Reading mode: Light Dark

6D VS 5DMKIII what does 6D lack?

Go to last post
BAK said:
I have a Fujifilm X30 that can do a lot of picture taking.

Weighs very little. Fits in a pocket.

There are lots of other little cameras.

I picked the X30 because of the overall quality, and the deal-maker was the eye level viewfinder and the somewhat tilting back.

BAK
Click to expand...
For exactly those reasons, but find it's controls way too fiddly for it to be much fun. Sigh.

I may buy a 6D instead of waiting to see what the 6D II looks like out of impatience. (I have a 5D II and lots of glass.)
 
Sounds like you want to change systems mainly for the interest of trying a new system. I'm not sure if this really makes much sense unless you have money to burn.

I've just moved from Canon to Nikon, and in the processes I am unloading lenses which I have collected over a 20 year period. It's not a large collection, but includes L zooms, so it's not a trivial move for me. I tested the Canon 5 and 6 cameras, and decided to move to a D750- for me I couldn't think of a single area where I preferred the Canon options and the D750 had technical and huge ergonomic advantages, and it was the ergonomics that drive the switch.

To me a body isn't something that is supposed to "light my fire". In order of least to most importance, a body is basic tool that gives me the base functionality required to let me mount the lenses that I want, to get images that I will treasure.

If you want a challenge, perhaps look for one in another direction when it comes to photography- improving existing technique, branching out into another style of shooting?
 
Last edited:
dog house riley said:
Thanks to you who has jumped on to my post so soon? After reading your responses, I Too am thinking of the 6D, its not imperative I have 5 DIII, but I do like its full function.

I'm no longer shooting the things i used too, today its for entertainment, not dead serious. I still shoot for our local zoo, I volunteer my time and photos, no charge to zoo. Lately I've been using my D7100 instead of my D2X or D700 its lighter, and using my 80 400 VR. As a lightweight kit, due to past health issues, I'm using my D3300 as my day to day kit, its a fine little kit.

If you should check my past profiles health is a serious issue, just now getting to where i can walk more than a short distance. I had wanted the Nikon D600 when it appeared? but then the roof caved in, and with all its issues i wanted no part of the D6XX series.

My D700 is a fine camera and heavy, add my grip for the 8 fps rate and its a beast!, I just never warmed up to it. It still after 5 years has less than 20K "clicks"

A lot of your descriptions are more the way i shoot today, more so than years ago, I don't need a high frame rate 5 or 6 is fine, buffer not on top of my list, I shoot RAW, and use LR6, center focus point works for me most times and not fast action like BIF, gave up on that,I shoot song birds in my blind in back yard.

The 17 40 to buy from a friend is just fine for me, she used it on her 60D, for several years, but she just never liked it, now even less.

So information of the 6D, is more to my liking I just never read much, I just kept reading about 5D series.

I'm just a "plinker" anymore, just simple shooting,and out walking, as my health will allow, but I don't want to give up the DSLR, thanks I'll spend more time looking into the 6D, price more to my liking too.

The lens system if I can manage it would be 17 40 and 70 300 L lens[ Jennifer has one] and down the road, I'd like to spring for the 50 1.2? I've looked at that lens, another friend shoots a 5DMKIII and only the 50 1.2. So I do find your help helpful, but I must come to grips to sell some equipment I've had for many years my 300 F4 AD is at least 20 plus years[my bird blind lens] I'm a keeper, hard to part with older equipment still shoot my D200 on pretty days, but I have too much equipment and must adjust.

I post to flickr, no printing, my site is palmerb16, I'm having almost as much fun at 70 as i did back in the 80's.

"dog house riley'
Click to expand...
I've owned the 5D Mark iii and 6D. I'd get the 6D. As far as the 50 1.2, I'd avoid that. Some may tell you other wise but it's just not worth he money. It cost a ton of money and when you see it compared to the 50mm that's like 100 dollars it doesn't wow you. You don't want to spend that kind of money and feel like, "It's just kinda better than the plastic one." You want to invest in something that is a LOT better. Hopefully Canon will update that lens to something much better.

The 24-70 2.8 ii, while an expensive lens, only goes 2.8, won't do the 1.2, but honestly the 50mm on that looks sharper to me. In fact that 24-70 2.8 ii seems to be sharper than most primes I've owned.

I own Canons sharpest prime lens and I've compared it side by side with my 24-70 2.8 ii and honestly I can't tell the difference. If there is a difference, it's subtle at that point because once it reaches a certain level of sharpness, even if another lens is sharper, you start to not care or even be able to really see it.

I also owned one of the highest rated primes out there from Zeiss, is it sharper than my 24-70 2.8 ii? Probably but it's not the night and day you'd think it is.

