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

You would think that they could have updated the 28-135 with better build and a new IS and called that the kit lens. I wouldn't have to be a L lens but it would have been a good lens to start out with. It was my first lens and I think it was great. I traded it in for the 24-105 F4 L. Which is a much nicer lens.

I can't switch to get the equal quality in lens I would have to spend more than just a body upgrade. To me that doesn't make sense. Sure the Nikon might seem to be better at this stage but who knows the future might bring. I could swap now and 2 years down the track Canon shows off this new sensor that blows the world apart. Then it would be like gee should I swap. Not worth it when I think that the lenses are more important than the body.

I want FF and the mk3 is just too higher cost for me to justify it. that's why this camera is calling my name

Kenji, I think you might not be the target audience for the 6D.
Like you said, I think it'll be great out in the wild (at least as good as the D600) but the 5D III would be the product for you (and me).
I'm saving up for that...

As much as I like Canon, they need to work on improving their sensors. They seemed to be aimed at ISO, FPS, and video. DR is a biggie for landscape guys and they're ignoring that part of the market. In comes the D800/D600 to fulfill that void. I would love to invest in more Canon gear but, they offer nothing that I need at this time. :/ Until then I sit and wait till they release a high MP body.

The 5D 3 is a great camera and I could buy it right now if I wanted but, my 1Ds 3 imo has better performance at native ISO 100 which is what I use most of the time for landscape shooting. The 5D 3 is the better performer all around but, I don't need high ISO and FPS.

Kenji, I'm not sure if you've seen these samples but, this should give you an idea of why sensor performance is so important to me at low ISO. Particularly at ISO 100. I'm preordered for the D600 and I suspect the DR will be useful as well at the lower end.

This image is just for experimental purposes only and to me this is testing the DR of the D800 EXMOR sensor. Editing was done in LR4 and the usual suspects to up the exposure in the shadows. This is an extreme example but, I always ETTR as much as possible.

The original image:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Interesting discussion. I think there are a few points to it.

First of all - Canon has a major advantage above Nikon and Sony and any other SLR manufacturer and that is the lens lineup. I mean, endless choices, superb IQ etc etc.

The major disadvantage of Canon against Nikon, Sony etc. is the sensor technology. Look at the scores of all the Canon sensors and compare them to the Sony sensors which are now in more than 60% of all cameras worldwide and you will realize that Canon sensor tech blows. If Canon would have the Sony sensor inside, it would immediately become the king of the hill. Sony sensors and Canon lenses would be an unbelievable combination which would be unmatched. But perhaps that is the reason why Canon so far has no access to them.

Then, Canon has an other major issue and that is inovation. In the mirrorless segment they are too late, and what they presented is less than what you get with the competition. Sony is rolling through this segment with their NEX line and neither Nikon nor Canon will be successfull there.

And while many will dislike what Sony is doing, the SLT is a great evolution, the A99 will bring video features which benefit from the Sony Pro Video experience, they release an affordable FF NEX video camera, the FF RX1 etc. And while Nikon at least benefits from the Sony sensors, it seems Canon is stuck somewhere behind with not so many product novelties coming out, while the Nikon/Sony dynamic duo is pushing forward.

There is one more thing to add where Canon should watch out. Sony is pushing agressively forward. While the partnership with Hasselblad right now only produced a looney camera at an incredible price, it will in the future help promote the E and A mount Sony uses. Sony has also purchased a major stake in Olympus, so it IMHO is only a matter of time when we will see the first Olympus A or E mount camera. Again, Canon must move finally and improove or outsource their sensor tech. Otherwise they will get eaten by Nikon/Sony.

Its time Canon users cleansed their souls, admit, and move on - or move to Nikon. Nikon is drinking Canons milkshake right now, in almost every way, and its not even debatable. The roles were once reversed (and Nikonians were doing the same thing your are now - knowingly wrong), and probably in a decade the role might reverse back, but insignificant moral victories here and there cant change the fact that Nikon is class of the camera industry right now - and they're cheaper to boot.

And the D7000 easily bests the 60D, comparing it to a 7D in the same comparison is a bit ridiculous no?

Actually Kenji mate, from what I've seen you shoot I think the 6D would be perfect (especially for your food shots which seem to be in quite low light) I don't really see where you'd benefit from the 5DIII's AF.

theflyingkiwi wrote in post #15012609
You would think that they could have updated the 28-135 with better build and a new IS and called that the kit lens. I wouldn't have to be a L lens but it would have been a good lens to start out with. It was my first lens and I think it was great. I traded it in for the 24-105 F4 L. Which is a much nicer lens.

