The real issue with 6D and 5Dm3

I think arguing about Nikon vs. Canon is a bit pedantic in today's market. Both make exceptional cameras with little discernible difference from the resulting shots for each price/performance bracket.

It also seems that people are so caught up in "gear" mentality that they will argue to the death about specs, but they still take crappy shots and don't worry so much about improving as a photographer.

I would hate to be a Canon engineer and be happy to introduce a budget FF only to have it rejected by forum debaters. The OP doesn't even have a clue about the naming conventions or his comparison would have been that the 5D3 was the 3D and the 6D the 5D3 (and even that would be wrong).

Erik S. Klein wrote in post #15013400
I agree that both companies hold a view partially compatible with what you're saying, but to completely discount model to model competition in a given price range or class is disingenuous.

Both companies realize that there are a finite number of buyers in each segment and that they are going up against each other as well as other makers for each of those buyers.

The "entry level full-frame DSLR" segment now consists of the D600, the 6D and maybe a Sony.

If someone new to the market with a limited budget wants full frame they will look at those cameras and decide, based on price and specifications, which to buy.

In that segment, for those customers, Canon is losing the evaluation. They offer a lower-level feature set for more money.

The same holds true in the pro-sumer FF DSLR space.

Yes, loyalists or those already invested in a system will continue to buy their brand, but as more new folks buy one or the other the number of loyalists shifts...

Good points but... These features were probably set in stone a year ago while still a company secret. They have no idea what the other is planning. Of even IF they are planning. So they simply cant do a one to one.

And also every buyer is different. IF they were all the same it would be easy to pick a feature set and kill off the competition. But they have no idea what one person will call a "stupid gimmick" while the next person will call it a life saver. So they have to do a best guess to the feature set they they believe fits the market best.

Agree with many points in here. This new camera is an entry level full frame sensor camera. From the specs i just read, only the center point is a cross type. Only has 11 focal points.And no word on the material that they made up the body with.....the 5D3 on the other hand was and is a game changer camera. It completely blows away a 1DsMK111 at every place you can test it at except build. The 1Ds was the top dog for a number of years. I see no comparison to a 5D3 other than a full frame sensor with this camera announcement. The pixel peepers with will dig in and give thier conclusions. For me, the AF system, the low light capabilities of the 5D3, and the wonderful IQ of the images make it the professionals choice for many needs. If you want build and speed you can step up to the 1Dx.

http://www.dpreview.co​m/previews/canon-eos-6d

It would keep them perpetually behind the curve if they designed in that manner.

The other factor is that different features become feasible at different times in the project cycles of the different cameras. A given feature might be planned for the 5D series--when it becomes feasibly integratable into that camera given its other requirements--yet that feature could show up first in two or three different models of the Rebel before it hits the right point in the 5D project cycle.

Canon Inc said that they were initially planning a self-cleaning sensor for the 20D, but it simply wasn't feasible for them for that camera, and in fact didn't show up in their prosumer line until the 5D2...yet appeared earlier in the Rebels.

Eye-controlled focus never did reach the 1-series.

Mark1 wrote in post #15013440
Good points but... These features were probably set in stone a year ago while still a company secret. They have no idea what the other is planning. Of even IF they are planning. So they simply cant do a one to one.

You are right. Feature to feature, no, they can't really do one to one.

Segment to segment, clearly they are. Both companies have released their entry level, mid level and high level FF entries within weeks or, maybe, months of each other.

Nikon announces in a segment at $x and Canon responds in that segment at $x+15%.

And, when going down those feature lists, the cameras appear to be about equal, at best.

So sure, the features are likely set early (although I will credit the industrial espionage capabilities of both organizations against the "in secret" comment) but the price can be adjusted, at least some, at introduction...

RDKirk wrote in post #15013511
It would keep them perpetually behind the curve if they designed in that manner.

Isnt that what everybody is continually complaining about?

But nothing can be designed and then produce 30 million of them in three weeks. Features are set well ahead of time. Things can be disabled at the last minute. But nothing has been added in, I would say, 6 months ahead of the start of production.

And you would imply Canon and Nikon share what future feature sets cameras will have?

Erik S. Klein wrote in post #15013645
(although I will credit the industrial espionage capabilities of both organizations against the "in secret" comment) ..

You cant commit espionage if there are no secrets!

umphotography wrote in post #15013485
Agree with many points in here. This new camera is an entry level full frame sensor camera. From the specs i just read, only the center point is a cross type. Only has 11 focal points.And no word on the material that they made up the body with.....the 5D3 on the other hand was and is a game changer camera. It completely blows away a 1DsMK111 at every place you can test it at except build. The 1Ds was the top dog for a number of years. I see no comparison to a 5D3 other than a full frame sensor with this camera announcement. The pixel peepers with will dig in and give thier conclusions. For me, the AF system, the low light capabilities of the 5D3, and the wonderful IQ of the images make it the professionals choice for many needs. If you want build and speed you can step up to the 1Dx.

http://www.dpreview.co​m/previews/canon-eos-6d

That's pretty much what I was saying before. The 5D3 represents Canon's having actually paid attention to what professional photographers were asking for. They've done even more inside the camera to improve its functional reliability beyond that of a mere consumer camera.

No, it's not built for combat, but as you say, that's what the 1Dx is for. I think Canon has actually gotten the division between "professional studio camera" and "professional field camera" right.

Mark1 wrote in post #15013649
Isnt that what everybody is continually complaining about?

