Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS News & Rumors Photography Industry News 
Thread started 18 Sep 2012 (Tuesday) 10:36
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

My Musing on the 6D vs D600... And Canon in General right now

 
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,362 posts
Gallery: 550 photos
Likes: 2618
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Sep 18, 2012 10:36 |  #1

To sum it up quickly, I think Canon has a problem building hype... This is going to be a long one, But please, bear with me and read

To get more in depth into it...

The entire 6D vs D600 situation reminds me of the 60D and the D7000 from a few years back, the 60D was launched and on paper looked like a terrible camera, Too many "consumer" features, a plastic body, a "Rebel on steroids" compared to the outgoing 50D, the lack of some nice basic things like AF Microadjustment certainly didnt help matters...

On the other side we had the D7000, Which seemed to be an amazing camera, a 7D for $700 less, a Pocket Battleship of a camera that combined everything you could want for a very respectible price, Everyone praised it, and they should, its a cracking camera

But then people got their hands on the 60D and the screaming about how it sucked quickly stopped, Canon's decisions made sense, The flippy screen was useful for movies, which the 60D excelled at, and the AF system, while crappy on paper, in reality works quite well, in fact, in my opinion (Albeit from only playing with both cameras a bit in the store) I feel the 60D AF is actually better, the D7000 always felt a bit "deliberate" to me...

And the D7000 wasnt as good as it looked on paper, I played with one, Dont get me wrong, its a very nice camera, But its not a 7D equal, its a Pocket Battleship, Not the Yamato, The 7D is built better, has a better viewfinder, has snappier AF and overall just feels faster, About the only thing the D7000 can claim is slightly better IQ, but as i said in another thread, Look at my shots from the 7D and tell me the D7000 would do any of them better, I dare you

----

Cut to a few months ago, 5D Mark III vs D800...

Instantly we hear it again, The 5DIII is met with disappointed sighs, grumbles and complaints, People wanted more resolution after seeing the D800 and what it could do... the D800s image quality is astounding and there were samples available right out of the gate showing what a 36mp FX sensor can do

Of course, the 5D Mark III is in many ways what people here were asking for, Nowone complained too much that the 5D Mark II didnt have enough resolution, What they wanted was a better AF system, More FPS, better build... and thats exactly what the 5D Mark III gave them, With the added cherry in the whiskey being better noise performance at high ISOs, People screamed that Canon wasnt "listening" to the market, When in fact, it seems they had listened perfectly....

A few months before when the 36mp D800 was just a rumor if Canon had launched the 5D Mark III I guarantee the tune would have been one of applause, a Worthy Successor to the 5D Mark II

After all, the 24mp sensors in the D3x and a900 werent exactly "breathtaking" in many situations and many people thought a 36mp wasnt going to be much better, at least thats what we saw until we saw what the D800 could do with our own eyes...

And that would be one of the big differences, The D800 had a slew of pictures and previews showing off what that 36mp sensor could do, Canon had a lot less "show" going for it, Although it didnt take too long before we started to see samples from the 5D Mark III I still remember the D800 was first out of the gate when it came to such things...

Heres where I have to concede I'm relying on the various reviews I've read, videos I've watched and etc, I cant get my hands on a 5D3 or a D800 in reality....

But the D800 isnt without its flaws, weird color cast on the rear LCD, the focusing asymmetry, and of course that awesome 36mp sensor, Whats bad about it you ask? Well how many of the Nikon lenses in existence can actually deliver enough resolution to take advantage of it? The answer is not too many, In fact, even the lauded-upon 14-24 and 24-70 fall a bit short when faced with the challenge of delivering when placed before the mighty D800... The D800 is also a bit slow, and I've heard the AF system while pretty fast can have moments of "hesitation", Most field reports I've heard say the 5DIII's AF wins in most situations, Not that the D800 is bad, But the 5DIII is better... And the 5D Mark III has fantastic IQ, even if it doesnt have the bonkers resolution of the D800....

But very recently I realized something, Maybe Canon was thinking ahead, Think to what I mentioned about the lenses, in Nikon's lineup theres only a handful of lenses that can really deliver on the D800, Even recent designs look to need an update..

