# Tony Northrup: I Made a Mistake: The Canon EOS 6D Mark II is the BEST Vlogging Camera. Seriously.



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 1, 2018)

> Tony Northrup has amended his original review of the Canon EOS 6D Mark II and is now declaring it the best vlogging camera out there.
> What changed his mind? Check out the video to find out.
> *Canon EOS 6D Mark II at Adorama*
> *From Tony Northrup:*
> The Canon 6D Mark II really is the best vlogging camera for YouTubers who might need to film themselves at times. Canon’s Dual Pixel Autofocus (DPAF) simply works better than any of the competitors. The only camera that even comes close are Sony’s latest round of full-frame e-mount cameras, like the Sony a7 III. However, those cameras lack a selfie screen, and when they do focus during video, it isn’t smooth and cinematic. Besides the reliable face autofocus when recording, I’ve come to appreciate being able to use fast full-frame lenses, like the Canon 24mm f/1.4, to blur the background. The 6D...



Continue reading...


----------



## Durf (Aug 1, 2018)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Tony Northrup has amended his original review of the Canon EOS 6D Mark II and is now declaring it the best vlogging camera out there.
> What changed his mind? Check out the video to find out.
> 
> *From Tony Northrup:*
> ...



Tony was just another poor soul that succumbed to all the trolls negativity about this camera (and he also spent the last year going through camera after camera having constant focusing issues due to not having DPAF)......

Live and learn!


----------



## ken (Aug 1, 2018)

Durf said:


> Tony was just another poor soul that succumbed to all the trolls negativity about this camera (and he also spent the last year going through camera after camera having constant focusing issues due to not having DPAF)......
> 
> Live and learn!



In my opinion, he expressed the justifiable disappointment that a lot of us had in the Mark ii in his original review. He's just got a specific use-case (vlogging) that this camera excels at, and hasn't been able to find a better alternative. If I cared at all about vlogging, I'd own that camera.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 1, 2018)

I still like my EOS 6D Mark II, I wish the IQ had gotten noticeably better, but usability sure did. I don't vlog, but it's nice to see it get some love in that regard.


----------



## CanoKnight (Aug 1, 2018)

Looks like the check that went out from Canon marketing has cashed in Tony's account. Whether or not it results in a tiny blip in sales remains to be seen.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 1, 2018)

I take it you didn't rate the 6D2 then....


----------



## Durf (Aug 1, 2018)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> I still like my EOS 6D Mark II, I wish the IQ had gotten noticeably better, but usability sure did. I don't vlog, but it's nice to see it get some love in that regard.



I've been using mine a lot for just about a year now and love it. I have no desire to replace it or upgrade it at all. I have it paired with the 80D and these two cameras are excellent shooters.....totally happy with the 6D2.

The only time I ever used it for video was the day I got it almost a year ago just to see if it actually worked. (it does).


----------



## Jester74 (Aug 1, 2018)

So this poor not-so well specced camera turns out to be a good one if you try to use it IRL? Such a surprise...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 1, 2018)

Translation: no new releases for a while, need


CanoKnight said:


> Looks like the check that went out from Canon marketing has cashed in Tony's account. Whether or not it results in a tiny blip in sales remains to be seen.


As much as I loathe TN, I would not accuse him of being a paid shill without evidence. Do you have any?

What he is, is an infotainer, and since he does earn money from clicks and affiliate links, and there haven’t been many new releases lately, it behooves him to post fresh content that may drive clicks, particularly if there’s some controversy such as reversing a previous opinion (taking a page from KR’s long, family-feeding book).


----------



## docsmith (Aug 1, 2018)

Jester74 said:


> So this poor not-so well specced camera turns out to be a good one if you try to use it IRL? Such a surprise...



Hmmm...much maligned based on specs upon release. But, much loved by those actually using it....where.have.I.seen.this.before????

Oh yeah, 6D Mark 1 was thrashed based on specs and even some initial reviews, but I have heard a lot of praise by those that actually own(ed) and use it.

Seems to be true with the 6DII as well. And, for that matter, the 5DIV ("sloooow lackluster compared to xxx"...yet mine does everything I have asked of it).

Anyway, gear are tools, and it is nice (dare I say vindicating???) to see TN find a niche where he considers the 6DII the best fit.


----------



## Etienne (Aug 1, 2018)

He has some good points for vlogging, but I can't see buying a 6D2 and a 24 f/1.4, together well over US$ 3,000 just for vlogging, especially if you are travelling a lot and can't have a cameraman with you. When travelling you'll have to use that camera for everything, not just the Vlogs.
A much cheaper option is a T7i or 77D with a sigma 18-35 f/1.8. Less than half the price of the 6D2 option. Or maybe the M50 and the 22mm f/2 for even less money (less than $850 at BH right now) ... it's vlogging not cinema


----------



## Canoneer (Aug 1, 2018)

Still waiting on a Magic Lantern build for the 6D2 so I can get C-Log


----------



## snappy604 (Aug 1, 2018)

Its probably a fine, but a bit lack-luster camera. Interesting to note it re-enforces what some have said about marketing specs vs actual use, but it still seemed... dull.

In end for me the focus points were too clustered in centre to be useful for what I do. Image quality seemed similar to my 80D so while I wanted full frame, it wasn't enough of a game changer to warrant forking the $ for it.


----------



## rpritch (Aug 1, 2018)

I love the 6D2. In January, I was robbed of my 5dIV and thought that going to the 6d2 would be a painful transition; unfortunately, I couldn't afford to replace the 5d--even after my insurance check--I had lost every piece of photo equipment and my coverage was capped at 10K. We had just moved to Colorado, so the big lenses took priority. Much to my surprise, I have seen limited difference in the field. While DR is not as good, the focus system gets the job done most of the time. It's a great camera, and when paired with my 7dii, I feel well equipped.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 1, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> Its probably a fine, but a bit lack-luster camera. Interesting to note it re-enforces what some have said about marketing specs vs actual use, but it still seemed... dull.
> 
> In end for me the focus points were too clustered in centre to be useful for what I do. Image quality seemed similar to my 80D so while I wanted full frame, it wasn't enough of a game changer to warrant forking the $ for it.



Comments like that make me ask 'why do you want FF'. For a specific purpose(s)? Pride of ownership? Ego? Status? And all those reasons are as good as any to spend your money - lord knows I shudder to think how much money I have spent on gear (cameras and hifi) even though I have not pushed what I already have to the limit. 
If image quality is not sufficiently better, all that means is that you do not use a camera under the circumstances that FF has definite advantages. 
This is not getting at you, these thoughts occur every time someone posts similar comment.


