Anyone Disappointed After Upgrading to Full Frame?

[beatboxa]

It's really basic physics...

Excellent analysis and explanation.

I had already decided on FF due to your previous posts in this thread but now I'm even more convinced FF is the upgrade I need to do. I think I will be getting Canon 6D only because at this point of time in Australia it is $460 cheaper than D610 and $950 cheaper than D750.

Great decision! It will serve you well for years. The 6D is a phenominal camera. But I'll still give you flak for not going with a D750 for no reason other than my brand loyalty lol j/k

I should have noted that I'm biased towards physics and data and numbers since it's what I studies at Uni...and what I do for a living....I went on into data science and analytics...

Let us know how it goes and don't hesitate to ask any questions. You will have questions and you will make mistakes. Speaking for others, I and others am more than happy to help!

 

[owlgroot]

Speaking for others, I and others am more than happy to help!

Thanks for your assistance very helpful!

 

[osv]

It's really basic physics...

Excellent analysis and explanation.

I had already decided on FF due to your previous posts in this thread but now I'm even more convinced FF is the upgrade I need to do. I think I will be getting Canon 6D

the 6d is a low-rez sensor with a really weak d.r. vs. iso curve... a good crop sensor camera like the a6300 will give you more resolution and roughly equivalent d.r. vs. iso: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Sony ILCE-6300

the a6300 is over $200 cheaper than a 6d here in the states; the lenses are smaller, lighter, and it records 4k, while the 6d can't do native 4k video.

--
dan

 

[osv]

Great decision! It will serve you well for years. The 6D is a phenominal camera.

no, it's not a "phenominal" camera, see the d.r. curve in the post that i linked to above.

the 6d is just another canon weak sensor.

But I'll still give you flak for not going with a D750 for no reason other than my brand loyalty lol j/k

>sigh<

the d750 is a 24mp camera vs the 20.6mp 6d, and the nikon is also a *big* step up in terms of d.r.: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Nikon D750,Sony ILCE-6300

I should have noted that I'm biased towards physics and data and numbers since it's what I studies at Uni...and what I do for a living....I went on into data science and analytics...

which makes me wonder how you could have failed to tell the o.p. what was wrong with his 6d choice.

 

[golfhov]

It's really basic physics...

Excellent analysis and explanation.

I had already decided on FF due to your previous posts in this thread but now I'm even more convinced FF is the upgrade I need to do. I think I will be getting Canon 6D

the 6d is a low-rez sensor with a really weak d.r. vs. iso curve... a good crop sensor camera like the a6300 will give you more resolution and roughly equivalent d.r. vs. iso: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Sony ILCE-6300

Key word "roughly". He can feel free to run it through DXO , studio samples, etc. Is it the best sensor? No. Absolutely not. Is it VERY good for its price? Arguably yes

the a6300 is over $200 cheaper than a 6d here in the states; the lenses are smaller,

Just curious how many "equivelant" lenses are there? You were busting Jaque's chops in another thread. Same rule applies here.

lighter,

For sure

and it records 4k, while the 6d can't do native 4k video.

Here I would absolutely agree to skip the 6d. Video is a very weak category genreally speaking

 

[Tariag]

Having had an A99, and several other FF, APS-C and MFT cameras, I would say that:

DR, resolution, gradation, are on par with other 24mp FF DSLR. With the benefits (DOF) and drawbacks of a FF sensor (weight).

High ISO is worse than the other FF DSLRs but still way better than MFT. Similar to APS-C.

I was at first disappointed by the A99 IQ but it was because *I* was wrong when using using. Wrong settings, wrong AF mode, missed focus...

Per se it's still a very good camera even by today's standards, as long as you stay under 16000 ISO, and a bargain when bought used (more or less the price of a D600 with a bit lower IQ but much more features).

 

[osv]

It's really basic physics...

Excellent analysis and explanation.

