# Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 20, 2017)

```
<p>Full production Canon EOS 6D Mark II camera bodies have started hitting the desks of reviewers. With that, we are also seeing a lot of sample images and sensor talk.</p>
<p>DPReview has completed a dynamic range test and have found that the EOS 6D Mark II isn’t a step forward in this regard. Base ISO dynamic range is not as good as the EOS 6D in early tests, though the EOS 6D Mark II does squeak out slightly better dynamic range performance at higher ISO’s than it’s predecessor.</p>
<p><strong>From DPReview:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>….it seems the benefits that appeared in the sensors used in the EOS 80D and EOS 5D IV have not been applied to the latest EOS 6D II, and the new camera has less dynamic range than we’ve become used to. Graphs plotted by regular DPR collaborator <a href="http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%206D%20Mark%20II,Canon%20EOS%2080D,Nikon%20D750" target="article-3416153698">Bill Claff illustrate this pretty clearly</a>. In this article, we’re taking a look at what this might mean for your images. <a href="https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3416153698/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-dynamic-range">Read the full test</a></p></blockquote>
<p>Obviously dynamic range isn’t everything and the sensor is more capable than that in the EOS 6D, but it is a bit disappointing there hasn’t been a bigger advancement from Canon in this regard.</p>
<p>You can also check out samples from DPReview: <a href="https://www.dpreview.com/samples/5865039367/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-sample-photos">Image Samples</a> | <a href="https://www.dpreview.com/samples/5865039367/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-sample-photos">Video Samples</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Now ends the debate over DR measured on preproduction bodies vs production bodies. All hope is gone. Let the lamintation begin.


----------



## CanonGuy (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Very well done Canon. Very well done! It's amazing that you can't even match a feature that other cameras had 3/4 years ago. Very well done indeed.

Canon took 4 years to produce this?! Recycling af and dpaf systems from old bodies and call it a day? Simply wow! I skipped getting 5D4 as it's just a meh upgrade for me (I don't shoot video and don't care about the video hum dums on 5D4). Now seems like I'll have to skip 6D2 too! I'll probably hold onto my current 5d3 and 6d bodies one more year and slowly transition into something that has a great sensor.

I know fan boys will come here to roast me. To you guys, I have used 'other' cameras with sigma art/Metabone adapter. The af speed and accuracy was enough for me. Don't care about sppedlite options. And don't use big white lenses as I never even shot sports. So I don't think I'll miss out on anything after switch and gain something that canon deprived me of because of their stubbornness and incapable engineers. 

I wonder when canon will stop using their pre historic sensors and adapt sensors from someone else that's leaps and bounds ahead! Or at least hire some capable engineers and make a sensor that's at least playing catch up game well! Such a disgrace. 

With all pro bodies updates out (1dx2, 5d4 and 6d2) and next ones at least 3 years away, I think Canon took the laziness too far. Hopefully we'll (except blind fan boys) answer with our wallet. Good luck


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



BeenThere said:


> Now ends the debate over DR measured on preproduction bodies vs production bodies. All hope is gone. Let the lamintation begin.



I'm glad this is over. There were a few people here going after cgarcia's credibility pretty hard when he's always been very careful and methodical in the past.


----------



## Cory (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I've officially declared all photos taken prior to 2015 completely and utterly obsolete.


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cory said:


> I've officially declared all photos taken prior to 2015 completely and utterly obsolete.


And garbage! Don't forget garbage ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Jester74 (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Canon is *******. I will sell all Canon stuff and jump ship. Or out of the window.


----------



## schmidtfilme (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Does anyone know or understand how the DR from the 6D M2 does compare to the 80D?


----------



## Hornet (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Very well done Canon. Very well done! It's amazing that you can't even match a feature that other cameras had 3/4 years ago. Very well done indeed.
> 
> Canon took 4 years to produce this?! Recycling af and dpaf systems from old bodies and call it a day? Simply wow! I skipped getting 5D4 as it's just a meh upgrade for me (I don't shoot video and don't care about the video hum dums on 5D4). Now seems like I'll have to skip 6D2 too! I'll probably hold onto my current 5d2 and 6d bodies one more year and slowly transition into something that has a great sensor.
> 
> ...



I agree, the Fan Boys will uncritically accept anything that Canon releases. I had already decided to skip this minor upgrade, but I'm very surprised that dynamic range performance is unchanged. I shoot regularly with the 6D and poor dynamic range is for me as a real estate photographer its biggest weakness. So they've added a few features Canon already had on the shelf, but if 4 years later image quality is essentially unchanged what's the point of this camera?


----------



## smithcon (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Well, I was on the fence about buying one, and Canon likely just saved me a couple of thousand dollars. I'm sure it's going to be a great camera in a lot of ways, and the tilty-flippy screen and better AF seems nice, but my old 6D still works nicely and will remain my main camera for now.


----------



## Hflm (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Very well done Canon. Very well done! It's amazing that you can't even match a feature that other cameras had 3/4 years ago. Very well done indeed.
> 
> Canon took 4 years to produce this?! Recycling af and dpaf systems from old bodies and call it a day? Simply wow! I skipped getting 5D4 as it's just a meh upgrade for me (I don't shoot video and don't care about the video hum dums on 5D4). Now seems like I'll have to skip 6D2 too! I'll probably hold onto my current 5d2 and 6d bodies one more year and slowly transition into something that has a great sensor.
> 
> ...


The 6dii is indeed disappointing for me, too, so far. Regarding the 5div, which we use along Sony, that is a really great camera with a great sensor holding its own against the A9 or even A7rii (which is only marginally better in real life). So why not trying out the 5div?


----------



## arthurbikemad (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Jester74 said:


> Canon is *******. I will sell all Canon stuff and jump ship. Or out of the window.



Please PM me time and date and address of window :-* :-* :-*


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Hornet said:


> CanonGuy said:
> 
> 
> > Very well done Canon. Very well done! It's amazing that you can't even match a feature that other cameras had 3/4 years ago. Very well done indeed.
> ...



Maximizing profit by giving you the least amount of new tech possible. At least it has DPAF.


----------



## jeanluc (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I have a 5d4; the dynamic range in terms of lack of shadow noise and banding at low ISO's is actually very much improved over the 5D3. It gives one a lot more room in post and leads to less exposure blending etc. In short, it doesn't always matter, but sometimes it helps a lot.

The M5 is also very good BTW in this regard.

Never shot a 6d, and not sure why they didn't improve the DR there when they clearly do have the sensor tech to do this.

So this is not a Canon "know-how" issue, they can make sensors as good as any. It must be a marketing issue.
The 6D2 seems very good in all other features, and I bet many will love it.

If anybody is on the fence about the 5D4 still and does need the DR, it is very, very good.


----------



## CanonGuy (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Hflm said:


> CanonGuy said:
> 
> 
> > Very well done Canon. Very well done! It's amazing that you can't even match a feature that other cameras had 3/4 years ago. Very well done indeed.
> ...



You realize that you are comparing with a7rii which is 2 year old right? Why support a company who's still playing catch up game after 2 years?

As I mentioned, I don't shoot video and the incremental minute updates on 5d4 wasn't anything special to me. I would much rather support another company who's trying better with my wallet.


----------



## lightwriter (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



schmidtfilme said:


> Does anyone know or understand how the DR from the 6D M2 does compare to the 80D?



80D has the advantage until around ISO 500 or so.







The chart I linked isn't showing up for me, so here's the link in case anyone wants to see the chart: http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%206D%20Mark%20II,Canon%20EOS%2080D


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Hflm said:
> 
> 
> > CanonGuy said:
> ...


Why not? Canon haters compare Nikon D500 with Canon 7DMkII which is 3 years old...


----------



## Orangutan (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> You realize that you are comparing with a7rii which is 2 year old right? Why support a company who's still playing catch up game after 2 years?



I agree: Sony is still playing catch-up on build-quality, reliability, AF, ergonomics, support, resale value, lens selection, accessory selection, etc. Why would you support a company like that?


----------



## Etienne (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

If you really want an articulating touchscreen with DPAF, save some money and get a T7i or SL2. Same IQ, but much cheaper.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Hflm said:


> Regarding the 5div, which we use along Sony, that is a really great camera with a great sensor holding its own against the A9 or even A7rii (which is only marginally better in real life). So why not trying out the 5div?



Thank you; I will. I appreciate your input.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



schmidtfilme said:


> Does anyone know or understand how the DR from the 6D M2 does compare to the 80D?



Here you are:

http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%206D%20Mark%20II,Canon%20EOS%2080D

- A


----------



## chrysoberyl (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



tron said:


> Cory said:
> 
> 
> > I've officially declared all photos taken prior to 2015 completely and utterly obsolete.
> ...



Don't forget to destroy the Canon gear, too! All most go in one clean purge. It would be ethically impure to sell it...


----------



## chrysoberyl (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jeanluc said:


> If anybody is on the fence about the 5D4 still and does need the DR, it is very, very good.



Many thanks, I just fell off the fence on the 5D4 side.


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



chrysoberyl said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Cory said:
> ...


In which case I respectfully accept to carry it personally to the waste bins, for recycling, etc ;D ;D ;D


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Etienne said:


> If you really want an articulating touchscreen with DPAF, save some money and get a T7i or SL2. Same IQ if IQ is defined solely as base ISO DR with no consideration of small DOF opportunity, high ISO performance and availability of high quality UWA lenses, but much cheaper.



There. Fixed that for you. 

- A


----------



## SteveM (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Getting a bit worried now. I hope the 7D mklll doesn't follow the same school of thought as Canon have here in going from the the 6D to the 6D mkll.


----------



## CanonGuy (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Orangutan said:


> CanonGuy said:
> 
> 
> > You realize that you are comparing with a7rii which is 2 year old right? Why support a company who's still playing catch up game after 2 years?
> ...



What a funny post smh!

build-quality: you are kidding right? Have you actually used any of the other bodies? Lol
reliability: I always buy extended warranty on bodies so doesn't matter to me a lot. 
AF: I used sigma art and Metabone adaptor. The accuracy and speed was enough for me
ergonomics: have you actually used a sony/nikon/fuji body? I have and they each has their own advintages.
support: ill have warranty and they'll fix it. It's simple and I don't need all bell and whistle about support.
resale value: one wedding shoot pays the price of a new full frame body for me. It's not even a factor to me or any other professional. Maybe to amateurs like you.
lens selection: Metabone adaptor / sigma art (I'm already replacing my canon glasses with sigma art)
accessory selection : like what? Strap or Pringle chips? Like what accessory canon exclusively has? Lmao

But thanks for your pointless post. It let me evaluate the whole scene more.


----------



## Hflm (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Hflm said:
> 
> 
> > CanonGuy said:
> ...


Of course, still probably the best sensor overall for FF cameras. The A9 fares worse than the A7rii and the 5div is clearly on par according to Bill Claffs data: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-9(ES) , better at low ISOs and minimally worse at high ISOs (not relevant in real life in my opinion). I added the 5diii, too, so you will gain substantially if you upgrade. 
You can choose ideal FF in Bill Claffs data, too, being only shot noise limited. Over the last couple of introductions (D810, A7x, D750, 5div, 1dxii, D5 etc.) there isn't a huge improvement with current technology anymore. Maybe Eric Fossums ideas lead to improved DR. 
But looking at your answers, I get the impression that you are not interested in arguments anyway and have your mind set already.


----------



## bereninga (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

This is disappointing news.

If you've purchased the 6D a while ago, it seems to be an even better value now. IMO, I think Canon will need to ditch the 6D series after this one. There'll be too much overlap w/ the 5D series unless they can push their 5D even more.

Other than DPAF, objectively, what other unique features does Canon have for the future of their bodies?

I already purchased an M6 for the video and DPAF need and I also get the extra reach and other benefits. Yeah, it sucks to carry two bodies, but the M6 is small enough and is good for smaller events.

I'll save up for the 5DIV in the meantime.


----------



## Hflm (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > CanonGuy said:
> ...


I use Sony A7rii for weddings, too. For many situations too slow and laggy. With adapters we had bad experience. Sometimes they just stop working or certain functions are not available. Numerous threads are dealing with this. I would not dare to use them at weddings. Native glass is excellent, so no need for Sigmas.
It depends on the country of what to charge for a wedding. The best photographers in Germany charge around 4k Euros (usually a duo), average is 2k for 10h wedding. And that is before taxes, paying second shooter, insurance etc. Considering 5.3k for a Sony A9, your statement is arrogant and not true for all for sure. If money is no issue, I would go for native glass anyway.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

The first thing they should have compared this with is the Nikon D5, they're both optimized for high ISO and both Canon and Nikon took the same strategy in sensor design.

Are they going to celebrate the best in class high ISO performance the same as they did the D5?


----------



## tomscott (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

In the metadata the images were taken on the 14th July still makes me wonder if it was a pre production unless it is stated it was a final production model.

I find it very hard to believe they could make a worse sensor when the 6Ds sensor wasn't the best when it was released. If they indeed have and these results are true then I have no words. Certainly an injustice to consumers.

I think its worth waiting for more reviews and the camera getting into more hands.

It has happened before the 5DSr was also slated because of pre production images that to this day have not been updated on the site and are constantly said to be poor results when most of the people that have used it know its an incredible camera. 

Just wait it out.


----------



## sebasan (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

When you buy a camera, you buy a system. The DR (at base ISO) of Canon cameras are behind the competition (with the new cameras, except this, catching the competition), but when you put the all the stuff that are in a system together, all brands have their limitations. Today, you can't go wrong with the mayor brands (canon, nikon, sony, fuji, olympus, pentax, panasonic)


----------



## Billybob (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



SteveM said:


> Getting a bit worried now. I hope the 7D mklll doesn't follow the same school of thought as Canon have here in going from the the 6D to the 6D mkll.



I don't think you need to worry about the 7D line. The 7D is at the top of the crop-sensor line, so purchasing it doesn't endanger sales of higher-end models. Plus, the 7D is a sports camera for which low-ISO DR is a secondary, at best, concern. Therefore, there is no reason for Canon to intentionally cripple the 7D's DR. 

The 6D, by contrast, was eating into 5D sales. What Canon found was that there are a ton of photographers who care only about getting the best IQ available. If you don't do video or action photography, the new upgraded AF is irrelevant. But if you're getting the same or better IQ as the higher-end 5D, landscape, portrait, and many other photographers go with the compact cheaper camera. 

I was in this latter group. I shoot mostly with Nikon bodies, but I still have a lot of Canon glass--including 5 L lenses--that I'm loathe to dump. The 6DMII would have been a perfect companion for my 24-70 L II lens--if its DR matched the 5DM IV's. Thus, this move was designed to slot people like me into the 5D. However, the difference between 6D IQ and what I'm use to on the Nikon side is just too great, and I'm not going to spend $3k+ for a 5D IV. 

That leaves me with the decision of whether to finally unload my Canon glass--I already sold my 5DM III--hope that the Sony A7rIII or A9r works better with adapter than earlier Sony bodies, or hope that some fewer Canon body gives me what I need. The obvious answer is to dump my Canon gear, but Canon glass is so good!


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



bereninga said:


> If you've purchased the 6D a while ago, it seems to be an even better value now. IMO, I think Canon will need to ditch the 6D series after this one. There'll be too much overlap w/ the 5D series unless they can push their 5D even more.



So the 6D line is useless or does it overlap with the (far from useless) 5D line too much? Which is it? I'm legitimately confused with that comment.



