6D I/II 1/4000 - why?

Gogster said:
Your comment was based on this image, which was simply a display of a bright day?

Who's being obnoxious?
Click to expand...

Didn't I already say, you!? The image didn't benefit in any way from being shot at 2.8, it's not like it's got extreme shallow dof, you'd have better chance of keeping the subject sharp at 5.6, take the advice instead of getting briary about it .
 
I love the focus on me, people really do get a degree of arrogance on forums. I was simply commenting that it's a shame and, in my opinion, a needed feature for a full frame camera.

If it were not needed 5D series, 1D etc. wouldn't have it and, would you believe, I have some experience in taking the odd pic and have used wide apertures. Who'd have thought?!
 
Gogster said:
I love the focus on me, people really do get a degree of arrogance on forums. I was simply commenting that it's a shame and, in my opinion, a needed feature for a full frame camera.

If it were not needed 5D series, 1D etc. wouldn't have it and, would you believe, I have some experience in taking the odd pic and have used wide apertures. Who'd have thought?!
Click to expand...

Sounds like you want the memory cards in the 6d to be equally as fast with an unlimited buffer too... (just kidding) but they have to offer some differences
 
Gogster said:
I love the focus on me, people really do get a degree of arrogance on forums. I was simply commenting that it's a shame and, in my opinion, a needed feature for a full frame camera.

If it were not needed 5D series, 1D etc. wouldn't have it and, would you believe, I have some experience in taking the odd pic and have used wide apertures. Who'd have thought?!
Click to expand...
Ignore the personal posts, it’s a generally friendly forum.

However at the end of the day it’s still only one stop, even though the numbers look big, the effective DoF between 1.4 and 2 isn’t often such a big deal that it’s a dealbreaker.

The 6d is built down to a price, which means it’s shutterbox is different to other Canon FF cameras, the slower flash sync is more of an issue to me than the max SS. But it’s part of the compromise to get an affordable FF camera (though the 750d makes the 6d look overpriced).
 
Cagey75 said:
Didn't I already say, you!? The image didn't benefit in any way from being shot at 2.8, it's not like it's got extreme shallow dof, you'd have better chance of keeping the subject sharp at 5.6, take the advice instead of getting briary about it .
Click to expand...

“Advice”

Thanks for your “advice,” wasn’t particularly after any, it was a comment on the features of the camera.
 
Phil V said:
Ignore the personal posts, it’s a generally friendly forum.

However at the end of the day it’s still only one stop, even though the numbers look big, the effective DoF between 1.4 and 2 isn’t often such a big deal that it’s a dealbreaker.

The 6d is built down to a price, which means it’s shutterbox is different to other Canon FF cameras, the slower flash sync is more of an issue to me than the max SS. But it’s part of the compromise to get an affordable FF camera (though the 750d makes the 6d look overpriced).
Click to expand...

Now this is an opinion on the whys, thanks.
 
To be honest, if you were a camera manufacturer with a full-pro press/sports photographer grade flagship DSLR, an all singing and dancing weatherproofed pro-grade general purpose camera, and a keen amateur/enthusiast grade (come-second body type) DSLR wouldn't you price them in a 1, 2 and 3 type order? To do so you'd want to turn a similar profit margin (at least when taking sales volume into account) on each camera, so you wouldn't want the 3rd model in the range to have the same spec and features as the ones above it... or why would people buy those in preference the cheapest one?

Given the spec and the actual results the 6D delivered at its time of launch, I think they got the price range to spec ratio about right, plus they threw in Wi-Fi and a more modern sensor that coped with high ISO/low light conditions just a tad better than the 5D III. So it doesn't have 1/8000 sec top shutter speed or 45 zone metering system... but there's an alternative, the trouble is that at the time that cost several hundred pounds more! And probably quite rightly so. So you paid your money and took your choice.

