p.6 #2 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
Monito wrote:
The 6D is ... obviously meant more for enthusiasts who want image quality (that full-frame provides compared to crop-factors) such as landscape, travel photos, and portraits.
Yes, I am one of these enthusiasts.
Right now I'm in the market for a $2K FF camera for landscapes, travel photos, and portraits.
So, since the 6D is aimed directly at me, I'll voice my opinion about it:
I will definitely not be buying the 6D ... ever.
My decision is final and is based on the intentionally crippled AF system in the 6D.
Here's also my open letter to Canon:
Dear Canon,
My I please ask you not to be stingy and to put at least nine cross-type/high-precision AF points in this class of camera.
I'd like to use this camera for portraits with one or two of your excellent fast primes (likely the 35/1.4L and the 85/1.2L).
These high-quality L lenses produce very thin DOF when used wide open.
Unfortunately, I don't feel confident that the crippled and primitive AF system in the 6D can focus properly with these lenses.
Consequently, I will not be buying neither the 6D, nor any of these excellent primes at this time.
Instead, I'll be patiently waiting for a more suitable offering, while at the same time pondering a switch to Nikon.
Thank you all for listening.
(To the self-appointed Canon gestapo on this forum: get lost, will you!).
p.6 #3 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
jorkata wrote:
Yes, I am one of these enthusiasts.
Right now I'm in the market for a $2K FF camera for landscapes, travel photos, and portraits.
So, since the 6D is aimed directly at me, I'll voice my opinion about it:
I will definitely not be buying the 6D ... ever.
My decision is final and is based on the intentionally crippled AF system in the 6D.
Here's also my open letter to Canon:
Dear Canon,
My I please ask you not to be stingy and to put at least nine cross-type/high-precision AF points in this class of camera.
I'd like to use this camera for portraits with one or two of your excellent fast primes (likely the 35/1.4L and the 85/1.2L).
These high-quality L lenses produce very thin DOF when used wide open.
Unfortunately, I don't feel confident that the crippled and primitive AF system in the 6D can focus properly with these lenses.
Consequently, I will not be buying neither the 6D, nor any of these excellent primes at this time.
Instead, I'll be patiently waiting for a more suitable offering, while at the same time pondering a switch to Nikon.
Ah, an excellent example of what I've been talking about; thanks! "intentionally crippled"? Gee, people managed to focus manual focus, film cameras for "landscapes, travel photos, and portraits" (it really doesn't get any easier than that, and even my old 10D did an excellent job of that), and you're whining about the 6D's autofocus? ROTFLMFAO!! What's that they say about poor workmen blaming their tools?
(And to the self-appointed Canon gestapo on this forum: get lost, will you!).
Gestapo are we? It just gets better and better; not only do you exhibit aggressive ignorance of economics and marketing, but of history (Gestapo? Really?). Not to mention an apparent inability to focus an autofocusing camera. Poor guy doesn't like it when someone points out that he's just a whiner, so those pointing out this unflattering fact are "gestapo"? So very, very sorry! Actually, of course, we're not "Canon gestapo," since generally we are quite realistic about Canon's weaknesses (and strengths); we're just not mindless Canon bashers (see, the real world isn't divided into either "Canon Bashers" or "Canon Gestapo").
I'm sure Canon will miss you very much when you switch over to bitching about Nikon....
p.6 #4 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
cordellwillis wrote:
WOW! Dudes and Dudets, they make cameras for different segments. Get the 1, 2, 3, etc cameras that fit YOUR needs. This is like complaining that a printer that only prints up to size 8x10 is crippled because it can't print 11x17.
These cameras are not crippled; that's really a very stupid statement. For those who sell your work in different packages why do you do it? Is the bottom level package or product crap or is it for those who want something not so grande?
How critical is focus on your smartphone? How critical is focus on your P&S? It's important, BUT it's something you can deal with for what it is. If you're foolish enough to pull out a 6D to *try* to shoot an indoor pro sport the camera isn't what's crippled, it's the so called photographer. It aint for that!...Show more →
Please. Haven't we been through this almost FIVE years ago, with the 5D and then the 5D2 released with crappier outer AF points than the much less expensive 40D? Nikon came along with the D700, proving that much more robust AF systems could be included with bodies in the same price range. Now Nikon has a camera body with 24mp (so no more argument that Canon offers higher resolution) with a more robust AF system than is in the 6D. At the same price. Canon's management has made a deliberate decision to cripple the 6D relative to not only the 5D3, but to less expensive Canon models as well. It's as if they're still living in 2005!
A $2000 camera needs more than just a good full-frame sensor - and nowadays, the Canon sensor isn't as good as the Nikon. In a just world, Canon's market share should suffer, and the people who made this design choice should be out on their ears. .
