Canon 6D - full frame without the smarts

$2K I heard

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-6d

$2100 actually, but yeah. Available for preorder now.

What makes the 6D preferable to the 5D mkII?
Can´t be price, as the mkII has been steadily declining in the price department, both used and new.
Can´t be sheer resolution at lower ISOs, as they are more or less the same in the megapixel department.
Could, of course, be higher ISO resolution and cleanliness, but who the fuck cares. If I had a camera that shot clean above 3200, I doubt I´d use it that much.
Could, of course, be GPS. No?
Looks? Pretty much the same to my eyes.
I hear you get a pentamirror box, though. That´s awesome. :fm:

Same shit, same wrappings, higher price? A bit what Leica just did with their "new" M-E, which is an M9 with magnesium top and bottom plates(instead of brass), new (good looking, though) colorscheme, removed one useful function and one entirely useless, and slapped off 20% on the pricetag. I liked that move, but it´s still fucking expensive.

arild, I'm with you. It's a very odd "in-between" child.

One-trick wonder with night photography I guess. One thing to consider is possible fringe markets where the size and high ISO are important. For example, my friend actually uses a 5dii with the crazy super macro lens for work because it's cheaper than a microscope camera and takes much better images at the size scale he needs.

the wifi is interesting for sure. i dont even have a smart phone but being able to access live view and other exposure settings and whatnot sounds pretty cool.

Remote liveview via WiFi from an RC heli - could mean not having to use an external wireless uplink?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arild

What makes the 6D preferable to the 5D mkII?
Can´t be price, as the mkII has been steadily declining in the price department, both used and new.
Can´t be sheer resolution at lower ISOs, as they are more or less the same in the megapixel department.
Could, of course, be higher ISO resolution and cleanliness, but who the fuck cares. If I had a camera that shot clean above 3200, I doubt I´d use it that much.
Could, of course, be GPS. No?
Looks? Pretty much the same to my eyes.
I hear you get a pentamirror box, though. That´s awesome. :fm:

Same shit, same wrappings, higher price? A bit what Leica just did with their "new" M-E, which is an M9 with magnesium top and bottom plates(instead of brass), new (good looking, though) colorscheme, removed one useful function and one entirely useless, and slapped off 20% on the pricetag. I liked that move, but it´s still fucking expensive.

---

Just because some of the features are of no value to you doesn't prove the 6D is useless.

If everyone had the same needs then Canon would only need to make one camera. :wink:

You guys see any reviews of this thing regarding high ISOs?

I'm kind of bouncing around between the 5ds right now and this looks kind of interesting.

And yes.......I'm only looking at any of them for night shots :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eldo

Just because some of the features are of no value to you doesn't prove the 6D is useless.

If everyone had the same needs then Canon would only need to make one camera. :wink:

---

You´re not incorrect. However, it´s very much useless to me, which makes my rant valid. Almost.

What I´m thinking of is more the hopes and expectations of the rumor crowd. They all hoped the 6D, long rumored to be a small, rebel-like (cheaper), lightweight full frame camera, which this, in comparison to the 5D mkII, is not. It´s a whopping 40 grams lighter, and pretty much the exact same body size. If it turns out the IQ at higher ISOs look more like the 1Dx than the 5DmkII, i can sort of understand the choice why a 6D would be preferable to the 5DmkII. Same with the wifi function - if that brings more creative opportunities towards the photographer/videographer, awesome! Can´t wait to see the results from a wifi operated recording on an RC helicopter!

Buuuut.. This is neither more affordable than the 5DmkII in its current state, nor is it, when it all comes down to it, a necessary camera for Canon to develop and sell. It´s practically the same price point as the D600. The D600, from what I´ve seen, looks like a pretty awesome DSLR, compared to lots of things. It´s small-esque, and looks great. Canon is a very reactionary company, it seems to me. They trickle down a bit of technology from the other manufacturers, slap a price tag on it, and all is good. It seems they feel the need to fill every pricepoint in their ongoing war with Nikon. Why not create an entirely new niche with this 6D(my thoughts before the actual camera was released)? Make it a rebel sized model with a full frame sensor, polycarbonate outer construction, kill off a bunch of functions not too many need nor use, and make it either
a) an extremely capable backup camera for the working pro, lacking in luxury functionality, though essentially useful
or
b) an extremely capable entry level full frame body to really suck the masses into the lure that is L-primes.

Call it $1500, and grow some fucking balls, Canon. Reactionary behaviour like this must be bad for the benefits of progress through rivalry/competition.

PS: I´m a Canon shooter, really going towards the more compact spectrum of photographic equipment. At the moment, I have an old, but well loved 20D, a 1DmkII, and a 1DsmkII.

PPS: The Hassy Lunar looks....butt fucked. Had to say it.