1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

First time with Canon FF (6d). WOW

Discussion in 'Back Room' started by Art, Aug 9, 2015.

  1. saladin

    saladin Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 29, 2015
    jason
    I'm glad you found something you like. Just Enjoy it. Lifes too short.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. tyrphoto

    tyrphoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2014
    Seoul | NYC
    ㅇtㅈyㅅr
    I sold my 5D Mk.II after a year of using an E-M1 and a Fuji X100. Even before these two cameras, I shot more images with my Ricoh GRD3 than the Canon. Canon's FF cameras are excellent, as are Nikon FF cameras. However, I found myself using it less and less over the years.

    As for Canon JPEGs, I was never a fan and this is from someone who shot Canon DSLRs for 15 years. This is why I always shot RAW only. The RAW files themselves are also very flat until you post process which is when they really shine.

    Anyways, if the 6D impressed you that much, then by all means buy it.
     
  3. mannukiddo

    mannukiddo Mu-43 Veteran

    269
    Jul 28, 2013
    India
    IMHO IQ from from my D800E is way better than anything I get out of my GX-7. If you need that kind of IQ for your purpose by all means get that FF and no matter what one says about its IQ being indistinguishable from a m43 camera, I for one do not believe that. But I don't always need that kind of IQ and so I have my m43 system.
     
  4. cptobvious

    cptobvious Mu-43 Veteran

    312
    Jan 8, 2013
    I've owned the 6D. The IQ is noticeably better than MFT, but there are some things to consider:

    -Phase detection AF is not as accurate as MFT's contrast detect for static subjects. Even after micro-adjusting my Canon lenses with the Dot Tune method, there is more variability in focus accuracy than with MFT. I get a far higher rate of hitting critical focus with MFT than with the 6D, except for tracking AF where the 6D is better.
    -If you pixel peep, many of the older Canon lenses designed in the film era are soft compared to the newer MFT lenses, as is to be expected. The 135L might be an exception. But I think Canon should update some of its bread-and-butter primes like the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 for the digital age, like they did with the 35mm f/2 IS. Many recommend the Sigma lenses but I feel they are too large and heavy for travel. The 40/2.8 is a great lens, though.
    -No IBIS (Oly only) means that if you're comparing with non-IS Canon lenses in low-light shooting of static subjects, the Oly system can actually put out cleaner output than the 6D due to being able to get sharp shots at ridiculously low shutter speeds.
    -I prefer having an EVF and live preview of exposure, but some prefer the OVF so this is a wash.
    -The 6D feels great in the hand when you first pick it up, but after carrying it with lenses for 20 minutes, the weight difference becomes very apparent.

    Other than that, I think the 6D is enough of an upgrade in IQ to own both systems. After lugging around the 5D on a couple of vacations, I probably wouldn't use it for travel, though.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    I fully agree that 6d is an absolute hassle to use as I mentioned previously. It feels very obsolete in use. LiveView is unusable, horrid video with no IBIS, forget face/eye detect, off angle shooting, touch shutter, live bulb, AF is much less precise and without EVF you never know if you nailed it - upon review on LCD the moment is gone. There is no question Oly is much more modern. However, at the end of the day, it's the results that matter and the gap is huge, IMO. I love how 6d can achieve vivid, saturated colors without looking unnatural. Skin tones are incredible and I thought Oly was good. I am in the process of building a 6d system with three lenses. I may keep m43 just in case if I have second thoughts after using FF for a while. But after seeing the results and how all my family was wowed by the snapshots, I am simply not motivated to continue using m43. 6d+40mm pancake is pretty manageable, not at all heavy and produces outstanding images with strong contrast and colors, plus battery lasts for 1000 shots.
     
  6. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Want some fun? If you're shooting JPEG, grab the EM10 and shoot at EV+0.7 and either Vivid or Portrait depending on subject. Take same shots on 6D default settings and compare full size images, no pixel peeping.
     
  7. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439570843.490364.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    Finally got my 6d with a few lenses including 40mm pancake. Surprisingly, the size between 6d w/prime vs. E-M10+PL25 is not that different for practical considerations. 6d is thinner but much heavier. Still blown away by images in good light with 85mn f1.8 -skin tones, sharpness, tonality and organic, clean full frame look at any screen size. Much much better than Oly 45mm. Jpegs are superb, wouldn't change a thing, and only 5-7MB for Large, 20MP.

