Something tells me this isn't going to feature many questions about Lightroom 5...
Ruy Penalva: Canon should think on things more affordable.
Professionals need to know what things cost. What you're referring to is billionaires, they don't need to ask.
penguinman: From Andy Rouse web page.
This is a plea to the lens geeks. Please do not start comparing the Canon lens with the Nikon one, it is pointless. The Nikon 200-400 does a great job for Nikon photographers and the Canon lens will do a great job for Canon photographers. Comparing the two is just pointless, as no one is going to change camera system to use this lens are they? No they are not, so please don’t fuel the silly Canon vs Nikon debate anymore, it’s not what this lens or this review is all about.
A lot of people use websites such as this in order to educate themselves about a product before they buy/rent/test it. I think objective comparison is exactly what we should be doing here. I already know that the 2 lenses fit on different bodies and, for the record, I also know that photography is about taking pictures, good pictures don't just come from better cameras etc, but this is an article about a specific lens. I want to know how good it is. A comparison to the Nikon, as well as Canon primes would be a good place to start. Especially true because I can buy the Nikon and a D800 for less money than this.
Comparison doesn't have to mean brand bashing and fanboyism, although I know it often does...
Lanski: 2000 posts!
It's an honour to claim this coveted spot. I'd like to take this moment to thank some of the people who've helped me realise this lifelong dream:
My parents, for bringing me in to the world,
My girlfriend, for going out with a guy who sits around on DPR hoping to get the 2000th comment on a news item,
but most of all Adobe, without whom this would never have been possible, for uniting public opinion against themselves in a way none of us would have predicted.
djsphynx: For those who feel comfortable with LR + PS alternative, be warned.
Imagine a scenario in 2 years time where Adobe says "The last 12 months of development was brutal. And there were results we were not happy with. We have decided to focus on the CC LR product." Sounds familiar? It should, it's what they said about CS PS.
So regardless of the fact that they've said "ya, we'll keep CS LR going, but make CC LR better", be warned before you commit more and more to their catalogues etc.
Fool me once...
Great minds think alike! :)
What concerns me is that the logic they used to explain moving CS to subscription only also applies equally to Lightroom. They may have said "We don't have plans to make Lightroom a subscription-only option but we do envision added functionality for CC members using Lightroom", but they have also stated "The reason behind the subscription-only move is the logistics of supporting two sets of software".
I can't trust them not to move LR to subscription only, not based on any anti-Adobe sentiment, but based on their words.
Hahaha, love it!
Samuel Dilworth: A fine review. I’m amazed you can pump out a review of this quality in three weeks of hands-on time. I guess that’s economies of scale for you.
All those interesting scenes carefully chosen for the viewfinder images, the display images, the coin video, etc.? I noticed them. I appreciate that kind of attention to detail.
I like the tungsten low-light setup on page 19, too (and bonus points for using a mambo theme rather the usual reviewer’s plastic clutter). But could you please check the links to the full-size D600 images on that page? They seem to go to photos at one-stop higher ISO than the 6D images.
The video moiré problems shown on page 21 are pretty disappointing. It seems that video in SLRs is a hard nut to crack: every camera seems to have a ‘gotcha’.
I have my own, slightly different conclusions about this camera (I like it a lot, though I shoot Nikon), but your review lets me do that. I’m renewing my DPReview subscription as I type.
Seconded. I think the level of detail in the reviews doesn't get enough mention here. I've just made a purchase (different camera) and the immense review makes me feel like I already know it inside out. I particularly benefitted from being able to download RAW files, then download RAW files taken with a 7D (which I own) of the same scene, process them both myself and really understand what I'm going to be using.
That alone was worth more than the subscription price ;)
SnapHappy32: The 6D is not a camera for crop-shooters upgrading. It's a very specialized tool. Nobody has made an indoor concert/event camera like this before - especially considering the price point.
I shoot corporate events (at my workplace) - but not as a professional. We have approx. 8-10 events a year. I use my D7000 (premature sale of the D700 I'm afraid - and the D800 doesn't fit the bill) along with a 70-200. It's great - but I have some serious reservations about upping the ISO (above 3200), and the AF-performance could be better. A good friend (wedding shooter) has the D600 - I'll try it on for size.
Returning to the 6D. The lowlight focusing ability paired with the awesome high ISO performance make it a very specialized tool. One of a kind. The problem is - this seems to be a supplement to the 5DMK3. Not a stand alone camera. Time will tell if they are leaving a flank open for Nikon to exploit with the D600.
Or maybe they just don't deem the 5D3 to be THAT expensive.
Again, I agree, though I'd say it probably suits a few different areas of special interest. I do think it's a shame that it seems to be a little deliberately compromised though, or that it isn't cheaper (either would be fine!).
Noogy: DPR can continue to lavish praises over the D600 and I don't care. They completely ignored the quality control issues in the process, yet felt it was ok to give it a gold rating. Come on guys! But then again that's the reason I proceeded to buy the 6D way before this review came out, because DPR ceases to be the benchmark on camera reviews that it used to be.
The D600 got a gold award, the one above what the 6D got.