I had already decided on FF due to your previous posts in this thread but now I'm even more convinced FF is the upgrade I need to do. I think I will be getting Canon 6D

the 6d is a low-rez sensor with a really weak d.r. vs. iso curve... a good crop sensor camera like the a6300 will give you more resolution and roughly equivalent d.r. vs. iso: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Sony ILCE-6300

Key word "roughly". He can feel free to run it through DXO , studio samples, etc. Is it the best sensor? No. Absolutely not. Is it VERY good for its price? Arguably yes

there are many options that are better than the 6d.

i posted the a6300 as only one example of that; it's a crop sensor that's better than the ff 6d sensor.

the a6300 is over $200 cheaper than a 6d here in the states; the lenses are smaller,

Just curious how many "equivelant" lenses are there? You were busting Jaque's chops in another thread. Same rule applies here.

everything that i said went right over your head.

the d750 is only what, $140 more than a 6d? they are both ff; your little lens rant about equivalence was irrelevant to the overall point that i made.

to give you an idea of how bad the canon 6d is... look at the old ff nikon d600, circa 2012; it has a couple of stops of better d.r. than the 6d: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Nikon D600

not sure why you are defending canon like that, but it's very misleading for the o.p., and other people who are reading this thread.

canon has strengths in other areas, including a huge lens selection.

My problem is your choice of adjectives. It is fine to point out something is "better" or preferred. It is another thing to insult people and call equipment "junk" just because you prefer something else

Jeez........

don't claim that i "prefer" any dslr, you should know by now that i hate dslrs this thread is about giving the o.p. the correct info about what *he* wants.

--
dan

 

[golfhov]

It's really basic physics...

Excellent analysis and explanation.

I had already decided on FF due to your previous posts in this thread but now I'm even more convinced FF is the upgrade I need to do. I think I will be getting Canon 6D

the 6d is a low-rez sensor with a really weak d.r. vs. iso curve... a good crop sensor camera like the a6300 will give you more resolution and roughly equivalent d.r. vs. iso: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Sony ILCE-6300

Key word "roughly". He can feel free to run it through DXO , studio samples, etc. Is it the best sensor? No. Absolutely not. Is it VERY good for its price? Arguably yes

there are many options that are better than the 6d.

I never refuted your claim there were "better" sensors

i posted the a6300 as only one example of that; it's a crop sensor that's better than the ff 6d sensor.

Just curious. If you like fast wide angles or shallow DOF how is the a6300 "better". This qualification would make it "junk"

the a6300 is over $200 cheaper than a 6d here in the states; the lenses are smaller,

Just curious how many "equivelant" lenses are there? You were busting Jaque's chops in another thread. Same rule applies here.

everything that i said went right over your head.

Not at all. I guess the fact I am communicating with you and not using insults makes me sound strange

the d750 is only what, $140 more than a 6d?

In English this is often referred to as "cherry picking". It is where you pick a used or refurbished price to compare to a retail price. For the sake of comparison you need to a lititle more objective

they are both ff; your little lens rant about equivalence was irrelevant to the overall point that i made.

No not at all. The OP who was considering FF must understand the entire subject (which he mostly does)

to give you an idea of how bad the canon 6d is... look at the old ff nikon d600, circa 2012; it has a couple of stops of better d.r. than the 6d: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Nikon D600

D600 is the same sensor as 610 for the most part and that camera was released about the same time

not sure why you are defending canon like that,

Because there are three FF sensors that retail at that low price right now. A7, 610, 6d. The 6d is the "worst" but not "junk" by any stretch of the imagination. If you spent some time shooting and editing you might understand real world differences vs charts and percentages.

but it's very misleading for the o.p., and other people who are reading this thread.

No intent to mislead anyone. For the price the 6d sensor is good. Any reader is free to compare all the charts, studio scenes, etc and judge for themselves

canon has strengths in other areas, including a huge lens selection.

As does nikon

My problem is your choice of adjectives. It is fine to point out something is "better" or preferred. It is another thing to insult people and call equipment "junk" just because you prefer something else

Jeez........

don't claim that i "prefer" any dslr,

Once again reading.........where in that sentence did I write "DSLR"? You cannot find it? That is because it isn't there

you should know by now that i hate dslrs

Really? You are pretty shy with your opinions.

this thread is about giving the o.p. the correct info about what *he* wants.

Feel free to add and contribute. It can be done with milder adjetties and without insulting people (this has to do with the Jaque's thread).

 

[beatboxa]

Great decision! It will serve you well for years. The 6D is a phenominal camera.

no, it's not a "phenominal" camera, see the d.r. curve in the post that i linked to above.

the 6d is just another canon weak sensor.

