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 General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
Thread started 06 Jun 2018 (Wednesday) 13:10
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Worth upgrading from 6D to 5D Mark IV?

 
George ­ Zip
My neighbours are looking at me a bit strangely
Avatar
1,387 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 1941
Joined Aug 2015
     
Jul 24, 2018 14:57 |  #31

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18669752 (external link)
.
Actually, Team Speed did not forget to mention flicker control. . It is the 7th item on his list of features.

.

Indeed. I was referring to myself. I forgot to mention it. I think he was replying to me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Mbell1975
Member
248 posts
Likes: 61
Joined Jul 2018
Post edited 8 months ago by Mbell1975. (4 edits in all)
     
Jul 26, 2018 21:19 |  #32
bannedPermanent ban

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18668716 (external link)
Agreed :)

- 50% more resolution
- Better low ISO DR (by over 1 stop)
- Better high ISO
- 3fps more burst
- Larger buffer
- Dual cards with UHS-1 support
- Flicker control
- Better AWB
- Better build
- Better video functions and resolution
- 61 AF points ala the 1D series
- 51 cross type AF points vs just 1
- Better rear LCD
- 1 stop faster max shutter speed
- f8 AF

For some, these add up to a much, much better package over the 6D, just depends on what you shoot, and your functional needs.

Yes, and some people are paying a steep premium for those features. $2100 to be exact, ouch. Id much rather put that money into 2-3 quality lenses for a 6D. Also, one advantage the 6D has over the 5DIV thats always goes overlooked but I find more important than most the features on your list is the fact the 6D has a 50% larger pixel area. 43.29 µm2 vs 28.69 µm2, thats massive and thats why its considered one of the best (if not THE best) low light cameras around.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,564 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5614
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jul 26, 2018 23:40 |  #33

Mbell1975 wrote in post #18671550 (external link)
Yes, and some people are paying a steep premium for those features. $2100 to be exact, ouch. Id much rather put that money into 2-3 quality lenses for a 6D. Also, one advantage the 6D has over the 5DIV thats always goes overlooked but I find more important than most the features on your list is the fact the 6D has a 50% larger pixel area. 43.29 µm2 vs 28.69 µm2, thats massive and thats why its considered one of the best (if not THE best) low light cameras around.

You are mistaken if you really believe the 6D to be Superior low light compared to the 5D4.

it may be better at the pixel level, however at similar print sizes, it WILL NOT be better than the 5D4.

https://www.dxomark.co​m …s-Canon-EOS-6D___1106_836 (external link)


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mbell1975
Member
248 posts
Likes: 61
Joined Jul 2018
Post edited 8 months ago by Mbell1975. (9 edits in all)
     
Jul 27, 2018 01:47 |  #34
bannedPermanent ban

Charlie wrote in post #18671601 (external link)
You are mistaken if you really believe the 6D to be Superior low light compared to the 5D4.

it may be better at the pixel level, however at similar print sizes, it WILL NOT be better than the 5D4.

https://www.dxomark.co​m …s-Canon-EOS-6D___1106_836 (external link)

Watch from the mark here and pay attention to the graphs starting at 7 minutes in, especially the ones at 8:40 and 10:44, the 6D is better. Thats despite having less megapixels and 4 year old tech and it still hangs with the 5DIV in the other graphs too. Larger pixel area is an advantage. The 6DII was a downgrade in this regard. If the 6D had the same, newer tech the 5DIV does, it would really crush it in low light/high ISO performance with its pixel area advantage. Its a shame they went backwards with the 6DII.

https://youtu.be/Oes5c​B50FnM?t=5m56s (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,589 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4995
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
     
Jul 27, 2018 04:44 as a reply to  @ Mbell1975's post |  #35

I have/had both, and there is nothing I would point to the 6d as an advantage other than size/weight, which is a big part of its lower price. The 5d4 does better than the 6d in all measurable final image specs, especially when you equalize for resolution.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,564 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5614
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jul 27, 2018 06:26 |  #36

Mbell1975 wrote in post #18671660 (external link)
Watch from the mark here and pay attention to the graphs starting at 7 minutes in, especially the ones at 8:40 and 10:44, the 6D is better. Thats despite having less megapixels and 4 year old tech and it still hangs with the 5DIV in the other graphs too. Larger pixel area is an advantage. The 6DII was a downgrade in this regard. If the 6D had the same, newer tech the 5DIV does, it would really crush it in low light/high ISO performance with its pixel area advantage. Its a shame they went backwards with the 6DII.

https://youtu.be/Oes5c​B50FnM?t=5m56s (external link)

I'm plenty aware of what the 6D is capable of. High ISO was great then, and is now quite frankly. Better than newer cameras? No.

Does it make a difference? Practical Wise, not really. 1/5 a stop is not enough for me to differentiate. What is different with the low iso and megapixel is pretty significant if that's what you're looking for.

As you go up the chain into expensive bodies, value drops, thats just the way it goes with photography. I'm with Tom on his assessment of what's it worth. I simply put imaginary thresholds on priorities. As for the 6D to 5D4 price jump... It's pretty massive...... IF you're not accustomed to paying that amount for a body. Keep in mind that many folks are ok with spending that amount of money on photography without hesitation, and it's not always about how big their account is, but what they have done historically and consider ok for their budget.

