Canon 6D - Any alternatives or regrets from owners?

I could give you the hard sell on the D750 but i don't really know anything about the 6D. Well, no experience of it at least anyway. The 255 page owner thread will probably answer all your questions but the camera will probably have been replaced by the time you come to buy one. :LOL:

It's above your budget though, even from Panamoz and then you have to consider lenses. If you want an 85mm then they can be picked up for £280ish new from Digital Rev and the 24-120mm F4 (same class as the Canon 24-105mm F4) can be had for under £400 used if you look around.

The low light focusing ability is pretty much mind blowing and it comes with 51 AF points (not much use for you i guess) the ISO performance is incredible also.

A quick overview:
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-6D-vs-Nikon-D750
 
minnnt said:
I could give you the hard sell on the D750 but i don't really know anything about the 6D. Well, no experience of it at least anyway. The 255 page owner thread will probably answer all your questions but the camera will probably have been replaced by the time you come to buy one. :LOL:

It's above your budget though, even from Panamoz and then you have to consider lenses. If you want an 85mm then they can be picked up for £280ish new from Digital Rev and the 24-120mm F4 (same class as the Canon 24-105mm F4) can be had for under £400 used if you look around.

The low light focusing ability is pretty much mind blowing and it comes with 51 AF points (not much use for you i guess) the ISO performance is incredible also.

A quick overview:
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-6D-vs-Nikon-D750
Click to expand...
That comparison would have had me buying a D750 right up till the point they scored the 6d down for not having a focus motor :wave:
 
minnnt said:
It does have a Nikon badge though so that should be reason enough.

:D
Click to expand...
I think the D750 is an awesome camera, but only a complete moron would mark down a Canon DSLR for having no focus motor in the body (given that none of them do)
 
studioworks said:
Sounds like the man I need to hear from, hopefully he'll have his input.
Click to expand...

The 6d is a good camera, very good... if you have existing ef canon glass you dont want to get rid of or are heavily invested in canon accessories etc. The d750 is the better camera though, more on par with and exceeding 5d3 performance for less money. Starting from scratch I see no reason to buy a 6d instead of d750 if you can afford the little extra.
 
Last edited:
As I said the D750 looks good but I'd have to thoroughly look into Nikon glass which I know nothing about. My thinking was it might be closer to the 5D3 but the price point is good. I don't generally need the AF but it'd be nice to have for occasional use. I don't think the D610 really offers anything over a 6D. It is only a defect rectified D600. The D800 takes great pictures but is more expensive, heavier and has big files.
 
Phil V said:
I couldn't say for definite, but Nikon started to look attractive when they put dual card slots in their midrange cameras, and then when their high ISO performance started to beat Canon's by more than a stop.

Even now, Canon are short of cameras with dual card slots, the 60d and 6d would both have them if they were Nikon's. :(

The focus system on the 6d should be better, and it should have 2 card slots, and the dual function buttons from the xxd range but Canon are scared of it treading on the toes of the 5dIII, Nikon seem to have more confidence across the range.

On the upside, I like the smaller size of the 6d, the idea of carrying 2 5dIIIs with 2.8 zooms isn't an attractive proposition for a 12 hour day.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of that. I find the 6D makes a very good companion to my 5D3 when shooting weddings but there are things it could do better, such as the AF and dual card slots (the latter scares me when shooting something as critical as a wedding).

I have a feeling the 6D2 will remedy both of these issues and, if so, I'll upgrade in a shot but, for now, the 6D is still a great little camera.
 
Phil is referring to how they've marked the 6D not having a built-in focus motor as a negative when no Canon bodies do because that's no how they work.

If anything, Canon's system of putting the motor in the lenses - ALL of the lenses, is a point in favour over Nikon and their utterly bizarre system of motors in bodies and/or lenses and needing to make sure what you're matching with what.

Snapsort is a joke anyway.
 
Vertigo1 said:
Agree with all of that. I find the 6D makes a very good companion to my 5D3 when shooting weddings but there are things it could do better, such as the AF and dual card slots (the latter scares me when shooting something as critical as a wedding).

I have a feeling the 6D2 will remedy both of these issues and, if so, I'll upgrade in a shot but, for now, the 6D is still a great little camera.
Click to expand...
I have one and love it, but I do think it looks knobbled by Canon's marketing dept. It would have cost them about a fiver to put a better AF system in it, but it would have been too close to the 5dIII. It's a sad reflection on Canon that it's a better camera than the 5dII,

A 6dII can't give us those things whilst the 5dIII is the next camera up, there's not enough of a gap. The 5ds needed to replace the 5dIII to create a space in the market for a new 6d.
 
minnnt said:
?
Click to expand...
What Jim said.

