# Review: Canon EOS 6D Mark II by TDP



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 12, 2017)

```
<p>The-Digital-Picture has completed their review of the Canon EOS 6D Mark II, and came away pretty impressed overall. While it’s not a perfect camera body, the image quality is great as far as noise and color go, but we’re all disappointed we didn’t get a dynamic range performance bump.</p>
<p><strong>From TDP:</strong></p>

<blockquote><p>The 6D Mark II did not impress me with its AI Servo AF capabilities, its dynamic range is only adequate and I’m not a fan of the 8-way multi-controller. But, the image quality benefits, especially color and noise levels, of Canon’s full frame CMOS sensors are big, while the footprint of the 6D II remains small – as does, probably most importantly, the relative impact on your wallet. Expectations were that the 6D Mark II would deliver very impressive image quality and rapidly hit the most-popular list. It has delivered on expectations. <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-Mark-II.aspx">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p>I still haven’t used the EOS 6D Mark II enough to give my final verdict to folks, but I do like the camera so far.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
<div style="font-size:0px;height:0px;line-height:0px;margin:0;padding:0;clear:both"></div>
```


----------



## ScottyP (Aug 12, 2017)

I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.


----------



## jedy (Aug 12, 2017)

ScottyP said:


> I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.


I hope you're joking 'cause otherwise this comment looks rather stupid.

I've said in another post that Canon customers need this camera to fail to hopefully give Canon a much needed wake up call and realise we won't put up with such lacklustre releases. Sadly I suspect it will sell rather well and Canon will Be laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 12, 2017)

Canon bypassed Nikon, Pentax, and other camera makers in the 1970's and 1980's with their philosophy of producing lower priced cameras that are very good, but did not include extra bells and whistles.

That philosophy has served them well over time, they are going to stick with it. They design cameras to be easy to produce and maintain, and price every feature before selecting what will be included. They have a target market and select features for that market. I know that many want it to be a different camera, but then it would also be for a different market.

The buyers targeted by this camera are buying out stock at the major camera stores, Canon is delivering them constantly, but they seem to fly off the shelves. This morning, Amazon has been out for 2 weeks, B&H has them, I did not check others.


----------



## Tangent (Aug 12, 2017)

ScottyP said:


> I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.



All kidding aside, the 5D mkIV lacks the tilt flip screen, so it's not a simple as move up and get a superset of the lower model's features. I'm irritated.


----------



## Rockskipper (Aug 12, 2017)

I bought one, took it out of the box and looked at it, didn't even mount a lens, reboxed it and shipped it back.

After shooting with my M5, it seemed monstrous in size, though it was very light. Guess I'm not ready for a FF. I've always had Rebels and found them to be big, so will wait for a FF mirrorless, if they ever come out, or maybe even go to Sony at some point.

But as a woman I have small hands and like to stick my camera in my pocket and don't shoot for money. The M5 is a nice little camera and will be fine for as long as I want. I can put my 100-400 on it with the adaptor when I want to get close, works great. I may even get a SL2 for the meantime.


----------



## Talys (Aug 12, 2017)

Rockskipper said:


> I bought one, took it out of the box and looked at it, didn't even mount a lens, reboxed it and shipped it back.
> 
> After shooting with my M5, it seemed monstrous in size, though it was very light. Guess I'm not ready for a FF. I've always had Rebels and found them to be big, so will wait for a FF mirrorless, if they ever come out, or maybe even go to Sony at some point.
> 
> But as a woman I have small hands and like to stick my camera in my pocket and don't shoot for money. The M5 is a nice little camera and will be fine for as long as I want. I can put my 100-400 on it with the adaptor when I want to get close, works great. I may even get a SL2 for the meantime.



I am sympathetic, but it was a ******* purchase for you. I mean, if a rebel was too big, there is no way a 6D would work out. 

By the way, the camera is not light. I mean, sure, the body doesn't weigh much, but a camera needs a lens too, and unless you were planning on walking around with a 50/1.8, jut about anything that is paired for it, certainly anything wit an L, is going to make it feel humongous. A telephoto that would take advantage of it is going to weigh a kazillion times more than you're likely willing to carry. 

But that isn't unique to Canon - just remember, FF lenses are all going to be significantly bigger and heavier than APSC counterparts, and pro lenses are designed to allow in more light, and weather abuse, so will be many times heavier. 

