Canon 6d

Peter_West 8 258 United Kingdom
22 May 2014 10:22AM
decisions decisions, I have at moment a canon 600d and want to upgrade to full frame cant afford 5dmk111 sadly so its the 6d, lenses I own are 100-400L and 100L Macro, and buying camera with the 24 to 105L I'm mainly wildlife and landscape at moment, I realise its only 4.5 frame per second, compared to the 70d at 8per second, but compared to my 600d at 3.7, I did seem to manage and honestly don't do a lot of moving wildlife, just hope I'm doing the right thing, please if anyone has the 6d I'd appreciate your comments or anyone. Thanks Peter

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

cabbie Plus
12 31 United Kingdom
22 May 2014 2:11PM
I think the 6d is a excellent choice it performs superb in low light. Had mine since the first shipment went in the shops no problems

Peter_West 8 258 United Kingdom
22 May 2014 2:23PM
hi cabbie. cheers Wink
Coast 11 1.6k 292 United Kingdom
22 May 2014 2:56PM
I have the 5d MkIII. Excellent camera. Friend in same situation as you bought 6D after having a go with my FF Canon. Like you he couldn't stretch to the 5D. Loves the cameras and swears it was the best thing he ever did going FF. Shoots landscape mainly with a bit of portraiture and garden birds.
Peter_West 8 258 United Kingdom
22 May 2014 3:16PM
Cheers Coast, Gone and done it picking it up tonight after work oh eck SmileSmileSmile, thing cost more than my first house, as do most things Tongue
Coast 11 1.6k 292 United Kingdom
22 May 2014 4:47PM
Enjoy. Grin
h4rsx 9 17 5 United Kingdom
22 May 2014 6:28PM
I don't think you will regret buying a 6D, if it's main purpose is not to photograph wildlife or fast moving objects, then it's a no brainier. IQ is indistinguishable against a 5D MKIII, better at higher ISO I believe, and has a slightly better dynamic range. For the price in comparison to the 5DMKIII, you get alot for your money.

Feels lovely in your hands and isn't as large or as heavy as he 5DMKIII.

Hope that helps.

mikehit 10 8.0k 13 United Kingdom
22 May 2014 10:17PM
The 6D is an excellent choice. In comparison to the 5Diii the AF is sluggish but having said that I used the 100-400 on my 30D and still got a decent keeper rate of gulls whipping around cliffs on a high wind.
The only lens you are missing is the superlative70-200 f4L....Tongue
Im a Pro Travel & Landscape photographer and went from the 5d mark II to the 6D instead of the 5D mark III. Image quality is better than the 5 D mark II in low light as is the high iso performance. as regard the AF, its not sluggish. in fact its faster than the 5D or any other camera in low light. Although this only when using the central focus point. Which for me is not an issue. The wifi function is a bonus when downloading images on the go. as is the built in GPS. i now never forget where i took a shot, as i can track it on maps.

overall I'm really pleased with the 6D. its lighter, smaller and has stunning image quality. which is perfect for my line of business.
if you mostly shoot landscapes then the 6D is your better option. however if the majority of your work is wildlife you should save up and get the Mark III. or even stick with an APS sensor and think about the 70D. 7fps and the advantage of the 1.6 crop factor. which is a great bonus with wildlife. If you don't print bigger than A3 or even A2 you won't really know the difference if your using good glass.

Quite a few years ago i had a 450D as a back up, and it always had a sigma 18-200mm lens fitted. It was my go anywhere, chuck in the bag camera when i didn't want to carry all my gear, when i was popping out or wasn't working. even with the limited spec and the lower quality glass, i look back now and find i sold just as many images from that cheaper set up then i did with my main camera and lenses that cost 10 times as much.

i find clients aren't the pixel peepers, just photographers.

Ive also just come back from running a workshop in Tuscany, and the best photo's i saw from the whole group, came from a lady who was using an entry level Nikon DSLR with a Tamron 18-270mm superzoom. Yes their may have been the slight technical loss in image quality but they were the most enjoyable to look at.

So by all means go full frame if you need it. but it won't make you a better photographer or make anymore people want to look at you images. If you just want a new and better camera, then thats a good enough reason too. I'm a photographer and i can't resist a new bit of kit to play with, just like the next man or women.

have fun !!!!!!!!!!
Peter_West 8 258 United Kingdom
24 May 2014 12:11PM
Ah well to late now bought 6d, just cant afford 5dmk111 at moment, had to upgrade while trying to photograph owl other week thought id kick my camera over side of quarry as you do, Sad the language was terrible loads of blimey and dear me's, so in the end went for 6d, one day I will get the 5d111, I mainly do landscape, macro, and wildlife, understand its not really a wildlife camera but honestly don't do a lot of fast moving subject's, so hopefully I'll be fine, only had it 2 days and ok so far, need to get out this weekend and give it a good test, many thanks everyone for comments, cant beat this site for friendly advice. hope you all have a good bank holiday weekend. Pete
Peter_West 8 258 United Kingdom
25 May 2014 4:10PM
well I've been out with camera in between showers,

Cracking shot there Peter.

Obviously well worth the investment. Good luck and have fun !!!!!!

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.