Ralph Conway wrote:
Easy choice here (fore me). Better sensor/IQ, more reliable AF, higher ISO capabilities, less (if not no) banding at ISO 6.400, better ooc jpegs, Usable pics up to ISO 25k and the center AF point sensitive to -3 EV. Additional wifi and GPS. MA at both zoom ends.
Better weight, size, build. All at a 10% higher price?
What you lose:
1/8000 (I never needed)
CF card (who really cares?)
joystick (stupid decission by Canon imo)
I love the 5D II. For me the best camera Canon manufactured in digital till last generation. But it is topped by 1D X, 5D III, 6D now.
And 6D sales start at nearly the actual 5D II price. This 200 € difference imo make the decission easy.
Partially agree (see my first post earlier in this thread). The -3 EV can be convenient, but you can easily also use the M mode to under/overexpose above the given 2 EV stops. WiFi and GPS definitely a plus, also MA at both zoom ends. Don't forget that you lose another 1% in the viewfinder coverage compared to the 5D II, which I see as a big drawback (here the 100% coverage of the 5D III is great). Agree with points mentioned about CF card and joystick.
For me it is not a question to under/overexpose. It is just a big advantadge having a (center) AF point you can trust upon, when your eyes are not longer able to detect, if your manual focusing hits focus. That was what happened to me when I first tested the camera.
The 97% VF is no issue to me. Usually I recompose and know well what is hidden by the VFs borders. The 98% of 5D II are not better. The 100% of course are best. But I never lost a pic by this since I started into digital photography.
Joystick: I really thought about if there might be a way to customize 6D and put the joystick back. - but I guess that would become extraordinary expensive. I guess Canon canceled it to have a "new" feature for 6D II in 3 years.
I don't shoot in a cave or under the sewers. So -3EV is useless.
- single-function top button is inadequate.
- SD card. If you are starting new, no big deal.
- 1/4000th max Tv fails when you like to use fast primes under broad daylight.
- No joystick. Again if you are new or are graduating from a Rebel, it is ok.
IMO, used 5d2 is a stellar deal. Both suck at outer point AF.
Get a used 5d2 and use the rest of the money to buy wads of land in Arizona suburbs... or lenses.
M Lucca wrote:
I don't shoot in a cave or under the sewers. So -3EV is useless.
- single-function top button is inadequate.
- SD card. If you are starting new, no big deal.
- 1/4000th max Tv fails when you like to use fast primes under broad daylight.
- No joystick. Again if you are new or are graduating from a Rebel, it is ok.
IMO, used 5d2 is a stellar deal. Both suck at outer point AF.
Get a used 5d2 and use the rest of the money to buy wads of land in Arizona suburbs... or lenses.
Opinions vrs. opinions.
- Shoot in dark churches and do portraits at fireplaces, where -0.5 EV AF does not work
- single function top button feels more ergonomic to me
- 1/4000 is enough for me - I use 1.4 open when low light forces me
- No joystick is not okay if you upgrade from an xxD or xD (5, 7 or any 1 before 1D X)
Maybe one gets much land in Arizona. But 300 $ is not much money if you want to use it for lenses.
Ah, I got it. Your comment was mentioned ironical!
coons10 wrote:
OK guys tell me what to do? I finally get to upgrade to a FF sensor but I don't quite have enough cash for the 5D3. So I have to choose between the 6D or the 5D2.
6D Body Only is $2,100, or w/24-105 bundle is $2,700.
5D2 Body Only is $1,800, or w/24-105 bundle is $2,500.
The 6D body alone is $300 more than the 5D2 body, but with the bundles the difference is only $200. So far I only own one piece of L glass, so I'm leaning toward one of the bundles.
I primarily shoot landscapes but I do some sports stuff too. (I know that neither of these bodies is a great action shooter, but I can deal with those limitations)
Is the older technology on the 5D2 a serious problem when comparing these two bodies? Early reviews of the 6D seem pretty solid.
How important is the sports stuff? That's where the improved AF of the 5D3, 7D, 1Danything comes in. Not sure about the 6D as of yet for sports, you might want to check with someone who has one. The 5D2 will be great for landscapes... the sports aspect is where you need to be concerned...
joezasada wrote:
How important is the sports stuff? That's where the improved AF of the 5D3, 7D, 1Danything comes in. Not sure about the 6D as of yet for sports, you might want to check with someone who has one. The 5D2 will be great for landscapes... the sports aspect is where you need to be concerned...
+ 100
And concerned about 6D, too. AF system and frame rate do not make this camera the perfect sports gear, imo. I was shooting some american football for a friends team 2 years ago with 5D II. It worked out, but first time I wished to use a camera like 1D IV for this stuff.
Ralph Conway wrote:
Easy choice here (fore me). Better sensor/IQ, more reliable AF, higher ISO capabilities, less (if not no) banding at ISO 6.400, better ooc jpegs, Usable pics up to ISO 25k and the center AF point sensitive to -3 EV. Additional wifi and GPS. MA at both zoom ends.
Better weight, size, build. All at a 10% higher price?
