Canon eos 6d offically announced

How come the 6D gets built in wireless, even though the 5D3 and 1DX didn't get it?

I'm not complaining. It is about freakin' time they give us built in wifi in DSLRs. This feature has been available in many P&S-cameras since 2011.

I just don't see why they decide to launch it with their "entry level FF".

kfreels wrote in post #15001265
I don't get all the complaints. The market position of this camera is for it to be an entry level full-frame camera. Some of the specs on the Nikon are better. So what? The D600 can't shoot faster than 1/4000. Canon has superior specs in a few other areas as well. They aren't "Handing" anything to Nikon.

As for as "things that matter", well, different things matter to different people. Anyone who thinks that 1/8000 is less important than an extra few megapixels just isn't shooting the same types of shots. Personally I could care less about a few megapixels. 20 is plenty for my needs. It's an ideal balance of resolution and file size for me. ISO 25,600 native is much more useful for me than 6400 on the D600. To me, 6400 is "underwhelming". This is the camera I have been waiting to add to my equipment list. I have my 7D for most of the stuff that I do. But when I need higher ISO or need to do portraits, then I can use the 6D. I expect I'll be buying one as soon as they are available.

Given the prices being the same on the two, I would say the higher ISO and faster top shutter speed are more important than an extra few MP and 1 extra fps or a bunch of extra focus points. On my 7D I probably use only about 11 anyways.

For what it is meant to be, I think this camera is "ideal". It isn't earth shattering, but it doesn't need to be....it fits the market position it is seeking very well and it certainly isn't anything to be embarrassed about. Spot focus, 25,600 native ISO and 1/8000 shutter speeds are not "gimmicks".

This. I agree here.

Canon placed this model exactly where the intended. It's meant to compliment the 60D.

Basically the enthusiast models were split starting with the 7D and 60D. Canon now has 4 distinct levels. Entry, Consumer, Enthusiast, Pro. The original DEOS consumer cameras were the xxD models. Everyone loved to call them "semi pro", but in reality the bodies were based off of the film EOS élan models which was one step above the entry level film Rebels. Above the Elan models were the EOS A2 and EOS 3, notice a similarity? Then as now on top was the 1 series. The slight blending here comes from the APS-C and FF mucking up the waters. The SLR 35mm camera used film and it came in one size for this type body.

Really, where did the rest of you expect the 6D to fit? The 5DIII already is a semi pro body, with a pro level AF system, at a consumer price point, yeah it's above the original price point of the original 5D, but it rests nicely between the Consumer FF 6D, and the Prosumer 5DIII now. As it sits right now the 5DIII risks stealing some sales from the 1 series, just as the excellent EOS 3 did.

If the 6D had all you are expecting it to have, it would be a 5DIII, you all seem to be expecting a 5DIII at a 5DII price. The 7D was way ahead of the 5DII and now has a FF model that carries a lot of the same features in the 5DIII. So the Canon line is back to where it was in the mid 90s. Rebel, XXD XD consumer, XD enthusiast, and 1 pro.

nardox wrote in post #15001219
A few things I'm concerned with
1. The performance of the AF system, honestly why don't they just use the 7D AF system, a new, supposedly better(6D vs 7D) camera with a worse AF system?
2. MFA
3. High ISO performance compared to 5D2 and 5D3
4. IQ compared to 5D2 and 5D3

Maybe I should just save some more money and get a 5D3.

1. Wouldn't it basically be a 5DIII then?
2. Wouldn't it basically be a 5DIII then?
3. After being the leader for a while, Canon's been struggling here lately.
4. IQ should be very comparable to the 5D series.

That's exactly what is intended here. The 6D is a consumer FF camera.

Michael Cheddar wrote in post #15001184
You can quote me on whatever you'd like, I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm saying you don't have the facts to make any of those claims at this moment. If the sensor ends up being worse, I'll have no problem saying so.

Kinson just enjoys arguing on the internet. He once said weight and volume doesn't affect hiking up mountains. Shows you how credible he really is.

kin2son wrote in post #15001145
It's not just the MP count. The D600 sensor is better in every way. Better performance, cleaner image and better Dynamic Range for shadow recovery.

