manta wrote:It's OK.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-6d/25
Especially good for video or low light photography or back-up for a wedding business.
Do you really need a full frame? You'll have to spend a lot more than the camera body cost to get proper glass for this thing. If you have no real need for full frame, get a 60D.
It all depends on what you want it for, but if you're going to use it a lot, get the Canon EOS 5D Mark III DSLR. Well worth the extra bucks for an excellent full frame.
If it is for hobby, family, travel, guitar collection, etc. get a 60D. Full frame is just another way for Canon to say, "Thanks for the extra $500".
The 6D can't really do much more than a 60D.
With proper full frame lenses you'll be out about $6,000 total so no buying new RICs for a while!!!
My 2 cents.
Thanks!
I have read all the worthy reviews, (dpreview, imaging-resource, ken rockwell, etc.) I guess I am hoping to find opinions from those of us who have used this camera in the field.
I have been a professional (and avid amateur) photographer for a few decades now, my preferred type of camera being a 4x5 (or larger) view camera. In the past I had a Minolta Dimage A1 and when it finally bit the dust in the Fall of '06 I bought a Canon 30D along with 17-40/4L, 24-105/4L IS USM, and 70-200/4 L IS USM lenses with an eye towards eventually buying a FF camera as I could not justify cost of the current, at that time, FF cameras that Canon had on offer. The 30D is still an excellent camera in all respects, especially so after having recently compared it to some images taken with a Nikon D4 and their 14-24mm AFS f/2.8 G ED lens, of the same subject matter in the same lighting conditions, a true apples to apples comparison. The only thing the Nikon had on my 30D with the 17-40/4L lens was a wider angle of view (the maximum aperture opening means little to me as I always stop down at least a couple of stops and usually use a tripod. (In my view camera days the lenses had f5.6, f8 and f9 maximum apertures and I was never wanting for more focusing screen brightness.)
I won't justify the price of a 5D Mk III, way more in dollars than I need (let alone the higher end pro models) and it does not really have features I would use, either. I could do without the gimmicks on the 6D (WiFi and GPS) I just want a camera to use in manual exposure and provide the angles of view I want, hence the FF sensor. I have superb glass already so I don't want to change to a different manufacturer, (from what I have read the D600 is inferior to the 6D, anyway, so would I want to go there?). Ideally, I'd like to see Canon come out with a simple, minimally feature laden FF camera for about $1200-1400, I know it would do well with real (true amateur) photographers but all these high tech companies think the user wants more KrAp® piled onto the devices we use.
The 6D can't really do much more than a 60D.
Well, the 60D would turn my 17mm lens into a 27mm, just as my 30D does.
I know of, and have used, the 10-16 lens but then that would lock me into APS-C format cameras; I did consider that, for picosecond, but my original goal of eventually acquiring a FF camera would have been shot down, then. Decisions decisions!
As to cost vs. pro or hobby use, well to answer that:
I play Rickenbackers vs. Squiers..............
A 5D Mk III would be nice but I already have the "difference $$$" earmarked for a couple of new LDS bass cabinets that should be in the design phase as I type this. 
