Just Posted: Canon EOS 6D In-depth Review

hi everyone, i don't get it: why compare the 6d to 5dIII and not to 5dII

i'm a 60d user and have been waiting for my chance to get back to FF; if the D600 hadn't have the oil/dust problem, I would buy one - but it has.

so i'll buy a lightly used 5dII, which basically would bring me all the 6d quality, better construction, no gadget (gps/wifi), real video hability... of course it is a bit bigger/heavier, don't accept SD cards... but except that, why prefer a 6d to a near new 5dII? Can someone explain it to me please?

An error in the review: "The camera's AF system is decidedly less sophisticated than the more expensive Canon DSLRS and is limited to 11 autofocus points, less than a third fewer than is found on its direct competitor, the Nikon D600."

It is not "less than a third FEWER" (which would be correct for 27+ focus points), it is either "less than a third" (or more precise, "just about one fourth as many"), or "more that three times fewer" (or better "almost four times fewer").
Also, "entry level Rebel-like" comparison would be appropriate.

I am maybe one of the first 6D buyers . I wrote in the forum about 500 comments ago. I took the 6D in field trips in India and Korea and I have to say the camera is fantastic :
lightweight : you can carry it for 4-5 hours without getting tired
Ergonomic : perfect handling (at least for my hand size) . All the dials and buttons can be operated without leaving your sight from the viewfinder
Autofocus : fantastic . Never lost a shot in any light condition
Highlights : very forgiving . Very smooth transition , few clippings
Silent shot mode: very useful in several occasion
High Iso : excellent .
Canon Lens: the kit lens is a L series 24-105 f4. Great traveling companion : light and sharp, I agree with many , this lens has notable distortion at 24mm and vignetting at full but you can fix both in LR, so no worries

You can see some photos in 500px : user name mega-pixel

5d3 iso performance isnt worse than 6D
t4i iso performance isnt worse than t3i

I owned a D600 but packed it in because of sensor issues. Take quite a few indoor shots around the house and the 6D is wayyyy better at focusing in low light. The D600 is probably better for action shooting if the subject is within that little focus area. The 6D seems to work fantastically for most shooting situations and have taken some bif shots that turned out very well with their 100-400 lens. Certainly the 5D mkiii is better for that, but the 6D is pretty good.

I think its more of a specs game that DP is playing on this one.

Honest question. One reason for the lower score (over the D600) is the autofocus system is 'less robust'. Can you expand on that? Granted there are less points, and not as many cross type (by a long way!), but the Nikon review hints at poor low light accuracy and failure, whereas the same section of the Canon suggests (even on the non-cross types) that auto-focus is accurate even in low light. Reading what is written in the two comparable sections I would probably conclude that the Canon has the 'more robust' system. Obviously this is not the case? Which has the FUNCTIONALLY better AF system?

This camera will suit me just fine and I would be upgrading from my 60D.

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.

The built-in flash is absolute no way for me, I am always using external one. I do not use video, I do not need swivel screen, I hate sports, dogs and birds ))). I will probably miss 1/8000, but I can live without it and neither 6d or d600 has it. In overall, 6d is just a great pure camera without any flaws for me. It cost me 200 euros more, but I think I will spend the same amount of money for sending d600 forth and back for cleaning the sensor (I am not shooting too much, and probably will not pass 3000 mark after the warranty will end).

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.

The best review is from the real users. Yesterday I have looked for the Amazon.com. d600 has 4 star rating on average, and all 1 to 3 stars which is 70 reviews out of 223 (31%) complains about horrible dust and oil issues. As already noted here, it is ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS that DPR does not take that into account, this must be a very-very serious concern!
On the other hand, Canon 6d has only 6 out of 58 2-3 stars rating (none of 1) and average of 4.5. None of the users with 2-3 rating report any technical problems, just complaining about setting up wi-fi (RTFM!), of course comparing to d600, etc.

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?

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.

I am a happy owner of the 6D, and I'm sorry to note that you throw mud on him, especially when put in comparison with Nikon D600. The 6D and 'a machine specialist lightweight and compact, with essential and interesting features for those who make certain types of photography. The files that churns out are crisp, sharp, high color rendering, and a recovery of the shadows at 100 and 200 ISO truly remarkable. In high iso behaves traordinariamente, giving file with low noise even at iso 6400-10 thousand. Maybe it 's the best home sensor Canon. The central AF point and 'very fast and accurate, and allows you to fit even in low light conditions. The sides are rather more 'slow, but very accurate. If they were all on the cross would be ideal. The 6D and 'a great camera for those who do landscape photography, street, reportage and portraits. Sorry for my Bad English
Here my shots with 6D: http//500px.com/magps.
Nikon D600 86%. But nobody talks about the sensor dirt and green file?

