Welcome to the forum!

As an adjunct to the Tangents blog, the intention with this forum is to answer any questions, and allow a diverse discussion of topics related photography. With that, see it as an open invitation to just climb in and start threads and to respond to any threads.

Canon 6D vs. Canon 600D: How come I didn't scream WOW!?

dbrunodbruno Member
edited October 2015 in Canon
I shot the first event with my new Canon 6D last night, using a Canon 24-105mm F4.0L IS. Not sure if it's my imagination, or I'm mis-remembering what I was getting from my 600D, but there really wasn't the OMG I was expecting when going through the pictures first pass in LR. Not a lot of pop to the colors. I know I have to go through the settings again to see if I've missed anything. But I feel the shots from last night - a place I have worked at a number of times - will need more tweaking in LR than those from my 600D, and I don't like that.



  • Hi Dave! I do not own a 6D but I went through the very same emotion the first time I processed 5D mark III files. I had seen what the images look like by other photographers and I guess I had unrealistic expectations of the files themselves straight out of the camera. At first glance ,I didn't see a big difference from a canon rebel to be honest (within normal ISO) With that said, I know I have the ability to shoot at higher ISO's and still maintain quality images. Better IQ in shadow areas etc.. Also for what it is worth, I too have the 24-105 and out of all the glass I own, this lens is not the greatest. I do use it a lot out of convenience, but every time I go to edit, I kick myself:) 
  • Dave,

    I assume you are shooting in raw and cooking  them to your preferred taste. That's the whole point of raw straight from the camera, they'll have no pop, little contrast, saturation etc. Are you applying an import preset to the pics to get them to a basic level as a first pass before you do anything. You'll be comparing sooc images with peoples final processed images which could be far removed from the raw.

    Trev has given some great tips on here re raw processing and giving the images some pop such as increasing the blacks plus loads more stuff.

  • Thanks, CJ an TT. This stuff does help. I've used this lens for outdoor events on my T3i, and it has performed well. Maybe now with a full frame, the edges of the lens are more prominent.

    In LR, I do have a few things I do initially, but I don't have a canned preset. I usually put the few things I know I will want on all photos in the first one, and then sync them all. I definitely do not use the "auto" button like some people do for a starting point. I think it really screws things up.

    Tony - if you have those tips from Trev bookmarked somewhere, I would appreciate seeing them.

  • Dave you setup a preset to your liking and apply it as an import preset  so every time you import pictures they are adjusted on import to lightroom, you can make several import presets for different looks you are going for.

    Don't have them bookmarked I tend to make notes of them and just incorporate them into my workflow, I'll try and remember the various threads Trev has posted on raw processing, although I'm sure Trev himself will point you to them.

  • TrevTrev Moderator

    I think Tony was referring to THIS thread, but it was primarily to set up for Nikon NEF files, although you can choose another Camera Profile to suit your Canon files, like Camera Standard, but have a read through it all anyway as there is still useful tips in there.

    What generic preferences you can do on all images upon import would be generally speaking in the Tonal Curve/Detail (Sharpening), Camera Calibration for your Process and Profile choice, but I would leave White Balance 'As Shot' since there would be a wide range you probably shot under so have a 'set' WB would be foolhardy as you would then go and change it all again.

    Hope you get a little bit of information to help you out though.

    Actually, if you could maybe upload a Canon file somewhere and send me a link to:   fstop_87_2@internode.on.net I could maybe set something up for a generic import setting, you open it then you can generate a New Preset in LR so you just choose that, of course you could do general tweaks, don't be specific, so it can be applied across the board on import.

  • Thanks, guys. I have in the camera the lens profile switched "on", in LR I have the lens profile switched "on". What I typically do is first divide the images into the different rooms where they were shot - almost always completely different lighting - get the exposure, etc correct on one, and then sync.I don't touch anything with regard to exposure before I divide them up. Everyone has their own schemes, and I'm sure mine could be more efficient.

