Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: hassiman on August 09, 2013, 12:35:53 pm
-
Hi.... Nikon just refunded the money I paid for a Nikon D600 in October as it was full of oil and dust. I am now in the market for a digital camera. I do fine art scenic and street photography. I was just wondering how the Canon 6D stacks up to the D600 in terms of IQ. ??? I LOVED the D600's DR but 100's of dust spots were unacceptable.
Has anyone compared these two in terms of IQ in a real-world A/B? ???
Whose glass is better?
-
A starting point to answer this question would be ask yourself what lens do you think you'll be using for your landscapes. Both are capable cameras and if you liked the D600, and you're considering it again, that means you're willing to take the risk with the oil and dust spots. Just buy the d600 and start shooting. If you're not willing to take the risk, buy the 6D and start shooting.
For dynamic range options: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-6d/16
-
From what I have read
. Barring low light AF and a few gizmos the D600 is a better package all round
. The oil and dust problem seems to have been solved/minimized in the current lot. Any way Nikon has been cleaning up the sensor free of cost for D600.
So getting another D600 is in my opinion a better option to getting a canon 6D
-
There are a lot of sources to use when getting a sense of how one piece of gear compares with another. There are some interesting numbers on cameras/sensors at the DxO site. In their measurements, the Nikon D600 sensor has an edge in most performance areas. Numbers are only part of the story, however. If you have the opportunity, find a Canon D6 and see how it "feels" in the hand, check the menu system, etc. For many, those form factor and usability issues are as important as having a somewhat higher scoring sensor. Neither will make you a better photographer, but the better we can use our tools, the better our output.
-
The two cameras will provide virtually undistinguishable image quality, so I would recommend handling both to see what you prefer. Or in your case handling the Canon, since you already had experience with the Nikon.
In terms of lenses, well, both brands offer the most comprehensive lens system on Earth, so there will be little to decide based on that...
-
The two cameras will provide virtually undistinguishable image quality, so I would recommend handling both to see what you prefer. Or in your case handling the Canon, since you already had experience with the Nikon.
Hi Paulo,
I agree, they are technically pretty close, and handling them is always a good idea. The Nikon does allow to print some 10% larger output with the same quality though, should large format output be a goal.
In terms of lenses, well, both brands offer the most comprehensive lens system on Earth, so there will be little to decide based on that...
While true, there are a few lenses that have no real match, e.g. the Canon TS-E 24mm II which might be useful in landscapes as well as other applications. Besides for architecture, it also allows to focus really close which may allow rather unique, macro like, nature shots with adjustable DOF. That lens is very special, offers super image quality, but is not cheap.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I switched to Nikon D600 from 5Dmk2 and after 2 months I went back to Canon and got 6D. I am very happy with my decision to get 6D, it is a better camera than 5Dmk2 (that I loved!).
I shoot landscape only and the Nikon just didnt work for me, the built quality, the lenses selection, the inferior liveview (mainly!!!). The dynamic range was bit better than on the 6D, but that is not a big deal for me as I always use filters and know how to postprocess.
-
Very happy with 6D. I love the wi-fi and the low-light performance. Two images to show you. This is a professional modern dancer during her performance. It doesn't look she was moving but believe me, she was moving all the time. I set the camera to Auto ISO, AV at 2.8 and fired away with the Tamron 28-70 2.8 VC. The AF point to center only.
Eduardo
-
I shoot landscape only and the Nikon just didnt work for me, the built quality, the lenses selection, the inferior liveview (mainly!!!).
Glad you found a camera that you like.
Just out of curiosity:
- what was your main purpose when you decided to jumpship to the Nikon D600? In other words, what problem(s) were you trying to solve?
- what lenses were you using on your D600 vs what lenses are you now using on your 6D?
- how did the build quality of the D600 concretely impact your landscape shooting experience?
- have you ever experienced non optimally focused images as a result on the "inferior" live view of the D600?
- what was the total cost for you of this back and forth?