And now, I see results from the 24-70 Mark II and I think I realized something, Canon is smarter than they let on, They knew this, They didnt push the 5D Mark III's resolution higher because they knew their lenses cant take it with the exception of a few of their primes and their 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, So Canon decided they need to update their bread and butter, The lenses pros use to make money, the flagship L lineup, to be able to handle these Mondo sensors....

The 24-70 II supports this, that thing is a beast, Wide open it out resolves the TS-E 24 f/3.5L, a $2000 prime lens renowned for its sharpness, Its not only one of, if not the sharpest zoom lens out there, Its one of the sharpest lenses on the market right now period, The 70-200 f/2.8L IS II is equally beastly in terms of resolution... The only thing Canon is missing, and I expect we'll see it soon, is a fast wide zoom (A 14-24 f/2.8L) to cement this trinity... and perhaps an update to the 35mm f/1.4L is in order, Or the 85mm f/1.2L or something else thats prime-y and loved by the people likely to want an uber-high resolution camera

Now, What approach is better? To have the resolution today, but waiting for Nikon to update its bread and butter to really take full use of that resolution, Or to wait on the resolution and have the lenses ready to go when it comes out? Personally, I think the second is better.... Your Glass is far more likely to last you longer than your camera body after all...

-----

Cut to now, and the D600 vs 6D

In many ways I'm seeing parallels between this and the 60D vs D7000 stuff from back then, Screaming, Yelling, Making assumptions...

On paper, the D600 is an excellent package, 24mp, 5.5fps, a 39 point AF system with 9 cross types from the D7000 which has proven to be a very good AF system (Albeit a bit "deliberate" in its function... something the one D600 review thats up noted) a 100% viewfinder, and nothing "consumerish" in sight... People are already saying its a 5D Mark III for $1400 less, and seeing it as the best budget thing around since affordable sliced bread

The 6D on the other hand looks like reheated leftovers, a 20 megapixel sensor, 4.5fps, 11 point unproven AF system with only ONE crosstype sensor and a 97% viewfinder, Its almost like they took a 5D Mark II and made it pretty, The addition of Wi-Fi and GPS is just consumerization, Such things have no place IN a serious camera Canon, They're supposed to be a $200 add on! Thats how you know its a SERIOUS Camera after all

The two companies approaches are radically different again, The D600 is shipping now, Theres a review up already, DPReview has samples ready to go, You can already see how good the D600 is and you can even order it right now to have in your hands before the end of the week

Canon on the other hand? The 6D will be shipped in a couple months, Theres about 5 images up from it, nothing high ISO yet, A few previews that are little more than rattling off spec sheets, Some guy with an afro sniffing a camera thats been manhandled by god knows how many people...

No words on performance, Only one source I've found has actually managed to play with the AF a bit it seems (or everyone is too concerned sniffing the camera to bother seeing if the AF works alright) and they did praise it, Saying it seems very fast and sure... Canon seems to not want to release samples from it for whatever reason.. Which to many people is suspicious, Arent they sure of it? Does it suck at high ISO? Is there banding if you underexpose the image by 10 stops and push it back up? Nowone can say...

Well ok one guy can, he did push one of the sample images a bit to see if there was banding, And there wasnt any.. Whatever

And this here was the point of the article:

I think Canon has a timing problem, Even if the 6D is a bit preproduction DPReview, Engadget, The Verge, and other sites should have a 6D in hand, They should have some sample cameras, and they should be able to post up about it when you announce it, They should be able to sit there and say "Even though this is preproduction this things image quality is astounding" or "The new 11 point AF may seem like a slight upgrade from the 5DII but its far more than that, Despite the modest endowment of points it proves quality is better than quantity, It kicks the D600's AF where it hurts and steals its wallet"

Even if the thing doesnt ship for 2 months, they should build hype, They should be able to do more than sit there with their thumbs you know where and say well.. Something which a lot of people say mirrors their sentiments on the 6D:

The elephant in the room, though, is the Nikon D600 - a camera that offers a higher spec in several key areas, with its 39-point AF system (including 9 cross-type), 100% viewfinder, 2016 pixel colour-sensitive metering, faster 5.5 fps shooting, dual card slots and excellent movie spec (including such things as clean HDMI output and a headphone socket for sound monitoring). In many areas the 6D just comes up slightly short in comparison, and the question is whether merely being highly competent will be enough to win the hearts and cash of buyers. This is further complicated by the fact that, in principle at least, you can buy (or at least order) a D600 today, whereas the 6D won't be in the shops for some time yet.

in our estimation a lot will hinge on how well the 6D's autofocus system behaves in practice. If it proves positive and accurate with off-centre subjects (a clear weakness of the EOS 5D series prior to the Mark III), then many users will probably be very happy with it.

The 6D is clearly aimed at tempting APS-C owners to upgrade to full frame, but here Canon has given itself another problem. Its EF-S lenses simply won't fit on the 6D, so users with a decent collection - perhaps the 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM (external link), 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (external link) and 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM (external link) - will have to buy a new lens set to use with it. At which point the barrier to switching systems becomes rather lower, and the temptation to change brands stronger.

Overall, though, it's difficult to shake the feeling that the EOS 6D simply lacks the 'wow' factor of its main rival. Whereas Nikon seems to have taken the approach of taking away as little as possible from D800 when creating the D600, Canon appears almost to have gone the other way, removing as much as it thinks it can get away with at the price. The result is the kind of conservative, slightly unimaginative design that's become the company's hallmark. It's still bound to be a very good camera, of course; just perhaps not quite as good as it could be.

I'm sorry but if i was Canon this is NOT the kind of stuff I want to see on a major review site, Does this sell you a 6D? No it doesnt, it makes you contemplate switching systems, Which is exactly what I see a lot of people commenting they're considering doing, or in fact, have already done...

And it would have been avoided had Canon given DPReview and them cameras sooner, To let them put up first impressions or a preview, To talk about how the camera actually works, Not how nervous they are its going to suck compared to the D600 they've been playing with for the last few weeks...

------

And this brings us back full circle, Remember what I said before about the 60D and the D7000? Well I was actually disappointed in the D7000, it didnt live up to the spec sheet or the hype people made about it, it was not a 7D for $1100... it was a very good Pocket Battleship, But it was not my Yamato...On the other hand i was really impressed by the 60D to the point of apologizing for mocking it and admitting a lot of things people criticized were in fact things I'd love to have on my 7D

People are saying the D600 is a 5D Mark III for $1400 off, People who think this are so laughably wrong, I guarantee you if you think this, You are going to be disappointed, is the D600 bad? No, But a 5D Mark III is $1400 more for a reason, if you buy a D600 thinking this, You are probubly going to be disappointed...

The D600 has more points, So what? All the cross type ones are clustered in the center, How useful is that? the rest of them are exactly like the Canon points, They cover the same area too.. So you're really not getting much... except just a lot more points

Consider, Canon could have put the AF from a 5D Mark II in the 6D, in fact, this would have made the camera even cheaper, using an old AF system off the shelf as opposed to developing an entirely new one... they didnt, and I'm going to think the reason they didnt is that the new one is better.....

And finally... this may be an assumption, but I expect when the 6D gets in reviewers hands they're going to say something like this:

What the EOS 6D lacks in style and headline, attention-grabbing features, it more than makes up for in practicality, In practice its a fantastic imaging tool that reliably delivers results, the Image sensor is the best Canon has made, Even besting the 5D Mark III in some respects and easily more than a match for its closest competition, the D600, the Autofocus system made us nervous at first, but in practice it shows that Canon knew what they were doing, the 5D Mark II this isnt, it consistently delivers spot on focusing, even in the worst conditions, in fact, the AF module easily matches and in some situations exceeds the Nikon D600's, All in all, while not impressive at first the EOS 6D is a superb imaging tool and another camera that any Canon shooter should be proud to have in their bag


But for now, Nikon is winning, Their camera is shipping, and soon the internet will be flooded with cat pictures taken by the D600 while we wait patiently for Canon to give us some more samples

Thank you, to anyone who read all this.. I hope what I said makes sense and you can see my points...