Canon AF SLRs never needed focus in the bodies, because they built a proper AF system from the word go, which is why they led the AF race for so many years.
 
Ah but the 1DX2 is next, then the 5D4 then the 6D2 so they'll have upgraded the 5D by the time the 6D's successor arrives.

I'm not sure whether they'd upgrade the AF on the 1DX2 and 5D4 even further then give the current 61-point system to the 6D or come up with some new mid-range system for the 6D (possibly even an adaptation of the 19-point system from the 7D and 70D) but I'm convinced they'll upgrade the AF - they have to because, as you say, they have to compete with Nikon.
 
Phil V said:
What Jim said.

Canon AF SLRs never needed focus in the bodies, because they built a proper AF system from the word go, which is why they led the AF race for so many years.
Click to expand...

Given the amazing AF systems we enjoy today, it seems strange to think back to when I first got into SLR photography with my Ricoh KR10 and my dad's Canon AE-1, when there was no such thing as autofocus and it was all done manually.
 
Vertigo1 said:
Given the amazing AF systems we enjoy today, it seems strange to think back to when I first got into SLR photography with my Ricoh KR10 and my dad's Canon AE-1, when there was no such thing as autofocus and it was all done manually.
Click to expand...
My first AF camera was 2002, I've been shooting proper cameras since 1985
 
studioworks said:
Have to admit that's impressed me at f4, if I'd of guessed id of though a longer telephoto and f2.8 for the picture to pop like that. Defenitly going to be my walk around combination I think.
Click to expand...

FYI, I carry the 6D @ 24-105 with me on field trips as you never know when you might need it, just as in this occasion. I too back button focus, and have yet to find the 6D wanting. That said, I would generally use my 7D as a primary for wildlife work, but the 6D has proven very good at places like Longleat and the BWC...

6D with Sigma 150-600. f6.3 (wide open), 400 ISO, handheld.

BWC May 15 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

If you already have Canon fit lenses, it seems a big step to change brands when there is a perfectly good body available to you. Part of the fun of the 6D is that it's not over complex (unlike the 7D2 I picked up today) and it let's you think about the image rather than all the technology.
 
Jelster said:
FYI, I carry the 6D @ 24-105 with me on field trips as you never know when you might need it, just as in this occasion. I too back button focus, and have yet to find the 6D wanting. That said, I would generally use my 7D as a primary for wildlife work, but the 6D has proven very good at places like Longleat and the BWC...

6D with Sigma 150-600. f6.3 (wide open), 400 ISO, handheld.

BWC May 15 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

If you already have Canon fit lenses, it seems a big step to change brands when there is a perfectly good body available to you. Part of the fun of the 6D is that it's not over complex (unlike the 7D2 I picked up today) and it let's you think about the image rather than all the technology.
Click to expand...

He only has 1 lens. The 85mm. Switching is easy anyway, done it loads of times and doesn't really cost either.
 
@Jelster - thought that cat looked familiar :)

5D3_7852.jpg
 
I bought the 6D only because of the Nikon D600 sensor oil/dust issue. Do I have regrets, no, it was the right decision 3 years ago. However if it were today I would at least rent the Nikon D750 first as that seems like an awful lot of camera for just £200 more. The bigger question is why you want full frame? What lenses will you be buying?
 
Last edited:
minnnt said:
I could give you the hard sell on he D750 but i don't really know anything about the 6D. Well, no experiencis of it at least anyway. the 255 page owner thread will probably answer all your questions but the camera have been replaced by the time you come to buy one. :LOL:

It's above your budget though, even from Panamoz and then you have to consider lenses. If you want an 85mm then they can be picked up for £280ish new from Digital Rev and the 24-120mm F4 (same class as the. Canon 24-105mm F4) can be had for under £400 used if you look around.

The low light focusing ability is pretty much mind blowing and it comes with 51 AF points (not much use for you i guess) the ISO performance is incredible also.

A quick overview:
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-6D-vs-Nikon-D750
Click to expand...