But I'll still give you flak for not going with a D750 for no reason other than my brand loyalty lol j/k

>sigh<

the d750 is a 24mp camera vs the 20.6mp 6d, and the nikon is also a *big* step up in terms of d.r.: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Nikon D750,Sony ILCE-6300

I should have noted that I'm biased towards physics and data and numbers since it's what I studies at Uni...and what I do for a living....I went on into data science and analytics...

which makes me wonder how you could have failed to tell the o.p. what was wrong with his 6d choice.

--
dan

Low ISO DR isn't everything when making a decision, and the 6D is a great camera. It's not as good as the D750, but it's also not as expensive. There are also subjective aspects to everything. I'd say the Nikon D5 is a phenomenal camera too--and it's max DR performance is almost identical to the Canon 6D.

Even your link shows the DR performance is almost identical at ISO 1250 & above. Low ISO DR isn't everything. In fact, low ISO DR is typically one of the easiest things to overcome when you most often need it (landscapes on a tripod). It's called bracketing. By bracketing, you'll improve your signal-to-noise, DR, and even resolution. This isn't possible for situations when you need to raise ISO (because you have lower light), which is why high ISO performance is be important if you shoot anything other than landscapes on a tripod all the time.

The OP isn't necessarily wrong with his choice for him. He's wrong for you. So that's where you start arguing something subjective. Trolling again, I see..?

Now, if I recall correctly, you never gave the OP a specific kit recommendation that worked. So what would you recommend the OP buy?

 

[sportyaccordy]

It's really basic physics...

Excellent analysis and explanation.

I had already decided on FF due to your previous posts in this thread but now I'm even more convinced FF is the upgrade I need to do. I think I will be getting Canon 6D

the 6d is a low-rez sensor with a really weak d.r. vs. iso curve... a good crop sensor camera like the a6300 will give you more resolution and roughly equivalent d.r. vs. iso: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Sony ILCE-6300

Key word "roughly". He can feel free to run it through DXO , studio samples, etc. Is it the best sensor? No. Absolutely not. Is it VERY good for its price? Arguably yes

there are many options that are better than the 6d.

i posted the a6300 as only one example of that; it's a crop sensor that's better than the ff 6d sensor.

the a6300 is over $200 cheaper than a 6d here in the states; the lenses are smaller,

Just curious how many "equivelant" lenses are there? You were busting Jaque's chops in another thread. Same rule applies here.

everything that i said went right over your head.

the d750 is only what, $140 more than a 6d? they are both ff; your little lens rant about equivalence was irrelevant to the overall point that i made.

to give you an idea of how bad the canon 6d is... look at the old ff nikon d600, circa 2012; it has a couple of stops of better d.r. than the 6d: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Nikon D600

not sure why you are defending canon like that, but it's very misleading for the o.p., and other people who are reading this thread.

canon has strengths in other areas, including a huge lens selection.

My problem is your choice of adjectives. It is fine to point out something is "better" or preferred. It is another thing to insult people and call equipment "junk" just because you prefer something else

Jeez........

don't claim that i "prefer" any dslr, you should know by now that i hate dslrs this thread is about giving the o.p. the correct info about what *he* wants.

--
dan

He's not buying a sensor, he's buying a camera.

Most people shoot at a wide range of ISOs, not just base. From ISO800 and beyond the 6D has better DR than the 24 MP Nikons.

Plus again, as a camera, the 6D slaps the A6xxx around and is the D750's equal in lens selection and quality, and beats both in build quality and customer support. Plus I'm pretty sure Magic Lantern, which is FREE, closes that DR gap significantly, if not completely.

For beating off to DxO charts the 6D is no good, but then one doesn't have to even buy a camera for such endeavors. Your camera valuation ideology is ridiculous.

--
Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 

[osv]

Key word "roughly". He can feel free to run it through DXO , studio samples, etc. Is it the best sensor? No. Absolutely not. Is it VERY good for its price? Arguably yes

there are many options that are better than the 6d.

I never refuted your claim there were "better" sensors

it's not my claim at all.

i posted the bill claff data.

i posted the a6300 as only one example of that; it's a crop sensor that's better than the ff 6d sensor.

Just curious. If you like fast wide angles or shallow DOF how is the a6300 "better". This qualification would make it "junk"

did the o.p. specifically ask for "fast wide angles or shallow dof"?