    Low light is a different story. Most of my low light shots are under indoor lightning. I was appalled that Canon has not fixed AWB which was one of the reasons I didn't like T2i. Indoor AWB is grossly inaccurate with reddish and yellow casts. No settings in camera work well to properly correct WB especially with variable lightning. Available WB presets shift colors to greenish or magneta, etc. WB has dramatic impact on skin tones. It's a shame
    cause I find 6d skin tones in daylight outstanding. WB is not something I ever mess in RAW and it also affects exposure and noise. I prefer shooting in jpegs and only keep raw files in case I need to adjust exposure and NR or optimize for large size printing (rare). Oly has incredible AWB under artificial light - I got spoiled for years.
    I am still debating whether I should keep E-M10+PL25 but I definitely prefer 6d files to the point that I lost motivation with m43 even though shooting with E-M10 is way more fun. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole industry will start migrating to FF, it seems in a few years FF bodies will be well under $1000. Canon lenses are very reasonably priced. Once they add dual pixel focus (like 70d) to their future FF bodies, we may gain full mirrorless functionality with video C-AF. To me, size is not the most important advantage of mirrorless, it is LiveView which is detrimental for face/eye detect, portraits, low light, off angle shooting, video, etc.
    6d actually has usable LiveView with reliable face detect but it's slow of course - faster in daylight.
    Will be shooting a lot this weekend with 6d and several lenses to make a decision. I would rather not maintain two systems cause it's a hassle to charge separate batteries, keep accessories, etc. My RX100 can take care of occasions when 6d is too much.
    I do not shoot telephoto so 6d system will be with 24-70 F4 zoom, 35mm f2 and 85mm f1.8 primes. It's very manageable in size and surprisingly cheaper than my m43 system. Size wise is not bad but it is much heavier. Then again, 85mm wouldn't be in my bag most of the time - only for special occasions/photo shoots.
     
  8. fransglans

    fransglans Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 12, 2012
    Sweden
    gus
    I Used to change WB even with my JPEGS, especially when I had my eos 5D. And that was before I had lightroom. I opened the jpegs in camera raw and adjusted the wb in there. Not as good as a RAW but still better than "at shot".
     
  9. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    I tried that and WB is still not as good as E-M10 out of camera. Hues are off, for portraits-skin tones it's those very subtle casts that have impact. I am also building my workflow around transferring jpegs to iPhone via EOS app and sync all my keepers to Google Photo. EOS wifi transfer app is quite a bit faster than E-M10 (with iphone 6).
     
  10. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team Subscribing Member

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Honestly - if you're serious about your photography at all, you need to be shooting raw. With CMOS sensors, it matters not one iota what WB you use at exposure time - you can adjust it later with no impact on noise or anything else.

    Hope you continue to enjoy the "organic, clean full frame look". Whatever that is... ( oh, and remind me what resolution you get on Google Photo from your iPhone WiFi uploads ;) ). Snarky I know, but please stop coming back and telling us how wonderful FF is but refusing to post any photographic evidence as justification.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2015
  11. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    This forum used to be so much better when members could openly share their thought process and observations without users becoming so defensive. Based on the replies I am getting, this community is becoming much more like dpreview which I don't bother posting anything on. Flickr, 500px is full of samples if you need them. This is m43 forum, I've posted plenty of m43 pictures over the years. I've been shooting with m43 for 5 years during which time I've tried countless lenses and camera bodies and it helped to improve skills due to ease of use and ease of carrying around. I never seriously considered FF primarily due to high cost.
    Now that cost is the same, I was accidentally introduced to 6d by a friend. I simply found that by far I prefer 6d images even when looking on a small screen (it's the depth to them that matter to me). I was simply curious if some other m43 users found the same. Photography is more art than science. All those dxomark charts and measurements do not demonstrate how significant the gap between m43 and FF. I am not a professional photographer, it is a passionate hobby of mine. I spend enough time in front of PC and I much rather reduce that time by not shooting raw, simplify my workflow and enjoy photography and not lightrooming/photoshopping and clogging my HDD space But more importantly not wasting valuable family time. If photography is what you do for a living, then of course you are getting paid to deliver the best results to your clients.

    I would appreciate if Amin could close this thread as it is getting out of hand...
     
