Yes, tried both, 6D is lacking - not comparable to the D750. It's barely comparable to the D610. If your main concern is ergonomics, that's a personal thing. I don't much care for Canon ergonomics. The controls, layout, menu system - all are much more natural and logical on Nikon for me.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Nikon D750 or the Canon 6D
- Thread starter jjmontiel82
- Start date
I picked up both the 6D and the D750 in their respective showrooms. The 6D was a "yeah, maybe I could get used to holding this fat brick... huh, AF system is a bit limited, maybe I could live with that compromise" and the d750 was "wow, holding this body is comfortable! Wow, AF points!" so now I'm in the process of selling off my EF lenses and figuring out which Nikon lenses to replace them with.
Admittedly with the D750 there is also "what do all these crazy controls do?" but that's just a re-learning process. And this early into the re-learning process, I'm pretty convinced I'm going to prefer the Nikon controls in the longer term anyway.
The only thing I'm not so keen on having moved to Nikon is that some of the current production lenses seem to be stuck in the 1990s when it comes to technology. Seriously- Nikon is still using their screwdriver blade tech on current lenses?
Admittedly with the D750 there is also "what do all these crazy controls do?" but that's just a re-learning process. And this early into the re-learning process, I'm pretty convinced I'm going to prefer the Nikon controls in the longer term anyway.
The only thing I'm not so keen on having moved to Nikon is that some of the current production lenses seem to be stuck in the 1990s when it comes to technology. Seriously- Nikon is still using their screwdriver blade tech on current lenses?
Last edited:
Umm..the screwdriver lenses are labeled "D" lenses and I don't think Nikon makes them anymore.
The current lineup is "G" lenses and there is an excellent selection of FX lenses. If you are willing to look at third party lenses from Sigma and Tamron, you are get some excellent ones too at more affordable prices.
Nikon 14-24 f/2.8
Nikon 24-70 f/2.8
Nikon 20 f/1.8
Nikon 35 f/1.8
Nikon 58 f/1.4
Nikon 50 f/1.4
Nikon 70-200 f/2.8
Nikon 24 f/1.4
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8
Tamron 70-200 f/2.8
Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art
Sigma 35 f/1.8
Albert Silver
Senior Member
Although still purchasable, much as the D lenses, they are not current technology by Nikon. One thing I did when I compared systems (not just bodies) was to make a selection of lenses that I found attractive and affordable. The lineup for Nikon was:
24-120 f/4 - I knew that would be my first jack-of-all-trades lens if i got for a good price (bought for $600)
35 f/1.8G (I have now opted for the Tamron SP 35 f/1.8 VC and will receive in a couple of weeks)
85 f/1.8G (simply amazing quality for value - next in line most likely)
70-200 f/2.8 or f/4 (will decide when time comes)
Last edited:
i stand corrected. In that focal length you can try the Sigma 24-105 f/4
Rich Rosen
Senior Member
Just a point to ponder: Unlike Nikon, Canon full frame cameras will not take EF-S lenses, whereas Nikon FX cameras will take DX lenses. That means that your 55-250 and 18-55 would not be able to be used on a 6D. So if you chose Canon, you would starting from scratch anyhow, or pretty much so because the 50 is still usable on the 6D. Since I have never used the Canon 6D, and used the D750 for only a few minutes, your plan to try them both out makes the most sense, to me. I know I don't feel comfortable with the Canon user interface, but I have been using Nikon since 1994. You probably feel the opposite.
What? They're still supporting older lenses, but I can't think of a lens left in the current lineup that has screw drive.
Last edited:
If you mean current as in currently for sale from Nikon, then yes, there are quite a few D lenses still in production. But of course they are old designs.
photowurks
Forum Enthusiast
I look at DXOMark figures for DR vs. ISO (much to the chagrin of some). After 1600, the cameras are pretty much comparable for DR figures (small edge to 6D if you're being strict about it). If you're looking for improved image quality, both cameras are going to deliver that to you at all ISOs over the T2i, as well as at the higher ISOs. But, if you want better image at ISOs less than 1600, get the D750. There are other features that may be of value to you so make a consideration for them next.