There are some lenses in which the sharpness does start to matter. People will hate me when I say this, but the 24-105 F/4, that lens is horrible. It may be versatile in focal length but the thing is soft and not just the edges, even the center is soft. I don't mind F/4, I mind the softness.

If you need lenses that do 1.2 it does get complicated because a lot of times we are paying a ton of money for 1.2 but once we use it for anything above 2.8 it starts to become no different than things that cost more than less the price.

Personally, on a full frame camera, I don't really need anything beyond 2.8. I understand some people do and like the look of the extreme shallow depth of field but to me 1.2 gets to the point where I don't like that look on a full frame.

The only time I go to F/2 or F/ 1.8 even is when there is no choice. Also in the days where I did a lot of video, sometimes I would like it for shots.

When it comes to portraits, even 2.8 doesn't feel needed to me anymore. I have a 135mm F/2, at 2.8 the background is completely gone but it can start to affect the subject. I have the 100mm F/2 as well, same thing.

This is why I tried to like the 24-105 F/4. At portrait distances, F/4 on a full frame camera is plenty enough. But the sharpness level just wasn't there, especially on my copy.

With Canon, things are kinda weird right now. The stuff I do professional is Landscape. As a Landscape shooter I want the best possible lens I can get at my preferred focal lengths which are mostly 24, 28, and 35. I used to do 16mm but I don't like that look much. I looked into getting the 24 and 35mm primes and when I did the test, it was quite clear the the 24-70 2.8 ii was better than both of them and not just a little bit.

The new 35mm they are either coming out with or will come up with, (only heard about it, have not seen it.) I don't know about.
 
David J. Littleboy said:
BAK said:
I have a Fujifilm X30 that can do a lot of picture taking.

Weighs very little. Fits in a pocket.

There are lots of other little cameras.

I picked the X30 because of the overall quality, and the deal-maker was the eye level viewfinder and the somewhat tilting back.

BAK
Click to expand...
For exactly those reasons, but find it's controls way too fiddly for it to be much fun. Sigh.

I may buy a 6D instead of waiting to see what the 6D II looks like out of impatience. (I have a 5D II and lots of glass.)

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Click to expand...
I'd wait if you got a 5D ii. The 6D is like a 5D mark iii with an upgraded 5D Mark ii focus system. It is a faster auto focus system and much nicer than the 5D ii, so is the ISO performance. But if I still had the 5D ii at this point I'd wait. You want your upgrade to REALLY be an upgrade. It won't feel like an upgrade if you only get a little faster auto focus.

Even though the 6D's ISO performance is better, to be honest, when I sold my 5D Mark ii and went to the 5D Mark iii, I didn't even notice the Iso difference. The auto focus difference, I only noticed it was faster. I still used the center point mostly even on the 5D Mark iii.

It won't be long, the summer will be here before you know it. Some people will tell you that the 6D won't come out until 2017 but I don't buy that at all.

They're gonna announce the 1DX tomorrow or Tuesday, and like they always do, they will then announce the 5D Mark IV. They will let as many people buy the 5D as possible and when it's initial sales get normal they will drop the 6D.
 
StIves said:
Sounds like you want to change systems mainly for the interest of trying a new system. I'm not sure if this really makes much sense unless you have money to burn.

I've just moved from Canon to Nikon, and in the processes I am unloading lenses which I have collected over a 20 year period, so it's not a small or inexpensive move for me. I tested the Canon 5 and 6 cameras, and decided to move to a D750- for me I couldn't think of a single area where I preferred the Canon options and the D750 had technical and huge ergonomic advantages, and it was the ergonomics that drive the switch.

To me a body isn't something that is supposed to "light my fire". In order of least to most importance, a body is basic tool that gives me the base functionality required to let me mount the lenses that I want, to get images that I will treasure.

If you want a challenge, perhaps look for one in another direction when it comes to photography- improving existing technique, branching out into another style of shooting?
Click to expand...
Good morning;

No I don't" have money to burn!" after my last almost 30 years[1988] as mainly a Nikon shooter, [Short stint as Canon film] i look to some upgrades, lens and camera, I know i have way too much equipment, most of which is old and way out of date,[D2X, D2Hs, D200] these will not fetch much money but at least i can turn them into cash.

I can see no valid reason to just jump to Canon, other than at this point in my life I'd like another challenge? Digital was a big challenge for me I almost sold 1st digital and gone back to film! but I persevered used help from friends and stayed in digital [still have[ F100 FE2 and N2000]

At this point in time, I think Nikons D750 is their best choice? and have researched it on you tube, and its quite a camera, most likely would be my best choice,within Nikon.

I enjoy my DX systems so much, thinking about selling my D700 and just use my D7100 and D3300 till I sort this out, if I make a mistake, I'm "cooked"! if I make a good choice i hope to enjoy my remaining years having a ball like the first years i was into photography.