Keep in mind too that as you go higher end, the focal range also narrows. So, a consumer APSC lens will go 55-250mm or even from 20-300mm, or more. A pro EF lens will be like 24-70mm or 70-200mm (and weigh three to ten times more), meaning you'll need to carry at least two lenses if you want to shoot a variety of focal ranges. Also, the reach is 1.6x less, so if you were used to shooting faraway subjects at 300mm, to get the same magnification FF you need 480mm -- and that's going to be huge.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 12, 2017)

Rockskipper said:


> I bought one, took it out of the box and looked at it, didn't even mount a lens, reboxed it and shipped it back.
> 
> After shooting with my M5, it seemed monstrous in size, though it was very light. Guess I'm not ready for a FF. I've always had Rebels and found them to be big, so will wait for a FF mirrorless, if they ever come out, or maybe even go to Sony at some point.
> 
> But as a woman I have small hands and like to stick my camera in my pocket and don't shoot for money. The M5 is a nice little camera and will be fine for as long as I want. I can put my 100-400 on it with the adaptor when I want to get close, works great. I may even get a SL2 for the meantime.



I have a G7X II that I use for travel. It takes amazingly good pictures for its size. I just printed out a couple of 13" x 19" prints for framing to hang in my hallway. It zooms in only to 100mm equivalent, but has enough additional resolution over the S120 it replaced to make up for it. I use my rebel mostly on a tripod, so the extra weight of the 6D2 shouldn't bother me.


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 12, 2017)

Tangent said:


> ScottyP said:
> 
> 
> > I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.
> ...



This has been the most irritating part, I have a 6d now, and really like the flip screens and tilt screens that my friends have on their cameras, so was all lined up for this. Unfortunately, I had mistakenly assumed that the iq would improve too. 

There really any option with Canon if one wants better iq than the original 6d, and a flip/tilt screen. I just wonder how many people are in the same as I am


----------



## Talys (Aug 13, 2017)

AA said:


> That's is the funniest conclusion I've ever read... . This camera in many respects has worse IQ and worse video quality than the original 6D from five years ago! It is the Canon 6D'oh . You've gotta be an idiot to pay $2,000 for it. If you wanted 2007 DR, 2010 video and a 2010 APS-C AF system, you could pick something up from eBay for a fraction of the price.



Except, Bryan doesn't say that it has inferior IQ or video quality than the 6D at all. How do you get that, out of:



> How do the Canon EOS 6D Mark II noise levels compare the original 6D? Despite the increased resolution, the 6D II's noise levels are very slightly improved at the pixel level. Downsizing the 6D II images to 6D pixel dimensions will give an additional advantage to the 6D II results.



He goes on to say that IQ in isolation is probably not enough to motivate an upgrade from 6D to II, and that noise levels are pretty close to 5DIV.

You can disagree with the review, but please don't make things up.



Takingshots said:


> Like you.. I am also thinking about buying Sony but what adapter are you recommending for your Canon lens that would not frustrate with one focusing , delay, etc with different lenses? Or are you thinking of ditching Canon lens and opt for Zeiss and other lens to go with Sony?



Why would you do that? Canon lens not only have excellent value retention, but they sell very quickly and easily on the second-hand market. I've gotten 70% back on my original purchase price for lenses that were 10 years old, for heavens sake. Just sell them, and buy Sony FE glass. There's no way that EF lens will outperform native Sony lenses, not to mention ergonomics and all that.


----------



## dak723 (Aug 13, 2017)

AA said:


> That's is the funniest conclusion I've ever read... . This camera in many respects has worse IQ and worse video quality than the original 6D from five years ago! It is the Canon 6D'oh . You've gotta be an idiot to pay $2,000 for it. If you wanted 2007 DR, 2010 video and a 2010 APS-C AF system, you could pick something up from eBay for a fraction of the price.



Well you might want to read the comments in other threads from folks who have bought and used the camera. They all find that the IQ is better, the noise much easier to reduce, that the camera is an improvement in almost all aspects over the original 6D. Sure, the improvements may be small, but there has never been a large improvement from one camera generation to the next - and images from pretty much any FF camera brand are essentially the same. So, who's the idiot now?


----------



## dak723 (Aug 13, 2017)

Talys said:


> Just sell them, and buy Sony FE glass. There's no way that EF lens will outperform native Sony lenses, not to mention ergonomics and all that.



Well, maybe not. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II and the two kit lenses (28-70mm & 24-70mm) both perform very poorly away from the image center due to the short flange distance of the Sony. My Canon lenses performed much better with adapter - at least in terms of image quality. I understand that the higher end Sony lenses are a big improvement over their kit lenses, but the kit lenses are all that many can afford.


