# TDP: EOS 6D Mark II Image Quality and analysis



## mukul (Aug 7, 2017)

Brian has added the Noise test result
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=1140

and his comments on the Noise performance on review page
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-Mark-II.aspx

He seems to be convinced that noise performance of 6D2 is very comparable to 5D4 although later has higher resolution 

Vs 5D4 @6400
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=1140&Test=0&ISO=6400&CameraComp=1074&TestComp=0&ISOComp=6400

*and also 6d2 @6400 seems to be a bit better than 1Dx2 @12800*
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=1140&Test=0&ISO=6400&CameraComp=1041&TestComp=0&ISOComp=12800


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 7, 2017)

And a significant improvement over the 80D (especially 800 and above).

So for all those complaining about the superiority of the 80D, and how the 6DII uses 'old technology'....I just don't see it.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 7, 2017)

Starting to look like a brilliant astro outfit and even a decent wildlife rig that won't cost a fortune


----------



## Sharlin (Aug 7, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> And a significant improvement over the 80D (especially 800 and above).
> 
> So for all those complaining about the superiority of the 80D, and how the 6DII uses 'old technology'....I just don't see it.



I don't think anybody has complained about 6D2 *high* ISO compared to the 80D... The former has the expected 1 1/3-ish stop advantage simply due to the 2.5x larger surface area. The whole controversy is about low-ISO DR (mostly shadow lifting) where the 80D definitely appears to have the lead.

Edit: Here's Bryan's comparison of the 6D2 and 5D4 underexposed and pushed three stops. The difference is notable. There's no -3EV version for the 80D but at -2EV the 6D2 and the 80D appear to be roughly equal.


----------



## BillB (Aug 7, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> And a significant improvement over the 80D (especially 800 and above).
> 
> So for all those complaining about the superiority of the 80D, and how the 6DII uses 'old technology'....I just don't see it.



I'm not sure that these results are all that different from the earlier DPR results. It may be more a matter of interpretation and spin. All that DPR really cares about is gross shadow lifting, at least in their "landscape" scoring. This would seem to be comparable to Brian C's comparison of underexposed images where the 5DIV has an advantage in noise level. The difference may be that DPR goes into its usual Chicken Little mode, complete with its magic DR numbers, while Brian C evaluates this difference in a broader context, without the spurious numerical ratings.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 7, 2017)

Sharlin said:


> The whole controversy is about low-ISO DR (mostly shadow lifting) where the 80D definitely appears to have the lead.



I looked at those on Brian's comparison and to me the 6D2 looks equal if not better. The 80D may have the advantage per pixel or whatever, but when looking at outputs the benefits of FF seems to override the technological advaentage of the APS-C.


----------



## BillB (Aug 7, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > The whole controversy is about low-ISO DR (mostly shadow lifting) where the 80D definitely appears to have the lead.
> ...



Often, the important question is not whether there is any measurable difference in shadow noise under some specific conditions, but whether there is any practical significance to that difference. Brian C used DPP in processing his images, which is likely as good as it gets for 6DII images, in these early days for that camera. TDP of course used something else, for reasons best known to themselves.


----------



## daphins (Aug 7, 2017)

Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.

BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.

The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.


----------



## The Supplanter (Aug 7, 2017)

daphins said:


> Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.
> 
> BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.
> 
> The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.



Glad to read some real-world testimonies. I would imagine the 6DII would be a nice improvement over the 70D as well. I'm really itching to pair the 6DII with the 16-35 f/4L.


----------



## 9VIII (Aug 7, 2017)

The biggest difference I can see is the 6D2 has red noise and the 5D4 has blue/green noise.

As long as nothing shows banding (which I have yet to see from any recent camera) it should be fine.

I actually still have a slight preference for the old sensors. In my (admittedly very limited) opinion the 1DX renders skin tone better than the 1DX2.
At base ISO I wouldn't consider the 6D2 to be at a disadvantage to anything else on the market, sometimes I still prefer the look of 5D2 samples (it really makes the reds "pop" and gives a "punchy" image).

The most interesting question in my mind is how much Dual Pixel AF is affecting the image. Would it look significantly different without DPAF?
It'll be interesting to see if the 5Dsr2 keeps whole pixels or adopts split pixels.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 7, 2017)

daphins said:


> Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.
> 
> BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.
> 
> The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.