bereninga said:


> Other than DPAF, objectively, what other unique features does Canon have for the future of their bodies?



I believe it's called the EF mount, and the command of first-party AF routines that come with it.

Forgive the snark above, but as much as I am flummoxed that Canon didn't deliver the goods we all thought were coming, we have to presume that Canon has data that backs up that Base ISO DR is not on the top list of things that moves camera bodies in the market. A tilt-screen does. More MPs do. A better AF system does. Wireless communications do. 4K and dual-slots do as well, but apparently, the return on investment (or potential impact to the 5D4) had them it out here.

But Base ISO DR probably doesn't move nearly as many units as this forum believes. See below: plots like these are not new. Despite the gulf in Base ISO DR the 5D3 endured until the 5D4 was released, and it _somehow_ sold brilliantly. :

I'm no apologist -- and I still don't get this decision -- but Canon has proven time and time again that they see the market better than we do.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> But Base ISO DR probably doesn't move nearly as many units as this forum believes. See below: plots like these are not new. Despite the gulf in Base ISO DR the 5D3 endured until the 5D4 was released, and it _somehow_ sold brilliantly. :
> 
> I'm no apologist -- and I still don't get this decision -- but Canon has proven time and time again that they see the market better than we do.



+1

Competitors started surpassing Canon in low ISO DR way back in 2009. What's happened to Canon's market share since then? It's grown, to the point where now they have nearly 50% of the ILC market. 

FWIW, I'm as surprised as you about the low ISO DR of the 6DII. But history shows the relevance (or rather, the lack thereof) of that particular metric to the broader ILC-buying public.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> FWIW, I'm as surprised as you about the low ISO DR of the 6DII. But history shows the relevance (or rather, the lack thereof) of that particular metric to the broader ILC-buying public.



And that above is coming from _Canon's #1 apologist at CR_ -- oh, the scandal!  

Next thing you'll tell me Bryan Carnathan will use the phrase "Canon really blew it with this one" in one of his reviews.

- A


----------



## Joules (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Competitors started surpassing Canon in low ISO DR way back in 2009. What's happened to Canon's market share since then? It's grown, to the point where now they have nearly 50% of the ILC market.


I don't doubt that you're right about that, but where do you get such data? I've tried to find some good sources on ILC maket shares for Canon, Sony and the like but failed.


----------



## meho1a (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Or maybe, canon is making some room for new FF camera between 6d and 5d. Maybe FF mirrorless with beter sensor than 6d mk2. 
If not, i really dont understand this move considering the price/performance of competition. And the quality of crop cameras such 80d.


----------



## leadin2 (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



meho1a said:


> Or maybe, canon is making some room for new FF camera between 6d and 5d. Maybe FF mirrorless with beter sensor than 6d mk2.
> If not, i really dont understand this move considering the price/performance of competition. And the quality of crop cameras such 80d.



Same thoughts. I'm still thinking they will release something in between, maybe an A7S or video power house equivalent either dslr or mirrorless. While waiting for 5D4 price drop, I'm sticking around to watch. Still love my 5D2 and M6.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

This kind of makes me feel happier about my purchase of the 5DIV (body only).

Which may be part of Canon's strategy. Still, if they are doing this to "protect" the 5DIV sales, how are they competing against other companies? I know, criticizing Canon's actions here is a fool's game, because the chanting response is "Canon is winning."

But this, coupled with last year's release of the abysmal ef 24-105mm f/4 IS II, doesn't seem the move of a company that plans to keep winning.


----------



## tomscott (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



meho1a said:


> Or maybe, canon is making some room for new FF camera between 6d and 5d. Maybe FF mirrorless with beter sensor than 6d mk2.
> If not, i really dont understand this move considering the price/performance of competition. And the quality of crop cameras such 80d.



It wouldn't make sense to make a product worse than its predecessor to make room for a mirrorless that will most probably share the same specifications but be a smaller body and again bought by different people.

It is an odd decision to take two steps forward with the other bodies and 3 back with the 6DMKII.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Joules said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Competitors started surpassing Canon in low ISO DR way back in 2009. What's happened to Canon's market share since then? It's grown, to the point where now they have nearly 50% of the ILC market.
> ...



IDC periodically publishes reports on the ILC industry, although they're expensive to buy. Once in a while, parts of those reports are made available in news stories about the industry (e.g. WSJ, Bloomberg, etc.). 

CIPA tracks global ILC production and shipments for the industry, and although they don't provide a breakdown by manufacturer, the quarterly/annual financial reporting for various companies provides data on sales volume that, combined with the CIPA data, allows reasonable inferences to be made.


----------



## tomscott (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



YuengLinger said:


> This kind of makes me feel happier about my purchase of the 5DIV (body only).
> 
> Which may be part of Canon's strategy. Still, if they are doing this to "protect" the 5DIV sales, how are they competing against other companies? I know, criticizing Canon's actions here is a fool's game, because the chanting response is "Canon is winning."
> 
> But this, coupled with last year's release of the abysmal ef 24-105mm f/4 IS II, doesn't seem the move of a company that plans to keep winning.



I cant see them making a camera to purposely push people to another camera. Even tho parts have been borrowed the R&D and the production of another sensor costs money.

If that was the case they wouldn't have made a new 6D at all.


----------



## testthewest (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



tron said:


> CanonGuy said:
> 
> 
> > Hflm said:
> ...



Glad to see you ain't any better than the people you try to redicule.


----------



## snoke (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> ...
> I'm no apologist -- and I still don't get this decision -- but Canon has proven time and time again that they see the market better than we do.
> ...



Who is Canon's target market for this camera?

Those that have already bought Canon. They've already bought into the "Canon dream". This camera isn't going to lure anyone from the Nikon or Sony camps. Why wouldn't Canon want to do that? There are more people that have bought into the Canon "dream" with APS-C cameras that are an easier sell than there are other brand owners that Canon would have to convert. The only problem Canon might have here is 80D owners but more than likely those cameras are "new enough" that the owners won't yet be thinking about upgrading to full frame so the 6D Mark II doesn't have to be better than it.

Right now Canon will just be hoping that it can get all those that might switch brands to jump on the 6D Mark II before Nikon/Sony launch their successors to the D620/D750/A7II.

This is a defensive product move by Canon, not an aggressive one.

Why defensive? With a 50% market share, they've got more to lose than they have to gain. Getting 1% of existing Canon owners to buy a 6D Mark II is a larger population than converting 1% of Nikon owners (for example.)


----------



## bereninga (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> bereninga said:
> 
> 
> > If you've purchased the 6D a while ago, it seems to be an even better value now. IMO, I think Canon will need to ditch the 6D series after this one. There'll be too much overlap w/ the 5D series unless they can push their 5D even more.
> ...



Sorry, I didn't mean to confuse. I meant to say that because there'll too much overlap in the future, the 6D series I think will struggle. I'm no expert and don't claim to be. That's just my opinion.



ahsanford said:


> bereninga said:
> 
> 
> > Other than DPAF, objectively, what other unique features does Canon have for the future of their bodies?
> ...



True, this is def a big one.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



meho1a said:


> Or maybe, canon is making some room for new FF camera between 6d and 5d. Maybe FF mirrorless with beter sensor than 6d mk2.
> If not, i really dont understand this move considering the price/performance of competition. And the quality of crop cameras such 80d.



I don't think Canon will pull a "5.5D" in-betweener line, but it's an interesting thought.

The 6D2 right now is sitting somewhere between the 6D/D610's relatively stripped down 'entry' FF position and the 50-50 of entry/pro that the D750 offers. So the 6D2 indeed 'moved upmarket' as it alleged it would in prior rumors, but just barely:

Resolution: Entry (24 has been the standard for that with Sony and Nikon)
Max shutter: Entry
Sync speed: Entry
AF: Between Entry and Pro
Burst: Pro (only 0.5 behind the 5D4, by far the biggest positive surprise of this rig)
JPG buffer: Entry
RAW buffer: Pro
Onboard tech: Pro (Communications, anti-flicker, GPS, etc.)
Card slots: Entry
Video: Entry (there's more to it than that, but no 4k)
Build Quality: Need reviews, but presumed to be Entry (for a $2k FF rig, this is no Rebel)

Note that I'm leaving the tilty-flippy + DPAF + touch out of this, as that's neither pro nor entry -- it's just the future of almost every Canon rig. But then again, I thought on-chip ADC was, too. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



YuengLinger said:


> But this, coupled with last year's release of the abysmal ef 24-105mm f/4 IS II, doesn't seem the move of a company that plans to keep winning.



Fair, but name me another disappointment of an EF lens Canon has released in the last few years. I'm hard-pressed to think of one. Meanwhile, we now have:

11-24L
35L II
16-35 f/4L IS (the landscaping lens we've needed for SO long)
16-35 f/2.8L III
100-400L II
non-L 70-300 (quite nice for the dollar)
(And a world's first f/1.4 IS lens is around the corner with the impending new 85L)

Meanwhile, on the glass front, Sony is pumping out > $2k products that are only FBW and Nikon has been a bit hit (200-500 f/5.6 VR) or miss with some exotic Ferrari like glass (105 f/1.4) and some head-scratchers (28 f/1.4, which I'd love but it's awfully niche). I'll take Canon's FF lens output any day of the week over those two.

- A


----------



## Joules (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



bereninga said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > bereninga said:
> ...


I do wonder, is it really? The current third party options are great for the most part and many are probably closer to the price point the typical 6DII buyer is comfortable with than the native Canon ones. The specialty stuff like the TS-E and MP-E aren't likely to be interesting for the majority of 6DII shooters, are they? Besides that and a lot of expensive big whites, what's not to be had on the side where the grass seems greener?

I'm actually curious, because the point is brought up so often as a pro Canon argument but never truly convinced me.

Edit: ahsanford named a good list, but the 16-35mm 4.0L IS is the only one that would actually fit my personal hobby photograpphy budget I think. Maybe I'm just not as financially up to the task as most are though.


----------



## Takingshots (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I am in the same camp waiting to buy the 6D mkii but now the news with the specs are disappointing for a 2,000 camera. I can't afford a 5D mk iv. Is there a alt camera at this price range with an adapter to go with my Canon L glass lens with respect to its operation without being laggy, slow etc? Maybe Canon will update their software to improve the DR and somehow adapt 4K into the camera....


----------



## snoke (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Hflm said:


> Of course, still probably the best sensor overall for FF cameras.



What sensor do you mean here?



> The A9 fares worse than the A7rii and the 5div is clearly on par according to Bill Claffs data: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-9(ES) , better at low ISOs and minimally worse at high ISOs (not relevant in real life in my opinion).



This is a better graph:
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-9(ES

Don't know what Nikon were thinking with the D5.

A PDR of 8 (256 levels of red or green or blue) is JPEG quality but some monitors and TVs will not do full 8 bits per channel (RGB). Once the PDR is under 6 (64 levels), your quality starts to become seriously compromised. Personally, I prefer to keep my ISO at levels where (using that graph), PDR is >= 7.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



bereninga said:


> This is disappointing news.
> 
> If you've purchased the 6D a while ago, it seems to be an even better value now. IMO, I think Canon will need to ditch the 6D series after this one. There'll be too much overlap w/ the 5D series unless they can push their 5D even more.
> 
> ...



I'd ask, other than FF mirrorless, objectively, what other unique features does Sony have for the future of their bodies? You can get their sensors in other bodies, you can get crop mirrorless with peaking and zebras and whatnot elsewhere, and the sensor quality gap is narrowing (6D2 aside). What does Sony offer that is unique? Maybe I just don't know, but I'm not specifically aware of anything that can't be gotten elsewhere.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



tomscott said:


> It is an odd decision to take two steps forward with the other bodies and 3 back with the base ISO DR of the 6DMKII.



Corrected above. 

Tom, I always respect your posts, but that's glossing over the bigger picture quite a bit. 

Canon brought a ton of much-needed love to the brand -- AF overhaul + DPAF + tilty-flippy + touchscreen + communications + 6.5 fps -- but apparently left the car in neutral on something we all expected would happen. 

I would say on aggregate the 6D2 met reasonable expectations spec/feature-wise minus the odd surprise. It will be a fine rig and it will sell well.

- A


----------



## testthewest (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > If you really want an articulating touchscreen with DPAF, save some money and get a T7i or SL2. Same IQ if IQ is defined solely as base ISO DR with no consideration of small DOF opportunity, high ISO performance and availability of high quality UWA lenses, but much cheaper.
> ...



Well, you have to admit: It is a bit sad that you have to resort to this. This camera is alot more expensive and probably everybody would have been happy with a sensor like the 80D. Also I don't understand your arguement about the lenses: Can't you put EF lenses on canon crop bodys?

Anyway: IQ of a camera sensor is certainly not defined by lenses or DOP (which has nothing to do with the quality of the sensor). That leaves us with better high ISO performance. I had hoped for more and I am think now hard if I cancel my preorder. (as I was foolishly expecting a sensor at least as good as the 80D)


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > But this, coupled with last year's release of the abysmal ef 24-105mm f/4 IS II, doesn't seem the move of a company that plans to keep winning.
> ...



Good, point, but I think this forum largely overlooks the 24-105mm L, failing to see its widespread use among portrait and landscape photographers. And anybody buying the current model as a first L is bound to wonder what the big deal is about the L series.

I'm still seeing, in almost every issue of Professional Photographer Magazine and Outdoor Photography the original 24-105mm as a staple among featured images.

And like the 6DII's sensor possibly protecting sales of higher end bodies, the 24-105 II's disappointing performance generated speculation that Canon is protecting other L series lenses by not releasing a lens that does too much at too low a price.

Those other lenses you've listed are winners. But, again, the 24-105, in my opinion, shapes more photographers' impressions of Canon glass than this forum acknowledges.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > But this, coupled with last year's release of the abysmal ef 24-105mm f/4 IS II, doesn't seem the move of a company that plans to keep winning.
> ...



And there are people who swear by the 24-105ii, no matter how odd it seems to you and me. And your list is just the most recent releases - it leaves off some other stunners that are still current (including the 70-200/2.8ii and the 24-70/2.8ii). The images blew me away immediately with those, and my friends were quickly happy to see "the big camera" at races after seeing the first batch. And I'm just an amateur hack.

When I got back into photography, I decided to go with the company with the great lenses instead of the great sensors. I'm feeling very good about that decision. One of these day's I'll take a stab at selling my 5D3 and get a 5D4.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Billybob said:


> The 7D is at the top of the crop-sensor line, so purchasing it doesn't endanger sales of higher-end models.



What makes you think the higher end models are more profitable and must be protected? Price? That has nothing to do with the profit margin. Why is it people assume Canon is always trying to drive people into a higher price point?



Billybob said:


> Plus, the 7D is a sports camera for which low-ISO DR is a secondary, at best, concern. Therefore, there is no reason for Canon to intentionally cripple the 7D's DR.



Which cameras does Canon "intentionally cripple?" Differentiating one price point from another has nothing to do with "crippling a camera". Don't know why people want to call this crippling. Is a Ford Focus crippled because it is not as big or powerful as a top end Taurus? No. It is made for a different market and has a different price point for that reason.



Billybob said:


> The 6D, by contrast, was eating into 5D sales. What Canon found was that there are a ton of photographers who care only about getting the best IQ available.



Where did you get the sales data and where do you get the idea that the 6D was eating into 5D sales since Canon doesn't make that public?


