stanj wrote:
Because a 5D3 and 1DX is enough for now
That pretty well sums it up. Even the last generation are workhorses. Our 1DsIII, 5DII, and 7D cover off all our needs perfectly. We looked at the 6D but it was just too small for my hand and my wife didn't like the balance wit a 70-200 v2 or even the 24-70 v2. It was fine with the 100 L macro though.
I still loved the value for the price. A FF for that cost is pretty good. It just lacked the feel we're used too.
I will recommend it to advanced amateurs with potential.
If it suits your needs then, indeed, why woud't you get it?
Since you asked abouth others; I had a 1DmII, then a 5DmkII, 1DmIV and a 1Dx so it would not be an advancement for me. Indeed, the 5DmII was a wrong move for me. That does not make it any less suitable for you.
Walk around with it for hours and shoot as much as you can.
Put it through its paces under your typical shooting conditions and also in low light. Low light autofocus and high ISO performance are stellar. Handling is intuitive.
Critically examine the output.
The camera is absolutely excellent. It performs. Unless you are into fast action sports of very serious video (which granted, the 5D3 does better) the 6D is brilliant.
I have had mine for about 6 weeks and, unlike other bodies that I have had, I just can't let this one out of my hands.
Shutterbug2006 wrote:
I was out shooting in my backyard last night. I couldn't see the target, but the center AF could.
But the outer AF points suck in good light. They work about as well as they do on a 5D2. Maybe worse.
Hmmmm, that's conradictory on the outer points from what some other people were claiming....but inline with what I observed in the camera shop.
With the center point, how well does it track in low light. How well does it keep focus on moving kids indoors. I understand it can aquire focus in dim light, but how well does it keep focus as the subject moves.
Ralph Conway wrote:
As far I found out center AF in low(est) light looks like being fast and reliable.
Ralph, you also claim there is a huge difference in AF with the outer points compared to the 5d2. Is this truly the case. Have others who had experience with both cameras also noticed a huge difference between the 5d2 and 6d outer points.
The little testing I did in a camera shop really could not see any difference at all...both basically being pretty poor, especially indoors.
chez wrote:
Ralph, you also claim there is a huge difference in AF with the outer points compared to the 5d2. Is this truly the case. Have others who had experience with both cameras also noticed a huge difference between the 5d2 and 6d outer points.
The little testing I did in a camera shop really could not see any difference at all...both basically being pretty poor, especially indoors.
During photokina I was not allowed to put a SD card inside. So I did not get any images from testing to check if and how accurate the outer points worked. But the responded all and very fast in standard exhibition light. And it felt that they work accurate in VF and zoomed in on the display. My 5D II was lame compared to it under same light conditions (when it found focus on the left/right outer points - the upper and down ones or the inbetweens never really worked reliable in any light).
Most who already shoot it, are happy with the AF performance. Maybe many did not use a 5D II before. I guess RobDickinson surely did:
Don't forget, optical light projection is changing while short & fast lens stopping down and this matter shall challenge any AF system. I hardly believe lower D series having any AF compensation error for this optical effect. So, seeing and locking better does not means your final focal plane always at 1/3 dof. I would think twice about focussing screen option if you are frequently shooting with most fast lenses.
You can ignore this optical effect if you have f4 and slower in shorter lenses.
Shutterbug2006 wrote:
I was out shooting in my backyard last night. I couldn't see the target, but the center AF could.
But the outer AF points suck in good light. They work about as well as they do on a 5D2. Maybe worse.
agreed.....I went to the local best buy and was comparing the 6D with the D600. The outer AF points on the D600 were working well the 6D not so much, a lot of hunting going on. This was in a well lit area and was trying to hit on areas of good contrast
Michaelparris wrote:
agreed.....I went to the local best buy and was comparing the 6D with the D600. The outer AF points on the D600 were working well the 6D not so much, a lot of hunting going on. This was in a well lit area and was trying to hit on areas of good contrast
Assumed one with 24LII @ f2.8 shot, below is an optical effect sample that screws up an AF calculation that i have discussed earlier. Look at small black marks (focus shift) during AFed and image recorded.
You can see not so much for the shift if you've used an AF center point. An off center optical error AF compensation system might be exits in Canon bodies but not in 5/6/7 or lower series for sure and you know how canon marketing work.
For me, I would have felt like I'd settled for the 6D. What I really wanted was the 5D III, as I appreciate the beefier AF capabilities and build. The 6D is no slouch, however; I played with one and it did not feel like a 60D, though I did miss the multi-controller.