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 400
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Sep 18, 2012 11:04 |  #2

Canon's problem for the past few years is that they've simply been unable to match the Exmor. You can argue endlessly over AF, ergonomics, lens collections, viewfinders and colour casts on LCD screens (yellow for Canon, green for Nikon), but, when the chips are down, Nikon has the ultimate advantage in that their sensors can deliver DR and image quality that Canon simply cannot match, except at high ISOs, where other types of noise dominate and drown out the IQ difference.

Also, I'd disagree about sensors outresolving lenses being a problem. In fact, being lens-limited rather than sensor-limited is the ideal situation - that way, you're extracting every last bit of performance you can from the optics, and can more easily do away with the AA filter.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DTBaan
"male gigolo"
Avatar
14,106 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 1479
Joined Apr 2011
     
Sep 18, 2012 11:17 as a reply to  @ Shadowblade's post |  #3

Kenji. At first i felt nikon was very slow at af/tracking but after trying it out some more i found that they are not as slow as i thought. If you play with the canon, it will track in an instant but you have to wait for the red dot/s to appear before the shutter could be activated. On the other hand, Nikon doesnt track as fast but when its in focus the red focus dot appears right away. Canon's af is faster, but nikon is not as slow as you think it is. Also i didnt see much of a green tint on the new shipments of the d800, wonder if they fudged with it... it was in store shots so i cant say too much about it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,362 posts
Gallery: 550 photos
Likes: 2618
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Sep 18, 2012 11:22 |  #4

DTBaan wrote in post #15009132 (external link)
Kenji. At first i felt nikon was very slow at af/tracking but after trying it out some more i found that they are not as slow as i thought. If you play with the canon, it will track in an instant but you have to wait for the red dot/s to appear before the shutter could be activated. On the other hand, Nikon doesnt track as fast but when its in focus the red focus dot appears right away. Canon's af is faster, but nikon is not as slow as you think it is. Also i didnt see much of a green tint on the new shipments of the d800, wonder if they fudged with it... it was in store shots so i cant say too much about it.

I heard it was a firmware update, I was more or less discussing that the D800 is far from the "perfection" people thought it was at first, it was flawed in some pretty bad ways...of course the 5DIII had a light leak issue...

And I dont doubt it, I wish I was Kai and i got my hands on stuff like the D600 to play with for more than 10-20 minutes.. I still really stand behind my 7D AF system, Even if its a bit weird sometimes I think it works marvelously, I know its quirks at this point, and I compensate for them and take them into account when i compose a shot


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blindshooter
Member
229 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Tampa
     
Sep 18, 2012 11:24 |  #5

KenjiS wrote in post #15008937 (external link)
To sum it up quickly, I think Canon has a problem building hype... This is going to be a long one, But please, bear with me and read

To get more in depth into it...

The entire 6D vs D600 situation reminds me of the 60D and the D7000 from a few years back, the 60D was launched and on paper looked like a terrible camera, Too many "consumer" features, a plastic body, a "Rebel on steroids" compared to the outgoing 50D, the lack of some nice basic things like AF Microadjustment certainly didnt help matters...

On the other side we had the D7000, Which seemed to be an amazing camera, a 7D for $700 less, a Pocket Battleship of a camera that combined everything you could want for a very respectible price, Everyone praised it, and they should, its a cracking camera

But then people got their hands on the 60D and the screaming about how it sucked quickly stopped, Canon's decisions made sense, The flippy screen was useful for movies, which the 60D excelled at, and the AF system, while crappy on paper, in reality works quite well, in fact, in my opinion (Albeit from only playing with both cameras a bit in the store) I feel the 60D AF is actually better, the D7000 always felt a bit "deliberate" to me...

And the D7000 wasnt as good as it looked on paper, I played with one, Dont get me wrong, its a very nice camera, But its not a 7D equal, its a Pocket Battleship, Not the Yamato, The 7D is built better, has a better viewfinder, has snappier AF and overall just feels faster, About the only thing the D7000 can claim is slightly better IQ, but as i said in another thread, Look at my shots from the 7D and tell me the D7000 would do any of them better, I dare you

----

Cut to a few months ago, 5D Mark III vs D800...

