Between the two Canon 6D and Mark II, which would you go for? Need image and video quality. Although the MP on the 6D is a tad lower, SnapSort says the 6D actually has a better image quality. As well as better AF system with 11 vs 9. Interestingly Canon has taken the Mark II off their market but is still easily available to find new. Here is what I'm looking at:

NEW
- Mark II $ 1700-2000 (Body only)
- EOS 6D $ 2099 (Body Only)
- EOS 6D $ 2599 (With 24-105mm f/4L IS US/M)

Other Option

- I could hold out for a Mark III for the cost of the 6D and lens. What do you guys think? I watched plenty of reviews and comparisons and image quality difference isn't too noticeable, specially between the Mark II and 6D.. Video is also big for me too. Owners of both or whatever, lemme know!

 

Do you already shoot with Canon or is this going to be your first DSLR?

 

I've actually had a 5D Mark II for a while, and didn't like the AF but as for the rest, it was great. It was given for a few months for a project. I've been looking into the new 6D which I was told was basically the 5D Mark II replacement. Yet, updated and fixed with newer technology. I'm still not quite sure. I could do Mark III with a ok lens or 6D with a great lens. Camera is only as good as its glass is. Video is also big to me, and I can not find a great side-by-side video quality comparison between the Mark II and 6D.

 

Canon had Mark IIIs for $2400 (refurbished) on their website a week or two ago. Assuming you already have a lens or two, I'd take the Mark III at that price over all of them.

Honestly, I don't think you'll notice much of a difference between a 6D and a Mark II. Why pay for the newer body to get marginally better results? Unless you're shooting at very high ISOs, you probably won't ever see an IQ difference and the new focus system isn't really that great either way...

 

I agree with JonBoy. If you already have a 5DII it would be dumb to go to a marginal at most upgrade to the 6D. The 6D isn't a replacement for the 5DII it's just an entry level full frame camera. It's basically a Rebel with a full frame sensor. Honestly I don't think it would make sense to upgrade unless it was to a 5DIII. I would just spend that money burning a hole in your pocket on better glass for the 5DII unless you limited by what you can currently do with your 5DII right now. Personally for me, I didn't like the AF points on the 5D2 when I'm used to 19 AF points on my 7D which is why I couldn't downgrade to only 9 points. That would drive me nuts, I'm not a big fan of focus and recompose approach. I'm sure if you have been shooting with limited AF points you're used to it but I couldn't go backwards. I'm planning to upgrade to a 1D body sooner than later, 1D4 hopefully unless I win the lotto and get a 1DX.

 

There is a guy with a big catalog of really nice looking videos using the Mark II if you say video is of concern. You might want to check out some of his work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ger9exVd2I

his youtube name is devinsupertramp

EDIT* I see you already bought one, good choice.

 

Alright. I went ahead and bought the 6D and couldn't be happier. After doing a lot of research, the 6D won it for me because Digic5 in the 6D is faster and better than the Mark III, the 6D is better at noise reduction than the Mark III. Using the same lens between the Mark III and 6D, you can not tell a difference in image quality. Video quality the Mark III is a tad better, but the 6D video noise is still better than the Mark III. Like experts always said, its not the mega-pixels its the glass. After owning the 2, the 6D is miles ahead of the Mark II. AF system is day and night compared to the Mark II, the 6D is better all-in-all. Video is smoother, crisper, and cleaner looking. I will upgrade to the Mark III later on, because personally its still to expensive. Many faithful Canon enthusiast said the Mark III gives them no reason to upgrade from their Mark II. Because Im happier with the 6D, and the 6D being better than the Mark II.. its a keeper.

 

I'm a Nikon shooter, but I don't understand your logic.
You will eventually buy the 5d3, yet you purchased an entry level full frame sensor camera?

So you've spent money on the 6D, which is close/north of 2000, and later you will eventually upgrade to the 5d3 when the price drops... And sell your 6D? Or backup?

I would've just gone with the 5d3 at mid 2000 prices, rather than the 6D. If anything closer to nikon, it made no sense for d700 owners to go to the d600, instead of the 800. Lower max frame rate, slower flash sync, no pc port, etc.

 

Well, I bought the 6D and absolutely loved the decision. The 6D will be used for now, 5D Mark III will be by its side later on. Will use both. The 6D I have to say has a quality much better than that of the 5D Mark II, in both image quality and video. Easy of use is a tad more frustrating, they made it more complex. Otherwise its an amazing camera.

 

Glad you're enjoying the 6D While it may be the entry level full-frame model, I'd hardly call it an entry level camera by any means. Out of curiosity, did you end up getting the body only or the 24-105mm kit? And which other lenses do you have?