Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.55 #17 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II | |
JohnK007 wrote:
Disagree.
The D810 was a grand slam for its class.
The D500 was a grand slam for its class.
Utterly peerless when they came out.
The D5 was almost a grand slam, not quite, but still the best high-ISO/AF camera in its class, and at least as good as its primary competitor, the 1DxII.
By contrast, the 6D II will already be blown away by every one of its peers before the first one ships ...
Missing one or two things, while coming out with major advancements, is acceptable. But just coming out as a no-perk, already-outdated nothing ... as an "upgrade" is inexcusable. For a FF camera to get its ass kicked by even low-end APS-Cs ... it's not even worth another post discussing after this. Especially at that price point.
Every Canon 6D owner, looking to upgrade, has to be disappointed, hurt, and confused 
Pricing this dud at $1,999 is (literally) adding insult to injury. Canon is insulting its followers' intelligence.
I wouldn't buy the D7500. It's not a joke, like the 6D II, but if I wanted the speed I'd save a little more and just get the D500. If I didn't care about the speed, I'd get the D7200 (which is better for macro, really).
With cameras like the 1Dx II and the D5, they at least are highly-competitive. Both are at the top of their game. Both are exceptional. You're essentially splitting hairs discussing their differences.
But the 6D II is a blatant dog ... especially at $2,000 ... are you freaking kidding me? 
There are some really capable camera options, from $1200 to $2,000, that trounce the 6D II.
With the quality products Nikon keeps coming out with, I am very confident the D850 will be worth buying immediately 
Time to go back over to the Nikon forum ... my condolences to those who were hoping to be excited by the 6D II  ...Show more →
You are right. Time to go back to the Nikon forum.
You really compare an (actual) 6500 professional monster body with an 2000 (intro price) consumer FF body?
Just as a reminder: The (really nice) D750 is the direct competitor of 5D II. It just needed 5-6 years for Nikon to come out with it and compete. In pricing this dud (I copy your words) at 2.200 Nikon was trying to insult its followers' intelligence. What did not work (2000 for 6D II will not work, too). That is why the wonderfull D750 was sold for 25% less including a grip half a year later. What keppt it still more expensive and less successful than itīs (imo) better compettitor 6D.
Nikon glas is superb? :-) Again Nikon needed (nearly) a decade to produce an exact copy of the fantastic 70-200 4.0 L IS USM, color it black and price it higher. And meanwhile we reach a situation where 3rd party glass overcomes both, Nikon and Canon in IQ at a better price and durability (e. g.: Tammys 70-200 2.8 GII).
I am not happy with 6D II either. Canon should have given it -4 EV (center AF), bring the joystick and enhance its ISO capabilities to 50-75k at same IQ the 6D already offers at 25K.
But you should stay on the ground and compare more realistic. I just saw the "D5 100". Itīs low light capabilities NOW overcome 5 year old 6Ds sensitiveness. This looks really great. But we should keep in mind, that Nikon asks for 8.500 instead of 1.300 .
Are you able to see yourself that you praise how Nikon might rip Canon when they bring out new stuff that does not exist? If not, you should go on posting in the Nikon forum how much better Nikon will be than Canon for what they might bring in the future.
Conny
|