Instantly we hear it again, The 5DIII is met with disappointed sighs, grumbles and complaints, People wanted more resolution after seeing the D800 and what it could do... the D800s image quality is astounding and there were samples available right out of the gate showing what a 36mp FX sensor can do

Of course, the 5D Mark III is in many ways what people here were asking for, Nowone complained too much that the 5D Mark II didnt have enough resolution, What they wanted was a better AF system, More FPS, better build... and thats exactly what the 5D Mark III gave them, With the added cherry in the whiskey being better noise performance at high ISOs, People screamed that Canon wasnt "listening" to the market, When in fact, it seems they had listened perfectly....

A few months before when the 36mp D800 was just a rumor if Canon had launched the 5D Mark III I guarantee the tune would have been one of applause, a Worthy Successor to the 5D Mark II

After all, the 24mp sensors in the D3x and a900 werent exactly "breathtaking" in many situations and many people thought a 36mp wasnt going to be much better, at least thats what we saw until we saw what the D800 could do with our own eyes...

And that would be one of the big differences, The D800 had a slew of pictures and previews showing off what that 36mp sensor could do, Canon had a lot less "show" going for it, Although it didnt take too long before we started to see samples from the 5D Mark III I still remember the D800 was first out of the gate when it came to such things...

Heres where I have to concede I'm relying on the various reviews I've read, videos I've watched and etc, I cant get my hands on a 5D3 or a D800 in reality....

But the D800 isnt without its flaws, weird color cast on the rear LCD, the focusing asymmetry, and of course that awesome 36mp sensor, Whats bad about it you ask? Well how many of the Nikon lenses in existence can actually deliver enough resolution to take advantage of it? The answer is not too many, In fact, even the lauded-upon 14-24 and 24-70 fall a bit short when faced with the challenge of delivering when placed before the mighty D800... The D800 is also a bit slow, and I've heard the AF system while pretty fast can have moments of "hesitation", Most field reports I've heard say the 5DIII's AF wins in most situations, Not that the D800 is bad, But the 5DIII is better... And the 5D Mark III has fantastic IQ, even if it doesnt have the bonkers resolution of the D800....

But very recently I realized something, Maybe Canon was thinking ahead, Think to what I mentioned about the lenses, in Nikon's lineup theres only a handful of lenses that can really deliver on the D800, Even recent designs look to need an update..

And now, I see results from the 24-70 Mark II and I think I realized something, Canon is smarter than they let on, They knew this, They didnt push the 5D Mark III's resolution higher because they knew their lenses cant take it with the exception of a few of their primes and their 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, So Canon decided they need to update their bread and butter, The lenses pros use to make money, the flagship L lineup, to be able to handle these Mondo sensors....

The 24-70 II supports this, that thing is a beast, Wide open it out resolves the TS-E 24 f/3.5L, a $2000 prime lens renowned for its sharpness, Its not only one of, if not the sharpest zoom lens out there, Its one of the sharpest lenses on the market right now period, The 70-200 f/2.8L IS II is equally beastly in terms of resolution... The only thing Canon is missing, and I expect we'll see it soon, is a fast wide zoom (A 14-24 f/2.8L) to cement this trinity... and perhaps an update to the 35mm f/1.4L is in order, Or the 85mm f/1.2L or something else thats prime-y and loved by the people likely to want an uber-high resolution camera

Now, What approach is better? To have the resolution today, but waiting for Nikon to update its bread and butter to really take full use of that resolution, Or to wait on the resolution and have the lenses ready to go when it comes out? Personally, I think the second is better.... Your Glass is far more likely to last you longer than your camera body after all...

-----

Cut to now, and the D600 vs 6D

In many ways I'm seeing parallels between this and the 60D vs D7000 stuff from back then, Screaming, Yelling, Making assumptions...