The D600 has an outstanding sensor, good build, very good AF, dual card slots, flash, higher resolution, higher FPS. The Canon has (probably) got a cleaner sensor, WiFi, GPS and a cool middle autofocus point, whilst costing more upon release. Obviously the value you place on these differences will affect which one you perceive as better, but I don't think that DPR's decision to award the D600 a higher accolade (by one) seems unreasonable.
tmurph: This is a fine camera but so is the Nikon D600 and also the Sony SLT-A99 and so on.This "my camera is better than your camera" school of thought is getting a bit boring, and yes I'm reading between the lines here and again yes, everyone is entitled to an oppinion but comments like..."makes the A-99 look like a P&S" just beggars belief. Go to a good photography gallery and before you enter you're asked to try and identify the cameras used and you will be there all day because there's no way for anyone to tell what equipment the photographer used.Todays cameras are amazing pieces of technology, end of.
SnapHappy32, I couldn't agree more, and it's nice to see a rational point made with some decent corollary.
I'm sure we all get just as annoyed with the fanboys, those that blow things out of proportion, consider only one side of an issue or (at worst) just spend their time accusing DPR of all sorts of heinous crimes. The fact remains though, that this is the comment section below a (expensive) camera review. It is for analysis of the camera, and analysis will tend to be quite limted (though not necessarily pointless) without comparison to the competition.
I actually think in the case of the 6D/D600 there is quite a lot to discuss (humbling, quality control, sensor comparison, dual cards, build quality, autofocus, gadgets... going in favour of either model at times) before we're silenced by "it's the person behind the camera" or "get out and take photos" (WE KNOW!!!) and I also think it's healthy for the market that this discussion occurs. It also can genuinely inform a purchase.
RuthC: This is just beautiful, with its unusual coloured (in my experience) frond-to-be. A well-deserved top spot in this interesting challenge. Ruth :-)
Joris1632: Seems to be an excellent lens, pity it tilts horizons and makes all buildings lean to the right .................... ;-)
He's joking! Some of the sample shots are a bit wonky that's all.
Excellent - really enjoyed reading this. I'm choosing between the RX100 and the LX7. I primarily want the camera for underwater use (yes, with a housing...), but I also want a pocketable camera for when I don't want to bring my Canon 7D. With housings (Ikelite), they both end up at a similar price (the LX7 housing is more expensive due to the ergonomics).
Advantages of the RX100:- Awesome light gathering at the wide angle (it's the wide angle i need underwater)- 20MP- Great DR and noise control- Good AF, I think...- Truly pocketable for non underwater use- I've fallen in love with the spec sheet - sorry!
Advantages of LX7:- Wider wide angle- Superfast shooting (is this RAW?)- Camera will be the cheaper part of the underwater setup (useful in case i fail to seal the housing properly.
They both look like great cameras. I'm probably leaning towards the RX100 (could you tell?) but was wondering if anyone had any useful info or opinions to share.
neo_nights: I really liked that ginger girl :)
Same. It's a good job I don't do test shots for DPR, they'd all be of her.
Sad Joe: I plan to attend next months Open day at Calumet - the Canon staff will of course be there - anything you Canon fans would like me to tell them face to face about the c**p 6D and how we all wish our lenses would fit the Nikon D600 instead ?
I don't think anyone was disputing which would sell more - Canon have by far the largest market share. The 6D will be good for landscapes, I just suspect that the Nikon offerings will be better.
fanderso3: to Alberto," Also can't use the lenses for the market of the aps-c cameras......another betrayal from Canon."that's not betrayel...NONE of the full frame cameras can use the aps-c (EF-S) lenses, but all aps-c cameras can use the EF-S as well as the EF lenses.
I've been pretty critical of this camera when compared to the excellent looking Nikons, but I'm really not that bothered about their ability to fit crop lenses which only illuminate a small part of the sensor. If you're buying a full frame camera then you should be buying some decent glass for it, otherwise you'll be wasting your money. Granted, I'd rather have the option to fit my EF-S lenses than not, but I'd know that pictures taken with them could've been so much better. Also I knew that they wouldn't fit FF when I bought them, so no complaints over that particular issue.
Dan Tong: There is no question that with just about any of the new cameras from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Fuji, Sigma etc. it is much easier to take really good photos than at any other time in the past. In fact, this true even with the kit lenses.
However, under some difficult conditions whether, poor lighting, fast moving subjects, tough environments (extreme cold or heat, moisture, extreme vibration, the capabilities of the camera (as a tool), may become extremely important. So too does the weight of the camera and lenses when you must carry everything that you need on your back, on foot away from any other mode of transportation.
You're dead right, though I'm amazed that this should even need saying. Basically you're either in the market for a c£2k camera or you're not. If you feel that specs such as class leading DR, 40ish AF points, 2 cards etc would only get in the way of your art, then presumably you'll buy something considerably cheaper.
I'd actually like all of those things, not because I plan to forget about proper exposure and composition, but because when I've taken a photo with all my best efforts (perhaps constrained by conditions at the time), I'd like it to look the best that it possibly could.
Surely nobody is in the category where they don't wish to have the best spec that their c£2k can buy, but do wish to spend the full amount anyway. That'd be crazy. Some people are forced in to this position through lens investment (and good lenses they are too btw), but let's tell it like it is: This camera is a disappointment, whether you'll end up buying it or not.
cgarrard: This whole Lunar thing is turning into one big Hassel for them.
It'd help if it wasn't so Blad looking...