And there in lies the point all the measurbators, testers, forum pundits, pixel peepers, pretentious idiots, and clickbate authors miss entirely, the target market are _"blown away"_ with how good it is!


----------



## dcm (Aug 8, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> daphins said:
> 
> 
> > Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.
> ...



Exactly the same response I had when I upgraded from a T2i to the 6D a few years ago. The target market is likely pretty much the same.


----------



## daphins (Aug 8, 2017)

The Supplanter said:


> daphins said:
> 
> 
> > Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.
> ...



It'll be an amazing. I used my 16-35 f2.8L this weekend and my new refurb 70-200 2.L8 IS. Best shots I've ever gotten, and cleanup was a cinch.

I'm not a pro, but I'm an architect and have pretty damn high standards for imagery. I'm very happy with the purchase, and the touch screen is amazing. Thought about getting a 6D a year ago. Glad I waited


----------



## Aglet (Aug 8, 2017)

I haven't had a thorough look at Bryan's test shots for the 6d2 but what I've looked at so far I did not see some of the faint vertical noise striation I've seen in other images posted online at various ISO.
This may be individual sensor variability...

Noise character on Bryans noise comparison shots looked more workable.

hmmm... ???


----------



## jeffa4444 (Sep 4, 2017)

Been using the 6D MKII for just over 1 month and so far not found it to be too different image quality wise to the 6D except for the better sharpness especially with good L glass. 
The flippy screen has been a god send in low tripod positions now I dont have to link up my iphone to trigger the camera & view the image. 
Not seen any banding so far so that is an improvement over the 6D but I have to agree one thing with testers the new sensor does not really move the game on to the 6D in terms of low light / shadows noise which really should have been the case in 5 years of development change given the camera cost £ 1,999 body only in the UK. 

All the improvements it does have are beneficial and Im sure I will be using it for yesrs to come along side my 5DS which is a great studio camera (and for landscape).


----------



## Frodo (Sep 4, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> daphins said:
> 
> 
> > Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.
> ...



If the target market is those upgrading from a crop sensor camera you are right.
However, I consider it quite reasonable to compare the 6DII with equivalent (i.e. FF) cameras. From an image quality perspective, there is no incentive for me to upgrade my 6D.
And while I agree that low ISO DR is not everything, the TDP comparison of +3EV images between the 6DII and 5DIV, shows that the criticism is valid. For me, as a landscape photographer, often shooting on tripods, DR is important. As I often shoot moving water and foliage, HDR from multiple images often causes ghosting that I'd like to avoid.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 4, 2017)

Frodo said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > daphins said:
> ...



Unlike so many here I don't presume to know the results of all the market research Canon did before making the decisions that resulted in the 6D MkII, I don't know who they consider to be the target market but I'd be surprised if Canon expected huge numbers of 6D owners to upgrade. I would think they would like 6D owners who have outgrown their current bodies to be looking at a much broader feature set and capability as found in the 5 series, but that is because it seems obvious to me.

What I do know is I haven't yet seen a write up by a dissatisfied 6D MkII purchaser, indeed considering the very broad range of user skills and experience that covers it seems remarkable to me that such a comparatively simple camera can please such a wide range of users.

Another anacdotal observation, I know two people that recently bought 6's, both moved 'up' from crop DSLR's, both also bought M5's. Both use the M5's a lot more than their 6's.


----------



## tomscott (Sep 4, 2017)

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=33212.0

Will update with some more images later this evening


----------



## Frodo (Sep 5, 2017)

Hey PBD
I don't disagree that Canon's primary market is crop sensor upgraders.
Just that the comparison of the 6DII should be vs other FF cameras, not crop sensors.
In spite of all this, there is plenty of scope for experienced photographers (like myself) to buy the 6DII. I moved from a 300D to a 20D to a 5D, to 5DII to 6D. Dustin Abbott wrote an excellent blog saying why he bought a 6D rather than 5DIII.
And, finally, having seen that, I've compared my 6D to my M3 image quality and the gain is just a little shadow detail. Other than DoF, FF has little benefit over an equivalent MP crop camera. I'm now considering a 5DS as my next camera - quite a bit cheaper than 5DIV.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 5, 2017)

Frodo said:


> Hey PBD
> I don't disagree that Canon's primary market is crop sensor upgraders.
> Just that the comparison of the 6DII should be vs other FF cameras, not crop sensors.
> In spite of all this, there is plenty of scope for experienced photographers (like myself) to buy the 6DII. I moved from a 300D to a 20D to a 5D, to 5DII to 6D. Dustin Abbott wrote an excellent blog saying why he bought a 6D rather than 5DIII.
> And, finally, having seen that, I've compared my 6D to my M3 image quality and the gain is just a little shadow detail. Other than DoF, FF has little benefit over an equivalent MP crop camera. I'm now considering a 5DS as my next camera - quite a bit cheaper than 5DIV.