On paper, the D600 is an excellent package, 24mp, 5.5fps, a 39 point AF system with 9 cross types from the D7000 which has proven to be a very good AF system (Albeit a bit "deliberate" in its function... something the one D600 review thats up noted) a 100% viewfinder, and nothing "consumerish" in sight... People are already saying its a 5D Mark III for $1400 less, and seeing it as the best budget thing around since affordable sliced bread

The 6D on the other hand looks like reheated leftovers, a 20 megapixel sensor, 4.5fps, 11 point unproven AF system with only ONE crosstype sensor and a 97% viewfinder, Its almost like they took a 5D Mark II and made it pretty, The addition of Wi-Fi and GPS is just consumerization, Such things have no place IN a serious camera Canon, They're supposed to be a $200 add on! Thats how you know its a SERIOUS Camera after all

The two companies approaches are radically different again, The D600 is shipping now, Theres a review up already, DPReview has samples ready to go, You can already see how good the D600 is and you can even order it right now to have in your hands before the end of the week

Canon on the other hand? The 6D will be shipped in a couple months, Theres about 5 images up from it, nothing high ISO yet, A few previews that are little more than rattling off spec sheets, Some guy with an afro sniffing a camera thats been manhandled by god knows how many people...

No words on performance, Only one source I've found has actually managed to play with the AF a bit it seems (or everyone is too concerned sniffing the camera to bother seeing if the AF works alright) and they did praise it, Saying it seems very fast and sure... Canon seems to not want to release samples from it for whatever reason.. Which to many people is suspicious, Arent they sure of it? Does it suck at high ISO? Is there banding if you underexpose the image by 10 stops and push it back up? Nowone can say...

Well ok one guy can, he did push one of the sample images a bit to see if there was banding, And there wasnt any.. Whatever

And this here was the point of the article:

I think Canon has a timing problem, Even if the 6D is a bit preproduction DPReview, Engadget, The Verge, and other sites should have a 6D in hand, They should have some sample cameras, and they should be able to post up about it when you announce it, They should be able to sit there and say "Even though this is preproduction this things image quality is astounding" or "The new 11 point AF may seem like a slight upgrade from the 5DII but its far more than that, Despite the modest endowment of points it proves quality is better than quantity, It kicks the D600's AF where it hurts and steals its wallet"

Even if the thing doesnt ship for 2 months, they should build hype, They should be able to do more than sit there with their thumbs you know where and say well.. Something which a lot of people say mirrors their sentiments on the 6D:

I'm sorry but if i was Canon this is NOT the kind of stuff I want to see on a major review site, Does this sell you a 6D? No it doesnt, it makes you contemplate switching systems, Which is exactly what I see a lot of people commenting they're considering doing, or in fact, have already done...

And it would have been avoided had Canon given DPReview and them cameras sooner, To let them put up first impressions or a preview, To talk about how the camera actually works, Not how nervous they are its going to suck compared to the D600 they've been playing with for the last few weeks...

------

And this brings us back full circle, Remember what I said before about the 60D and the D7000? Well I was actually disappointed in the D7000, it didnt live up to the spec sheet or the hype people made about it, it was not a 7D for $1100... it was a very good Pocket Battleship, But it was not my Yamato...On the other hand i was really impressed by the 60D to the point of apologizing for mocking it and admitting a lot of things people criticized were in fact things I'd love to have on my 7D

People are saying the D600 is a 5D Mark III for $1400 off, People who think this are so laughably wrong, I guarantee you if you think this, You are going to be disappointed, is the D600 bad? No, But a 5D Mark III is $1400 more for a reason, if you buy a D600 thinking this, You are probubly going to be disappointed...

The D600 has more points, So what? All the cross type ones are clustered in the center, How useful is that? the rest of them are exactly like the Canon points, They cover the same area too.. So you're really not getting much... except just a lot more points

Consider, Canon could have put the AF from a 5D Mark II in the 6D, in fact, this would have made the camera even cheaper, using an old AF system off the shelf as opposed to developing an entirely new one... they didnt, and I'm going to think the reason they didnt is that the new one is better.....

