutinising the LCD. The closest other similar niche is birding, but less so.<br>

So really, does it matter which one does this or that. We have no leverage on product development, so just accept a Canon FF body at $2k and stop complaining. Geees, you don't see this fuss and negativity over in the Nikon forum, discussing the D600. The parameters are the same as are the price points generally:<br>

D600/6D, D800/D5mk3 </p>

<p>So whats the problem? The best thing about all this is that FF will probably be at the $1k price point within two years and thats all good as far as I am concerned. It will simplify lens considerations and revive use of all those great EF L lenses. The only caution I would have is I won't be investing in any DX or crop sensor-only lenses until the market settles.</p>

 

[anders_carlsson]

<p>Excuse me for being a bit snarky: For some commentators, life seems to be an endless row of disappointments as new cameras are launched, lacking in features. Others, particularly those who'd be happy with a 5D Classic upgraded with improved image processing, a better screen and sensor cleaning, now feel relief as they see the 6D as a way out from 1.6x territory. They regard the slight DOF control advantage that FF gives (perhaps using a 50/1.4) along with the larger viewfinder as paramount features and will now rejoice as these are now available in a reasonably sized and prized but still sturdy body. They haven't experienced anything like this since they retired their trusty EOS 50s and 33s. (They almost jumped to Nikon D600 last week but will now stay.)</p>

[dan_south]

>> Sure the 6D and 5Ds are nice cameras but there are plenty of things Canon could have put in with little effort and little

extra cost that would have made them better and not so far behind the competition.

<<

 

First of all, no one but the engineers know how much effort or expense that would require.

 

Secondly, the 5D Mark III is not 'behind the competitiion'. I have been shooting along side a D800, and I can tell you from

firsthand experience that the 5D3's performance blew the Nikon away in some circumstances. The D800 was better in

some other circumstances, but the 5D3 would be my FIRST choice in a lot of shooting circumstances. I'm making this

judgment from actual experience, not from comparing specs.

 

Canon users need to look past the fact that 22 < 36 and realize that the 5D design is perfect for many apps.

[dogbert]

<blockquote>

<p>Geees, you don't see this fuss and negativity over in the Nikon forum, discussing the D600.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ahem, the D600 has 39 AF points with 9 cross points, 2 SD card slots, built in flash, 5.5 fps, and shutter rated to 150 000 cycles, and an improved 24 MP sensor for the same price as the 6D. And it is in theory available now.<br>

I can kind of see why they are not complaining in the Nikon forum.</p>

[peter_j2]

<blockquote>

<p>an improved 24 MP sensor [Geoff Francis]</p>

</blockquote>

<p>6D, 20 MP sensor.<br>

<br />D600, 24 MP sensor.</p>

<p>Hmm? High ISO low noise champion may be the 6D?</p>

[dogbert]

<p>Just to be clear, I wasn't saying the D600 sensor was definitely better than the 6D sensor. I expect it will as the Sony sensors have been a bit better than the Canon ones of late, but nobody knows yet.<br>

I was making the point that the D600 sensor is an improvement on its relacement, whereas Canon seems to have gone backwards or at best stayed the same.</p>