Canon's rationale for the 6D

I've been thinking about Canon's release of the 6D, and the fact that it appears to be decidedly inferior to its apparent competitor, the D600, in almost every single way.

I don't think the D600 factored into Canon's calculation for this camera at all. Simply, it wasn't designed to compete with it. Rather, the 6D is Canon's attempt to design a 5D2 that's with a few extra selling points/gimmicks to attract beginners. It's a camera designed for those for whom a 5D2 (in 2012/2013) is 'good enough', who wouldn't benefit from either the 5D3 or a high-resolution version.

The 5D2, in its time, was a groundbreaking design - high resolution, video, a great screen for live view (far better than that on the 1Ds3). But I think even Canon was stunned at its overwhelming success. It likely wasn't designed for such high-volume production, requiring Canon's more advanced assembly lines and resources which cheaper cameras don't need. But, now, Canon needs those same assembly lines and resources to build newer, more complex models - yet the 5D2 remains popular and is more than enough camera for many beginners today. The solution? Come up with a new design, with performance similar to the 5D2, that's cheaper and simpler to manufacture. Enter the 6D.

IMO the 6D will probably settle around the $1600 mark, with the 5D3 settling around $2500 (the prices are down to $2745 already, and sales seem to have dropped off markedly after the initlal rush of people who would buy the 5D2's successor for any price - something that hasn't happened with the D800, which continues to be in great demand), leaving room for a high-resolution version in the $3500-$4000 range. Not unreasonable, given that Canon models tend to drop off in price more quickly after launch than Nikon models. In other words, Canon isn't competing directly with the Nikon models, but finding the gaps in between. The low-end 6D is situated well below the D600, the 5D3 is situated between the D600 and D800 (after all, on technical specifications, the D800 is superior in most areas, most notably the sensor), leaving room for a top-end, high-resolution, 16-bit-output 3D, or whatever name they choose, above the D800. Then, of course, there are the specialist sports/action cameras in the 1Dx and D4, but they are really in their own category.

It's a bit like the case when the 5D2 was released - sure, it was a great new camera, but it also cost USD$2700. The 5Dc was more than enough for many people, who didn't shoot video and didn't need 21MP, but wanted a full-frame sensor. If Canon had continued to sell the 5D at $1600-$1800, it would have continued to sell well, alongside the 5D2 (perhaps with a few extra tweaks, such as live view and AF microadjustment). But they stopped production of the 5D in order to make way for the new camera. With the 6D, it seems like Canon is trying to not let that happen again.

Any thoughts?

My off the wall $0.02 worth...

I think non SLR cameras are making solid enough strides and inroads that we're seeing the death of non-FF SLRs.

I think there's a sea change in the traditional camera market and eventually APS-C will die off as APS-H has already.

One more generation (maybe two) and we'll have FF across the board from Rebel to 1DX.

Just Spitballing mind you but that's how we roll on POTN!

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #15007751
My off the wall $0.02 worth...

I think non SLR cameras are making solid enough strides and inroads that we're seeing the death of non-FF SLRs.

I think there's a sea change in the traditional camera market and eventually APS-C will die off as APS-H has already.

One more generation (maybe two) and we'll have FF across the board from Rebel to 1DX.

Just Spitballing mind you but that's how we roll on POTN!

It will take a good deal more processing power for that to happen.

There are several applications which demand high pixel density (for cropping) as well as high frame rate. An 18MP 1.6x crop sensor has the same pixel density as a 46MP full-frame sensor, while a 24MP 1.5x crop sensor has the same pixel density as a 54MP full-frame sensor.

The full-frame sensor itself is fine - just make a 54MP full-frame sensor and you can easily crop it down to APS-C size for distant targets when even 800mm lenses aren't long enough to properly frame a squirrel at a distance. You'd have the IQ of the full-frame sensor, with the pixel density of the crop when needed.

The problem is the data bandwidth to deal with 8-10 54MP, 14- or 16-bit RAWs per second. It'll take more than 2 Digic 5s to handle that.

Give it 5-10 years, maybe.

Of course, by that stage, contrast-detection AF (which comes with processor power) will likely be good enough to do away with the mirror entirely, making every camera mirrorless and using an EVF. It would also make AF points a moot issue, since you'd be able to focus at any point on the image, from the centre to the corners.

5Dc hit the market at what price point?

6D will end up sub $2K

Not that much of a stretch to see a sub $1K FF "beginner" body in far less than 5-10 years.
Don't judge "entry level" performance by professional standards.

I'm seeing more and more of this as the prevailing attitude right now:
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1229297

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #15007777
5Dc hit the market at what price point?

6D will end up sub $2K

Not that much of a stretch to see a sub $1K FF "beginner" body in far less than 5-10 years.
Don't judge "entry level" performance by professional standards.