And finally... this may be an assumption, but I expect when the 6D gets in reviewers hands they're going to say something like this:

What the EOS 6D lacks in style and headline, attention-grabbing features, it more than makes up for in practicality, In practice its a fantastic imaging tool that reliably delivers results, the Image sensor is the best Canon has made, Even besting the 5D Mark III in some respects and easily more than a match for its closest competition, the D600, the Autofocus system made us nervous at first, but in practice it shows that Canon knew what they were doing, the 5D Mark II this isnt, it consistently delivers spot on focusing, even in the worst conditions, in fact, the AF module easily matches and in some situations exceeds the Nikon D600's, All in all, while not impressive at first the EOS 6D is a superb imaging tool and another camera that any Canon shooter should be proud to have in their bag


But for now, Nikon is winning, Their camera is shipping, and soon the internet will be flooded with cat pictures taken by the D600 while we wait patiently for Canon to give us some more samples

Thank you, to anyone who read all this.. I hope what I said makes sense and you can see my points...




It makes sense. What I'm interpreting from all this is that you'd rather be a reviewer on Anandtech, Engadget, DPreview or other site rather than just be a photog!

;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DTBaan
"male gigolo"
Avatar
14,106 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 1479
Joined Apr 2011
     
Sep 18, 2012 11:27 |  #6

KenjiS wrote in post #15009161 (external link)
I heard it was a firmware update, I was more or less discussing that the D800 is far from the "perfection" people thought it was at first, it was flawed in some pretty bad ways...of course the 5DIII had a light leak issue...

And I dont doubt it, I wish I was Kai and i got my hands on stuff like the D600 to play with for more than 10-20 minutes.. I still really stand behind my 7D AF system, Even if its a bit weird sometimes I think it works marvelously, I know its quirks at this point, and I compensate for them and take them into account when i compose a shot

heh, nothing is perfect. There's always gonna be something faulty.

blindshooter wrote in post #15009164 (external link)
It makes sense. What I'm interpreting from all this is that you'd rather be a reviewer on Anandtech, Engadget, DPreview or other site rather than just be a photog!

;)

Kenji > ken rockwell :cool: :lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pawelgawel
Senior Member
308 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 29
Joined Mar 2011
     
Sep 18, 2012 11:33 |  #7

I'm not a pro in this field and I don't read many articles regarding the performance of the above companies as a whole, but after speaking to a seminar teacher who is also a pro in Calgary and is sponsored by Canon, he notified that Canon is slowly moving out of the photography realm and is primarily concentrating more on the videography. Apparently this is the future and a market they have a firm grasp on.
Please correct me if my info is incorrect.

I just don't understand why they couldn't match Nikon with their MPs... I think this may be the first signs of Canon backing off slowly


5D3 x2 | 16-35 2.8L II | 24-70 2.8L | 70-200 2.8L II | 85 1.2L II | S 50 1.4 ART | S 1.4x | YN600EXRT x3 | Bowens 400RX | Lowepro LOVE :)
flickr (external link)
urban-pixel (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 400
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Sep 18, 2012 11:42 |  #8

pawelgawel wrote in post #15009207 (external link)
I'm not a pro in this field and I don't read many articles regarding the performance of the above companies as a whole, but after speaking to a seminar teacher who is also a pro in Calgary and is sponsored by Canon, he notified that Canon is slowly moving out of the photography realm and is primarily concentrating more on the videography. Apparently this is the future and a market they have a firm grasp on.
Please correct me if my info is incorrect.

I just don't understand why they couldn't match Nikon with their MPs... I think this may be the first signes of Canon backing off slowly

It wouldn't surprise me.

A year or two ago, a Canon exec said that, by 2030, we'd be taking photos with a single, 10-1000mm zoom lens, and, instead of taking photos, we'd just be capturing a video and taking a frame from that. Certainly sounds like a shift to videography to me...

The thing is, that is all well and good for news journalism and sports, but hardly an adequate solution for artistic photography (e.g. landscapes), fashion shoots for advertising, weddings/yearbooks/oth​er memories, and National Geographic-type work. But, then again, artistic photography has never been Canon's thing - from the earliest days, Canon's focus in photography has been in sports, action (e.g. wildlife) and journalism. Nikon, Leica and other companies have always been much more heavily invested in general photography.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Sep 18, 2012 11:45 |  #9

Bollocks...

