6D vs 5DmkII vs 7D (Upgrading from a 600D)

[Austin Greene]

Well if finally getting a fully functional 70-200 F4L IS has taught me one thing, its that I desperately want a better body. The T3i has served me faithfully, and it really is a pain to have to let it go (wish I could afford to keep it), but I've decided its high time to match my lens with an equally deserving body. I have a great offer that has been made for my T3i, so I'll be free of it as of this weekend and ready to move on. Just in time, I have shoots scheduled every weekend from here until April.

I mainly shoot macro and wildlife, though in an attempt to force myself into branching out, I have made a significant investment in looking more seriously at portraiture. My hope is to do it on the side at some point for a little extra, but I will say that my main shooting modes are those mentioned, macro and wildlife.

My budget is a firm $1800. As of this weekend I will no longer have a body, so turnaround is a priority here. Saving for a 5DmkIII is NOT an option.

I'm looking at the following bodies, for the following reasons (I'm leaving a lot of stuff out, this is what I see as being pertinent to my shooting style):

6D:

Likes:​

• IQ is fantastic, with high-ISO performance matching the 5DmkIII
• Durability is improved over my current 600D. Whats the point of a weather sealed lens on a non-weather sealed body?
• -3 EV central AF point should prove useful.
• Boyish curiosity over going to FF.
• I would only have a nifty fifty and a 70-200 at this point, so no woes about not being able to use lenses.
• I could use my current SD cards, no need to go out and buy more.
• GPS/Wifi: Genuinely not that interesting to me, but I can think of some uses. Barely earned a bullet point.

Concerns: ​

• It only has 1 cross type AF point! Granted, this is what I'm used to working with, but I suppose some part of me was hoping I would see some kind of improvement in AF flexibility.
• Going to FF means my 50mm f/1.8 will lose quite a bit of sharpness. This sucks, its my main macro lens when used on 49mm of extension tubes.
• Longevity: I'm a tad concerned about the longevity of the 6D for the shooting I do. I really want something that will not only last, but will keep me excited. It also needs to handle relatively unfriendly conditions.
• Cost of lenses. As an independent college student, I'm trying my best to really put my resources into my photography. That said, paying out the A$$ for EF lenses from here on will be a downer.
• Flash sync is 1/180 sec. In practice is this really a big issue? I usually use 1/200 on my T3i. I also use a wireless transmitter, so lack of a built in flash is a non-issue.

5DmkII:

Likes:
​

• 
  [*=1]Roughly the same price (used) as a new 6D.
  [*=1]Time-tested IQ and functionality.
  [*=1]Hell, its a 5DmkII.

Concerns:
​

• 
  [*=1]It costs the same, used, as a brand spankin' new 6D, which will have better IQ across all ISOs.
  [*=1]The AF is renowned for being utterly terrible. The 6D is no improvement in terms of AF points, but it does have the -3EV AF going for it on the center point.
  [*=1]Less weather sealing than the 6D. I plan on putting whatever body I choose through the ringer.

7D:

Likes:
​

• 
  [*=1]Excellent AF and burst for my wildlife shooting.
  [*=1]50mm f/1.8 would still be suitable for macro.
  [*=1]Built like a tank.
  [*=1]I could still use cheaper EFS lenses in addition to my EF lenses.

Concerns:
​

• 
  [*=1]Its an older body, with a new version set to arrive this summer.
  [*=1]IQ looks like it could be an issue at higher ISOs, which would be a problem when I have to use it for portraiture on occasion. Same sensor as my T3i, so I would question what the point would be besides better AF.
  [*=1]I'd have to go out and buy a whole set of CF cards. My SD cards would be useless. (Minor Issue)
  [*=1]Not FF. While I'm not dead-set on going FF, I do think its an important move for me to make at some point.

So ultimately I am looking for the body that will give me the most bang for my buck in terms of IQ, durability, longevity, and will be able to meet my needs as a growing photographer looking to enter the semi-professional/professional bracket in the coming years. I struggle with the idea of upgrading to the 7D because its running the same sensor I am currently (albeit 2 of them), and the 600D's similar noise levels have grown annoying. Similarly, the 6D is a scary prospect, as it seems largely untested due to being such a recent release.

Sure, at some point I hope to run a dual-format setup, but that is not anywhere in the near future. Right now I need to look at utilizing what I've got, IE a very expensive piece of glass (70-200 f/4L IS), and getting the most flexibility, and highest image quality possible. I'm good at stretching my equipment, I think I've done a decent job with the results I've gotten out of the T3i, but I need something that will let me step confidently into the professional arena at some point. That said, while portraiture will be gaining traction, I would still like to be able to shoot wildlife regularly.


