peevee1: The decision to make lenses in white is dumb - everybody looking from far enough will think people shoot with Canon L glass - free ad for Canon, no ad for Sony. At least silver was distinctive.And I have seen what white paint on Canons looks like after many hours in the sun and handling without squeaky-clean gloves - dirty yellowish shouting "I am old and tired, please replace me" - an expensive message to make.
Yep - well done Sony - everyone knows that telephone glass in WHITE means only one brand - CANON! Having VERY BIG blue Zeiss stickers might help a little. Perhaps Sony HQ has kept that upgrade for the Mark Two versions ?
I'm sure that these will both be excellent products if only Sony could sell a few upmarket DSLR's for them to fit on to ! All joking apart - would love to see how the 50 1.4 Sony/Zeiss stacks up against the older manual focus 50 1.4 Zeiss (with its well known CA issues) - bring the test on DPREview!
Well, if this were the new Canon 7D MK2 overall I'd be pleased. Over the past 5 years Nikon has pushed its DX range forward whilst Canon has had a range of cameras that confuse potential users and owners - Canon have introduced new features yes - video - yes improvements in overall quality - doubtful at best. As a Canon fan I hope the Nikon 7100 will KICK Canon into doing something decent as a reply. But I'm guessing not...another small nail in Canon's coffin.
Built in flash is OK - sometimes it can be a life saver but I agree remote flash is normally better. Here again the Nikon D600 has a better spec than the 6D. Faster sync speed (so what) but full access to the Nikon flash system which is pretty good without having to buy an add on module or a top of the range flash gun.
Vignes: Sad Joe, looks like you don’t want Canon gear anymore and may want to move to Nikon. Which is understandable. There are also lots of folks who have moved from Nikon to Canon. This is an individual matter and you have your cons about the Canon gear. The Wi-Fi and GPS is not new tech but it’s implemented first time in a FF DSLR, which I think will be followed by many. The next D600 would probably have it in built. Nikon has been packaging the external GPS and Wi-Fi with D600 in some countries. Why are they doing this – because they can see the treat from 6D but only in specific countries? I have a colleague who wants to buy a DSLR for the first time and guess what, 6D was in his list not D600. Look at the final package for a first time purchaser: D600 with cheap Nikon lens and 6D with L series lens with all the latest gizmo. How would a first timer see this? Canon vs. Nikon marketing?
A most interesting reply - my 1st SLR was a Pentax MX I moved to Nikon (still have a Nikon FM from 1979) and some Nikon kit. At one point I have a Nikon F3 T (wish I still had that one !!!) but several years ago moved across to Canon because of better ISO and better AF - my main reasons for sticking with Canon now are: 1: A lack of money - things are tight so no longer money to burn 2: 8 decent Canon lenses including some L glass. These factors however do not blind me to the fact that Nikon has OVERTAKEN Canon in ALL important factors/areas apart from DLSR video - which is of great interest too me. To have a brand new Canon FF DSLR with DUFF video is unforgivable. If /when I have serious money to burn on new kit I might well move back into Nikon - I know I am not alone. In fact the only people who are BLIND are Canon. I'm at inFocus (NEC Birmingham England) early March and intend to tell the Canon reps how I and many others feel directly!
hud80: As for me, I chose 6d because d600 grip is absolutely horrible, IMO, and 5dm3 is to big for my hands, while I do not want to handle 36-40mb files from d800. I was changing the complete system (pentax + 5 lenses and flash, very slow AF) and was open-minded for everything. After 5 minute comparison in the shop I understood that this horrible grip does not worth additional features that I barely will use. I am used with mostly only central AF point without tracking. Although, I am now also playing with side-points, I want them to be more on the edges, like d300 from what I have seen. d600 has most distant points identical to 6d. I do not need that 3x additional points in between, so from this point of view cameras are on par.