Thank you.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
If you shoot mainly at high ISO, you may get more mileage out of the 6D.
If you typically shoot at ISO 100-400, however, there's no comparison - lens selection notwithstanding (i.e. comparing image quality alone), the D600 completely blows the 6D out of the water. Doubly so if you're shooting a typical landscape, with deep shadows and bright highlights within the same shot, and no direct control over lighting.
-
what was your main purpose when you decided to jumpship to the Nikon D600? In other words, what problem(s) were you trying to solve?
I wanted to try the great DR everyone is talking about.
what lenses were you using on your D600 vs what lenses are you now using on your 6D?
I had Tokina 17-35, Nikon's 50 1.4, I was going to get 70-200 but you dont find reasonable priced f4 zoom in Nikon's lineup.
how did the build quality of the D600 concretely impact your landscape shooting experience?
Didnt really affect that much. I just threw this comment in there as per my experience. I did feel like I could break it easily tho.
have you ever experienced non optimally focused images as a result on the "inferior" live view of the D600?
Not that I had not optimally focused shots, I ended up with no shots! I have missed way too many shots trying to focus using the liveview..
what was the total cost for you of this back and forth?
Dont know exactly, but I can imagine I would get 70-200 f4 IS for that.
-
Not that I had not optimally focused shots, I ended up with no shots! I have missed way too many shots trying to focus using the liveview...
I am not sure to understand what you mean, could you please elaborate?
You are speaking about landscape shooting here?
Thanks.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The OP does fine art, which means he needs good color reproduction ability. Maybe someone here should discuss this - my view is that Canon color may be a bit better than Nikon color on modern cameras.
Edmund
-
The OP does fine art, which means he needs good color reproduction ability. Maybe someone here should discuss this - my view is that Canon color may be a bit better than Nikon color on modern cameras.
Edmund
Accurate colour reproduction means that you'll be calibrating the camera with a profile anyway, so the default colour/white balance settings don't matter. The D600 has a better colour depth than the 6D, though, which means it is capable of recording finer graduations between colours.
-
Accurate colour reproduction means that you'll be calibrating the camera with a profile anyway, so the default colour/white balance settings don't matter. The D600 has a better colour depth than the 6D, though, which means it is capable of recording finer graduations between colours.
The sensor's ability to record color, which means the CFA's ability to separate colors, does matter. CFAs vary from model to model.
Edmund
-
The sensor's ability to record color, which means the CFA's ability to separate colors, does matter. CFAs vary from model to model.
Edmund
Canon used to overlap the color filters quite a bit compared to Sony sensors. Has that changed?
I find the D600 color accuracy very good if a bit muted. I use the D800 color profile in Raw Therapee.
-
I am not sure to understand what you mean, could you please elaborate?
You are speaking about landscape shooting here?
Thanks.
Cheers,
Bernard
Yes, I am speaking about landscape shooting. As mentioned thats the only subject I shoot.
What I meant that I missed a lot of shots due to the inability to use the liveview properly at times when taking pictures at dusk/dawn when lighting conditions changes really quickly.
-
How do you miss focus when shooting a landscape?
Missing exposure is one thing - especially in rapidly-changing light - but how do you miss focus when you're (presumably) shooting well stopped-down, with a focus point often past the hyperfocal distance?
-
Canon used to overlap the color filters quite a bit compared to Sony sensors. Has that changed?
I find the D600 color accuracy very good if a bit muted. I use the D800 color profile in Raw Therapee.
Nikon and Sony CFAs may be different even if the underlying sensors are the same - see A900 and D3x
Edmund
-
How do you miss focus when shooting a landscape?
Missing exposure is one thing - especially in rapidly-changing light - but how do you miss focus when you're (presumably) shooting well stopped-down, with a focus point often past the hyperfocal distance?
Yeah you are right about the exposure more than anything, I could of explained myself better. But I do quite a bit of shallow focus landscape shots where you need to focus as accurate as possible. Let alone focusing through big stopper without taking the darn thing off between each frame.
