I upgrade my camera body every two years, a time frame that in our technological society brings many advances. I was going to get a 5DIII---until I saw the price tag. As a non-professional I just could not justify that kind of an investment in a depreciating asset, so I held onto my now long-in-the-tooth 5DII. When I heard rumors of the 6D, that really piqued my interest. As the spec's were leaked, some were pooh-poohing the AF system, but as primarily a landscaper it made little difference to me--I was excited about the new sensor and processor. I hate carrying a tripod, and the rumors of clean high ISO's had me excited!
I was all set to buy myself the camera as a Christmas gift, but walking through my local Costco I was struck by an incredible deal they offered on the Nikon D600. The body and a two-lens kit (24-85, 70-300) was specially priced at around $2900. My favorite lens for landscape is a Nikon 14-24 that I used on my 5DII with a special adapter, but I still had no autofocus and had to shoot in manual. Now I was really in a conundrum--if I bought the Nikon kit, my favorite lens would now operate like a champ and I would have all my focal lengths covered--ultra wide, a walk around, and a telephoto. I've been a Canon shooter since 1979, but I don't get emotionally attached to tools and have no qualms about selling gear, so I began an intensive study of the pro's and con's of both camera's and systems. DXO Mark rated the Nikon sensor a 94---an incredibly high rating and a full 12 points higher than the 6D's (surprisingly, the 6D's rating equaled Canon's flagship model, the 1DX, and was a bit higher than the 5DIII's). The sensor, combined with a superior AF system, built-in flash, bigger viewfinder and faster frame rate had me almost settled on switching systems. Next, knowing nothing about Nikon glass, I needed to check on the kit lenses. I discovered that these were not great lenses, and that Nikon really didn't have a great "walk-around" lens to compare to my 24-105 (the 24-70 is two grand), and the 70-300 was nowhere near the optic my 70-200 was. But then again, I could use the stellar Nikkor 14-24 in the way it was intended. Hmm. More confusion.
I decided to go to my local shop (Tempe Camera plug) and check out the 6D in person--it was said to be smaller than my 5DII and I wanted to test it in person. By chance, the Canon representative was there and it was the first day the 6D was on sale. I told the Canon rep I was interested in the 6D as an upgrade from my 5DII and she told me the camera wasn't for me, but for newcomers to the full frame world. I needed the 5DIII. I told her I wasn't about to pay that for a camera and began playing with the 6D. My sales associate (Guy), however, was really sold on the 6D and detailed areas of superiority of the 6D over my 5DII---superior processor, larger sensor pixel pitch (?) with a new light-sucking honeycomb shape, GPS, wifi, yada, yada. More than anything he was telling me, the camera felt great in my hands! It was a fantastic size for me and had a nice, rubbery tactile feel when compared to the 5DII. I've never been a huge advocate of "hand feel", I can get used to anything with repeated use, but this was like stepping into a pair of warm house slippers. Wow! A quick check of the layout, buttons, etc. showed the build was as good as what I was used to. With any new camera you have to get used to the new layout work process. The GPS was a cool feature for me as well; my usual photo locations are somewhere out on the Navajo reservation or in some isolated backcountry locale where a GPS coordinate would be nice to have. I left the shop very impressed, but I needed to check the Nikon more extensively so went back to the Costco to put it through its paces. The build quality seemed fine , but I was immediately struck by the larger size, not terribly larger but the "hand feel" was totally off. And the buttons and dials were about as foreign to me as possible. It did not make my decision an easy one.
After a few difficult days of going back and forth hashing out the benefits of one camera and system over the other, I chose the 6D. My reason was more the familiarity of the camera body than anything else. I like to shoot by instinct, to know the camera so well that it's an extension of my body, to be able to dig into a sub-menu in seconds if need be. It took me a long time to get to the point where I can master the mechanical aspects of the camera in order to free up the creative side of photography, and with the Nikon it would be an entire new learning experience which at this point in my life I am not willing to invest in.
Is the 6D the perfect camera? No, but for my needs its really close (but Canon, you broke my heart when you took away the joystick!) Would I rather have the 5DIII? Yes, but not for the price premium. And the wifi? Really cool when I can get it to work. I've not had a chance to put it through the paces in my preferred field (landscape), but so far the files are great and the low light performance is stellar. For those of you in my position--wanting a full frame camera but cannot justify the $3,500, the 6D is a surprisingly good alternative.
