Ghost wrote:
Shot with 50 1.4 Siggy. Mostly wide open @ISO100. Most of the photos per the exif were > 1/4000. The D600 would've been useless thanks to the crippled shutter speed.

The 6D max shutter speed is 1/4000th.

DavidCZ wrote:
Ghost wrote:
I will be watching this in interest. If it is 11-pt AF based on FF sensor size then the spread should be better than the cropped d7k AF derived with the D600. Especially if it is all X-type and has similar AF flexibility as the 7d.

I just had a shoot yesterday afternoon. Shot with 50 1.4 Siggy. Mostly wide open @ISO100. Most of the photos per the exif were > 1/4000. The D600 would've been useless thanks to the crippled shutter speed. Something that I don't quite understand.

Will see. I might nab a cheap 1ds-something instead.

D600 has the option of ISO setting from 50 to ISO 25600 equivalent.

D700 has native ISO range 200-6400. I sometimes dial it down to L-1 which is equivalent ISO 50 in a sunny day.

D600's native ISO range is better than D700 in this case.

David, the L settings are really just the base iso with more clipped highlights. If you shoot raw (like I know you do) there is NO reason to ever use them.

D600/D800/D4 = ISO 100+
D700/D3 = ISO 200+

tobicus wrote:
This kind of looks like a downgraded 5D2, to be honest.

I thought the same thing and right now you can buy a NEW 5DII for less since it's on sale at the moment.

Not impressed. Even less impressed with Canon ruining my resale values.

This stupid camera war BS needs to stop. Just make a consumer/prosumer/professional selection of single offers already; and update them accordingly. This holding and splitting up features just to battle back and forth is getting childish. In the long run, they're just going to dwindle their overall value and run off professional shooters who would like to retain some value in their gear. Sure, it's a tool, but many of us take into consideration the resale value of our tools as part investment.

^ I don't think Canon or Nikon cares about resale, as they don't profit from it. They're going to keep putting out incremental upgrades as long as possible. I'd say the bigger threat to professional shooters isn't the decreased resale value of their gear, but the fact that the gear gap between pros and hobbyists will continue to decrease until the Uncle Bobs are as equipped and empowered as the professionals. This, of course, benefits the camera corporations, but will only make business more difficult for folks who want to do this full time.

Well, that was also sort of my point, but I agree with the way you laid it out.

Odd. Canon confuses me. Who are they building cameras for?

Also, no PC port? I realize it's an old interface, but I still use it.

Spencer

tobicus wrote:
I'd say the bigger threat to professional shooters isn't the decreased resale value of their gear, but the fact that the gear gap between pros and hobbyists will continue to decrease until the Uncle Bobs are as equipped and empowered as the professionals.
mmm I guess that's your opinion, but I completely disagree specially if you're basing this on gear. I've had "pros" with better gear than I have churn out bad photos even though I work with rebels.


To me the 6d is something I don't want because it sacrifices on stuff I'm interested in upgrading, canon did this as always to have more "candy" for the consumers but nothing really interesting for the people that actually know what they need. Someone mentioned "full frame rebel" I think (after reading more info) he's right not even stuff that a 50d had

Cuervo79 wrote:
not even stuff that a 50d had

The 40D, which came out in '07 for about half the price of the 6D, had 9 AF points and they were ALL cross.

ok the 5D mk3 is the replacement for the mark 2 get it...the 6D is just an entry level FF,of which OBVIOUSLY wont have the same bells and whistles as the 5D mk3,and more OBVIOUS the 5D mk2 is on its way out of production...geez

One feature that could be killer - the centre cross point focuses down to -3 EV. combine that with presumably superior ISO performance (to 5d2) and you could have something very compelling for low-light shooting.

amonline wrote:
Not impressed. Even less impressed with Canon ruining my resale values.

This stupid camera war BS needs to stop. Just make a consumer/prosumer/professional selection of single offers already; and update them accordingly. This holding and splitting up features just to battle back and forth is getting childish. In the long run, they're just going to dwindle their overall value and run off professional shooters who would like to retain some value in their gear. Sure, it's a tool, but many of us take into consideration the resale value of our tools as part investment.


This might cause some flames from Apple Fanboys here but it looks more like Canon & Nikon are taking page from Apple playbook by offering products with crippled down feature in each cycle to make sure people keep upgrading. Also both are targeting more and more of consumer market just like Apple does with consumer appliance philosophy for devices.

mjoshi wrote:
amonline wrote:
Not impressed. Even less impressed with Canon ruining my resale values.

This stupid camera war BS needs to stop. Just make a consumer/prosumer/professional selection of single offers already; and update them accordingly. This holding and splitting up features just to battle back and forth is getting childish. In the long run, they're just going to dwindle their overall value and run off professional shooters who would like to retain some value in their gear. Sure, it's a tool, but many of us take into consideration the resale value of our tools as part investment.


This might cause some flames from Apple Fanboys here but it looks more like Canon & Nikon are taking page from Apple playbook by offering products with crippled down feature in each cycle to make sure people keep upgrading. Also both are targeting more and more of consumer market just like Apple does with consumer appliance philosophy for devices.

I think you are slight off on the concept of Apple.
Apple does not cripple there products. No...

Apple offers certain features - but the features they offer they do very well. Along with doing their 'own thing' philosophy. Either you want in or not. ....creates a 'cool' factor. This is Apple.

Disclaimer: I own just one Apple product: iphone 4.

Canon is going after the consumer money because of recent economic/natural disasters.
Yes, the 6D could have been many things from a no video FF to the often dreamed about 3D.

I mean really - why offer a 1 cross point AF? Really it is backwards.

Ziffl3 wrote:
mjoshi wrote:
amonline wrote:
Not impressed. Even less impressed with Canon ruining my resale values.

This stupid camera war BS needs to stop. Just make a consumer/prosumer/professional selection of single offers already; and update them accordingly. This holding and splitting up features just to battle back and forth is getting childish. In the long run, they're just going to dwindle their overall value and run off professional shooters who would like to retain some value in their gear. Sure, it's a tool, but many of us take into consideration the resale value of our tools as part investment.


This might cause some flames from Apple Fanboys here but it looks more like Canon & Nikon are taking page from Apple playbook by offering products with crippled down feature in each cycle to make sure people keep upgrading. Also both are targeting more and more of consumer market just like Apple does with consumer appliance philosophy for devices.

I think you are slight off on the concept of Apple.
Apple does not cripple there products. No...

Apple offers certain features - but the features they offer they do very well. Along with doing their 'own thing' philosophy. Either you want in or not. ....creates a 'cool' factor. This is Apple.

Disclaimer: I own just one Apple product: iphone 4.



I dont want to turn this into Apple conversation but let me help understand why no 4G on iPhone4S when 4G is prevelant market when phone was released ? This is just one example and I can keep give you many more but as I said not interested in turning this into Apple thread.

4g wasn't prevalent worldwide. It's a worldwide market to consider.

It annoys me when people say that Americans don't know that there is any other country outside of of their own. Let's not say things that might perpetrate that impression.

The criticism of this camera reminds me of the 5Dmk2 complaints when it first came out. Years later the emotional bond people have to that model is well documented.

Not saying i disagree with some of the negatives raised but i'm expecting a more rose colored view once shooters have been using it for a few years.

mjoshi wrote:

I dont want to turn this into Apple conversation but let me help understand why no 4G on iPhone4S when 4G is prevelant market when phone was released ? This is just one example and I can keep give you many more but as I said not interested in turning this into Apple thread.

Because there is more to it than that. Just as MP isn't everything, some other parts of the unit are optimized and work just fine and keep up with the latest and greatest tech without that same tech. Example, the 5DIII does well against the high megapixel D800.

It amazes me when people call gear "crippled". It aint crippled. It's a segment to differentiate (or blur). I suppose people want any and everything because they think they deserve it. I don't complain that my SAAB 9-3 can't haul the stack of drywall I wanted to bring home from Home Depot. I don't think my car is crippled. I should have purchased what *I* need.

I dont understand Canon naming system... Why call it 5D, 5D II, 5D III? 7D? then 6D? Not making any sense.

Robin Usagani wrote:
I dont understand Canon naming system... Why call it 5D, 5D II, 5D III? 7D? then 6D? Not making any sense.

My opinion - Canon did a swap at the top of the line compared to the bottom and middle line cameras (350d-400d-450d... and 10d-20d-30d-40d...) Top will always be 1d (s,x...). Anything less than one is lower. Hence 5D III is current second top dog then 6d and then 7d (only because of sensor size and age in my opinion). If the much rumored 3D ever materializes it would most likely be better than the 5d III but still less than the 1Dx in some ways.

Does that help?

mattnz wrote:
One feature that could be killer - the centre cross point focuses down to -3 EV. combine that with presumably superior ISO performance (to 5d2) and you could have something very compelling for low-light shooting.

On my 7D I use all 19 cross points all the time as I know I can rely on them. On my 5D II I use the center point 95% of the time because I can't rely on the others and besides that they are not spread enough to be overly useful. People who buy the 6D will just learn it's capabilities and work around/within them. I personally would pay for more AF points/better spread and less video features. I would like to try out -3 EV focusing though.

Robin Usagani wrote:
I dont understand Canon naming system... Why call it 5D, 5D II, 5D III? 7D? then 6D? Not making any sense.


My guess is because it's somewhat similar to what Nikon did with D700/D600 (though not exactly the same) and they wanted it to be clear that this was the competitor to the D600.

brad