I'm struggling to decide on a camera, sensor size, mirrorless or SLR...Think you can help? ;)

[Designer]

Well, it's settled then. The Canon 6D it is! Congratulations!

 

[Braineack]

yeah, but do you even need any of that?

 

[Designer]

yeah, but do you even need any of that?

Don't confuse him! He was making real progress.

 

[TimmyD11]

yeah, but do you even need any of that?

Well I do want in camera HDR. I think I mentioned that.

 

[Dragster3]

Why doesn't anybody ever recommend Pentax? I would love to try one. That's all I ever owned in the 90's.

Are they that bad? The specs seem good. Sorry for the high jack...lol
BTW
I still have my spotmatic.

 

[cherylynne1]

Pentax has a comparatively small but fiercely loyal fan base, from what I've seen.

Actually, I think they are often recommended for astrophotography work, although I've forgotten what their specific advantage is.

I've never even seen one, I don't think. The specs and reviews do seem pretty good, though.

 

[astroNikon]

... Actually, I think they are often recommended for astrophotography work, although I've forgotten what their specific advantage is.
...

The K-1 FullFrame & K3-II models are if you don't have a tracking system (ie, only a tripod and the camera). ==> Pentax K1 Review: Perfect Astro Camera? - Outdoor Photographer


back to the OP. You'll have to justify your total budget for your camera. If you blow too much you may think otherwise of your purchase. So just make sure that you total expense (tripod, lenses, camera) is within your identified budget. And none of it matters if you just keep reading internet fodder instead of making a decision, buying it and then learning how to use it.

 

[Benoby]

I think right now Canon has the fastest autofocus which coud be handy for "shooting" animals, but the built in anti-vibration system in some Nikon lenses is great.

 

[TimmyD11]

back to the OP. You'll have to justify your total budget for your camera. If you blow too much you may think otherwise of your purchase. So just make sure that you total expense (tripod, lenses, camera) is within your identified budget. And none of it matters if you just keep reading internet fodder instead of making a decision, buying it and then learning how to use it.

My hangup right now is between owning Canon EF lenses and liking the concept of their shooting modes and in camera HDR

vs

Nikons apparently being the better cameras.

Seriously, lets say I splurge for the 6D for $1400, and there's the D610 staring me in the face at $1500 and the numbers say the D610 blows the 6D out of the water! Then I think back to the people that say "forget the numbers, it's more about the skill of the photographer!"

I'm just having a hard time finalizing and justifying one purchase over the other.

 

[TimmyD11]

According to imaging resource the 6D has slightly better dynamic range and the D610 has slightly better detail. However, going by numbers alone at dxomark a normal person wouldn't even think of buying a 6D over a D610.

Derrel, where are you? You planted many of my seeds of doubt! (ISO invariance an all!)

What are your thoughts on this if I decide between these 2 cameras?

 

[Braineack]

The thing that wins it over for me, is not in-body HDR -- which turns over all the creative control to canon, but things like (from the same article you quoted from):

39 focus-points vs 11
9 cross-type points vs. 1
Nikon has a center focus in the dark to -1EV, where the Canon has an advantage with the center point at -3EV (basically the canon can acquire focus in a scene much darker than the Nikon can)
However, the Nikon's center point is good for f/8, the Canon only f/2.8 (basically the Nikon doesnt need fast glass to achieve the focus, and may even negate the issue above if using fast glass)

Those are the technical things that increase your ability to shoot. In camera HDR, imho, screams gimmick, but mainly because I like doing my own processing and Nikon's sensor doesn't need bracketing in most scenes. I do however, have my Google Pixel phone set to always do HDR processing.

Overall the Nikon offers much better costerformance. I don't see where you're seeing the D610 being more expensive than Canon... A used D610 (body only) is going to run around $1000-1100. A Used 6Dmi (body only) is around $1200.

However, the 6D mii probably beats out the D610 since its so much newer and has an improved sensor and AF-module, but the price tag comes with it.

 

[Braineack]

According to imaging resource the 6D has slightly better dynamic range and the D610 has slightly better detail.

be careful with that quote, the Canon has slightly better DR at higher ISO levels it says. Between 100 and 1600ISO, the D610 blows it out of the water.

 

[Derrel]

According to imaging resource the 6D has slightly better dynamic range and the D610 has slightly better detail. However, going by numbers alone at dxomark a normal person wouldn't even think of buying a 6D over a D610.

Derrel, where are you? You planted many of my seeds of doubt! (ISO invariance an all!)

What are your thoughts on this if I decide between these 2 cameras?