I chose the 6D as I felt it offered the best value for money, and I knew for the type of photography I did that I wouldn't actually need the additional features the 5D III had; so buying a 5D III (or iv) would, in my case, have been pretty much just for vanity rather than necessary functionality. Fortunately, as I've got older I no longer feel the need to wear the latest badge or label and that makes me feel a lot happier and more contented with my lot. :)
 
Gogster said:
“Advice”

Thanks for your “advice,” wasn’t particularly after any, it was a comment on the features of the camera.
Click to expand...
Gogster said:
I love the focus on me, people really do get a degree of arrogance on forums. I was simply commenting that it's a shame and, in my opinion, a needed feature for a full frame camera.

If it were not needed 5D series, 1D etc. wouldn't have it and, would you believe, I have some experience in taking the odd pic and have used wide apertures. Who'd have thought?!
Click to expand...


The only arrogance I've seen in this thread is from yourself. Pick and choose the replies that suit your ego, but I was only offering a very valid point. The image you posted did not highlight any need for a higher shutter speed, and I explained why, plain simple. Why you had to get your knickers in a twist I have no idea. If you want 1/8000 or better, why not try a mirrorless camera, bloody great they are ....
 
Cagey75 said:
The only arrogance I've seen in this thread is from yourself. Pick and choose the replies that suit your ego, but I was only offering a very valid point. The image you posted did not highlight any need for a higher shutter speed, and I explained why, plain simple. Why you had to get your knickers in a twist I have no idea. If you want 1/8000 or better, why not try a mirrorless camera, bloody great they are ....
Click to expand...

The image was indicative. You continue with your condescending tone, I don’t appreciate it, I’m not sure why you think it’s appropriate?
 
Gogster said:
I love the focus on me, people really do get a degree of arrogance on forums. I was simply commenting that it's a shame and, in my opinion, a needed feature for a full frame camera.

If it were not needed 5D series, 1D etc. wouldn't have it and, would you believe, I have some experience in taking the odd pic and have used wide apertures. Who'd have thought?!
Click to expand...
Part of the marketing and sale of new cameras is features that people "needs" if these needs does not exist the camera makers establish them. Funny thing how Mark I starts to suck right after Mark II is announced, Mark II starts to suck right after Mark III............
Be aware that many of our needs in new cameras are made up by the sales departments
 
soeren said:
Part of the marketing and sale of new cameras is features that people "needs" if these needs does not exist the camera makers establish them. Funny thing how Mark I starts to suck right after Mark II is announced, Mark II starts to suck right after Mark III............
Be aware that many of our needs in new cameras are made up by the sales departments
Click to expand...
Indeed.
I saw the spec of the 6D Mk2 and there's nothing it provides that I strictly *need* (over the Mk1), but the only thing that I would like is the better AF system.

The 6D is a budget full frame body and it fills a gap between the 5D series and the 80D/7D crop bodies.

If you are shooting sports and are used to the performance of the 5D and 1D series cameras, I think the AF speed and frame rate of the 6D is actually going to be more of a problem for you than the maximum shutter speed (granted the Mk2 is better for AF than the Mk1).
 
Gogster said:
The image was indicative. You continue with your condescending tone, I don’t appreciate it, I’m not sure why you think it’s appropriate?
Click to expand...
Perhaps I'm perpetuating an argument which is best left sleeping ... but I think the point of the questioning was "why do you think you need 1/8000". On the assumption that the 6D MkII (well all cameras) are built to a price point, how much more would you be prepared to pay for 1/8000 maximum speed vs the current 1/4000?
 
Eloise said:
Perhaps I'm perpetuating an argument which is best left sleeping ... but I think the point of the questioning was "why do you think you need 1/8000". On the assumption that the 6D MkII (well all cameras) are built to a price point, how much more would you be prepared to pay for 1/8000 maximum speed vs the current 1/4000?
Click to expand...

Hi, I know I've needed 4000+ in that past however some commenters are right, it's probably a commercial decision on the perceived entry point for the camera, my point was concerning the full-frame sensor on the camera. Big sensor = more light, L lenses (or even the nifties at 1.8/1.4) = wide apertures, just seemed like silly restriction. However I fully understand they have to keep something between the 5/1 series.

I don't have endless cash, but for me the 1/4000 would always preclude the camera from consideration. It would be too much of a limitation, I'm not saying often, but occasionally.

