Does the D6 help photographers stay competitive, or has the Canon 1Dx mark 3 left it behind?
Delivering informative capability based reviews and tutorials on camera gear filming techniques
and content creation I wanted to publish a Nikon D6 video for sometime,
but there were no specs of any significance to report.
During the same time, I released three videos on the Canon one DX mark 3.
Canon is getting aggressive creating buzz in the press and on YouTube.
Two days ago, under the cover of darkness, while not a single creature was stirring,
Nikon quietly announced the D6.
People were shocked.
The specifications were underwhelming.
The camera was largely panned.
Jared Polin summed up the D6 as highly disappointing.
Matt Granger called it a flagship fail.
Tony Northrup took the high road, but in the end, he essentially said that the Canon One
DX offered superior capabilities in every category.
Then there was Theoria Apophasis.
He could not stop ranting about how bad it was.
It was clear to him that this camera should have been more.
And felt taken for granted as a Nikon customer.
I understand that feeling.
As a former Commodore Amiga user, I know what it is like to be let down year after year
before products fade into oblivion.
And as a current canon owner, the past three years have been anything but exciting.
But what irritated me the most were promotional ads from photographers stating that for sports,
this camera is it.
This is the holy grail.
This is all we wanted, it can’t get much better than this.
Canon stunned the market with the 8K Ibis EOS R5.
The one DX provides five point five kay raw 10 bit four two two internal, unlimited buffer
for jpeg, 1000 image buffer for RAW and jpeg.
The only way the D6 stunned the market was what amounts to a very minor update to a four
year old camera that is priced at sixty five hundred dollars.
Enough ranting, let’s get into it.
I’ll compare the Nikon D6 with its arch nemesis, the Canon one DX mark 3, with special
mention to the EOS R5.
The D6 has fifty fewer autofocus points covering a smaller frame area.
At first this seems this sounds bad and the D6 is getting ripped for this.
While there are fewer autofocus points, Nikon claims that the focus points are more capable.
They are able to detect contrast changes diagonally as well as horizontally and vertically.
The Canon one DX mark 3 has five hundred twenty five autofocus areas with ninety to 100 percent
coverage for video.
For photo, the One DX has one hundred ninety one cross type auto focus points.
Both cameras do very well in photo mode, and both have very fast autofocus.
In video, the Nikon D6 is no better than the D5.
Live view in the D5 was useless and the D6 has not seen any upgrades here.
Canon is the clear winner of these two when it comes to video autofocus on normal and
low light.
Unfortunately, the Nikon D6 does not get eye detection autofocus.
It does not even get face detection.
That shows you how little Nikon has put into the D6.
Video capabilities have not been improved over the D5.
The D5 video capabilities were criticized being inadequate.
Video autofocus is terrible.
Live view is awful.
It’s not reliable.
Cameras a third the price can do a much better.
The D780 can do a much better.
The Z6 can do a much better job.
Four kay tops out at 30 frames a second with a staggering one point five times crop.
In ten eighty, all we get is sixty frames per second.
How much effort would it take you to give customers 120 frames per second?
The Canon one DX mark 3, can do 120 frames per second in ten eighty without breaking
a sweat.
We are talking about ten eighty.
The D6 is worse than the recently announced D780.
I understand why Theoria Apophasis is so upset.
The Canon one DX can do one twenty frames in ten eighty.
It can do 60 frames in 4K with a 15 percent crop with autofocus.
It can do five point five kay raw 10 bit internal four two two.
It has clog.
The Nikon D6 is selling us six year old technology for sixty five hundred dollars.
I get a lot photographers that complaining that these cameras should not have video.
They are for photographers.
Some get very angry.
Shawn Davie says Does anyone else not care about video?
I just want to shoot.
Make a good camera that does not shoot video, for less money.
Leo says What's up with everyone?
They all rave about its video features, yet no-one appears interested in its photographic
properties.
This is a photo camera in the first place, and only secondarily - a video camera.
They don’t see the need for video capabilities in a camera.
We should just get a camcorder.
Today, most photographers provide video to their customers.
Most phot.
It’s demanded.
It’s required.
The market for photos is shrinking while the market for videos is expanding.
If you are just shooting photos, consider the video capabilities as an opportunity to
leverage additional income streams.
The Nikon D6 costs the same as the one DX mark 3.
