6D users, don't kill me...

kin2son wrote in post #16419794
...and they all know very well the one obvious deficiency which is fixed and improved significantly in the successor

So then how do you explain the success of the 5DII with such a "deficiency"? You're constantly attempting to avoid my questions.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16419651
Unfortunately, there is a tendency on this forum to sometimes imply that if a newer and better camera comes out (5DIII), all of a sudden an older one, even if it is still world class, becomes an unusable pile of junk, incapable of taking decent photos.

Noticed that did you...., so I wonder, if those that think like that routinely throw away all of their "OLD" images that were taken with said pile of junk, when a new model comes out....

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16419757
^If that last sentence is how you feel, why is it you feel the need to come into every 6D thread and talk about how horrible it's AF is (which it isn't)?...

Maybe because he is a troll.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16419752
kin2son, have you seen my shots I posted (football game).

I just had a look and here's my humble opinion.

First of all these weren't critically focused shot. What I mean by that is from that distance, the outer point in the vf will probably cover the whole player, and because the player as a whole has lots of contrast (notice the pattern/number on their back?), it's not challenging the point.

Secondly, the shots were all stopped down. As I've mentioned before, shots at smaller aperture (combined with high ISO in your case) hides all the flaws. The fact that the players are so tiny within the whole frame means all the fine details are non-present.

What bobbyz, Charlie and me have been saying are nailing critical focus on people at large aperture, namely eyes. With your set I bet even a 550D's outer points would have no issue.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16419816
So then how do you explain the success of the 5DII with such a "deficiency"? You're constantly attempting to avoid my questions.

Times have passed, things have moved on, technology advances...

It was a success because it was the best thing out there back then (well sure there was 1D4). Simple as that.

Can't believe I have to type that out loud

kin2son wrote in post #16419826
I just had a look and here's my humble opinion.

First of all these weren't critically focused shot. What I mean by that is from that distance, the outer point in the vf will probably cover the whole player, and because the player as a whole has lots of contrast (notice the pattern on their jerseys?), it's not challenging the point.

Secondly, the shots were all stopped down. As I've mentioned before, shots at smaller aperture (combined with high ISO in your case) hides all the flaws. The fact that the players are so tiny within the whole frame means all the fine details are non-present.

What bobbyz, Charlie and me have been saying are nailing critical focus on people at large aperture, namely eyes. With your set I bet ever a 550D's outer points would have no issue.

Wow. Just wow. You're really stuck on tracking eyeballs at f/0.00012 aren't you?

kin2son wrote in post #16419829
Times have passed, things have moved on, technology advances...

It was a success because it was the best thing out there back then. Simple as that.

Can't believe I have to type that out loud

I'm still not getting my answer, how was that possible that all those pros, award winning photographer somehow still managed to use the 5DII with great results. The bought them like cupcakes.
And what about the 1DsIII? Wasn't that the "best thing out there back then"? Maybe because 5DII users did not need the super duper AF of the 1Ds and the 5DII was sufficient enough for their work.
Now, why can't the 6D be sufficient for us 6D owners?

dscri001 wrote in post #16419841
Wow. Just wow. You're really stuck on tracking eyeballs at f/0.00012 aren't you?

Of course not. Besides at 400mm, you can't as the point easily covers the whole player.

I was merely trying to explain why the outer points on the 6D could lock on in Gabe's example.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16419842
I'm still not getting my answer, how was that possible that all those pros, award winning photographer somehow still managed to use the 5DII with great results. The bought them like cupcakes.
And what about the 1DsIII? Wasn't that the "best thing out there back then"? Maybe because 5DII users did not need the super duper AF of the 1Ds and the 5DII was sufficient enough for their work.
Now, why can't the 6D be sufficient for us 6D owners?

I think it just bothers him that we're really happy with the 6D. The football shots look great and he is only dismissing them because they're aren't shot wide open, 2 inches away.

kin2son wrote in post #16419826
I just had a look and here's my humble opinion.

First of all these weren't critically focused shot. What I mean by that is from that distance, the outer point in the vf will probably cover the whole player, and because the player as a whole has lots of contrast (notice the pattern on their jerseys?), it's not challenging the point.

Secondly, the shots were all stopped down. As I've mentioned before, shots at smaller aperture (combined with high ISO in your case) hides all the flaws. The fact that the players are so tiny within the whole frame means all the fine details are non-present.

What bobbyz, Charlie and me have been saying are nailing critical focus on people at large aperture, namely eyes. With your set I bet even a 550D's outer points would have no issue.

3 out of 4 were not stopped down, shot wide open at f/5.6, which admittedly has a nice deep DoF at that distance. But so does a 400mm f/2.8, whose DoF also covers the whole player at that distance. But isn't that the point of taking a photo of a player? Show me a lens that has such shallow DoF that only the player's eyes are in focus from 50-60 yards away. Nope, you can't. Even my 300 2.8 keeps the whole player (in soccer) in focus from 30-40 yards away.

But again, how was that possible with a focus and recompose, center point only camera? Don't your words imply that it shouldn't even be possible? Shouldn't the outer AF point hunt? Or produce completely out of focus images? Granted 400mm f/5.6 is not very impressive, but it can miss AF easily and produce a blurry photo if not AF'd properly.

kin2son wrote in post #16419846
Of course not. Besides at 400mm, you can't as the point easily covers the whole player.

I was merely trying to explain why the outer points on the 6D could lock on in Gabe's example.

And isn't that what you guys are after? He clearly showed that the outer points work. But you dismissed it. Which is why I pointed it out. You're clearly not happy with anybody's opinion accept your own. You turn down every explanation and ask for indisputable evidence, but can't site any of your own. All of your arguments are subjective and based off nothing.

Refer to post #274 for examples.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16419842
Now, why can't the 6D be sufficient for us 6D owners?

I've never said that and that wasn't what I've been saying sigh....

I've quoted and explained myself more than once regarding that, I just don't feel the need to do it again and again.

dscri001 wrote in post #16419857
And isn't that what you guys are after? He clearly showed that the outer points work. But you dismissed it. Which is why I pointed it out.

I'm sorry what did I dismiss?

In fact it was quite the opposite. I tried to explain why it worked in Gabe's case.

bobbyz wrote in post #16419612
So I pulled my 6d and 35L and did some quick tests. Center is very good no question but top most and the left to it plain suck IMHO. Here is my test subject.

#1 ISO6400, f1.4, 1/100, with the problem points no AF in AI servo, lens keeps trying to AF

#2 ISO1600, f1.4, 1/250, Same issue here when trying to AF on "brother". One shot works much better than AI servo mode,


#3 ISO1600, f1.4, 1/250, Trying to focus on the edge (canon red bar), Top most point yes as vertical sensitive. Left to top most, forget it.

Hi Bobby,
I did some quick 6D/Sigma 35 1.4 shots. Shot as jpeg, only thing I did in LR was adjust the white balance. shot at 1.6, flash used.
I focused on the K for Kinson
1st is far right focal point, second is center, third is second from the left, bottom.

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Just for the heck of it, here is a 100% crop of one of the photos so the player isn't "tiny"

keep in mind the following before you make your judgement!

- Cold, drizzling weather
- Night game under stadium lights
- Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS + 2x TC (not even a bare lens). A 2x TC really drops your IQ, especially under demanding conditions.
- wide open aperture = f/5.6
- This was shot wide open
- ISO 5000 to get a decent shutter speed
- Shot with the upper center AF point

Now, keeping these in mind, here is the 100% crop.