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....

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.

3) planned and well executed gelding: no mobile screen, less direct controls (especially taking out the stick controller), no flash remote control (unless you pay to add external), simplified auto focus, lowered framerate
4) addition of useless gimmicks like GPS and Wi-Fi. I have read a couple idiotic comments that you can use your mobile phone as a screen. Unless blessed with additional hands, I wonder how they manage to direct the camera, zoom on subject and operate the rest of controls and focus and shot. Unless they take pics of their own ... legs. I think that most of these guys try to impress us letting us know they have smartphones and tablets. And, anyway, both GPS and Wi-Fi could have been added if and when needed. BTW, the option of not having these is priced by Canon at just 50 USD/EUR, which is a spit in the eye.

The comments here veer a lot from essential: how 6D is in itself. Apart from the IQ that is definitely better than any APS-C of Canon, the overall experience (yes, I have briefly shot with 6D) is poor:
1) small body with poor holding ergonomic (I just wonder - and feel pity - about the tiny hands and weakened muscles of the ones who praise it's smallness and lightness).

2) plasticky and frail feeling of the plastic clad on mag-alloy frame body

This nagging perception that Canon sensors are in anyway inferior to their Sony / Nikon counterparts exists only in theory... and is primarily propagated by DXO...

Despite the extravagant ratings that DXO awards Sony sensors... the reality is that Sony camera's doen't even come close to touching Canons image quality... in both RAW & JPEG...

Isn't it miraculous with Toshiba's foray into sensor development... Nikon manages to catapult that maiden sensor to take the top spot amongst DXO's APS-C sensors... considering the fact that noise is eating away at detail beyond ISO 3200... talk about bias...

The 6D is an outstanding camera as far as pure IQ goes... The level of captured / retained detail in anything from 12800 and above is simply awe inspiring... Personally i'd rather have better noise control compared to better dynamic range... Nikon in true fashion try to give you the best of both worlds - a jack of all trades... Canon on the other hand is the master of noise control...

As many comments said before I think comparing and rating this camera only by side by spec comparsion is not doing justice.
6D wins on any recent DSLRS on the realism and color or Film like characteristics this camera brings to the digital world. Compare to D600 shots which is still digital on first glance and clinical on details and colors. Nothing compared to to this camera bringin the emotion and realism film like simulattion and finer details onto the digital front. This may be the advantage of Canon higher end DSLRS brining the warmth and tone of light onto the image depending on the time of the day and season.
These qualities are simply overlooked by reviwers and peepers when they are busy comparing the spec sheet and technical details.

for testimony look at the sample images on www.techradar.com

That explains why the full review was delayed, DP wanted to give Nikon enough time to calm d600 users down.

Thankfully I got my 6d few weeks ago otherwise this review might have changed my decision. In the future I will take these reviews like a grain of sand.

Very happy with my 6d, its a great camera.

The judgement/statements in the review doesn't add up plus the test shots looks all right vs. the statements associated with it. I can' really make up Dpreview score and Silver award. It’s like they are saying the results are great but because it's poor spec we couldn't give it a gold award. I thought the whole idea of a good camera is how well it handles in the hands of the photographer and the results specific to the application. People should seek advice from experts based on the application e.g. people whom are good at portrait, landscape, events etc. I’m not a pro but I follow some and these guys can really relate with their gear. DPreview and other ones like this is good for first pass thought of the equipment but you’ll need to do more research by your own before you purchase this fine equipment’s. Canon, Nikon have been in this game more longer than any of this sites… they know what their doing - it’s market driven thing and you always can’t please everybody.

It is hard to imagine that canon still produces such hideous noise at low ISO levels in the shadow areas. This is a HUGE problem on the 5DmkIII and 1DX rendering them almost useless for landscape work as pulling detail out of shadows should not bring such high levels of noise. It wouldn't be that much of a problem if the canon sensors had decent dynamic range but they are a whole generation behind everybody else, specially Nikon which has been delivering over 2 stops beyond canon for a few years now. Because of this, one almost has to always pull detail out of shadows and thus the noise problem becoming even more severe. And why can't they just do what Nikon/sony do and deliver clean shadows at LOW ISO? I mean this is ISO100 for god's sake! why is there noise!