----------



## mikekeck (Aug 1, 2018)

I own the 6D & the 6D ii and have taken many tens of thousands of photos with each (I don't shoot video and I have never used the "flippy" screen). I like both cameras, but my copy of the 6D ii is a better camera than my 6D; the specs may not say it's better, but it is. I suspect that most of the people who trash the 6D ii have looked at the specs but not actually used the camera long term. Of course I would rather have a 5D iv, but I am happy with my 6D ii. I think it is a great camera for the current price.


----------



## transpo1 (Aug 1, 2018)

Canon's DPAF is still the best for Vlogging- as soon if they update their next round of DSLRs and new MILCs with serious 4K video specs and proper codecs, they'll have the potential to again have the cache with video makers that Sony and Panasonic currently enjoy with their lineup. But we already knew that 

Most Vloggers don't need 4K, but more advanced low-budget filmmakers / social media / content creators / influencers want the best specced cameras and that word of mouth spreads down to the Vlogging masses and guides opinion, creating buzz and excitement.


----------



## KirkD (Aug 1, 2018)

This is great news. Although I am first and foremost a Canon guy, I've been making videos with a Sony a6500 and a Canon 35mm f1.4L II lens with Sigma MC-11 adapter ... useless for autofocus during shooting, so I can't move around unless I go for a lot of depth of field, which is a bit of a bummer. I tried my Canon 6D MK I for making videos, but it lacks the crispness of the 4K Sony a6500, and I must say that TN's video is not as crisp as what I need, even at 1080. I've been dragging my feet about going completely over to Sony, hoping Canon comes out with a better 4K option and the rumours are keeping me hopeful. What excites me about TN's findings, is the effectiveness of DP autofocus. Couple that with a higher end 4K camera and decent C-log, and I'll be snagging it faster than a piece of steak in a cage full of Hyenas. Waiting for Canon's next big camera announcement later this year.


----------



## wanako (Aug 1, 2018)

I bought my 6DII a few months ago despite all the hate it got and I can say that I love mine. It does everything I want it to do excellently.


----------



## Braintoggle33 (Aug 1, 2018)

Seems like the only people I see bashing this camera are people that don't own it. It's more than just a spec sheet


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 1, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Canon's DPAF is still the best for Vlogging- as soon if they update their next round of DSLRs and new MILCs with serious 4K video specs and proper codecs, they'll have the potential to again have the cache with video makers that Sony and Panasonic currently enjoy with their lineup. But we already knew that
> 
> Most Vloggers don't need 4K, but more advanced low-budget filmmakers / social media / content creators / influencers want the best specced cameras and that word of mouth spreads down to the Vlogging masses and guides opinion, creating buzz and excitement.



You're first point is why I personally was disappointed with the 6dmk2 and moved on to another - it had the potential to be a great camera, rather than just a decently performing one. A few upgrades in features, or a lower starting price would have meant a far better reception, I think. 

Back to the video in question though, wouldn't the ff camera and a 24mm 1.4 lens weight more than one would like for vlogging? 
I would have thought the M50 with the 11-22 would be a better option : you lose the bokeh yes, but gain better video, lower weight, small size etc?


----------



## snappy604 (Aug 1, 2018)

I take a lot of low-light band pictures in crowded environments. Full frame would remove the crop zoom factor (1.6x) and allow better low light capture. So yes for a very specific purpose. (re-read your comment)



Mikehit said:


> Comments like that make me ask 'why do you want FF'. For a specific purpose(s)? Pride of ownership? Ego? Status? And all those reasons are as good as any to spend your money - lord knows I shudder to think how much money I have spent on gear (cameras and hifi) even though I have not pushed what I already have to the limit.
> If image quality is not sufficiently better, all that means is that you do not use a camera under the circumstances that FF has definite advantages.
> This is not getting at you, these thoughts occur every time someone posts similar comment.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 1, 2018)

mikekeck said:


> I own the 6D & the 6D ii and have taken many tens of thousands of photos with each (I don't shoot video and I have never used the "flippy" screen). I like both cameras, but my copy of the 6D ii is a better camera than my 6D; the specs may not say it's better, but it is. I suspect that most of the people who trash the 6D ii have looked at the specs but not actually used the camera long term. Of course I would rather have a 5D iv, but I am happy with my 6D ii. I think it is a great camera for the current price.



Got a 6D at work. Got a 6D2 in my home life. The 6D2 is a better camera, period! It seems to do everything better than the 6D.


----------



## Sharlin (Aug 1, 2018)

Canoneer said:


> Still waiting on a Magic Lantern build for the 6D2 so I can get C-Log



I wouldn't hold my breath. Progress has been very slow with the last couple of generations of Canon bodies.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 1, 2018)

Sharlin said:


> I wouldn't hold my breath. Progress has been very slow with the last couple of generations of Canon bodies.



Apparently they (Magic Lantern) are finding it hard to work with the DPAF.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 1, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> I take a lot of low-light band pictures in crowded environments. Full frame would remove the crop zoom factor (1.6x) and allow better low light capture. So yes for a very specific purpose. (re-read your comment)



So are you saying that at low light, the APS-C is very close to 6D2? Is your concern noise performance, resolution or both?


----------



## KirkD (Aug 1, 2018)

I'm a bit mystified by some of the comments here. I don't think anyone would dispute that the 6D II is a better camera than the 6D, so why don't we just lay that to rest. The only reason I did not upgrade from my 6D to a 6DII was the lack of 4K. It sounds like the 6D II gives impressive autofocusing. Now all it needs is 4K video to go with it and we have a serious vlogging winner.


----------



## mikekeck (Aug 1, 2018)

KirkD said:


> I'm a bit mystified by some of the comments here. I don't think anyone would dispute that the 6D II is a better camera than the 6D, so why don't we just lay that to rest. The only reason I did not upgrade from my 6D to a 6DII was the lack of 4K. It sounds like the 6D II gives impressive autofocusing. Now all it needs is 4K video to go with it and we have a serious vlogging winner.



Numerous Internet reviewers have written that the 6D ii is not much (if any) of an upgrade from the 6D. One site called the 6D ii the "worst camera of 2017." I can't remember a full frame camera getting such bad reviews. It has a terrible reputation, that I think is very undeserved.


----------



## Durf (Aug 1, 2018)

mikekeck said:


> Numerous Internet reviewers have written that the 6D ii is not much (if any) of an upgrade from the 6D. One site called the 6D ii the "worst camera of 2017." I can't remember a full frame camera getting such bad reviews. It has a terrible reputation, that I think is very undeserved.