The post certainly wasn't intended as a whine to wonder why don't Canon give me everything the 5D or 1D does for the price of a 6.
 
Gogster said:
Hi, I know I've needed 4000+ in that past however some commenters are right, it's probably a commercial decision on the perceived entry point for the camera, my point was concerning the full-frame sensor on the camera. Big sensor = more light, L lenses (or even the nifties at 1.8/1.4) = wide apertures, just seemed like silly restriction. However I fully understand they have to keep something between the 5/1 series.

I don't have endless cash, but for me the 1/4000 would always preclude the camera from consideration. It would be too much of a limitation, I'm not saying often, but occasionally.

The post certainly wasn't intended as a whine to wonder why don't Canon give me everything the 5D or 1D does for the price of a 6.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that Big Sensor = More light. It's really only the lens aperture that can affect that. Personally I've never had an issue where I've needed 1/8000 but I'm a landscape photographer so most of my stuff is F11+.

As I mentioned previously though, the 6D can use ISO 50 so if you do hit the 1/4000 barrier you can always drop to ISO 50 which will mimic 1/8000 in terms of light.
I know ISO 50 is not native for the camera but I've used it once or twice to reduce the light when I've not had filters with me and haven't seen any issues with image quality.
 
Last edited:
ecoleman said:
I'm not sure that Big Sensor = More light. It's really only the lens aperture that can affect that. Personally I've never had an issue where I've needed 1/8000 but I'm a landscape photographer so most of my stuff is F11+.

As I mentioned previously though, the 6D can use ISO 50 so if you do hit the 1/4000 barrier you can always drop to ISO 50 which will mimic 1/8000 in terms of light.
I know ISO 50 is not native for the camera but I've used it once or twice to reduce the light when I've not had filters with me and haven't seen any issues with image quality.
Click to expand...

It's not particularly an issue I'm having, it was a 3rd body purchase decision, which I decided to get a 1DS Mk III instead.
 
Mr Badger said:
So where does f/1.8 (that was oh so popular for 50mm lenses back in the day) come from then? ;)
Click to expand...

Well, it's like amps that go up to 11 innit? It's faster than 2. :P
 
Ive been lusting for the Fuji X-T2 some time now
But now I see with an native ISO of 200 it's 1/8000 is insufficient i must have 1/1600 on the mechanical shutter at least ;)
 
Gogster said:
I don't have endless cash, but for me the 1/4000 would always preclude the camera from consideration. It would be too much of a limitation, I'm not saying often, but occasionally.
Click to expand...
It’s one stop!
So if you’re getting f1.4 with a 1dxII you’ll be getting f2 with a 6d, or indeed just carry an ND. I hate to sound argumentative but if in your brightest album the fastest shutter speed I can find is 1/640 why are you obsessing about 1/8000? You were shooting at f5 or f5.6 and you’re arguing the toss between f1.4 and f2?

Seriously 1 stop? You’ll note when this is discussed, many detractors quote figures of 2+ stops difference in aperture to compensate for 1 stop of SS just hoping people can’t do their own maths.

Now there’s loads of reasons I’d rather have a 5dIII or IV than a 6d, but one stop on the max shutter speed is well down the list.

ETA if I was a sports photographer like you; the 6d would never have been on my shortlist, I too would have bought another 1 series.
 
Last edited:
I have cameras with a max shutterspeed from 1/400 - 1/8000, my Nikons range from 1/1000 - and my Sony is 1/4000
I must say ive never maxed out on shutter speed and don't Remember even using/needing the 1/8000. Should i find myself in such situation my polarizer will serve 2 jobs
 
If they made the 6d with 1/8000 - someone would then say - well why doesn't it have this or that - there has to be model differentiation at different price points - if the 6d became too similar to the 5d4 - people would be saying 'why do i need to spend all that money on the 5d4 when the 6d2 is about the same'. It's the usual method of selling people up the range - whether they actually 'need it' or not... In your particular case - you 'want' 1/8000 of a second for your own reasons, and so that precludes you from buying a 6d2, as the spec isn't up to that standard. Canon's marketing machine has done the job intended, and steered you away from the entry level full frame due to your specific requirements.

