michael_h4 Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>I'm an enthusiast, not a pro. I've been shooting with a 7D for about three years and have decided to upgrade to full frame this year. My favorite things to shoot are landscapes, portraits, and macro. My lenses are the 17-40 4.0 L, the 100 2.8 L IS and macro, and the 50 USM.<br /><br />I tried out the 6D yesterday and wanted to love it. I've read so many rave reviews about how much of an improvement the 6D is over the 5D Mark II. I hate to admit it, but I found the 6D underwhelming after my years with the 7D. <br /><br />The AF system and lack of joy stick felt like a downgrade from the 7D. So did the lack of an M-Fn button by the shutter of that third memory function (C3)-- things I actually use. I know that all of these things and ergonomics are minor. Nevertheless, I found the 6D to feel more like an upgraded Rebel than a FF step up from the 7D. It just doesn't <em>feel</em> like a $2,000 camera to me. I also have no use whatsoever for wi-fi or GPS.<br /><br />My question here is for others who may have upgraded from a 7D to full frame: Are the shortcomings of the 6D something you soon forget thanks to the 6D's great image quality? Or is it worth it to save up longer (a<em> lot</em> longer) for the 5D Mark III? It's a matter of personal preference, I know. But I'd really like to hear the preferences and perspectives of other 7D owners who've upgraded to FF.</p><p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esfishdoc Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>My path over the last 4+ years: 450D, 7D, 5DMkII, 5DMkIII. <br> At each step of the way I was very happy. I have not used a 6D.<br> I am more interested in the "feel" and look of the images I get with FF. I also like the size of the full size FF camera and in fact I have a grip on everything I've owned with the exception of the 450D.<br> There are so many variables to consider and so many reasons to stay or upgrade. Only you can figure out what you want/need. <br> Right now the best value out there is a used 5DMkII if you are interested in a FF camera (assuming you don't need features on the 6D or 5DMkIII)<br> It sounds like the 6D is probably not for you.<br> Richard</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member69643 Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>I'm confused by the premise that a 6D is an "upgrade" to a 7D...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <blockquote> <p>I've read so many rave reviews about how much of an improvement the 6D is over the 5D Mark II.</p> </blockquote> <p>I must have missed those. </p> <p>Coming from a 7D you will notice the inferior AF of the 6D, lack of a built in flash and lower fps. Other than those things the 6D is better in almost every respect. If you think you need better AF and/or higher fps the only new full frame Canon options are the 5D MkIII and the 1Dx.</p> <p>Consider a used 1Ds II. Good value, stellar image quality and excellent AF.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_m. Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>Playing the devil's advocate.....What is it that your 7D does not do for you? Exactly what are you expecting to get by going to a full frame camera? </p> <p>Lots of people are switching over and many of them shooting exactly what you shoot but I think that the hype may be clouding some people's judgment. You said:</p> <blockquote> <p>The AF system and lack of joy stick felt like a downgrade from the 7D. So did the lack of an M-Fn button by the shutter of that third memory function (C3)-- things I actually use. I know that all of these things and ergonomics are minor.</p> </blockquote> <p>They are absolutely NOT minor. They are about as important as they can be. I think the mistake that some people make is in assuming that a full frame camera is an "upgrade". It is not necessarily so. It is a different camera but not an upgrade. The 6D and it competitor the Nikon D600 are entry level consumer cameras that happen to have full frame sensors for those who want them. They are designed to be light, easy to use and relatively inexpensive. Your 7D was not designed to be an entry level camera. It is fast shooting and well built. It is aimed at a somewhat different market if you think about it. </p> <p>This is sacrilege in the Canon forum but perhaps you should look also at Nikon. You are not so invested in lenses that you could not switch. You may like the ergonomics of the Nikon system better. What do you have to lose? Just a trip to the camera store.<br> My suspicion is that you should hold what you have until you can feel comfortable really "upgrading". And that means not trading down in features, feel and capability to get full frame which is not an upgrade in and of itself but simply a different format better for some things and not for others. <br> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robin_sibson1 Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>I have used a dual-format kit for some years, and when that consisted of a 7D and a 5DII I would often use the 7D because, sensor apart, I found it t be the better camera. Not any more, now that the 5DII has been replaced with a 5DIII. The 5DIII has all the good features of the 7D and more, lacking only the built-in flash and having a slightly slower frame-rate. For you the 5DIII looks like the natural move into FF, and I would be very surprised if you are disappointed. That's not to say that the 6D is a bad camera, and it has some good features of its own. My 7D will still be useful for working with long lenses, since after adjusting for the different pixel count the reach factor is about ×1.4. Even there, when the 5DIII gets its upgraded firmware in a few weeks, I shall have to compare 7D results with 5DIII+Extender 1.4×.