So instead of complaint about the D6, I should just get a video camera to do video so I spend
another $2000 to shot videos for my clients.
So I get to spend $8500 dollars when I could just spend $6500 with Canon and now I have
more kit to take care of.
Sure, in 1999, cameras just took photos, but today, photo only cameras get panned and do
not sell as well as hybrid cameras.
Even Nikon stresses the importance of video in their marketing material for the D6.
Nikon understands video is important to modern professional camera.
They boldly claim that the D6 is up for the challenge when video content is part of the
assignment.
They state that the D6 has impressive video features.
Someone from marketing should tell this to the product managers.
No matter how much we value impressive video capabilities, the primary use case for the
D6 and the 1 DX mark 3 is high speed, accurate fast action and sports photography.
These cameras are built to last.
They are not only durable, but they are reliable go anywhere in any condition cameras.
Both have dual CF Express cards to handle raw speed.
The Nikon D6 can move 14 bit images.
Nikon states it’s buffer can handle 200 jpeg files, but Canon’s buffer and store
an unlimited amount of jpeg files.
It can even do ten bit heef files.
But this is a professional camera and we don’t care about jpeg do we?
Why is Nikon not posting raw buffer performance?
The Canon one DX mark 3 can easily buffer up to 1000 raw and jpeg shots before filling.
If the Nikon D6 can only shoot 200 jpeg images before filling, it is no wonder everyone is
upset.
For high speed shooting, photographers want a camera that can keep up.
What good is 14 frames a second if the buffer cannot keep up?
Both Nikon and Canon provide excellent color accuracy.
I am not going to get into a battle of which camera has the best color science.
Sure there are subtle differences, but it’s hard to find a camera these days at this price
level that disappoints.
Both perform well.
However, neither camera has Ibis.
The message is clear, if you want Ibis, go with their mirrorless offerings.
Neither company has announced a mirrorless version of their flagship camera, but canon
has come close with yesterday’s announcement of the EOS R5.
Eight K video, Ibis, 14 frames mechanical, 20 frames electronic and it is not even their
flagship camera.
The R5 while light on details is aiming very high.
Higher than anyone has gone before.
RF lenses are getting excellent reviews and are innovative.
The one Dx and the D6 lens mount is at end of life.
While both cameras have access to a deep inventory of lenses, all development is going to the
mirrorless mounts.
Neither company is lacking in the pro department.
Insert Conclusion card here.
The Nikon D6 primary use case is sports and fast action photography.
That is where most of the praise or criticism should fall.
A good scenario would be the 2020 summer Olympics.
The D5 does a great job in this scenario so the D6 will also perform well.
But the competition does a great job too.
The one DX has both face detection and eye autofocus, it has a wider autofocus coverage
area.
It has a buffer that can handle 1000 raw and jpeg files before filling up.
The D6 can only handle 200 jpeg files before filling.
Which one has more tools?
Which one has a better probability of landing that shot?
Which one would you trust to get the shot?
For their last flagship DSLR, canon is going out with a bang.
Nikon is going out with a whimper.
At least the D6 does a great job at producing good shots.
For video, there is no four kay sixty, no ten eighty one twenty.
There is no 10 bit four two two.
Better video specs can be had at a third of the price of the D6.
I hear you.
Shooting video is not what this camera was designed for.
Agreed, but Nikon did nothing to improve the video capabilities over the D5.
Clients are demanding video.
Canon gave the one DX very powerful video features.
If you only need to shoot photos, then the D6 may give you what you need.
If you do not need a huge buffer, the D6 may be for you.
If you have a lot of Nikon lenses, the D6 is worth consideration.
Nikon is not aiming the D6 to anyone outside of Nikon’s customer base.
As I stated in this video, and this one, Nikon is in financial trouble, they are in more
trouble than any other manufacturer.
The lack of development was done on purpose.
Put out another camera body to generate revenue.
Spend very little on research and development to maximize profits to keep the company going
while it commits fully to the Z system.
Unfortunately, Nikon spent so little on the D6 development, that too few D5 owners are
likely to pay for the upgrade.
This strategy worked with the D780.
Take the guts of the Z6 and make a DSLR version.
With the D6, Nikon red the market wrong and under developed the D6.
The Canon one DX mark 3 is a better camera in every way.