  • Dave -- I own a 400D, 7D, and 6D.  With the same lens and with plenty of light, I see little difference in image quality across the three camera bodies.  But start reducing the light and increasing the ISO and the 6D blows the other two cameras out of the water.  I don't hesitate to shoot ISO 6400 with my 6D -- and the noise I get seems comparable to 800 ISO on my 7D.  To me, that makes the 6D worth every penny.  If I don't need high ISOs or the shallow(er) depth of field afforded by the 6D's full-frame sensor, then I'm content with the 7D, the 400D, and sometimes just a point-and-shoot.  Good luck!

  • JC - wow, that sounds good, and I'm sure I will come to realize the benefits of this camera as I shoot more and more events, which will now be probably all indoors as the cold weather approaches.

    I still have to look into the DOF/sensor size relationship, as I don't recall reading anything about this.

  • I think I get it now. I thought it only was dependent upon F stop, but I see now that focusing distance comes into play.


  • Dave -- The larger the sensor, the less the depth of field.  Based on my experience, the size difference between the sensor on my crop body and the sensor on my full-frame 6D is about "one stop."  For example, if my aperture is set to f/5.6 on my crop-sensor camera then I'll need an aperture of f/8 on my full-frame camera to get comparable depth of field.  Not a huge difference, but noticeable.  This has been both helpful and a detriment.  Helpful because sometimes I want a really out-of-focus background, and the full-frame 6D can give me one stop more than the crop-sensor body.  And a detriment because sometimes I need more depth of field than I can get for a given aperture/iso/shutter combination.

  • Dave, 

    Here's a screen capture before and after edit, the unedited raw looks pretty lack lustre and overexposed compared to the edited version.

    The guys posts above have it pretty much covered totally agree with it.
  • Tony - yes, I get it. What I have to do is look at RAW photos from a place where I have used both cameras, in similar lighting conditions, and really see if I am in fact mis-remembering what was coming out of my 600D with the Sigma lens. I think that's really the only way I can convince myself.

    I have to think more like a film shooter who has his own darkroom, you know? I have to "develop" my pictures from my "negatives".

  • Justin - Thanks for the response. From what I've read in the past half-hour, I'm understanding a bit more the connection between sensor size and DOF.

  • The best way would be to do a little experiment in low light, with the rebel and 6D using the same lens, as a direct comparison.
  • Trev, 

    There was plenty of useful stuff in your nikon nef thread even to me as a canon user. There were some other good threads too, one of a mountain/ lake scene that you processed, I think it may have been a jpg though. 
    Another one where you reviewed capture one, I ended up buying it ....really good stuff thank you for sharing
  • TrevTrev Moderator
    Thanks Tony. Glad you got some tips out of it all.

  • Neil vNNeil vN Administrator
    Dave - you haven't read anything about the relationship between DoF and sensor size!?  Maaaaaan!

  • yes, man oh man ... I do remember the link you sent, and thanks.

  • Neil - a lot of my feelings about all this stems from my moaning about not being able to use my Sigma lens on my 6D. But, looking at things a bit more closely - thanks to Trev asking to look at a few of my shots - I'm feeling a bit better about "only" having a Canon 24-105 F4L IS to use right now for events. I do have a Canon 40 mm F2.8 "pancake" which is sharp as heck, but may be inconvenient switching back and forth.

    Also, I have always been really shy about going above 1600 ISO, but from the few shots I took at 2500 and 3200, they looked pretty darn good.

    Additionally, I have to get used to the fact that if I'm shooting RAW, I will be digitally developing these images in LR. My goal has always been to get it as right as possible in the camera, but there is just no way around "developing" the photos. My mindset has to change.

  • Definitely worth shooting a 6D at 6400 ISO - it's absolutely usable so long as the picture is correctly exposed to start with.
  • Mr_Logic - I had an event Tuesday night at a low-light brew pub where people were competing in different sorts of games for prizes. My shutter speed could not go below 1/100, and bouncing ETTL flash behind me wasn't cutting it (I soon went to 1/2-full manual flash), so I had no choice but to gut it out at 6400 ISO. I looked at a few photos this morning in LR zoomed in, and yep, it was W-O-W! So, looking at the quality of these shots, I'm really confident shooting at 3200 ISO because of the quality at 6400 ISO. THIS is why I spent the money.

  • Glad to hear you're happy Dave :) running high ISO is quite eye-opening!
Sign In or Register to comment.