-
Yeah you are right about the exposure more than anything, I could of explained myself better. But I do quite a bit of shallow focus landscape shots where you need to focus as accurate as possible. Let alone focusing through big stopper without taking the darn thing off between each frame.
I have been using a D800 for 1.5 years, whose Live view is said to be worse than that of the D600, and I am yet to see a single frame not perfectly focused when I use live view.
The high magnification mode of the live view on these cameras is not sexy, but it makes it very easy to find the peak of focus by looking at the way the pixelization changes as the focus is tuned.
The fact that live view uses the lens stopped down gives you 2 options:
- If you use a lens with some focus shift (probably the case of the Tokina you were trying to use), then you should directly use live view with the lens stopped down to get very good, but not excellent, focus accuracy. This can make the image pretty dark, but this focus shift is a lens issue that would bite you if you were trying to focus with the lens wide open anyway,
- If you use a lens without any focus shift, then you will get a better focussing accuracy by focusing with the lens wide opened and then stopping down afterwards.
So I still don't understand your comment, unless you are saying that it is not a good idea to use a lens showing some focus shift for dusk/dawn photography... in which case I totally agree! ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I have used the Nikon D800/D800E now for over a year, and a 6D since early February. I have shot the D600 but stayed away from it in the 4th quarter of 2012 due to excessive dust issues and returns (at one time my local dealer had 25 units stacked up to return to Nikon). Based on my brief shooting with the D600, I felt the results were pretty much identical to the D800/E except for the extra resolution. My photography is all landscape, no tethering, some wildlife. I found the D600 had the same amazing DR in the iso 100 range as the D800 possibly just a bit more. The higher iso range limit for my work was around 2500 iso with 3200 a push in ambient temps in the high 60's (F) as much higher than that I found the noise too destructive.
The Canon 6D was introduced to me on a night shoot in February, I was so impressed with the 6D I went out and purchased one the next day. The two things that impressed me immediately were the fact that the 6D had very clean higher iso's up to 6400 (about my max) and the noise in the normal range was like no other Canon noise in that it did not have the traditional green/red blotchy noise that for years I had struggled with forcing HDR type photography. You can't push the shadows as much with the 6D as you can with the D800/D600, but the noise to me is more like film grain, and less digital. It cleans up with much less image destruction.
The 6D outperforms the 5D MKIII in noise as I found the noise characteristics of the 5D MKIII to be the same as other older Canons. Red green banded noise that causes image destruction and required exposure bracketing to get an acceptable solution. On a regular basis I will pull up the shadows on D800 exposures as much as 2.5 stops with no noise or loss of color/sat in the shadows. For a landscape shooter the D800 DR was revolutionary to me and still amazes me.
My only real issues with the 6D are the fact that Canon should have just carried their tried and tested camera interface forward, i.e 5D MKII, MKIII, instead they IMO tried to figured out the worst possible combination of buttons, knobs and dials to give the worst possible user interface I have ever seen.
The user of the 6D has the ability to load the Magic Lantern firmware and unlock a HUGE amount of potential. If you use this firmware you will find yourself asking, why did Canon not do this. The firmware is free, a bit tricky to load ( I strongly recommend having someone who has it loaded help out) but it is a great asset to the 6D (5D MKIII 5D MKII 60D) also. I have been running it now for 1 month and have had no issues.
The 6D is clean in the upper iso range up to around 6400, much past that and the noise gets pretty harsh. However as stated before the noise at the higher iso ranges shows much less of the destructive red, green banding.
LIve view on the 6D is very straight forward and in lower light it's superior to Nikon as Canon somehow buffers out the noise. In low light Nikon shows a lot of noise and can get hard to focus with Live View. There already has been a lot written about Nikon's "over zoom past 100%) for me it's much easier to use when backed off 3 and you can set a preset for this.