Yes, but have you been following Tom's posts across threads and linked to in the post above yours? His actual use of the camera and his experienced impressions of it are kinda making arm chair analysis's like you look kinda irrelevant.

Same with jeffa444, another very experienced camera user who moved from a 6D and has a 5DS yet is really liking the 6D MkII http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=33197.msg685018#msg685018

Now I am not trying to change your mind or opinion, of course you are welcome to both, but your opinion has little value when compared to actual users from various upgrade paths, not just more modest crop cameras, that as far as I can see are universally loving the camera and the output from the 6D MkII.

If I were you I'd seriously look at my reason for doing the photography and the actual output I am making, the 6D MkII and 5DS are entirely different beasts with very different strengths and weaknesses, if you are in the market for one I don't see how you could swap that out for the other. I could understand owning both, but not comparing them to do the same job.


----------



## Talys (Sep 5, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> ...the camera cost £ 1,999 body only in the UK.



Holy crap. You guys pay a LOT more for that. This is 30% more than north American pricing


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 5, 2017)

Here we go again....the US prices are without tax, the European prices include tax.


----------



## Frodo (Sep 5, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Yes, but have you been following Tom's posts across threads and linked to in the post above yours? His actual use of the camera and his experienced impressions of it are kinda making arm chair analysis's like you look kinda irrelevant.
> 
> Same with jeffa444, another very experienced camera user who moved from a 6D and has a 5DS yet is really liking the 6D MkII http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=33197.msg685018#msg685018
> 
> ...



My challenge is that my photography covers a very wide spectrum:
- I'm a biologist and use photography as a tool to highlight the importance of the natural environment and the threats it faces
- I shoot events and weddings, as well as water sports
- My passion is exhibition-grade black and white landscapes.
- And I take my M3 hiking and on travel.

So perhaps I have covered the question about my reason for photography. Some of these activities generate income, but I still need to carefully manage "investment" in gear, especially bodies, that don't have the life of lenses, and in particular to cover the wide spectrum that I shoot.

So when a new generation of bodies comes available I look with an open mind as to how that will advance my craft. Indeed I've just invested in a large format printer and this gave a boost to my craft that a new body ever would.

I considered that the move from a 5DII to a 6D to be an upgrade in IQ. In hindsight, I should have invested more in getting a 5DIII, because as I noted in Tom's thread, AF proved to be a major constraint in event photography. It appears to me that the AF of the 5DS is a step up on the 6D and would meet my needs (it is more than a high MP camera). The pricing of the 5DIV is now a third more than a 5DS, so is out of my ballpark. Just like the 5DS when introduced.

You questioned my choices between various FF models. You will see that I look for bang for my buck. The 6D represented quite a big bang for my buck at the time. As an armchair observer, it does not look like the 6DII represents an upgrade at this point in time. 

I don't care if I am part of Canon's target market for the 6DII. I compare the camera to other new Canon cameras (given my investment in lenses) as well as my existing bodies when I consider further investment.


----------



## tomscott (Sep 5, 2017)

Frodo said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, but have you been following Tom's posts across threads and linked to in the post above yours? His actual use of the camera and his experienced impressions of it are kinda making arm chair analysis's like you look kinda irrelevant.
> ...



I didnt say AF was a huge constraint, the difference in af is very small you just dont have the case selection but you can make your own and attach it to a custom mode. 

The actual spread is smaller but then the MKIII isnt exactly large either... you get maybe an extra 10% spread on the MKIII. It was a little strange at first but soon forgot about it. Same with the lack of AF selection stick, I have found changing the way I shoot to the 2 control wheels makes AF selection much faster so it doesnt hamper me. Moving the wheel you can fly through 3-4 points in the same time for one push of the control stick. Makes me shoot faster and miss less.

