Canon eos 6d offically announced

Pit wrote in post #15008094
Wow all this complaining at this price point, you guys want a 1Dx for a price of a rebel?
I'm fairly interested in this body, I was holding out for 5D MK III and i want to see how well the ISO high performs on this body as that is my main reason for upgrade. i don't need 9000 AF points as i only use the center point 99.9998% of the time, 3fps is more then enough for me as well.

It is hilarious how so many people are complaining about the "lack" of features, its not lack of features it's you get what you pay for, and canon will not kill the sales of their more high end bodies.

I think the issue is that, on paper, the D600 makes a better case for many people, Add to that the fact this camera directly targets a market that may NOT have a big investment in lenses, or that may have to do some lens switching anyways to upgrade means that some people might be more interested in dumping what little gear they have and jumping over to the other side simply because the cost differential is either non existant or very small...

Add to that the fact the competition has come prepared with an affordable kit zoom (Thats pretty decent) and a freshly updated line of 28, 50 and 85mm f/1.8 primes that you can get for not a lot of cash and the 6D might have a hard time selling to some people, and unlike folks looking at the $3500 5D Mark III, the people looking at the 6D might not have 5 lenses (With at least 2 L-class lenses) they need to replace, They might have 3, and only one or two will work on the 6D anyways..

Its not that the camera is really all that bad, its that the spec sheet just doesnt "sell" instantly the way the D600 does... Same thing happened to the 60D, Which was vindicated after it came out when people actually used one and realized that its actually a pretty damn good little camera

Canon however DOES need to refresh a few primes and a cheap zoom to go with it, Like a new 50 prime, and a cheap fast 28 wouldnt be bad either, or perhaps a compact 35mm f/2 to go with this camera's role as a lightweight full frame travel camera... and I think Canon needs to give this camera a 28-80 f/3.5-4.5 IS as a kit lens for around the $2500 mark...

KenjiS wrote in post #15008019
Well, I dunno if this was posted but i found this just a lil ago

http://www.pocket-lint.com …slr-pictures-and-hands-on

Some quotes:

This is why I will buy one. I have used the 5D III several times for weddings and I did not use all of those focus points (bells and whistles)...maybe only a few at best. I just find it odd that people weren't going crazy over just 9 auto-focus points on the old 5D II...and it was considered the holy grail for DSLR owners.

Why this wins in my book...

1. Price
2. Same sensor as 5D III (low light shooting = win)
3. Wi-Fi (perfect for when I'm at weddings)
4. Money still left over to get me a few L Lenses
5. lightweight and i can still use my batts i have already
6. SD Cards......yeah it'll be a little slow copying to pc but I have a ton of these already lying around the house and if I need some I can easily get a 32 gb for pennies.


I wanted a nice 7D AF system but...I have a 7D so I'm cool with that. I needed a ff and can't afford to shell out 3-4 grand on a new body (right now)...I'm working on building a studio.

After reading and understanding the product...I'll have to say I'm satisfied.


I just think "marketing wise" Canon could have done a lot better.

KenjiS wrote in post #15008132
Canon however DOES need to refresh a few primes and a cheap zoom to go with it, Like a new 50 prime, and a cheap fast 28 wouldnt be bad either, or perhaps a compact 35mm f/2 to go with this camera's role as a lightweight full frame travel camera... and I think Canon needs to give this camera a 28-80 f/3.5-4.5 IS as a kit lens for around the $2500 mark...

Right the old 28-135mm and the 28-80mm. Decent consumer grade full frame lenses from the late 90s. These would make competitive cheap kit lenses for the 6D.

Hogloff wrote in post #15006818
Out of their price range. They would not only have to shell out $2000, but also most likely their existing lenses will need to be replaced. Ain't happening in boat loads. Their upgrades would be to the 60d or 7d.

Wrong, there are boatloads of them - willing to replace their lenses too.

$2k is the right price point for a large market.

You guys are all missing the big distinction between these two cameras: The backup battery!

The 5DMkIII uses a CR1616 coin cell that needs to be replaced every so often. The new 6D instead uses an internal lifetime automatic rechargeable backup battery with no maintenance required. This is the most significant difference, and presents a compelling case for the 6D!

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #15007640
I'm still a bit surprised by Canon's naming strategy. I think this camera should have been called the 5DIII and the camera that is the 5DIII should have been called the 5DX or 3DX. The 5D range was conceived as being a budget full frame camera. A fantastic sensor in a budget box...which really is this new 6D camera. The 5DIII is a completely different concept to the mkI and mkII, fast fps, pro AF array and dual cards, it puts this camera into a pro sports / wildlife genre that the previous 5D range would struggle to compete in.

i disagree with your post. The reason why is because if 5d3 had 6d specs, a lot of people would complain how the 5d3 doesnt have many plus points compared to the 5d2 and that is exactly the situation with the 6d and 5d2. anyone with a 5d2 wont upgrade to a 6d as it doesnt have many benefits over the 5d2.

i am glad canon made the 5d3 feature pack and different the 5d2. that is how u develope a clear sequal to a product. not increment it a tiny bit. that pisses off people

Nick3434 wrote in post #15007937
* * *

I am being very devils advocate, and I get that some features missing are wanted, but everyone here (including myself) loves the 5dc images and the awesomeness of that full frame feel. What if canon simply is offering a NEW upgraded 5dc, that may be about $800 more than a good condition 5dc. I think the point is To be a nice, new, ff camera. NOT a spec monster, but a 2012 5dc. Is that really that bad?