Well, you can either believe those that have used it for a while and put it through the paces or those that did a quick you tube video about it a year ago with no real experience using it other than taking a 10 stop under exposed image with it and whining about it having absolutely no dynamic range! lol......and of course screaming it had no 4k.


----------



## jpcanon (Aug 2, 2018)

The 6D Mark II is easily one of the best photography purchases I've ever made. I bought mine during the sales this summer, upgrading from my Rebel T1i + Kit lens because I really wanted to go full frame. I will say: Canon KNOWS cameras. Despite all the bad press , the harsh comments, I've yet to see a bad photo come out of this thing that wasn't due to user error. For a enthusiast non-professional amateur who wants to celebrate 10 yrs learning photography there was NOTHING out there from the competition, those fancy mirrorless Sonys are just big cybershots, I really wanted to like the old D750 but it seems only Canon is offering the lightest, full featured FF, recently updated with a proven ecosystem and the best ergonomic controls. And a price drop to $1499 in store w/ free 13 month canon Carepak? As we say in Sales: no brainer


----------



## stevelee (Aug 2, 2018)

docsmith said:


> Hmmm...much maligned based on specs upon release. But, much loved by those actually using it....where.have.I.seen.this.before????
> 
> Oh yeah, 6D Mark 1 was thrashed based on specs and even some initial reviews, but I have heard a lot of praise by those that actually own(ed) and use it.
> 
> ...



Apparently since the 6D2 came out, the original 6D has greatly improved, from what I read.


----------



## snappy604 (Aug 2, 2018)

The 80D does surprisingly well with good glass. I use a sigma 20mm 1.4 ART with it. I tried a few images at a store with a 6D MkII and my 80d.. there was a slight improvement in image quality and lot more in the field of view, but I couldn't focus where I needed it. 

Crop factor is part of the issue, I can be closer without a crop factor and get more stage. I can accept and process some noise, but I need as much shutter speed as I can get in the light conditions I'm in. I often shoot at 3200 ISO and 1.4 aperture.. but means a small Depth of Field. Depending on venue that might get me 1/30 of a second, not great for movement. With the narrow depth of field and moving bodies, I need to be able to focus in an area and shoot immediately.. No time to use centre and re-compose. 



Mikehit said:


> So are you saying that at low light, the APS-C is very close to 6D2? Is your concern noise performance, resolution or both?


----------



## tmc784 (Aug 2, 2018)

I am waiting for the NEW FF model 2019, forget about 6DII


----------



## michi (Aug 2, 2018)

I really don't do anything with video, but during this whole youtube video I wanted to nudge the camera up because his head was cut off the whole time. Is this a thing now to cut the top of your head off when vlogging?


----------



## stevelee (Aug 2, 2018)

Depends upon the amount of hair loss.


----------



## sebasan (Aug 2, 2018)

The 6d mark II specification sheet was very good. Maybe for video the lack of 4k was a step back, but in others specifications, it was excellent.
The problem started when the first files were analyzed, and they showed that the sensor was not better than the 6d sensor. That was why it was so much noise about the 6d mark II.


----------



## Durf (Aug 3, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Apparently since the 6D2 came out, the original 6D has greatly improved, from what I read.



Just think, in a few years the 6D2 will be even better than it is now!


----------



## stevelee (Aug 3, 2018)

Durf said:


> Just think, in a few years the 6D2 will be even better than it is now!



And I'll still be using it.

I think it may have already improved a bit during the 10 months I have had it.


----------



## slclick (Aug 3, 2018)

I'd trade my 5D3 straight out for a 6D2 in a heartbeat if I could with no money changing hands. Of course then I'd be left with some sweet RRS accessories....AF points, there's more to a camera body than points.


----------



## Cariboucoach (Aug 3, 2018)

Jester74 said:


> So this poor not-so well specced camera turns out to be a good one if you try to use it IRL? Such a surprise...


Reminds me of another Canon camera that came out about 5 years ago. Surprise, surprise!


----------



## Jester74 (Aug 3, 2018)

Cariboucoach said:


> Reminds me of another Canon camera that came out about 5 years ago. Surprise, surprise!


5DmkIII? That was also a crippled piece of shoot...


----------



## thomic (Aug 4, 2018)

I ordered 6d II few days ago. It was nice to read all the positive comments here. I was initially planned to upgrade to 6d II. My glass and flash were ready to make the jump for FF photography. DR reviews postponed my jump. I finally made it with great discount. Shallow DOF, better IQ and better AF than my all loved 600d here I come 

I will still be interested about mirrorless FF camera from Canon. I am sure Canon will have good solution for the new mount. Hope the mount will be compatible EF glass and new glass if there will be any.


----------



## Talys (Aug 4, 2018)

thomic said:


> I ordered 6d II few days ago. It was nice to read all the positive comments here. I was initially planned to upgrade to 6d II. My glass and flash were ready to make the jump for FF photography. DR reviews postponed my jump. I finally made it with great discount. Shallow DOF, better IQ and better AF than my all loved 600d here I come
> 
> I will still be interested about mirrorless FF camera from Canon. I am sure Canon will have good solution for the new mount. Hope the mount will be compatible EF glass and new glass if there will be any.



It's a wonderful camera. I absolutely love mine. The pictures I get from it make me very happy, and I have a lot of fun using it; at the end of the day, I think that's what it's all about.


----------



## denstore (Aug 4, 2018)

I have owned the 6D2 for about 10 months, and I really like it. My only gripe is that it is a bit small, and my right hand little finger can’t find a good place to be. I don’t like using the battery grip for daily use, so that isn’t a solution.
I’m very happy with the IQ, and low light capabilities. I came from a 5D2 and 6D setup, and I will probably pair the 6D2with an 80D in the near future. 
I do like the articulated screen. One thing that few people talk about is the ability to turn the screen towards the camera for protection. It’s a feature I really like, since I walk a lot with the camera slung, and bump into thing and people a lot.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 4, 2018)

If you are going to talk about Vlogging, you have to talk about interfacing your camera and portable device. The 6D2 is super easy to pair to a phone and transfer over photos while on the road. 

Image shot a few minutes ago, in the car, on a road trip, in a covered bridge...... transferred wirelessly to the phone and uploaded....


----------



## Durf (Aug 4, 2018)

thomic said:


> I ordered 6d II few days ago. It was nice to read all the positive comments here. I was initially planned to upgrade to 6d II. My glass and flash were ready to make the jump for FF photography. DR reviews postponed my jump. I finally made it with great discount. Shallow DOF, better IQ and better AF than my all loved 600d here I come
> 
> I will still be interested about mirrorless FF camera from Canon. I am sure Canon will have good solution for the new mount. Hope the mount will be compatible EF glass and new glass if there will be any.



You'll be impressed and enjoy the 6D2, I've been shooting with it for almost a year now and love it.


----------



## yungfat (Aug 4, 2018)

Currently owned a 6D, played 6DII few minutes and confirmed that it is better than 6D at least on AF. Good camera anyway.


----------



## Firillu (Aug 5, 2018)

I bet my last dollar that 99% of the crappy photos taken by the 6D II are user incompetence, and unrelated to the camera specifications.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 6, 2018)

sebasan said:


> The 6d mark II specification sheet was very good. Maybe for video the lack of 4k was a step back, but in others specifications, it was excellent.
> The problem started when the first files were analyzed, and they showed that the sensor was not better than the 6d sensor. That was why it was so much noise about the 6d mark II.



It was a mixed bag in the lab. The 6D has slightly better DR, the 6D Mark II has slightly better S/N ratio and color sensitivity.

For most _competent _photographers, the S/N ratio and color sensitivity gains are worth the slight loss in DR.

So what if you can "only" underexpose by four stops instead of five stops and still be able to pull out the detail on the underside of that leaf in the shadows in the corner of the frame?

Not to mention all of the other improvements: PDAF accuracy/consistency, flicker reduction (very useful for what I do), DPAF, etc.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 6, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Depends upon the amount of hair loss.



ROTFLMAO!


----------



## HarryFilm (Aug 7, 2018)

Durf said:


> Tony was just another poor soul that succumbed to all the trolls negativity about this camera (and he also spent the last year going through camera after camera having constant focusing issues due to not having DPAF)......
> 
> Live and learn!



---

The 6D2 is perfectly fine for any general sports, wedding and portraiture photography. DPAF pretty much changes everything and for video, Canon has got this aspect DOWN PAT on all of the higher end cameras from the M5, 7D, 6D, 5D and 1D series to all their Cinema EOS video cameras. Sony, Nikon, Fuji, Olympus, Pentax, etc just haven't got anything like DPAF at all. I of course prefer using our company 1Dc's, 1DxMk2's or the C700's but in a pinch I have no problem using a 6Dmk2 or a 7D series or even an M5 for pro work! The key is making sure you LIGHT your subjects properly in controllable situations and in uncontrolled settings, use the fastest lens you've got at it's sharpest aperture say F2.8 or F4-F5.6 with a continuously ON booster light (i.e. a 6500K sun-gun) Any colour or brightness corrections for video OR stills you can always do in BM Resolve or Photoshop anyways! 

REMEMBER: Light The Night !!! to get good video/stills in low light situations!

AND....for those of you who are on the fence between choosing a 6D mk2 vs a 5Dmk4 --- I say if you can do it on a mental-acceptance basis, you SHOULD GET a low-shutter-count used Canon 5D Mk4 over a new 6D Mk2 --- The 5D mk4 is a TRULY a PROFESSIONAL CAMERA and deserves every accolade given to it! It has great video, great (i.. low) noise stills and video imagery, has incredible autofocus and of course can take every lens in Canon's inventory. ONLY the 1DxMk2 and C700 cameras are better! The hand-grip comfort-level over the 6Dmk2 makes the 5Dmk4 a much better buy even when used! 

AFTER that try and find yourself the BEST F1.2 or F1.4 16mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and/or 135mm prime lenses you can afford and you will be ECSTATIC with your results!


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 8, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> It was a mixed bag in the lab. The 6D has slightly better DR, the 6D Mark II has slightly better S/N ratio and color sensitivity.
> 
> For most _competent _photographers, the S/N ratio and color sensitivity gains are worth the slight loss in DR.
> 
> ...



Is it really a case of only one stop difference though? A number of the comparisons to other modern cameras (5dmk4 etc) show that the difference is larger than that. More like up to 3 stops at base iso?


----------



## stevelee (Aug 8, 2018)

If it were a 3-stop difference, wouldn't that be enough for me to be able to observe it? Over the ten months I've been shooting with the 6D2, I haven't seen any pictures that seemed to have problems with dynamic range. Admittedly, I don't shoot at ISO 100 all that often, and I never set the camera to underexpose by four stops.


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 8, 2018)

stevelee said:


> If it were a 3-stop difference, wouldn't that be enough for me to be able to observe it? Over the ten months I've been shooting with the 6D2, I haven't seen any pictures that seemed to have problems with dynamic range. Admittedly, I don't shoot at ISO 100 all that often, and I never set the camera to underexpose by four stops.



That's totally fair - if you don't shoot at base iso, there's a decent chance that you may not notice it. 

For the photography I do, timelapse, landscape and widefield astro, I notice a massive difference between my Canon 6d and my Sony (I know, I know). Easily 2 - 3 stops of extra latitude for landscapes at base iso (expose for highlights, bring up deep shadows), and I notice maybe a stop or so at high iso (3200 plus). 

It's not a true comparison as it's the older 6d yes, but from the little difference between the 6d models, I feel it's reasonably close. 

The 5dmk4 is far closer, and I don't think I'd notice the small difference there if I used that in comparison more often. 

Out of interest, what camera are you comparing the 6dmk2 against? I've seen a number of comments that people enjoy using it, so it sounds like it's a fun camera to use.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 8, 2018)

Funny, and Steve Huff praises the M50 as best vlogging camera... obviously Canon isn't that crab you always can read on all those threads such as dpreview provides. 

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2018/...s-in-mirrorless-for-video-i-seem-to-think-so/


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 8, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Canon's DPAF is still the best for Vlogging- as soon if they update their next round of DSLRs and new MILCs with serious 4K video specs and proper codecs, they'll have the potential to again have the cache with video makers that Sony and Panasonic currently enjoy with their lineup. But we already knew that
> 
> Most Vloggers don't need 4K, but more advanced low-budget filmmakers / social media / content creators / influencers want the best specced cameras and that word of mouth spreads down to the Vlogging masses and guides opinion, creating buzz and excitement.



I think the never ending blah blah of many vloggers deserves 8k video quality as a minimum. Let's flood the internet and raise its CO2 emissions with as big as possible video files!


----------



## Takingshots (Aug 8, 2018)

It all depends whether you are okay to spend at this price point close to* $2,000 + *Cdn for a "Vlog" camera and okay with its other mediocre specs.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 8, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> Out of interest, what camera are you comparing the 6dmk2 against? I've seen a number of comments that people enjoy using it, so it sounds like it's a fun camera to use.


I'm not really comparing it with anything else, and certainly not running tests, just taking pictures. I have yet to make a picture with the 6D2 that I felt need for more dynamic range. Everything so far has worked fine with a bit of tweaking the Highlights (recovery) and Shadows sliders, certainly nothing like three stops either way. I don't think I've ever shot a JPEG with it, so I can't speak for that.

My first outing with the camera I went with a neighbor and her family to a garden that was having a Chinese lantern display. I used auto exposure and auto focus with default parameters for both stills and video. I started in daylight, went through twilight, and into the dark. I could be wrong, but it seemed to be just about a worst case scenario for exposure. I didn't try to recover insignificant (to me anyway) detail off in the dark background. I don't like a phony HDR look, and strive more to suggest how things looked to me then and there. Maybe it is just that my style is not very demanding in terms of DR. Still, I'm surprised that I apparently can't tell a three-stop deficiency.


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 8, 2018)

stevelee said:


> I'm not really comparing it with anything else, and certainly not running tests, just taking pictures. I have yet to make a picture with the 6D2 that I felt need for more dynamic range. Everything so far has worked fine with a bit of tweaking the Highlights (recovery) and Shadows sliders, certainly nothing like three stops either way. I don't think I've ever shot a JPEG with it, so I can't speak for that.
> 
> My first outing with the camera I went with a neighbor and her family to a garden that was having a Chinese lantern display. I used auto exposure and auto focus with default parameters for both stills and video. I started in daylight, went through twilight, and into the dark. I could be wrong, but it seemed to be just about a worst case scenario for exposure. I didn't try to recover insignificant (to me anyway) detail off in the dark background. I don't like a phony HDR look, and strive more to suggest how things looked to me then and there. Maybe it is just that my style is not very demanding in terms of DR. Still, I'm surprised that I apparently can't tell a three-stop deficiency.



Yeah, if your not adjusting shadows and/or highlights that much, then I don't think you'd really see any difference in effective dynamic range vs say the 5dmk4. I guess in the same way that it's hard to tell the difference between a crop sensor and ff shot in good light, from an iso noise perspective

Twilight and dark situations are going to be fairly even for dynamic range from most ff cameras, as you'll be above base iso (I'm assuming your not using a tripod for long exposure at iso 100).

If your style doesn't tend to push dynamic range, then other factors are easily going to be more important, af in low light, ef mount etc. I know I was struggling with banding on the 6d (and still do) in many of my landscape shots where there were deep shadows and strong highlights, so it was at the top of my upgrade list. My case is maybe a bit less common though as I can't keep the exposure exact each shot in a timelapse, so often there's a heavier push in the shadows or exposure in pp as the lighting changes during the shoot


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 9, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> Is it really a case of only one stop difference though? A number of the comparisons to other modern cameras (5dmk4 etc) show that the difference is larger than that. More like up to 3 stops at base iso?



This doesn't look like three stops to me. More like 1/3 stop compared to the original 6D or the 5D Mark III (which was good enough for a lot of people for a long time, and still is for many). About 1 1/2 stops at base ISO compared to the 5D Mark IV, but most of that is gone by ISO 1600.




There's essentially no difference with regard to S/N ratio, on the other hand...


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 9, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> This doesn't look like three stops to me. More like 1/3 stop compared to the original 6D or the 5D Mark III (which was good enough for a lot of people for a long time, and still is for many). About 1 1/2 stops at base ISO compared to the 5D Mark IV, but most of that is gone by ISO 1600.
> View attachment 179587
> View attachment 179588
> 
> ...


I still have, and like much, an old 5D3 with nearly 150.000 actuations now. It still is capable of producing very good results, if you know about its limitations (no overwhelming DR, color banding in the shadows, if you push them too much). Never forget: most situations with a lot of contrast are simply no good for good photography.


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 9, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> This doesn't look like three stops to me. More like 1/3 stop compared to the original 6D or the 5D Mark III (which was good enough for a lot of people for a long time, and still is for many). About 1 1/2 stops at base ISO compared to the 5D Mark IV, but most of that is gone by ISO 1600.
> View attachment 179587
> View attachment 179588
> 
> ...



Ah, sorry - I was originally meaning between my 6d and sony, although I can see that it wasn't that clearly written on my part. 

I was relating it back to the 6dmk2 as the hasn't been any improvement in the dynamic range there. Just checked the dxomark site and it looks like my guesstimates have been pretty close too - looks to be about 2.5 stops at base iso, and about 1 stop from iso 1600. Maybe the banding on the 6d makes it look closer to 3 stops to me?

And I agree, it's a useable amount of dynamic range for a lot of uses - I can still get some nice shots on the 6d after all. I just find I miss a lot more with it also


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 9, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> Ah, sorry - I was originally meaning between my 6d and sony, although I can see that it wasn't that clearly written on my part.
> 
> I was relating it back to the 6dmk2 as the hasn't been any improvement in the dynamic range there. Just checked the dxomark site and it looks like my guesstimates have been pretty close too - looks to be about 2.5 stops at base iso, and about 1 stop from iso 1600. Maybe the banding on the 6d makes it look closer to 3 stops to me?
> 
> And I agree, it's a useable amount of dynamic range for a lot of uses - I can still get some nice shots on the 6d after all. I just find I miss a lot more with it also



And yet there is negligible to no difference between the 6D Mark II, The 5D Mark IV, and the Sony α7R III in terms of S/N ratio, color sensitivity, and tonal range. What good is the extra DR in such a case except for pulling the details off the bottom of a leaf in the shadows in the corner of a 5-stop underexposed image?

I just don't buy that the extra DR is worth that much in a usability sense for real world work when there's no difference in the other benchmarks. It seems more to me like a sensor/processing pipeline that has been gamed to do well on one test.

Then there's the whole ergonomic and ruggedness/dependability shortcomings of the Sony cameras. That's OK for even advanced hobbiasts/enthusiasts, but not so much for working pros who do the type of work where they don't get to set their own shooting schedule. Sometimes consistency and reliability (and battery life that lasts for days) are worth more than a couple of stops of DR when the user has a clue how to properly expose an image to start with.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 9, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> It seems more to me like a sensor/processing pipeline that has been gamed to do well on one test.
> 
> .



I think it was the A7R3 where I interpreted the press releases as hinting strongly that the improvements in DR etc were as much (or more?) to do with the processing after the image had been taken - the now infamous Sony Star-eater only added to that impression.