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Joules said:


> I do wonder, is it really? The current third party options are great for the most part and many are probably closer to the price point the typical 6DII buyer is comfortable with than the native Canon ones. The specialty stuff like the TS-E and MP-E aren't likely to be interesting for the majority of 6DII shooters, are they? Besides that and a lot of expensive big whites, what's not to be had on the side where the grass seems greener?
> 
> I'm actually curious, because the point is brought up so often as a pro Canon argument but never truly convinced me.



My take on EF: Choice. Canon has the most breadth of options, depth of price points at those options, and they have some truly unique glass you cannot use elsewhere.

Nikon certainly has a few standout pieces of kit, but they are slightly underweight offerings-wise and price-point-options-wise to Canon.

Sony I just roll my eyes at. I will not spike the AF punch with an 3rd party adapter, and their first-party GM stuff is FBW and overpriced (presumably due to their limited production volumes in comparison to CaNikon).

I'm not going to stand out on a ledge and say that they have the best of everything, but on aggregate, they have everything I need (save one lens I've been harping on for a few days now :) at numerous price points. It's EF for me.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LonelyBoy said:


> I'd ask, other than FF mirrorless, objectively, what other unique features does Sony have for the future of their bodies? You can get their sensors in other bodies, you can get crop mirrorless with peaking and zebras and whatnot elsewhere, and the sensor quality gap is narrowing (6D2 aside). What does Sony offer that is unique? Maybe I just don't know, but I'm not specifically aware of anything that can't be gotten elsewhere.



Nothing unique, just a useful suite of features:

IBIS
4K (it's totally fine, just wear gloves ;D)
Adapting old glass
Using MF glass handheld through the viewfinder (for those of us who can't change our SLR focusing screens)
Amplifying VF light in dark rooms + the aforementioned MF usage on AF lenses when light is low
The option to keep your body + lens combo small if you want to

It's not for me, but it is for the patient tinkerers out there and the folks who will give their left nut for a better sensor but don't want to fully migrate.

- A


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jeanluc said:


> I have a 5d4; the dynamic range in terms of lack of shadow noise and banding at low ISO's is actually very much improved over the 5D3. It gives one a lot more room in post and leads to less exposure blending etc. In short, it doesn't always matter, but sometimes it helps a lot.
> 
> The M5 is also very good BTW in this regard.



The M5 is surprisingly good. I left the 5DS & 5D IV behind the other night and just carried the M5 with a Samyang 8mm. 
This is a unprocessed jpg(I shoot raw & jpg) with all camera settings on factory default.

ISO 5000, 25 seconds, f2.8



Canon EOS M5 mirrorless with the Rokinon 8mm f2.8 fisheye lens unprocessed jpg © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



YuengLinger said:


> But this, coupled with last year's release of the abysmal ef 24-105mm f/4 IS II, doesn't seem the move of a company that plans to keep winning.



You have an odd definition of "abysmal," since the 24-105 II equals or exceeds the performance of every other comparable lens made by other manufacturers and far exceeds the performance of Nikon's comparable lens. You would have a point if Sigma, for example, had a better lens. But they don't. The 24-105 II tells us more about the limits of lens design in a wide-angle to telephoto zoom than it does about Canon.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Wow, the histrionics on this thread are pretty impressive.

The 6D is a bargain full-frame camera. All of the reviews are declaring it to be a very good camera, with maybe a slight disadvantage in low ISO dynamic range. But, even a cursory look at the published charts show that the differences are tiny. Time and time again, the market has proven that only a handful of people find this a deal breaker. 

Let's stop imputing motives to this. Canon made the camera they made and we are unlikely to ever know for sure what choices they were faced with and what the associated costs were. It seems like a lot of people on this forum have elected to spend the extra money on a 5DIV. How does that qualify as a mistake on Canon's part?


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



testthewest said:


> Well, you have to admit: It is a bit sad that you have to resort to this. This camera is alot more expensive and probably everybody would have been happy with a sensor like the 80D. Also I don't understand your arguement about the lenses: Can't you put EF lenses on canon crop bodys?



1) It's sad I have to resort to clarifying the spectacular simplification that _'IQ = Base ISO DR'?_ Okay. I'd find it much more sad that a world would accept that statement rather than correct it.

2) I honestly think the mount matters if you don't have the glass to maximize the potential of that sensor. Yes, you can use EF glass on crop bodies, but if you want EF quality _on the UWA end of the focal length range_, the crop factor is your enemy. You're stuck with putting on a FF UWA lens like a 14 prime, 11-24L (ha!) or perhaps a Sigma 12-24 -- none of which have front-filter threads and none of which are cheap.

3) The high ISO difference between the 6D2 and 80D will be non-trivial, like 1.5 stops or so. If one ever leaves the base ISO ivory tower this ruckus has been all about and say, cover events, shoot in available light handheld, take some astro, etc. the 6D2 is a far better call. 

So if you don't leave the tripod/studio/ISO 100 and don't mind a plasticky / non-sealed EF-S 10-18 to take your landscape shots with, sure, perhaps the 80D is what you need. But harpooning the 6D2 over base ISO DR seems a shade over-the-top given all the other things it can do.

- A


----------



## Hflm (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> Hflm said:
> 
> 
> > Of course, still probably the best sensor overall for FF cameras.
> ...


A7rii. Very good at base and higher ISOs as well.
Agree to your reasoning regarding PDR.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



YuengLinger said:


> Those other lenses you've listed are winners. But, again, the 24-105, in my opinion, shapes more photographers' impressions of Canon glass than this forum acknowledges.



Fair point, they laid an egg on an important lens there (in that it did not make great strides forward over the predecessor). I agree.

Makes you wonder if it was less about protecting f/2.8 zoom sales than it was killing off the cut-rate 24-105L Mk I 2nd-hand / grey box market to increase margins. Because other than a zoom lock and slightly better IS, what is better about this lens?

- A


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I have the 6D and I have been frustrated by the relatively poor AF away from the centre (mainly with regards the point distribution than the left-to-right spread). A vast majority of my shooting is ISO 400 and above.

This camera is a significant development for me and it will be the AF performance that decides whether I buy this or save for a 5DIV. The tilty-flippy, AF at f8 and what seems like easier-to-handle noise are other big pluses.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



unfocused said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > But this, coupled with last year's release of the abysmal ef 24-105mm f/4 IS II, doesn't seem the move of a company that plans to keep winning.
> ...



After owning the version 1, and trying, for 3 months to obtain a new version that was reasonably sharp and had an IS motor without problems, I've given up. Four out of four were fatally flawed in one way or another. The one sharp copy of the lot had, according to CPS, "a bad IS motor." 

My fourth copy, btw, came straight from Canon Store. First three came from a major authorized retailer.

Add in that at least one production run resulted in an advisory, lukewarm reviews, and, I stand by my personal assessment of the lens as ABYSMAL.  Maybe I'm just feeling the burn at the moment because I sent back the last of the four today, and threw up my hands (before putting them back down to type).

Have you tried it for yourself? 

I'm not predicting doom and gloom for Canon, based on a 2017 release's DR or one sub-par L series lens, but when friends ask for recommendations, it would be nice to give them without mounting reservations.


----------



## LukasS (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



unfocused said:


> It seems like a lot of people on this forum have elected to spend the extra money on a 5DIV. How does that qualify as a mistake on Canon's part?



I just did that 2 weeks ago, based on initial specs and suggested price it was clear to me that it was worth to own mkIV.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LukasS said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > It seems like a lot of people on this forum have elected to spend the extra money on a 5DIV. How does that qualify as a mistake on Canon's part?
> ...



In my case, I bought it before the 6DII had even rumored specs and release date. And I had a learning curve with it, first accepting that ETTR wasn't beneficial, then seeing IQ problems that, fortunately, disappeared after the last firmware update, though my issue was not hinted at in the firmware release notes.

From day one with the 5DIV, I've loved the amazing AF, how it has added new life to my fastest lenses, including the 85 1.2 II, and works so well with the 100-400mm II + 1.4. And after the last firmware release, nothing but praise for the IQ.


----------



## Talys (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> I have the 6D and I have been frustrated by the relatively poor AF away from the centre (mainly with regards the point distribution than the left-to-right spread). A vast majority of my shooting is ISO 400 and above.
> 
> This camera is a significant development for me and it will be the AF performance that decides whether I buy this or save for a 5DIV. The tilty-flippy, AF at f8 and what seems like easier-to-handle noise are other big pluses.



For me, there aren't enough DR steps to make up for tilty-flippy. After T3i, I would not ever purchase a camera without some kind of articulating screen. Every time I have used a 5D4, I have ended up attaching it to a field monitor with an HDMI cable, because I hate ladders, and I am not 8 feet tall  It works great, except that you then have to run power to the field monitor, or have a whole bunch of batteries to run a full-day shoot. And plus, no touch screen on the field monitor sucks.

I am disappointed that DR at low ISO (where I mostly shoot) isn't as good as 6D, but I'll live with it -- I'm still in, as what I want more than anything is a FF with tilty-flippy and EF mount.



YuengLinger said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > YuengLinger said:
> ...



I had a 24-105 Mk 1 for quite a while, and I wouldn't have characterize it _abysmal_, though certainly inferior to 24-70f/4 especially close to 24mm, and especially when it's wide open. The main reason I got rid of it isn't that the pictures weren't good enough; it's just that the 24-70 is an exceptional lens, and almost all the times where I'd want 100mm, I'd love to be able to have more than 100mm too, so the better solution was to just carry 2 bodies. 

But, I mean, it's a kit lens designed as an entry level L, and the Mk1 you can get now for cheap. I think it's fine there. It's definitely a step up from most of Canon's consumer grade lenses.




ahsanford said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > Those other lenses you've listed are winners. But, again, the 24-105, in my opinion, shapes more photographers' impressions of Canon glass than this forum acknowledges.
> ...



I don't think there's any reason at all to buy 24-105L Mk2 when you consider the price difference versus Mk1. Frankly, I just see it as a minor refresh. Eventually, when all the Mk1 sell out, they'll bundle it (with a discount) and it will drop to the current Mk1 prices. I mean, when it's $600 or so, it will become a "why not?" decision with a new camera body.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Talys said:


> I had a 24-105 Mk 1 for quite a while, and I wouldn't have characterize it _abysmal_, though certainly inferior to 24-70f/4 especially close to 24mm, and especially when it's wide open. The main reason I got rid of it isn't that the pictures weren't good enough; it's just that the 24-70 is an exceptional lens, and almost all the times where I'd want 100mm, I'd love to be able to have more than 100mm too, so the better solution was to just carry 2 bodies.
> 
> But, I mean, it's a kit lens designed as an entry level L, and the Mk1 you can get now for cheap. I think it's fine there. It's definitely a step up from most of Canon's consumer grade lenses.



My version 1 was very good. It was part of a 5DIII kit, which I sold to finance the 5DIV body-only. 

Unless you try version II, you can't understand the disappointment.

And I agree with your solution--anything over 70mm, use another lens!


----------



## Jopa (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

The "First world problems" meme comes to mind...


----------



## CanonCams (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



YuengLinger said:


> LukasS said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



What isn't beneficial about ETTR with the IV? (I actually just ordered one yesterday..)


----------



## Tangent (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

This is most disappointing. It's like Subaru coming out with a new CrossTrek and giving it a 108hp engine.

Because I'm invested in Canon lenses I'm reluctant to change systems. I'll take another look at Sony, though not likely to switch. I'm thinking at this point of waiting for a web special of some kind. In many respects the mkII does offer significant advance over the mkI, but fails to improve in the one area I wanted most.


----------



## ken (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

So much discussion about the DR... but what do people think about the sample images? This is the latest batch of samples that I'm not warming up to. Is it just me??? Maybe it is since no one else seems to notice anything past the DR graph.

The one with the black dog seemed pretty good. But many of the unprocessed RAW images seemed way underexposed. And nothing jumped out at me as "oh yes..."


----------



## AdamBotond (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Truly dissappointing regardless what the high iso will be! I'm not too much into this anymore, but I used to shoot with the 6D for years. Its DR was considered one of the best in the Canon line up back then. My wildlife interest shipped me to 1DX (, which has even worse DR), but I was hoping a 6D successor with better DR, especially after Canon has introduced on-chip ADC on most of their recent cameras. The original 6D was very well handycapped in many ways to not hurt 5D III sales (Ancient AF, 1/4000, 1/180 flash sync, etc.). Now Canon just took it to the next level. Now, if you after DR, you are pushed towards 5Ds(R) or 5D IV, which have average DR on the market at best.
That is BLASPHEMOUS!


----------



## shutterlag (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Orangutan said:


> CanonGuy said:
> 
> 
> > You realize that you are comparing with a7rii which is 2 year old right? Why support a company who's still playing catch up game after 2 years?
> ...



Actually, if you watch the lensrentals.com of any of the G series lenses, they are on par with Canon these days, ditto for reliability, and the AF on the A9 sits between the 5D and the 1D series. The ergonomics are still inferior, but certainly usable. Accessory selection is lacking, granted. Resale value? You obviously haven't looked lately, because they're holding value quite well now. Lens selection - well, they've got pro grade lenses covering everything from FF 10mm (Voigtlander Heliar) all the way through 400mm. Yes, they have gaps in the sports prime lineup, but they just started shipping their 1st sports body a matter of weeks ago. Don't forget that the A9's silent shutter is a game changer. Nikon and Canon have no answer for it. Press core, pro sports (golf), etc. etc. Sony is now the only game in town.

I guess my point is, if you think they're not competing, you're SORELY mistaken. The old arguments you used before are mostly dead.


----------



## LesC (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

The DPR headline states "6D Mark II dynamic range falls behind modern APS-C cameras" 

Unless the 6D MKII is worse than the original 6D, I'm confused. I have both the original 6D and an 80D & when processing RAW files, the 80D images have way more noise under any circumstances than the 6D. If I want the best quality I'll always reach for my 6D over the 80D. 

So for me the MKII will be a worthwhile upgrade over the original...


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Very well done Canon. Very well done! It's amazing that you can't even match a feature that other cameras had 3/4 years ago. Very well done indeed.
> 
> Canon took 4 years to produce this?! Recycling af and dpaf systems from old bodies and call it a day? Simply wow!
> 
> I skipped getting 5D4 as it's just a meh upgrade for me (I don't shoot video and don't care about the video hum dums on 5D4). Now seems like I'll have to skip 6D2 too! I'll probably hold onto my current 5d3 and 6d bodies one more year and slowly transition into something that has a great sensor.



;D ;D

Oh the irony ! Thank you Canon for giving us this low DR 6DII. Canon rumours is going to be fun again with posts like this. Just love it !


----------



## Sarpedon (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



shutterlag said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > CanonGuy said:
> ...



Speaking as someone who may switch bodies to Sony (or maybe a 5D IV), I think you're overstating the case here. 

Ergonomics are pretty important, and if you shoot for extended periods, "usable" isn't exactly what you're looking for. I'm sure I'm speaking for others when I say that the act of photography itself ought to be enjoyable. Unless you're using a small lens on a Sony, you need a grip for comfort. By contrast, I've found every Canon DSLR I've used to be extremely comfortable and natural in the hand. 

Sony's lens lineup is getting better, true, but it's not there yet (hence, "catch up") and for most models it's also very, very expensive compared to the competition, even Nikon. 

And for a lot of your examples here, you're talking about the A9, a $4500 camera, and the only one so far to see the improvements you're citing. This is a forum about an entry-level full-frame DSLR. Not exactly comparable. 

There's also the questions of battery life: better with the A9, but still not great, and terrible on every other full-frame model they have. Response time (image playback, buffer, etc) is the same story. 