What you lose:
1/8000 (I never needed)
CF card (who really cares?)
joystick (stupid decission by Canon imo)
I love the 5D II. For me the best camera Canon manufactured in digital till last generation. But it is topped by 1D X, 5D III, 6D now.
And 6D sales start at nearly the actual 5D II price. This 200 € difference imo make the decission easy.
Most people would agree with Ralph. I certainly do. At the prices you mention, the 6D is the best possible choice. If you had the cash I would point you to the 5DIII, A better "all-around" camera, IMO. But maybe not $800 better. Choosing between a $1700-$1800 5DII and a 6D is no decision at all. Now, if you were willing to buy used gear, the 5D2 is the best Canon bargain going right now. My choice is the 6D. Over the 5DII and the Nikon D600.
But since you don't want to buy used-- a sentiment I don't at all understand in this case-- then 6D.
Yeh, I've seen 5d2's advertised for $1200 with less than 20,000 clicks. That's a savings of $900 over a new 6d. I personally would purchase the 5d2 used, shoot with it for a year after which you can pick up a lightly used 5d3.
But hey, if it wasn't for these early adopters paying the price premium, who would buy these new toys?
Ralph Conway wrote:
Opinions vrs. opinions.
- Shoot in dark churches and do portraits at fireplaces, where -0.5 EV AF does not work
- single function top button feels more ergonomic to me
- 1/4000 is enough for me - I use 1.4 open when low light forces me
- No joystick is not okay if you upgrade from an xxD or xD (5, 7 or any 1 before 1D X)
Maybe one gets much land in Arizona. But 300 $ is not much money if you want to use it for lenses.
Ah, I got it. Your comment was mentioned ironical!
It's only a $300 savings if you like the new smell of a camera. You can get the 5d2 for $900 cheaper than the 6d. That is a good chunk of change.
I know it's not a choice in your question, but would you consider getting a great condition used Canon 5DC? That'd open up a lot of room for cash on a real nice lens. Since you say you won't be doing sports/action shots it may be worth looking into. I ended up getting the 5DC and am amazed with the IQ. Granted I'm sure the 5D II and 5D III are even better but I haven't had the pleasure of using them yet.
Another option is, you could always rent and see which you like the most. :-)
joezasada wrote:
How important is the sports stuff? That's where the improved AF of the 5D3, 7D, 1Danything comes in. Not sure about the 6D as of yet for sports, you might want to check with someone who has one. The 5D2 will be great for landscapes... the sports aspect is where you need to be concerned...
In reality you can buy a used 7d and 5d2 for the price of a 6d. The dual camera setup will much better match what he wants to shoot.
A couple benjamins diff between the two cameras are nuttin' across the useful life of the gear, so I'd buy the one you like the most and not think about the cost. I have a four year old 5D2 and it's still going strong so no immediate plans to upgrade or switch. However if I was starting over, I'd spring for the new tech of the 6D. The difference in IQ between the two cameras is nominal but a little better high ISO and noise behavior is always welcome. The 5D2 is not a large camera, heck it's lighter than my 7D, so the slightly smaller form factor and weight of the 6D is a pretty minor consideration. That -3 EV center point is also nice if you're a nocturnal shooter.
retrofocus wrote:
And this is exactly the way Canon likes to have you think! Being afraid to buy an older model since it might not be fixed in the soon future after you purchased the item. DSLRs are electronics which are replaced in a 3 year cycle (the more expensive ones) or even earlier. The probability is high that you will be fine with an "outdated" (?) camera like the 5D II for many years to come until you can switch to a new tool/camera later on.
That doesn't make sense because Canon still wants to sell their old stock. Why would they want to scare people away?
Ralph Conway wrote:
The 97% VF is no issue to me. Usually I recompose and know well what is hidden by the VFs borders. The 98% of 5D II are not better. The 100% of course are best. But I never lost a pic by this since I started into digital photography.
IMO ist is a huge drawback, 1% difference is visible. You don't lose a shot, but it might need more cropping in post processing since your final photo includes more area than you expect from your original composition. Of course LiveView avoids this concern since it is always 100%. But I personally use in most cases the viewfinder still. And already the 98% in my 5D II gets sometimes annoying even I always add in my mind the 2% missing to the composition. Even more than the improvement in AF, the 100% viewfinder in the 5D III is the best improvement in this cmera IMO.
The EOS 5D Mark II Body Refurbished is $1760 as of my last check and it's in stock on Canon's website. Call Canon's loyalty Program and trade in an old or broken slr/dslr, p&s or old MF film camera and you usually get 10 or 20% off the above price; sometimes it's just $200 off...that would bring the body down to $1560 or so, often you can add a lens to the body at a discount off the lenses referb price...you get a 90 day warranty, not a 1 year, these referbs are like new.
It's an option...I've had excellent purchases from here on FM as well, buying used gear has been a great way to explore photography with a much smaller dent in my bank, and I've not been disappointed yet.
For me it is not a question to under/overexpose. It is just a big advantadge having a (center) AF point you can trust upon, when your eyes are not longer able to detect, if your manual focusing hits focus. That was what happened to me when I first tested the camera. 
- but I guess that would become extraordinary expensive. I guess Canon canceled it to have a "new" feature for 6D II in 3 years.
