@tshore -- I also came from 7D to 6D and my first impressions on the build and controls etc mirrored yours. I've now turned off the auto image review and set the magnification to actual size as I like to check for focus with one push of the mangifying glass button. I also found that my lenses seem to focus much better on the 6D and my 24-70 mk1 was revived by it.
On the other hand, I prefer 6D's shutter sound. Even in the non-silent mode, it is much quieter than 7D's, which I found a bit too loud when I was shooting in an audience seat.
I've shot some outdoor actions using both 7D and 6D (using outdoor AF points on 7D and center AF point on 6D) over the holiday and I think the 6D did pretty well with tracking so now I need to re-think about whether I need to keep the 7D for action shots.
py2000 wrote:
On the other hand, I prefer 6D's shutter sound. Even in the non-silent mode, it is much quieter than 7D's, which I found a bit too loud when I was shooting in an audience seat.
I've shot some outdoor actions using both 7D and 6D (using outdoor AF points on 7D and center AF point on 6D) over the holiday and I think the 6D did pretty well with tracking so now I need to re-think about whether I need to keep the 7D for action shots.
Yeah, something's wrong with BOTH shots. They looked like they've gone through the rack of resizing and compression in a bad way if those are supposed to be 100% crops (or less).
tshore -- Not trying to rake you over the coals. Just curious about the processing. The overall shots look good, with good color and contrast. (crickets. . . )
6D is a winner for Canon .When the tech specs of 6D became public, a lot of people (including myself) where dissapointed because of the D600's tech specs. But in reality ,beside de 2 stops of DR at ISO 100 for D600 ,there is no other aspects in that the D600 is superior to 6D (for me, dual card feature is not important ).
Thanks everyone for the replies. I think that I didn't do very well creating apples-to-apples comparable crops for the two cameras. I think I re-sized to 900x600 when I saved them.
I re-did the crops, this time on DPP, cropping to 450px by 300px. for each crop. Because the number of pixels is very close on the two cameras, the resulting crops are also very close in size, and should be "100% crops" in the sense that 1 jpeg pixel in the original image is still 1 jpeg pixel in the crop. There should be no mushing-about or re-mapping of the pixels as a result of cropping and re-sizing. I took both sets in jpeg rather than raw. No additional sharpening was applied in DPP. When I get the chance I will re-test shooting in raw, to control for any in-camera jpeg processing differences.
I think the images below will show that the sharpness difference between the two bodies is very small, with maybe a tiny edge to the 6D. The 6D seems to have a larger edge in color and contrast, but again, pretty close. My initial take is that in good light, low ISO, and with equal glass, the 6D and 7D images are very close in IQ.
I am thinking the slight edge to the 6D might be due in part to the fact that absolute size of the lens aperture is larger when shooting at 155mm at f/8 on the 6D than at 102mm at f/8 on the 7D. The larger absolute aperture size would result in a lower ratio of aperture circumference to lens area, resulting in less diffraction. Does this make sense?
Here are the crops...hope they show on your screens what they show on mine...
Yep 7d isnt a bad camera but the 6d is better for landscapes.
ISO 100 wony be so much difference apart from foliage definition (and lens choice), but I shoot a lot of star shots and clean ISO 1600/3200+ makes a huge difference.
I like it. No regrets but I do wish that Canon would have kept the power switch on the backside of the camera. That and after years of shooting with the 1D Series, I have to remember the camera has a mode dial.