Haptics is another issue: I'm not sure they've solved it with the A9 (I'll be looking into it, in hopes that positive changes transfer to the next A7R III), but button/dial placement and quality leave a lot to be desired. 

Finally, there's service and repair. I'm not sure Sony will ever be on a level with CPS, and it certainly won't be any time soon. Just google some of the horror stories. 

Don't get me wrong: to me, _for my specific needs_, the 6D II is a huge disappointment and I won't be getting one. The 5D IV looks like the only adequate model in the lineup now for my purposes, and I'm excited about the possibilities a better A7R model might offer. But Sony has lots of issues and even if they're inclined to fix them, it's going to take a while. Their competition has been a force for good, but they're not the only game in town. They're not even the biggest game in town. If you doubt that, check out the "press core, sports" photographers you mentioned. You'll see a sea of white lenses, used comfortably in the knowledge that the equipment is reliable, and that if there are any problems they'll get a replacement or a loaner in the mail right away.


----------



## Cory (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I'm not going to lie - my vagina just fell off.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cory said:


> I'm not going to lie - my vagina just fell off.



Is that a known effect of low DR ?


----------



## Billybob (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonFanBoy said:


> Billybob said:
> 
> 
> > The 7D is at the top of the crop-sensor line, so purchasing it doesn't endanger sales of higher-end models.
> ...



*"What makes you think the higher end models are more profitable and must be protected? Price?"* 

When I can get $1500 or more off the original list price of a new, USA or gray market, 6D like the discounts I can get with the purchase of a new 5D mark III or 1D X camera I'll take your comment seriously. 

*"Which cameras does Canon "intentionally cripple?" Differentiating one price point from another has nothing to do with "crippling a camera". Don't know why people want to call this crippling."
*
My definition of crippled is a bit more expansive than yours. It includes omitting a feature that other cameras produced by the company of the same generation have. More importantly I consider it crippled if it omits a feature that its APS-C twin has. And your car analogy falls flat. A more appropriate analogy is if a a Ford Focus can be had with a 250hp engine and Ford decides to make an Acura (its luxury brand) version of the focus but only offers an 180hp engine because luxury car buyers might prefer the low-end Acura over a mid-level Acura if it had the 250hp engine. 

Yes, it is market differentiation. But it is differentiation by crippling features. 


*"Where did you get the sales data and where do you get the idea that the 6D was eating into 5D sales since Canon doesn't make that public?"*

So you're telling me that no one purchased the 6D instead of a 5D Mark III? I suspect you could do a poll on this forum right now and find a dozen or more people who purchased the lower-cost 6D instead of the higher-end 5DMIII.

It's no secret that the 6D had a better sensor (no, I'm not going to provide links. Just search on Dpreview for comparisons) then the 5DMIII. It had virtually no banding, less high-ISO noise and was the choice of astro-photographers who shot Canon. 

So, sure, you can throw the "where's your data" retort in my face. But the reality is that the 5DMIII was not a clearly better camera than the 6D due to the relative quality of the sensors. In some critical respects it was, in fact, inferior. Today, the 5DM IV has an unequivocally better sensor than the 6D II. I'm extremely skeptical that the choice wasn't intentional. But I'm willing to entertain any data you have to the contrary.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sarpedon said:


> If you doubt that, check out the "press core, sports" photographers you mentioned. You'll see a sea of white lenses, used comfortably in the knowledge that the equipment is reliable, and that if there are any problems they'll get a replacement or a loaner *in the mail* right away.



Or, in many cases, get a replacement/loaner by simply walking down to the Canon support tent/van/room at the venue and asking for one.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Billybob said:


> *"Which cameras does Canon "intentionally cripple?" Differentiating one price point from another has nothing to do with "crippling a camera". Don't know why people want to call this crippling."
> *
> My definition of crippled is a bit more expansive than yours. It includes omitting a feature that other cameras produced by the company of the same generation have. More importantly I consider it crippled if it omits a feature that its APS-C twin has. And your car analogy falls flat. A more appropriate analogy is if a a Ford Focus can be had with a 250hp engine and Ford decides to make an Acura (its luxury brand) version of the focus but only offers an 180hp engine because luxury car buyers might prefer the low-end Acura over a mid-level Acura if it had the 250hp engine.



If you are talking about a menu feature, sure. On-chip ADC? We're still debating that. If it turns out that Canon's sub $500 crop offerings start getting 13.0+ EV (at DXO) on-chip sensors and their FF offerings don't get the same courtesy, either it's nerfing or volume-sharing related -- keep in mind a 26 MP FF sensor is only going into a 6D2 while that 24 MP 80D sensor might get huge volume assistance from the entire crop line over time.

But if it's a mechanical demand, your argument won't hold water in some cases. The 80D has a 1/8000 shutter and a 1/250 sync because crop has far less material to move than FF -- it is easier and less expensive to deliver that functionality on crop than on FF.

So in the soup of cost containtment / nerfing / market positioning, I think it varies. The 6D1 had a boatload of things left out of it that the 70D and 7D2 received -- yet it still sold very, very well.

- A


----------



## Cory (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> Cory said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not going to lie - my vagina just fell off.
> ...


Not sure. My best pic so far was with my T1i so my world-view is now destroyed.


----------



## meho1a (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Many of you are comparing A9 to 6D, which is irrelevant comparison. Not the same level of camera. So it is better to compare it with D750 for example ..around 3 year old 1700€ camera with better sensor and practically same specs. So you get rotating touch screen for 400eur.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonCams said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > LukasS said:
> ...



I mean on my 5DIV, exposing to the right doesn't produce slightly better exposures as it did in my 20D, 60D, and 5DIII. It's the first Canon digital camera I've used that works like this. I'm finding it a little too easy to overexpose, get blown-out highlights, but the very good flipside is being able to work better with shadows and sharpening.

Don't get me wrong, highlights recover nicely, better than the 5DIII, BUT, it seems that the threshold for a true blowout is lower than with the 5DIII.

So, I had a learning curve which involved changing the ETTR habit I had developed. I'm extremely happy with the camera now.


----------



## JohnUSA1 (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

A very big shame on Canon.
Canon must get rid of the responsible idiots who are designing these new horrible cameras and making Canon hopefuls and fans very angry and disappointed.
I am very disappointed in Canon.


----------



## Aglet (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



shutterlag said:


> .. Don't forget that the A9's silent shutter is a game changer. Nikon and Canon have no answer for it. Press core, pro sports (golf), etc. etc. Sony is now the only game in town.



And Fuji and Panasonic and Olympus...

Olympus EM1 at half the price of the "pro" names

and for golf swing it'll do 60fps at full rez with pre-release capture too
CANNOT BEAT THE OLY IN THIS EVENT!


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonFanBoy said:


> Which cameras does Canon "intentionally cripple?" Differentiating one price point from another has nothing to do with "crippling a camera". Don't know why people want to call this crippling. Is a Ford Focus crippled because it is not as big or powerful as a top end Taurus? No. It is made for a different market and has a different price point for that reason.



But what if the Focus came with a carburetor instead of fuel injection? That's the sort of thing here, throwing a blatantly outdated major component into the product.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



JohnUSA1 said:


> A very big shame on Canon.
> Canon must get rid of the responsible idiots who are designing these new horrible cameras and making Canon hopefuls and fans very angry and disappointed.
> I am very disappointed in Canon.



You mean the same idiots who designed the cameras that have kept Canon the ILC market leader for 14+ years? Yeah, that'll happen… :


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > I'd ask, other than FF mirrorless, objectively, what other unique features does Sony have for the future of their bodies? You can get their sensors in other bodies, you can get crop mirrorless with peaking and zebras and whatnot elsewhere, and the sensor quality gap is narrowing (6D2 aside). What does Sony offer that is unique? Maybe I just don't know, but I'm not specifically aware of anything that can't be gotten elsewhere.
> ...



Isn't basically all of that (other than FF sensor) available on m43 and APS-C mirrorless ILCs? That's what I meant about "unique" - those features are all elsewhere.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Billybob said:


> My definition of crippled is a bit more expansive than yours. It includes omitting a feature that other cameras produced by the company of the same generation have. More importantly I consider it crippled if it omits a feature that its APS-C twin has. And your car analogy falls flat. A more appropriate analogy is if a a Ford Focus can be had with a 250hp engine and Ford decides to make an Acura (its luxury brand) version of the focus but only offers an 180hp engine because luxury car buyers might prefer the low-end Acura over a mid-level Acura if it had the 250hp engine.



I love a good car analogy, but... check your brands there.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LonelyBoy said:


> Billybob said:
> 
> 
> > My definition of crippled is a bit more expansive than yours. It includes omitting a feature that other cameras produced by the company of the same generation have. More importantly I consider it crippled if it omits a feature that its APS-C twin has. And your car analogy falls flat. A more appropriate analogy is if a a Ford Focus can be had with a 250hp engine and Ford decides to make an Acura (its luxury brand) version of the focus but only offers an 180hp engine because luxury car buyers might prefer the low-end Acura over a mid-level Acura if it had the 250hp engine.
> ...



When did Honda sell its Acura brand to Ford?


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LonelyBoy said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > LonelyBoy said:
> ...



I said "nothing unique", didn't I? They have great sensors and the ability to do mirrorless things. That's Sony's ballgame. Uniqueness has nothing to do with it. 

Want unique? Um... go get a Pentax? Unique doesn't drive the market.

- A


----------



## aceflibble (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Why is anybody surprised at this?

The original 6D was created specifically to mitigate the losses caused by the second hand market being flooded with 5D2s after the 5D3 had been around for a while.
The 6D2 is doing the same job for the 5D3. Now the 5DS/R/4 has been out a while, the second hand market is being flooded with 5D3s. (And even more 5D2s.) The 6D2 is made to address that; offer a new body at a similar price as the second hand units, with a comparable feature set.

This was never going to be a leader in low noise.
This was never going to be a leader in dynamic range.
This was never going to be a leader in colour reproduction.
This was never going to be a leader in AF.
This was never going to be a leader in video.
This was never going to be a leader in durability.

_The entire point_ of the 6D line is to offer a new alternative to a used 5D series. That's it. They're not intended to be anything more. The 6D2 isn't intended to match the 5D4 in image quality, or any other regard. They're just a way for Canon to mitigate the used market. Nothing more, nothing less.


The way some of y'all are talking you'd think you had never seen or heard of Canon before today. They've been doing this for _decades_. Stop people from buying used by offering a slightly worse but at least brand new alternative at the same price point. They've been doing it ever since the A-1. You're (allegedly) Canon users and fans, y'all should know this by now and see it coming.


----------



## canonlover (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



aceflibble said:


> Why is anybody surprised at this?
> 
> The original 6D was created specifically to mitigate the losses caused by the second hand market being flooded with 5D2s after the 5D3 had been around for a while.
> The 6D2 is doing the same job for the 5D3. Now the 5DS/R/4 has been out a while, the second hand market is being flooded with 5D3s. (And even more 5D2s.) The 6D2 is made to address that; offer a new body at a similar price as the second hand units, with a comparable feature set.
> ...



Exactly.


----------



## hbr (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

In Canon's announcement for the 6DII I found this paragraph: 
“After just one day in Yellowstone National Park with the EOS 6D Mark II DSLR Camera,* it was clear that dynamic range has greatly improved over its predecessor*,” said acclaimed nature photographer and Canon Explorer of Light Adam Jones “ Landscape and nature photographers will be very happy. The new and improved autofocus is way ahead of the previous generation and performed extremely well, even in very low-light situations.”

It looks like Adam Jones lied, doesn't it?


----------



## james75 (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



aceflibble said:


> Why is anybody surprised at this?
> 
> The original 6D was created specifically to mitigate the losses caused by the second hand market being flooded with 5D2s after the 5D3 had been around for a while.
> The 6D2 is doing the same job for the 5D3. Now the 5DS/R/4 has been out a while, the second hand market is being flooded with 5D3s. (And even more 5D2s.) The 6D2 is made to address that; offer a new body at a similar price as the second hand units, with a comparable feature set.
> ...



the 6d line was created to kill off the secondhand market could be partly right. If they were not intended to compete with each other, then why did the original 6d have a better sensor than the 5d3? I think Canon realized afterwards that putting a better sensor in it was taking a lot of sales away from the 5d3 and have now corrected the problem. Now there is nothing the camera does better.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



hbr said:


> In Canon's announcement for the 6DII I found this paragraph:
> “After just one day in Yellowstone National Park with the EOS 6D Mark II DSLR Camera,* it was clear that dynamic range has greatly improved over its predecessor*,” said acclaimed nature photographer and Canon Explorer of Light Adam Jones “ Landscape and nature photographers will be very happy. The new and improved autofocus is way ahead of the previous generation and performed extremely well, even in very low-light situations.”
> 
> It looks like Adam Jones lied, doesn't it?



Not categorically. 

He might have been shooting around ISO 12,800 to 25,600... :

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



aceflibble said:


> The way some of y'all are talking you'd think you had never seen or heard of Canon before today. They've been doing this for _decades_. Stop people from buying used by offering a slightly worse but at least brand new alternative at the same price point. They've been doing it ever since the A-1. You're (allegedly) Canon users and fans, y'all should know this by now and see it coming.



Sure, but that implies that 6D2 is clearly worse than the 5D3. You'd have a hell of an arm-wrestle from the forum on that. There is an art to dangling just enough to get people to buy mid-level new instead of top-level used.

So the 5D3 is still a better rig for some folks, but a LOT of people would choose the tilty-flippy + DPAF + touchscreen + wireless options + GPS combo over a few aging pro feature set options on the 5D3. 

- A


----------



## hbr (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

And from Canon UK:

*Dynamic range
The EOS 6D Mark II’s latest CMOS sensor delivers a wide dynamic range, preserving detail in bright highlights and dark shadows for an authentic look and feel. Generous exposure latitude lets you do more with your files in post-production.*


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



You didn't - the person I responded to did. Bereningia or something like that. That's why I emphasized that word specifically and, in the context, thought you were agreeing with that other poster.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



james75 said:


> the 6d line was created to kill off the secondhand market could be partly right. If they were not intended to compete with each other, then why did the original 6d have a better sensor than the 5d3? I think Canon realized afterwards that putting a better sensor in it was taking a lot of sales away from the 5d3 by DXO-reading fundamentalists that believe the 'film' in the camera is more important _than everything else about it _and have now corrected the problem. Now there is nothing the camera does better.



Corrected that for you. The 5D3 is a comprehensively better camera than the 6D1 on aggregate. Sensor devotees will disagree of course, but the difference even there was marginal. Everywhere else the 5D3 was clearly the better product -- AF, build, grip, controls/wheel/joystick, FPS, dual card, video, etc.

Anyone who thought the 6D1 was better than the 5D3 on aggregate likely had a very pure/simple/specialized need (i.e. astro, landscape ONLY shooters, maaaaybe low light event specialists for that -3 EV center point) for that extra X% sensor improvement or they desperately wanted onboard wifi/GPS.... or the mind wanders if they bought a 6D1 to puff up their chest for the forum community about the purity of their camera-buying priorities. (I kid.)

The 6D1 undoubtedly took some sales from the 5D3, but the general market -- i.e. _not. folks. on. forums._ -- responded to the 6D1 _simply because Canon finally offered a choice between the $1200-1400 7d level camera and a $3500 5D level camera_. The mere creation of a not-plutonium-priced FF offering dwarfed any small percentage of people that got a 6D1 expressly because of a fractionally better sensor.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



hbr said:


> And from Canon UK:
> 
> *Dynamic range
> The EOS 6D Mark II’s latest CMOS sensor delivers a wide dynamic range, preserving detail in bright highlights and dark shadows for an authentic look and feel. Generous exposure latitude lets you do more with your files in post-production.*



That's a 100% valid marketing statement as it laughably has no basis of comparison. 

