Anyone done a real world comparison between 6D and D600?

Hi,

I am trying to make up my mind between the 2 and was wondering if anyone has seen a real world A/B IQ comparison between the 6D and the D600?

So confused....... ARRRRGHHH

1) Google "D600 oil" without quotes. I think this will make the choice easier.

2) Also, this URL: http://www.kenrockwell​.com/canon/6d.htm

FWIW, he says, "The Canon 6D is the world's second-best DSLR regardless of price, right behind the very similar Canon 5D Mark III. If you're in the market for a full-frame DSLR for ultimate technical quality and super-fast autofocus for action, but don't want to pay extra for (or carry the weight of) the 5D Mark III, the 6D is about 95% of the 5D Mark III for a lot less money. I own both, and see and feel very little difference between them. (I also own the Nikon D600, which is inferior).".

I faced the same choice. Went with the 6D.

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=jmnoabuXzy0

smu johnson wrote in post #16186052
1) Google "D600 oil" without quotes. I think this will make the choice easier.

2) Also, this URL: http://www.kenrockwell​.com/canon/6d.htm

FWIW, he says, "The Canon 6D is the world's second-best DSLR regardless of price, right behind the very similar Canon 5D Mark III. If you're in the market for a full-frame DSLR for ultimate technical quality and super-fast autofocus for action, but don't want to pay extra for (or carry the weight of) the 5D Mark III, the 6D is about 95% of the 5D Mark III for a lot less money. I own both, and see and feel very little difference between them. (I also own the Nikon D600, which is inferior).".

I faced the same choice. Went with the 6D.

Can you please elaborate how the d600 is inferior to the 6d? I've seen prints from both and I'd say the 6d has better high ISO abilities, but the D600 is better at middle to low ISO. Blatant statements where one is so much better than another really needs facts to back up such bold statements.

Hogloff wrote in post #16186129
Can you please elaborate how the d600 is inferior to the 6d? I've seen prints from both and I'd say the 6d has better high ISO abilities, but the D600 is better at middle to low ISO. Blatant statements where one is so much better than another really needs facts to back up such bold statements.

He is just repeating a quote from Ken Rockwell's review, which should be taken with a grain of salt as with everything on his site. Ken has the following to say about the D600 it it's review: "The Nikon D600 is Nikon's best digital camera ever, at any price". Sort of contradictory if you ask me.

There are a number of good videos on YouTube comparing the two (see http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=Q9HlxWqcG5Y).

If you are (heavily) invested in Canon glass I'd stick with Canon, I doubt you can spot the difference in prints or reallife to be honest.

MaizeRage25 wrote in post #16186149
He is just repeating a quote from Ken Rockwell's review, which should be taken with a grain of salt as with everything on his site.

Taken with a grain of salt at best. That guy is a complete idiot.

reprazent wrote in post #16186168
If you are (heavily) invested in Canon glass I'd stick with Canon, I doubt you can spot the difference in prints or reallife to be honest.

^This

If you aren't sure which camera would be best for you, gotta wonder if you are so invested and experienced that it actually matters. (no offense intended, just sayin')
The very real oil issue with the D600 would make me steer clear of it, but the ergonomics of it are my real issue with the D600. I just couldn't stand holding it for more than a few minutes at a time.

I think either camera would do the job perfectly fine. It is just a tool, and neither is going to make you a better photographer through some magical technology inside the body you choose.

adamo99 wrote in post #16186245
Taken with a grain of salt at best. That guy is a complete idiot.

I was trying to be nice

On a serious note, I'm looking at the same question and I'm not sure you can go wrong. If you have already have some decent Canon lenses then I don't see a compelling reason to switch to Nikon with the D600 (esp with some quality issues). I think the only reason to switch is if you absolutely needed the better focus system and if that is the case then you're probably better off saving for a MarkIII.

They are both awesome bodies with fantastic IQs. On Canon dedicated forums (@ POTN) you are bound to have more answers saying get the Canon. But the truth is they are very close to each other in performance. If you are not already too heavily invested in Canon glass the Nikon D600 is certainly a viable option. And this "oil in sensor" is totally blown of proportions here..

Some basic advantages for D600:
-More AF points (better AF tracking, in 6D you are still basicly stuck on the center AF point for most reliable focus)
-2 EV stops better dynamic range (in landscaping photography you'll appreciate this)
- 4 more megapixels
- built-in flash
- better low ISO perfomance (e.g. ability to pull out shadows without that horrible banding)

Some basic advantages for 6D
- better high ISO perfomance (it becomes more especially visible above ISO 6400, but you have to ask your self: do I really shoot with such high ISO numbers?)
- GPS
- WIFI
- If you are already invested in Canon glass, in my opinion it's not worth changing them for Nikon

To sum up: they are both awesome bodies. Just go to some store, see how they feel on your hand. And make your decision based on that feeling

If this is your first DSLR, go handle both in a store or rent each for a week. As others said, they're so close it should really come down to preference. I'd still go with Canon because of the lens selection though.

BrickR wrote in post #16186264
...but the ergonomics of it are my real issue with the D600. I just couldn't stand holding it for more than a few minutes at a time.

same here, the very reason why I could never shoot Nikon bodies, it hurts my hand. While Canon cameras fit like a glove.I agree with the last poster, go try it out at the store.

It doesn't matter which camera you buy, it's the system that you are committing to. In 5 years when the body is obsolete, which set of lenses do you want to be selecting a new body for? Which company has the design and execution you prefer?

ElectronGuru wrote in post #16186750
It doesn't matter which camera you buy, it's the system that you are committing to. In 5 years when the body is obsolete, which set of lenses do you want to be selecting a new body for? Which company has the design and execution you prefer?

I have three systems and it's wondeful to have all options at my calling.

Tmuussoni wrote in post #16186325
They are both awesome bodies with fantastic IQs. On Canon dedicated forums (@ POTN) you are bound to have more answers saying get the Canon. But the truth is they are very close to each other in performance. If you are not already too heavily invested in Canon glass the Nikon D600 is certainly a viable option. And this "oil in sensor" is totally blown of proportions here..

Some basic advantages for D600:
-More AF points (better AF tracking, in 6D you are still basicly stuck on the center AF point for most reliable focus)
-2 EV stops better dynamic range (in landscaping photography you'll appreciate this)
- 4 more megapixels
- built-in flash
- better low ISO perfomance (e.g. ability to pull out shadows without that horrible banding)

Some basic advantages for 6D
- better high ISO perfomance (it becomes more especially visible above ISO 6400, but you have to ask your self: do I really shoot with such high ISO numbers?)
- GPS
- WIFI
- If you are already invested in Canon glass, in my opinion it's not worth changing them for Nikon

To sum up: they are both awesome bodies. Just go to some store, see how they feel on your hand. And make your decision based on that feeling

The best and by far the most reasonable post I've ever read. Things will change when the new forum goes live bcoz' this forum will no longer be centered toward the Canon brand!