So, I know you've all got plenty of thoughts in your heads at this point. Throw em' at me. Again, the budget is a firm $1800, and I plan to purchase a body by mid next week. I am hesitant to buy used.

Thanks,

Togalive


P.S: I know the Nikon D600 is a great choice, but at this point I have too much invested in the 70-200 to warrant jumping ship. Also, I do plan on testing out each camera at a local store as well, but I value the opinions of TPF members as well.

 

[Scurra]

I had the same conuncdrum a while back between the 5DMkII and the 7D (this was before the 6D was even released) and I went for the 5D MkII and boy am I glad I did.

The newer AF system in the 7D almost won me over but then good sense prevailed and I went for the full frame option. If you want to make the most of nice glass (I have the 70-200 f/2.8 ISII) then full frame is the way to go. Also you won't then be tempted to pour money into a bunch of EFS lenses that you'll more than likely leave behind if you do want to enter the semi-pro/pro and end up with a suitable full frame body further down the line.

Hope this helps.

 

[kathyt]

I have heard great things about the 6D. I say if you can't do the Mark III, go for the 6D. The focus system on the 6D is going to far out weigh the Mark II. The 6D has all the upgraded technology for $1500.00 less than the Mark III. I will tell you though that I saw a refurbished Mark III on Canon's website this week for $2600ish bucks.

 

[Overread]

7D and don't look back.

It might be an older body, but its a very solid design and feature set, heck the newer 5DMIII basically just copies the 7D AF system. The 7D might be older and there "MIGHT" be a new version, but then again they'll be a new 6D and there is already a new 5DMIII so new versions are always going to come around. The only certancy is that new editions nearly always cost far more, so you can wait till summer when there might be a new release, but you'll likely have to save and spent far far more on the newer body.


You've currently a clear interest in wildlife and macro as your driving force so I would focus on those two areas. It's what you enjoy from the hobby and whilst you can consider taking it further to a profession the two areas are quite different in what you would need. Ideally the best option for you is the 5DMIII - its got the AF and the build quality along with the fullframe sensor - but its currently way outside of your budget (and if you had a budget that big I'd say go for a lens not another body at this stage).

Personally I would say that if you want to dabble in the fullframe world consider the 5D original second hand. It's old but for studio portrait work its a very fine body and has all you would need for that area of photography. Yes there are newer bodies, but if you only want to dabble its the most affordable fullframe camera and its still capable of (with the right glass, lighting and control - like any camera) of producing professional grade results.

 

[Austin Greene]

I had the same conuncdrum a while back between the 5DMkII and the 7D (this was before the 6D was even released) and I went for the 5D MkII and boy am I glad I did.

The newer AF system in the 7D almost won me over but then good sense prevailed and I went for the full frame option. If you want to make the most of nice glass (I have the 70-200 f/2.8 ISII) then full frame is the way to go. Also you won't then be tempted to pour money into a bunch of EFS lenses that you'll more than likely leave behind if you do want to enter the semi-pro/pro and end up with a suitable full frame body further down the line.

Hope this helps.

I appreciate the insight, conundrum is right! Considering that the 6D has improved high ISO performance over the 5DII, do you think you would have chosen it over the MkII if you had to buy one in today's market?

I have heard great things about the 6D. I say if you can't do the Mark III, go for the 6D. The focus system on the 6D is going to far out weigh the Mark II. The 6D has all the upgraded technology for $1500.00 less than the Mark III. I will tell you though that I saw a refurbished Mark III on Canon's website this week for $2600ish bucks.

Thanks for the tip! At this point, if it comes down to mkII vs 6D, I have to think I'd lean towards the 6D for the IQ alone. AF improvements would be nice as well.

7D and don't look back.

It might be an older body, but its a very solid design and feature set, heck the newer 5DMIII basically just copies the 7D AF system. The 7D might be older and there "MIGHT" be a new version, but then again they'll be a new 6D and there is already a new 5DMIII so new versions are always going to come around. The only certancy is that new editions nearly always cost far more, so you can wait till summer when there might be a new release, but you'll likely have to save and spent far far more on the newer body.


