[dtmateojr]

You should compare systems and not single cameras. Canon has lens mount that it is years ahead of Nikon. Today Nikon cameras are ahead of Canon in dinamic range but that could change very quickly, lens mount of Nikon has a lot of limitations (mechanical aperture).

Why is mechanical aperture a limitation :-D

[ChristianRock]

Mechanical aperture has nothing to do with image quality.

I understand the want to go full frame, by the way. I'm sure it's not out of necessity, but it's good to try a larger format, if one has the means to do so.

[dfujevec]

Why is mechanical aperture a limitation :-D

If you are using Pentax camera you should know that.
Pentax have same problem with K mount. Many functions (first one video) are suffering from mechanical controls in the mount. Speed and smooth transition of aperture from body to lens in very likely to be much better controled with modern electronic control. None the less all of new mounts (Fuji, Sony E, Samusing NX, miceo 4/3) don't have have mechanical controls for some reason.

And yes ChristianRock mechanical aperture has nothing to do with image quality for now. As thinks are today Nikon have some advantage in image quality, but as a system I still prefer Canon. As lens line up is concern, Nikon is better in a wide ange (with 14-24 f2,8), Canon in tele lenses, prices are lower with Canon and with Canon you have some special lenses that Nikon mount doesn't have.
Ideal set up would be Nikon D800 with Canon mount

[dtmateojr]

If you are using Pentax camera you should know that.

Pentax have same problem with K mount. Many functions (first one video) are suffering from mechanical controls in the mount. Speed and smooth transition of aperture from body to lens in very likely to be much better controled with modern electronic control. None the less all of new mounts (Fuji, Sony E, Samusing NX, miceo 4/3) don't have have mechanical controls for some reason.



And yes ChristianRock mechanical aperture has nothing to do with image quality for now. As thinks are today Nikon have some advantage in image quality, but as a system I still prefer Canon. As lens line up is concern, Nikon is better in a wide ange (with 14-24 f2,8), Canon in tele lenses, prices are lower with Canon and with Canon you have some special lenses that Nikon mount doesn't have.

Ideal set up would be Nikon D800 with Canon mount

I never had issues with mechanical apertures with my Nikon or my Pentax. In fact the mechanical apertures allow me to use macro tubes because I can control the aperture. Unlike Canon where you have to hack the electronic aperture.

No, I don't pretend to be a videographer. I make photos.

[ChristianRock]

And yes ChristianRock mechanical aperture has nothing to do with image quality for now. As thinks are today Nikon have some advantage in image quality, but as a system I still prefer Canon. As lens line up is concern, Nikon is better in a wide ange (with 14-24 f2,8), Canon in tele lenses, prices are lower with Canon and with Canon you have some special lenses that Nikon mount doesn't have.
Ideal set up would be Nikon D800 with Canon mount

I find that the Canon system is great if you like zooms (and Nikon isn't that far behind). But if you're a primes guy like I am, I find the Nikon system works better. Recently I made a little study of what system I'd go if I had the money to go full frame and for my needs the Nikon system was clearly more affordable.

I do like the "Canon look" though.

[osv]

i hate to diverge from the status quo :-) but if affordable full-frame was part of the o.p.'s criteria, his best bet would be mirrorless, because it's cheaper than canikon, and it gives you a wider range of lens options, if you don't mind using manual mode on some of 'em.

now back to your regularly scheduled canikon programming, lol

[6BQ5]

i hate to diverge from the status quo :-) but if affordable full-frame was part of the o.p.'s criteria, his best bet would be mirrorless, because it's cheaper than canikon, and it gives you a wider range of lens options, if you don't mind using manual mode on some of 'em.

now back to your regularly scheduled canikon programming, lol

When I saw the OP's opening post I was also wondering why not mirrorless in the long run? I understand the EVF vs. OVF debate but EVFs will no doubt get better and better. Sony is going full throttle with new new lenses and bodies. Seem to be like a hip and happening system to get into.

[ChristianRock]

Nikon D610 and Canon 6D aren't that expensive compared to Sony A7. There's only a 100 dollar difference on the price body. And you can still buy D600s (which I'd rather have, instead of an A7) for 1500 brand new with warranty (then you send them in to get that sensor issue resolved). That's 200 dollars less than the Sony mirrorless. And now when you start looking at lens, the Canon and Nikon systems make a lot more sense - especially if you used lenses in the equation - and they are a very important consideration for those on a budget.

Mirrorless full frame might make financial sense in the future but for now, to my mind, it does not. Sony's still being greedy, I think.

I don't think mirrorless APS-C makes financial sense compared to Pentax APS-C either, but that's a different topic...

[normhead]

Just from my messing around, I'd say get a D600. I picked one up to play with at the local camera store, and loved it. I just can't give up the extra magnification in macro and telephoto. Going exclusively FF would be out of this world expensive for me. Although, I've considered it for landscape. But then I'd have to carry two bodies. I look at the dog image above, and that just doesn't appeal to me. My urge would be to reshoot, and keep the dogs nose in focus... but hey, clearly, you're not like that...to each his own.

More my style...

[osv]

Nikon D610 and Canon 6D aren't that expensive compared to Sony A7. There's only a 100 dollar difference on the price body.

both the d610 and the 6d are $1900:
https://www.google.com/search?q=d610+price&newwindow=1&safe=off&espvd=2&es_s...71731582241257
https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&safe=off&es_sm=122&biw=1862&bih=91...61702362697976

the a7 body is $1700:
https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&safe=off&es_sm=122&biw=1862&bih=91...51792193409982

that's a $200 difference, not $100.

And you can still buy D600s (which I'd rather have, instead of an A7) for 1500 brand new with warranty (then you send them in to get that sensor issue resolved).

i'm not buying a new junk camera body that has to be sent to service before it can be used

how do you propose to use both canon and nikon lenses on a canikon camera? you've limited your options with canikon, the only thing that you have is what canikon gives you... the nex mount lets you buy the most cost-effective, highest performing lens you want, from any platform.

---------- Post added 04-09-2014 at 04:25 PM ----------

Just from my messing around, I'd say get a D600. I picked one up to play with at the local camera store, and loved it. I just can't give up the extra magnification in macro and telephoto. Going exclusively FF would be out of this world expensive for me. Although, I've considered it for landscape. But then I'd have to carry two bodies. I look at the dog image above, and that just doesn't appeal to me. My urge would be to reshoot, and keep the dogs nose in focus... but hey, clearly, you're not like that...to each his own.

More my style...

killer dog pics norm!

not that it applies there so much, but i miss the dof you get with a crop sensor.

[dms]

Maybe rent prospective cameras and see what works for you. 3 weekends/one setup each weekend.
You may find one is especially appealing, or unappealing. Your down the road cost will be very large, so some money up front seems prudent.

[pinholecam]

The 6D will be able to more easily use other brand lenses with a simple adapter, if that matters.
It is also a bit smaller and lighter (but feels less well built than the D610 too)

D610 has better DR at low ISO.
6D has better noise smoothing at high ISO.

There isn't that big of a wrong choice between them.
Both have cheap f1.8, f2, f2.8 prime options to get things going.

When I saw the OP's opening post I was also wondering why not mirrorless in the long run? I understand the EVF vs. OVF debate but EVFs will no doubt get better and better. Sony is going full throttle with new new lenses and bodies. Seem to be like a hip and happening system to get into.

Few problems with the Sony A7/r baby.
Lack of native FE lenses for the benefit of AF, wide open focusing, exif data, TTL flash
Sensor reflection issue (not a killer in some cases but better be aware of it before purchase)
Not as good AF in low non contrasty situations.
Potential light leak for mount
Potential light leak from adapter
Its the best MF platform out there now IMO, but I have reservations recommending it fully due to the issues it has., so the potential buyer need to be aware of them and decide if it will be an issue for them or not.

[jeffshaddix]

Canon, firmware SDK.

[bkpix]

One word for you: Rent.

Trying before buying will make many things clear. And one thing you may learn is that going full-frame, whether with Nikon or Canon, doesn't give you wildly different image quality from using a good crop body like the K-5 or K-3. I shoot with a 6D and like it, but mostly because the Canon autofocus is better.

[Miguel]

One word for you: Rent.

I can only reiterate these words. The cost of a rental is far less than the aggravation of owning a camera and/or lens that you don't like. I'm currently renting a 400mm Canon DO lens plus the new 1.4x TC v3. New, this combo would set me back about about $7000US. The fee I pay for a few days of evaluation is about 5%. The realization that I wouldn't be a happy camper with this combo is priceless.

M