Some important things don't appear in specification lists. The number one thing I hate about my 5D is that I can't see the viewfinder information on a bright day. A few months ago I had it out on Sydney Harbour, and it was like shooting screw mount all over again - I had to look at the top of the camera to see the shutter speed.
When the Mark II came out, I picked a hot day to call in on a dealer I knew and asked to carry his demo out onto the street. As far as I could tell, it was no better. I'd be pleased to be corrected by someone from hot country who owns the camera, but that was my impression.
If they've fixed it on the 6D, that makes a difference.
All the other differences between the 5D Mark II and the 6D are, IMO, less important than this.
If people are skeptical of the performance of a new Canon camera I can understand that. Canon has a way of preannouncing then late delivering cameras that have important quirks (shadow banding, MK III AF problems, black box/red box AF, etc.). Much later than announced delivery has the customer receiving less value during the life of the product cycle especially if you feel compelled to wait for the field reviews.
SoundHound wrote:
If people are skeptical of the performance of a new Canon camera I can understand that. Canon has a way of preannouncing then late delivering cameras that have important quirks (shadow banding, MK III AF problems, black box/red box AF, etc.). Much later than announced delivery has the customer receiving less value during the life of the product cycle especially if you feel compelled to wait for the field reviews.
If the world was perfect I would agree. Those with a narrow mind of what Canon "should" do and when they "supposed" to get it. Manufacturing cameras, lenses, flashes is no different than the rest of the world of manufacturing. Sh!t happens.
I'm waiting until I get my hands on one in the store to draw an opinion. I never liked the idea of Canon until I shot with my uncles 1D3, then I sold all my Nikon gear and switched over. The price seems pretty good on the 6D (especially once they start showing up used), and I'm currently saving up for a 5D2 or similar. What I'm really looking for is good noise performance, AF and overall ease of use. If the 6D ends up providing those features, then I will consider buying one. But I won't be ruling it out until I get to check it out in person and see some hands reviews from people here.
jamesf99 wrote:
Huh? I never did. Why don't you read it again, but a little slower this time... I said "higher resolution" and yes, 21.x is higher than 20.x, unless you use some new math...
I looked, but couldn't find that, but I'm glad it does..
Get a clue. That's what Canon says, not me. Why don't you read first, then make nonsense statements?
Twain said it best. "First get your facts. then you can distort them at your leisure".
Fine, show me the samples. I'm sure we all would like to see them... BTW - the 5d3 shows a miniscule improvement over the 5d2 in real life, but I'm sure you don't like that fact....
Where? where's the demonstrable proof, because in reading several sites, it's no where to be found. Until I see it, and it could be out there somewhere, I'll just chalk it up to more nonsense on your part, which is 90% of what you say in all posts.
Am I saying they're lying? Nope. What's to lie about. They haven't said that it's any better than what we had in 2005 with the difference of 1 EV. Have they made claims that didn't live up to what they said in the past? Absolutely.
You either don't remember, or don't know what you're talking about (my vote). I purchased 2 1D3s. I purchased 3 or 4 5ds. Do I know that marketing literature doesn't equal reality? Yes. You apparently do not.
Thank you. I've always found you a dullard. Glad we got that out of the way.. ...Show more →
Let it be peace...We are comparing cameras, not saving people.
I made a very big personal investment on the 5DIII and I'm happy that now we do have no less than 3 good choices for FF photography in the canon camp. (4 counting 5DII)
Each of them has its field, I find the 6D to be a very good choice once down to $1600 (6 or 7 months from now?).
The 5DIII will also come down to $2600/2800 soon enough.
Certainly the scenario is better than what we had 3 or 4 years ago.
mMontag wrote:
Why do people keep referencing 1/4000 SS - the latest specs are indeed listing 1/8000.
Whoops - found the spec on the Canon site (maybe they know?) - it does list 1/4000 - that alone kills it for me & have now stopped looking at the 6d. Another big detriment is the 100,000 shutter life.
I'm looking to upgrade from a 5d mainly for landscape work - my interest has just turned to Sony - done.
Turned to sony? Are you kidding me? Why not pick up a pray and shoot? You'll get the same quality.
5DII and 7D owner here, and Canon shooter since the 20D. Have zero interest in the 6D or 5DIII. Have to wonder what Canon is thinking with these two new cameras?
First Canon screws up by forgetting to upgrade raw image quality on the 5DIII. Better focusing is nice, but not exactly what the majority of us use the camera for. We want top of the line, class leading image quality. Something Nikon took over the lead back when they came out with their D3x.