For me, 3500 is probably the most I'll ever spend on a camera body, but who knows if this threshold changes in the future. I have 2x bodies that were 3K each when I bought them........ Kind of expensive now reflecting on it. I'm in a perpetual mode of saving funds for future gear, so my budget grows over time. I've also started trimming down my gear, growing my budget even further...

Once you start having these bigger budgets, is it worth it tends to be yes more often.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mbell1975
Member
248 posts
Likes: 61
Joined Jul 2018
Post edited 7 months ago by Mbell1975. (2 edits in all)
     
Jul 27, 2018 15:17 |  #37
bannedPermanent ban

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18671702 (external link)
I have/had both, and there is nothing I would point to the 6d as an advantage other than size/weight, which is a big part of its lower price. The 5d4 does better than the 6d in all measurable final image specs, especially when you equalize for resolution.

Did you watch that video? The 6D equaled or beat the 5DIV at high ISO in every test. This despite having 10 less megapixels and 4 year older technology. Quite an accomplishment.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
George ­ Zip
My neighbours are looking at me a bit strangely
Avatar
1,387 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 1941
Joined Aug 2015
     
Jul 27, 2018 15:23 |  #38

The 6D is such a great camera and can be had for chump change now.

I just like saying chump change




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,589 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4995
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
Post edited 7 months ago by TeamSpeed.
     
Jul 27, 2018 16:02 as a reply to  @ Mbell1975's post |  #39

1) Again I have had both
2) DR only matters at the lower ISO range, almost all bodies, especially Canon start to level out around each other at higher ISOs, and you don't shoot high ISO hoping to keep a very wide DR, it drops significantly
3) Showing screen shots of the DPReview studio site is useless when others can go there and make sure they are comparing the correct settings and file types. I also prefer real comparisons from real cameras than taking graphs from one site and DPreview files, if possible. That is where the rubber meets the road.
4) Noise characteristics are not divulged through any of the graphs or DXO ratings
5) Again, equalize the raw file resolutions and the differences will be more stark
6) Yes the 6D is close, but it isn't better in DR or noise management, the noise is a bit rougher and clumpy to deal with. This is why I always suggest either the 6D or 5D4 to folks, and nothing much more than those (other than the 1DX2).
7) Go to their comparator and make sure you select raw, choose comparative sizes, and the low light flag. Pull in the raw files if you would like but also resize there too. The 5D4 cleans up easier.
8) What are your real world experiences with both?

Also a good read when comparing the 7D2 and 6D, showing that graphs don't tell the whole truth. ;)
http://www.clarkvision​.com …ws/evaluation-canon-7dii/ (external link)

The 5D4 hasn't been reviewed by him at this point.

Fixed Pattern (Banding) Noise

Table 2 shows the noise as a function of ISO in image form. The images illustrate several things: 1) lower banding noise at higher ISOs. 2) Better detection of smaller signals at higher ISOs (the random noise on the subject decreases). 3) At a certain high ISO, improvements decrease, meaning there is no benefit to higher ISO. Note, ISO is a post sensor gain and does not increase sensitivity. Increasing ISO digitizes a smaller range (see Table 1) but does improve the noise floor up to a point. For night and low light photography, ISO 1600 produces excellent results and there should be little need for going to higher ISOs (which have a detrimental effect of lower dynamic range). Only go to higher ISOs when dynamic range of the scene is low and you need to detect the very faintest subjects. The 7D Mark II camera has the LOWEST fixed pattern noise at all ISOs than any other Canon camera that I have tested to date, including the Canon 1DX and 6D (as of November, 2014).


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,589 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4995
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
     
Jul 27, 2018 16:05 as a reply to  @ George Zip's post |  #40

It indeed is, no doubt! But if budget permits, there are a few other better choices these days. :) Including So.... I can't say it. :D


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
George ­ Zip
My neighbours are looking at me a bit strangely
Avatar
1,387 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 1941
Joined Aug 2015
     
Jul 27, 2018 19:10 |  #41

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18672015 (external link)
1) Again I have had both
2) DR only matters at the lower ISO range, almost all bodies, especially Canon start to level out around each other at higher ISOs, and you don't shoot high ISO hoping to keep a very wide DR, it drops significantly
3) Showing screen shots of the DPReview studio site is useless when others can go there and make sure they are comparing the correct settings and file types. I also prefer real comparisons from real cameras than taking graphs from one site and DPreview files, if possible. That is where the rubber meets the road.
4) Noise characteristics are not divulged through any of the graphs or DXO ratings
5) Again, equalize the raw file resolutions and the differences will be more stark
6) Yes the 6D is close, but it isn't better in DR or noise management, the noise is a bit rougher and clumpy to deal with. This is why I always suggest either the 6D or 5D4 to folks, and nothing much more than those (other than the 1DX2).
7) Go to their comparator and make sure you select raw, choose comparative sizes, and the low light flag. Pull in the raw files if you would like but also resize there too. The 5D4 cleans up easier.
8) What are your real world experiences with both?