In terms of AF accuracy I am having a little inconsistency with the 24-70 MKI but nothing to complain too much about, all my other lenses are stellar. The 100-400mm locks on so quickly and I came home from a weekend of shooting deer with barely one out of focus from around 3k images. One of the days I used the 1.4 attached exclusively. With my 5DMKIII and 7DMKII I just didnt trust the combo, very rarely hit constantly. Having the F8 points across the middle of the frame is also a revelation for wildlife photographers it makes composition so much easier and its accurate. 

For travel, GPS, WIFI and the tilt screen... revelation. I traveled the world for a year with my 5DMKIII and 7DMKII could easily combine the two into the 6DMKII and really wish I had it. Quick send images to the phone/tablet for lightroom mobile, I know where I shot images with GPS. getting low angles with the screen instead of getting filthy and wet lying down. Just fantastic. I havent been and done any traveling yet because Ive only had it for a few weeks but did hike 20km with it at the weekend and its light enough not to worry about and I even took a few selfies with it! haha! ridiculous.

I had the same thoughts as you and its not an easy decision. I narrowed it down and these were my thoughts that put me off the 5DSR and 5DS.

I generally shoot 6-8tbs of images per year using all my bodies which were all in the 20-22mp region. The 5DS/R is nearly 3x the resolution so your talking nearly 18tb on the small end. I really dont want to deal with that, if you have a decent back up strategy you have a main machine with said drives with an on site back up and an offsite. Essentially 54TBs between my mac pro and two HP servers. A 4tb drive is £100 I would need 13.5 of them to cover the low end which would be over £1000 extra per year.

Continuing with that point per wedding - the 5Ds and SR opens a whole other can of worms, in terms of file size and storage, man I would hate to bring back 3-4k images that are 50mp. Currently im shooting around 150gbs per wedding at that volume with a 5DS double it and probably a bit more. Then there is the taxation on your rig say you bring that 3-4k down to 500-600 images it would take lightroom the best part of 3-4 hours maybe more to make 1-1 previews so you can actually edit them even if you have the latest quad i7s. Lightroom just isnt well optimized and the more MP you throw at it the worse it gets. (Currently)

When you actually start adding adjustments especially sharpening and noise reduction it makes computers crawl at that resolution. Im currently using a 3.5 hex mac pro which is a few years old and its ok with the 5DMKIII and 6DMKII but can be frustrating. Seen as apple hasnt made a new mac pro I didnt want to be spending more time editing then eventually having to swap out my rig probably another £4-5k when they release a new one.

Then actual benefit... the IQ on the 6DMKII especially at high ISO is much improved over the 5DS, 3200iso is probably as far as I would like to go. On the 6DMKII I was happy to let it run to 12800 and the files looked great. 

All the things you speak of I shoot too, apart from im not a biologist but wildlife is a personal passion and I shoot Motorsport not Watersport. Apart from landscape all the disciplines are in the higher ISO spectrum because of freezing action and the fact all the disciplines are rarely in good light. 

Cost also, the 5DS is 2 years old already, I bought my 6DMKII for £1500 at launch thats a fair chunk of saving. 

There is also the issue of lens quality. My most used lenses 24-70mm MKI and 16-35mm MKII both are not suitable for the 5DS/R which would mean me spending £3k upgrading them alone. Also the fact that its touch and go with balancing ISO with shutterspeeds in the lighting conditions at weddings and the fact you have more than twice the resolution than the 5DMKIII means you have to be super careful with shutterspeed to ensure that your images are sharp. The fact the 70-200mm MKII is the only lens in the F2.8 trinity that has IS doesn't really help with such a high res camera.

They are great cameras for sure but for weddings they just arent IMO. How often would you crop down far enough to use the 50mp, most of the time I would be downsizing them just to get them to a suitable file size for a client to use. Largest I print is A2 unless its a special request.

There is more than the body to think about in an upgrade. What I listed there was a huge investment in the short term. 2k on the camera 3k on lenses and extra 1k on drives and probably an upgraded rig of 4-5k. Thats a huge investment for me to make one camera work in my workflow. People often forget this, especially if you shoot professionally and deal with the amount of images I do.

When you look at it like that the 6DMKII is a relative bargain. A 5DMKIII with a little more resolution (that I can still use my lenses and rig without taxing it too much more) sharper sensor and all the banding and purple muddy shadow areas solved.