  12. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team Subscribing Member

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Well, if Amin wants to close the thread, that's OK with me. But really, you're making some very bold claims here that don't resonate with the experiences of many - even those (me included) who have used, or do still use, FF. That's fine, but there's no need to keep coming back with the same bold assertions ("organic, clean full frame look", "more tonality" etc), especially if you don't actually post any pictures to justify it.

    The icing on the cake is when you tell us that you only ever do JPEGs, view only on the web and never print. I'm all for honesty and open discussion but your posts are turning into m43 bashing sessions without any good arguments other than wild unsubstantiated claims.

    There are plenty of top-level, world-class photographers who'll tell you ( with some examples as proof) that the difference between FF and mu43 can be vanishingly small when used correctly in suitable conditions.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2015
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. sootyvrs

    sootyvrs Mu-43 Regular

    80
    Mar 6, 2015
    David
    I must admit I miss the Canon IQ when I had my 5D mark1 and although I used to shoot raw the DPP software also gave that superb jpeg rendering which I just never could replicate with Lightroom.

    I recently moved back to FF with Sony as their systems are smaller and lighter than Canon FF, especially with the mark1 A7 system but the look of the images are different to Canons but I am very pleased with the DOF control and IQ.

    I still have retained M43 though as an ultra compact system with the tiny GM1 which I leave in my car and take everywhere with me...

    Enjoy the Canon and do give DPP a go with raw as it will give you that extra latitude for adjustments while still retaining the Canon look unless it's changed from when I last used it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    You can hardly call it defensive comments when you are making claims that seem to be unlikely, i.e. they seem exaggerated. You keep referring to the "huge difference even on the small back screen", "special Canon tech only in their FF cameras", "forget the science, it's an art, and canon FF (and only FF) have nailed the art to a level vastly superior not only over m43 or APS-C but also over Sony FF." You repeatedly make it out to be a superiority, a 'gap', and this arcs a few members a little, when in reality I think you only mean the it's a look that you like a lot more.

    This makes members suspect you don't know much about cameras, so they are trying to help you get more out of your m43 gear. You should be grateful for the guidance. If they are wrong in their assumptions about your camera nous, they are only being guided by your exaggerated claims. And you can hardly criticise members in m43 forums for trying to guide you to better m43 results....

    This fellow has posted a side-by-side comparison of the two cameras that you have. Differences at the size shown (much bigger than your back-screen comparison) are basically invisible.

    In post #20 I suggested what is basically happening here, and in #26 I suggested an adjustment to try with your E-M10. Trying to help you, okay?

    I quoted your phrase above "it's the depth to them that matter to me". I'm not sure if you are referring to shallow depth of field? It's easy to fall in love with shallow-DOF lens effects, I agree, although it's a two-edged sword when you blow up a head portrait taken at 85/1.8 which has a gorgeous 'look', only to have the subject look a little dismayed that only one half of one eyebrow isn't blurred. Yet, I suspect you mean some other kind of 'depth', because you are also referring to shots take with the EF 40/2.8 lens, which is not especially shallow in DOF.
     
  15. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439680265.642751.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439680275.078428.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439680285.581035.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    Here is a few snapshots with 6d and 35mm F2 IS. I simply love everything about these pictures, to me they stand out, no processing - jpegs to iphone via app. I could never get anything similar with Oly 17mm f1.8 or PL25.
    It's all a matter of taste. Me, my friends and family all unanimously prefer 6d images. And it's not DoF although it helps too. This even applies to misfocused images which I get a lot. 6d AF sucks big time compared to E-M10, no eye detect and focus and recompose is a poor choice for moving subjects - children and dogs are rarely still:)  The lens may need to be micro adjusted too - we're dealing with very old, legacy technology here:) 

    One of my best captures with m43 was with PL25 and it required quite a bit of post-processing:
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439680697.049921.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    To me it is obvious which one I prefer. But we all have different eyes of course. And it's absolutely not about resolution, I do not pixel peep. I view most images on iPad and iPhone.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  16. bigboysdad

    bigboysdad Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 25, 2013
    Sydney/ London
    Well done for posting the images Art, I've see quite a few people not post examples in this type of debate, but you did, it really does push the conversation along.
     
  17. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    All nice shots mate. I agree there is a different look to your Canon vs Oly samples, but the completely different conditions would be a big factor. IMO there are plenty of m43 shots on the internet that have the same 'look' as your Canon samples.

