Canon 6D announced...

Dpreview have a nice summary:
"Overall, though, it's difficult to shake the feeling that the EOS 6D simply lacks the 'wow' factor of its main rival. Whereas Nikon seems to have taken the approach of taking away as little as possible from D800 when creating the D600, Canon appears almost to have gone the other way, removing as much as it thinks it can get away with at the price. The result is the kind of conservative, slightly unimaginative design that's become the company's hallmark
Click to expand...
 
a1ex2001 said:
Love these comments about the AF, it's clearly perfectly adequate for 90% of users yes it's not all singing all dancing 65 cross point stuff but twelve months ago nearly every wedding tog in the country was shooting a 9 point 5D mkii and we were all drooling over the results the best of them could muster. Yes it's not great for AI Servo on a fast mooving target but thats what the 7D is for in this market segment.
Click to expand...


Having gone back to my 40D whilst my 7D is at Canon I completely disagree.

Having so much space between AF points is poor and I will personally never go to a camera which has less AF coverage than the 7D.
 
olv said:
The new Leica S system camera only does 1/1000. WHY IS IT SO RUBBISH?!!
Click to expand...

Is this sarcasm, or are you new to photography?

If your new then I'll help you out with saying, 1/1000 IS SOOOOO RUBBISH WHEN SHOOTING IN BRIGHT SUNLIGHT & WIDE APERTURES BECAUSE ALL YOUR PICTURES ARE WAY OVER EXPOSED.
 
D.P. said:
Not really, 4 years ago Canon was slated for releasing a gimped 5DMKII with antiquated AF that was well below the competitors level and so 5DMKII users endured the shortcomings in an otherwise excellent camera (bar sensor banding issues in the the shadows). 4 Years later an Canon do the same thing and release another camera with highly gimped.

When paying that kind of money you expect very good AF system, at least at the 7D level if not better. The competition can give equal or better 7D AF system (albeit the same central clustering), why can't Canon?
Click to expand...

Only if you consider something D7000 based equal to the 7D, which I don't. The D600 AF system isn't looking as good as the 6D as far as I am concerned. Both are clustered in the centre so I'd be looking at the -3 EV AF point on the 6D as the standout. Neither system is something I'm interested in though ultimately.

It's just hyperbole that everyone didn't like the 5D2 AF, thousands upon thousands of landscape users were more than happy with the decent liveview system, and even more are quite happy with just using the centre along with the f4 kit lens. Not to mention all the studio use. Having said that, I don't want one :D

Oh, and if you quote a summary you should quote it all, not just selectively quote the negative ;)
 
What Canon lists in terms of EV is not the same as Nikon's equivalent listed EV.

5Diii listed to AF at -2EV ~ D7000 listed to AF at -1 EV.

Clearly these EV numbers are not comparable.

 
AF has never been a deal breaker for me (Canon could release a 1point system and id be just as content) but really I dont understand Canon at all.
They seem to be in this trend of pushing the least they can out whilst Nikon seems to be creating cameras that make headlines in positive ways.

The sensor at least on paper doesnt appear to be that big a difference to something like a mk2 (bar better light processing obvs) but for the extra £500+ whats the point?
 
I think people don't miss what they never had tbh, they simply carry on making do.
Obviously depending on what they shoot, not everyone needs fast AF, or AF that aids composition and timing, however I personally would hate to go back to the days of focus recompose.

All I want is an AF system with well placed AF points. That's fast and accurate/consistent, and lastly an AF system that is easy and fast to navigate between points.

I doubt either the 6D or D600 offers what my D700 already does.

 
An Exception said:
What Canon lists in terms of EV is not the same as Nikon's equivalent listed EV.

5Diii listed to AF at -2EV ~ D7000 listed to AF at -1 EV.

Clearly these EV numbers are not comparable.

Click to expand...

Indeed, at best the -3EV on the 6D will bring the 6D in line with the D7K for focus in low light.There is no ISO standard for this so manufacturer specs can be very misleading.

Also the difference between manufacturer phase sensors can be very large. 5DMKIII boast all these cross sensors but it appears they really aren't any more sensitive than single sensors, and some AF sensor that are supposed to operate to f/5.6 are barely workable at that aperture etc.
 
Last edited:
An Exception said:
I think people don't miss what they never had tbh, they simply carry on making do.
Click to expand...

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. Take me for example, I've only ever had (digitally that is), 300D, 30D, 60D and now I've upgraded to the 5dmk3 which for me is an absolutely stunning leap forwards. For the first time I've spent time reading the manual, there's so much that's different. I haven't even touched the camera today (admittedly been doing other things) but read about a third of the manual in breaks during work.

I honestly can't see me needing another camera for 5 years. I've finally got to the point where I have a camera that's way beyond my skill level, and my lenses are all pretty much the best you'll get, with a couple of exceptions.

My point being that there are arguments (not inviting another brand war, so stop it before anyone posts!) that there are better cameras than the one I now have, and will be better over the next few years, but this will do everything I need and more, and for years to come. The only way I can see me getting a better camera is if someone gives me £20k and I get a pro body with long lens for F1 or aerial sport stuff.
 
D.P. said:
Indeed, at best the -3EV on the 6D will bring the 6D in line with the D7K for focus in low light.There is no ISO standard for this so manufacturer specs can be very misleading.

Also the difference between manufacturer phase sensors can be very large. 5DMKIII boast all these cross sensors but it appears they really aren't any more sensitive than single sensors, and some AF sensor that are supposed to operate to f/5.6 are barely workable at that aperture etc.
Click to expand...

You do realise it's a pointless test? Not only is the 100mm macro a poor AF performer in low light it's not even in the compatibility list for the high precision centre point anyway. It's a loaded test...
 
Rojin said:
You do realise it's a pointless test? Not only is the 100mm macro a poor AF performer in low light it's not even in the compatibility list for the high precision centre point anyway. It's a loaded test...
Click to expand...

Fair enough, i did not know that. But I wouldn't take manufacturer specs at face value (coincidentally I just came back from a physics presentation where someone had to compare several $40-70,000 camera to find the best for their experiments, the official readout specs and S/N values were widely inaccurate)

Stated focus point sensitivities are also much like some of the officially supported ISOs- e.g. in theory the 5DMk3 can operate at far higher ISOs than the D800 but in practice the noise is actually lower on the D800, as well as the fact that the stated ISOs are no where near what the true ISO sensitivities should be.

Until someone tests the 6D in the dark I wouldn't ay much attention to it, it might be a big step forwards but it would be very, very strange to have such a big step forwards in AF sensitivity on a camera with antiquated AF when the 5DMK3 and 1Dx with their state of the art pro AF don't have this sensitivity. We know the D7K work well in the dark already and the D600 is supposed to be an improvement.
 
Yeah, until we see actual reviews and real world tests by users it's all speculation. The 6D AF specification is something you might see from a 2005 camera brochure, but it's supposedly newly developed. That it doesn't fill the FF frame properly is just beyond belief though.

Nikon are sure churning out some nice bodies, hopefully Canon will start to lose some market share so that it wakes them up to some actual innovation! Although it would be easier to just start buying some sensors off Sony :D
 
Compared to the D600 I can't see any way on paper that (without seeing real-world performance comparisons on the AF) this would be a better purchase at the same price, other than it having WiFi and GPS as standard (which isn't really a good reason).
 
cokebottles said:
Neither does the D600:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5892731439/photos/2211600/nikon-d600-viewfinder-af-points

I wonder how in practise that is any more useful that the D6 autofocus?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=42513452
Click to expand...

I know, I've already raised that. I'm not convinced the 9 cross points of the D600 offer any benefit at all unless you are using automatic AF modes. It could help in tracking as well I guess? However as I always use a single AF point that I move across the frame it really wouldn't matter to me. I could quite happily use a 9 all cross point system with proper spacing around the frame.

Richdog said:
Compared to the D600 I can't see any way on paper that (without seeing real-world performance comparisons on the AF) this would be a better purchase at the same price, other than it having WiFi and GPS as standard (which isn't really a good reason).
Click to expand...

Well the sensor having the edge is almost a given, that and the dual slots and higher FPS are all plus points for the D600. The 6D has its gadgets and is smaller and lighter which are plus points. Take your pick and fill your boots!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom