I currently shoot with the original 6D, which I've enjoyed for almost 5 years. Lenses are 16-35 f2.8 ll, 24-105 f/4, 100 f/2.8 ll Macro, 100-400 f/4-5.6 ll. I'm preparing to buy a body upgrade. The specs on the 6D M2, scheduled to be formally announced on June 29, are mostly confirmed and include 26 megapixels, 45 focal points (all cross-wise), an articulating touchscreen LCD, Digic 7 sensor, no 4K video, and single card slot. I have no interest in video, concentrate mainly on landscape and close-up, but also do some shooting of wildlife and live orchestral concerts.

The street price of the 5D M4 has dropped to $3,000, making the difference with the 6D M2 only $1,000. Since I will likely have the camera for at least 5 years, the $1,000 is not a major impediment. I do like the articulating LCD and the more simplified operation of the 6D, since I probably won't use several of the features on the 5D, but these are not deal breaker considerations. I also don't shoot in rough conditions.

I would welcome opinions on whether there are aspects of the 5D M4 that would likely make it a meaningfully better camera for me than the 6D. I fully understand the decision is mine, I am just looking for experienced opinions about the difference in capabilities, assuming the specs on the 6D are correct and operate as one would expect. Thanks very much.

It will be interesting to see the 6D MII the ISO performance of the original 6D was better than the 5D MIII. After owning a 60D with an articulating screen I don't think that I would ever own another camera with that feature. I have never heard anyone else make this complaint but I had my camera out in a very light drizzle, actually had a grocery bag wrapped around it and water was still able to get into the camera and rust some of the electronics inside. That will never happen with my 5D MIV. I assume that the screen on the 6D is a touch screen.