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 9, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> And yet there is negligible to no difference between the 6D Mark II, The 5D Mark IV, and the Sony α7R III in terms of S/N ratio, color sensitivity, and tonal range. What good is the extra DR in such a case except for pulling the details off the bottom of a leaf in the shadows in the corner of a 5-stop underexposed image?
> 
> I just don't buy that the extra DR is worth that much in a usability sense for real world work when there's no difference in the other benchmarks. It seems more to me like a sensor/processing pipeline that has been gamed to do well on one test.
> 
> Then there's the whole ergonomic and ruggedness/dependability shortcomings of the Sony cameras. That's OK for even advanced hobbiasts/enthusiasts, but not so much for working pros who do the type of work where they don't get to set their own shooting schedule. Sometimes consistency and reliability (and battery life that lasts for days) are worth more than a couple of stops of DR when the user has a clue how to properly expose an image to start with.



I'm of the opinion that as the s/n ratio seems to be on par with the 5dmk4 and the sony, then Canon may have left something out, or the data pipeline is adding noise where it shouldn't. 

The extra dynamic range, in my cases, often means I can get photos without regular banding in timelapses; sometimes this will occur on the 6d just when setting the lens corrections on the 16-35 f4 l lens, as an example. 

It really doesn't have to be only in situations where the photo has been underexposed greatly. 

For your uses, you may find that it doesn't have any significant impact, and that's completely fine, but for others (and definitely for me), those 2.5 stops make a huge difference. 

Ergonomics, that's another discussion. I do agree that Sony still have more improvements to make here. I find the ergos work well for me, but I'm usually on a tripod. A bit less of a factor in my case


----------



## wanako (Aug 10, 2018)

In my scenario, I really find all this arguing of the 6DII's Dynamic Range being terrible, absolutely hilarious. Unlike people who buy a new body every year or two, I came from a 30D that I had from 2007-2017, so for me the DR of this camera is absolutely mind-blowing. I found it incredible the things I can recover from shadows and highlights, so I had a hard time understanding what people were bitching about.


----------



## Durf (Aug 10, 2018)

wanako said:


> In my scenario, I really find all this arguing of the 6DII's Dynamic Range being terrible, absolutely hilarious. Unlike people who buy a new body every year or two, I came from a 30D that I had from 2007-2017, so for me the DR of this camera is absolutely mind-blowing. I found it incredible the things I can recover from shadows and highlights, so I had a hard time understanding what people were bitching about.



It's really quite simple; take a shot with your 6D2 about 7 to 10 stops under exposed and make a youtube video trying to recover the shadows.......then you'll understand all the bitching! lol

I've literally shot several thousand images with my 6D2 for about the last year now and very seldom have I ever had an issue with its dynamic range except for only in extreme conditions that likely just about every other camera on the planet would of had issues with too. 
It's an awesome camera in my opinion and I get some outstanding results with it every time I use it regardless of the conditions 99.9% of the time. (I know how to use it!)


----------



## LSXPhotog (Aug 13, 2018)

Canoneer said:


> Still waiting on a Magic Lantern build for the 6D2 so I can get C-Log



I hate to break this to you, but there hasn't been any progress with Magic Lantern on a camera released SINCE the 6D. They don't even have a full build for that camera yet, and they don't even have a "Nightly Build" for the 70D or 7D Mark II.

I recall reading something about the new Digic processors making it extremely difficult to downright near impossible to crack.

In other words: don't hold your breath. Just download the EOSHD C-Log. It's like $20-40.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Aug 13, 2018)

All of you defending the dynamic range are missing the point of the complaints. While I rest firmly in the camp that feels dynamic range isn't a necessity, but a welcome luxury. I built my entire career using cameras with extremely poor shadow recovery and bad dynamic range by today's standards. It is not something that makes you a better photographer. But, it's 2018. There have been very small advances in low-light performance, but giant leaps in dynamic range in regards to shadow retention and recovery of highlights. To release a camera in 2017 that did not take advantage of newer sensor design with on-chip analog to digital conversion is absolutely unacceptable in the current market place.

I had every intention of buying this camera for travel, but have been spoiled by the dynamic range of my newer sensors, I could not justify spending money on a camera with a sensor design from 4+ years ago. I'd much rather buy an original 6D again. Canon managed to improve nearly all functions of the camera, to which I praise. The new autofocus system, while clustered mostly in the middle as it borrowed its sensor from the 80D, is still a big improvement over the original 6D. Dual pixel autofocus? Awesome. Tilt touch screen? Amazing. Even the single card slot didn't bother me much. But, the fact that it's imaging capability is mostly unchanged from its predecessor is just silly.

So the camera is absolutely capable of taking incredible images and is not a real limitation. It's just that if someone is spending their money in 2017 there are too many options that do a better job for around the same money or less. It's the principle and nothing personal.


----------



## Durf (Aug 13, 2018)

LSXPhotog said:


> All of you defending the dynamic range are missing the point of the complaints. While I rest firmly in the camp that feels dynamic range isn't a necessity, but a welcome luxury. I built my entire career using cameras with extremely poor shadow recovery and bad dynamic range by today's standards. It is not something that makes you a better photographer. But, it's 2018. There have been very small advances in low-light performance, but giant leaps in dynamic range in regards to shadow retention and recovery of highlights. To release a camera in 2017 that did not take advantage of newer sensor design with on-chip analog to digital conversion is absolutely unacceptable in the current market place.
> 
> I had every intention of buying this camera for travel, but have been spoiled by the dynamic range of my newer sensors, I could not justify spending money on a camera with a sensor design from 4+ years ago. I'd much rather buy an original 6D again. Canon managed to improve nearly all functions of the camera, to which I praise. The new autofocus system, while clustered mostly in the middle as it borrowed its sensor from the 80D, is still a big improvement over the original 6D. Dual pixel autofocus? Awesome. Tilt touch screen? Amazing. Even the single card slot didn't bother me much. But, the fact that it's imaging capability is mostly unchanged from its predecessor is just silly.
> 
> So the camera is absolutely capable of taking incredible images and is not a real limitation. It's just that if someone is spending their money in 2017 there are too many options that do a better job for around the same money or less. It's the principle and nothing personal.



Actually for me there wasn't another or better option in the Canon line up for a full frame camera in early 2017 other than the 6D2. I do a lot of low and on the ground shooting and for the previous two years or so I was using a T6i and 80D. I wanted a full frame camera and with my bad knees a flip screen was mandatory so to speak. I almost jumped and dumped 3500.00 + bucks on the 5D4 but when the 6D2 came out it was pretty much a no brainer for me regardless of all the smoke being blown about it. The 80D's image quality was satisfactory for what I was and am doing so I knew the 6D2 could not be worse but most likely better. (I was right).

