Some very exciting announcements by both Canon and Nikon this past week, the introducing of a new full-frame line of cameras, Canon’s 6D and Nikon’s D600. These two releases actually piqued my interests as a wedding photographer for a couple of reasons: 1) full-frame at a lower price point and 2) lack of high megapixels. As a wedding photographer, full-frame offers two very important functions: wide-angle lenses stay wide and lower noise. Also with less megapixels, this will generally achieve lower noise and faster processing (smaller files sizes). This is not to say all wedding photographers need, want, or like full-frame and less megapixels. Personally, I’ve rarely found the need for lots of megapixels, but I’m always at the need of higher ISO capabilities. Why? Bui Photos shoot for mood and feel. Our clients spend money to achieve a feel with accent lighting and our job is to capture that and not just wash it away with a big blast of flash.

So this buying guide post isn’t written so much of whether to choose Canon or Nikon, but rather if you should upgrade or get it at all.

Canon EOS 6D

Canon had released their 5D Mark III earlier this year as the replacement to the 5D Mark II. It was finally the camera the Mark II should have been and would have been more successful if it had been. The Mark III is a great camera that performs flawlessly. But for a low-light wedding photographer like me, is the Mark III really the best fit?

Let’s see how the 6D compares to the 5D Mark III:

Should You Upgrade?

The biggest draw is certainly the price for a full-frame professional dSLR. What’s also cool about the 6D is the inclusion of GPS and Wi-Fi. The built-in GPS will mean all the photos will have geo-locations tagged and the built-in Wi-Fi will allow you to use iOS or Android devices to remotely control the 6D with Canon’s special software. This was first seen with the optional Wi-Fi add-on for the Canon EOS 1D-X.

If you already own a Mark III, you’d be crazy to trade it in for a 6D. While it might not be replacement worthy, the 6D would make a great backup body. With both bodies being full-frame, you don’t have to worry about having the wrong lens on the wrong camera.

What if you own a 5D Mark II? The choice is a bit easier, it is my opinion you should upgrade. The old 9-point autofocus system is enough to make me upgrade. Yes, it’s only two more focus points, but don’t forget this is a new autofocus system whereas the Mark II was using the same autofocus system as the 5D classic. Also the new exposure metering system is stellar from what I’ve seen. But you are sacrificing a few things: 1/8000 max shutter speed (which can make a difference if you tend to shoot fast lenses wide open in bright environments), a few MP (hardly noticeable), and a third of a stop in max sync speed (again, this can make a difference when shooting with flash).

If you own any other Canon dSLR (minus the flagship 1D-X), you should upgrade if it’s in your budget for full-frame and the high ISO capabilities. Otherwise, invest in lenses.

Nikon D600

When Nikon introduced the D800, it seemed to be more than a D700 replacement. The rumors were that the D800 introduces a whole new line to Nikon and not replace the D700. This seems to be true with the release of the D600. So let’s compare, D600 vs D700:

Should You Upgrade?

Well, if you already bought the Nikon D800, you would be crazy to downgrade. But again, the D600 makes a lot of sense as a back-up body to the D800 when you don’t need all the megapixels. The D800 also has many of the more “pro” features that the D600 is lacking such as 1/8000 shutter speed.

What about people who have the D700? This is where I’m hard-pressed to just say: yes, you should upgrade. Why? Well, the D700 is still a great camera. With full-frame, high ISO capabilities, AND with 51 autofocus points compared to 39, in many ways the D700 can hold its own. But the D600 has something the D700 doesn’t: video. For those who want and need video, the choice should be clear. But if you’re like me, a stills-photographer, I would stay with the D700 for mainly the extra focus points. I know there will be others that disagree with how useful additional AF points are, but if you use lots of fast primes, you’ll know how crappy and inaccurate focus and recompose is.

For those who have been using the Nikon D7000 and ready to step it up, this is a nice upgrade. It doesn’t quite have the fast frames-per-second, but there is plenty to make up for that.

Conclusion

It’s clear that both Canon and Nikon had to sacrifice features to achieve a $2,000 full-frame camera and it’s interesting how both went about it. Canon for example gives users the really high ISO capabilities of 102k whereas Nikon is doing only 25k. But Nikon is throwing in the 39-point auto-focus, but Canon is keeping it with the 11-point. But Canon is upping the bar by including GPS and Wi-Fi, although single slot SD; Nikon has the dual-slot SD. Both have a max shutter speed of 1/4000, which is quite low for a pro camera. And for probably the first time ever, Canon didn’t design some new battery for the 6D, opting to keep it the same battery as the 5D Mark III. Bravo!

So is it worth upgrading? The answer depends on what you currently have and if what you currently have does what you need it to do. Both the Canon and Nikon offer killer new dSLRs to their existing lineup and you can’t really go wrong with either.