----------



## ScottyP (Aug 13, 2017)

jedy said:


> ScottyP said:
> 
> 
> > I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.
> ...



Now that you mention it, one thing that never fails to make one "look stupid" is to take something literally that was clearly intended ironically. To break it down for you, it would clearly be helping Canon, not hurting them, to forego giving them $2,000.00 and to instead give them $3,200.00. Read it out loud to yourself if it helps.


----------



## candc (Aug 13, 2017)

mppix said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



i've gotten good results using the metabones IV adaptor on the a7rii. i did not see the edge softness that kr did in his comparison. i compared the canon 16-35 f/4 to the sony version and found the canon better. the sony is about equal at 16 but the canon is clearly better at 35. af is good with normal fl lenses but drops off as fl increases into the supertele range.


----------



## HarryFilm (Aug 13, 2017)

After all this kafuffle about the 6Dmk2,
why not just upgrade to a Canon 5Dmk4 
or Canon 1DxMk2? The price really isn't 
all that much higher and you can always
LEASE the camera and top-notch lenses for 
about $300 to $600 per month for 18 to 24 
months and do a $600 to $1000 buyout at 
the end of the lease!

Look for audio/production houses in your area 
and ask THEM where they LEASE their gear from!


----------



## Joules (Aug 13, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> After all this kafuffle about the 6Dmk2,
> why not just upgrade to a Canon 5Dmk4


Because it is significantly more expensive, a bit heavier and lacks the Vari Angle screen, for example. It is simply overkill for a lot of people. And I'm probably not alone in thinking that paying about 60% more (Comparing the price of 2100€ for the 6D II and the 3300€ for the 5D IV in German online stores) when the current 6D II price is already slightly above my budget isn't an option for a hobby.

I'd rather _save_ money and get the 80D or D750 as a replacement for my T3i, both of which would still be a deal better in every aspect that is relevant for me. But the Vari Angle screen is pretty damn high on my priorities list and full-frame is more attractive than staying on the APS-C side of things, so right now the 6D II looks more decent in my eyes. It also has been available from Amazon for "just" 1859€, which puts it close enough to the other two and further apart from the 5D IV.


----------



## Aglet (Aug 13, 2017)

The 6d2 has image quality that will be _mostly_ usable by _most_ people who will buy it.
It certainly does not come even close enough for a few of us.

It (finally) does have a lot of other good features on it in a nice compact body that will make it more fun and possibly easier to use, whether you're a green-box-shooter, pro, or somewhere in between.

That said, what you're getting for the introductory price is not a bargain by any stretch when compared to the competition.
When the street price hits something around $1500us for a new 6d2 body... then you're getting a reasonable deal, IMO.

If you don't NEED it right now, don't buy it. Promo pricing is likely to begin by the holidays, likely in the form of discounted kits if that works for you. Could be next spring before we see reduced MSRP for body-alone. Watch out for open-box and refurb deals which are often pretty good.


----------



## Talys (Aug 13, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> After all this kafuffle about the 6Dmk2,
> why not just upgrade to a Canon 5Dmk4
> or Canon 1DxMk2? The price really isn't
> all that much higher and you can always
> ...



For me, it's tilty flippy, which I really can't live without since many of my photos make my camera inaccessible (too high) without a ladder. No fully articulating screen means that I have to use a field monitor; the biggest problem with those is that I have to carry and charge another bag of batteries.

Deal-killers aside, the 5DIV price is a disincentive (though not a deal killer), the size makes 5DIV less comfortable to handhold, and now that I've used it, and 6DII Bluetooth trigger is pretty damn awesome. 

The opposite can be said, though, too: "Why would I bother with the 5DIV?" Call it my skill level or the type of shots I take (I don't do sunsets or night shots, really), but I don't think I'd really benefit from a fraction of an EV of DR. I will never shoot videos beyond cute baby raccoons in my back yard that I would be happy with cell-phone quality shots of, and I would never give up size for more weather sealing, because when it's not nice out, I'd rather stay in.

To be perfectly honest, the 80D is an ideal camera for me, with one fault -- I often have ceiling constraints, where I can't get a shot as wide as I want it, because I can't raise the camera any higher. This happens especially on-site. And I can't shoot any wider without distortion, which is unacceptable. Now, these shots are infrequent, but 6DII neatly fixes it.

Dynamic range isn't really an issue for me professionally, because nearly all of the photos have a requirement for the subject to be cut out (transparent background), or against white with natural shadows. The subjects themselves just don't have anything close to the color range that would challenge the hardware.

