Nikon D600 or Canon 6D That is the Question

Canon EOS 6D and Nikon D600

I am seriously considering going to one of the above brands and as I consider digital a disposable medium, I will not spend a fortune on a camera that will become obsolete in a couple of years or so.

Nikon D600

I won’t go in to a major diatribe, as I haven’t tried them out as yet. I do want a Full Frame camera and as Pentax has yet to come out with one, I think it is time to look at another system.

Canon EOS 6D

So what are the differences? Which camera do I think I will embrace in the Full Frame 24x36mm format? Well, both are economy versions of their upscale brands, the Nikon D800 and Canon 5D MkIII.

Canon EOS 6D

They are both Full Frame highly capable cameras that would work famously for my applications, i.e. slow shooting studio or location productions.

Nikon D600

Nikon does have more focussing points and does have 4 megapixels more than the Canon. Canon is better in low lighting conditions and has mega support in the video arena.

Canon ESO 6D

Nikon D600

You may see the other parts by clicking in the screen frame for Part 2, Part 3, etc.

Let’s have a closer look at the specifications and discuss them a bit later…

Nikon D600 vs Canon 6D Specification Comparison

Camera Feature	Nikon D600	Canon 6D
Sensor Resolution	24.3 Million	20.2 Million
Sensor Type	CMOS	CMOS
Sensor Size	35.9×24.0mm	35.8×23.9mm
Sensor Pixel Size	5.96µ	6.55µm
Dust Reduction / Sensor Cleaning	Yes	Yes
Image Size	6,016 x 4,016	5,472 x 3,648
Image Processor	EXPEED 3	DIGIC 5+
Viewfinder Type	Pentaprism	Pentaprism
Viewfinder Coverage	100%	97%
Built-in Flash	Yes, with flash commander mode	No
Storage Media	2x SD	1x SD
Continuous Shooting Speed	5.5 FPS	4.5 FPS
Max Shutter Speed	1/4000 to 30 sec	1/4000 to 30 sec
Shutter Durability	150,000 cycles	100,000 cycles
Exposure Metering Sensor	2,016-pixel RGB sensor 3D Color Matrix Metering II	63-zone dual-layer iFCL metering sensor
Base ISO	ISO 100	ISO 100
Native ISO Sensitivity	ISO 100-6,400	ISO 100-25,600
Boosted ISO Sensitivity	ISO 50, ISO 12,800-25,600	ISO 50, ISO 51,200, ISO 102,400
Autofocus System	Multi-CAM 4800FX	11-point AF with 1 cross-type sensor (center, sensitive down to -3EV)
AF Detection	Up to f/8 (center 7 AF points only)	Up to f/5.6
Video Capability	Yes	Yes
Video Output	MOV, Compressed and Uncompressed	AVI, H.264/MPEG-4 in MOV Format
Video Maximum Resolution	1920×1080 (1080p) @ 24p, 25p, 30p	1920×1080 (1080p) @ 29.97p, 25p, 23.976p
Audio Recording	Built-in microphone External stereo microphone (optional)	Built-in microphone External stereo microphone (optional)
LCD Size	3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD	3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD
LCD Resolution	921,000 dots	1,040,000 dots
HDR Support	Yes	Yes
Built-in GPS	No	Yes
Wi-Fi Functionality	Eye-Fi Compatible, WU-1B, UT-1	Built-in Wi-Fi
Battery	EN-EL15 Lithium-ion Battery	LP-E6 Lithium-ion Battery
Battery Life	900 shots (CIPA)	980 shots
Weather Sealed Body	Yes	Yes
USB Version	2.0	2.0
Weight (Body Only)	26.8 oz. (760g)	24 oz. (680g)
Dimensions	141 x 113 x 82mm	145 x 111 x 71mm
MSRP Price	$2,099 (as introduced)	$2,099 (as introduced)

On paper the Nikon does seem to outshine the Canon on several fronts and I would be remiss if I didn’t give them both a serious workout before making my decision.

But for now it is looking that the Nikon may be the way to go. However, I really like the Canon 24-105 lens that it comes with in their package.

But then again I have heard that the Nikkor 24-85mm lens is a real keeper as well. I used the older version on my brother’s D70 and it is an amazing kit lens. I also heard great things about the 24-120 Nikkor lens as well.

I really love the ergonomics of the Canon and find the look of the Nikon a bit plastic. I know it isn’t but it sure looks like it in my opinion. I do like the fact that the Canon sensor is only packing 20 megapixels thus more real estate per pixel which translates in to better noise performance, generally speaking.