Use the new studio comparison tool to get an idea of the quality of the noise at ISO 1600 or greater. This may influence your decision on the 6D or the D750. Then consider the OEM lens and accessory system you'd be getting in to, if there's something there that you are planning to grow in to.
I meant the old models from the 1990s that are still currently being produced, so still "current lineup" in my opinion.
I'm glad they are still being produced (I'm about to buy one!) but it's kind of funny to me that they haven't been embarrassed enough to update the technology and at the same time charge more for than their Canon equivalents which focusing technology which is two generations newer. This is only comparing the 105 and 135 DC lenses, mind you. Looks like the 80-200 2.8 is still made, whereas Canon stopped offering that decades ago and I'm not aware if there are any other screwdriver lenses in production.
Don't get me wrong, and I certainly don't intend to start a Canon vs Nikon argument. I appreciate having the choice of these 'old' lenses. It's just an amusing approach to product management.
Anyway, apologies for going off on a bit of a tangent.
Yes, good point. By current, I mean the latest version. Some the last to be updated are just recent such as 20mm prime.
They still sell the screw drive versions - Nikon doesn't strand their users like Canon did.
But they have finally updated the most of the last of them.
Canon's aperture technology is also newer. But then I've never seen a Nikon aperture fail. And Nikon's mount seems to prevent some wider aperture lenses from being designed like 85 1.2.
I think they still make the recently refreshed 20mm 2.8 etc. and even one of the micros. That is, they still show them in the catalogue on nikon.com. They've mostly been refreshed, but I find it amazing that they still make the old designs when are arguably more rugged.
Why not?
But it's somewhat relevant to the decision process.
They always break - they have a very finite lifespan. I've seen it happen several times on Nikon and Canon workhorse lenses.
Overall, the D750 looks better at all ISOs - detail, DR, sharpness, low light, noise etc. But the 6D is 4 year old technology, so what do we expect? It holds it's own pretty well for an older camera.
gipper51
Veteran Member
As a Canon shooter, I'll run and duck for cover after posting this 
While the D750 is a better camera in probably about every way on a spec sheet, don't discount the humble 6D especially for the price. I have this camera, along with a 7D Mark II and a Sony A7R. The 6D may be the one I enjoy shooting most, it's probably the best in the category of "easiest to shoot with stellar results". The camera just gets out of your way and delivers great images, no fuss.
Sometimes when shooting with the 7D or the Sony I'm adjusting the techy options and settings a lot more, and I think my pics suffer for it as I'm less engaged with image making and more into playing with the camera. There's less to fiddle with on the 6D, and I just shut up and shoot. Maybe it's an example of "less is more"? Although the camera is not lesser in the IQ department. Great all around but in low light the camera is stunning, especially for the price.
So yeah, it's weird that for me that my least sophisticated camera is most often the one I take. But check the Canon forums and you'll see I'm not the only one. This camera has a very high user satisfaction rating. The money saved with this camera could go a long way towards lens choices.
Just my $0.02.
While the D750 is a better camera in probably about every way on a spec sheet, don't discount the humble 6D especially for the price. I have this camera, along with a 7D Mark II and a Sony A7R. The 6D may be the one I enjoy shooting most, it's probably the best in the category of "easiest to shoot with stellar results". The camera just gets out of your way and delivers great images, no fuss.
Sometimes when shooting with the 7D or the Sony I'm adjusting the techy options and settings a lot more, and I think my pics suffer for it as I'm less engaged with image making and more into playing with the camera. There's less to fiddle with on the 6D, and I just shut up and shoot. Maybe it's an example of "less is more"? Although the camera is not lesser in the IQ department. Great all around but in low light the camera is stunning, especially for the price.
So yeah, it's weird that for me that my least sophisticated camera is most often the one I take. But check the Canon forums and you'll see I'm not the only one. This camera has a very high user satisfaction rating. The money saved with this camera could go a long way towards lens choices.
Just my $0.02.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum