Yohan Pamudji
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.2 #8 · 6D - no "WOW" feeling? | |
RobDickinson wrote:
Its wierd. The 6d is in exactly the same position the 5d was.
5d was a 20d with a FF sensor and a few tweaks.
6d is a 60d with a ff sensor and a few tweaks.
Except that it isn't. When the light got dim, both 5D and 20D had 1 usable AF point. On paper the 6D's 1 cross-type AF point is mediocre compared to the even the 60D's. On paper. I know--don't judge until it's out. But in this case IMO it's safe to start from what we know and work from there until otherwise proven, which in the case of non-cross-type AF points all of my past experience has been that they're mostly useless in low light, certainly not reliable enough to use consistently in pressure situations.
I know that what you said has a of truth to it, but when AF is a crucial feature then the comparison breaks down. For some people a single AF point is great, and for them I say, "More power to you!" But for some of us that's not the case.
5D launched at $3200, 6d launches at $2100 at a time when the USD is worth peanuts.
This coincides with their relative positioning as you stated above. The 60D is a lower end product compared to the 20D at its time. Similarly the 6D is a lower end product than the 5D in its time. Hence the price makes sense. Again my only real problem with the 6D is the AF. The price would have been acceptable for me if the 7D were at least all cross-type points.
It has 20mp, ISO 25600+ -3ev focus, wifi, gps, 4.5fps, live view, remote control from your phone, movies etc etc etc.
And yet were unimpressed. hmm..
If I need reasonably good AF am I supposed to be impressed by things I have absolutely no need for such as Wifi, GPS, live view, and remote control? I would trade all of those for all cross-type AF points any day and twice on Sunday. Heck, strip the camera all the way down to 5D-level technology (No live view! No movies! How did savages live back then?!) except put an amazing sensor in it (which arguably Canon can't do with their current gen sensors) and a very good AF system in it and I would buy it in a heartbeat over the 6D.
Obviously the camera isn't targeted at me. I'm a general-interest shooter who shoots a lot of people in both posed and candid situations, but basically shoots anything that moves or doesn't move... Uh, so everything then  This makes me wonder who it is for? Studio shooters and landscapers? Is that it? Not that you couldn't shoot anything else with it, but are there really so many people out there who would actually use the Wifi, GPS, remote control, etc. over a more competent AF system? I'm not talking about users who think those features might be neat, use them once, then forget they even exist. Are my requirements so unusual? All of the support for the 5DII's AF and now the 6D make me wonder sometimes, despite the many people seemingly on my side decrying the AF.
I understand that a camera can't be designed for everybody, but I think I'm being honest with myself that my bewilderment with Canon's strategy isn't simply a result of selfish pouting from not having my needs catered to. Does this camera really make sense, and if so who does it make sense to and are there enough of those users to justify the feature set?
|
The 6D is not for people who regularly tirade on this forum - people who think the cost of a 24 L2 is normal and who think that the 70-200 2.8 L2 is just a zoom. People who think 45 focus points is barely enough and 22 MP is not enough. You've got the 5D3 with 1 series AF at $3500, the 1DX with 10 FPS at $7000, and you've got the 6D with regular AF and frame rate at $2100. For the normal consumer (as opposed to the prosumer) who thinks maybe FF is better than crop, this is a great camera. I know PetKal won't want one, he just bought a 1DX and a 400 f2.8. EB-1 might want to replace his 50D, 30D, and XTi with one, its no more blah than those, but only if he gets over expecting 2005 pricing for a 2012 body. 