The brand doesn't matter. It's the vision.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,362 posts
Gallery: 550 photos
Likes: 2618
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Sep 18, 2012 13:11 |  #10

pawelgawel wrote in post #15009207 (external link)
I'm not a pro in this field and I don't read many articles regarding the performance of the above companies as a whole, but after speaking to a seminar teacher who is also a pro in Calgary and is sponsored by Canon, he notified that Canon is slowly moving out of the photography realm and is primarily concentrating more on the videography. Apparently this is the future and a market they have a firm grasp on.
Please correct me if my info is incorrect.

This is also a valid theory.. Whether or not this is how things will be in the future i dont know to be honest.. I think taking a still image with always be superior to just taking a frame of video... There will be advances in still photography that keep it relevent


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,362 posts
Gallery: 550 photos
Likes: 2618
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Sep 18, 2012 13:12 |  #11

blindshooter wrote in post #15009164 (external link)
It makes sense. What I'm interpreting from all this is that you'd rather be a reviewer on Anandtech, Engadget, DPreview or other site rather than just be a photog!

;)

Actually, Yeah, to an extent, I'd enjoy writing about games, technology, photography etc, The reason I dont do more of this is i have no outlet for it :P

I actually thought of doing a Jered Polin-ish video about this instead but... I have no assistants to help me with video


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chet
my rates fluctuate
Avatar
43,229 posts
Gallery: 130 photos
Likes: 2097
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 18, 2012 13:13 |  #12

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #15009275 (external link)
The brand doesn't matter. It's the vision.


I thought is was the pants?


Curator of the Bob's Pickle Emporium experience. -As always, One location to serve you better!
~Feel good today and donate to this great forum~ LINK
My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,437 posts
Likes: 2393
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Sep 18, 2012 13:18 |  #13

KenjiS wrote in post #15009707 (external link)
This is also a valid theory.. Whether or not this is how things will be in the future i dont know to be honest.. I think taking a still image with always be superior to just taking a frame of video... There will be advances in still photography that keep it relevent

Actually, whatever advances are made in still photography can also apply to video as well. After all the basics don't change. Aperture, shutter speed, and ISO are universal. Even fashion photogs take 100s/1000s of pics during a shoot only to select a couple. They could just as easily video the session and choose that single frame they are looking for. Solve the storage problems, the bandwidth problems and you're there.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 400
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Sep 18, 2012 13:42 |  #14

KenjiS wrote in post #15009707 (external link)
This is also a valid theory.. Whether or not this is how things will be in the future i dont know to be honest.. I think taking a still image with always be superior to just taking a frame of video... There will be advances in still photography that keep it relevent

Relevant, yes. A frame grab is unlikely to be of the same quality as a dedicated still. Also, many shots require artistic use of long exposures, off-camera flash, etc., which you just won't get with a frame grab.

But maybe not relevant to Canon. Frame grabs are good enough for the 24-hour press, small prints in sports magazines and web use. And Canon's offerings suggest that they cater more towards press and commercial sports photography than other sorts of photographers.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 400
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Sep 18, 2012 13:48 |  #15

gjl711 wrote in post #15009730 (external link)
Actually, whatever advances are made in still photography can also apply to video as well. After all the basics don't change. Aperture, shutter speed, and ISO are universal. Even fashion photogs take 100s/1000s of pics during a shoot only to select a couple. They could just as easily video the session and choose that single frame they are looking for. Solve the storage problems, the bandwidth problems and you're there.

Video is often taken at medium shutter speed and cannot take advantage of flash (they need continuous lights). Fashion photography tends to use a lot of flash, as well as extra-fast shutter speeds to capture effects such as splashing water. Video taken with such fast shutter speeds tends to look choppy - if you look at a video frame grab, it will often exhibit motion blur, due to the use of shutter speeds of around 1/40.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

34,613 views & 0 likes for this thread
My Musing on the 6D vs D600... And Canon in General right now
FORUMS News & Rumors Photography Industry News 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is proxyrdp
1162 guests, 211 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.