6D vs 5D3, can't make up my mind...

I don't understand why people hate on the 6D so much for lacking features found on cameras that cost nearly twice as much or even more.

Please correct me if I'm wrong (I'm kind of new to photography) but wasn't the 5D kind of like a FF 20D at its release. While it lacked some features found in the one series bodies it was still very highly regarded. It was also Canons most affordable FF body...

See where I'm going with this? Just because the 6D is kind of like a FF 60D with its joystick, pedestrian fps, and entry level price tag... It doesn't mean it's not a good camera.

Like I said before, OP, don't listen to the 6D haters. If you think that's what you want go for it. It will likely serve you well.

I've used a 6D. It's a great camera and will definitely provide the OP with the better image quality and ISO performance he's looking for.

People who compare the 6D to the 5Diii... shouldn't. If you want a 5Diii, get a 5Diii. You can't compare the two, it's apples and oranges. The only thing they have in common is the Digic5 chip and an SD memory slot. They don't even have the same sensor.

I suggest 6D. It'll do everything your camera does now and more.

I think the best combo is the 7D/6D/5D3 so you have reach/lightweight vacation/tracking perfection

Get a 6D with some decent glass. When shooting in studio you would rather need wi-fi to tether images to the computer, than super-fast autofocus and high framerate.

5DIII is rather body for documentary photographers, i really can't find anything that's better on 5DIII than 6D for slow photography.

elitejp wrote in post #15580995
Huh? the cheaper part i can understand the second half of your statement sounds a little ridiculous

That's what happens when your half a sleep. LOL *thanks for catching that*

What I meant to say was that it's a entry level full frame.

This thread is proof that Canon's marketing of the 6D is working like a charm.

To say that there's no comparing the 6D to a 5DIII is absolutely ridiculous. They're both full frame digital SLRs that use the same processor and very similar sensors and they're about the same age. And guess what, both take photos. Really the ONLY thing worth mentioning on the 5DIII over the 6D for someone who's really just focused on taking pictures is the AF. Stuff like a %100 VF and 1/8000 shutterspeed over 97% and 1/4000 is ridiculous to argue over. A shooter who wears glasses will almost never use a full 100% coverage of their VF and I doubt they're worse photographers for it, and if you need to shoot above 1/4000 of a second slap an ND filter on your lens.

I love how the argument comes down to a joystick... really? That joystick is worth the extra $1000?

I'm not saying the 5DIII isn't a great camera, it is. I've gotten to spend a little time using one since my main shooting buddy has one, but when comparing shots from his 5DIII and my T2i in terms of focus, we're getting pretty much the same shots. Now if it came to tracking erratically fast moving objects, I'm sure he'd do better, but even in the gym shooting gymnastics together I don't miss focus much more than he does.

I find it hilarious that people feel compelled to spend the extra $1000 on a 5DIII just so they can have the label of a "pro" product over an "entry" level camera. 6D very obviously suits the OP's needs, why tell him to throw away more money on stuff he'll rarely ever need?

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #15581992
This thread is proof that Canon's marketing of the 6D is working like a charm.

To say that there's no comparing the 6D to a 5DIII is absolutely ridiculous. They're both full frame digital SLRs that use the same processor and very similar sensors and they're about the same age. And guess what, both take photos. Really the ONLY thing worth mentioning on the 5DIII over the 6D for someone who's really just focused on taking pictures is the AF. Stuff like a %100 VF and 1/8000 shutterspeed over 97% and 1/4000 is ridiculous to argue over. A shooter who wears glasses will almost never use a full 100% coverage of their VF and I doubt they're worse photographers for it, and if you need to shoot above 1/4000 of a second slap an ND filter on your lens.

I love how the argument comes down to a joystick... really? That joystick is worth the extra $1000?

I'm not saying the 5DIII isn't a great camera, it is. I've gotten to spend a little time using one since my main shooting buddy has one, but when comparing shots from his 5DIII and my T2i in terms of focus, we're getting pretty much the same shots. Now if it came to tracking erratically fast moving objects, I'm sure he'd do better, but even in the gym shooting gymnastics together I don't miss focus much more than he does.

I find it hilarious that people feel compelled to spend the extra $1000 on a 5DIII just so they can have the label of a "pro" product over an "entry" level camera. 6D very obviously suits the OP's needs, why tell him to throw away more money on stuff he'll rarely ever need?

Great points. People get so caught up in numbers and gear they forget that what theyre arguing is so minuscule in the grand scheme of things. Its like everyone forgets to actually go out and learn technique and then decide on which body works best for them.