For me its just entertainment now, I'm over the serious game, I don't get out at dawn, i go around 10am, home by 4pm, enjoying my wife of 47 years we met the night I was discharged from the U S Air Force in 1968, and her cooking, no! I don't beat the bushes any more.

Shooting my volunteer photos for our local zoo, is my biggest photo outings, zoos only about 5 miles from my house .Cureently my D7100 and 80 400 VR, is my zoo rig.

Thanks for your recommendation of the D750? I haven't completely ruled it out of the picture at all? but its all a big ??? for me. And canon has some equipment that "stirs my soul"

"dog house riley"
 
Thanks the reason for liking the 50 1.2, was a friend shoots a 5DIII and only the 1.2 50? god the viewfinder was so bright? to me anyway, but i had another Canon friend[deceased] had to 50 1.0 but terribly slow focussing even on a EOS1N, But I'm fond of a fast 50, I sold my Nikon 50 1.4 G, because the focus was god awful slow.

I thank you for your input, I hope to "glean" as much as i can from all this and make a intelligent decision.

D H R
 
dog house riley said:
No I don't" have money to burn!" after my last almost 30 years[1988] as mainly a Nikon shooter, [Short stint as Canon film] i look to some upgrades, lens and camera, I know i have way too much equipment, most of which is old and way out of date,[D2X, D2Hs, D200] these will not fetch much money but at least i can turn them into cash.

I can see no valid reason to just jump to Canon, other than at this point in my life I'd like another challenge? Digital was a big challenge for me I almost sold 1st digital and gone back to film! but I persevered used help from friends and stayed in digital [still have[ F100 FE2 and N2000]

At this point in time, I think Nikons D750 is their best choice? and have researched it on you tube, and its quite a camera, most likely would be my best choice,within Nikon.

I enjoy my DX systems so much, thinking about selling my D700 and just use my D7100 and D3300 till I sort this out, if I make a mistake, I'm "cooked"! if I make a good choice i hope to enjoy my remaining years having a ball like the first years i was into photography.

For me its just entertainment now, I'm over the serious game, I don't get out at dawn, i go around 10am, home by 4pm, enjoying my wife of 47 years we met the night I was discharged from the U S Air Force in 1968, and her cooking, no! I don't beat the bushes any more.

Shooting my volunteer photos for our local zoo, is my biggest photo outings, zoos only about 5 miles from my house .Cureently my D7100 and 80 400 VR, is my zoo rig.

Thanks for your recommendation of the D750? I haven't completely ruled it out of the picture at all? but its all a big ??? for me. And canon has some equipment that "stirs my soul"

"dog house riley"
Click to expand...
I would agree with this plan, sell off the older Nikon bodies, shoot with the crop bodies for awhile- maybe you don't really need full frame?

At that point, newer Canons will be out and you can evaluate then whether a switch makes sense.

For myself, I expect the 6DII to have significant improvements over the current one (which I have and love). Just because the competition is intense, and the market is shrinking. This is no time to rest on your laurels in that business. If the 6D has improved AF, flip screen, improved DR and a few more pixels, that is a camera that will last you (and maybe me!) a long time.
 
Given your equipment, budget and urge for something new, the Nikon D610, along with a software package for processing the Nikon output to true neutral color and contrast, would satisfy my preferences.

My Canon FT for film, and my Canon 5D and Canon 30D satisfy my urges. I can use film and scanning for high resolution and sunsets, and the 5D for true color and contrast.

But get me a Nikon and I will put it to work.
 
BlueCosmo5050 said:
David J. Littleboy said:
BAK said:
I have a Fujifilm X30 that can do a lot of picture taking.

Weighs very little. Fits in a pocket.

There are lots of other little cameras.

I picked the X30 because of the overall quality, and the deal-maker was the eye level viewfinder and the somewhat tilting back.

BAK
Click to expand...
For exactly those reasons, but find it's controls way too fiddly for it to be much fun. Sigh.

I may buy a 6D instead of waiting to see what the 6D II looks like out of impatience. (I have a 5D II and lots of glass.)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
dog house riley said:
Thanks to you who has jumped on to my post so soon? After reading your responses, I Too am thinking of the 6D, its not imperative I have 5 DIII, but I do like its full function.

I'm no longer shooting the things i used too, today its for entertainment, not dead serious. I still shoot for our local zoo, I volunteer my time and photos, no charge to zoo. Lately I've been using my D7100 instead of my D2X or D700 its lighter, and using my 80 400 VR. As a lightweight kit, due to past health issues, I'm using my D3300 as my day to day kit, its a fine little kit.