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 >>> Are the shortcomings of the 6D something you soon forget thanks to the 6D's great image quality? Been using a 6D for street photography and street portraiture. I've yet to find any shortcomings... www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crowe Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>I have used five DSLRs, three of them pro bodies from three different manufacturers, so I have had to adapt through many different control/ergonomic systems. Not one has been the perfect solution. Even buying my current 5D II was a compromise as it had to replace both a high speed crop sports body and a full frame body. However, I made no compromise in image quality and that is what remains most important to me. The 5D II, 6D, 5D III, and 1DsIII will all have virtually identical image quality at ISO 100, which is the setting I use 99% of the time for everything from landscapes to sports.</p> <p>A full frame body will set your 17-40/4 L, and your imagination, free. The 50mm and the macro would still likely feel more at home on the 7D though, so you will have to decide which is more important. </p> <p>The autofocus of the 5D II more than meets my needs so I have the luxury of waiting a few years for the 5D III. I just hope it acts more like the D800!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arie_vandervelden1 Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>Have you tried printing any photos from your 6D</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>Like others, I think you got bamboozled into the idea that full frame is automatically an upgrade from APS-C. I see no way that the 6D is really an improvement over the 7D for most shooters in terms of features. The 6D has improved image quality because it is full frame and that is about it. As a 5DII owner I don't see it as offering anything extra that makes me want to trade mine in for it either. The 6D is a good basic FF camera and as such does what is wanted of it. I think you must have misunderstood the reviews. The real upgrade <em>in all areas</em> for the 7D is the 5DIII.</p> Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>The 6D is the Rebel of Canon full frame bodies. It's built down to a price not up to a speciification. It's actually a very good camera, capable of very high quality images (as are the Digital Rebels), but it lacks some of the extra features found on the 7D and 5D MkIII. That's why it's full frame and still priced under $2000.</p> <p>The image quality of the 6D is only better than that of the 7D if you make prints that are large enough to see the difference.</p> <p>The 6D's main technical feature is that it can AF in lower light than most other EOS DSLRs</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francisco_salaquanda Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>One can look at it this way: The 6D is an entry level full frame camera to entice crop camera users to change to full frame. It has compromises known to 5DII and III users. The 7D is at the top of Canons crop sensor range so it does have lots of the bells and whistles.</p> <p>The advantage of full frame can be elusive to those crop sensor users. But we old folks who had a few decades in film know the difference. BUT you have to be good to take advantage of it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_h4 Posted March 31, 2013 Author Share Posted March 31, 2013 <blockquote> <p>But we old folks who had a few decades in film know the difference.</p> </blockquote> <p>Started with a Nikkormat FT in the 70's and worked my way up to an N90 and ultimately an F5. From also shooting film with my Rolleiflex back in the day, I learned the advantages of a bigger "sensor" (aka format).<br /><br />I'd say I've reached a point where I know the difference after shooting for more than 30 years. I guess I'm either going to buy a 5D ii or save up the princely sum to buy a 5D iii.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_ethridge Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 As soon as I read the specs on the 6D I knew it wasn't an upgrade to my 7D. I'm not really in need of full frame right now, but if I get to that point it will have to be something more than the 6D. The reason I bought the 7D was because it matched up perfectly with what I needed. I can't see giving up features just to go to full frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_pierlot Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>Michael, if I were you, I'd keep my 7D and pick up a used 5DII, which can be had for downwards of a grand these days. I use both of those bodies in tandem (and do much the same kind of photography that you do), and couldn't be happier. I passed on the 5DIII (and never considered the 6D) because it just doesn't offer me any advantage over my 5DII/7D combo.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_m. Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 I'm old. Shot film for decades. Own both full and dx cameras. I think the difference is highly overrated for all but a few uses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
znabal Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>I've had my 6D for about 3 weeks now. I've moved "up" from a 5DM1 which I've had for 6 years and had a EOS-3 before it. There are a number of Rebel models in my family which I've used at various times, but I've never had one myself. It sounds to me like the 6D just isn't the camera for Michael. For me 6D has the only 2 things that would get me to move on from the 5D, better low light performance and integrated GPS. It has things I don't care about that others may, such as video, live view, and wi-fi. It is missing things that obviously others care about that I don't, such as pop-up flash, the joy-stick, more focus points and faster frame rate.</p> <p>So far the differences I've found noticeable from the 5D in my way of shooting :<br> On the plus side the 6D is way faster to focus, quieter shutter (I use the quiet mode exclusively), and has sensor cleaning. The LCD is far easier to read/see.