From a hobby perspective, the low light benefits are nice too.

For me, 6DII is just a nice blend of features, full frame, and price, with sufficient image quality that I'm happy with the shots that I take.


----------



## RGF (Aug 13, 2017)

sounds like Canon was successful with the camera. Provide an entry level FF that would not steal sales from the more expensive and more profitable 5D M4.


----------



## Talys (Aug 13, 2017)

mppix said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



I will freely admit to having no experience in this respect, so I could be totally wrong.

I was kind of assuming that the original Canon lens would be expensive glass, that would get traded in for expensive Sony glass, though. It doesn't really make any sense at all to me to trade in a 6D + 24-70/4 and 70-200II... for a Sony a7RII + kit lens 

I am constantly amazed at how much people will offer me for my used (high-end) Canon lenses. I do keep them in perfect condition -- they're sold with no defects, with all the original packaging, and they're pretty much indistinguishable from new. Still, there are very few things in the technology/electronics world that retain value like that, over a period of 5-10 years. I think good Canon glass is one of the best investments when it comes to professional tools.


----------



## Skywise (Aug 13, 2017)

I've read lots of reviews of how it's a great entry level FF camera.

But what about those of us that already HAVE an entry level FF camera... like the 6D? It's marginal upgrade at best with a trade-off of with potentially lower video quality and slightly worse DR but some better DR depending on what ISO you're shooting at.

If it had the SAME video/IQ at all levels of the older 6D I'd at least be thinking of an upgrade to grab the DPAF and video AF capabilities and to a lesser extent the flippy screen.

Maybe when promo pricing kicks in it'll be worth a look... maybe


----------



## Ryananthony (Aug 13, 2017)

Skywise said:


> I've read lots of reviews of how it's a great entry level FF camera.
> 
> But what about those of us that already HAVE an entry level FF camera... like the 6D? It's marginal upgrade at best with a trade-off of with potentially lower video quality and slightly worse DR but some better DR depending on what ISO you're shooting at.
> 
> ...



The same can be said for anyone who is looking to upgrade from one generation to the next. I own a 5d3, and 1dx, I didn't upgrade either of them. _For me_, it was not worth the upgrade. If you don't feel it is, don't purchase it, wait another generation or change brands.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 13, 2017)

If I already owned a 6D, I wouldn't have started reading the Canon Rumors site to see about the 6D2. I'm not suggesting that it is not a good upgrade for some people who have a 6D, just an unlikely one for me.

That said, I have an increased appreciation for the flippy screen on my T3i. Even the tilty screen on my G7X II came in really handy photographing inside the dome of the Colorado state capitol last fall and church towers in Britain this spring.

The sun has popped in and out of clouds today. My eclipse glasses were in my PO box when I checked after church today, and I tried one out by looking at the sun when it was out. I didn't go blind, so the glasses seem to work. I certainly couldn't see anything besides the sun through them.

Then about 2pm the sun came back out, and I took the T3i out to test the filter that came Thursday. I positioned the flippy screen in the shadow of the camera and wore a ball cap. Focusing was not easy, even so. The 75-300mm lens is by far the worst Canon lens I own, but I have made some decent moon pictures with it in the past. So I don't know how much was my fault, and how much was the lens's problem. I'll practice more before next Monday and continue trying different exposures. I don't know if I'm going to view the 98% version here or drive two hours south for totality. Traffic between here and there is a zoo even on good days. I plan to put more emphasis on what I can see and experience over taking pictures. I see that totality in the place I'm considering going to has just over a minute of totality. Not much time to take a filter off. So here is my least bad sun picture from this afternoon:






What you see is the full frame, with the picture reduced in size for posting.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 13, 2017)

And while I'm inflicting my flippy pictures from this afternoon on you, here is one as the clouds moved over the sun. It is a somewhat more interesting picture. 5 seconds, f/8, ISO 100. The other picture was taken at 1/200, f/8, ISO 200.





Cropped very slightly and again resized from the original 5184x3456. I didn't do anything to reduce the obvious noise.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 14, 2017)

stevelee said:


> And while I'm inflicting my flippy pictures from this afternoon on you, here is one as the clouds moved over the sun. It is a somewhat more interesting picture. 5 seconds, f/8, ISO 100. The other picture was taken at 1/200, f/8, ISO 200.
> 
> 
> Cropped very slightly and again resized from the original 5184x3456. I didn't do anything to reduce the obvious noise.



