Canon 6D vs 5D Mark III

[BMW F22]

Is there any reasons to why one would get the 6D instead of the 5D Mk III? Is the price difference justifiable?

[M_Six]

If you do lots of low light stuff and not much sports or other action shots, the 6D would be fine. If you need fast AF tracking, get the 5D MkIII. If you shop carefully and are not in a hurry, you might find the 6D at almost half the price of the MkIII.

[Chewy734]

The build quality on the 5D3 is noticeably better, imo. Also, the AF is significantly better, and it shoots a little faster. In pretty much every way the 5D3 is a better camera, except for the price difference.

As Mark said, it's really depends on what you shoot. I think the 5D3 is the best bang for the buck, but that buck is ~40% higher in price than the 6D.

If you don't need the better AF, get the 6D and put that money towards better glass. If you need the better AF (even in low-light), get the 5D3, because you'll be disappointed with the 6D, in comparison.

[M_Six]

I don't know if I agree with that last statement. The 6D is phenomenal in low light. I haven't played around with the 5D MkIII in low light, but reviews I've read usually put the 6D ahead in low light situations.

[Chewy734]

Really Mark? With an AF system similar to the 5D2 (unless I'm mistaken?), I find it hard to believe it performs well under low-light. That was one of my major gripes about the 5D2 when I owned one.

But, then again, take my above advice with the caveat that I haven't actually used a 6D before.

[ddk632]

This thing (the 6D) focuses in near pitch black as long as there is some semblance of contrast of the subject.

5DIII has heavy focus on video improvements.

Taking out video, the main thing is AF - better for moving/tracking and more focus point selections, more advanced algorithms, more cross type points, etc.

Not to be confused with AF low light capability, I think, with which the 6D is unique in ability in the current Canon lineup.

I haven't used a 5DIII.

I shoot landscapes, cityscapes, my daughters activities (preschool ballet, soccer), my son (infant) crawling about, bikes, cars, etc. For all of this, the 6D has been awesome. I use AI Servo only for the kids, all default settings so far.

I am sure the 5DIII would be even more kick ass for chasing the kiddos, but that's a lot of camera for chasing kiddos. I don't shoot birds, or pro sports. I have shot MotoGP and Superbike races with my film Rebel and my XTi and came out with decent shots.

Bottom line if you aren't a burst shooter too often, chasing targets, the 5DIII's advantages may be moot to you.

Low light meaning high ISO, both the 6D and 5DIII excel at this; however the many reviews I've read point to the 6D as having better noise pattern, easier to clean up. So I would not base the 6D vs. 5DIII decision on this factor at all.

Finally, the 6D has some features that the 5DIII does not. Namely, GPS geo tagging of all your shots, and WiFi tethering. I have used both of these extensively, my GPS is never off. I like to setup low angle shots and the WiFi with my iPad kicks major ass for this purpose. I can place the camera in places I previously wasn't able to, and still precisely focus and take a shot, remotely. The only drawback is there's no native iPad app yet, which I view as a software life cycle issue vs. a 6D feature issue, since the app will be updated and also used for newer Canons that will also be released with WiFi (I would imagine).

I made that calculated decision on features I'd use vs cost back in November, pre-ordered the 6D / 24-105L kit, and picked up a Pancake and a TS-E 17 which has kept me plenty excited and I haven't once thought I made the wrong decision.

Your mileage may vary, of course.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Really Mark? With an AF system similar to the 5D2 (unless I'm mistaken?), I find it hard to believe it performs well under low-light. That was one of my major gripes about the 5D2 when I owned one.

But, then again, take my above advice with the caveat that I haven't actually used a 6D before.

I haven't used a 5D MkII, so I can't speak to that. But the 6D will snap focus on your target in very dark conditions and shooting at 16000-25600 ISO still can result in usable images. I don't think you could that with a 5D MkII.

ISO 25600 - I printed this out. Came out beautiful.



ISO 16000



I now have a 5D MkIII at work, so I'll get around to testing its low light capabilities. I can't imagine they'd be any better, except maybe with moving objects.

[Itsed65]

Great kitty portraits Mark!

I'm sure the 6D would be great if you don't shoot birds in flight, race cars, sports, etc. I really want a 5D3 myself, but I am also holding out to see what they bring with the second gen 7D. I actually like the crop factor for birds, they just need to clean up the sensor. I am not in any particular hurry, luckily the gear I already have is still better than I am.

[dcstep]

I own the 5D3 and agree with all the analysis here. You only need it, vs. the 6D, if you need it's AF flexibility, speed, accuracy and consistency. If you do, you can't live without it, but, if you don't, it's wasted money, in general.

Dave

[BMW F22]

Honestly if money wasn't a problem I would definitely go with a 5D Mk III. It's just crazy expensive at over $3k. I only asked because if it's really worth it I'd rather save up for it instead of "settling."

[M_Six]

Again, if you don't need the advanced AF system, you won't miss a thing using the 6D. And you'll be stunned by the high ISO IQ.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

Honestly if money wasn't a problem I would definitely go with a 5D Mk III. It's just crazy expensive at over $3k. I only asked because if it's really worth it I'd rather save up for it instead of "settling."

What shooting will you do to take advantage of the AF system?

[druu]

another factor (and i think this is really important) is the ergonomics and size. I personally can't live without the joystick in the back (5d2, 7d, 5d3 etc). The 6D is a little smaller, but that may or may not be an advantage. I think the staying power of a 5d3 will be better. But if money is an issue, the 6d is a mighty fine camera. Plus, do you have the kit to work with your bodies? If not then a 6D with glass would be my suggestion...

