melcat wrote:
vsg28 wrote:
I sure hope that is the case. As you said, it isn't explicitly mentioned in the Canon info section on the app.

I found a copy of the page back now on the UK site:

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/Digital_SLR/eos_remote.aspx

which I thought I read earlier on the US or Australian site. Anyway, there's a drawing there of someone checking their pictures from their phone sitting on a train with the camera in a bag. And it says

"EOS Remote allows connection via access points (infrastructure), but even in environments without access points, it can be used if you have just a camera and a smartphone."

Ok now we are talking. This may be a tipping point for a lot of prosumers people wanting to go FF.

People in forums like this have a funny idea of "very old". Mine is 5 years old, and the software ceased to work on OS X Lion, which is *already* one version old.

Well, unfortunately electronic devices such as digital cameras, and even PCs, don't age very well.

And if little Santa business' MacBook should break, it's probably better to get a Windows 7 laptop.

coranda wrote:
If I understand you correctly, what you are saying is that it won't work if you upgrade your laptop and your software but not your camera.

No, it breaks with Apple's periodic OS releases, which in the Apple world you have to take eventually because security patches don't go out for more than 2 versions of the OS.

There has to be a limit to how far it is reasonable to stretch that separation of technologies. We can, of course reasonably argue about where that limit should lie, but there does have to be a limit. I have a lot of audio tech that used to work with old computers but doesn't now on my new hardware.

Yes, the limit should be when underlying hardware connections etc. are no longer industry standard. I have a nice Firewire audio interface in the cupboard...

But how long is it reasonable to expect to be able to upgrade one side of your technology without the other?

I would say 3 years, when there hasn't been any fundamental change in interfaces or even connectors, is not good enough for a multithousand dollar "professional" camera.

When USB3 is ubiquitous one might look at that 5D and say it transfers too slowly. OK, but the 6D is still only USB2.

gdanmitchell wrote:
artd wrote:
Huh. It is approaching four years now since I purchased my 5DII. And Canon--despite releasing three new FF cameras this year--has still not produced a camera I would want to purchase as an upgrade.



+1, though that doesn't necessarily make me unhappy... ;-)

It will make me unhappy if Canon follows another 4-year product development cycle and they don't come out with a more appealing product until 2016.

Nikon wins. Screw you Canon. As a 5Dc shooter I wouldn't give this pathetic camera a 2nd look.

artd wrote:
gdanmitchell wrote:
artd wrote:
Huh. It is approaching four years now since I purchased my 5DII. And Canon--despite releasing three new FF cameras this year--has still not produced a camera I would want to purchase as an upgrade.



+1, though that doesn't necessarily make me unhappy... ;-)

It will make me unhappy if Canon follows another 4-year product development cycle and they don't come out with a more appealing product until 2016.

I totally agree. This is pathetic, as already mentioned.

melcat wrote:

Yes, the limit should be when underlying hardware connections etc. are no longer industry standard. I have a nice Firewire audio interface in the cupboard...

I've got an ancient MOTU Ultralite, circa 2006, and it still works fine with my Macs. Even works with the Thunderbolt adapter. MOTU finally added a duo FW/USB interface to the newest Ultralite so they are a bit behind the cutting edge but no biggie. Whatever "Industry Standard" emerges, it will not last forever and something better is always on the horizon. Most of the audio pros I know are still stuck in FW-land and will probably continue using it until it breaks or turns to dust.

So weird. I actually like the 6D.
Just not for the price, but that will drop. Street price will be around $1800 real soon I think.

That will make it a very nice camera. Ok, it's crippled like the D600.
The problem isn't this camera , it's the missing cameras, from both Nikon and Canon (in my opinion of course)

I still think these two cameras will sell well though.

I think Canon made a mistake. It's 9D not 6D.

When they said "entry level FF", I thought it was gonna be on par with the 650D........

I didn't realise they meant 1100D "entry level".

The D600 is not so focus crippled as the 6D. Canon, of course, has cut the 6D's Mp to 20 and adds GPS. So it seems I already own a 6D and accessories-my obsolete 5D MK II. The D6's problem is that it has to be less than the MK III. The MK III is way behind the much cheaper D800. So the $2100 D600 is some kind of competitor to the $3500 MK III.

The problem with the 6D isn't its design or specification. The problem is its price.

If the 6D were priced at the original 7D price point, well, we would all throwing our hats in the air, cheering finally the era of reasonably priced full frame. But if released at the best part of £2000 the 6D would look very lacklustre bearing in mind the prices of the 5D2 and 5D3, let alone the existing 60D price point.

For most cameras the price point is important, but for the 6D I suspect it will be particularly critical. Lets hope for a low price.

The problem with the 6D isn't its design or specification.

I see a huge problem in its "newly-developed 11-point AF sensor"

To quote Canon:

To support the ample sensitivity of the new camera’s sensor, the EOS 6D camera’s Auto Focus (AF) system includes a newly-developed 11-point AF sensor featuring a high-precision center cross-type point with an exceptional EV -3 sensitivity rating for accurate focusing even in extremely low-light conditions.