The 6D works with Canon's standard plug for their intervoltmeter, with the D6600 you will have to purchase an adapter to use the Nikon MC-36 or one of it's ebay clones. There may now be a non Nikon model that gives you intervoltmeter functions with the port the D600 has. Yes both the D600 and D800 have an intervoltmeter built in, but they limit you to exposures of no longer than 30". If you are working at night you will need longer.
AF on the 6D is the same number of points as the older 5D MKII, however the AF to me seems a bit better in the ability to lock on to a subject the first time in lower light than the 5D MKII. The newer 70D has Canon's most advanced AF to date, and I have not read much about it's abilities yet. The D800 has 51 points, and most of the time they seem to do a good job, however in low contrast, low light situations, I have trouble getting focus lock. If you are using a telephoto lens this problem can get a bit worse. My experience is with the 200-400, a lens which I love, but in low light at 400mm F4, my D800 will miss about 45% or so of the time with the center point. Working small song birds from 15 to 20 feet with the D800 in mixed light can be a bit frustrating as the camera can't seem to lock and many misses are so close. Hands down in my experience the AF of the 5D MKIII is the best I have ever used in both AI and low light focus but this is beyond the scope of your question.
Nikon's D800 family lock you out of the camera when long exposure noise reduction is turned on, i.e. take a 2 minute exposure you have to wait another two minutes while the dark frame is written. Canon on the 6D buffers this operation to the background and frees up the camera. In fact the 6D can buffer this out very well, allowing a least 2 40 minute exposures with the dark frame running in the background. You will be locked out before you can take a 3rd exposure for about 20 minutes while the buffer is cleared. I was very surprised to see this with my D800 as it can really slow down workflow, especially if you are shooting a series of 10 second or longer exposures. I am assuming the D600 works the same way.
Both cameras will give you excellent results and both are an excellent value.
Paul Caldwell
-
My 6D does handle low light quite well. I have given it a workout for fireworks, astrophotography, and other night photography. I like the 6D live view. Buttons are a matter of taste. I can't compare it to the Nikon because I really have no intention of changing systems - I have too many lenses I like and won't give up (particularly my well-used 400mm f/5.6L no-IS, for birding - no relatively inexpensive equivalent in Nikon-land). At any rate, the 6D is a capable tool. It fits well in my hands. AF is not elaborate, and a sports/wildlife photographer may choose to spend more and get the 1DX.
FWIW, the Canon 70-200 lenses are great. The 70-200mm f/4 IS lens is the one I have, and it is crisp, with great color and contrast. It is also light and handles well on the two prosumer cameras I have (60D for action/wildlife and 6D for everything else).
Good luck. Buy to taste - either camera ought to satisfy.
-
I have never had 6D, but I used 5D Mk II for years, and used 5D Mk III a bit before moving to D800e. I have used D600 off and on. The answer depends on what IQ means for you, but here is why I prefer Nikon.
At ISO 100-200, Nikon/Sony sensor leave Canon in dust. Call me a bad photographer (and you would be correct ) but I have to do post-processing on most of my images. Curve adjustment, Dodge/burn, clarity, selective color processing, are normal for me. When putting files through their paces, Canon files (which I used from 2007 to 2012) start to break sweat a lot sooner then the Nikon cameras.The S/N ratio is markedly higher in Nikon. Also, there is that thing called DR which these cameras have oodles of.
As for high ISO, although the grapevine is that 5D/6D are better at very high ISO (6400+), I am quite satisfied with my D800 at 25600 (relatively and comparatively speaking). D600 and 5D Mk III are about the same and normalizing for size brings D800 at the same level.
I see Canon 5D Mark III (and 6D) bundles going cheap on eBay and am really tempted, but apart from 17mm TS-E (and 24mm TS-E II to a lesser extent), can't think of a good reason to go for it.
-
I'll just chime in as a D600 user and say that I really like the high ISO performance on my D600. Coming from a D700 I'm really impressed.