I take a lot of street photography, yet use a 1dx2. It can do 16fps! That's one of the reasons I bought it. I rarely use 16fps - but when I do - I'm very glad to have it... the 6d2 would never keep up, and so it's off my list of possible cameras. They could have upped the fps a bit in their lower models of course - but then they wouldn't have gotten their sale of the 1dx2. Before you know it - it becomes - why cant they up the fps a bit? why can't they improve the weathersealing a bit? Why can't they up the ISO a touch? and before you know it - you have the 1dx2.
 
Wauv
Incredible HCB, Winogrand, Maier, Doisneau et al. did as well as they did :thinking: :LOL:

Are we todays photographer, amateurs or pro's getting to hung up on specs forgetting the craft?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good grief, if personal experience isn't enough I'll bow down to the superior knowledge here.

I was at the NMA, quite a few years ago, another blisteringly hot sunny day, I got talking to a serviceman who was injured and had quite an injury on his face, he agreed to tell his story and have his picture taken, at the time I had 1/4000 camera, I really can't remember what it was.

I wanted a close up, distorted look with my 35mm 1.4 and really shallow depth of field, however with the sunshine I couldn't have 1.4 without blowing out the shot and remember being quite irritated by it.

Anticipating some more lofty opinions - I didn't want him to move to shadows or inside, it was delicate and I didn't want to put any more pressure on him, yes I decreased the aperture, but that took away from what I was trying to achieve, all I wanted was the eyes in focus.

Because my experience doesn't match with yours, doesn't make me wrong, a feature tweaker, a skinflint moaning about the price of kit, it was just an observation from a something that had stuck in my head when I saw the 6D had the same limitation.

Want me to regret posting? Well done, I bloody well regret it.
 
soeren said:
Wauv
Incredible HCB, Winogrand, Maier, Doisneau et al. did as well as they did :thinking: [emoji38]

Are we todays photographer, amateurs or pro's getting to hung up on specs forgetting the craft?
Click to expand...
That is my thought, Soeren. Technology is taking over from art. Skill requires knowing how to make the technology do what you want. Technological limits should be a spur to achievement, not an obstacle.
 
Last edited:
This thread seems to encapsulate modern photography perfectly. It seems to me we now have too much choice, both of range of items available and spec of what we do have. Many people forget, or never used the primitive equipment of even 20 years ago. I’m sure there is a model to suit any spec you care to dream of now, whether we can afford it is another matter!
 
Chop in the 35mm 1.4 and buy one of these

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EF-3...&qid=1522127347&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+35mm+f2

Simples.

Your NMA shot. If you look at the DOF difference from f1.4 to f2 at a shooting distance of 0.6m, pretty in your face, then it goes from 2cm to 3cm and this could be done with that setup by focusing around the bridge of the nose to retain the eyes the eyes in focus, at 1m it's 7cm and 9cm but generally that principle holds at these apertures,
 
Gogster said:
Good grief, if personal experience isn't enough I'll bow down to the superior knowledge here.

I was at the NMA, quite a few years ago, another blisteringly hot sunny day, I got talking to a serviceman who was injured and had quite an injury on his face, he agreed to tell his story and have his picture taken, at the time I had 1/4000 camera, I really can't remember what it was.

I wanted a close up, distorted look with my 35mm 1.4 and really shallow depth of field, however with the sunshine I couldn't have 1.4 without blowing out the shot and remember being quite irritated by it.

Anticipating some more lofty opinions - I didn't want him to move to shadows or inside, it was delicate and I didn't want to put any more pressure on him, yes I decreased the aperture, but that took away from what I was trying to achieve, all I wanted was the eyes in focus.

Because my experience doesn't match with yours, doesn't make me wrong, a feature tweaker, a skinflint moaning about the price of kit, it was just an observation from a something that had stuck in my head when I saw the 6D had the same limitation.