Not at all. I guess the fact I am communicating with you and not using insults makes me sound strange

it sounds strange because it's not relevant(see above).

the d750 is only what, $140 more than a 6d?

In English this is often referred to as "cherry picking". It is where you pick a used or refurbished price to compare to a retail price. For the sake of comparison you need to a lititle more objective

true, the d750 sale is over.

so lets make it a brand it new 24mp ff d610 instead, it's $1497 on b&h, while your 20.2mp 6d is $1499 on b&h: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1008264-REG/nikon_d_610_digital_slr_body.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892349-REG/Canon_8035b002_EOS_6D_Digital_Camera.html

the d610 has over *two stops* better d.r. than the 6d:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Nikon D610

congrats on helping me prove my point better than i did before, lol

no place there for another snarky comment about equivalence...

D600 is the same sensor as 610 for the most part and that camera was released about the same time

the d610 is about a year newer than the d600, and it also came out after the 6d...

Because there are three FF sensors that retail at that low price right now. A7, 610, 6d. The 6d is the "worst" but not "junk" by any stretch of the imagination. If you spent some time shooting and editing you might understand real world differences vs charts and percentages.

if you understood "charts" we wouldn't be having this discussion, because factual data is not arguable.

but it's very misleading for the o.p., and other people who are reading this thread.

No intent to mislead anyone.

it's a bit late for that, now isn't it.

don't claim that i "prefer" any dslr,

Once again reading.........where in that sentence did I write "DSLR"?

yes, the fact that the o.p. wants a 6d, and that we've been discussing d600, d610, d750, etc., is all completely meaningless.

I am just going to wish you good luck. You clearly have no idea how to talk to people and I hope you have a good life

personal attacks are not relevant to the thread.

--
dan

 

[Limburger]

Got an A7 (D600/610 sensor) though I wish it had the 6D centre point AF

Common guys these are all good cameras but you need to sort out what is for you.

In case you buy native lenses I'd say Canon has an edge but only slightly, just don't buy native Sony lenses and guys I got a Sony!

 

[osv]

Great decision! It will serve you well for years. The 6D is a phenominal camera.

no, it's not a "phenominal" camera, see the d.r. curve in the post that i linked to above.

the 6d is just another canon weak sensor.

But I'll still give you flak for not going with a D750 for no reason other than my brand loyalty lol j/k

>sigh<

the d750 is a 24mp camera vs the 20.6mp 6d, and the nikon is also a *big* step up in terms of d.r.: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D,Nikon D750,Sony ILCE-6300

I should have noted that I'm biased towards physics and data and numbers since it's what I studies at Uni...and what I do for a living....I went on into data science and analytics...

which makes me wonder how you could have failed to tell the o.p. what was wrong with his 6d choice.

 

[Ubert]

Yes, there's an improvement, but by what--maybe 20-25% or so? That's about 5% per year.

That's pretty modest.

A 20% improvement is 'pretty modest'?

What if your car consumed 20% less fuel? Revolutionary!

What if your phone lasted 20% longer on it's battery? Revolutionary!

The newest graphics card getting a 20% better framerate at the latest games? Revolutionary!

Image sensor performance increased by 20%? Meh, pretty modest.

Please, also take into account, it takes years for a new image sensor design to actually make it into a consumer product. Technologies available now have been developed many years ago. The things I see pass on my desk these days, they show much promise for what the future has to offer.

 

[osv]

He's not buying a sensor, he's buying a camera.

he's shooting landscapes, so the sensor is a big consideration.

Most people shoot at a wide range of ISOs, not just base.

smart photographers want to shoot at the lowest possible iso range... why do you think that people want fast glass?

good grief.

From ISO800 and beyond the 6D has better DR than the 24 MP Nikons.

totally wrong, look at any bill claff link that i posted to this thread.

 

[beatboxa]

Yes, there's an improvement, but by what--maybe 20-25% or so? That's about 5% per year.

That's pretty modest.

A 20% improvement is 'pretty modest'?

What if your car consumed 20% less fuel? Revolutionary!

What if your phone lasted 20% longer on it's battery? Revolutionary!

The newest graphics card getting a 20% better framerate at the latest games? Revolutionary!

Image sensor performance increased by 20%? Meh, pretty modest.