Im getting a 5DIII in the future because that body has the most of what I need as a photographer. The 6D is still an awesome camera, but it doesnt fit my needs. The 6D has features that I dont care for, while the 5DIII has the features I want (mostly improvements over my 5DII).

Bottom line, I agree with you. Labels like "pro" or "entry" are for gear heads. Ill keep shooting with my 5DII because it still fits my needs right now, even if it is an "old/semi pro/aging/antiquated" body.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #15581992
This thread is proof that Canon's marketing of the 6D is working like a charm.

To say that there's no comparing the 6D to a 5DIII is absolutely ridiculous. They're both full frame digital SLRs that use the same processor and very similar sensors and they're about the same age. And guess what, both take photos. Really the ONLY thing worth mentioning on the 5DIII over the 6D for someone who's really just focused on taking pictures is the AF. Stuff like a %100 VF and 1/8000 shutterspeed over 97% and 1/4000 is ridiculous to argue over. A shooter who wears glasses will almost never use a full 100% coverage of their VF and I doubt they're worse photographers for it, and if you need to shoot above 1/4000 of a second slap an ND filter on your lens.

I love how the argument comes down to a joystick... really? That joystick is worth the extra $1000?

I'm not saying the 5DIII isn't a great camera, it is. I've gotten to spend a little time using one since my main shooting buddy has one, but when comparing shots from his 5DIII and my T2i in terms of focus, we're getting pretty much the same shots. Now if it came to tracking erratically fast moving objects, I'm sure he'd do better, but even in the gym shooting gymnastics together I don't miss focus much more than he does.

I find it hilarious that people feel compelled to spend the extra $1000 on a 5DIII just so they can have the label of a "pro" product over an "entry" level camera. 6D very obviously suits the OP's needs, why tell him to throw away more money on stuff he'll rarely ever need?

LoL, they dont market both cameras to the same crowd. The 5D3 has features that is more useful to a full time pro than a weekend hobbyist.

yes, that joystick is worth the extra $1000, along with the 100% VF, 1/8000 shutter speed, mag body, extra buttons, etc. Saying that both are the same because they're both FF is just silly and ignorant. I guess those suckers who overpayed for their 1Dx shoulda gotten 6Ds

Thanks for the replies so far. I will take some time to post a big reply this evening.

I think some people's problem dealing with the 6D on this forum is that we're photographers first and not seeing the 6D's appeal to those that aren't. When I spoke to some of my daughter's people recently, they couldn't see why anyone would buy the 5DIII when you could have all the 'goodies' and a full frame for a grand less in the 6D. They don't need 1/8000 and they're way too busy to use all those AF points when they can just expose and compose. And it's small too! And can be used at night without a flash!

However, horses for courses, I think I'll still end up with the 5DIII. It's not like I know how to Facepage on my iphone anyway.

I just got my 6D yesterday and while I've only used it for a few hours and in my poorly lit living room, I am impressed. My place's lighting sucks and I was able to take some sharp pictures of my kids with no flash, something that's never been possible for me before. It's funny...with my old camera I would cringe going past ISO 800 or 1600. With the 6D I had no issues even going up to 12500. Amazing stuff. Sure makes shooting fun when you know you have a capable machine in your hands.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #15581992
This thread is proof that Canon's marketing of the 6D is working like a charm.

To say that there's no comparing the 6D to a 5DIII is absolutely ridiculous. They're both full frame digital SLRs that use the same processor and very similar sensors and they're about the same age. And guess what, both take photos.

I believe you're not putting as much value into "overall usability" than others, which may have led you to make this statement. Regardless, I don't think anyone is arguing image quality here, and I'm pretty sure we know they take photos

Yes, and amazingly, the OP mentions this several times in the original post as being very important to him. No doubt the cameras are both very good, but the 5D3 is just better for some people, especially those people needing 3rds AF operation or performance AF.

Well, it depends. If one does a lot of critical composition work, the 100% VF might be nice. Someone who shoots outside and large aperture might really appreciate that extra stop without having to use an ND filter.

Not really. It seems you've completely disregarded several other aspects of the 5D3 vs 6D to focus just on this rather ridiculous point

Dual card slots - Extremely important for some people.
6FPS vs 4.5FPS - Doesn't sound like much, but it is.
Shorter shutter lag - Again, every bit helps.
AF - no contest.
Dedicated FEC button - Some people REALLY need this.
Larger rear LCD
Orientation-linked AF (does the 6D have this? Unsure)
And yes, a joystick.

I doubt many people are spending the extra money "just" to have a "pro" camera. I agree if that's the only reason, it's ridiculous. I believe you just don't place the value on some features as much as others, which is fine.