Also a good read when comparing the 7D2 and 6D, showing that graphs don't tell the whole truth. ;)
http://www.clarkvision​.com …ws/evaluation-canon-7dii/ (external link)

The 5D4 hasn't been reviewed by him at this point.

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by TeamSpeed in
./showthread.php?p=186​72015&i=i127619366
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

In the spirit of forums and drifting from the original discussion....

I had the 7d2 and I loved that camera. I still think it Is actually Canons best value stills camera. Outside in nice light it was awesome. Inside in S@#$y light it just sucked compared to the 5d4 or 6D or whatever, everything ended up a b;ack and white. I looked at test charts and read up on it and in theory it should have been fine.

Sometimes real world shooting is the real test.

That’s just what I think.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,589 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4995
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
Post edited 7 months ago by TeamSpeed.
     
Jul 27, 2018 21:06 as a reply to  @ George Zip's post |  #42

There is indeed a learning curve to the 7d2 on settings to get the most out of low light results. The FF offerings are a bit more forgiving, and the 5d4 I have owned is the first where I can use high ISO JPEG right out of the camera to process instead of going to the raw first.

I feel the 7D2 complements the 5D4, they work well together.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
graham121
Goldmember
Avatar
1,183 posts
Gallery: 107 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 10243
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Pakenham, VIC, Aus
     
Jul 27, 2018 22:49 |  #43

THE key difference for me between the 6D and the 5D4 is that I can take pictures using f8 maximum aperture lens/converters combinations with the 5D4 that I could not take with the 6D.

So for me it is not a case of is this bit 10% better or is that bit 5% better... it is a case of being able to do what I could not do before, and is therefore worthwhile.


A coupla bodies and a few lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
txsizzler
Senior Member
Avatar
543 posts
Gallery: 179 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1516
Joined Jan 2017
Location: South Texas
     
Aug 02, 2018 10:00 |  #44

I bought a 5D Mark IV last December (local, used with 3800 shutter actuations, came with the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro, and the 24-105mm f/4 L for $2600.. couldn't pass that deal up!). I use it in conjunction with my 5D classic and 5D Mark II camera bodies. Compared to those older bodies, is like night and day.

The 5D Mark IV, even in jpeg mode, has more flexibility than the RAW files off of the older models. Enormous upgrade.. and I could imagine with the 6D, the 5D Mark IV would be a huge upgrade too. That being said, the very best upgrades you can do for yourself is with high end glass. Even my old 5D "Classic" shines with high quality lenses.

Moral of the story: if you are more or less satisfied with the 6D output, and cannot afford the 5D Mark IV, but are itching for better image quality, look at your lenses, and see if you cannot go that route first over a camera body. Canon's newest L lenses are soooo nice.. and have the capability of making even the oldest bodies (like my 1Ds Mark I) take incredible photos, within the limitations of the camera body itself.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,908 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3355
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited 7 months ago by Tom Reichner.
     
Aug 02, 2018 10:08 |  #45

txsizzler wrote in post #18675641 (external link)
Moral of the story: if you are more or less satisfied with the 6D output, and cannot afford the 5D Mark IV, but are itching for better image quality, look at your lenses, and see if you cannot go that route first over a camera body. Canon's newest L lenses are soooo nice.. and have the capability of making even the oldest bodies (like my 1Ds Mark I) take incredible photos, within the limitations of the camera body itself.

What you say is true, but I think that the vast majority of people who have a 6D and are considering a 5D4 are already shooting with Canon's L lenses.

What I mean is, well ....... I think I am fairly typical of folks here on this forum, and I have a 6D and am looking for a little better output. . I use my 6D with a 400 f2.8 and a 100-400 v2 and a 24-105 L. . In other words, most of us who use a 6D are already shooting with some of the best lenses available, so upgrading our glass isn't really an option.
.

.

graham121 wrote in post #18672201 (external link)
THE key difference for me between the 6D and the 5D4 is that I can take pictures using f8 maximum aperture lens/converters combinations with the 5D4 that I could not take with the 6D.

So for me it is not a case of is this bit 10% better or is that bit 5% better... it is a case of being able to do what I could not do before, and is therefore worthwhile.

That's kind of how I feel.

I am generally satisfied with the 6D image quality. However, I often fail to connect on a lot of shots when I am shooting fast-paced action sequences, such as birds in flight approaching rapidly from acute angles. The autofocus just doesn't keep up on an "every single frame being perfect" kind of basis, the way my 1d4 does. So I find myself using my 1D4 for those kinds of situations, even thought I like the 6D image quality more.

So I am compromising and not getting the very best images.

I'm thinking that the 5D4 would give me the image quality that my 6D gives me, and it would also give me the autofocus ability that my 1D4 gives me. So it would be like combining the best features of each of my cameras into one camera. Like you, I would then be able to do things that I cannot do now.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

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

5,007 views & 34 likes for this thread
Worth upgrading from 6D to 5D Mark IV?
FORUMS General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
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 Argonaut70
956 guests, 258 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.