Please, also take into account, it takes years for a new image sensor design to actually make it into a consumer product. Technologies available now have been developed many years ago. The things I see pass on my desk these days, they show much promise for what the future has to offer.

You and I are probably not defining "performance" the same. It's a 20% improvement in ISO number, not what I'd call performance.

Going from ISO 100 to ISO 120 is a lot different than going from ISO 6400 to ISO 6420. The first one is a 20% improvement. The second is not. These are all relative, and the percent I listed was the ISO number across several years. The performance improvement decreases--diminishing returns.

 

[owlgroot]

the 6d has much worse d.r. than the d610, and they are priced the same here in the states.

I know Nikon D610 is a better camera but in Australia Canon 6D is $450 cheaper than Nikon D610 and $950 cheaper than D750. $450 may not seem a lot to you but with my limited budget it means I can buy 85mm 1.8 right now whereas if I get Nikon D610 I will have to wait 3-4 months to get 85mm 1.8. Also, I was Canon shooter previously and quite like Canon lens like 85mm 1.2L, 50mm 1.2L etc - I won't buy these now but I'm going to save and buy them.

 

[osv]

the 6d has much worse d.r. than the d610, and they are priced the same here in the states.

I know Nikon D610 is a better camera but in Australia Canon 6D is $450 cheaper than Nikon D610 and $950 cheaper than D750. $450 may not seem a lot to you but with my limited budget it means I can buy 85mm 1.8 right now whereas if I get Nikon D610 I will have to wait 3-4 months to get 85mm 1.8. Also, I was Canon shooter previously and quite like Canon lens like 85mm 1.2L, 50mm 1.2L etc - I won't buy these now but I'm going to save and buy them.

i'd also like to have those two canon lenses, but i think that we'll both be saving for a long time in order to afford that level of gear.

i prefer canon glass over nikon glass, in part because it's far more adaptable to mirrorless... there are several electronic adapters in ef-mount, and given that canon has just released the m5, there is a chance that they might come out with a serious mirrorless camera.

not sure where you seeing those obscene camera body prices at, i just checked an australian vendor on ebay, the 6d vs. d610 are both claimed to be in stock in sydney, and they list within $50 or so of each other:

Loading…

www.ebay.com.au

Loading…

www.ebay.com.au

 

[sportyaccordy]

He's not buying a sensor, he's buying a camera.

he's shooting landscapes, so the sensor is a big consideration.

Again, Magic Lantern closes the gap, and if he doesn't want to mess with that he can bracket.

Most people shoot at a wide range of ISOs, not just base.

smart photographers want to shoot at the lowest possible iso range... why do you think that people want fast glass?

good grief.

Many reasons.... I shoot fast glass for subject isolation. Fast glass is also generally of better optical quality which is visible even stopped.

From ISO800 and beyond the 6D has better DR than the 24 MP Nikons.

totally wrong, look at any bill claff link that i posted to this thread.

 

[osv]

He's not buying a sensor, he's buying a camera.

he's shooting landscapes, so the sensor is a big consideration.

Again, Magic Lantern closes the gap,

no, it doesn't.

and if he doesn't want to mess with that he can bracket.

he never expressed any indication of wanting to use bracketing.

most people don't want to hassle with it, and it's only useful in very limited scenarios.

Most people shoot at a wide range of ISOs, not just base.

smart photographers want to shoot at the lowest possible iso range... why do you think that people want fast glass?

good grief.

Many reasons.... I shoot fast glass for subject isolation. Fast glass is also generally of better optical quality which is visible even stopped.

lets hear it from a real pro: "Pro shooters call lenses like these fast glass, meaning they have large maximum apertures—f/1.4 for this trio—that let in lots of light and thus allow the use of fast shutter speeds.

"In a lot of situations that was critical," Jim says. "Take the first image, of elephant polo at night, for instance. There are a few lights, but most of the field is pretty dark. I got that shot at f/1.4, 1/8 of a second and pushed the ISO to 6400; I needed all the speed that 24mm lens could give me." http://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-an...-why-fast-lenses-make-all-the-difference.html

if he didn't have fast glass there, he would have had to crank the iso way up.

From ISO800 and beyond the 6D has better DR than the 24 MP Nikons.

totally wrong, look at any bill claff link that i posted to this thread.

--
dan

They match on his readings.

wrong again.

--
dan