But, let's reverse your entire argument - "I find it ridiculous that people can even compare the 6D to the 5D3 - the 5D3 has a lot of features missing from the 6D that when taken into summation, equal a better overall camera."

My above assertion is equally as false as yours because we can only speak for ourselves!

Well, I think some people are recommending the 5D3 because the OP typed:

and

and

Granted, he also makes some very valid points for the 6D, so all we can do is make suggestions


Here's my logic in the matter - If one is happy with the 6D, then one has saved a lot of cash.

If one is not happy with the 6D, you're stuck with it (assuming you haven't returned it). One can always add the wifi capability to the 5D3 (at a ridiculous cost) but one cannot add the AF to the 6D.

Both great cameras, but only the OP can decide what he values more, and both sides of the argument are equally valid on the 6D vs 5D3

The OP should also be reminded that photography purchases should be made in the context of both what he can afford and what is currently in his camera bag. The debate about which camera body is all good - however, he should also think about the lenses he has in his bag. Going full frame, he could use an upgrade in his glass. That 18-55 will become useless if the full frame is his only body after the upgrade.

Like I said earlier, he could really choose any full frame flavor and will realize a huge benefit in ISO performance - the exception would be the original 5D, depending on his shooting style and how well he knows to expose his shots. The 5Dii or 6D would leave him with cash to upgrade his lenses.

Glass is definitely worth more than that joystick

Numenorean wrote in post #15580038
5D3 unless you want another Rebel.

IMO ...6D hater = 5Dii/7D buyers' remorse

First of all... Thanks for all the replies so far. I'm sorry but although I've read every reply, I can't answer them all. So please don't feel offended if I didn't quote you.

francis_a wrote in post #15580049
I had this dilemma a couple of weeks ago .... {quite honestly, it still haunted me after I made the decision}. Between 5DIII or 6D.

After weighing in everything I can think of and find, I bought the 6D and have been happy with it. As others have said, the only thing that swayed me towards the 5DIII was the AF system. It's just simply amazing. But I find that I've always used the center AF point which is one of the strengths of the 6D (-3EV). As for the joystick ....... never had, nor used, it before so I won't miss it.

In the end, I could have had a 5DIII with the 24-105L instead of the 6D with 24-105L plus 70-200 f4L IS which is what I have now. So I traded the pros of the 5DIII to glass instead.

I've always tried to use the AF point closest to the subject on my 550D (T2i). Not always with success because the peripheral AF points aren't crosstype AF points or because it was too dark.

Nathan wrote in post #15580461
For a casual shooter who wants to have better noise performance in a full frame, I think you could go with just about any flavor full frame body that Canon offers - or go Nikon, seriously.

For still life, portraits, products that you buy - I don't see why you don't set your ISO around 400 and bounce your flash. Noise should be well controlled on a cropper - even better on any full frame. I don't know what catches your eye, but you should be able to shoot with flash at least on some occasions.

Buy want you are comfortable spending.

You shot Aikido once - meaning yout don't have experience shooting moving subjects and/or sports. You can't assume that an improved AF system will necessarily mean you'll get the shots you want. Sounds like you still have some things to learn.

People got along rather well with cameras with lesser AF. It's not really impacted their ability to apply the rule of thirds when they want to. For a lesser body, it just means you have to work a little bit harder. Not that big a deal in my opinion.

I don't like flash photography. It kind of kills the atmosphere for me in many circumstances. Plus I always have the feeling my flash will rip off the whole hotshoe if I move my camera a little bit too fast in any direction (like it wasn't made to put on there).

Shooting an Aikido training was a rather hopeless case with my setup at the time. I had the "slow-focussing" EF 50mm F/1.8 II attached to my 550D (it was that or the poor kitlens). My shutter time was 1/500s, I believe ISO1600 was used (for me really the maximum for my 550D) and aperture was set to F/2.0 (this didn't give me enough DOF). The images looked decent after post-processing and when being viewed at about 25%, but "decent" wasn't good enough for me.

Canon_Lover wrote in post #15580899
The 6D is like the 60D and can get cramps trying to hold onto it for a long time with. On the flip side, the small size is great for tripods and backpacking.

I would 100% without hesitation buy a 5D over a 6D if I did a lot of carrying and viewfinder work, such as weddings, wildlife, or street shooting. I could carry my 5D for hours without a strap and a 70-200 attached, one-handed, with no issues. Not so with the 60D/6D and 70-200.

Even though it is cramped, the 6D grip locks into my hand like glue, and is incredibly secure to hold with confidence.

To be honest, the 60D is the best camera I've ever held in my hands (ergonomically seen). But I have to admit that I've never touched an xD series camera.

x_tan wrote in post #15580969
If AF is not that important to you, you might be better to get a 5D2.