Compared to your cell phone, that statement is spot on. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LonelyBoy said:


> You didn't - the person I responded to did. Bereningia or something like that. That's why I emphasized that word specifically and, in the context, thought you were agreeing with that other poster.



Apologies -- missed that.

- A


----------



## CanonCams (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



YuengLinger said:


> CanonCams said:
> 
> 
> > YuengLinger said:
> ...



Gotcha. Any other tips?

I leave for vacation in a month with it.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-9(ES

Apparently the Nikon D5 has about a 3/4 Bit noise advantage above ISO 3200, that has to be worth something to someone or Nkon wouldn't have made it one of the main selling points of their flagship camera.
Maybe the 6D2 is similar?

Until we see high ISO shots there's no way to tell if anything is wrong with the 6D2.

I admit it doesn't look promising though.

The upside is if the price drops like a rock I'll still take the 6D2 over anything else in the $1.5K price range.


----------



## nightscape123 (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



9VIII said:


> http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-9(ES
> 
> Apparently the Nikon D5 has about a 3/4 Bit noise advantage above ISO 3200, that has to be worth something to someone or Nkon wouldn't have made it one of the main selling points of their flagship camera.
> Maybe the 6D2 is similar?
> ...



DPR has ISO 6400 shots up. The 6DII is slightly worse than the 6D so another step backwards there...


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> james75 said:
> 
> 
> > the 6d line was created to kill off the secondhand market could be partly right. If they were not intended to compete with each other, then why did the original 6d have a better sensor than the 5d3? I think Canon realized afterwards that putting a better sensor in it was taking a lot of sales away from the 5d3 by DXO-reading fundamentalists that believe the 'film' in the camera is more important _than everything else about it _and have now corrected the problem. Now there is nothing the camera does better.
> ...



I'd say there's even another group - the Rebel group that wanted an IQ upgrade but not complexity upgrade. When used to the Rebel AF system (9- or 19-point, depending on time), moving to a 7D with those extra controls and AF settings and all could be intimidating. Not to most of us here, but to "normal people with cameras"? Yes. And the 6D delivers a similar experience to the Rebels, right? Think the Green Box crowd.

The 6D2's new, upgraded AF system still matches the Rebels. So do its controls. And hey, so does the single card slot! The upgrade path makes sense; it's just not intended for pretty much literally anyone here. And still doesn't make me happy about the sensor, but c'est la vie.



ahsanford said:


> Apologies -- missed that.
> 
> - A



BTDT myself.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

So much of this stuff is just utter sh!t.

DPReview are doing the camera buying community yet another huge disservice and are being, at best, obtuse.

1st shot. So here is a crop of the 100iso shot from the 6D MkII vs the D750 both lifted 5 stops, and it's link.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3416153698/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-dynamic-range

2nd shot. I downloaded the 6D MkII file and processed it optimally and this is the result.

You *cannot* apply the same _'standard_' settings to different cameras and say look at the differences. You *have* to process each file optimally! 

When you do you get very different results. When will people stop eating this DPReview sh!t up?


----------



## Pax2You (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

So I am new here, but I was wondering about the software used to process the raw files. Did DPreview use old software? I downloaded one of their RAW files shot at iso 100 and opened it in the latest version of DPP 4 that supports the 6Dmk2. I upped the exposure to +3 and thats all. Forgive the subject matter as it was underwhelming. Shadows seemed to lift fine without getting swamped by noise. These are 100% crops with no resizing.


----------



## Adelino (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



9VIII said:


> http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-9(ES
> 
> Apparently the Nikon D5 has about a 3/4 Bit noise advantage above ISO 3200, that has to be worth something to someone or Nkon wouldn't have made it one of the main selling points of their flagship camera.
> Maybe the 6D2 is similar?
> ...



Yeah so I am with you there. I was hoping for a great 2K camera now I will wait for an ok 1.5K camera. Hope the price drops fast or maybe we will see refurbished returns sooner.


----------



## james75 (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> james75 said:
> 
> 
> > the 6d line was created to kill off the secondhand market could be partly right. If they were not intended to compete with each other, then why did the original 6d have a better sensor than the 5d3? I think Canon realized afterwards that putting a better sensor in it was taking a lot of sales away from the 5d3 by DXO-reading fundamentalists that believe the 'film' in the camera is more important _than everything else about it _and have now corrected the problem. Now there is nothing the camera does better.
> ...



Yes of course the 5d3 is a better all around camera. Sorry if it seemed I said otherwise. And even if the 6d's sensor was only marginally better, it was still better. Having an improved sensor was what I was looking to most since I like shooting landscapes. 
Oh well....I was disappointed at first, but now I'm over it.


----------



## Pax2You (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Privatebydesign we must have posted simultaneously. You've illustrated the point even better


----------



## Adelino (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LonelyBoy said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Which cameras does Canon "intentionally cripple?" Differentiating one price point from another has nothing to do with "crippling a camera". Don't know why people want to call this crippling. Is a Ford Focus crippled because it is not as big or powerful as a top end Taurus? No. It is made for a different market and has a different price point for that reason.
> ...



Great analogy! Canon also lied to us when they stated in an interview that they will always use the best sensor available. I guess in this case Canon meant best sesnsor we can design in a way to keep any IQ improvement.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Pax2You said:


> Privatebydesign we must have posted simultaneously. You've illustrated the point even better


----------



## Adelino (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Billybob said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Billybob said:
> ...



Lincoln, I think you meant Lincoln is Ford's luxury brand. Acura is owned by Honda.


----------



## Luds34 (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Billybob said:


> The 6D, by contrast, was eating into 5D sales. What Canon found was that there are a ton of photographers who care only about getting the best IQ available. If you don't do video or action photography, the new upgraded AF is irrelevant. But if you're getting the same or better IQ as the higher-end 5D, landscape, portrait, and many other photographers go with the compact cheaper camera.



I don't buy it. A prick (one whom happened to be a computer tech pioneer) once said, "if you don't cannibalize yourself someone else will."

If the 6D line truly was stealing sales away from the 5D line, than why did Canon add it in the first place? It's because Canon was missing a product in THEIR lineup that existed in their competitors. The 6D line doesn't exist to steal sales from the 5D, but to battle against Nikon and others.


----------



## Luds34 (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Joules said:


> Edit: ahsanford named a good list, but the 16-35mm 4.0L IS is the only one that would actually fit my personal hobby photograpphy budget I think. Maybe I'm just not as financially up to the task as most are though.



Haha, no you and I (and I expect many others) are in the same boat. $1k is about my limit for a single lens purchase.


----------



## -pekr- (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> You *cannot* apply the same _'standard_' settings to different cameras and say look at the differences. You *have* to process each file optimally!



No, you don't have to. Processing your files optimally, is like applying your best tricks to get the facts hidden. If it worked out well, well then. But the purpose is very simple - take out of the camera shot, lift the shadows, see what the camera is capable of, as a measure to its sensor and related circuity performance. 

if what you just proved is that the noise structure of the 6DII is easily fixable, surely DPreview should have mentioned that. But as a comparison to raw sensor performance, the comparison might be still valid.


----------



## Aglet (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



-pekr- said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > You *cannot* apply the same _'standard_' settings to different cameras and say look at the differences. You *have* to process each file optimally!
> ...



I'm still seeing the 6D2's noise forming vertical banding patterns even in lower to midtones.
That's worse than just plain shadow noise. The latter is more fixable.
Since there's no real loss of DR, just a bit of increased overall noise which can mask pattern noise, a workaround is to not turn the ISO dial on this thing down below 400 or 800 unless you're not likely to have to make any adjustments in post.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



-pekr- said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > You *cannot* apply the same _'standard_' settings to different cameras and say look at the differences. You *have* to process each file optimally!
> ...



That is a fallacious assumption based on the premise that both cameras RAW files are essentially the same thing and the information within them is stored in a similar fashion.

An anology would be applying the same heat energy to a sealed pressure cooker and an open pan and trying to tell how much water is in them by the temperature rise. They are not comparable.

Nikon RAW files do not use a floating black point, Canon RAW files do, in these 'tests' you have to adjust the black point to not clip first, then you have a playing field closer to level.


----------



## -pekr- (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



OK, you might have a point there. Did not think about the low level differences in the sensor technology (or more in a RAW files architeture) itself ...


----------



## Zv (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I'm not quite sure what to make of all this! I had hoped to one day upgrade to the 6DII but now I'm thinking I'm better off holding on to the 6D until it dies. Seems Canon have prioritized high ISO performance. Also the specs seems to dictate a camera made to shoot more action type situations than landscape. We have improved AF, better tracking, DPAF and a faster burst rate that's quite decent. All adds up to it being used for events IMO rather than static landscape stuff. Maybe there's more money in events? But then why the lack of decent video features? 

Puzzling to say the least. Even if the DR was the same as 6D that would be fair but worse? What the heck? I can't defend that. 

Might ditch this upgrade and see about getting an M5 or M6 instead. The 6D should do fine for at least another 5 years.


----------



## pinoyplaya4life (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Well... I'm glad I got the 5D4 for roughly the same price as a new 6D2 brand new


----------



## -pekr- (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



pinoyplaya4life said:


> Well... I'm glad I got the 5D4 for roughly the same price as a new 6D2 brand new



A used one, right? Or a grey market?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



BeenThere said:


> Now ends the debate over DR measured on preproduction bodies vs production bodies. All hope is gone. Let the lamintation begin.



Although I don't expect the info to change, we do not know where the info came from, but it likely did not come from a production camera, since they are not yet available. Its likely that the origin of the data comes from the same photos that others are reporting, so the results are going to be the same. Various sites pick up the info and republish it as though it was theirs, at Least DPR tells us who made the calculations, but we do not know who/ where / when the images were captured used in the Analysis, much less the status of the camera. Many of his observations are also made using DXO data, and that is always in question.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

correction: retail units are available in Australia., People do get deliveries and one of those lucky owners shared some RAW images straight out of his brand new 6D II. results were as expected, no surprise there.


----------



## Ladislav (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > It is an odd decision to take two steps forward with the other bodies and 3 back with the base ISO DR of the 6DMKII.
> ...



Lets be fair. Digital camera is about taking pictures and for that sensor is number one feature. Releasing new camera with sensor which has worse DR than previous model and just a very slightly better high iso is not just odd surprise. 

It is still not bad camera. DR is same as 5D Mk.III and people were taking awesome pictures with that one! But of course people expect more from camera released 5 years after the previous one. 

Since sensor performance is very similar to 5D Mk. III, I can imagine many photographers upgrading to used 5D instead of new 6D Mk.II.

I was first disappointed with AF spread but after doing more research, I found it kind of expected and still considered 6D Mk. II to be my next camera. That has now definitely changed.


----------



## tomscott (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Ladislav said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > tomscott said:
> ...



Completely agree the 5DMKIII is a better camera for the £. 

The camera does feel its age tho the small additions like the viewfinder II, tilt screen, wifi etc etc really make the experience of day to day shooting.

One thing to bare in mind with the 5D and 1D series is that most have been properly used are usually used hard. 

Mine was well used, it was used professionally and was not a museum piece. It shot motorsport events in yellow weather warnings in rain for 6-8 hours on a regular basis here in the UK. On one occasion the camera just had enough and failed after about 6 hours, first the shutter button then total unit failure. Obviously you do your best not to get the gear wet but in torrential rain like that its very difficult, these are expensive you you dont want to ruin it for the sake of it. Wrapped it in a towel and left over night and booted up fine the next day. 

Although I hate to think what it was like inside.

It went to some of the most hostile places on Earth like the Amazon, Atacama desert, 4500 miles across Africa including rain forests of Uganda the Namibian desert... to name a few etc etc 

I did try to keep it in a decent condition but daily use and thousands of shots make it difficult and I wasn't that bothered prefer a camera that looks used. Deters thieves etc but then again mine was stolen not long ago... so it obviously doest make much difference. Thankfully it was nearly through its second shutter and not really worth a lot maybe £650-700 to trade in.

I could have kept the body in immaculate condition and thats something that you have to bare in mind when buying used, it may look fantastic but you cant see whats going on the inside. Used out in heavy rain the damage may not be bad enough for the unit to fail but corrosion happens over time and high shutter count (80-90k+) 5DMKIII in the UK goes for roughly £1400. Having it repaired could be expensive.

Also the 5DMKIIIs shutter are meant to last 150k shots. In my experience this is a bit of an overstatement. My first one went at 86k and the second one went at around 115k. A new shutter and service isnt cheap either so you have to bare it in mind when buying used.

For many a new product with a 2 year warranty is worth the increased cost. Because you never know.

I would probably only buy one if it was bought from an amateur that babied their investment. With the way I and other photographers use their gear to get the shot I dont think I would buy a pre owned body.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Tom, there are plenty of low shutter, mint 5D III bodies out there that people just bought because they wanted a "good reliable camera" that was recomended by that salesman in the camera store next door. People do have dollars to burn. A friend of mine received 5D III body for his 50th birthday from his wife and he is not really into photography.
There are cashed up retirees, hobists, etc., that can afford expensive camera (toy). I hope it all makes sense.
your personal use case is a bit extreme, as you would agree. there are some very nice 5D III bodies out there.


----------



## tomscott (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

To continue my argument from the previous thread 6DMKII DR thread.

The DR may not have improved but the quality of the files has vastly improved.

Sorry to again explain my main issues with the 5DMKIII but...

I found (not always) that I would run into problems with banding, colour noise and purple muddy shadows if I lifted more than a stop which in high contrast situations I would say is fairly common. 

The colour noise was always my most hated issue with the previous tech, I would have the slider up to 35-40 on colour noise and the smoothness up to 75. Even at base ISO I had issues. The 3 issues were really a pain and would increase PP time significantly. Although not all the time but with dark wedding venues where you cant light the room, or in high contrast situations like wildlife in rain forests with dark shadows and beams of light through the canopy it was very hard to expose correctly and inevitably you would expose to protect either side.

Anyway as previously noted this image is a 200 ISO image so should be on the better side of the scale. 

This was one of the first REAL raw files posted by an Australian guy on the DP forum and have now been deleted. I have posted this because its the first half decent contrast scene posted to test if you could push. Shot into the sun and a dark corner scene. 

Here is a image that has been pushed 4 stops and has a 100% crop to show the quality. There is no NR or sharpening just the standard lightroom profile.

As you can see there are none of the above issues like the 5DMKIII which shows a considerable improvement. The difference between a keeper or a binner.

I appreciate it should recover well at 200 so there is also a 3200 ISO image too. 4 stops at 3200ISO and again no banding, colour noise or muddy purple casts. Ok it has noise but its a 3200 file pushed 4 stops its a silly push.

There is something going on here I haven't done anything but an exposure push and these real world images show a very different result to the ones posted by DP.

For all you who are on the fence and are disappointed. Its just one aspect and ok it may have the same DR but these files are miles more usable because they are so much cleaner. How often will you do a 4 stop push on a 3200ISO file. As you can see on both they are completely blown out. This is because they were exposed correctly. So I dont know how it would perform if you did shoot your lens cap and push it 4 stops ;D 

But in real world useage with good exposure this IMO is a really great performer and its not showing the tell tale signs of the old cameras from these two examples.

This is why it makes me think that camera used for the DP samples is a pre production the files were taken on the 14th July. Adobe released its Camera Raw support on the 19th. Take that what you will.