I can't switch to get the equal quality in lens I would have to spend more than just a body upgrade. To me that doesn't make sense. Sure the Nikon might seem to be better at this stage but who knows the future might bring. I could swap now and 2 years down the track Canon shows off this new sensor that blows the world apart. Then it would be like gee should I swap. Not worth it when I think that the lenses are more important than the body.

I want FF and the mk3 is just too higher cost for me to justify it. that's why this camera is calling my name

Exactly. Switching and selling all gear is just stupid. Yes Sony sensors are better. But canon sensors are not bad. Roles will reverse, and then you will be switching back. All this switching back and fourth going cost you 2-3 lenses that you could have bought extra.

If some one is rich and they wipe their ass with $100 bills go for it.

Any hobbyist don't waste your time and hard earned money

reading this it's like reading Android vs iOS or Apple vs Samsung.

:P

D600 DxO Mark

Apologies if this has been posted already.

http://www.dxomark.com …-for-sensor-image-quality

My first thoughts were, 'it did not take them long to test this camera'.

i look at these offerings like a pendulum - right now the bob is heading in the direction of Nikon. It'll swing back. I used Nikon from 22 years ('67 to 89), when I made the switch to Canon in '89, I thought Nikon might go out of business, they lacked the innovation I was seeing from Canon. I shot only Canon for 23 years ('89 to '12). While I'm not concerned Canon will go out of business, their innovation needs a jump start. I'm sure they'll release something in 2013 that will be one of those "WOW!" products. These days I'm using both Canon and Nikon, they each have their place in my photography and both do a superb job. My only wish is they'd get together and standardize the controls, with my Nikon I find myself going for that big dial on the back all the time.

Very impressive for an entry level camera... go Sony!!! .

match14 wrote in post #15013613
Apologies if this has been posted already.

http://www.dxomark.com …-for-sensor-image-quality

My first thoughts were, 'it did not take them long to test this camera'.

rick_reno wrote in post #15013632
i look at these offerings like a pendulum - right now the bob is heading in the direction of Nikon. It'll swing back. I used Nikon from 22 years ('67 to 89), when I made the switch to Canon in '89, I thought Nikon might go out of business, they lacked the innovation I was seeing from Canon. I shot only Canon for 23 years ('89 to '12). While I'm not concerned Canon will go out of business, their innovation needs a jump start. I'm sure they'll release something in 2013 that will be one of those "WOW!" products. These days I'm using both Canon and Nikon, they each have their place in my photography and both do a superb job. My only wish is they'd get together and standardize the controls, with my Nikon I find myself going for that big dial on the back all the time.

Rightly so. Shooting both systems is benefiting me.

Interesting read, OP. I agree about the 60D vs. D7000. At the time I thought the D7000 was so much more camera for $100 more. And in many respects it was, but I preferred the grip and handling of the 60D more once I had a chance to use both. My decision to go with the 60D later on was helped by the fact that the D7000 did not drop in price until recently (due to the Thailand floods) while the 60D was available refurbished for $640 through CLP, which was almost half the price of a new D7000.

I also think the D7000 killed sales of the D300S because of how feature-rich it was. The 60D lacked MFA (still a mistake in my eyes) and pro build quality and AF that made the distinction between it and the 7D clearer. As a result, even if D7000 sales beat the 60D, I'm sure the 7D sold much better than the D300S. I'm not partial to either brand (I've owned more Nikons than Canons, actually) but I think Canon's offerings ultimately make sense once they start dropping prices.

Once the 6D drops in price a few hundred dollars or more, I think the complaints will stop and it'll be appreciated. I think it's likely the 6D will be selling at a steeper discount than the D600 once the initial demand dies down.

DarthVader wrote in post #15013647
Very impressive for an entry level camera... go Sony!!! .

That's the same EXPEED sensor that was in the D3X ($8000.00). And it's nice that they didn't kill it off because the performance is very good. Remap the sensor and drop it in the D600 and it's a bargain.

The 60d worked out because it had the same great (for the time) sensor from the 7d, with a flip screen. It also quickly got priced right. It also had more MP (slightly). Also, all the AF points are cross type-you NEVER hear complaints about the 60d's AF because it just works.

If the 6d had 26mp (2 more than its competitors), 11 cross type AF points, and a flip screen (no one is falling for the "durability reasons!" bs anymore, Canon), and cost 1800, no one would be complaining. Even with less DR.