Whilst I am a committed Canon fan boy I'm not pleased with the 6D spec and the reviews now confirm my worst fears, if I were in the market for a new FF camera I might well buy Nikon D600 - HOWEVER I've used one and I have to agree that grip/ body is way too small - can't please everyone I guess - the body form of the older D700 was simply brilliant - why on why didn't Nikon stick with that ? Answer - cost cutting and the desire to have the smallest/ lightest FF on the market - Nikon put marketing ahead of real users needs. With senior management at BOTH Canon & Nikon making simple mistakes how long before we have a new DSLR/camera device brand coming from China that blows them ALL away? Mad thinking - hell no.If I'd said this 20 years ago, that Japan was heading into the dustbin people would have laughed at me. Well, time as they say will tell.
Almost 3 years on and the lazy giants Canon & Nikon have nothing like as interesting a products as the X range. Shame on them ! Only Sony have picked up the fight - but at far far too high a price point. Rock on Fuji - keep up the good work !
ThomasSwitzerland: One should not underestimate the financial powers of Canon and Nikon. The tech wave is favoring Nikon for now. Canon will come back again after having realized that they have lost the vision for the time being.
Nevertheless, the present euphoria with affordable Full Frame to the public means: get out of it. It’s like when a taxi driver recommends stock investments. The future is not FF in its present state.
The coming years are in the mobile and initiatives pushing FF to medium format strengths like the d800 jumped on. Interesting times ahead.
Software and the sensors define the game, not the casings around. Mirror less like Panasonic and the new entry like the d800e are setting the upcoming wave.
Again I find myself agreeing with someone else's postings - the future does belong to very large sensor products and also very tiny but very high quality sensors, within 5 years there will be products (note products not just traditional camera bodies) that will make todays highest performers seem tame.
Alec_c: In a nutshell, a camera that might have been great but put down on purpose, that has the ability to take some great pictures if you can overcame handling difficulties, which should not been there.Overall, that Canon smart samurai so full of himself (see pic of his interview) , should really be proud looking how a universe of Canon users continue to support his nice life of leaking on our heads. There will be people to buy that, as there were ones buying the 60D, which is a similar concept. Not me.
I could not agree more ! My 40D is good but I want better - and all its replacements have suffered faults or poor performance in one area or another. Canon must try harder to earn my money and the 6d simply isn't anywhere good enough. How Nikon must have laughed when they saw the 6D spec for the 1st time....I'm not a happy Canon fanboy...at all.
Sad Joe: So not only has Canon ensured they 'gave' us the minimum spec apart from a few headliners they also included a duff video performance as well. I disliked this camera from the off and the debate got quite heated a while back when I suggested that the 6D would be regarded as a poor camera by history and a huge mistake made by Canon - so I have avoided adding any new comments until this full review. I now regard the 6D as a VERY poor camera and whist no camera is perfect the Nikon D600 would appear to be the camera of choice for those new or changing over and wishing to go FF without massive spend.Unless you HAVE to go FF for lowest cost and HAVE to stick with Canon the 6D IS ONE TO AVOID. The EOS- M and its rubbish AF system further confirm my views (as a long time Canon user) CANON YOU HAVE LOST THE PLOT and the 6D / EOS-M are two more nails in your coffin. Number one brand ? Not for much longer....
Indeed they are - I have the great pleasure of using a Canon 1D X a couple of weeks ago and a 5D3 a few months ago, both superb and if I was still earning money shooting weddings I love either or both. My point is that Canon are relying on people being drawn into the 6D by 'toy town' features that as a semi pro/ ex pro I don't wish to spend money on. The rot set in when the Nikon D3 hit the market, then the D700 - both of which I have used - both superb. Since then Canon have been left standing and the 6D simply doesn't cut the mustard. The ONE area that Canon still has a lead over Nikon is DSLR video - the 5D3 has a brilliant video mode (we'll forget the much cheaper Panasonic GH system for a moment) so what did Canon feel it could GET AWAY with such POOR performance from the 6D market place? Sorry Canon your taking your customers for granted and over time you'll end up paying. Nikon did the same over AF and its taken them almost 30 years to begin to take top slot again.