I think its worth waiting for more images. Similar to the 5DSR that was slated to have poor DR and the out of camera JPGs were posted as the raw converter wasn't available and then pushed and still haven't been updated.

I assume to be the first to get data out. I dislike this and the first reviews stick with people.

You have to be objective for your usage, not just look at charts. 

Again take from this what you will.


----------



## tomscott (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



SecureGSM said:


> Tom, there are plenty of low shutter, mint 5D III bodies out there that people just bought because they wanted a "good reliable camera" that was recomended by that salesman in the camera store next door. People do have dollars to burn. A friend of mine received 5D III body for his 50th birthday from his wife and he is not really into photography.
> There are cashed up retirees, hobists, etc., that can afford expensive camera (toy). I hope it all makes sense.
> your personal use case is a bit extreme, as you would agree. there are some very nice 5D III bodies out there.



All im saying is you have to be careful and just buying a used 5DMKIII because they are weather proof and will last 150k doesnt mean they will depending on how they have been treated therefore for a lot of people buying a new camera that does 90% and has more features makes sense for a lot of people.


----------



## Otara (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Obviously for those who are worried, new has a warranty.

But with shutter counts and some knowledge, I dont think secondhand is quite as risky as you're suggesting. The large majority of DSLR's never come near to their service life.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

It's been quite clear that the 6D range is an attempt my Canon to depth charge the sale of S/H previous gen 5D cameras (Canon makes no money on S/H cams) by basically selling a slightly fresher / modded 5DII as a 6D and the same for the 5DIII / 6DII. It's a close call between a 6DII and a S/H 5DIII...but new and shiny...with a full warranty...is always king in my books. Which is probably Canon's intention. 
So lets face it...when the 6DII starts to drop in price...the S/H value for a 5DIII will plummet too.


----------



## Pippan (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



GMCPhotographics said:


> It's a close call between a 6DII and a S/H 5DIII...but new and shiny...with a full warranty...is always king in my books. Which is probably Canon's intention.
> So lets face it...when the 6DII starts to drop in price...the S/H value for a 5DIII will plummet too.


Not only new and shiny and with a warranty and flippy touchscreen, the 6DII is 6 oz/172 g lighter, a not insignificant difference for some.


----------



## Luds34 (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



GMCPhotographics said:


> (Canon makes no money on S/H cams)



While that is the general sentiment on this forum that's not entirely true. While Canon does not directly make money on any 2nd hand sale, often folks who sell something used are doing so because they have purchased something new. So when you see a 2nd hand 5D3, there is a solid chance the seller may have purchased a 5D4 to replace it. Furthermore, that 2nd hand sale just might be bringing a new customer into the Canon system, which may lead to lens purchases, new bodies in the future. 

Looking at a more macro level, all Canon purchases (lenses included), whether on primary or secondary markets are creating a market, and therefore overall demand for Canon products which drives their business.


----------



## hne (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> Nikon RAW files do not use a floating black point, Canon RAW files do, in these 'tests' you have to adjust the black point to not clip first, then you have a playing field closer to level.



This is more important than people might first think.

More information on the topic is available at Mr Clark's informative web pages: http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/canon.raw.processing1


----------



## tron (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Luds34 said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > (Canon makes no money on S/H cams)
> ...


+1 Very true.


----------



## tomscott (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



hne said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon RAW files do not use a floating black point, Canon RAW files do, in these 'tests' you have to adjust the black point to not clip first, then you have a playing field closer to level.
> ...



Hell of a lot more effort with results in all honesty not really being much better.







The thing is that scene is pretty static so why you wouldnt make a bracket is just silly albeit not as convenient but even the best DR cameras would struggle with this scene.


----------



## meho1a (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



tron said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > GMCPhotographics said:
> ...



I also think that good second hand market invites people into their system. At the moment Sony makes more "moderen" cameras and good lenses, also fuji makes great stuff but pearsonaly I would rather stay with Canon since I can easily get some great lens for smaller bucks. 
Sony and fuji lenses will sell in used market only after few updates, which could be very long time. So why not to 
take advantage of used lenses to invite people into your system.


----------



## albron00 (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Already moved to Sony.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

just finished a quick sharpness test over 6D, 6DII and 5D III files.

I posted results here:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=33003.msg676608#msg676608


----------



## tron (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



hne said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon RAW files do not use a floating black point, Canon RAW files do, in these 'tests' you have to adjust the black point to not clip first, then you have a playing field closer to level.
> ...


Many thanks to both of you for this information. It reminded me of my doing something (rather naive compared to that article's methods): In cases I had shadows to lift I was trying to do it with anything but the shadows slider (mainly moving exposure to the right and highlights to the left). The result was a little cleaner shadows (without knowing any underlying theory though...)


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



meho1a said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Luds34 said:
> ...



The above comments are certainly correct, but more to the point, I'd like to put this whole "Canon is releasing X to kill second-hand sales of Y" to rest.

No business is going to release any product to compete with or "kill" second hand sales. For one reason, it is an impossibility that is ******* to failure. A new product has a price floor. That is, it cannot be sold below a set price without creating a loss. Second hand goods have no price floor. They can be sold for effectively zero. So to try to "dry up" or "kill" the second hard market is impossible. No matter how low you sell your product for, the people selling second hand goods can always go lower, because they don't have to pay any costs and are only seeking to recoup some of the money they have already spent.

In addition, you can't "kill" the second hand market because the supply is already set. There are already X number of used cameras (for example) in existence and eventually they will all either find their way to the second hand market or the junkyard. No one is making new batches of second-hand cameras. It's not like a business can "dry up" that supply, the supply is essentially fixed and it is whatever it is. 

Let's look at how this might work in the real world. I buy a 1DX II and decide to sell my 5DIII. Let's pretend that 5DIII is competing against a brand-spanking new 6DII. If I can't sell the 5DIII for $1,800 what do I do? I lower the price. I have in my mind a price that is the lowest I want to go and so long as the market offers me at least that much I will sell it, whether it is $1,500 or $1,000. If the price in the market gets too low ($200) I might instead just give it away to a son-in-law (It's still being sold on the second-hand market, the price is just $0 or maybe a six pack of beer).

How is Canon ever going to "kill" that market? They can't. This is just a fantasy that some people have.


----------



## BillB (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Like many others, I have been thinking about the 6DII in comparison to FF alternatives, and the pluses for the 6DII seem to be price (in comparison to the 5DIV) and buying new (in comparison the 5DIII), along with joining or staying in the Canon system (in comparison to other brands). It is hard for me to see a performance edge for the 6DII in comparison to any FF alternative, at least from what we know now.

But what about the comparison to the 80D and other crop cameras? The 6DII isn't going to have an IQ advantage over the 80D and other crops except at higher ISO levels. There will also be the FF advantage of using EF lenses at there "real" focal length. For me, using a 16-35 f4 as an UWA is a pretty big deal.

With an articulated screen and touchscreen focussing, the 6DII may attract buyers interested in video (excepting of course the 4K crowd). The 80D has these features too, but the 6DII could have the low light video edge with the FF sensor. Not my niche, but I don't go to that many children's birthday parties these days.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

People keep on quoting the 80D as a serious alternative to the 6D2. And it is - not denying that.

But if you take the same photo with both bodies (changing lens to get the same framing) at what point does the different sensor size override the greater DR of the 80D? They both have the same number of pixels on the subject (give or take a few) but with the 80D they become more dispersed because of the greater magnification.


----------



## BillB (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> People keep on quoting the 80D as a serious alternative to the 6D2. And it is - not denying that.
> 
> But if you take the same photo with both bodies (changing lens to get the same framing) at what point does the different sensor size override the greater DR of the 80D? They both have the same number of pixels on the subject (give or take a few) but with the 80D they become more dispersed because of the greater magnification.



Three variables would be the contrast in the image, the ISO used and the size of the print. Up to a print size of at least 12x18, I would guess it would be hard to tell the difference except possibly at high ISO's (advantage FF) or if there was some serious shadow lifting (advantage 80D).


----------



## jmoya (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I've seen the reviews and dynamic range tests on the link provided. How is it that the canon 6d mark II has more/worse noise than the 6d mark I. I was hoping for atleast good shadow recovery since the reports and news surrounding this have been " This is stills camera not a video camera and this is why there is no 4k." This is a huge let down. My old canon 5d III with is's old processor still has better noise control than the 6d mark II. I've preordered this camera already and the anticipation of it's arrival just keeps getting more anti climatic by the day.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> AF: I used sigma art and Metabone adaptor. The accuracy and speed was enough for me



You've said this a couple of times. It's absolutely fine, but why can't you accept that for many others, Canon's DR is enough for them? Different people have different tolerances for different things.


----------



## Luds34 (Jul 21, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



unfocused said:


> meho1a said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



I agree.

I'm not 1DX material so I'm going to stick with the hot trending camera and use the 6D2 and 5D3. I think many would agree those two cameras probably compete a bit in terms of capabilities, price and will both be attractive to the same buyer.

The over simplification of the economics is that every buyer who purchases a 2nd hand 5D3 just means someone else ends up purchasing a new 6D2. Every buyer who grabs a 5D3 on the secondary market helps maintain that price point, a price point that pushes enough other buyers into paying full retail for a 6D2.

Let's simplify the model and make it small, think some local market, let's continue unfocused thinking and use craigslist. Let's say there are a number of 5D3's available on CL. The potential 6D2/5D3 buyer we speak of comes in a spectrum, some preferring the 5D vs the 6D, all price conscience of course. So those who feel the 5D3 serves them better (for the price) will go after those 2nd 5D3's and "bring a balance to the force". Now what happens if you remove too many of these potential buyers? You know, these guys that buy 2nd hand cameras that have "zero" benefit to Canon. Well, as unfocused said, that lack of demand can cause the craigslist sellers to have to discount there 5D3 cameras even more. Then all of a sudden the price of these 5D3s reaches a point that is low enough that it starts to entice those "I'm more of a 6D2" type buyer. They ideally liked the 6D2 better for their needs. But the 5D3 on the secondary market has dropped to a price that they just can't justify the full $2k for a 6D2 and that is a lost new sale to Canon as this user now picks up the 5D3 that would have been picked up from the "removed potential 5D3 buyer" in our model.

In short, buyers of used Canon equipment determine the price of what this equipment goes for on the secondary market. This secondary market of used equipment competes directly against the market of new equipment. A weak secondary market with low demand and therefore low prices steal buyers away from the new equipment. And therefore drives down retails prices to make the new equipment competitive and to move inventory.

So the next time someone says, "Canon makes zero money from a used sale" you might want to ask that individual to think about it a little more. Like most things in this world, it is rarely black or white.


----------



## Tangent (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

With my left brain I am thinking, OK, I will just wait for a deal down the road and wind up with the 6DmkII. With my right brain I am googling "switched to Sony from Canon."

Here for example: https://www.phototraces.com/photography-reviews/sony-a6000-review/ But there is a ton of information out there. The A7 III is a FF body rumored to be coming this fall, roughly same price point as the 6D mkII. The Sony lens choice is getting better... Many things to consider.

With the 6DmkII sensor performance Canon has given me a shove to the edge of the creek bank. Fool around on the edge of the bank and you just might fall in. :


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

give your right brain a fair crack of the whip, but not immediately though ... re-consider in 2 years from now  we might not be able to resist Sony's FF MILC hotness by then, all the facts considered.. or... Canon FF mirrorless EF mount equipped camera will support your left brain motivations 




Tangent said:


> With my left brain I am thinking, OK, I will just wait for a deal down the road and wind up with the 6DmkII. With my right brain I am googling "switched to Sony from Canon."
> 
> Here for example: https://www.phototraces.com/photography-reviews/sony-a6000-review/ But there is a ton of information out there. The A7 III is a FF body rumored to be coming this fall, roughly same price point as the 6D mkII. The Sony lens choice is getting better... Many things to consider.
> 
> With the 6DmkII sensor performance Canon has given me a shove to the edge of the creek bank. Fool around on the edge of the bank and you just might fall in. :


----------



## Pippan (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



BillB said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > People keep on quoting the 80D as a serious alternative to the 6D2. And it is - not denying that.
> ...


If there were some serious shadow lifting up to ISO 200. Beyond that it's advantage FF.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> JohnUSA1 said:
> 
> 
> > A very big shame on Canon.
> ...



Canon has been on the record that is has different teams working on different bodies. The team that design the 6d2 might have nothing to do with the team(s) that designed any previous body.

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.


----------



## Confused Man (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Tangent said:


> With my left brain I am thinking, OK, I will just wait for a deal down the road and wind up with the 6DmkII. With my right brain I am googling "switched to Sony from Canon."
> 
> Here for example: https://www.phototraces.com/photography-reviews/sony-a6000-review/ But there is a ton of information out there. The A7 III is a FF body rumored to be coming this fall, roughly same price point as the 6D mkII. The Sony lens choice is getting better... Many things to consider.
> 
> With the 6DmkII sensor performance Canon has given me a shove to the edge of the creek bank. Fool around on the edge of the bank and you just might fall in. :



I agree with your right brain, and I'm in a bit of a dilemma because there is a reputable shop in the U.K. selling the Sony A7R for £899. 

This is not forum bravado - Canon is loosing sales because of its decision to give the 6D Mkii poor DR. I have a friend who owns a 6D and was all set to buy the Mkii but due to the DR issue he is now keeping his money. The point he made is that he is a hobby photographer who can not justify the expense of a 5D Mkiv but he will not spend his money on the 6D Mkii which does not give an uplift in image quality (except of course for the higher mega pixels.)

I own a 7D Mkii and am extremely pleased will the cameras performance (yes I can confirm the AF ability of this camera is excellent.) However I am finding that more and more I am using this camera for travel and landscape photography and am getting a little frustrated with the crop factor and poor choice of APS-C wide angle lenses (I own the EF-S 10-18mm lens and whilst it's very cheap I'm not loving the image quality.) I was therefore considering switching to the 6D Mkii but due to the poor DR I'm not going to bother. 

This brings me back to the Sony dilemma. I now can't decide between a Sony A7R (and Sigma converter) as a second camera for landscape and travel with my EF 24-105mm L lens or buying the EF 16-35mm F4 L lens. Whilst I know the EF 16-35mm lens is the cheaper option, it's only a little cheaper when you consider that having the A7R would open up far more possibilities for me ............ like I say this is not bravado I might be buying the A7R because of Canon's (in my opinion) bad decision. 

I


----------



## Khalai (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Confused Man said:


> Tangent said:
> 
> 
> > With my left brain I am thinking, OK, I will just wait for a deal down the road and wind up with the 6DmkII. With my right brain I am googling "switched to Sony from Canon."
> ...



I strongly suggest that you rent A7r before you buy it. It has its quirks as well as completely different ergonomics philosophy. I've had A72 for a while and eventually did not buy it, because what good is a great IQ camera body, if you can't get comfortable with it and basically struggle with your muscle memory. Not to mention abysmal battery life, where you have to carry at least 2-3 spare batteries for a single day of shooting. So do yourself a favor and rent it first. Sony cameras look great on paper, but they also have their weak spots as any other cameras out there.


----------



## Confused Man (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> Confused Man said:
> 
> 
> > Tangent said:
> ...



Thank you for your advice Khalai, I will consider your points.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > JohnUSA1 said:
> ...



The resale value of lenses is directly tied to Canon's market share. If people stop shooting Canon your Big Whites go from being as good as gold to paperweights.