Want me to regret posting? Well done, I bloody well regret it.
Click to expand...
Again I’m really not being argumentative. This isn’t about being ‘wrong’
You absolutely did the right thing not buying a 6d. ;)
It’s not a suitable camera for your general subjects.:thinking:

The 1/4000 shutter speed might have made a tiny difference to one shot every year* (tiny difference btw, speaking as someone who’s bread and butter shots would be affected more often, see the DoF calcs above).

However, picking up a 6d after a 1d series camera would firstly have frustrated because the user interface is completely different (not helpful when you’re working), and the mk1 is effectively a single AF point camera. The outer AF points are useless in anything less than ideal light and even in good light are only good for static subjects. The MkII is of course better, but still has the alien interface.

* the light levels on the day you named at the start of this thread and in your scenario above would have got you 1.4 at 50 ISO - the shot you wanted.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
Again I’m really not being argumentative. This isn’t about being ‘wrong’
You absolutely did the right thing not buying a 6d. ;)
It’s not a suitable camera for your general subjects.:thinking:

The 1/4000 shutter speed might have made a tiny difference to one shot every year* (tiny difference btw, speaking as someone who’s bread and butter shots would be affected more often, see the DoF calcs above).

However, picking up a 6d after a 1d series camera would firstly have frustrated because the user interface is completely different (not helpful when you’re working), and the mk1 is effectively a single AF point camera. The outer AF points are useless in anything less than ideal light and even in good light are only good for static subjects. The MkII is of course better, but still has the alien interface.

* the light levels on the day you named at the start of this thread and in your scenario above would have got you 1.4 at 50 ISO - the shot you wanted.
Click to expand...

Wasn't an option at the time Phil, and my comments aren't aimed at you, there's small minority who form an opinion that a circumstance hasn't affected them, they can't see it affecting them and therefore it's something on which they need to pour scorn.

Forums are rife with this lack of empathy, keyboard warriors abound.
 
:) Sorry but from the start this whole thread seemed to be for justifying buying a higher end camera opting out the 6D just for the shutterspeed.
I can think of lots of reason to buy the topoftheline model shutterspeed not being one of them
The simplets reason is pure lust, just because this model appeal to you in it self and that's more than enough. There is is no reason to try rationalising.
You already got two bodies and are buying the third so for the odd once every other year occasion you might encounter those lighting situations a simple 2-3 stop ND mounted on a lens on one camera body could solve that "problem"
I want the Fuji X-T2, not because its weathersealed, got 1/8000 ss or better lenses or IQ but simply because it appeals to me and I like the handling of it.
I could bring a gazillion arguments and this forum could tear them all apart except for the one
I WANT IT and that's really the only argument you need.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
soeren said:
:) Sorry but from the start this whole thread seemed to be for justifying buying a higher end camera opting out the 6D just for the shutterspeed.
I can think of lots of reason to buy the topoftheline model shutterspeed not being one of them
The simplets reason is pure lust, just because this model appeal to you in it self and that's more than enough. There is is no reason to try rationalising.
You already got two bodies and are buying the third so for the odd once every other year occasion you might encounter those lighting situations a simple 2-3 stop ND mounted on a lens on one camera body could solve that "problem"
I want the Fuji X-T2, not because its weathersealed, got 1/8000 ss or better lenses or IQ but simply because it appeals to me and I like the handling of it.
I could bring a gazillion arguments and this forum could tear them all apart except for the one
I WANT IT and that's really the only argument you need.
Click to expand...

Well put...... we have many...

Sony GAS members.
Nikon GAS members.
Fuji GAS members.
Olympus GAS members.
Panasonic GAS members.
Canon GAS members.

On this forum! :D
 
Riz_Guru said:
Well put...... we have many...

Sony GAS members.
Nikon GAS members.
Fuji GAS members.
Olympus GAS members.
Panasonic GAS members.
Canon GAS members.

On this forum! :D
Click to expand...
I happily admit to be prone to GAS and I dare you to talk me out of it.
Though before you do you gotta ask yourself one question " do I feel lucky?"
Well do you....? :D
 
soeren said:
I happily admit to be prone to GAS and I dare you to talk me out of it.
Though before you do you gotta ask yourself one question " do I feel lucky?"
Well do you....? :D
Click to expand...
:D haha quality movie!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top