But then again, the output samples I have seen from the Nikon look pretty amazing. It looks like the score right now is Nikon 52 vs Canon 48…Once I decide what I will do, I will post an update.

As a caveat I’m not in a rush to drop Pentax yet, but I am hoping for a FF soon. If they show no signs of that direction or if they do not improve their auto focus system, I’ll most definitely bite the bullet and jump ship.

So if anyone wants to sound off, please comment below. I need all the help I can get…

Tagged with

Canon Nikon Pentax Photography

leonsroar

Another aspect to compare per below link…

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/836|0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28appareil2%29/834|0/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28appareil3%29/830|0/%28brand3%29/Pentax

I am also the one who use Pentax and wait for FF.
I would go with Nikon if no news about FF from Pentax in this year…
http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/ Benjamin Kanarek

I have decided to stay with Pentax for the being.
Nantza

I worked with Canon for 8 years and switched to Pentax a year ago. Do not miss my Canon stuff at all. Must say that the autofocus was faster on my Canons but i still had the same amout of images out of focus with my 5 d mark2 as with my k5.
I have really enjoyed to use my 645d. It is soooo slow but at the same time my quality and keeper files has gone to a new level. I shoot less but the images are just so much more better overall so the slow flow is perfect for me. And I enjoy shooting alot again.

For fashion and celebrity portrait work I have noticed that I do not miss my FF at all.

Hopefully you find a right setup for you.
Class A

You are confused regarding the low-light capabilities. The Canon 6D hasn’t been tested by DxOMark yet, but I’m betting my bottom dollar that it won’t beat the D600 in the low-light score; it won’t even come close. Sony sensors (as used by Nikon) clearly outclass what Canon can produce at the moment.

Pixel size has no relevance for overall image noise. More pixels mean smaller pixels and each pixel will hence be noisier but collectively the many pixels average out to an image that is just as noisy (only more fine-grained).
Class A

You are confused regarding the low-light capabilities. The Canon 6D hasn’t been tested by DxOMark yet, but I’m betting my bottom dollar that it won’t beat the D600 in the low-light score; it won’t even come close. Sony sensors (as used by Nikon) clearly outclass what Canon can produce at the moment.

Pixel size has no relevance for overall image noise. More pixels mean smaller pixels and each pixel will hence be noisier but collectively the many pixels average out to an image that is just as noisy (only more fine-grained).
DK Brooklyn

Hola Ben, Let me begin by saying that I am an admirer of your work. You have a very creative eye that shows in your beautiful fotos. By choosing Pentex, i.e.: prosumer, cameras you serve as an inspiration to us amateurs who might feel the need to purchase a more professional camera. With that said why do you need a professional camera? What will a full frame camera do for you that DX format camera cannot? This is megapixels that you need, then why don’t you purchase Pentax’s medium format camera? Thanks again. Peace
c.d.embrey

Why Full Frame? Over the years you’ve shoot MF, 35mm and both crop and FF Digital. You seemed to be happy with the image quality/resolution of earlier crop Pentax cameras. Why not test the Nikon D7000 and Sony A77?
- http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/ Benjamin Kanarek
  
  I will be sticking with Pentax for now. Looks like there are some good things t come with their Ricoh association.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Libby-Hsiao/100002173271338 Libby Hsiao

I made the switch a few years back to Nikon and keep wishing Pentax would produce a full frame body to go back to. I had some time with both the D700 and 5D2 and the ergonomics of the 5D2 just felt odd coming from a Pentax. There are definitely things I miss about the Pentax ergonomics though like a dedicated bulb mode and the green button to get me to metered quickly in manual mode. Minor quibbles, but definitely details that I’ve come to appreciate in their absence.
Feroze

As a long time Pentax user I know exactly what you going through. I gave up on them ever going full frame and even though I still have my Pentax gear, including the MZs, I’ve recently bought a 5d and a 600ex-rt, and hope to get a 70-200 soon . I’ve been blown away by the cannon’s abilities. I dont think the 6D is the right camera for you though and would seriously rent a 5D and a 70-200 before making any decision. HTH
http://www.facebook.com/jc.oconnell1 Jc O’Connell

You overlooked a key advantage of the Canon body. Since it has a shorter registration distance than Nikon, you can adapt many more lenses while keeping infinity focus than you can with the Nikon body.
Strat Man

BK,

take your time, heavily evaluate both systems before you make a final decision. For years, many have felt that “prosumer” 35mm digital cameras were good enough for magazine/print quality needs. The full-frame, less noise, high ISO features have made this an easy decision. Actually it started with the 35mm film cameras like the Nikon FM2.