I bought a used Nikon D610 and the MBD-14 grip and three batteries, used, for $849 a month ago at a local brick and mortar photo store (a super-good deal, I realize).The image quality is very high, and even 12-bit raw files can be "worked" to a very high degree. I have not shot many 14-bit .NEF files with it, but if I wanted the absolute, ultimate image manipulation ability, I'd likely shoot 14-bit raw files for the times I needed to do exteme post-capture exposure adjustments (astrophotography for example, or night-time,tined-exposure shotsqwhere I might want to "lift" the exposures in software later and have the absolute best-best possible raw data to work with).

As to the above in-camera HDR differences; the Nikon sensor has a 2.3-EV edge in total dynamic range over the 6D, so, that could get very good in-camera HDR with fewer needed exposures. In my own experience, the 2.3 EV DR advantage is a huge one in favor of the Nikon. The recover-ability of these new Nikon files is superb. It truly,truly is. THIS is where, IMHO, Nikon betters Canon's offerings in general, but Canon *has made* some noticeable sensor advances in the last couple of years. The 80D for example is pretty close to the D3400's performance.

Still, you have the 28-105 and the 85/1.8 EF lenses for Canon and that one other EF lens. My original suggestion was a used Canon 5D or used Canon 6D, for those three lenses. I still stand by that suggestion for you if you want to keep shooting those lenses.

The 95 overall score is VERY high...the 82 overall score is equalled or bettered now by the very best of APS-C cameras, but for me, the FF-sized sensors are what I prefer. I think the FF sensor cameras work the best with the most lenses that are already out there; there is a LOT of Canon EF glass on the new and used market.

 

[TimmyD11]

According to imaging resource the 6D has slightly better dynamic range and the D610 has slightly better detail.

be careful with that quote, the Canon has slightly better DR at higher ISO levels it says. Between 100 and 1600ISO, the D610 blows it out of the water.

View attachment 144972

That graph may be correct but imaging resource ought to correct how they worded the summary paragraph because how they worded it could be interpreted to mean overall OR only at high ISO settings.


"On paper at least, there's not much to separate the Nikon D610 and Canon 6D in the sensor department. Both have nearly-identical sensor area, and while Nikon leads by around 10% in terms of linear resolution, that difference is more modest than the pixel counts of 24.3 megapixels for the D610 and 20.2 megapixels for the 6D might otherwise imply.

Still, if you're shooting with sharp, high-quality glass and aiming for larger print sizes, the Nikon D610 has a slight edge in terms of detail, capturing around 2,700 lines per picture height in our detailed lab testing, where the Canon 6D manages around 2,400 lines. (These figures are for JPEG mode at low ISO and low compression; both cameras can manage perhaps another hundred lines of detail, if you're willing to shoot in raw mode.)

On paper, the Canon 6D looks to have a significant edge in terms of sensitivity, with an upper limit of ISO 102,400 equivalent, where the Nikon D610 tops out at ISO 25,600 equivalent. Our in-depth testing found that the Canon's higher sensitivities were of relatively little utility, however, with ISO 51,200 from the Canon 6D only capable of producing a 4 x 6-inch print, and ISO 102,400 equivalent best avoided altogether.

Crank up the sensitivity, and both cameras will of course suffer the effects of noise (and noise reduction) on image detail. Both cameras provide four-step control over noise reduction, but Canon's NR is heavier-handed, doing a better job of reducing chroma noise in particular, but at the expense of fine detail. (Again, though, if you really care about detail, shoot RAW and convert using Lightroom, Photoshop, Capture One, Bibble, DxO Optics Pro, etc)

We also looked at dynamic range of both cameras, and here there was a slight advantage for the Canon 6D over its rival. Where the Nikon D610 offered a range of about 11 stops in JPEG mode, the 6D bested it slightly with an 11.5-stop range. Switch to raw shooting, and the two were essentially tied.

Image quality, then, isn't a huge point of differentiation between these cameras. Overall, we'd probably call it for the Nikon simply because it offers slightly more detail, but JPEG shooters might find the Canon's better dynamic range and control of chroma noise at high sensitivities appealing."

 

[TimmyD11]

In camera HDR, imho, screams gimmick, but mainly because I like doing my own processing and Nikon's sensor doesn't need bracketing in most scenes.

That may be true, but that is something I would like considering I am an amateur that currently wants simplicity and a shot at fantastic photographs without getting overly involved after I press the button and download them to my computer.

Also, seems to have pretty good bracketing, so if I ever want to do it the more detailed and time consuming way in the future I can.