If the 5D4 would of had a flip screen that's what I'd be shooting with right now, not the 6D2. Regardless, I have absolutely no regrets about buying the 6D2, it's an amazing camera. I was concerned when I bought it with all the bad press about it but after using it a while I realized most of those bitching about it actually never had experience using it; many were just parroting other nay-sayers.

It was never about the dynamic range for me, it was about ergonomics, usefulness and ease of handling for my type of shooting, and having decent image quality.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 13, 2018)

LSXPhotog said:


> While I rest firmly in the camp that feels dynamic range isn't a necessity...



I hope you really mean: ... [a marginal increase in] dynamic range isn’t a necessity.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 13, 2018)

Here are Bill Clafff's measurements from
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 5D Mark III,Canon EOS 5D Mark IV,Canon EOS 5DS R,Canon EOS 6D,Canon EOS 6D Mark II

Not much difference in DR 5DIII - 6D - 6DII. 5DSR slightly better, 5DIV more so below iso 600.


----------



## masterpix (Aug 13, 2018)

The "problem" of the 6D is that is it a "low end FF camera" where people expected it to be "high end cheapest FF camera". I is not the X, nor the 5, and therefore, people can't complain it is not one of the above when it was never intended to be one. It is a good camera for what it is made to do. One can't ask a rebel level camera to be a professional as the 7D is.


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 13, 2018)

masterpix said:


> The "problem" of the 6D is that is it a "low end FF camera" where people expected it to be "high end cheapest FF camera". I is not the X, nor the 5, and therefore, people can't complain it is not one of the above when it was never intended to be one. It is a good camera for what it is made to do. One can't ask a rebel level camera to be a professional as the 7D is.



I think part of the issue there was the price (and still is where I am); for $2000 it really left a bit much out/didn't get expected improvements, even compared to something like the 80d. I've seen posts where the US can get it for about $1100 - 1300, which sounds like a good buy.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 13, 2018)

Durf said:


> It was never about the dynamic range for me, it was about ergonomics, usefulness and ease of handling for my type of shooting, and having decent image quality.



BINGO!

If you are looking for a "vlog" camera, you want something with easy controls that does good AF in live view while you are shooting video clips..... like the 6D2....

He is not saying that it is the best camera, or that it has the best sensor or the best DR, he is saying that it works as the best VLOG camera......


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 13, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> I think part of the issue there was the price (and still is where I am); for $2000 it really left a bit much out/didn't get expected improvements, even compared to something like the 80d. I've seen posts where the US can get it for about $1100 - 1300, which sounds like a good buy.



Why do people keep comparing it to the 80D? The 6D2 has distinct advantages being FF - if you don't need those advantages buy the 80D and why do you care about the 6D2? If you need FF the 80D won't do what you need. The DR may be the same on the test bench but when you print at a given size the 6D2 will always be better.
At the moment in B&H, the 80D is 999 and the 6D2 is 1599 which seems a reasonable difference. I will bet anything that the prices of 1100-1300 are grey market imports and while that is indeed a great price it comes with caveats on the level of cover you will get.


----------



## Durf (Aug 13, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> BINGO!
> 
> If you are looking for a "vlog" camera, you want something with easy controls that does good AF in live view while you are shooting video clips..... like the 6D2....
> 
> He is not saying that it is the best camera, or that it has the best sensor or the best DR, he is saying that it works as the best VLOG camera......



Actually Don, I use the 6D2 for stills only. I've only used it a couple of times for video since I bought it. 
My 80D does my video stuff out in the field and I use my T6i for all my youtube videos at home.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 13, 2018)

Durf said:


> Actually Don, I use the 6D2 for stills only. I've only used it a couple of times for video since I bought it.
> My 80D does my video stuff out in the field and I use my T6i for all my youtube videos at home.


I use mine mostly for stills too.... I have a 7D2 and find the AF system there to be better for action shots, with the exception of small birds in flight where for some strange reason the 6D2 seems to work better when I have trouble keeping the AF zone on target....

For video, it seems to work better than the 7D2, but then again, I am told by others that the 80D is better than it for video, so what you say makes sense to me.....


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 13, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Why do people keep comparing it to the 80D? The 6D2 has distinct advantages being FF - if you don't need those advantages buy the 80D and why do you care about the 6D2? If you need FF the 80D won't do what you need. The DR may be the same on the test bench but when you print at a given size the 6D2 will always be better.
> At the moment in B&H, the 80D is 999 and the 6D2 is 1599 which seems a reasonable difference. I will bet anything that the prices of 1100-1300 are grey market imports and while that is indeed a great price it comes with caveats on the level of cover you will get.



I just compared it to the 80d as is seems to be the closest crop sensor variant in the canon lineup as it seems to be the most logical - they seem to match the most (like the 7d and 5d series seem to match closely in the pro line up). I could be wrong with both of those comparisons but they share the bodies from looks. For the cost, I would have though the 6dmk2 would have had the same features as the 80d, predominately the headphone jack and all-i video options in the case as a vlogging camera.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 13, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> I just compared it to the 80d as is seems to be the closest crop sensor variant in the canon lineup as it seems to be the most logical - they seem to match the most (like the 7d and 5d series seem to match closely in the pro line up). I could be wrong with both of those comparisons but they share the bodies from looks. For the cost, I would have though the 6dmk2 would have had the same features as the 80d, predominately the headphone jack and all-i video options in the case as a vlogging camera.


I still don't understand why Bluetooth headphones are not supported


----------



## Durf (Aug 13, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> I just compared it to the 80d as is seems to be the closest crop sensor variant in the canon lineup as it seems to be the most logical - they seem to match the most (like the 7d and 5d series seem to match closely in the pro line up). I could be wrong with both of those comparisons but they share the bodies from looks. For the cost, I would have though the 6dmk2 would have had the same features as the 80d, predominately the headphone jack and all-i video options in the case as a vlogging camera.



I constantly shoot with both the 80D and 6D2 and most often can't tell the difference at a glance with image quality. Once I get to pixel peepin the 6D2 has the edge. I can always tell the 80D though from the 6D2 at a glance by the auto white balance. The 80D images always look a touch cooler than the 6D2's. The 6D2 almost always nails the white balance perfectly in auto white balance mode.

These two cameras pair perfectly in my opinion and both are extremely good cameras.