Steve, just a guess, but it may be a issue with the filter. Some of them soften the images a lot. What brand is it?

I was not thrilled with my first try, then the sun was blotted out by smoke and not visible at all for over 2 weeks, but it does look sharper. It was captured with my 5D MK III and 100-400mm L II, and cropped way down. I used live view and live autofocus.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 14, 2017)

I have a 6D and a 6D2. The 6D2 beats the 6D in every way. The 6D2 at high ISO is FREAKIN AWESOME!!!!!!

This is a JPG from the camera, no adjustments, just resampled to 1/2 width to meet file sizes for uploading here...... ISO 102400 on a dark porch. The light source was moonlight through the trees! All the eye could see was that there was a cat in the bag, you could not even tell which cat it was. the fact that you can get anything under those conditions is amazing!

The second shot is of a fireplace, lit by a 60W light bulb 25 feet away in the far corner of the room, and the lamp has a thick yellow shade on it. This is also at ISO102400.

I also played around some with the time-lapse feature.... easy to use and great results! It lets you expose picture by picture, or from a master frame at the start. I am very impressed with this camera.


----------



## Talys (Aug 14, 2017)

Well, a few high ISO 6DII photos to share, all with Sigma 150-600mm. These shots didn't have to be high ISO; I purposely shot them that way to see how they would come out. All photos were processed to taste with DPP.

Moon shot, 600mm, f/6.3, 1/500, ISO 2000 (tripod):
The yellow tint of the moon is unedited; it's due to smoke from wildfires near my area.





Stellar's Jay, 347mm 1/800, f/5.6, ISO 4000:





Stellar's Jay, 347mm, 1/800, f/5.6, ISO 4000:





And to go a little crazy, Stellar's Jay, 244mm, 1/800, 5.6, ISO 8000





The ISO 4000 shots came out way better than I expected; I could never have gotten pictures that looked anything like that, at ISO 4000, with an APSC.


----------



## YuengLinger (Aug 14, 2017)

Really glad to read the many positives in this thorough review. Not sure why I reacted to early impressions by sites that have largely degenerated to click-bait.

Also, I don't understand the thinking, the expectations of owners of a camera one generation older. Why would you think any company is targeting you with an incremental upgrade? The 6D II is for, among others, those buying a first FF camera and those who want a good, reliable second camera that doesn't cost as much as a 5D IV. If a percentage of 6D owners see AF or other features as a worthwhile upgrade, or have used their 6D to the point of disintegration and want a similar but better replacement, great for Canon and for those replacing their 6D.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Aug 14, 2017)

YuengLinger said:


> Really glad to read the many positives in this thorough review. Not sure why I reacted to early impressions by sites that have largely degenerated to click-bait.
> 
> Also, I don't understand the thinking, the expectations of owners of a camera one generation older. Why would you think any company is targeting you with an incremental upgrade? The 6D II is for, among others, those buying a first FF camera and those who want a good, reliable second camera that doesn't cost as much as a 5D IV. If a percentage of 6D owners see AF or other features as a worthwhile upgrade, or have used their 6D to the point of disintegration and want a similar but better replacement, great for Canon and for those replacing their 6D.


I'm one of those that bought the 6D MKII as a replacement for my very well used 6D. Still early days but so far I don't have buyers remorse and the positives out-weigh any negatives thus far.


----------



## hbr (Aug 14, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > Really glad to read the many positives in this thorough review. Not sure why I reacted to early impressions by sites that have largely degenerated to click-bait.
> ...



I also purchased the 6D2 but I also kept my original 6D. I am finding that the 6D2 is better in every way than the original. Love the articulating screen, the improved AF, the improved resolution, the faster fps and I am completely blown away by the high ISO performance, especially in very low light. I simply do not understand all the negative comments - I guess these people making these comments have not used the camera, but want to sound important.

Brian


----------



## stevelee (Aug 14, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Steve, just a guess, but it may be a issue with the filter. Some of them soften the images a lot. What brand is it?
> 
> I was not thrilled with my first try, then the sun was blotted out by smoke and not visible at all for over 2 weeks, but it does look sharper. It was captured with my 5D MK III and 100-400mm L II, and cropped way down. I used live view and live autofocus.