For you, like me the 5DMKIV is the best camera but at the same time you are looking for value for money and the 6DMKII has it in spades its 85% the 5DMKIV at 50% the price. The 5DMKIV is amazing and I appreciate how much of a complete camera it is but for the improvements I didnt see the value in spending twice that of a MKIII. (Because mine was stolen)

Now the 6DMKII is out it is almost £500 cheaper than a brand new MKIII and it performs better and is 5 years newer. I shot over 350,000 images all over the world with my 5DMKIII and loved it but I wouldn't buy another. I was editing some images for a magazine earlier in the week and I opened an ISO 125 file and im so used to the latitude of the 6DMKII already that I was amazed how quickly noise and banding appeared and how much more work I had to do to fix it.

For me I have bought the 6DMKII it as a stop gap as its nearly the end of wedding season and Im going to do a 3-4 week trip in the fall (Not sure where yet) and I have a feeling that market pressure may push the 5DMKIV into a price reduction like what happened to the MKIII 18 months in, so will pick one up for the start of next years season then and keep the 6DMKII and use both.

That being said I am smitten with the 6DMKII its a really lovely camera to use and really doesn't deserve the blasting its had. The DR isnt improved but the quality of that DR has! which is the main thing the 5DMKIII needed to improve. The 5DMKIII was nearly all the camera I needed and wanted and the 6DMKII has added most thing, taken a couple away too... But thats life.

It is seriously underrated and its such a shame its given me a bit of a spring into my photographic step as I love all the extra features. 

The one main negative which is an issue is the single card slot but as Ive explained in 10 years ive never had a card fail so im not really worried. I swap my cards out regularly and look after them. 

Anyway who cares what I think or anyone else, go rent the bodies and shoot some images and do the math. 

It might turn out that the extra £500 on a 5DS for a 5DMKIV will save you money and you will get better images. Or it might be similar to me a stopgap. The 6DMKII may replace your M3 for travel and you get a 5DMKIV further down the line when the prices are more sensible.

At the end of the day ive spent the time shooting the images and posting comments to try and help people like me make difficult choices in a time where cameras are very very similar and we are comparing minuscule differences when you ACTUALLY get into the real world. Sometimes some objectiveness instead of emotion is helpful.


----------



## Frodo (Sep 5, 2017)

Hi Tom
I really appreciate your time to post your thoughts - lots to ponder. 
By the way, I'm at a conference in Chile and taking some informal photos for the company. I took the M3 +10-22 and 55-200. Lots of missed focus in marginal light with the 55-200 - I miss my 6D and 200/2.8! 
Cheers


----------



## Ivan Muller (Sep 21, 2017)

( I didnt say AF was a huge constraint, the difference in af is very small you just dont have the case selection but you can make your own and attach it to a custom mode. 

The actual spread is smaller but then the MKIII isnt exactly large either... you get maybe an extra 10% spread on the MKIII. It was a little strange at first but soon forgot about it. Same with the lack of AF selection stick, I have found changing the way I shoot to the 2 control wheels makes AF selection much faster so it doesnt hamper me. Moving the wheel you can fly through 3-4 points in the same time for one push of the control stick. Makes me shoot faster and miss less.

In terms of AF accuracy I am having a little inconsistency with the 24-70 MKI but nothing to complain too much about, all my other lenses are stellar. The 100-400mm locks on so quickly and I came home from a weekend of shooting deer with barely one out of focus from around 3k images. One of the days I used the 1.4 attached exclusively. With my 5DMKIII and 7DMKII I just didnt trust the combo, very rarely hit constantly. Having the F8 points across the middle of the frame is also a revelation for wildlife photographers it makes composition so much easier and its accurate. 

For travel, GPS, WIFI and the tilt screen... revelation. I traveled the world for a year with my 5DMKIII and 7DMKII could easily combine the two into the 6DMKII and really wish I had it. Quick send images to the phone/tablet for lightroom mobile, I know where I shot images with GPS. getting low angles with the screen instead of getting filthy and wet lying down. Just fantastic. I havent been and done any traveling yet because Ive only had it for a few weeks but did hike 20km with it at the weekend and its light enough not to worry about and I even took a few selfies with it! haha! ridiculous.