You've currently a clear interest in wildlife and macro as your driving force so I would focus on those two areas. It's what you enjoy from the hobby and whilst you can consider taking it further to a profession the two areas are quite different in what you would need. Ideally the best option for you is the 5DMIII - its got the AF and the build quality along with the fullframe sensor - but its currently way outside of your budget (and if you had a budget that big I'd say go for a lens not another body at this stage).

Personally I would say that if you want to dabble in the fullframe world consider the 5D original second hand. It's old but for studio portrait work its a very fine body and has all you would need for that area of photography. Yes there are newer bodies, but if you only want to dabble its the most affordable fullframe camera and its still capable of (with the right glass, lighting and control - like any camera) of producing professional grade results.

Thanks for all the great info Overread!

Do you think the high ISO performance would hamper my portraiture at all? My main interest is wildlife by far, but being able to expand pretty deep into portraiture is a key factor for me. Would the 7D's noise be an improvement over my 600D, or would I just be investing in a better AF system/tougher body? I've been leaning back and forth between the 6D and 7D since the start, the lower cost of the 7D is truly appealing. That said, I really need a body that will not need to be replaced anytime soon due yet can really fork out the IQ when I need it.

I have to admit that one of my primary reasons for looking at the 6D, regardless of IQ, is that I would expect it to have more longevity. If I decided to sell it a year down the road, however unlikely that is, I would hope it would hold its value better than a 5DmkII/7D considering canon really doesn't have any plans atm of adding any more bodies to the line above the mkIII and 6D. What do you think?

Lastly, as much as I know its more about the photographer than the body, do you think the 7D can produce professional quality images (in terms of IQ) in both the wildlife and portraiture arenas?


Thanks for all the great insight guys. I also really appreciate that this hasn't become a FF vs CF firefight, lets keep it that way

 

[kathyt]

7D and don't look back.

It might be an older body, but its a very solid design and feature set, heck the newer 5DMIII basically just copies the 7D AF system. The 7D might be older and there "MIGHT" be a new version, but then again they'll be a new 6D and there is already a new 5DMIII so new versions are always going to come around. The only certancy is that new editions nearly always cost far more, so you can wait till summer when there might be a new release, but you'll likely have to save and spent far far more on the newer body.


You've currently a clear interest in wildlife and macro as your driving force so I would focus on those two areas. It's what you enjoy from the hobby and whilst you can consider taking it further to a profession the two areas are quite different in what you would need. Ideally the best option for you is the 5DMIII - its got the AF and the build quality along with the fullframe sensor - but its currently way outside of your budget (and if you had a budget that big I'd say go for a lens not another body at this stage).

Personally I would say that if you want to dabble in the fullframe world consider the 5D original second hand. It's old but for studio portrait work its a very fine body and has all you would need for that area of photography. Yes there are newer bodies, but if you only want to dabble its the most affordable fullframe camera and its still capable of (with the right glass, lighting and control - like any camera) of producing professional grade results.

Wait a minute...you are saying ideally to go for the Mark III, but the 6D has the upgraded AF, FF, and ALOT of the newer features of the Mark III but much less money. Why wouldn't he want to go 6D?

 

[Overread]

Have a peek at some of these photos: Anatre e Oche di Racconigi by Juza [JuzaPhoto]
The camera body used is listed below - many in that set are from a 350D - that's a very old rebel entry level camera body. Granted the photographer is also using a high end long lens with these photo, but it shows that with good glass, good lighting and good photography skills even an entry level camera body can deliver great results.

What you buy with a higher end body is improvement over those factors. For something like portrait photography having a high ISO isn't the make or break if you're going to shoot in a studio or even outside, with lighting control - because often as not you'll have the lighting tools to light the scene without having to reach for the high ISO values.

Furthermore high ISO is generally very usable today even from a rebel - combined with good noise control methods in editing and also with good shooting practice (look up the theory of "expose to the right") and also with the fact that noise often vanishes a lot in prints (it just doesn't show up) and the high ISO game isn't too hard to play. Now of course there are situations where having that high performance is very desirable, no flash and dimly lit situations or even action photography all can require that you raise the ISO.

The 7D isn't the camera of choice for most portrait photographers, but that is more because many favour the fullframe sensor itself and the wider angle of view it gives which lets you use a longer focal length lens whilst shooting in an indoor (ie can't back up as far) space. With a crop sensor many find that 35mm lenses or there abouts are what they have to use, but once you start taking portraits with focal lengths shorter than around 50mm you start to introduce far more perspective distortion (ie things closer to the camera get enlarged - like feet/hands/noses).