[signes]

Just saw this deal on a 6D. Seems like a good price for the package:

http://m.slickdeals.net/f/6071020-Ca...Rebate-Adorama

[BMW F22]

I don't shoot sports or any fast action so a high fps doesn't help me. I'm more concerned about IQ and durability of the camera. I mainly shoot portraits and landscapes.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

I don't shoot sports or any fast action so a high fps doesn't help me. I'm more concerned about IQ and durability of the camera. I mainly shoot portraits and landscapes.

6D hands down.

[BMW F22]

Originally Posted by M_Six

6D hands down.

Any concerns about the 6D not being weather proofed or sealed? How's the built compared to the 5D mk iii?

[M_Six]

The big difference in build is that the 6D's metal casing does not extend to the top of the camera. This is to allow GPS and wifi to work. Personally I wouldn't use either camera in the rain without a rain sleeve, so the weather tight seal is not an issue. Overall I'd say the camera feels solid. I have a Mk III at work and it doesn't feel much different to me.

[ddk632]

Don't go swimming with it ... Unless you have an underwater case

Seriously I've had my entry level unanythingproof Rebel XTi out in the rain, in front of ocean waves, dropped in the mud, etc., still going strong after 7 years. The 6D has been dropped off a tripod at least once, kept in the underbelly of my X6M for weeks at a time in Florida heat and humidity, rained on, etc. No issues yet!

Just keep a cloth with you to wipe down excess water off of the buttons if you get caught in the rain with it. I would do that regardless of the camera.

These things are more durable than we give them credit for... The weather sealing is for extreme conditions that most people won't likely ever encounter, unless you're a journalist shooting in the middle of a monsoon or something. Even then there are as Mark mentioned rain sleeves available.

Btw, if money isn't an issue get a 1DX, best of all worlds

But when is money not an issue, seriously, for most people at some level... I would love a medium format digital kit, if money wasn't an issue!

[Jonjt]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Really Mark? With an AF system similar to the 5D2 (unless I'm mistaken?), I find it hard to believe it performs well under low-light. That was one of my major gripes about the 5D2 when I owned one.

But, then again, take my above advice with the caveat that I haven't actually used a 6D before.

He may have been talking about sensor performance, exclusively.

[bluecrab]

I know I'm coming into this conversation late... 8 months late... but I want to throw my $0.02 into the mix.

I have been a long-time 5D Mark II owner. I used the camera for pretty much everything, but its huge downfall was autofocus in low-light. Worse, was autofocusing on a moving subject in low light. And one of my applications was photographing dancers in low light using flash. Even with the AF beam assist activated on the 580EX-II, I would miss so many shots it wasn't funny. Oh, and I couldn't use the center AF point, because I was shooting in portrait orientation and wanted to focus on the dancers faces. So that meant shifting the AF point to one of the edge non-cross type focus points. Truly a recipe for disaster.

Now, I just now sold the 5D Mark II and upgraded to the 5D Mark III. Let me just say that the 5D Mark III is a dream to work with! I can now set a cluster of AF points right on the dancer's face. Bam! Got the shot! With the 6D, I would have been in the exact same situation as the 5D Mark II... I would not have been able to use its excellent center AF point and I would have lost shots.

Moral of the story: I feel that the 5D Mark III is a superior all-purpose camera compared to the 6D. Yes, both have the same image quality, both have the same ISO, but the Mark III adds the best AF system on the market. Plus it shoots faster (6 FPS), has a faster flash sync speed (1/200), and a faster shutter (1/8000), and vastly superior video (if you're into that).

I'm not saying the 6D is a bad camera, actually it's a great camera... way better than my 5D Mark II. But now that I've been shooting with the Mark III there's just no going back to 11 AF points.

If money is an issue, then definitely go with the 6D. If you've got money to burn, the 5D Mark III is just better, IMHO.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by bluecrab

I know I'm coming into this conversation late... 8 months late... but I want to throw my $0.02 into the mix.

I have been a long-time 5D Mark II owner. I used the camera for pretty much everything, but its huge downfall was autofocus in low-light. Worse, was autofocusing on a moving subject in low light. And one of my applications was photographing dancers in low light using flash. Even with the AF beam assist activated on the 580EX-II, I would miss so many shots it wasn't funny. Oh, and I couldn't use the center AF point, because I was shooting in portrait orientation and wanted to focus on the dancers faces. So that meant shifting the AF point to one of the edge non-cross type focus points. Truly a recipe for disaster.

Now, I just now sold the 5D Mark II and upgraded to the 5D Mark III. Let me just say that the 5D Mark III is a dream to work with! I can now set a cluster of AF points right on the dancer's face. Bam! Got the shot! With the 6D, I would have been in the exact same situation as the 5D Mark II... I would not have been able to use its excellent center AF point and I would have lost shots.

Moral of the story: I feel that the 5D Mark III is a superior all-purpose camera compared to the 6D. Yes, both have the same image quality, both have the same ISO, but the Mark III adds the best AF system on the market. Plus it shoots faster (6 FPS), has a faster flash sync speed (1/200), and a faster shutter (1/8000), and vastly superior video (if you're into that).

I'm not saying the 6D is a bad camera, actually it's a great camera... way better than my 5D Mark II. But now that I've been shooting with the Mark III there's just no going back to 11 AF points.

If money is an issue, then definitely go with the 6D. If you've got money to burn, the 5D Mark III is just better, IMHO.

Pretty much what most folks who have used both feel. I have both cameras and I agree the 5D MkIII is a better all around body. That's reflected in the cost.