It sure how Fuji got dragged into this, but as a 6D owner and Fuji xe2 owner, the usable/extension of your body size is even more than shown, and the experience of using Fuji is quite different. for me they both have a place, but they are quite different in form, function and fun. The Fuji IQ is nothing to pass off as apsC and meh, it is surprising. There is a reason I see a ton of FF guys who also have Fuji or have switched and written off the trade offs...
J Williams wrote:
I have the 6D w 24-70/4 & 70-200/4 and think this is about the best all around setup you can get. Size, weight, IQ combination is superb.
I bought a bargain 5dii about 4 months ago it has the same 9 AF points as my SL1 and 50d so I expected it to preform the same as those cameras. I was very wrong about that. The 5dii has great IQ to me but unless I need to shoot at ISO 1600 or above I'm picking up the SL1 because I can't depend on the 5dii AF to fire when I need it to. I plan to test all three of my cameras with the same lens sometime soon and start a new thread discussing the autofocus I'm worried that my 5d2 is not functioning properly it's so bad.
Nick3434 wrote:
It sure how Fuji got dragged into this, but as a 6D owner and Fuji xe2 owner, the usable/extension of your body size is even more than shown, and the experience of using Fuji is quite different. for me they both have a place, but they are quite different in form, function and fun. The Fuji IQ is nothing to pass off as apsC and meh, it is surprising. There is a reason I see a ton of FF guys who also have Fuji or have switched and written off the trade offs...
Not sure what you mean with "usable/extension of your body size" , but myself being a X-E2 & 6D owner, I agree that there is room for both...what changes the game for me is that I use my X-E2 exclusively with compact primes <35mm, making it notably smaller from a DSLR (even with a pankake lens on the DSLR) and even tho it doesn't become pocket-able per se, it stays in my messenger bag 24/7.
The 18-55 would completely beat that "EDC" purpose, but I can see the appeal for ppl using an XF camera exclusively.
---
On the OP: unless you are shooting action, the 6D has a more versatile IQ envelope delivered to the average photographer - pro or amateur - than the 5D3...as the discussion on the rumored 6D2 indicates too, what really brings the 6D down is the underwhelming AF versatility: you are pretty much stuck with the very reliable, yet lonely center point.
For some pros it is also the lack of dual cards...Nikon has been a proponent of dual slot cameras for awhile even on <$1K bodies, Fuji & Pentax now offer that with sub $2K bodies. I hope Canon does follow suit with the 6D2.
Still, for absolute IQ in stationary subjects, most portraiture, long exposures, high-ISO etc, the 6D is clearly better than 5D2 & 3, probably even with the 5DS and only really worse than the 5D4. The files are also more malleable (can be pushed with less artifacts) than the 5D2/3 options....the 6D is simply next-gen vs. the 5D3 and more than one gen ahead of the 5D2, but so is the 70D.
So in good light or with a knowable person behind the photo settings and the PP process, the 5D2 is still a camera capable for amazing results...but so is a 70D really...the IQ improvements going to FF you are after, are more present in the 6D than any of the 5Ds in the OP.
rstoddard11 wrote:
6D at ISO 3200 is almost the same as the other two at ISO 400.
I have one and I shoot action with it as well. I use the center point only and haven't seen a reason to upgrade.
Uhm, nope, not really. I appreciate the passion, but the exaggeration is a bit far.
The 5D3 is only about 1/3 stop behind the 6D, and the 5D2 maybe a stop, especially at this lower ISO. The higher the ISO, the greater the disparity between the 5D2 and 6D, but not so much with the 5D3.
There are numerous comparisons out on the web, or one can even play for themselves here, the results are pretty good in matching real life experiences.
I was going off of the attached chart in the post. Just saw some data points at 3.33 for one and for the other around the same noise levels at 400 or so and 3200 or so.
My intent was not to grossly exaggerate. It was in the context of the one supplied test in the post.
Its probably way closer in real life. I personally don't shoot over 1600 if I can help it.
I used my 6D at ISO 5000 on this and was very pleased....6D is still the best camera body for the money that Canon makes in my opinion....High ISO stuff is really good....just needs better auto focus for moving subjects
I have use 6d's for several years doing weddings and portraits...it is an amazing camera. What a lot of folks don't know...it is SIGNIFICANTLY lighther than the other bodies. I just got a 5dmk4 and can't believe how heavy it is compared to my 6d's...I may be selling it because I also don't see any advantage in image quality so far. Yes for action the af is pretty amazing, but I don't know how often I will used that.