Reselling is a consideration that I think might blind you to use - wildlife and macro are your core interests and the 7D gives you the ideal tool for those situations. Even when a new 7D comes out the original will still be a very viable option on the second hand market. I think if you were more keen on portraiture then I'd more strongly argue the 5DMII or 6D as options, but I think that with action photography in wildlife you want the solid build quality and the AF performance of the 7D if you can get it. The other cameras can certainly do wildlife, but the AF of the 7D makes it a lot easier and the more rugged build quality makes it more suitable for more outdoor adventures.
Macro wise any of the cameras will work well as most macro is almost studio conditions when you add a flash for the primary light source.

 

[Overread]

Wait a minute...you are saying ideally to go for the Mark III, but the 6D has the upgraded AF, FF, and ALOT of the newer features of the Mark III but much less money. Why wouldn't he want to go 6D?

The 6D AF is nothing like the 7D af system. Whilst the central point of the 6D might be superior the outlaying points are certainly not. For example the 7D has 19 cross type AF points to use instead of just the one from the 6D. Build quality wise I'm not as certain but from what I recall the 6D isn't a rugged or soundly built - its not bad don't get me wrong its just not an "out doors" styled camera.

 

[TCampbell]

THE focus system on the market is currently the 1D X. The 5D III has the same focus system with just one exception... the 1D X has a better metering system (100,000 pixel metering) and the metering system is linked to the follow-focus capability of the 1D X in the EOS iTR (intelligent Tracking & Recognition) system.

The 5D III has a 63 "zone" metering system and the metering system is NOT linked to the EOS iTR. The 5D III has the same number of points, cross type, and otherwise and it still has the EOS iTR but the "metering" system is not linked to the iTR.

Both the 1D X and 5D III have vastly better focus systems than any other Canon.

Over on LensRentals, Roger has a series of articles showing how they've tested the various models using the imatest system. You can start by looking at this article: LensRentals.com - A Quick 6D AF Test (but there are lots of links which may be helpful to follow.)

Basically what he studied was the standard deviation on focus accuracy. While the 7D has a more advanced focusing system, I was surprised at the standard deviation score (meaning focus accuracy is less consistent). The 5D II actually scored slightly better and, frankly, the 5D II has a consumer grade focus system. The 5D III and 1D X blow everything away with the best consistency of any other model -- but then you do pay a premium or those.

The 6D had a standard deviation score of 28 in Roger's test (lower numbers are better... for example both the 5D III and 1D X scored 17.)

VERY IMPORTANT: When they did these tests... they used ONLY the center focus point on each camera. All cameras have a high-precision center cross-type point. The 7D has 19 of them spread all around the frame. The 5D II and 6D just have ONE in the center. So this test isn't about testing the "whole" focus system because a 7D will do better when focusing on subjects which are off-center (using a point other than the center point). But when using the center point, the 5D II is actually more accurate than the 7D and the 6D is even better than the 5D II.

I would probably personally go with the 6D (I own both a 5D II and a 5D III).

Frankly none of these are bad cameras and you'll be blown away at the difference between your T3i and even a 5D II when it comes to low noise at high ISO.

Knowing what I know about my own experiencing upgrading into a 5D II I think you'll be QUITE impressed with the difference. The 7D is a great sports camera but it can't touch the full-frame cameras when it comes to shooting at high ISOs and maintaining low noise. I confess I don't shoot sports and very seldom shoot action. I often shoot events where I can't control the lighting so to me the ISO performance was king. But now that I have a 5D III I'm delighted to have staggeringly amazing ISO performance AND a staggeringly good focus system in the same camera.

 

[goodguy]

Maybe this will partly help you ?



BTW I would go with the 6D

 

[Alex_B]

5DmkII:

• 
  [*=1]The AF is renowned for being utterly terrible. The 6D is no improvement in terms of AF points, but it does have the -3EV AF going for it on the center point.
  [*=1]Less weather sealing than the 6D. I plan on putting whatever body I choose through the ringer.

I am not saying you should go for the 5D II, but just two comments here ...

1) There are better AF, yes. but utterly terrible does not do the 5D II AF justice in my eyes I have done horseracing, weddings and similar sports, and there the AF was sufficient for me. But then again I mainly do Landscape and other "slow" photography. Maybe if I would do fast sports all day I might talk differently regarding AF ...