    Here is one from me with a GX7 and the same PL25 lens as your m43 sample, no PP except WB was a bit green due to being under trees. I'm not saying it 'looks like' your Canon samples, which IMO is set by the sunny scene, but it also doesn't 'look like' your m43 sample.

    Christmas 2013-1220082.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    Here are a couple more samples (all portraits, to suit your chosen examples) with the same lens, showing some flexibility in the 'look':

    2015-Xmas-P2680529.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    2015Jan-P2690643.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    It's interesting that you have had this personal experience, and I wish you the best in pursuing your photography hobby, so please do run with your findings. But the link I showed in post #34 should have showed more differences if there is a 'gap', a 'big gap', an obvious gap indicative of an inherent superiority. It doesn't. That and the other reasons I have given, and your suggestion that shooting with your E-M10 has some advantages e.g. focusing that you regret leaving behind, are why I suggested playing with your E-M10 JPEG settings in post #26. The 'Canon look' is definitely exposing a bit hotter then Oly does with matrix metering.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    Here is a few with Canon's cheapest lens 50mm f1.8. These are just snapshots and not even perfectly focused cause I am still learning 6d AF and this lens may not be very precise. Yet I am still finding these results quite superior to what I was getting with Oly 45. Especially considering that these are just jpegs with no in-camera adjustments whatsoever - A mode at f1.8, the rest is full Auto, jpegs taken just minutes ago while hiking and transferred to iphone. I can only imagine what more expensive lenses can do on 6d. Again, this is my personal preference and it is quite possible that a lot of forum members cannot see the difference at all. Unfortunately for me, I do see tremendous difference.
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439691081.399780.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439691094.122598.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439691103.393794.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1439691111.379423.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    A few with Canon 24-70 F/4 zoom. All jpegs with default settings out of camera. Harsh sunlight. The last two with 85mm f1.8 lens (no sunlight). I am finding that 6d struggles to focus precisely with certain lenses at wide apertures. Still, I am very pleased with these snapshots on day 2 with 6d. I got several lenses to try, spent the whole day shooting. Still figuring out which lenses I want. 85mm is definitely a keeper.
     

    Attached Files:

  20. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Glad you are enjoying your new camera. Shoot whatever you feel is satisfying. IMO, the differences between systems and formats are subtle but they all contribute to the enjoyment (I used to shoot Canon EOS; 5d, 1dmark II w/ all high end lenses as well). For me the weight and size of my bag was the biggest factor paired with the fact that I no longer shoot for money (college thing). Camera body aside, there was a huge difference between my 24-70 f/2.8L + 70-200 f/2.8L + 100-400L when compared to my current 12-35, 35-100, 100-300 in terms size and weight.

    I still also enjoy the subtle differences of a FF sensor as well.... So while m4/3 system gets a good use frequently, my primary system still remains to be a FF one. (I noticed that most of your samples are portraiture with a preference in shallow DOF.)

    19927049534_be28140d0f_b.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    However, there would be no way to shoot this next photo with any FF system and yet be comfortable carrying all the stuff required for a family of 5 (3 young kids). It was a decision based on making the camera fit my lifestyle rather than work around my lifestyle to carry the camera. I recall a time when I bent over to pickup my son and the 1dmarkIIn + 70-200 f/2.8L swung around from my shoulder and gave him a very good bump on the forehead.. oops! Wife wasn't too happy either...

    7668142342_c9f49d84a6_b.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    If you enjoy that 50mm f/1.8 zippy, I highly recommend trading it in for the 50mm f/1.4 USM. If you like shallow DOF shots, the f/1.4 produces much more pleasing specular highlights/bokeh. Keep the 4/3rds camera for a little while. If you don't find yourself using it over the course of a couple months, I would recommend selling it... put the funds towards something for the 6d (50mm f/1.4?). My primary set on the EOS was 24 f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, 135mm f/2L and 300mm f/4L. All very good lenses that I wouldn't hesitate to recommend to anyone shooting with a Canon EOS.

    Both my systems are effective in their own way. On the other hand, the different systems can achieve similar results as T N Args pointed out....

    So with that, I leave a couple portraits done with a very much obsolete E-PL1

    7505395080_94f9f9bc08_b.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    18369386283_0ae0a35df3_b.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



    Enjoy! That's all that counts.
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2015
    • Like Like x 2
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.