So, we demo'd 6Ds over the last week, and ugh, what was Canon thinking

[AgentDrex]

Would this be a good upgrade for me, a Canon 1000D user? It's still the same lens mount, right? I use manual lenses so AF points are moot and I shoot landscapes so FPS being low isn't a concern for me.

 

[CCericola]

The 6D only accepts EF lenses. It might handle older canon mount lenses with an adapter but not the EFS lenses made for crop sensor cameras. I'm not sure if they make an EFS to EF adapter.

 

[AgentDrex]

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be using my kit lens and is doesn't get used as is. I see that from what you wrote that it is an EF mount still, so I'd be good on my adapters.

 

[STIC]

...

 

[rexbobcat]

Well, let me re-phrase that...

If i owned a crop sensor camera (like a 7D) that allowed me to control settings and functions with an easy to use button system that was very similar to most other offerings, was very fast and capable, then picked up a 6D where i find the controls are all missing and things like iso are hidden in a screen menu, i'd think it was crap...even though it's adequate enough for holiday snaps...

I would have to say, if you chose a 6D over either a 7D or 5DII, you should revisit your options...

7D, Crop, 18MP, 8FPS, NZ$ 1467
5DII, FF, 21.1MP, 3.9FPS, NZ$ 2465
6D, FF, 20.2MP, 4.5FPS, NZ$ 2860

I've tried both. The 7D has a lot of autofocus points but its accuracy is the equivalent of a deaf bat. Plus the ISO kind of sucks balls.

The 5D has bad ergonomics for my taste and its autofocus and ISO quality is less than that of the 6D.

Both cameras from my experience are...okay...but my 1D beats the 7D and the 6D beats the 5DII in my opinion.

If I was looking for a bargain I would not be in photography.

I'm interested in pure image quality. I can always change the technique in which I achieve an image, but it's impossible to improve the inherent image quality that the camera produces.

 

[TheFantasticG]

I can always change the technique in which I achieve an image, but it's impossible to improve the inherent image quality that the camera produces.

Very very very true. That's why I upgraded from the D90 to the D7000. No technique would improve the ISO or the DR of the D90.... Luckily I didn't lose any controls when I went from one to the other

 

[STIC]

...

 

[bigal1000]

So, as a lot of our 7Ds and 5DIIs are reaching the end of their life cycle, we've been trying to get a handle on what to move into for our next wave of upgrades at work. In a lot of ways the 6D looked near perfect, as it would allow us to go almost entirely full frame, the auto focus system seemed promising compared to the 5DII. We were hopeful that we could upgrade the bulk of our failing 7Ds and 5DIIs to 6Ds and then just have a few 7Ds purely for sports and a few top end 5DIIIs for our higher end work.

Basically, to me this is perhaps a bigger flop of a camera than the 60D was in comparison the the D7000.

First, pure image quality is fine. But pure image quality on a 5D classic is fine too. You don't upgrade modern full frame cameras for image quality. But I just wanted to get that out of the way. It's nice, but so is jsut about every full frame made by Canon or Nikon.

First, the autofocus system is not particularly good. It's slightly better than the 5DII, but nowhere near the 5DIII. It will 'focus' in low light, like Canon says, in that it will tell you it has focused, but the images are almost always fairly out of focus in real world usage.

Next, it claims 4.5 fps. That's already on the low end for sports. But this is made worse by the fact that it actually rarely seemed to achieve that. It seemed to routinely be at more like 3.5-4 fps in actual usage

No built in flash? is this a pro camera or a consumer camera? Decide? THis didn't so much bother me as it just seems weird, as we only use pocket wizards and OCF at work, but still, it's just strange.

Build quality wise, it feels cheap. It's about the size of a 7D, more or less, but weighs substantially less. Balance on a 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L was off. It almost felt like you were holding a hollow shell.

X sync speed of 1/180? Are you freaking kidding me? Like I didn't even know cameras with that kind of sync speed were even made any longer.

You got rid of the joystick in it's near optimal position for an inside the wheel control? Seriously? Like the joystick focal point control was the ONE THING that made the 5DIIs autofocus system workable. This camera's system ain't much butter. Now, the button to move it is inside the aperture control ring, which makes the aperture control ring even more useless, and basically forced into lock at all times if you're changing focal points. When your ergonomic design means that a photographer has to choose between controlling the focal point and controlling aperture, you've screwed things up.

We knew that they had moved to SD cards, but as a Canon studio that has a crap ton of CF cards, this camera needed to own to overcome that disadvantage. Obviously this might not matter to many who are buying this from a 60D. But it does bring up a point I'll come back to. Who is going to buy this thing? Nobody is going to switch from a 5DII to it. Nobody is going to switch from Nikon for it. Heck, I doubt anybody will give up their 7D for it. It's basically an upgrade just aimed at 60D users? Seriously?

Did I complain about the auto focus already? Yeah, it sucks. The low light claim seems to be bogus. Even though it has 11 points, their spread is even smaller than the 5DIIs barely adequate 9 point system.

Adding in the Q button was nice, as that was something I always missed when going back and forth between the 7D and 5DII. Literally I'd pick up the 5DII and say 'where the crap is the Q button, oh yeah.' However, much of that is mitigated by the less convenient location of the joy stick.

why go to SD cards when you're only going to give a single slot? People love dual slots. Why just 1? It's not a deal breaker, but why? It made sense with CF cards, but now it just seems lazy.

One tiny thing I love is that you can now feel the difference between the ISO control button and the rest. Simple thing, but I really liked that a lot.

SO those were specific notes I made. Overall, it's just a, I don't get it type of feeling. Who are they targeting with this camera? It's $2700 with the kit lens. APS-C owners are going to have to update their lenses if they're trying to get them to move up. Plus, despite being long in the tooth, the 7D is in a lot of ways a better camera. It's too expensive to entice many t4i owners. maybe 60D owners, they're literally the only people I can see consistently moving into this camera.

Further, I cannot envision a single person who is going back and forth between this camera and the D600, which is **$700** cheaper with the kit lens. The D600 DESTROYS the 6D in auto focus, both in points and accuracy and speed. the D600's high ISO performance is better and shoots faster. It's just a plain better camera in basically every respect. Well, Canon's ISO button placement is better, but that is literally the ONLY positive I can find for the 6D. The 6Dt has ONE (1) cross type sensor. And no, despite whatever Canon's claims are, the other points didn't become magical. They're completely average non cross type points. And there are only 10 of them (excluding the 1 cross type in the center) and they're clustered even tighter than the D600 (which was already pretty tight for a full frame).

So, Canon is really expecting people to buy this camera? Like built in wi-fi and GPS is going to be something that sells it despite it costing $700 more than the D600, and being easily bested in just about every single way?

We wanted to buy this camera. We wanted to buy like 15-20 of them. Instead it looks like we'll be buying a couple more 5DIIs, 5DIIIs and 7Ds. This thing is a bit of a joke, given the price point and what it lacks. It's not a terrible camera, it's a terrible camera for the price point, given the competition.

Why not go buy a Nikon !!