After a brief inspection of the nice and detailed in-depth review I feel a nice, warm feeling inside. I am very satisfied that the EOS 6D is the camera it is, now I do not regret getting new APS-C designed lenses for my Canon EOS 60D, becouse moving to an affordable state of the art FF camera from Canon is simply not optional. Where to begin? Fixed LCD, horrible moiré patterns in video (no improvement in this area whatsoever since the 5D MkII or the 60D), flash sync and fastest shutter speed worse than on my 60D (I use 1/8000 more often thatn I thought I will), price...

Again, thank you Canon. I can grab my 60D tomorrow and enjoy shotting with it (and with the Sigma 8-16, 17-50 and 50-150), with no questions in the back of my head about what has improved since I got the 60D. Becouse the answer is realy - nothing important for me. I do not care about the number of AF points or framerate, around 5 fps is still enough for me.

Now I am really interested in the new Sigma 30 mm f1.4 EX DC.

It is not bad except for the 2010 resolution and 2007 autofocus.

<feels well built and solid> by Scorehound

Just a U.S. problem of splendid isolation, outside demands more than this. They look further.

First of all, I am quite amused by all the reviews comparing the 6D to the 5D mkIII and Nikon D600. First and foremost, who cares what those cameras can do. One is $1500 more money and the other isn't even the same brand. Unless you're in the market for either system it doesn't matter what Nikon does. I couldn't care less.

I have had the 6D for about a month now and I can say with confidence that this camera is well worth the $1500 savings over the 5D mkIII. The images are great and the camera is very responsive and zippy. The default shutter noise is so low it's almost silent and the camera feels great in the hands. With the BG-113 Battery Grip attached this camera has some serious bulk and weight, and it looks and feels well built and solid.

The images it produces are fantastic, and the high ISO images are pleasing and more like film grain than traditional noise.

Despite some setbacks as far as the AF system, this camera is a joy to shoot with.

Try it before you judge it.

Full frame 35 mm comes from the Mr. Barnack (ancient chief Leica engineer) size out of the 1920s when just plastic movie rolls of film forced him to 35 mm. Minds get obsessed with sizing. Like a religion.

The future is the software reading out sensors from mechatronics (the camera, no more film). The importance of size shrinks rapidly, like modern cars coming down from their physical bulk, less steel but more intelligence.

This Canon FF camera (me-too product) like the Nikon FFs or Sony FFs (translucent, my god) - to name them - are over their technological peaks, already. Industry just wants to get your hard earned consumer dollars – now, before common knowledge is in the markets priced in.

There are so many equivalents or better choices available. Buy smart.

Recently I've read a comparative test: the new Audi A6 vs the new BMW 5. One of these at the end of the review got the first place. Let's say it was the Audi (I can't remember). But does this mean that the BMW 5 is "worse"?!? So, if you want to compare the D600 with the 6D and claim that the 6D got "just" the silver... then please remember that it is a wonderful camera and the real world is only about personal taste at this quality level. Driving any of the A6 or 5 series will be a pleasure, taking photos with the D600 or the 6D will be the same. Cheers! :)

DPR scored RAW IQ extremely high for the 6D, but with even a quick glance at the RAW test scene, you can see that colors are not as rich as the other FF cameras. I think DPR missed this aspect in their scoring of the 6D's RAW IQ (but perhaps it's mentioned somewhere in the review).

DxOMark gave a lower color depth score to the 6D relative to other FF cameras so other testers have noted the way it renders color.

One of the reasons why the 5D3, D600 or D800 high ISO images look so excellent is they don't lose saturation. Clearly weak color/contrast can be fixed in post, but it's an extra step.

stop talking jazz on here and go out and snap some frames and create something worth looking at. The camera's just a tool. You're the talent.

I vote with my piggy bank, and my piggy bank says that I should have enough pennies saved to buy my new 6D by Christmas.

So what's better? A Nikon D600 or a Canon 6D? There's only one way to find out.... Fight!*

* Or perhaps a Challenge?

This camera looks good. He lacks the Nikon D600 sensor.

Was anybody here at Bernabeu? The D4 was deployed by the usual suspects, but I did not spot any D600s. 6D was there, easy to see at the tunnel. 1D numbers still strong.