Aside from the viewfinder issues - which cause me trouble when working in low-light venues - the 5D3 is pretty much the Canon-mount D700 that I was waiting for, with the benefit of better outer AF points. But I used the D700 in preference to the 5D2, as it was a much better all-around camera unless the higher resolution sensor was of supreme importance to the user. To answer a poster several pages above: it is possible to use a D700 for a wider range of subject matter, much more easily than a 5D2. We'll wait to see what the reviews and real-life users report, but my guess is that the D600 will be a better, more useful camera for a wide range of tasks than will the 6D. And that's a shame. Canon proved with the 7D that it can outdo Nikon in a given market segment. To not equip the 6D with an AF system even as good as that of the 7D, when Nikon releases the D600 with a D7000-level AF system, is an insult to Canon users. Especially to those looking to move up to full-frame from a crop-sensor camera without going all the way to the $3500 5D3.
For $2000, Canon does owe us a camera with a more robust AF system (come on, cross type sensors can't cost much!) Could a car manufacturer these days offer 4-speed automatic transmissions when their competitors all have five and six-speed transmissions in the cars of the same price? Or when several of its own lower-priced models have that more advanced feature? Sure, Canon's management can try to segment the market this way. But why should anyone here defend them for doing that?
p.6 #5 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
jj_glos wrote:
They didn't cripple anything, they engineered a design that they feel fits the market segment that they are aiming for. If it doesn't meet your needs then you are not part of the intended market. They want you to buy the more expensive 5D3 not the cheaper 6D is you are after top AF performance.
This is Canons approach, Nikon obviously approach the matter differently (although the D600 AF could be better still).
Agreed... nothing's been "crippled", it's just been designed to be crap
Doesn't the newest Rebel have better AF (apart from the -3EV center point)?
p.6 #6 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
kodakeos wrote:
....And let me tell you, people spending $3500 on a camera are more important to canon than people buying $1500-2000 cameras.
I don't believe that for a bit. There are sure more people buying $1500 cameras than those buying $3500 cameras.
The "rebel" market sales generate much more profit than top of the line 1D's.
p.6 #7 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
Jim Levitt wrote:
For $2000, Canon does owe us a camera with a more robust AF system (come on, cross type sensors can't cost much!) Could a car manufacturer these days offer 4-speed automatic transmissions when their competitors all have five and six-speed transmissions in the cars of the same price? Or when several of its own lower-priced models have that more advanced feature? Sure, Canon's management can try to segment the market this way. But why should anyone here defend them for doing that?
Stockholm syndrome. It's the only possible explanation.
p.6 #8 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
Jim Levitt wrote:
A $2000 camera needs more than just a good full-frame sensor - and nowadays, the Canon sensor isn't as good as the Nikon. In a just world, Canon's market share should suffer, and the people who made this design choice should be out on their ears. .
p.6 #10 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
jorkata wrote:
Yes, you are. You have no business going after people on a public forum for voicing their opinions.
Ah, so you're free to whine about Canon' business decisions (however silly those "opinions" may be}, but I'm not free to point out how silly those "opinions" are? And you think I'm "gestapo"?
p.6 #11 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
I'll give my opinion sine I am in the market to transition to FF, but also on the 'wifey' budget. I don't get to shoot often and moreso what I want to shoot, but I do enjoy landscapes, portraits, street photography and I do a lot of traveling.
With that being said the 5D3 is just too high to justify for me, especially since I don't have the lenses I want built up yet or my ideal processing setup. I use a T2i and almost planned to get the 5D2 until more 6D rumors started to appear. Although I'm a little disappointment at hearing the 6D didn't come with all outer crosspoints, I'm waiting until more testing is done.
Since the 6D is marketed towards someone like me as well, I will say that I will most likely be getting the 6D (especially if the outerpoints are greatly improved compared to the 5D2) as it's seems to be the best choice for me at this moment and will likely meet 95% of my needs. The only expection is if the 5D3 continues to drop and go below $2500.
Sep 21, 2012 at 06:12 PM
jim allison Offline • • • [X]
p.6 #12 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
Would I rather buy a NikonD600 or the Canon 6D. There are many factors that have to be weighed. In my opinion the Nikon offering is far superior in every way.I think that this holds true for the D800 over the 5DMKII as well.However, as a satisfied Canon owner with several L lenses and two bodies. it doesn't make sense for me to switch. Canon will HAVE to offer better and more competitive products sooner rather then latter.However, the total dissatisfaction of Nikon owners with Nikon service is my most pressing reason not to switch brands.I've only had 1 experience with Canon service and I think that they are the best in the industry, I was one of the first Nikon techreps back in the late 1960s and a loyal Nikon user from the introduction of the SP and Nikon F until the D2Xs.Then they lost me and they would have to change their arrogant corporate culture to get me to change back.
p.6 #13 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
RobertLynn wrote:
... Maybe this is them saying they think it is rebel customers who will use the 6d. I don't know.
^ this is precisely what they are saying. The 6d is intended to be a FF rebel; the choice of a single cross AF point, wifi, and SD only is a great fit for someone coming from the rebel. It will give them the great IQ of FF that they read about online, they won't have to buy new cards, and they get to upload to facebook SOOC. Enthusiasts are happy because they can afford it, and the pro/semipro/forumographers still have the 5d3.
p.6 #14 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
Make it $1500 and I'll take a crippled AF any day. OR give me a sensor that's 30MP and designate it as a "landscape" body. Those are my wants as a Canon shooter looking to purchase an upgrade from my 5D.
p.6 #15 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
"It was a decision that we felt that this type of camera in this particular user group, auto focus performance is not 100% critical."