I had the same thoughts as you and its not an easy decision. I narrowed it down and these were my thoughts that put me off the 5DSR and 5DS.

I generally shoot 6-8tbs of images per year using all my bodies which were all in the 20-22mp region. The 5DS/R is nearly 3x the resolution so your talking nearly 18tb on the small end. I really dont want to deal with that, if you have a decent back up strategy you have a main machine with said drives with an on site back up and an offsite. Essentially 54TBs between my mac pro and two HP servers. A 4tb drive is £100 I would need 13.5 of them to cover the low end which would be over £1000 extra per year.

Continuing with that point per wedding - the 5Ds and SR opens a whole other can of worms, in terms of file size and storage, man I would hate to bring back 3-4k images that are 50mp. Currently im shooting around 150gbs per wedding at that volume with a 5DS double it and probably a bit more. Then there is the taxation on your rig say you bring that 3-4k down to 500-600 images it would take lightroom the best part of 3-4 hours maybe more to make 1-1 previews so you can actually edit them even if you have the latest quad i7s. Lightroom just isnt well optimized and the more MP you throw at it the worse it gets. (Currently)

When you actually start adding adjustments especially sharpening and noise reduction it makes computers crawl at that resolution. Im currently using a 3.5 hex mac pro which is a few years old and its ok with the 5DMKIII and 6DMKII but can be frustrating. Seen as apple hasnt made a new mac pro I didnt want to be spending more time editing then eventually having to swap out my rig probably another £4-5k when they release a new one.

Then actual benefit... the IQ on the 6DMKII especially at high ISO is much improved over the 5DS, 3200iso is probably as far as I would like to go. On the 6DMKII I was happy to let it run to 12800 and the files looked great. 

All the things you speak of I shoot too, apart from im not a biologist but wildlife is a personal passion and I shoot Motorsport not Watersport. Apart from landscape all the disciplines are in the higher ISO spectrum because of freezing action and the fact all the disciplines are rarely in good light. 

Cost also, the 5DS is 2 years old already, I bought my 6DMKII for £1500 at launch thats a fair chunk of saving. 

There is also the issue of lens quality. My most used lenses 24-70mm MKI and 16-35mm MKII both are not suitable for the 5DS/R which would mean me spending £3k upgrading them alone. Also the fact that its touch and go with balancing ISO with shutterspeeds in the lighting conditions at weddings and the fact you have more than twice the resolution than the 5DMKIII means you have to be super careful with shutterspeed to ensure that your images are sharp. The fact the 70-200mm MKII is the only lens in the F2.8 trinity that has IS doesn't really help with such a high res camera.

They are great cameras for sure but for weddings they just arent IMO. How often would you crop down far enough to use the 50mp, most of the time I would be downsizing them just to get them to a suitable file size for a client to use. Largest I print is A2 unless its a special request.

There is more than the body to think about in an upgrade. What I listed there was a huge investment in the short term. 2k on the camera 3k on lenses and extra 1k on drives and probably an upgraded rig of 4-5k. Thats a huge investment for me to make one camera work in my workflow. People often forget this, especially if you shoot professionally and deal with the amount of images I do.

When you look at it like that the 6DMKII is a relative bargain. A 5DMKIII with a little more resolution (that I can still use my lenses and rig without taxing it too much more) sharper sensor and all the banding and purple muddy shadow areas solved.

For you, like me the 5DMKIV is the best camera but at the same time you are looking for value for money and the 6DMKII has it in spades its 85% the 5DMKIV at 50% the price. The 5DMKIV is amazing and I appreciate how much of a complete camera it is but for the improvements I didnt see the value in spending twice that of a MKIII. (Because mine was stolen)

Now the 6DMKII is out it is almost £500 cheaper than a brand new MKIII and it performs better and is 5 years newer. I shot over 350,000 images all over the world with my 5DMKIII and loved it but I wouldn't buy another. I was editing some images for a magazine earlier in the week and I opened an ISO 125 file and im so used to the latitude of the 6DMKII already that I was amazed how quickly noise and banding appeared and how much more work I had to do to fix it.

For me I have bought the 6DMKII it as a stop gap as its nearly the end of wedding season and Im going to do a 3-4 week trip in the fall (Not sure where yet) and I have a feeling that market pressure may push the 5DMKIV into a price reduction like what happened to the MKIII 18 months in, so will pick one up for the start of next years season then and keep the 6DMKII and use both.