After so many shutter actuations, shooters found it was cheaper just to sell off the used bodies before they broke down and purchased new bodies that were still cheaper than their high-end big brothers. I think the same applies to 35mm digital bodies as well.

Keep up the stellar work, BK!

M-A
- http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/ Benjamin Kanarek
  
  Good advice
MJ

Pentax Forums tried out K5 IIs in Photokina and they were impressed with the autofocus performance of the new model. I know you are primarily looking for a FF system at this point, but also if you were not quite happy with the autofocus performance from your comment here, K5 IIs maybe worth to wait another 2 weeks.
- http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/ Benjamin Kanarek
  
  Perhaps Pentax can connect with me and take back my two K5′s and give me 2 K5 Mkll’s in exchange. If that were the case, it would certainly solve the endemic problem of AF issues I have had with Pentax.
  - Darren Addy
    
    Autograph your K-5 bodies and sell them that way on eBay. Autographed (perhaps with a glossy used on a fashion cover, also autographed, they would probably bring far more than would be needed to purchase new K-5iis bodies.
http://twitter.com/rudy_j Rudy J.

while I agree with your first statement not to spend a fortune on a camera that will become obsolete in a couple of years or so, shouldn’t your choice at least partly be based on the perception what your clients might think of your equipment? As you are an internationally published photographer, isn’t it expected of you to show up with the top of the line DSLR (or it sounds you’re still loyal to Pentax, show up with their digital medium format camera)?
- http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/ Benjamin Kanarek
  
  My clients have never once ever scrutinized my camera gear.
Ken

Hallo Ben,
i use both systems ,but now selling all my canon gear to keep the nikon and upgrade to the D600 or D800 , now i am almost sure it´ll be a d600 . as you mentioned the Noise at high iso made me hesitate a bit but after seeing this comparisson on Dpreview ( http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d600/5 ) i think the 600 is atleast as clean or even cleaner than the costly 5D3 or the d800s, and knowing canon as it is , they are no way going to make the 6D high iso better than their high end cams.

and much more than that i can get cleaner shadows even if i have to push the shadows 1 or 2 stops, with my old canons i use to to get a mesh like banding even pushing 1 stop, that´s one reason i want to stay with nikon.the sony sensor´s DR (as you might know it from the Pentax K5) will be easy on any retouching work than the canons.

second reason is the built in flash with commander controll mode, once you use nikon CLS flash system on some small location jobs, you can keep the heavy studio lights back home.it´s pretty much the best small flash system out there and the fact that with a d600 you can controll many flashes from your shooting position without even moving ,makes it fun to work with the 600.

simply giving both systems a try is the best thing to do. the canon lens 24-105 is a very good general purpose lens,which i found was a tad better and quicker than nikon´s. but you can´t beat the nikon´s new 50mm 1.8 and 85 mm 1.8 for the price and sharpness.

cheers and happy shooting,
Ken
JackAlltog

What a refreshing article,
not the Canon vs Nikon done to death debate, but a seasoned professional who
will publicly take such a crisp efficient view about the tools required for
the job now.

Also refreshing is that the
camera’s you mentioning are not too far out of reach for some advanced
amateurs.

I guess its also a bit annoying
that Ricoh have not yet pushed Pentax to deliver a FF solution so that you can
reuse your lenses if the image circle is big enough; I guess another
consideration is the question about whether the industry is moving towards more
of a medium frame resolution expectation with the Nikon 46M offering and the
Canon rumours of the same; Would that leave you at a disadvantage with your
peers?.

I’m not sure on the on shoot time
scales in your image productions but am sure that the assurance that the Nikon
shoots onto 2 Cards at once should help de-risk repeat shoots if a card ever
fails.

The 24-105mm is almost never
off my 60D but when I get a studio sorted the 24-70 on a 6D will be my
aspiration for extra sharpness and F2.8

Personally I hope Ricoh talk
to you to demo a FF Pentax that no one else knows about.

The trouble is you can wait
for ever if you wait for perfect.
Paul

What is obsolete? do you need a camera that out-resolves magazine print?
- http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/ Benjamin Kanarek
  
  I need a camera where when go to a shoot, I don’t feel paranoid that half of my stuff is not in focus…
  
  When it is, it is fine…But that should be the least of my concerns.
  - JF Touchette
    
    i wish Pentax could do a field retrofit of the AF module in the two K5 bodies I have.
    The AF is unpredictable way too often.
    I’m reluctant to buy yet another K5 (K5 II) just to fix what should have been functional already.