I'm seeing more and more of this as the prevailing attitude right now:
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1229297

That will probably happen.

But full-frame beginner bodies don't necessarily mean that all bodies will be full-frame. Sports and wildlife photographers often start at APS-H, and crop further (sometimes heavily) from there. For reasons of data bandwidth, it's much easier to build a 10-15fps crop sensor than a 10-15fps full-frame sensor with the same pixel density. The sensors can do it just fine. It's the processors that need to catch up.

Shadowblade wrote in post #15007738
...I don't think the D600 factored into Canon's calculation for this camera at all. Simply, it wasn't designed to compete with it. Rather, the 6D is Canon's attempt to design a 5D2 that's with a few extra selling points/gimmicks to attract beginners...

It's a good point. The problem of course for Canon is that if you release a camera at a similar time to a competitor, at a similar price, it will be seen as competition (and judged as such).

UK prices are (as usual) a bit of a rip compared to the US, but at the time of writing, the prices I'm seeing for the 5D3 are around £400 more than a D800 (£2680 vs £2250), and the preorder prices for the 6D and D600 has the D600 around £150 more (£1800 vs £1950).

£1800 (6D) is a lot of cash for a beginner, and I'd suggest a 60D or 7D would be a better choice. Plus if you were a beginner (with no prior kit) I couldn't recommend a 6D over a D600, as unless you're swayed by GPS and WiFi the D600 appears superior in every regard.

sploo wrote in post #15007862
It's a good point. The problem of course for Canon is that if you release a camera at a similar time to a competitor, at a similar price, it will be seen as competition (and judged as such).

UK prices are (as usual) a bit of a rip compared to the US, but at the time of writing, the prices I'm seeing for the 5D3 are around £400 more than a D800 (£2680 vs £2250), and the preorder prices for the 6D and D600 has the D600 around £150 more (£1800 vs £1950).

£1800 (6D) is a lot of cash for a beginner, and I'd suggest a 60D or 7D would be a better choice. Plus if you were a beginner (with no prior kit) I couldn't recommend a 6D over a D600, as unless you're swayed by GPS and WiFi the D600 appears superior in every regard.

There have been a few 5D3 'sales' lately, with prices down to 2745USD. Looks like it's paving the way for a price drop - if not official, then at least a de facto one. Anyway, Canon bodies always seem to drop in price significantly after a while.

It may have not been factored in. The issue will be it will Be compared to the D600 by every publication and every enthusiast out there that are gear junkies.

Steve Beck wrote in post #15008051
It may have not been factored in. The issue will be it will Be compared to the D600 by every publication and every enthusiast out there that are gear junkies.

The D600 seems to be in between the 6D and 5D3 in capability (and, likely, final price, after the early-adopter premium pricing has worn off), while the 5D3 will likely end up between the D600 and D800. Basically, Canon seems to be giving people a choice - the budget option, cheaper and less capable than the D600, or the mid-range option, more expensive and more capable than the D600, but cheaper and (at final pricing) less expensive than the D800. Which leaves room for the top-of-the-range high-resolution version, more expensive and more capable than the D800.

At least with UK pricing, the 5D3 would need to drop a long way to fit into that sort of model though - i.e. dropping by at least £600/$1000. Not that I'd complain if it did.

TBH, that does make sense. Thanks for the thought shadow!

Shadowblade wrote in post #15007738
IMO the 6D will probably settle around the $1600 mark, with the 5D3 settling around $2500 (the prices are down to $2745 already, and sales seem to have dropped off markedly...

Outside of used prices, incentive-laden deals and maybe eBay, I haven't found any place that sells the 5D3 body new for that low. They are still hovering around the $3460 mark at BH, Amazon, etc.

Where have you seen a new price that low a a legit place of business? Used I would understand.

Dmab wrote in post #15008156
Outside of used prices, incentive-laden deals and maybe eBay, I haven't found any place that sells the 5D3 body new for that low. They are still hovering around the $3460 mark at BH, Amazon, etc.

Where have you seen a new price that low a a legit place of business? Used I would understand.

Adorama's eBay store - it's ebay, but it's also Adorama and it's legit.

Canon keep producing evolutionary cameras, while Nikon goes further and produces revolutionary ones.
It frustrating for those of us with large investments in Canon lenses, can't understand why Nikon are the innovators, when they are the much smaller company

Shadowblade wrote in post #15008069
The D600 seems to be in between the 6D and 5D3 in capability (and, likely, final price, after the early-adopter premium pricing has worn off), while the 5D3 will likely end up between the D600 and D800. Basically, Canon seems to be giving people a choice - the budget option, cheaper and less capable than the D600, or the mid-range option, more expensive and more capable than the D600, but cheaper and (at final pricing) less expensive than the D800. Which leaves room for the top-of-the-range high-resolution version, more expensive and more capable than the D800.

Time will tell..