That being said I am smitten with the 6DMKII its a really lovely camera to use and really doesn't deserve the blasting its had. The DR isnt improved but the quality of that DR has! which is the main thing the 5DMKIII needed to improve. The 5DMKIII was nearly all the camera I needed and wanted and the 6DMKII has added most thing, taken a couple away too... But thats life.

It is seriously underrated and its such a shame its given me a bit of a spring into my photographic step as I love all the extra features. 

The one main negative which is an issue is the single card slot but as Ive explained in 10 years ive never had a card fail so im not really worried. I swap my cards out regularly and look after them. 

Anyway who cares what I think or anyone else, go rent the bodies and shoot some images and do the math. 

It might turn out that the extra £500 on a 5DS for a 5DMKIV will save you money and you will get better images. Or it might be similar to me a stopgap. The 6DMKII may replace your M3 for travel and you get a 5DMKIV further down the line when the prices are more sensible.

At the end of the day ive spent the time shooting the images and posting comments to try and help people like me make difficult choices in a time where cameras are very very similar and we are comparing minuscule differences when you ACTUALLY get into the real world. Sometimes some objectiveness instead of emotion is helpful. )


'Excellent Points!!!'


----------



## Talys (Sep 21, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Here we go again....the US prices are without tax, the European prices include tax.



I actually didn't know that, though I should, because I buy lots of stuff from the UK, which includes tax. The ironic thing with UK vendors is that for some of them, the GBP price includes tax for locals; but for international shipments, they charge the tax-in price, _and then they charge us our tax on top of that_. 

One thing to keep in mind in the US is, it's possible on the large purchases to buy it tax free -- there are states that are tax free (and some with very low sales tax), and some camera vendors don't charge sales tax if you buy it across state lines, because they don't do enough business in the state that they're selling to.

That can sound complicated... but it's not hard to take advantage of. Even things sold by Amazon, if they say "Fulfilled by Amazon" (where Amazon stocks and ships it for free to Prime members on behalf of another company) are often this way. So, there might be 6 vendors for an item, and 3 of them might happen to be tax free.

In Canada, the prices are without taxes too, but in most provinces, most of the sales taxes are fully refundable if it's for business purposes (in others, it's only the federal portion). If you report any professional earnings from your photography, even a negligible amount, you can get a refund. It's not hard to take advantage of, because you have to file the forms anyway, either monthly, quarterly or annually depending on your revenue.


----------



## Talys (Sep 21, 2017)

Frodo said:


> Hey PBD
> I don't disagree that Canon's primary market is crop sensor upgraders.
> Just that the comparison of the 6DII should be vs other FF cameras, not crop sensors.
> In spite of all this, there is plenty of scope for experienced photographers (like myself) to buy the 6DII. I moved from a 300D to a 20D to a 5D, to 5DII to 6D. Dustin Abbott wrote an excellent blog saying why he bought a 6D rather than 5DIII.
> And, finally, having seen that, I've compared my 6D to my M3 image quality and the gain is just a little shadow detail. Other than DoF, FF has little benefit over an equivalent MP crop camera. I'm now considering a 5DS as my next camera - quite a bit cheaper than 5DIV.



Yes, and no. 

Of course, from an apples to apples point of view, you're right - "which FF option is better for me?".

On the other hand, I think that the 6DII is squarely targeted at people who have been locked into APSC for a variety of reasons (price, probably being a large factor). It has much familiarity with the xxD bodies, more so than with 5D -- anyone with an 80D will be immediately at home, with the primary differences being slightly different size, the zoom button, and a few tiny menu differences.

So, if you're talking to someone with an APSC, they'll be comparing what they have with the 6DII. 

For a lot of those people, 5DIV is just going to be too expensive; they won't even consider it. For me, the 5DIV/5DSr has no flip screen, so it's automatically excluded from my shopping list  But I won't lie, the price is a deterrent anyways, partly because it's high, but also partly because I know that I'll want a new body in 3 years or less anyways, and I can take the difference of $1,000 and buy something else (lens, tripod stuff, studio case, lighting) that will last me 8-10+ years, or just save it and put it towards my next crop camera body, which will probably be an 80D/7D successor.