Pleased that you are pleased with the 6D, no doubt it can and will produce great images - if not so great video. My point is that this is the 4th FF semi pro spec camera from Canon (5d/5d2/5d3/6d) so we all expect more even at a lower price. For me the 6d FAILS on some simple basic, poor AF (becoming normal from Canon ? Recall the 7D had problems as does the EOS-M) poor to no AF tracking possible, slow bust, slow read write times, one card slot but worst of all poor video - my Canon VC 10 camera with seperate VHS recorder could record a wall of bricks without the bricks appearing to move around - so almost 30 years later why can't a brand new Canon DLSR do at least that well? I have a 40D and like many have found the replacement models lacking and thus have not moved forward despite wishing to do so. Canon will have to try a lot harder to win my money. Something like the Nikon D600 is the spec I want NOT the 6d with its wifi & GPS nonsense and poor video.
Canon 6d - the camera that just keeps on giving - to its rivals!
So not only has Canon ensured they 'gave' us the minimum spec apart from a few headliners they also included a duff video performance as well. I disliked this camera from the off and the debate got quite heated a while back when I suggested that the 6D would be regarded as a poor camera by history and a huge mistake made by Canon - so I have avoided adding any new comments until this full review. I now regard the 6D as a VERY poor camera and whist no camera is perfect the Nikon D600 would appear to be the camera of choice for those new or changing over and wishing to go FF without massive spend.Unless you HAVE to go FF for lowest cost and HAVE to stick with Canon the 6D IS ONE TO AVOID. The EOS- M and its rubbish AF system further confirm my views (as a long time Canon user) CANON YOU HAVE LOST THE PLOT and the 6D / EOS-M are two more nails in your coffin. Number one brand ? Not for much longer....
4k is the future - unlike the poor current 3D systems. Yep - roll on 4k at bargain prices - sure to come just before 4K 3D !!
Well - its BACK TO THE FUTURE - OM1 (now OM-D) MX (now MX-1) good luck to Pentax for 2013 - I look forward to the ME Super -1 and the FULL FRAME LX- 1 !!
peevee1: Strange camera. On the one hand, it is clearly aimed at a non-professional - GPS, Scene modes, light weight, simplistic AF system... On the other it drops articulated screen and built-in flash... what's Canon's problem?
? Can only agree - the 6D is simply half baked.....
xiod_crlx: Low DR, lack of Flash, really outdated AF system, no second card option, impossible to use EF-S for upgrading users (e.g. no "cropped mode") - nice move Canon!
D600 with the same price has everything plus all of features 6D doesn't have.Still, army of Canon followers WILL buy it (good experience about existing gear, not to betray old good friend, etc...). And in most cases nice Canon lenses will "do the rest" to produce excellent results!
As for 2013 it is "OKAY".
What will be in 2014 when D800's matrix will fall into new Nikon's budget FF model with the same price as D600? :)
Currently Nikon has a number of nice FF sensors for different tasks - it means it can make cheaper versions of FF cameras out of PROs very quickly and inexpensively (12-16-24-36Mp) = total line up, in a long run it seems Nikon is way far ahead and those upgrading to FF (from Canon, Sony, - whatever) should think carefully about it
As mainly a Canon user I have to agree with your comments regarding the half baked 6D - HOWEVER the D600 images have a green cast, the video is poor (Canon still lead the pack here) and as yet no problems with muck on brand new sensors. Both Nikon & Canon have failed to deliver the ideal camera and as BOTH a Canon & Nikon user (I prefer Canon overall) I feel let down by BOTH brands.
Rbrt: Those 6D test images look sharper than the D600 to me. Am I the only one who thinks so?
Its more than sharpness - Canon's may not have the 'best' sensors on test but they DO have the best colours...
Well, as expected what the 6d does it does well, but the AF system is the massive let down we all knew it would be. Buying a FF camera even one at a reduced price sticks in my guts knowing that the AF system from much cheaper APS-C cameras are much better. Canon should be thankful that Nikon have cocked up their new FF camera just as badly - the D600 has images with a green cast on images and dirt/ muck on the sensor.....seems that despite waiting most of us hard pressed camera users will keep their hands deeply inside their pockets. 6D MK2 anyone?
Love my S90 which is simply brilliant (yes I know it has a Sony sensor) if it was lost I'd get another quick as (or its updated replacement) it's just so quick and direct - it puts my Canon & Nikon DSLR's to shame...