That's really out of the question. Both the 6D and 5D3 have superior image quality/AF. I also only buy new, unused products (personal choice with very few exceptions).

tgara wrote in post #15581248
Any full frame camera will give you noise improvements over your T2i. That's just simple physics.

The question is which to choose: 5D3 or 6D. I'd say for the amount you shoot and the subjects you shoot, the 6D is the better choice. The focusing system of the 6D is not as sophisticated as that in the 5D3, but you don't really need a system like the 5D3 AF. And, I bet it's better than what's in your T2i. If you are happy with the focusing on your T2i, the 6D will be at least as good and likely much better.

As for wifi, the 6D has wifi built in, but the 5D3 does not. To get around this, I use an Eye Fi card in the SD slot of my 5D3. I record JPGs on the SD card, and RAW on the CF card. The Eye Fi dumps the JPGs right onto my iPad or computer for instant viewing. It works great.

Well the thing is... Before the 5D3 and 6D were released, I always said to myself: next time I buy a camera, it has to have less noise @ high ISO and has to have a better AF system than the AF system of my 550D. I don't really like the peripheral points on my 550D. However they aren't horrible either.

cputeq007 wrote in post #15582333

Really the ONLY thing worth mentioning on the 5DIII over the 6D for someone who's really just focused on taking pictures is the AF.

Yes, and amazingly, the OP mentions this several times in the original post as being very important to him. No doubt the cameras are both very good, but the 5D3 is just better for some people, especially those people needing 3rds AF operation or performance AF.

6D very obviously suits the OP's needs, why tell him to throw away more money on stuff he'll rarely ever need?

Well, I think some people are recommending the 5D3 because the OP typed:

I really would like to have its extremely versatile AF. All the other extra features don't really intrest me (except for the 100% viewfinder).

and

I also like the "Single Point Spot AF" of the 5D3 which seems very nice to nail the focus on tiny objects/spots (e.g. the eyes)

and

If focus errors because of focus&recompose didn't exist, I would immediately go for a 6D. But since I want to apply the rule of thirds to (most of) my pictures, I'm really afraid that focus errors would render the 6D useless because the AF points on the 6D are so centered

Granted, he also makes some very valid points for the 6D, so all we can do is make suggestions


Here's my logic in the matter - If one is happy with the 6D, then one has saved a lot of cash.

If one is not happy with the 6D, you're stuck with it (assuming you haven't returned it). One can always add the wifi capability to the 5D3 (at a ridiculous cost) but one cannot add the AF to the 6D.

Both great cameras, but only the OP can decide what he values more, and both sides of the argument are equally valid on the 6D vs 5D3

Well that's indeed my concern. If I buy the 6D and I notice that its peripheral AF points are not good enough (rule of thirds), then I'll always have to use the center AF point which will probably cause (some) images to be out-of-focus because of the focal plane shift (and this is especially true with fullframe sensor cameras since the DOF is smaller than with cropped sensor cameras). That would render me with a "useless" camera that costed me 1.800 euro. Pretty expensive (possible) joke. With the 5D3 I know the AF will deliver. However I will miss the WiFi for my selfportraits. Hope it's possible to use the EOS Remote app in combination with my iPhone/iPad when a WiFi module is attached to the 5D3.

Nathan wrote in post #15582686
The OP should also be reminded that photography purchases should be made in the context of both what he can afford and what is currently in his camera bag. The debate about which camera body is all good - however, he should also think about the lenses he has in his bag. Going full frame, he could use an upgrade in his glass. That 18-55 will become useless if the full frame is his only body after the upgrade.

Like I said earlier, he could really choose any full frame flavor and will realize a huge benefit in ISO performance - the exception would be the original 5D, depending on his shooting style and how well he knows to expose his shots. The 5Dii or 6D would leave him with cash to upgrade his lenses.

Glass is definitely worth more than that joystick

The EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 IS is hardly ever used here because it's rather weak optically. Never should have bought it, but it came with my 550D. Should have gotten a kit without a lens instead.

So I will use my EF 70-200mm F/4L USM IS and EF 50mm F/1.8 II until a new non-L 50mm lens comes out (the 50mm variant of the new 35mm F/2 lens).

Whichever camera I will buy, I can afford it without buying on credit. The money is already sitting on my bank account waiting to be used. My opinion is that if you can't pay cash (only exceptions: a car and a house), you should not buy it. I also paid my car this way and this way of thinking has been working wonderfully for me.

At this point I'm more focussed on getting the 5D3, but hey tomorrow is another day. Been switching sides many times lately.

More opinions/comments/rema​rks are always welcome.