----------



## docsmith (Sep 21, 2017)

Frodo said:


> And, finally, having seen that, I've compared my 6D to my M3 image quality and the gain is just a little shadow detail. Other than DoF, FF has little benefit over an equivalent MP crop camera.



Was this at base ISO?

I shoot the 5DIII, M3, and G7X II. The M3 does have pretty remarkable IQ at less than ISO 800, but I am seeing consistently 1-2 stops improvement in the 5DIII above that.

From another post, it also sounds as if you've run into some of the same other issues I've hit with the M3, AF, especially in low light. It is only rated down to +2 EV. In addition to DPAF, the M6 is rated down to -1EV. I may upgrade for the DPAF and lower sensitivity, but looking at DXOMark, the M3 actually has better DR at ISO's higher than 800.

Anyway, full frame still has its advantages, IMO. They are not always sensor related, the 5DIII's AF is sensitive down to -2 EV while the 6DII, and 5DIV are sensitive down to -3 EV. I borrowed the 5DIV and it would lock in near darkness where the 5DIII would continue to hunt (same lens).

Anyway, good luck!


----------



## Frodo (Sep 28, 2017)

This is a very useful, constructive thread!
Last night I shot an orientation/initiation event for young men. There was a lot of sitting around the fire. I used my 6D, 35/2IS and 85/1.8, mostly at 6400 ISO. The IS on the 35mm kept the images sharp, but the 85mm suffered a little at shutter speeds of 1/30 or so. Focusing with the centre point was okay, but I often had to prefocus on constrasty parts of the image. Overall, very pleased.
This made me realise:
- IQ at 6400 is important
- I missed a flip screen for taking low level and high level shots (getting spoiled with the M3)
- AF with live view is usable, but only just.

Ivan, I appreciate your points. I had not seen the 5DS as a step up from the 6DII, but more as a saving on the 5DIV. When I travel, I do use GPS and have used the wifi connected to a tablet to take high group shots with the camera at the end of an extended monopod. My current HP i7 desktop is perhaps 5 years old and needs an upgrade - I would rather spend the money on a new body - computers don't excite me - a 5DS file would kill it. So yes, you've help me shift the 5DS from the equation.

Docsmith, yes the comparison of the M3 and 6D was at base ISO, using the 24-105/4 mkI vs the 11-22/4-5.6. I shot images from the same tripod on a sunny summer day with deep shadows, exposed to give similar histograms, and processed in LR to give 6000x4000 files. Happy to post them here if others are interested. I was really surprised how the M3 performed. As I noted the 6D has better shadow detail, but not much (no more than a stop) and the M3 does not show banding, just noisy colour (getting into purple) if pushed too hard. If I really need shadow detail I can merge 3 photos (but with the 1 fps on the M3, this needs a tripod and non-moving subject) - I find I rarely exposure bracket the 6D.

The M3 is now my travel camera when I have to travel light and my casual camera when the 6D would otherwise stay at home. But it would have been hopeless last night.

The relative IQ of the M3 made me think that sensor IQ is getting the point that a 24MP APSC meets many (most) of my needs for travel and landscape work (the 11-22/4-5.6 is a gem). From a landscape IQ perspective, the 5DS would be a step up in terms of IQ and resolution - the 6DII not so. I have just bought a good printer and am now printing images 24 inches wide and the M3 does remarkably well. But frankly, I reprocessed and reprinted a couple of photos taken on my 12MP 5D that look good at 24 inches wide. The biggest difference is that the FF camera has a shallower depth of field with equivalent lenses and can more easily isolate background than an APSC camera. I certainly find that having a camera with me is better to capture a moment when the light or subject is just right, than a larger 6D that stays at home.

What I need in a DSLR is responsiveness, accurate AF, high ISO IQ. I sounds from the reports in this thread that the 6DII delivers. I'll wait for the price to drop just a little further...


----------



## Frodo (Nov 12, 2017)

FWIW, I ended up getting a used (20,000 exposures) 5DsR for only a little more than a new 6DII. Very happy with the decision. Dramatically better camera than the 6D (and my 5DII). Love the shutter. Quieter than the quiet mode of my 6D and faster. Dynamic range is about the same as my 6D. Focusing is waaay better. Main gripe is the very poor conversion of mRaw files by Lightroom. And a flippy screen would be nice.
Keeping my 6D is backup camera for events.


----------