It’s a very good and capable video shooter.
10 bit four two two internal.
Five point five Raw. h two six five recording.
The Canon one DX can shoot 14 frames mechanical, yes the same as the D6, but it can go up to
20 frames per second electronic, and has a huge buffer five times that of its predecessor
allowing it to record 1000 raw and jpeg images before filling.
The one DX includes the 10 bit Heef file format.
Buy the D6 and you will likely feel the need to upgrade within five years.
Buy the one DX and you won’t feel the need to upgrade for ten years or more unless those
RF lenses become appealing.
I cannot recommend the Nikon D6 even to existing D5 owners.
A camera priced at sixty five hundred dollars should be much more capable.
I hope the lack of development on the D6 means that every other remaining engineer at Nikon
has been working on stunning mirrorless cameras like canon’s R5 and rumored R6.
But I do not see innovation.
The rumours are quiet when it comes to Nikon.
The D seven eighty, which I reviewed last month, is a good DSLR.
It’s the mirrorless equivalent of the Z6, which was released a year earlier.
The D seven eighty is not innovative.
It’s a copy of the Z6, which was a copy of its competitors that came to the market
several years earlier.
The D6 is not innovative.
The D6 is not even competitive.
Two cameras in two years that fail to excite.
If you are considering the D6, wait until the camera has been released and has been
extensively reviewed.
Nikon, if you are listening, take an engineer and have them increase the buffer to allow
us to take advantage of the CF express cards.
This will greatly please your base.
They can live without Ibis, but having a deep buffer really maters.
You could also through in face detection while you are at it.
I am not a Nikon owner, but the D6 saddens me.
I hate it when companies take yesterdays leftovers and package them up as something special that
they expect us to pay top dollar.
That’s how I felt with the Canon 80D, the EOS R and RP when they came out.
I really hope Nikon is working hard on its Mirrorless camera equivalent or this is the
beginning of the end for Nikon’s camera division.
For Nikon to spend so little developing the D6 tells me that they are financially strapped.
They merely provided minor software improvements.
The LCD is only ten twenty four by seven sixty eight.
The sensor has not been upgraded.
This camera does not deserve the D6 moniker.
The upgrades, other than CF Express cards, which cannot be used, should have come in
a firmware update.
They are so cash negative, that would could not even provide sufficient buffer capabilities,
or include basic video capabilities that have been on the market for years.
I asked my viewers which camera company they thought would be the first to merge or file
for bankruptcy, and overwhelmingly Nikon was chosen.
When a vast majority of people feel a company is doomed, revenue begins to implode even
further as potential customer stay away.
Why buy a system if no one will be around to support or expand it.
On Wednesday, I boldly stated that Canon would be announcing the EOS R5 by midnight.
I was right.
I immediately released a video of the EOS R5 and provided my opinion of what I thought
this meant to canon and the market.
Comment after comment from viewers were stunned.
Up to the announcement, viewers were hopeful, and unsure what we would see.
I have hundreds of viewer comments and they are all excited.
They are happy about the future with canon, happy to see innovation in photo and video
capabilities, happy to see exciting new lenses.
Compared this to the comments from Nikon customers.
They are dejected, angry, feel taken advantage of.
I understand how they feel because as a Canon owner, I have felt that way since 2016.
I hope Nikon has something exciting coming.
If Nikon cannot provide an answer to Canon, or even Sony, it’s game over in the consumer
camera segment.
If you are a D5 owner, and your camera breaks, consider moving to canon’s one DX, or if
you want to stay with your large lens investment, just get another D5.
They can be had for fifty five hundred new or thirty five hundred used.
The Nikon D6 will be available at the end of April.
The Canon one DX is available for purchase now.
Both cameras are design for people that shot fast action sports photography that have to
get the shot.
They are durable, reliable, all weather sealed bodied.
These cameras are a staple and how they make their money.
Neither is designed for the ordinary filmmaker.
You would not enjoy carting this around with you as you travel.
I wanted you to see the different approaches the two companies are taking towards development.
If you have any questions or comments, drop them in the comments section below.
I do review all comments and do my best to respond to as many of you as I can.
Do me a favors and support this channel by punching the subscribe button, then click
the bell icon followed by all to receive notification of new video as I publish them.
Thanks so much for watching.
See you soon.