Thanks for the reply. It is a Firecrest, made in the UK by Formatt Hitech. I couldn't find anything on line that looked like it was worth ordering and was in stock. I put in requests with B&H to notify me when any of a few models were in stock, and I got email about this one, so I ordered it and a pack of glasses immediately. They rate it at 18 stops. The company seems rather serious about neutral density filters, and their other models get good ratings on Amazon and B&H. But that doesn't necessarily prove that the filter is not the weakest link in an otherwise already iffy chain. As I already said, I know the lens is not very good, certainly relative to my other Canons. The user is incompetent at this, but getting better with a little practice. For this test, I didn't put the little eyepiece cover back in after it came out on my way outside. Clouds were coming and going, so even at its clearest, there was almost for sure some haze.

And its not like I can run much alternate setups for testing. The only other lens I might try is the 100mm macro (non L). It is a fine lens, but I don't know that the tiny image of the sun it would produce would tell me anything. Since you used autofocus, maybe I should try that. Or maybe use it once and switch it off. 

From the weather forecast, I may not even bother to drive to SC that morning, and just hope that I get a break in the clouds some time from here, where it will peak at 97%. Maybe I will visit my friend in Dallas in 2024 if we are both still alive and not too senile by then.

If this were critical, or even important, I would have used it as an excuse to buy a decent telephoto lens. But I would like to see what is the best I can do under the circumstances, weather permitting. If we get any sunshine this week, I guess I'll try out f/5.6 and f/11 and see if the lens does any better. If I have way plenty of time in the sun, I might even try the 100mm. But as I think I said somewhere on this forum, the zoom at 300mm (480 equivalent crop) has produced passable moon pictures, such as this one (full resolution, cropped, I think, obviously not corrected for CA):


----------



## wunderpink (Aug 14, 2017)

Because of the nice tilting screen of the 6D II, for many the 5D IV isn't a good alternative (regardless of price).

If there would be a 5D-IV-like camera with tilting screen, I wouldn't hesitate to throw my money at Canon. This would be so incredibly helpful for outdoor tripod work.

Does anyone think it is possible that Canon releases a higher end camera with a tilt screen in the future? In my opinion, a 5DsR (II) with tilt screen could be a proper D850 rival. On the other hand, Canon really believes in keeping the handling of the 5D series consistent. A flipping screen would require to move the left row of buttons... :'( :'( :'(


----------



## reef58 (Aug 14, 2017)

wunderpink said:


> Because of the nice tilting screen of the 6D II, for many the 5D IV isn't a good alternative (regardless of price).
> 
> If there would be a 5D-IV-like camera with tilting screen, I wouldn't hesitate to throw my money at Canon. This would be so incredibly helpful for outdoor tripod work.
> 
> Does anyone think it is possible that Canon releases a higher end camera with a tilt screen in the future? In my opinion, a 5DsR (II) with tilt screen could be a proper D850 rival. On the other hand, Canon really believes in keeping the handling of the 5D series consistent. A flipping screen would require to move the left row of buttons... :'( :'( :'(



I would not be surprised if the 5dsr2 have a tilt screen. It may have more pixels than I prefer though. The 5d4 is close to being perfect if only it had a tilt screen and 10fps.


----------



## Talys (Aug 14, 2017)

reef58 said:


> I would not be surprised if the 5dsr2 have a tilt screen. It may have more pixels than I prefer though. The 5d4 is close to being perfect if only it had a tilt screen and 10fps.



Yeah, this is where a theoretical EVF that I fell in love with would work out - in my imagination, an EVF that performed "just like" an OVF would let a 50 MP camera run in crop mode basically work like an APSC, or give me 30ish MP out of full frame. I don't really want 50MP out of every picture, because the files just become too unwieldly, and the first thing I'm going to do is reduce them (a lot) anyhow.

The problem is, I haven't found an EVF that I want to use.

I don't know how to deal with the articulating screen. I would love one (it might even convince me to buy a top-end Canon), but so many people who are actually in the target market seem to really dislike the idea.


----------



## Talys (Aug 14, 2017)

hbr said:


> I am completely blown away by the high ISO performance, especially in very low light. I simply do not understand all the negative comments - I guess these people making these comments have not used the camera, but want to sound important.
> 
> Brian



Me too. The high ISO performance is really something.


----------



## reef58 (Aug 14, 2017)

Talys said:


> reef58 said:
> 
> 
> > I would not be surprised if the 5dsr2 have a tilt screen. It may have more pixels than I prefer though. The 5d4 is close to being perfect if only it had a tilt screen and 10fps.
> ...



The reason I prefer a tilt screen and max image quality as ISO100 is I primarily do landscape on a tripod with long exposures. The tripod is normally a foot off of the ground or lower. My knees would love the tilting screen. It would be nice if Canon designed a 5d4 with a tilt screen as an option. Who knows?


