After much deliberating and waffling between so many tasty new camera designs this year I just pulled the trigger on Canon's 6D.
I had looked at Nikon's D610 which is a superb machine but ruled it out because it just felt to chunky in my hand.
Also looked at Sony's latest models (A7, A7r and the oh-so-tiny RX1r) but when I went to try them, first hand, at a Sony store I was ambivalent about the new A7s maybe because of the noticeable image lag in the EVF after taking a shot and the somewhat larger than expected AF square that the kid in the store said couldn't be adjusted to be smaller except to reposition on the VF area. And while I know I'm definitely in the minority here, I felt the A7's were a bit TOO small. I REALLY did like the RX1r but I wanted to have an EVF and as good as it was (just as good as the one in the A7s) it, too had hesitance issues so I passed.
That left two considerations: Nikon's new Df which just got a HUGE boost of praise from DxO with it's amazing low light sensor performance. (Well there were more but these are the two that it was boiled down to.)
On first blush, DxO certainly showed the Df to be the better of the two. But on close inspection things got interesting.
ISO sensitivity: IDENTICAL
Signal To Noise: Nearly Identical (Df SLIGHTLY better but not significantly so)
DR: Here the DF definitely trumps the 6D--until ISO 1600 where it's pretty much a match. (Definitely an issue in certain low ISO circumstances...like maybe 3-4% of the time.)
Tonal Range: Again nearly IDENTICAL
Color sensitivity: Okay..the DF blows it away. But in all honesty I've never been too much of a stickler for color accuracy unless in an ad shoot where a package color has to be spot on! When I look at shots of sunsets, tropical fish, gaily painted Jamaican houses and other sources of color contrast I don't know if the color's are accurate. All I know is the shot is amazing! And I take the photographer's word that that's what he/she saw!
Yes, the Df has the D4's amazing sensor (although Thom Hogan reportedly feels it ain't). Again, an amazing sensor. But 16 MP vs 20 MP. But, okay, the other cameras I considered had 24 mp and as much as 36MP. True. But compared with the 16mp sensor on the Df I felt the 6D's 20 MP offered a slightly higher margin of safety for cropping.
Hi ISO capability: Well the Df's sensor certainly is legendary but the 6D has certainly shown it's strength in many a 'real-use' test where testers have been wowed by the cleanliness of the 6D's high ISO shots. One guy's video had very high praise for the high ISO prowess of the 6D over the D600 (and now D610 I suppose since that hadn't really changed): "Epic Shootout Comparison"
AF: Both don't have a lot of sensors but the one in the 6D is claimed to work at a low -3 eV. And speaking of AF, the one lens I want to mount on the thing is Sigma's 35mm f1.4 ART which was last reported to be having problems with the Df. (But I imagine that will be resolved shortly.)
Weather sealing: Both are weather sealed to a certain extent.
Weight: Both weigh about the same. Don't know why but I felt the 6D had a better 'feel' and weight of cameras I had held (unfortunately I had not actually held the Df so I imagine it would have been fine, though.)
Dimensions: Both are about the same dimensions. And while, admittedly, I hadn't held the Df I felt that it was going to be a bit chunky like the sibling it stole most of its internal organs from, the D610.
Battery capacity: The Df clearly rules with a reported 1400 shots per charge. BUT...the 6D, while certainly less, isn't too shabby either with it's 968 shots--a number that certainly blows away the 280 or so you get from Sony's feeble power packs.
Top shutter speed: 1/4000
Shutter noise: The Df isn't bad. But the 6D is sublimely quiet for a DSLR. (Truth be told, however, the RX1r was where my heart really was in this category.)
VF view: Df is 100%. The 6D comes in at 97%. Again nothing to lose sleep over. And am I glad I have those extra 4 MP in case I need to crop. Also the VF magnification is also nearly identical: Df is .70x while the 6D is .71x.
Continuous shooting: 5.5 fps for the Df vs 4.5 fps for the 6D. For a sports guy significant. For me? Nyet.
Pop-up Flash? Neither has any. (Thank God!)
Deck layout: Many obviously LOVE the retro analog dials and buttons festooned on the Df. Me? I happen to prefer the minimalist look of the 6D. This is a personal choice. Less is more.
Structure: The Df is Mg++ throughout. The 6D, however, just has a main superstructure in Mg++. The top is plastic to accommodate the wi-fi antenna.
Which brings us to wi-fi. This was strange at first until I saw this video from DigitalRev TV What I saw was Canon's EOS smartphone App for remote operation. One of the things I LOVED about the Panasonic Lumix cameras was their fully articulating LCD (which by the way is close enough for govt work between the 6D and the Df). Save for Canon's D60 most DSLR's simply don't put out (so to speak) like the Panasonic's LCD. The Sony's do this flippy thing which is better than nothing but still not quite fully articulating.
With Wi-Fi and this app it is just like having a fully articulating LCD..and then some. For example, you can look like you're txt-ing someone with your camera on your lap or something but really be taking a shot at some off angle without anyone realizing it. The phone (or pad) becomes your EVF. How cool is that? That plus setting a camera up on a tripod in the cold waiting for wildlife to show up is also a nice little plus.
So with all that, I took a plunge.
Sorry for going on and on so long.
Can't wait to start sharing the results.
(I also figured there would be a lot of people ditching their current 6D's because of all these new cameras out there so I got the thing on Ebay at an amazing price.)