Then Canon screws up further by coming out with 6D. A camera that is no upgrade, except to push down the value of used 5dII's. Heaven forbid the 6d is a real image quality upgrade (yet to be seen), as then it will push down the value of just released 5DIII's as well. I just don't get it? Canon must hate 5DII owners! Or maybe they invested in Nikon stock and looking to get rich quick. lol
In any case, Canon held the lead for many years, and competition is great for us consumers in the long run. That is if Canon can get back in the game.
If not, no biggie on switching, as I'm not brand loyal and will buy the best reasonably priced tools for the job. In the meantime, my 5DII and 7D are still serving me well. But sucks I have to look over at Nikons for an image quality upgrade.
RobDickinson wrote:
Probably had the same opinion on the 5d3 too at its 'crazy' $3500 price.
Yet that turned out to be a fantastic camera, I'm sure the 6d will too.
I guess it was different for the 5D3. A lot of people were frustrated with the AF of 5D2, myself included. When Canon released the 5D3, it's obviously the best replacement at the time.
Now, most who need a better focus system probably have upgraded to 5D3 already. On the paper, it's reasonable why people wouldn't jump onto the 6D bandwagon because it doesn't look like it provides anything special unless you absolutely need wifi and GPS. Higher ISO and AF capability in low light are nice too, but it's not really a must.
M.P.R. wrote:
First Canon screws up by forgetting to upgrade raw image quality on the 5DIII. Better focusing is nice, but not exactly what the majority of us use the camera for. We want top of the line, class leading image quality. Something Nikon took over the lead back when they came out with their D3x.
Yeah 5D III IQ blows massive chunks. I've started using a smart phone these days. I mean what were they thinking, trying to blindside us with state-of-the-art AF.
M.P.R. wrote:
First Canon screws up by forgetting to upgrade raw image quality on the 5DIII. Better focusing is nice, but not exactly what the majority of us use the camera for. We want top of the line, class leading image quality. Something Nikon took over the lead back when they came out with their D3x.
The one thing everyone wanted fixed on the 5d2 was the autofocus system. Everyone. By far the biggest issue with the camera. Everyone seemed to thing the image quality was fine (bar the shadow banding), Canon fix that, improved everything else. Theres a point where Iq is good enough and we've mostly passed that for most things.
Wahoowa wrote:
Now, most who need a better focus system probably have upgraded to 5D3 already.
So those that havnt upgraded arnt too bothered about whizzy AF. How abut a good FF sensor body in a small form factor? Most of us on here probably dont care because we are beyond the target market for the 6d!
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Yeah 5D III IQ blows massive chunks. I've started using a smart phone these days. I mean what were they thinking, trying to blindside us with state-of-the-art AF.
What have the Romans ever done for us anyway?
Hey, I never said the 5D III IQ blows massive chunks! Its just no raw image upgrade from the 5DII. Which happens to be a steal at todays prices. 5DIII image quality at half the price. lol
RobDickinson wrote:
The one thing everyone wanted fixed on the 5d2 was the autofocus system. Everyone. By far the biggest issue with the camera. Everyone seemed to thing the image quality was fine (bar the shadow banding), Canon fix that, improved everything else. Theres a point where Iq is good enough and we've mostly passed that for most things.
Not everyone. I never had a problem with the focus system on the 5DII. Works like a champ as far as I'm concerned so I'm happy to continue using it. I'm happy with the focus system on the 7D for sports and BIF as well.
When I upgrade cameras, its for raw image quality. Just not seeing it right now with 5DIII.
Sorry to break it to you but were past the point of huge steps forward.
Canon need to sort out the read noise at low ISO to open up the dynamic range (and nikon/sony arnt all the way there either) but apart from that expect very small steps for a while.
M.P.R. wrote:
Not everyone. I never had a problem with the focus system on the 5DII. Works like a champ as far as I'm concerned so I'm happy to continue using it. I'm happy with the focus system on the 7D for sports and BIF as well.
When I upgrade cameras, its for raw image quality. Just not seeing it right now with 5DIII.
Hope they do better when they upgrade the 7D.
I've shot with the 5D2 since Spring 2009 and have yet to suffer focus problems. Of course I don't shoot skateboarder and hummingbirds and it certainly locks well for my travel, landscape and macro images. The only cameras I recall in recent memory to have iffy AF were the Elan 7E and 10D.