----------



## Aglet (Aug 14, 2017)

reef58 said:


> The reason I prefer a tilt screen and max image quality as ISO100 is I primarily do landscape on a tripod with long exposures. The tripod is normally a foot off of the ground or lower. My knees would love the tilting screen. It would be nice if Canon designed a 5d4 with a tilt screen as an option. Who knows?



Can you get by using an "angle-finder?"
I had one for my 40D... clipped onto the VF and allowed me to compose even with the camera on the ground.
Had some optical issues but worked well enough and I could keep my face off the ground.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=angle+finder+camera+accessory


----------



## reef58 (Aug 15, 2017)

Soon I am going to get something with the tilting screen. Meanwhile I guess I will keep getting dirty. Thanks for the heads up though.


Aglet said:


> reef58 said:
> 
> 
> > The reason I prefer a tilt screen and max image quality as ISO100 is I primarily do landscape on a tripod with long exposures. The tripod is normally a foot off of the ground or lower. My knees would love the tilting screen. It would be nice if Canon designed a 5d4 with a tilt screen as an option. Who knows?
> ...



Looks interesting. Thanks for the heads up. I will do some digging around on those


----------



## jeffa4444 (Aug 15, 2017)

hbr said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > YuengLinger said:
> ...


Most if not all those complaining about the 6D MKII on the forum have not shot with it. One negative compared to the 6D is the wheel on the back of the camera does feel more plastic and lightweight for some reason and more inline with a Rebel something I never felt about the 6D. 
Small things make a difference and the remote socket being on the front is much better than on the side under a larger rubber cover as on the 6D. Being able to articulate the screen away from the back also avoids suntan lotion smeared on the screen or nose oil! The Bluetooth also works a treat. 

Ive found shadow recovery if kept within 1 - 2 stops is also well within the realms of good enough and certainly in real world use no worse than the original 6D and the sharper images help retain the perception than noise is well under control. Like the 5DS the camera has the tendency to under expose and if you purely go by the jpeg on the back of the screen your have to batch correct exposure so definitely expose to the right with this camera. 

Ive not compared any side by side shots to the 5DS and would be interested to see how they compare.


----------



## candyman (Aug 15, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> hbr said:
> 
> 
> > jeffa4444 said:
> ...


I agree about the wheel on the back. I also find the buttons on the back to be more plastic-like when pressing them. The remote socket in the front is a big plus. But why to point it to the left instead down? Pointing to the left makes it more complex for the use of a L-bracket. Looking forward for RSS to introduce that one (they are working on it)
Bluetooth with the Canon app....just great!


I am not sure about the comparison of slight shadow lifting to the 6D. I do not have the 6D anymore but at 100 ISO and a slight shadowlifting I see some color banding. Not sure if/how to avoid that
It can be seen on the left onder the bridge




Giant chordophone by Thornmill Images, on Flickr


----------



## scyrene (Aug 15, 2017)

RGF said:


> sounds like Canon was successful with the camera. Provide an entry level FF that would not steal sales from the more expensive and more profitable 5D M4.



We don't actually know the 5D4 is more profitable, just because it's more expensive.


----------



## Talys (Aug 15, 2017)

candyman said:


> I agree about the wheel on the back. I also find the buttons on the back to be more plastic-like when pressing them. The remote socket in the front is a big plus. But why to point it to the left instead down? Pointing to the left makes it more complex for the use of a L-bracket. Looking forward for RSS to introduce that one (they are working on it)
> Bluetooth with the Canon app....just great!



Forget about the N3 remote socket. Once you use the Bluetooth BR-E1, there's just no going back. No wires, no power switch to forget and tiny profile is a winner. It's even a "cheap" accessory -- not much more than any other wireless remote trigger.


----------



## SUNDOG04 (Aug 15, 2017)

I am sure is is an excellent camera. I have the original 6D. A few things, especially the sensor is a bit disappointing. I would love to have one. However, I would recommend for new owners, not invested in Canon lenses, to look at the Nikon 750.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 15, 2017)

Yeah, it is a nice camera to look at, as you suggested.  however Canon bodies require less frequent travel to service centres due to routine product recalls. It works out better mid to long term for people that value quality the most.
I hope it helps. 



SUNDOG04 said:


> I am sure is is an excellent camera. I have the original 6D. A few things, especially the sensor is a bit disappointing. I would love to have one. *However, I would recommend for new owners, not invested in Canon lenses, to look at the Nikon 750.*


----------



## HarryFilm (Aug 15, 2017)

Talys said:


> mppix said:
> 
> 
> > dak723 said:
> ...