Right now the stability of Canon's ecosystem is still unmatched and people who are hesitant to enter can be confident their money isn't just being thrown away.


----------



## -pekr- (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> I strongly suggest that you rent A7r before you buy it. It has its quirks as well as completely different ergonomics philosophy. I've had A72 for a while and eventually did not buy it, because what good is a great IQ camera body, if you can't get comfortable with it and basically struggle with your muscle memory. Not to mention abysmal battery life, where you have to carry at least 2-3 spare batteries for a single day of shooting. So do yourself a favor and rent it first. Sony cameras look great on paper, but they also have their weak spots as any other cameras out there.



Khalai, aren't you from CZ?  Well, judging upon your avatar. I wonder, where in CZK you can rent your camera, go outside, play with it, etc.? We are from the East, Megapixel will let us play in a store, but thta's just it. I sometimes envy those markets, where you can have it for few days and they decide if you buy or not ...


----------



## Khalai (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



-pekr- said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > I strongly suggest that you rent A7r before you buy it. It has its quirks as well as completely different ergonomics philosophy. I've had A72 for a while and eventually did not buy it, because what good is a great IQ camera body, if you can't get comfortable with it and basically struggle with your muscle memory. Not to mention abysmal battery life, where you have to carry at least 2-3 spare batteries for a single day of shooting. So do yourself a favor and rent it first. Sony cameras look great on paper, but they also have their weak spots as any other cameras out there.
> ...



FotoSkoda will lend you Sony, Nikon or Fuji for three days free of charge. And if you have a golden card, there is no deposit condition as well. Check their website, they even lend Leica cameras for three days for no rental fee 

FotoSkoda

_Uvidíte, že po otestování bude pro vás snazší se rozhodnout, který produkt je pro vás ten pravý. Zapůjčujeme vybrané produkty na 3 dny zdarma. Půjčovna zdarma se vztahuje pouze na občany ČR a SK, zákazníci se zlatou kartou Centra FotoŠkoda zálohu neskládají._

It's a very good service, I've used it several times. And sometimes we borrow each other's cameras on weekend landscape workshops. There are people with Sony, Nikon, Olympus or Canon cameras. Sharing gear and insight is quite common. Actually uncommon, given the nature and personality of a typical Czech I guess :

P.S.: I see you're located in Silesia. There is only Megapixel in Ostrava right? It's a pity that FotoSkoda is only located in Prague


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.



In that case you have difficulty understanding the most basic logic of that argument. 
At any given price point, it is not a case of 'throw everything at it' but understanding what pros an cons the market will accept. So it shows they make better business decisions on what is important than you would and they understand the relative importance of features than you do. 

Simple really...but obviously still too complicated for you to understand.


----------



## BillB (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > JohnUSA1 said:
> ...



Well, what camera you choose is your affair and there are other threads that are more helpful than this one for learning things that will improve our images. This exchange seems to be about whether canon is managed by idiots and whether the 6DII is a horrible camera. I don't think it is about the pros and cons of what camera you should buy.


----------



## Orangutan (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > _
> ...


Who does this? No one here is saying that commercial success is anything other than an indication that Canon is producing cameras that a lot of people want to buy. You're entitled to your own opinions, so if you don't want to buy it then that's your choice.

Please understand that your camera needs may be very different from the vast majority of buyers.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > JohnUSA1 said:
> ...



Who has done that? Lots of people have pointed to Canon's success as evidence that Canon probably made the correct decision, for Canon, in the design of the 6D2. I don't recall seeing anyone say "because Canon is profitable therefor you should use their products". Perhaps you can point me at some? But be sure they are not the first case.

It is also, at least to a degree, helpful to be bought into a system by a profitable company. This helps ensure there will be bodies, lenses, and flashes produced down the line. Companies not making money sometimes exit the market.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.



That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all. 

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point. 

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.


----------



## Point22 (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Guys!! 6D mark II ist Great camera with Great DR..  no joke
Time in video 5:45sec - 8:30sec

https://youtu.be/_Gkmqh3T1jc


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

It is a great camera indeed but can we skip the DR bit? 



Point22 said:


> Guys!! 6D mark II ist Great camera with Great DR..  no joke
> Time in video 5:45sec - 8:30sec
> 
> https://youtu.be/_Gkmqh3T1jc


----------



## Point22 (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



SecureGSM said:


> It is a great camera indeed but can we skip the DR bit?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Orangutan (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't...



Except Apple, which resists entirely the notion of repair -- they just want to sell you a new one.


----------



## Valvebounce (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Hi Orangutan. 
I'm guessing you speak from experience here, and I would not dispute your experience, however my experience has been much different, I dropped my out of warranty iPad (well it slid off my rollcab toolbox, same net result) and broke the screen and dented the case almost imperceptibly, took it to the Apple Store and left with a refurb unit (they don't repair in store) for a huge reduction on the price of a new unit, I also slipped on some stairs on a boat and threw my phone in to the air meaning it dropped from about 12ft on to the deck, good case meant no outward damage, but the wifi and Bluetooth didn't work, sent it in and it came back repaired (yes the same unit) very quickly, free of charge, as all they had to do was reconnect the wifi daughter board to the motherboard. 

Cheers, Graham. 



Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't...
> ...


----------



## Orangutan (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Valvebounce said:


> Hi Orangutan.
> I'm guessing you speak from experience here, and I would not dispute your experience, however my experience has been much different, I dropped my out of warranty iPad (well it slid off my rollcab toolbox, same net result) and broke the screen and dented the case almost imperceptibly, took it to the Apple Store and left with a refurb unit (they don't repair in store) for a huge reduction on the price of a new unit, I also slipped on some stairs on a boat and threw my phone in to the air meaning it dropped from about 12ft on to the deck, good case meant no outward damage, but the wifi and Bluetooth didn't work, sent it in and it came back repaired (yes the same unit) very quickly, free of charge, as all they had to do was reconnect the wifi daughter board to the motherboard.
> 
> Cheers, Graham.
> ...



Actually, I speak with a distinct lack of experience as regards Apple: I refuse to buy their products in part because of news reports that Apple makes it difficult/impossible for independent shops to get parts, and they charge very high fees for their authorized repair.

I'm glad your experience was different than what I've heard, but I'm still not convinced.

https://9to5mac.com/2017/05/19/apple-right-to-repair-legislation-lobbying/


----------



## Valvebounce (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Hi Orangutan. 
I don't know if that is a difference between the two sides of the Atlantic or if I was just lucky with my experience, also I was dealing with apple not a third party repairer. 

Cheers, Graham. 



Orangutan said:


> Actually, I speak with a distinct lack of experience as regards Apple: I refuse to buy their products in part because of news reports that Apple makes it difficult/impossible for independent shops to get parts, and they charge very high fees for their authorized repair.
> 
> I'm glad your experience was different than what I've heard, but I'm still not convinced.
> 
> https://9to5mac.com/2017/05/19/apple-right-to-repair-legislation-lobbying/


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Billybob said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Billybob said:
> ...



1. My take on your post is that the 6D ate into 5D Mark III (used or new) sales. You say that many people bought the 6D instead of the 5D Mark III. You neglect to also include the people who bought the 5D Mark III instead of the 6D which has inferior AF, no joystick, etc. You also neglect to add that some people bought the 6D because they would never want to spend the cost of a 5D Mark III to begin with. Ever.

You see, your argument is one sided. You base your argument solely on price and DR. Of course the 6D might have sold more than the 5D Mark III. That does not mean it ate into 5D Mark III sales. If it did, then your whole argument about "protecting 5D mark III sales" is a fallacy. And yes, the 5D Mark III is a better camera than the 6D. Counting that DR is the only factor is just silly. The 5D Mark III bests the 6D in many categories.

2. Crippling: Doesn't happen. Every camera is never going to have all the same features. There are no "twins". BTW: The only place Ford ever manufactured Acuras is in Neverland.

3. How many people purchased a 6D instead of a 5D mark III because the 6D was less expensive? How many bought a 5D Mark III because it is a better camera and never would have even considered the 6D.

A poll on this website about all that would not be too useful. This website is top heavy with high end users. make up a poll if you'd like. You are free to do that. Just as you are also free to make up facts to support your argument and also think you can divine Canon Inc.s motives, sales numbers, and the reasons people choose what they do without actually knowing any of it. Your whole package of reasoning is one sided and not really based on facts. Anecdotal evidence may or may not be fact.

What, by the way, do you actually own? A 6D? The 5D Mark III and the 6D are two different cameras at different price points for different people with differing ideas of what is important to them. That's it.

Did you buy a 6D because you felt it was more bang for the buck? If so, the whole argument that it was created to protect 5D mark III sales is downright stu.... :

Also, look at your first retort. Take my comment seriously? Does not matter to me whether you do or not. Still, your retort has nothing to do with what I wrote. Again, what are the profit margins and sales numbers? You don't know. You "think", therefore it must be true. Ha!

6D the choice of astro photographers? Some, but not all. Again, how many chose the 6D for astro rather than the 5D mark III where money is no object? You don't know. Then again, that destroys the idea in your world that the 6D was created to protect 5D sales. The 6D manufactured to protect the 5D mark III from the used market? What? You don't know that either. How many bought a used 5D mark III instead of the 6D? You don't know. You just make it all up. Then you believe it like it must be true coming from yourself.

I've not had any problem with banding via my 5D mark III. I also don't claim to know why certain cameras are created, why people buy them (other than personal desire), or how many bought this camera or that camera because of this or that. You don't know either. 

Nobody here that I know of is disputing that the 6D has a better sensor than the 5D Mark III. The problem for your imaginary "facts" is that people buy cameras for more reasons than the sensor.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Orangutan said:


> Valvebounce said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Orangutan.
> ...



It's certainly become increasingly difficult to repair Apple products, especially the laptop computers (the phones were never meant to be user-repairable; some of the desktops still retain some user-alterable parts, I believe). It's a shame, but on the other hand, they are quite robust and reliable in my experience. Tbh I treat them as I treat my cameras and lenses - I never expect to repair them, I'll use for a few years at most and either sell on if they're still valuable enough or they get recycled (that latter event hasn't come mostly due to a burglary but in principle...).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



scyrene said:


> It's certainly become increasingly difficult to repair Apple products, especially the laptop computers (the phones were never meant to be user-repairable; some of the desktops still retain some user-alterable parts, I believe). It's a shame, but on the other hand, they are quite robust and reliable in my experience. Tbh I treat them as I treat my cameras and lenses - I never expect to repair them, I'll use for a few years at most and either sell on if they're still valuable enough or they get recycled (that latter event hasn't come mostly due to a burglary but in principle...).



+1

I've had 3 iPhones (between my wife and I) replaced with refurb units under AppleCare (which I buy for iPhones and kids' iPads, but not laptops). I've never had an Apple laptop fail. My 17" MBP from 2006 (yes, 11 years old!) is currently used by my kids for occasional web browsing, I did have to replace a failed HDD. My wife's Late 2008 Aluminum MacBook is still going strong (her main computer, its had the HDD swapped for a 250 GB SSD for capacity and speed, and the battery replaced once, both by me). My current laptop is a Late 2011 17" MBP, all I've done is swap the 500 GB HDD (which went into the 2006 MBP) for a 1 TB SSD.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.
> ...



Canon can go bankrupt today and my gear will still work and I'll still be able to get it fixed by 3rd party. Conversely the company being profitable and successful doesn't help them service gear you can buy from them new right now.

Again the argument of the company's financial success is silly, most people buy under powered apsc cameras. The argument of what meets image making needs is specially silly when considering a line such as the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...



Because most people are too stupid to figure out what their needs are? Wow.  : BTW: How do you know why most people buy what they buy?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...



Still clueless, apparently. Canon makes the critical parts 3rd parties use to fix Canon gear. 

People buy what best meets their needs. To suggest that budget isn't part of that need is beyond silly, it's asinine. Who are you to say the 6D, or any product, doesn't meet peoples' needs? Since you don't determine their needs, you're nobody in that regard.


----------



## Otara (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

The thing we never get to know is exactly how it all works inside the company and the outcome.

Maybe there were torrid arguments over whether it should be old or new sensor, or whether there are signs that some in the company are seeing and others are ignoring. Maybe in time survey results will show they made a mistake and it had an measurable impact on profits, even though it was still a commercial success. We dont get to see the process and any of the internal debates and controversies, only the outcome.

Which makes many of these debates fairly pointless but it does pass the time I guess.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonFanBoy said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



So not having an unlimited budget = being too stupid? Where did you read that in my post? You can be a very intelligent person and not an experienced photographer, a gear nerd or just have other financial priorities and end up with a camera that doesn't matches your needs. 
A lot of my peers use a 6d, only a couple are actually satisfied with it -nobody is happy with it's focus system. It's a very limited camera in terms of features, it's there in virtually all customers reviews, write-ups and wish lists. Doesn't take a genius mind to know people get this camera for budgetary reasons and not because it meets their needs.


----------



## justawriter (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I think DR is really the gas mileage of the camera market. Everyone seems to know the numbers. Everyone agrees the numbers are important. Everyone thinks the numbers should be better. But when they get into the showroom, gas mileage is about number 18 on the list of why the consumer chose a particular vehicle - right below cupholders.* That is not to say that mileage isn't the primary reason a subset of buyers pick a particular vehicle, just not for most.

Lens selection, service and repairs, IQ, price and a bunch of other reasons expressed in this thread are why Canon is likely to sell a metric sh*tload of 6DMIIs.

*Someone did do a survey of new car buyers and why they made the choice they did, and yes, cupholders were mentioned more often then gas mileage.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Here's a clue: if they still make the parts to sell they'll still fix your lens. When it reaches EOL they might not accept your service request, even if it doesn't require parts. I'm close to their service center and they wouldn't look at my 300 f/4, but had no problem taking in a colleagues. 

Do you always need everything spelled out for you?


----------



## retroreflection (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:
 

> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...


But, it seems that it does take some maturity to understand that what one wants (some say "needs") has nothing to do with what one can afford. 
And, by the way, manufacturers also have to watch the budget. Price point = feature set. No crippling by evil mustache twirling types. Unless you like to cut yourself on Occam's razor.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...



Yes, please spell out for me how a company that has gone bankrupt and is no longer around will still be making parts for your lenses. 

Sheesh, there are some really inane posts on this forum, but you're achieving a whole new level of imbecility. Erm...congratulations? :


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



When did I ever make that point? Your inclination to ad-hominem and putting words into peoples mouths when you have nothing relevant to say is really unappealing. 
You need to get out of your basement more often.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...



Your putting words into others' mouths is what started this discussion (see the deepest nested quote of yours, an argument no one here has made). 'Gone bankrupt' and 'still make the parts' were also your words, nice oxymoron there. 

It's unfortunate that you have poor metacognition, but try not to take your flaws out on others. Clearly, there's no point in further discussion. I tire of the battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. Have a nice day.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



retroreflection said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



Yes, it does call for some level of maturity to stick to what you can afford. I've had a 6d when what I really wanted (needed for my subject matter) was a 1dx, same when I had a 5dmk3.
It goes both ways I guess, I've seen plenty of people shooting 1dxs on walkabouts or their kids playing, I think that fits your example better.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Battle of wits? Jeezus, you really need out that basement asap. A daily stroll would do you wonders.

You're mixing and matching two parts of unrelated sentences in different posts to try to make a point toargue against. That's just pathetic.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...



There you go again.

So, how many peers do you have that use a 6D? Two? Fifty? How many is a lot? There are many people on this forum who were and are very satisfied with the camera.

But there you go again, lumping everyone into the same group because you think your "peers" represent everyone.