The low light performance Is probably single most important factor to me in which camera I choose, for it to be able to focus well in dim conditions and clean images even at high iso's.
Not much comparing the 6D and D750 out their but In tthe comparisons it seems to trump the 5D3. I was amazed at It's dynamic range compared to the canons but it's not very clear if it keeps such an advantage at high iso's too as the examples were at 100 and 200 etc.

Wayne Els said:
As I said the D750 looks good but I'd have to thoroughly look into Nikon glass which I know nothing about. My thinking was it might be closer to the 5D3 but the price point is good. I don't generally need the AF but it'd be nice to have for occasional use. I don't think the D610 really offers anything over a 6D. It is only a defect rectified D600. The D800 takes great pictures but is more expensive, heavier and has big files.
Click to expand...

Pretty much sums up what I'd thought about the D610 and D800.
The D750 definitely seems a slightly better but cheaper version of the 5D3 and while I'm not conceived it has anything I NEED over the 6D it just seems to be that much capable a camera for only an extra £200.

Mintchocs said:
I bought the 6D only because of the Nikon D600 sensor oil/dust issue. Do I have regrets, no, it was the right decision 3 years ago. However if it were today I would at least rent the Nikon D750 first as that seems like an awful lot of camera for just £200 more. The bigger question is why you want full frame? What lenses will you be buying?
Click to expand...

Mainly for the low light ability as im often bumping up the ISO which will hopefully result in a lot cleaner images with a full frame, low light focusing Is also another big reason.
Well love my 85mm and was planning on a 24-105 and a 70-200 f4 so what ever the equivalant is in the nikon world.
 
Really am considering the D750 now instead, have seen them second hand for only £100 more than the 6D.
I'd have to sell my 85mm and my flash setup though, plus my Canon M and it's ef adapter wouldn't be quite as fun.
Main thing that's making me think hard is I can borrow Canon bodies or lens any time if I needed a spare body or a long telephoto or macro etc. Where as if I go Nikon no option of spare anything.

Got till the weekend to decide so plenty more time reading up no doubt.
 
Go for the original VR version of the 70-200 f2.8. The F4 is more money. If you was considering a non IS canon lens then the price hike to the Nikon version (which has VR) may make your eyes water. The Nikon 24-120 F4 VR is the equivalent of the Canon stalwart.
 
minnnt said:
Go for the original VR version of the 70-200 f2.8. The F4 is more money. If you was considering a non IS canon lens then the price hike to the Nikon version (which has VR) may make your eyes water. The Nikon 24-120 F4 VR is the equivalent of the Canon stalwart.
Click to expand...

It was the canon 70-200 f4 IS I was considering, walking round with it all day it's size was a definite advantage to the 2.8.

I know theirs a whole issue of some lens only focusing on some bodies etc with Nikon but would that affect me with a D750 or is it just older or cheaper bodies?
 
Nope. D750 has everything you need and both the 24-120 and 70-200 focuses internally anyway along with the silent wave motor built into them. Both great lenses and will offer you great performance.
 
minnnt said:
Nope. D750 has everything you need and both the 24-120 and 70-200 focuses internally anyway along with the silent wave motor built into them. Both great lenses and will offer you great performance.
Click to expand...

That's one less thing to worry about then, just had a look at lens prices and they seem pretty comparable to canon as well.
I can see this being a tough decision.
 
Nikkor did a grey limited edition .....


ImageUploadedByTalk Photography Forums1454399755.507768.jpg

Thank the Lord it was a one off
 
Last edited:
Have a read of Ross's review where there's comparisons with the 5d3. It was useful for the many who bought the camera close to launch time. If you bought with the 24 -120 you could add something like the Tamron 70-300VC lens until you can afford the 70-200 f4, even the old Sigma Apro Macro 70-300 has performed okay on my D750.

As for lens system, the D750 I believe can use more or less any lens Nikon have made...........With Canon, I think you can use only ef or efs lenses on certain bodies as they won't physically fit??

http://www.rossharvey.com/reviews/nikon-d750-review
 
6ds are awesome value for money cano comment in nikon
 
owenb said:
6ds are awesome value for money cano comment in nikon
Click to expand...

They do seem good for the money but after reading about the D750 I just can't help but feel it's so much more for the money. Going to have a think for a few more days but really drawn to changing to Nikon now.

On a side note I can't understand how people are charging more for a UK model which is out of any sort of warranty than I can get from panamoz with 3 years warranty. Surely once the official UK warranty runs out theirs no benefits over a grey import?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top