Sounds like a valid statement to me, I know several studio photographers to whom auto focus is a non issue, in fact they don't even use auto focus lenses a lot of the time. Also, Canons TSE lenses are not auto focussing so why pay big $$$ for a feature that one may not use. Offering a separate FF body like this which concentrates on IQ without the high end AF at a lower price point makes sense.
p.6 #16 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
StarNut wrote:
Ah, so you're free to whine about Canon' business decisions (however silly those "opinions" may be}, but I'm not free to point out how silly those "opinions" are? And you think I'm "gestapo"?
Gawd....
Jorkata, just ignore the fanboys in this forum. They serve the only purpose here to defend Canon's marketing policies and price strategies. If you stick around here longer, you find out about 10 people who fit into this category easily since they are always trying to undermine other opinions. Gestapo is not the right word in this context here, but they are just - useless.
p.6 #17 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
So, the folks who whine about Canon's decisions, as if Canon did it just to spite a few whiners on this forum, are performing a valuable service by the incessant, high-pitched whining?
Your mutual admiration society would be amusing, were it not so tiresome.
p.6 #18 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
mabidally wrote: "It was a decision that we felt that this type of camera in this particular user group, auto focus performance is not 100% critical."
Sounds like a valid statement to me, I know several studio photographers to whom auto focus is a non issue, in fact they don't even use auto focus lenses a lot of the time. Also, Canons TSE lenses are not auto focussing so why pay big $$$ for a feature that one may not use. Offering a separate FF body like this which concentrates on IQ without the high end AF at a lower price point makes sense. ...Show more →
True, I'm one of those that often disables AF and, when I use it, mainly use the center point. Moreover, I'm perfectly happy with 5D2 IQ and its "crippled" AF so I won't be buying a 6D unless my 5D2 has an unfortunate accident. However, it is almost too thoughtful that Canon currently gives us a choice of 4 different FF models at different price points. IF you're a gunslinger, spend the big bucks for a tricked out 1DX; those that need killer AF and IQ have the 5D3 and the landscape/studio crowd can buy a 5D2 or 6D and get top IQ without paying extra for a bunch of AF points they don't use. Of course, even if Canon had 10 FF models people would still moan and whimper they didn't get everything they wanted for a bargain price. Such behavior is basic human nature although I get the feeling the public whine, bitch 'n moan show seems to be on the rise among younger folk.
p.6 #19 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
mabidally wrote: "It was a decision that we felt that this type of camera in this particular user group, auto focus performance is not 100% critical."
Sounds like a valid statement to me, I know several studio photographers to whom auto focus is a non issue, in fact they don't even use auto focus lenses a lot of the time. Also, Canons TSE lenses are not auto focussing so why pay big $$$ for a feature that one may not use. Offering a separate FF body like this which concentrates on IQ without the high end AF at a lower price point makes sense.
Here's my two cents, my primary interest is landscape, but I also need a camera that can focus moving objects(my spaz lab mostly) so I bought a CLP 7D last year becuase the only option at time was 1DS3. If I could afford it I'd buy a 5d3 in a heartbeat. But since I cannot I have a keen interest in an affordable full frame sensor if the IQ is there. I don't need great AF as I have a 7D for that, so the 6D really interests me(as does a 5D2). My only gripe is the price, but that's a common theme with Canon products lately so I'll wait until it drops a bit and re-evaluate.
p.6 #20 · Canon finally honest and openly admit AF crippling
timbop wrote:
^ this is precisely what they are saying. The 6d is intended to be a FF rebel; the choice of a single cross AF point, wifi, and SD only is a great fit for someone coming from the rebel. It will give them the great IQ of FF that they read about online, they won't have to buy new cards, and they get to upload to facebook SOOC. Enthusiasts are happy because they can afford it, and the pro/semipro/forumographers still have the 5d3.
Huh? A Rebel user is going to spend two thousand dollars plus more for lenses (since their EF-S lenses won't work on the 6D), discover that the shallower apparent depth of field at the same aperture means focus is more critical on the 6D than on the Rebel, then find out that in other than bright light only the center point can be relied upon for accurate AF, and will somehow be happy about this? This doesn't sound likely to me.
Wouldn't someone about to spend that kind of money do some research? In the course of which they could and should find out that a competitor offers a camera of greater resolution, for the same price, with a more capable AF system. How does Canon's marketing team think this is a winning scenario for Canon?
How many potential camera buyers, other than a bunch of us on these forums, have more than one camera body, especially camera bodies costing several thousand dollars? Won't most likely buyers gravitate toward the camera that can best serve a wider range of uses?
Who is the target market for this camera? Is it somehow different than the market Nikon is targeting with the D600?