====

This is fully agree with in that once you have GOOD Canon Glass,
it would take a lot of really bad hardware development mistakes 
by Canon for the average prosumer or professional photographer 
to even contemplate changing over to Sony or Nikon.

For most of Canon Primes (i LOOOOVE prime lenses) -- my zooms
are all Sigma! -- the image quality coming out of that Canon glass 
is almost beyond compare. Only the Zeiss Otus and Sigma Art Series
can beat Canon primes! For the price and build quality, it's gonna
take a lot more from Sony to get me to switch. I won't goto Nikon
because of simple ergonomics due to my large hand size.

While that Sony A9 is looking REALLY GOOD, it's got limited glass!
Good Canon glass on our Canon 1Dc or 5Dmk 2/3/4 cameras
do the job we need so I cannot YET goto Sony unless they
REALLY IMPROVE the variety of prime and zoom lenses they have.

So like MANY on here, Canon's great glass really DOES make 
the difference to such an extent that most of us invested 
heavily in Canon glass can and WILL live with the hardware/software 
faults still present in the 6dmk2, 5Dmk2 or even the 1Dxmk2!

That said, I still think the 6D mk2 is a GREAT CAMERA when
upgrading from a Rebel series or the older 6Dmk1. The lack of
4K isn't really that big of an issue because when I ran some 
test HD-resolution 6D mk2 footage through a Lanczos-5 Video 
Frame resizer algorithm and ran the "Unsharp Mask" before or 
afterwards the Lanczos-5 upsize, I thought the final 
UPSIZED-to-4K footage looked FANTASTIC!

So I don't think the lack of true 4K on the 6Dmk2 
is a problem anymore! Just use a Lanczos-5 resizer
and remember to run an "Unsharp Mask" BEFORE or
AFTER the upsize to 4K (it's your choice as to running 
UnSharp Mask before or after Lanczos-5 resize - the 
results are slightly different for final anti-aliasing quality)


----------



## stevelee (Aug 16, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Steve, just a guess, but it may be a issue with the filter. Some of them soften the images a lot. What brand is it?
> 
> I was not thrilled with my first try, then the sun was blotted out by smoke and not visible at all for over 2 weeks, but it does look sharper. It was captured with my 5D MK III and 100-400mm L II, and cropped way down. I used live view and live autofocus.



Thanks for your help and encouragement.

I tried again today. The filter is apparently OK. I had done a poor job of focusing when I couldn't see well enough. In the meantime I looked up somebody charts from testing this lens, and it seems to be best between f/11 and f/16. I slipped a black t-shirt over my shirt to cut down on screen reflections. I carried another black t-shirt to put over my head and the screen. I put on reading glasses to help my eyes focus. I turned the screen as bright as it would go. Tip: unless you have a really good reason, don't stand out in the August sun in NC with a black t-shirt over your head.

I tried the autofocus. The T3i couldn't handle it. So I went back to manual focus and was very careful, taking advantage of the flippy screen and the precautions above. I forgot to magnify the image, but came out OK. I bracketed the shutter speed over a wide range and shot a lot at f/14, a few at f/16, and for grins, some at f/32 and f/45. The overexposed ones covered up the considerable CA. The underexposed ones showed some detail, most or all of which I assume to be noise. The sunspot in the upper right shows up in all but the most and least exposed pictures. They were taken on different parts of the sensor, and the sun moved while I was shooting anyway. So I gather from that it is a real feature on the sun and not an artifact of the sensor or dust, etc.

Here is a full-size crop of a shot at 1/320 sec. f/16 ISO 200 manual focus AWB. I did no adjustments in camera raw, and did just the crop in Photoshop and saved as a JPEG for posting:


----------



## sdsr (Aug 16, 2017)

mppix said:


> I keep asking people about the use of adapters and some (many) have stories like
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2015-10-16-a7r2-5dsr/index.htm
> [I don't recommend using that site in general ]



I don't have that lens, so I can't comment on how it compares, but the Canon lenses I've attached to Sony bodies have performed at least as well as on Canon bodies (24-105L, 28mm IS, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 100mm L, 135mm L, 70-200 f4 IS L and, on aps-c, 10-18mm) in terms of sheer image quality (AF performance varies with the adapter).

As for Rockwell, last week he announced in an essentially self-refuting post that the only lens a Sony mirrorless user need own is the relatively inexpensive 24-240mm. I won't comment further....


----------