My 80D almost always has my 70-300mm F/4-5.6L lens on it and my 6D2 almost always has the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 lens on it.
(my 16-35mm f/4L is always in my bag and ready for the 6D2 if needed)

This set up for what I do most often is perfect, I very seldom have to change a lens; I just reach down and grab one camera or the other


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 13, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> I just compared it to the 80d as is seems to be the closest crop sensor variant in the canon lineup as it seems to be the most logical - they seem to match the most (like the 7d and 5d series seem to match closely in the pro line up). I could be wrong with both of those comparisons but they share the bodies from looks. For the cost, I would have though the 6dmk2 would have had the same features as the 80d, predominately the headphone jack and all-i video options in the case as a vlogging camera.




The 6D Mark II is the lowest level Canon FF camera. It is a FF 'Rebel", not a FF 'x0D'.


----------



## Durf (Aug 13, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> The 6D Mark II is the lowest level Canon FF camera. It is a FF 'Rebel", not a FF 'x0D'.



I would say with my experience with it that it compares to a FF 80D more so than any type of rebel camera. It's a better performer than an 80D but not by a huge margin. Yes, Canon's lowest level FF camera......

Most people that complain about it expect it to be like a 5D4 or better......it's just a 6D Series camera, nothing more.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 13, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> The 6D Mark II is the lowest level Canon FF camera. It is a FF 'Rebel", not a FF 'x0D'.



It has the shoulder display, like the XXD
It has the ergonomics of the XXD
It even looks like an XXD

It is the XXD FF equivalent, there is no rebel FF equivalent......


----------



## LSXPhotog (Aug 14, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> I hope you really mean: ... [a marginal increase in] dynamic range isn’t a necessity.


Of course that's what I mean, what else would I mean? LOL


----------



## LSXPhotog (Aug 14, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Here are Bill Clafff's measurements from
> http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 5D Mark III,Canon EOS 5D Mark IV,Canon EOS 5DS R,Canon EOS 6D,Canon EOS 6D Mark II
> 
> Not much difference in DR 5DIII - 6D - 6DII. 5DSR slightly better, 5DIV more so below iso 600.



Yes, it's comparable to camera sensors from 2012 - that's kind of the point of my argument. It was discouraging to see that it didn't share the same sensor technology we've seen in the 5D4, 1DX Mark II, and 80D - all cameras that preceded the 6D2. It should perform similarly to the 6D and 5D3 - which is honestly more than enough. It's just discouraging and why it receives to much hate.


----------



## BillB (Aug 14, 2018)

Durf said:


> I would say with my experience with it that it compares to a FF 80D more so than any type of rebel camera. It's a better performer than an 80D but not by a huge margin. Yes, Canon's lowest level FF camera......
> 
> Most people that complain about it expect it to be like a 5D4 or better......it's just a 6D Series camera, nothing more.



A big issue has always been the "old technology" sensor. Without the "low" base ISO DR magic number quite a few people would have been happier.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 14, 2018)

BillB said:


> A big issue has always been the "old technology" sensor. Without the "low" base ISO DR magic number quite a few people would have been happier.



I was all set to move from the 5DII to the 5DIV because of the "old sensor tech" of the 5Ds/sr until a colleague of mine who had both told me she preferred the files from the 5Dsr, and I should try one before deciding. So I did and ended up agreeing with her. I've never been one to under expose anyway, but the DR of the 5Ds is quite robust. 

The 6DII seems to give pretty good results at insane isos due to how the data responds to noise reduction, and I'd guess that for the majority of users this would be much more valuable than huge shadow recovery in post, especially as so many people seem to use auto ISO nowadays.


----------



## BillB (Aug 14, 2018)

Sporgon said:


> I was all set to move from the 5DII to the 5DIV because of the "old sensor tech" of the 5Ds/sr until a colleague of mine who had both told me she preferred the files from the 5Dsr, and I should try one before deciding. So I did and ended up agreeing with her. I've never been one to under expose anyway, but the DR of the 5Ds is quite robust.
> 
> The 6DII seems to give pretty good results at insane isos due to how the data responds to noise reduction, and I'd guess that for the majority of users this would be much more valuable than huge shadow recovery in post, especially as so many people seem to use auto ISO nowadays.



Do you think that the cancellation of the AA filter has something to do with it?


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 14, 2018)

BillB said:


> Do you think that the cancellation of the AA filter has something to do with it?



No, not if her appreciation of the camera's strengths were accurate ! In my case, after comparing the s and the sr I went for the s with AA filter, for a number of reasons. Ultimately when the s is processed appropriately I see no difference between the two. If you're going to be cropping tight into a small single subject, like a bird for instance I can see why people might like no AA filter, but personally I don't believe that the world is made up of little rectangular blocks anyway


----------



## AlanF (Aug 14, 2018)

Sporgon said:


> No, not if her appreciation of the camera's strengths were accurate ! In my case, after comparing the s and the sr I went for the s with AA filter, for a number of reasons. Ultimately when the s is processed appropriately I see no difference between the two. If you're going to be cropping tight into a small single subject, like a bird for instance I can see why people might like no AA filter, but personally I don't believe that the world is made up of little rectangular blocks anyway



You don't see a difference at a coarse level and you do concede there might be for tight cropping. I tightly crop and really appreciate the 5DSR. Lensrentals https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests/ measured the MTFs of various lenses on the 5DS and 5DSR vs 5DIII and found that both significantly outresolved the 5DIII (20-30%) and dropping the AA-filter increased resolution by about 10%, depending on the lens.

The light receptors in your retina are made up of little blocks !


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 14, 2018)

AlanF said:


> You don't see a difference at a coarse level and you do concede there might be for tight cropping. I tightly crop and really appreciate the 5DSR. Lensrentals https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests/ measured the MTFs of various lenses on the 5DS and 5DSR vs 5DIII and found that both significantly outresolved the 5DIII (20-30%) and dropping the AA-filter increased resolution by about 10%, depending on the lens.
> 
> The light receptors in your retina are made up of little blocks !



 OK Touche

There are those of us who believe that a digital camera is better with an AA filter. Personally I'm pleased that Canon produced the 5Dsr for the likes of you and the s for me. I hope that in the series 2 they still offer this option, unlike Nikon. Who knows ? They may. Canon are quite good at offering what is fundamentally correct.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 14, 2018)

Sporgon said:


> OK Touche
> 
> There are those of us who believe that a digital camera is better with an AA filter. Personally I'm pleased that Canon produced the 5Dsr for the likes of you and the s for me. I hope that in the series 2 they still offer this option, unlike Nikon. Who knows ? They may. Canon are quite good at offering what is fundamentally correct.



The usefulness of the AA-filter decreases with increasing resolution as basically it filters out the high frequency noise, which gets less important with increasing pixel density. It is telling that Sony use an AA-filter for their 20 Mpx A9 but not for their high mpx bodies.


----------