In 2004 Canon is criticized for its single AF cross sensor in the 5D1. Canon is roasted again in 2008 in 5DII for its same single cross sensor. In 2012 Canon finally responds with its 5DIII with 41 cross sensors. So in 2012, Canon designs a new full frame sensor different than 5DIII and 1Dx, and goes to the trouble a designing a new AF sensor for the 6D, and it is still has only a single AF cross sensor Is Canon brain dead, or is this a further example Canon going to extreme and expensive lengths to intentionally cripple a mid range body?

David Baldwin wrote:
The problem with the 6D isn't its design or specification. The problem is its price.

If the 6D were priced at the original 7D price point, well, we would all throwing our hats in the air, cheering finally the era of reasonably priced full frame. But if released at the best part of £2000 the 6D would look very lacklustre bearing in mind the prices of the 5D2 and 5D3, let alone the existing 60D price point.

For most cameras the price point is important, but for the 6D I suspect it will be particularly critical. Lets hope for a low price.

This is the truth. Even if it wasn't the camera everyone wanted, if it was the right price people would be happy.

I think a lot of people had the same issue with the 5d3 (although after months of ownership I personally consider the original price good value, and the new price a bargain!).

Don Clary wrote:
In 2004 Canon is criticized for its single AF cross sensor in the 5D1. Canon is roasted again in 2008 in 5DII for its same single cross sensor. In 2012 Canon finally responds with its 5DIII with 41 cross sensors. So in 2012, Canon designs a new full frame sensor different than 5DIII and 1Dx, and goes to the trouble a designing a new AF sensor for the 6D, and it is still has only a single AF cross sensor Is Canon brain dead, or is this a further example Canon going to extreme and expensive lengths to intentionally cripple a mid range body?

Difficult to say what they were thinking, but if they **didn't know** it was going to be badly received, someone "deserves to be fired". The fact that it's sensitive to -3EV isn't even going down with that much excitement.

If they knew but had their business reasons then fair enough - they made their decision and have to live with it. But if it bombs someone "probably will be fired"

PhilDrinkwater wrote:
Don Clary wrote:
In 2004 Canon is criticized for its single AF cross sensor in the 5D1. Canon is roasted again in 2008 in 5DII for its same single cross sensor. In 2012 Canon finally responds with its 5DIII with 41 cross sensors. So in 2012, Canon designs a new full frame sensor different than 5DIII and 1Dx, and goes to the trouble a designing a new AF sensor for the 6D, and it is still has only a single AF cross sensor Is Canon brain dead, or is this a further example Canon going to extreme and expensive lengths to intentionally cripple a mid range body?

Difficult to say what they were thinking, but if they **didn't know** it was going to be badly received, someone "deserves to be fired". The fact that it's sensitive to -3EV isn't even going down with that much excitement.

If they knew but had their business reasons then fair enough - they made their decision and have to live with it. But if it bombs someone "probably will be fired"

Don Clary wrote:
The problem with the 6D isn't its design or specification.

I see a huge problem in its "newly-developed 11-point AF sensor"

To quote Canon:

To support the ample sensitivity of the new camera’s sensor, the EOS 6D camera’s Auto Focus (AF) system includes a newly-developed 11-point AF sensor featuring a high-precision center cross-type point with an exceptional EV -3 sensitivity rating for accurate focusing even in extremely low-light conditions.

In 2004 Canon is criticized for its single AF cross sensor in the 5D1. Canon is roasted again in 2008 in 5DII for its same single cross sensor. In 2012 Canon finally responds with its 5DIII with 41 cross sensors. So in 2012, Canon designs a new full frame sensor different than 5DIII and 1Dx, and goes to the trouble a designing a new AF sensor for the 6D, and it is still has only a single AF cross sensor Is Canon brain dead, or is this a further example Canon going to extreme and expensive lengths to intentionally cripple a mid range body?

I can just imagine the discussion they had in the board meeting.

A: De wa... what AF are we going to put in this camera?
B: Well, just give it the 650D AF.
A: Bakayaro!! If we give them the 9 cross type AF, many of our customers who doesn't really need the 61 point AF won't be buying the 5D3!!
B: Dame dame... We can't just give it the old 9 point AF with center cross type... our customers will be complaining.
A: Mou chotto kangaero yo... Just add a couple more AF and make the center AF more sensitive.
B: OK...

After the D600 announcement...

B: Ne... The new Nikon D600 has 39 point AF with 9 cross type...
A: Kuso Nikon... There goes my job.

Don

I understand what you are saying and agree with you. But what I was trying to say was that many of us could forgive the mediocre specs if we were compensated with a low price.

However, I do have a nasty suspicion that the body will stay high priced, in which case it will be undesirable to many of us.

If the center AF point is bulletproff and kicks a$$ than count on me to upgrade to the 6D from my 5Dc, esp. when the price drops into the $1800 range after the holidays. Also hoping for a stop better noise improvement over the 5DII.

Even if after 4 years, the 6D is only 1% better than the 5DII, Canon will still sell thousands and thousands of them and it will be business as usual at Canon.

Another boring camera from Canon. At $1700 I would start to look.