But nothing can be designed and then produce 30 million of them in three weeks. Features are set well ahead of time. Things can be disabled at the last minute. But nothing has been added in, I would say, 6 months ahead of the start of production.

And you would imply Canon and Nikon share what future feature sets cameras will have?

I was in agreement with you. They can't look at what Nikon did and then plan a camera to compete with it.

I would agree that not even a firmware change would be instituted as little as six months before the start of production, except in a dire emergency (a last-minute discovery of a serious firware error, for instance).

I understand that you were. Its just your comment pulled out a few more that I wanted to put out.

RDKirk wrote in post #15013691
That's pretty much what I was saying before. The 5D3 represents Canon's having actually paid attention to what professional photographers were asking for. They've done even more inside the camera to improve its functional reliability beyond that of a mere consumer camera.

No, it's not built for combat, but as you say, that's what the 1Dx is for. I think Canon has actually gotten the division between "professional studio camera" and "professional field camera" right.

I agree 100%. Servo has been the huge improvement for canon in the new line ups. It actually works really good. Honestly, While i miss the build of the MKIV i had and the speed, the low light servo capabilities of this 5D3 made me drop the MKIV and get another 5D3. We photograph 25 weddings a year and the indoor servo capabilities of the 5D3 are do doubt better than the MKIV. I can actuall shoot a processional in servo and get all the shots v/s one shot and a flash with previous bodies.the MKIV was the exception until you got in dim light. I have played with a 1Dx. Its a frickin tank and its heavy. By the time i get a bracket on it, with a flash and a 70-200, my carpel tunnel wrists just cant handle the weight. So its been a real joy using the lighter body for reception needs. The 1Dx is remarkable but not 4k more remarkable to me..so we went 2 5D3's.......this 6D is NO WHERE IN THE SAME LEAGUE as the 5D3 and 1Dx bodies. The are built for professionals.

Real issue?

For most people who look to upgrade from 5D2 or from something else to the 5D2 replacement, they waited for 5D3 and then, viola, it's priced at $3,500, which was out of reach for most. Those who have upgraded have been happy about it.

Now, when rumors about a new budget full frame surfaced, these same folks expected it to be the one true replacement. They expected the specs to be much much better than 5D2. However, when the official specs were released, it's deemed a big disappointment, especially the AF.

In short, they wanted the 5D3 again but at $2k.

And to expand upon that, it was never going to happen. Those same people complaining about the price of the 5D3 ignored the cost of the 5D2 at release and chose to expect the new camera to be released at the heavily discounted price of the outgoing camera.

Erik S. Klein wrote in post #15013645
You are right. Feature to feature, no, they can't really do one to one.

Segment to segment, clearly they are. Both companies have released their entry level, mid level and high level FF entries within weeks or, maybe, months of each other.

Nikon announces in a segment at $x and Canon responds in that segment at $x+15%.

And, when going down those feature lists, the cameras appear to be about equal, at best.

So sure, the features are likely set early (although I will credit the industrial espionage capabilities of both organizations against the "in secret" comment) but the price can be adjusted, at least some, at introduction...

Erik,
Before the design of a product, company's management will determine what they need and at what price they can sell. They put together a cost analysis of how much in R&D and what the BOM will cost. They then determine what price point they can sell and who are they going to market the product to. Yes I'm sure they look at what Nikon offered but I doubt they will say we need to have the same spec or features. Corners will have to be cut if they feel that they have other features for the targeted customers and if meeting the feature of Nikon will increase the BOM, they likely not add it unless they feel it is very important. Those $$$$ gets thrown in for the company's forcast. It's unlikely they will adjust the price. We don't know if the 6D will outsell Nikon or not. I'm sure Canon have a number of sales in mind prior to the design.

Also don't be so quick to judge any product based on spec. I would wait for the actual product to see the performance. Specs are very misleading and over the years, I've learned not to trust specs. There is no industry standard how a company can list their specs so company test and measured their specs differently. It would be nice for all company to send in their product to a third party to provide all the specs but that's not the case. Happy Shooting.....

drive_75 wrote in post #15014136
Erik,
Before the design of a product, company's management will determine what they need and at what price they can sell. They put together a cost analysis of how much in R&D and what the BOM will cost. They then determine what price point they can sell and who are they going to market the product to. Yes I'm sure they look at what Nikon offered but I doubt they will say we need to have the same spec or features. Corners will have to be cut if they feel that they have other features for the targeted customers and if meeting the feature of Nikon will increase the BOM, they likely not add it unless they feel it is very important. Those $$$$ gets thrown in for the company's forcast. It's unlikely they will adjust the price. We don't know if the 6D will outsell Nikon or not. I'm sure Canon have a number of sales in mind prior to the design.

Also don't be so quick to judge any product based on spec. I would wait for the actual product to see the performance. Specs are very misleading and over the years, I've learned not to trust specs. There is no industry standard how a company can list their specs so company test and measured their specs differently. It would be nice for all company to send in their product to a third party to provide all the specs but that's not the case. Happy Shooting.....

You're right that they probably won't adjust the price before release but if sales of the 6D are way below their forecasts (easily possible due to the massive discrepancy against the 600), they will adjust it in coming months.

Regardless of any arguments in favor of the 6D I think this was a poor business move by Canon in relation to their #1 competitor. There are plenty of people who are not that invested in Canon gear that are looking to upgrade to FF. I think they made a huge mistake but we'll have to wait a while to see how the sales numbers turn out.