<br> On the minus, it starts up slower (cleaning the sensor) and the battery doesn't last long at all. The GPS takes longer than I'd like to sync. GPS is also the battery culprit (which I expected, but...) </p> <p>I've read so many complaints about the 6D being basically a full frame Rebel that I was very worried it would be too small in my hands. It is far closer to the 5D than a Rebel in actual hand feel to me, so that certainly isn't an issue. Although the menu system is different, I find it logical and fast to use. I'm still getting used to the location of the power button and moving to the upper or lower focus points. At this point, all the cameras available can make great images, I pick the feature set I care about and go from there, and I just don't get hung up thinking that everyone values the same features as I do. Right now, I can't even think of a feature that would get me interested in buying a new camera, so I imagine I'm set for at least another 6 years. -jeffl</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francisco_salaquanda Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>Nikon is also having the same "perceptual" issues with marketing the D600 and now made worse by the $1200 D7100, for exactly the same reasons. And used prices are showing it and is mirrored with Canon.<br> Right now you can buy a good 5DII (or a D700) for about $1200. And in Nikons case the D800 is now off buy up to a grand. I'd wait for the 5DII to drop below $2k. Its like buying a car. Let someone else cop the depreciation.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <center> <P> . <P> <img src= "http://citysnaps.net/2013%20photos/Bart%20Colma.jpg"><br> <i> BART before daybreak • Colma, California • ©2013 Brad Evans</i> <P> . </center> <P> >>> The 6D is an entry level full frame camera to entice crop camera users to change to full frame. It has compromises known to 5DII and III users.<P> What are the compromises with respect to the 5DII? <P> Upgrading from one to a 6D, I see a lot of pluses (aside from GPS and WiFi). Better high ISO performance, better AF, silent shutter mode. And the best feature over the 5DII and 7D, is a MUCH better Auto ISO feature which I use all the time. I can specify the ISO range, AND, set a minimum shutter speed (to avoid blur). In aperture priority mode, that's great for street shooting where light changes dramatically (such as inside bars). Also, it's a little smaller/lighter, and better ergonomically for one-handed shooting. With a 40mm pancake lens mounted it's a great combo for street photography and street portraiture... www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_pugh Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>On the comment about waiting for the 5D II to drop below $2K, a couple of months ago it was on sale new from at least one major online photo retailer (and I would guess the other two as well) for a net of $1799, $2199 less a $400 rebate. I think that ran through the end of January. I ordered one for that price, but after a pro photographer acquaintance advised me to take a strong look at the 5D III largely because of the vastly superior autofocus system (she has shot with both extensively), I decided to send the 5D II back unopened and ordered the 5D III for $2975 net, $3175 less a $200 rebate. Had I not recently bought a telephoto lens to photograph birds and wildlife I would have kept the 5D II. From what I've read there's virtually no difference in IQ between the II and III; the 5D III has a better and larger LCD and a few other bells and whistles, but the 61 point autofocus is the major difference and I'd think would be the driver of most people's decisions about whether it's worth the cost differential to them. I have been delighted with 5D III, particularly for bird photography, and with a firmware update that will allow it to autofocus with f/8 aperture lenses I'll like it even better because I can use the 400mm L f/5.6 with a 1.4X TC and have autofocus.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_south Posted March 31, 2013 Share Posted March 31, 2013 <p>I could see how the lack of certain external controls that you've become used to could be an issue. That said, if you spend more than a day with the 6D you'll probably become comfortable with the way that it operates.</p> <p>I don't know about the AF comparison between the two cameras. I seem to recall that AF on the 7D was quite full featured. I'm sure that the 6D is capable of better image quality, but you might not see the difference at less than 50 percent.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hjoseph7 Posted April 1, 2013 Share Posted April 1, 2013 <p>The 6D would be a nice upgrade to the original 5D, but the 7D serves different functions.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted April 1, 2013 Share Posted April 1, 2013 <p>My impression of the 6D (and I'm still waiting to get my hands on one for evaluation and review) is that it appears better suited to someone shooting portraits and landscapes rather than action like sports and birds in flight. My 5D is much the same and upgrading from a 5D to a 6D would be something I may one day consider. The 5D is actually still pretty good for what I use it for (portraits, landscapes, things not requiring lightning fast tracking AF or high ISO settings)</p> <p>On the other hand, if I was going to upgrade my 7D it would either be to a 5D MkIII or the inevitable 7D MkII which will appear at some point in the future.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruslan Posted April 1, 2013 Share Posted April 1, 2013 <blockquote> <p>My favorite things to shoot are landscapes, portraits, and macro.</p> </blockquote> <p>So why do you need 7D's AF? Built-in flash and FPS rate? You need a top-notch landscape lens, yes, maybe a manual, but not the numerous AF points. If you shot PJ - I would understand you. But in good hands 6D is capable of PJ work. Consider this:<br> PICTURE QUALITY=6D. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruslan Posted April 1, 2013 Share Posted April 1, 2013 <blockquote> <p>The 6D and it competitor the Nikon D600 are entry level consumer cameras</p> </blockquote> <p>No. Consumer - yes, but not entry-level. Can an entry-level camera be without pop-up flash? Even in 1990s every entry-level Canon had it. Can an entry-level one have the best high ISO in the industry among all grades of cameras? No. For travelling its low weight really matters too. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now