If you should check my past profiles health is a serious issue, just now getting to where i can walk more than a short distance. I had wanted the Nikon D600 when it appeared? but then the roof caved in, and with all its issues i wanted no part of the D6XX series.

My D700 is a fine camera and heavy, add my grip for the 8 fps rate and its a beast!, I just never warmed up to it. It still after 5 years has less than 20K "clicks"

A lot of your descriptions are more the way i shoot today, more so than years ago, I don't need a high frame rate 5 or 6 is fine, buffer not on top of my list, I shoot RAW, and use LR6, center focus point works for me most times and not fast action like BIF, gave up on that,I shoot song birds in my blind in back yard.

The 17 40 to buy from a friend is just fine for me, she used it on her 60D, for several years, but she just never liked it, now even less.

So information of the 6D, is more to my liking I just never read much, I just kept reading about 5D series.

I'm just a "plinker" anymore, just simple shooting,and out walking, as my health will allow, but I don't want to give up the DSLR, thanks I'll spend more time looking into the 6D, price more to my liking too.

The lens system if I can manage it would be 17 40 and 70 300 L lens[ Jennifer has one] and down the road, I'd like to spring for the 50 1.2? I've looked at that lens, another friend shoots a 5DMKIII and only the 50 1.2. So I do find your help helpful, but I must come to grips to sell some equipment I've had for many years my 300 F4 AD is at least 20 plus years[my bird blind lens] I'm a keeper, hard to part with older equipment still shoot my D200 on pretty days, but I have too much equipment and must adjust.

I post to flickr, no printing, my site is palmerb16, I'm having almost as much fun at 70 as i did back in the 80's.

"dog house riley'
Click to expand...
So you have all those nice Nikon cameras, D200, D3300, D7100, D2X and a D700 and you want to change to a 6D?
 
6D focuses snail paced v 5D3

While it has better ISO capability, so you can use it in the dark, it just won't focus so well.

Yuck
 
Its not about changing to a 6D? most of these Nikon are old, and not too hot? they have things against them no high ISO's except the D7100 D3300 and D700, the others are best at below Iso 800, or less.

I've enjoyed shooting the "pro" Nikon bodies, feel great in hand and do a pretty good job in todays arena, but? I'm looking at different things, this started as a post about 5DMKIII and 6D, just basic differences, and the 6D does look like a nice choice, although some things I don't care for, but maybe a 6D II,might cure those faults?

My most interest in a canon is the 5D MKIII, I prefer it over Nikon D810? and the D750 could be a solid choice if I elect to stay in Nikons camp.

I'm most interested in no more than two cameras? just which?

"dog house riley"
 
Maybe he did. Why be so angry over a post? No one is making you read them or reply.
 
Jonathan Brady said:
Phoenix Headshots said:
6D focuses snail paced v 5D3

While it has better ISO capability, so you can use it in the dark, it just won't focus so well.

Yuck
Click to expand...
snail paced?

hy·per·bo·le
hīˈpərbəlē/noun
  1. exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
Oh... I get it...
Click to expand...
Actually, I mean it literally.

In lower light situations, where the 5D3 will get a shot in focus snap, click, the 6D can hunt for several seconds or the lights come on.

I see you do not list the 5D3 on your equipment list, so interesting you feel the 6D is on par with it's focus speed, or even in the same class. I do not feel it is. And I use both extensively, thou due to the 6D's issues, it sits in the bag a great deal.

In fact, the 5D2 also focuses WAY faster than the 6D, in low light.
 
Phoenix Headshots said:
Jonathan Brady said:
Phoenix Headshots said:
6D focuses snail paced v 5D3

While it has better ISO capability, so you can use it in the dark, it just won't focus so well.

Yuck
Click to expand...
snail paced?

hy·per·bo·le
hīˈpərbəlē/noun
  1. exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
Oh... I get it...
Click to expand...
Actually, I mean it literally.

In lower light situations, where the 5D3 will get a shot in focus snap, click, the 6D can hunt for several seconds or the lights come on.

I see you do not list the 5D3 on your equipment list, so interesting you feel the 6D is on par with it's focus speed, or even in the same class. I do not feel it is. And I use both extensively, thou due to the 6D's issues, it sits in the bag a great deal.

In fact, the 5D2 also focuses WAY faster than the 6D, in low light.
Click to expand...
"snails pace" is hyperbole. For any AF camera. Even the EOS M prior to the fw update. You've seen a snail actually move, right?
 
Jonathan Brady said:
"snails pace" is hyperbole. For any AF camera. Even the EOS M prior to the fw update. You've seen a snail actually move, right?
Click to expand...
You could literally mean that the focusing motor only moves as fast as a snail can crawl across the lens barrel. ha ha, but yeah....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top