Stop trolling, seriously :P You havent used either camera, and there are no scientific measurements for either camera's sensor available.

Not to mention one will be hard pressed for very tiny differences in sensors to make any difference after a photo has been post processed. D600, 6D, they are both going to be nice cameras that will produce quality output for people who can use them well.

Also, the built in wireless seems like a very nice feature to me. If it works well that would be great for anybody in a studio or doing still life stuff.

I seem to remember this same reaction to the 60d which is now very popular and well received.

Autofocus does sound like a bit of a downer but like the poster above said. if it was 7d like it may as well just be the 5d3.

My guess is once the price drops to around 1800 it will be extremely popular.

I was hoping for the articulated screen, so that's a bummer. But getting the touh screen and gps is great! Look forward to seeing it in person.

Could he a nice camera to pair with a 7D.

mrkgoo wrote in post #15001434
I was hoping for the articulated screen, so that's a bummer. But getting the touh screen and gps is great! Look forward to seeing it in person.

Could he a nice camera to pair with a 7D.

Careful. Someone is likely to hammer you for daring to use such a "gimmick".

I thought the 6D was supposed to be Canon's entry level full frame sensor camera?

<lurking in the background>

Cant wait to see what happens! Honestly, at this point I might be tempted to buy this body instead of a 7d for my "noob-ness" to be shaped into a decent photographer. I want a full frame but dont want a MKII and can NOT afford a MKIII for something I still consider "a hobby".

If this is for real, I will check it out and at least give it a once over. From what Ive heard you guys say its a let down... well no matter what its still an UPGRADE from my T1i

JAC Wagon wrote in post #15001470
If this is for real, I will check it out and at least give it a once over. From what Ive heard you guys say its a let down... well no matter what its still an UPGRADE from my T1i

Seems you are not heavily invested into Canon then?

Honestly, If I were you I'd jump over to Nikon now.

kfreels wrote in post #15001465
Careful. Someone is likely to hammer you for daring to use such a "gimmick".

Any feature that makes a camera more enjoyable or convenient to use is addition worth having in my opinion

I mean they can increment image quality, but the image quality on my current slr is beyond my ability to reach anyhow.

My god, more and more I see someone everyday wanting the best of the best for the least of the least. Of course I love to save money but I'm realistic about it. Come on, if the latest Canon bodies coming out are so disappointing, make the move already. No point in posting "I'm going to make the switch" all over the place.

If the 6D is the deal breaker, chances are you don't have enough invested in Canon, so the switch should be quite easy. I'm not saying this is true for all photographers, just saying that I would understand the complaints if it were in a different market. Do people not understand the point of "entry level"? I'm no fanboy or anything, I don't get paid by Canon for anything, I could careless. I do see the 6D as a thumbs up though, makes full frame more available to the majority. Sure we can compare numbers on paper all day long and say which one is better but until we have these bodies in our hands and images to look at some of you have got to take chill pill and relax a bit.

THE GRASS IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE GREENER ON THE OTHER SIDE NO MATTER WHICH SIDE YOU'RE LOOKING FROM. IF SOME OF YOU DO NOT REALIZE THIS YET, I HOPE YOU DO, CAUSE THERE'S MORE TO LIFE THAN THE ONE EXTRA MEGAPIXEL, THAT ONE EXTRA STOP IN DYNAMIC RANGE, THAT ONE EXTRA FRAME IN BURST. IF YOU'RE PUSHING YOUR CAMERA TO IT'S LIMITS AND YOU TRULY FEEL IT'S HOLDING YOU BACK, PERHAPS YOU DON'T BELONG IN THIS MARKET.

Not very impressed.

I'm pretty new at this, but the question that comes to my mind is, who is the target consumer for this camera? At a $2100 price point it is within reach of most beginners looking at a T4i, but it compete's with the 5DII pricewise and in other aspects. Most pro's are going with the 5D3 anyway. -rick

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15000954
Unfortunately, none of these features seem like features that true professionals would be interested in. Rather, they seem like consumer-grade gimmicks. Does one, even one of these features produce higher image quality for those whose clients closely scrutinize their images?
I hope this isn't for real.