2) I have been ever so reckless to my cameras (dust, sand, mud at +40°C and above with terrible humidity, snow, ice, blizzards at -40°C and below, shooting one handed while driving a dog sled) ... and the 5D II never failed me. The whole camera had been covered with ice more than once, with my eyebrows frozen to it, and was still functional, you just had to press the buttons harder And the whole body is like a tank, I have given it some hard shocks.

 

[Austin Greene]

Update:

Well I went in to a local camera store and got to handle both the 7D and the 6D. I even dared to hold the mkIII for a minute and dreamed of what could be one day.

Things I noticed about the 7D:

• Nice and big, felt very solid in the hand. I really felt like I could go after something and not be concerned about the camera.
• AF system seemed robust, if not a little too much for me at the moment. I didn't exactly have time to get used to it.
• Controls and menu layout seemed...ok. I wasn't a fan of the buttons on the right hand side, as it led to me taking my face away from the viewfinder often. That said, I'm sure I'd get used to it, and I did like the overall layout.
• It was quite enjoyable shooting with the fast burst rate. My inner rambo got its fill.
• I was unable to test IQ, didn't have a CF card to take home.

Things I noticed about the 6D:

• Felt sturdy in the hand, albeit a tad small compared to the 7D. I swear I'm not compensating for anything, but I really enjoyed the feel of the larger 7D, not to say though that the 6D wasn't good feeling. I switched from the 6D back to my 600D and noticed what a pig I was being about size. The 600D is tiny in comparison.
• The silent shutter option seemed very practical.
• Non-silent burst speeds, while nowhere near the 7D, seemed quite adequate.
• IQ was out-of-this-world fantastic. Images are what I would consider usable for clients up to and including ISO6400 at 100% crop. ISO12800 might even be useable if your not cropping at all. I was able to use my current SD card and take a number of them home.
• I did enjoy the new FF perspective on my 70-200, and testing out my macro setup it appeared to work decently well, retaining sharpness with the 50mm f/1.8.
• Menus were intuitive coming from the 600D.
• Now onto what was my biggest concern, the AF. While I wasn't able to practice tracking, I did practice making the 6D run the full scope of my 70-200's focus. It raked from infinity to minimum focus distance in no time, and nailed focus on every single subject (using the center point).

By far the oddest thing was every now and then looking at the top of each body and thinking to myself, "oh hey, look, I have an LCD to use now." Buttons were different between the 7D and 6D, but both felt comfy regardless, not too mushy, not too firm.

What really surprised me was how I felt about things afterwards. While the 6D was pleasant in its UI, if not familiar, I couldn't help but feel it wasn't quite big enough for my hands, which aren't massive by any means. Then again, my 600D felt the same way, until I put a lower battery grip on it, which transformed my enthusiasm for it to a borderline addiction. I suspect the same might be the case here. The 7D's AF system was no-doubt robust, but seemed almost too much for my control freak self. I had always though I'd want a kick-ass AF system, but I felt oddly uncomfortable with it, like maybe it was doing too much of the work. My usual routine of focus, then recompose, seemed to be a waste of it's AF abilities. The 7D also seemed slower to catch focus inside the shop, but only barely.

While I can't compare the two because I wasn't able to bring home photos from the 7D, I was pleasantly surprised by the 6D's IQ. I was getting perfectly useable shots at ISO6400 1/640 f/4 on my 70-200 IS, inside a dimly lit camera shop. I could easily see myself shooting indoors in situations I would have never before though possible without a flash, and that is incredibly attractive.

It also should be mentioned that shooting with the 6D, I felt like I was really getting the sharpness/IQ out of my 70-200 that was deserved by my investment in it. I've been happy with it on the 600D, but not anywhere near what I was once I had it on the FF sensor.

Overall, while I'm not yet decided, I have to admit I am leaning towards the 6D. Between the ISO performance opening new doors in terms of shooting locales, the overall IQ of shooting FF, and the familiarity of the control scheme, I was quite a happy camper. Did I wish it had the AF system of the 7D? Sure I did. That said, I have managed to get some pretty decent wildlife photos on my 600D with a much worse AF system than the 6D, so I feel confident I could still snag one in a pinch with some quality glass like my 70-200.

Lastly, while I hate to buy a camera and already be thinking of upgrading, the bottom line is that I do hope to own the 5DmkIII one day, there is no point in pretending otherwise. I suspect the 6D will retain its value well into the future, especially when folks realize it knocks the pants off the 5DmkII.

So with all this in mind, my final questions to you all are these:
1. Considering that, prior to the 5DmkIII, the 5DmkII was a staple of professional portraiture/weddings/etc, would you personally view the 6D as being a professional grade body, suitable to do professional work such as weddings etc? I know it has every bit to do with the camera behind the camera, but we're talking solely about functionality and impressions here. Do you personally see the 6D as being, wait for it, better than the 5DmkII?
2. Considering that the 6D only has a flash sync of 1/180, do you see this getting in the way of most portraiture? I normally shoot my 600D at 1/200, and while I know its a small step down, I'm curious how it might effect things in terms of real-world applications.
3. Do you all see anything that I've missed? Any giant issues I'm forgetting on either the 6D or 7D?



Again, thanks so much for all the great insight guys, its been a huge help. Keep it coming!


P.S: Just for giggles I tried out the D600. That lasted about 2 minutes. I've grown too accustomed to just how damn comfortable Canon makes their cameras. The D600, while feature rich, didn't have the same polished feel to it in either its performance, layout, or handling.

 

[jbkm1994]

Coming from someone who owns a 6D, I have been amazed. I still have my 50D and use it as a backup but there are numerous sites available for review. I did a ton of research on the Mk II, 7D, and the 6D and decided for my needs, the 6D more than does what I need. Snapsort is a good site that will compare any camera to any other camera that you are interested in comparing. Also, you can go to the Canon website and read the reviews. Here is one of the professional reviews:

Pros: Good Battery Life, Quiet, Nice Features/Settings, Quick Start-Up Time, Excellent Image Quality, Superior Build Quality, Bright LCD, Solid Operation, Lightweight/Portable,Simple Controls/Menu, Easy To Use

I was a little nervous about purchasing this camera because of the autofocus system. I'm currently shooting with a 1d series camera but my wife will not pack it because of its weight, so I purchased this body for so there were no more point and shoot pics taken.
All I can honestly say is wow. The low light shooting indoors or out side is amazing. The autofocus system is second to none. It is hard to take a poor picture with this body. I have never been this impressed with any body I have purchased including my 1dx.
Shooting in the same conditions as the 1dx and same Iso, same lens same tripod. The files look identical and maybe a little sharper because of the small resolution bump.
This camera is a true winner!!!

 

[Austin Greene]

Coming from someone who owns a 6D, I have been amazed. I still have my 50D and use it as a backup but there are numerous sites available for review. I did a ton of research on the Mk II, 7D, and the 6D and decided for my needs, the 6D more than does what I need. Snapsort is a good site that will compare any camera to any other camera that you are interested in comparing. Also, you can go to the Canon website and read the reviews. Here is one of the professional reviews:

Pros: Good Battery Life, Quiet, Nice Features/Settings, Quick Start-Up Time, Excellent Image Quality, Superior Build Quality, Bright LCD, Solid Operation, Lightweight/Portable,Simple Controls/Menu, Easy To Use

I was a little nervous about purchasing this camera because of the autofocus system. I'm currently shooting with a 1d series camera but my wife will not pack it because of its weight, so I purchased this body for so there were no more point and shoot pics taken.
All I can honestly say is wow. The low light shooting indoors or out side is amazing. The autofocus system is second to none. It is hard to take a poor picture with this body. I have never been this impressed with any body I have purchased including my 1dx.
Shooting in the same conditions as the 1dx and same Iso, same lens same tripod. The files look identical and maybe a little sharper because of the small resolution bump.
This camera is a true winner!!!

Great to hear from a 6D owner! Out of curiosity what are your thoughts on the 1/180 sec flash sync? Have you ran into issues with it being too slow for some portraiture?

As much as I hate to say it, if I end up moving into the professional arena, I want a body that not only I, but other photographers respect. I hate to hear the 6D called an "entry level FF body" because as I saw today, it simply isn't. It heartily beats out the 5DmkII (often considered a semipro body) in all respects but flash sync and shutter life. I'm not one to care too much what others think, but from a business/reputation standpoint, I would like a body that others see as being capable, aside from my knowing it to be.

 

[jbkm1994]

I have had no problems at all with the 1/180 flash sync. You will find yourself in situations that you might think you need flash but no longer due to the excellent low light performance. Many times I find that a reflector and window light do the trick!

I'm like you in that I could care less what others think of my gear. I care more about what my clients think of there portraits. As long as the gear I have gets the job done to mine and my clients standards! The post of the above 1Dx user is a 20 year professional and as you can see it doesn't seem to bother him either. Hope this helps.