I think that's an extremely good point. If this produces the 2012 equivalent of the 5D classic's lovely images but with better high-ISO and AF capability, it will arguably accomplish exactly what Canon apparently intended, an entry-level FF capable of wonderful image quality at a (fairly) reasonable price.

Very disappointing effort. The 5D III is overpriced and they have crippled the 6D as a result. If I was starting into photography again going Nikon would be a no-brainer.

However my 7D is awesome as it was built back in the golden age when Canon was about giving superlative products for reasonable prices. Too bad that company isn't around anymore.

The only good thing about this whole debacle is that smart buyers will pick up used 5D II's at good prices.

does this one has a micro adjustment?

brianodom wrote in post #15008154
This is why I will buy one. I have used the 5D III several times for weddings and I did not use all of those focus points (bells and whistles)...maybe only a few at best. I just find it odd that people weren't going crazy over just 9 auto-focus points on the old 5D II...and it was considered the holy grail for DSLR owners.

Why this wins in my book...

1. Price
2. Same sensor as 5D III (low light shooting = win)
3. Wi-Fi (perfect for when I'm at weddings)
4. Money still left over to get me a few L Lenses
5. lightweight and i can still use my batts i have already
6. SD Cards......yeah it'll be a little slow copying to pc but I have a ton of these already lying around the house and if I need some I can easily get a 32 gb for pennies.


I wanted a nice 7D AF system but...I have a 7D so I'm cool with that. I needed a ff and can't afford to shell out 3-4 grand on a new body (right now)...I'm working on building a studio.

After reading and understanding the product...I'll have to say I'm satisfied.


I just think "marketing wise" Canon could have done a lot better.

where r u from? because over here in the uk the 5d3 and 6d are priced nearly the same. we can get a 5d3 for 2k now and the 6d is around 1.8k.

You cant invest in a L lens with the 200 saved lol

jonneymendoza wrote in post #15008231
where r u from? because over here in the uk the 5d3 and 6d are priced nearly the same. we can get a 5d3 for 2k now and the 6d is around 1.8k.

You cant invest in a L lens with the 200 saved lol

i'm in the US

Mornnb wrote in post #15008162
Right the old 28-135mm and the 28-80mm. Decent consumer grade full frame lenses from the late 90s. These would make competitive cheap kit lenses for the 6D.

I dont think we need two, I think we need one... I think the 24-105 f/4L is just the WRONG lens for this camera in a kit sense... the kit price needs to come down more to the $2500 level or so..

brianodom wrote in post #15008238
i'm in the US

go grab a 5d3 in a hong kong distrubutor like DigitelRev and u will get it same price range as a 6d.

for us UK folks its a no brainer.
A question to u. if u could indeed get a 5d3 for 200 more, would u get that instead of a 6d?

Sure the people who have ef-s lenses can easily jump ship, but does canon really care about losing a customer that has a rebel and a kit lens? (they sell those at high value and they will continue to sell more to tourists who want an slr). Both companies want to attract buyers that will eventually start shelling out cash for premium glass. Besides 10-22, 18-55 2.8 and maybe few others there arent that many high value EF-s lenses out there. And the crop users that already have EF lenses will see this as a natural step.

Yes the nikon does look better on paper, but we all want to see these side by side in a shootout. I think it has more than enough features to justify the $2100 price tag, lets just wait to see how it performs as that is really what matters.

KenjiS wrote in post #15008132
I think the issue is that, on paper, the D600 makes a better case for many people, Add to that the fact this camera directly targets a market that may NOT have a big investment in lenses, or that may have to do some lens switching anyways to upgrade means that some people might be more interested in dumping what little gear they have and jumping over to the other side simply because the cost differential is either non existant or very small...

Add to that the fact the competition has come prepared with an affordable kit zoom (Thats pretty decent) and a freshly updated line of 28, 50 and 85mm f/1.8 primes that you can get for not a lot of cash and the 6D might have a hard time selling to some people, and unlike folks looking at the $3500 5D Mark III, the people looking at the 6D might not have 5 lenses (With at least 2 L-class lenses) they need to replace, They might have 3, and only one or two will work on the 6D anyways..

Its not that the camera is really all that bad, its that the spec sheet just doesnt "sell" instantly the way the D600 does... Same thing happened to the 60D, Which was vindicated after it came out when people actually used one and realized that its actually a pretty damn good little camera

Canon however DOES need to refresh a few primes and a cheap zoom to go with it, Like a new 50 prime, and a cheap fast 28 wouldnt be bad either, or perhaps a compact 35mm f/2 to go with this camera's role as a lightweight full frame travel camera... and I think Canon needs to give this camera a 28-80 f/3.5-4.5 IS as a kit lens for around the $2500 mark...

jonneymendoza wrote in post #15008231
where r u from? because over here in the uk the 5d3 and 6d are priced nearly the same. we can get a 5d3 for 2k now and the 6d is around 1.8k.

You cant invest in a L lens with the 200 saved lol

Yeah WTF is Canon thinking over there, I cant see buying the 6D when for 200 quid more I can have the 5D Mark III, Thats kind of a no **** deal and I'm pretty sure noone here would argue with me that if the 6D was say $3000 in the US they'd buy the 5D Mark III....

But in the US the price difference is $1400, I guarantee you a 6D with a 35L or a 50L is going to get better pictures than a 5D Mark III and a 50 f/1.8

That said Nikon is doing the same thing... so its not a Canon issue exclusively...