----------



## Fleetie (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I'm not sure why people are weighing up the pros and cons of buying a second-hand 5D3 versus a new 6D2, because here in the UK at least, Jessops are currently selling both for EXACTLY THE SAME PRICE, £1999.

If, and it's perhaps a big "if", the 6D2's sensor is only about as good as that of the 5D3, then as long as you're not really interested in the tilty-flippy screen, wi-fi, GPS, etc., the 5D3 is an easy choice.

I have the 5D3 (bought on the very first day of availability in the UK, and firmware never upgraded (!!!)), and I don't consider the 5D4 upgrade to be worth the £3500. I'm skipping that generation. I got an M5 as a lower-weight option, and I'll await the 5D5 or the full-frame mirrorless with interest.

I have to say I am surprised if it really is true that the 6D2's sensor is "worse" than that of the 6D. Maybe just differently-optimised.


----------



## mahdi_mak2000 (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

OK.... 

6dmk2 is 2000USD

5dmk4 is 3400USD

A7rII is 2300USD+ 400 USD metabones V =2700

should I get A7rII or wait for A7III?


----------



## mahdi_mak2000 (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



tomscott said:


> In the metadata the images were taken on the 14th July still makes me wonder if it was a pre production unless it is stated it was a final production model.
> 
> I find it very hard to believe they could make a worse sensor when the 6Ds sensor wasn't the best when it was released. If they indeed have and these results are true then I have no words. Certainly an injustice to consumers.
> 
> ...



they had 5 years to make a better product. I think they gonna make progress in 1 month?


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonFanBoy said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Definitely not 50. It's not that popular among working pros. But hey, stay on the argument and prove me wrong, create a poll that asks if money was no object which FF would you get, a 6dmk2, a 5dmk4 or a Sony A9.
Again, you don't need to be a genius to know the 6dmk2 won't be the winner.


----------



## 100 (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...



Why should people have to prove you wrong? 
You claim something, the burden of proof is on you.
Without proof, it’s just your opinion.
A nobody on the internet with an unfounded opinion… 
You don’t have to be a genius to know you have a credibility issue.


----------



## SteveM (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I'm surprised at the results out now, I can only hope the results from the cameras on the shelves in a weeks time are better. Were I in the market to upgrade right now, the 5D mklll is on sale at Wex in the U.K. for the same price as the new 6D mkll. Can't see that stock lasting long.
Incidentally, Nikon are playing 'chess' with their customers as well, there are a lot of angry bunnies in relation to the D7500, and the eventual D750 release is expected to be contentious as well. 'The Company giveth, and the Company taketh away.'
End of the road for useful innovation with the 'stills' camera? From a selfish perspective, the current 'stills' cameras have everything I'll ever need. I just wonder if, once I acquire the 7D mklll, I'll need to upgrade again within the next 10 years?


----------



## BillB (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



SteveM said:


> I'm surprised at the results out now, I can only hope the results from the cameras on the shelves in a weeks time are better. Were I in the market to upgrade right now, the 5D mklll is on sale at Wex in the U.K. for the same price as the new 6D mkll. Can't see that stock lasting long.
> Incidentally, Nikon are playing 'chess' with their customers as well, there are a lot of angry bunnies in relation to the D7500, and the eventual D750 release is expected to be contentious as well. 'The Company giveth, and the Company taketh away.'
> End of the road for useful innovation with the 'stills' camera? From a selfish perspective, the current 'stills' cameras have everything I'll ever need. I just wonder if, once I acquire the 7D mklll, I'll need to upgrade again within the next 10 years?



There is also the question of what people will be using stills cameras for in the future. My guess is that fewer and fewer people will be doing much printing, and that more and more it will be about video display of still images, which may tend to reinforce the belief that the current cameras are good enough. Not a comfortable prospect for either the camera manufacturers or people trying to generate clicks on their websites. On the other hand, it may free up time for those of us who spend too much time on the internet.


----------



## Salleen (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

5D Mark IV vs 6D Mark II ISO performance test with real world samples.

Details:

-All shots made at RAW format, no NR or any changes just White Balance
-I have used the new kit lens which is 24-105mm F4L IS II USM
-All shots made at Aperture Priority Mode and I have used the f4
- I have downscaled the 5d Mark IV to 26mp at Photoshop and compare with the 6D Mark II.

you can easily swipe your mouse right and left to make the compare. 

http://www.mertgundogdu.com/6d-mark-ii-ve-5d-mark-iv-iso-testi/


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Is there any chance that you can offer RAW files as well? downscaled images are nice and sharp but also was interested to have a go at unedited out of camera RAW files. Thank you.

p.s. Can you do me a huge favour and provide 3 photos of your X-Rite ColorChecker card taken at -3EV (3 stop underexposed), 0EV (correctly exposed, spot meter 18% grey swatch of the Card) and +3EV (3 stops overexposed) exposure levels at ISO 100 and identical F-Stop number, say F5.6? I would need RAW files please. Just the entire card with all the swatches visible as on the review page. Thank you.
I would like to compare DR levels of your camera with 6D at ISO 100. I hope you can help.





Salleen said:


> 5D Mark IV vs 6D Mark II ISO performance test with real world samples.
> 
> Details:
> 
> ...


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Salleen said:


> 5D Mark IV vs 6D Mark II ISO performance test with real world samples.
> 
> Details:
> 
> ...



Something is applying a large amount of color NR, look at the color smudging going on here in the swatches.


----------



## Salleen (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> Salleen said:
> 
> 
> > 5D Mark IV vs 6D Mark II ISO performance test with real world samples.
> ...



I do not understand maybe you do not meant to be but, there is no NR process on the photos. Neither on Photoshop stage nor in camera stage.

all the best


----------



## Salleen (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

And some new dynamic range tests.. Shoot as RAW format and adjusment made at Camera RAW.

*Orginal File shoot as RAW
*






Highlights down to bottom, -0.7 exposure down










You may see the Camera RAW process on the below ss.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Salleen said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Something is applying a large amount of color NR, look at the color smudging going on here in the swatches.
> ...



Ok here is a screen shot of your test swatch and DPReviews same test swatch both at 100%. Something seems amiss.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

There may be generic NR applied from default camera settings. One must intentionally turn NR off by diving into menu. Factory default is some NR applied IIRC.


----------



## PBguy (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I have to admit that this info on DR has me questioning whether or not I should buy the 6D Mark II next week. I'm first on the list at my local camera store but didn't have to put any money down so I can simply not purchase it. Might have to go for the 5D Mark IV instead or even just stick with the 6D for a while.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



PBguy said:


> I have to admit that this info on DR has me questioning whether or not I should buy the 6D Mark II next week. I'm first on the list at my local camera store but didn't have to put any money down so I can simply not purchase it. Might have to go for the 5D Mark IV instead or even just stick with the 6D for a while.



Depends on what you mostly shoot and inherently what ISO do you mostly use. Because after ISO 400, all DR discussions are a moot. Any DR advantage competition have is at low ISO and low ISO only.


----------



## ecka (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

We should boycott overpriced and intentionally crippled cameras, or they will continue to produce them.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> We should boycott overpriced and intentionally crippled cameras, or they will continue to produce them.



Honestly, good luck with that. Forum communities are rather small in numbers and would probably not influence sales of any camera in any significant way whatsoever. No matter how much I agree with you.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I'd agree forum communities are only a minor number. However I do think people read reviews before making large purchases like Full Frame cameras. Magazine reviews will be interesting. They could break this camera. It's still a fine camera but Canon have given them something specific to be unhappy about. Alit of buyers may not understand dynamic range but it's something you might reasonably to have similar to its competitors. I think it was a tactical mistake by Canon. Their next full frame mirrorless or not needs to be fairly good all over.


----------



## BillB (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> We should boycott overpriced and intentionally crippled cameras, or they will continue to produce them.



Sure. If you don't like the camera, you will most likely feel better if you don't by one. In fact, it would seem silly if you did. Sounds a little grandiose to call it a boycott though.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Hector1970 said:


> I'd agree forum communities are only a minor number. However I do think people read reviews before making large purchases like Full Frame cameras. Magazine reviews will be interesting. They could break this camera. It's still a fine camera but Canon have given them something specific to be unhappy about. Alit of buyers may not understand dynamic range but it's something you might reasonably to have similar to its competitors. I think it was a tactical mistake by Canon. Their next full frame mirrorless or not needs to be fairly good all over.



Mainstream magazines, like most reviewers, strive for balance. DPR does not. 

Have a skim through the smattering below, and tell me what in there you think will 'break this camera'. 

[quote author=Outdoor Photographer]
*Canon EOS 6D Mark II Hits The Sweet Spot*
Taking it all together — price, performance, size and handling — the EOS 6D Mark II is an excellent package for outdoor photographers, especially those who primarily shoot landscapes and scenics. The camera’s max continuous shooting of 6.5 fps is perhaps short of what serious wildlife photographers would like, but it’s acceptably fast for most enthusiasts. Though the lack of 4K video may be a turn off for some, if you primarily shoot stills, the Full HD video quality is very good for those occasions when you do want to take movie clips.

*Bottom line:* The Canon EOS 6D Mark II is one of the most refined DSLRs we've used at any price, and an excellent option for enthusiasts photographers who are stepping up to full-frame.
[/quote]

[quote author=Imaging Resource]
Overall, the Canon 6D Mark II is an impressive camera. It is in many ways an incremental upgrade over its predecessor, which is a bit disappointing given the amount of time that's passed between the release of the two cameras. I would have hoped for some additional improvements, such as better video recording capabilities and perhaps a more impressive viewfinder autofocus system. But what the 6D II does bring to the table is the series' patented blend of performance and price. Its image sensor is very good, Dual Pixel CMOS AF is an excellent inclusion and the new articulating touchscreen display is very useful in the field. The new features the camera includes may not be enough to make all 6D owners want to upgrade, but for users looking for a great full-frame DSLR that won't break the bank, the Canon 6D Mark II may well be an excellent option.
[/quote]

[quote author=Ken Rockwell (sort of)]
Please help feed my family by buying the 6D Mark II using the links below.
[/quote]

[quote author=TechRadar]
OUR EARLY VERDICT
Canon has made some significant improvements over the original 6D, with a fresh sensor, a faster processor, a more credible AF system and stronger burst rate heading a long list of changes. This is somewhat reflected in its asking price, which does make you wonder if it’s been elevated too far out of its 'affordable full-frame' bracket – although it's a good deal cheaper than the next full frame model in the line-up, the EOS 5D Mark IV.

FOR
• Brand new sensor and latest engine
• Brilliant handling
• Excellent connectivity options
AGAINST
• Viewfinder falls short of 100% coverage
• Absence of 4K likely to disappoint some
• No USB 3.0
[/quote]


----------



## riker (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Orangutan said:


> CanonGuy said:
> 
> 
> > You realize that you are comparing with a7rii which is 2 year old right? Why support a company who's still playing catch up game after 2 years?
> ...



WAAAAAIT wait wait. So I'm an ex-Canon-fanboy, using Canon digital since D60 (2002 or 2003?) 5d3 now. I always respected Sony for their innovation and great cameras, but as a whole system I felt it pretty lacking and was convinced that people changing from Canon to A7 and using adapters are simply retards. Still think so.
BUT!!! The other day I just ended up on DPR checking out Sony lenses. Have you guys noticed what stuff they were releasing the past 2 years?!?!?! 16-35/2.8 24-70/2.8 12-14/4 50/1.8 50/1.4 85/1.8 85/1.4 100-400, etc...they have released as much as Canon does in like 15 years!!! You can't name one among the 10 most popular lens models of which Sony does not have several years newer than Canon!!
----->>
Not surprisingly if u check DXOmark site (u can find sh*t there too but as a general reference it's not bad), and compare there lenses on A7RII vs 5D4, u will find that A7RII+Sony lenses beat the crap out of 5D4+Canon lenses especially in regards of sharpness (resolution) which is by far the most important value imho.

So instead of upgrading to 5D4 I think I'll just wait and see. 5D4 and A7RII are kinda equal right now with pros and cons. My 16-35/2.8L II, 70-200/4L IS and 180 macro are outdated anyway. With this pace Sony will have A7RIII in 1 year and who knows what lenses while we can't expect a thing from Canon.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I was running some pixel level sharness tests over the past weekend with some Canon, Sony and Nikon bodies.
I published the results here on CR. end result: Canon 80D and Canon 5D IV sensors exibit the best pixel level sharpness, following by Sony A9 and Nikon D750. so that you know. A7RII sucked quite a bit in that department.
in regards to Canon lenses are not as sharp as the Sony lenses:
head to Lensrentals for the lens reviews and you will find out that Canon lenses are in fact are very very good.
through longevity, reliability, quality of support and service in to the mix and all that sudden Canon 5D IV does not look all that bad anylonger 




riker said:


> Not surprisingly if u check DXOmark site (u can find sh*t there too but as a general reference it's not bad), and compare there lenses on A7RII vs 5D4, *u will find that A7RII+Sony lenses beat the crap out of 5D4+Canon lenses especially in regards of sharpness (resolution)* which is by far the most important value imho.
> 
> So instead of upgrading to 5D4 I think I'll just wait and see. 5D4 and A7RII are kinda equal right now with pros and cons. My 16-35/2.8L II, 70-200/4L IS and 180 macro are outdated anyway. With this pace Sony will have A7RIII in 1 year and who knows what lenses while we can't expect a thing from Canon.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



riker said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > CanonGuy said:
> ...



70-200/4L IS and outdated? How and why? One of the sharpest zooms Canon have, build like a tank and weathersealed. How exactly is that lens anyhow outdated?!?


----------



## Hflm (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



riker said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > CanonGuy said:
> ...


We use A7rii and Canon 5div and no, I don't agree in general, only in parts. It will always be so, that a lens on a higher MP body without AA filter will give higher acuity curves (I hope you don't look at overall scores). Older lenses will oftentimes look worse than newer ones, too. If required, one could use the 5dsr to increase the acuity, too. In real life, however, you will be hard pressed to even see a difference, unless you know the combination and watch at 100% on a 5k monitor. We often see that after a wedding when going through the images.

The 35/1.4ii is excellent and better imo than the 35/1.4 on the Sony. An excellent lens. As Canon's 50 and 85mm versions are a bit older already, we use the 50 and 85 1.4 Sigma Art lenses. No L-lenses, of course, but one advantage of the Canon body is that you can use Sigma's lenses natively (and if you specifically compare those, yes, their resolution wide open is showing the age of these lenses). The Sigmas, however, are in every aspect a match for the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4GM, which we own, too. The Sigma Art 85/1.4 is even a bit sharper than the 85 GM and focusses faster.
I compared the 70-200ii and the Sony 70-200GM at Photokina and did test images and both are similar in real life performance. Lensrentals optical bench tests seem to agree. The "old" Canon 24-70/2.8ii is the equal of Sony's 24-70, too, lensrentals.com sees it even a tiny bit better, if I remember. Canon new 16-35/2.8iii is currently one of the best WA-zooms (again optical bench measurments). I am sure the new Sony is similar, however. The 16-35/4 and 11-24 are very similar to the Sony counterparts, too. So your "beat the crap out" is just nonsense. You can't go wrong with either system right now, in my opinion.


----------



## ecka (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> riker said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



The older generation IS is not as effective as we have today. And there's an issue typical for the EF 70-200/4L IS - the slipping AF, when both AF and manual focus stop working properly. I'm not sure if Canon fixed the design, maybe the newly produced copies do not have that problem anymore (I hope).
However, I agree, it's one of Canon's best L zooms. The mark II version might just be bigger, heavier and more expensive, but not much better optically. So, it's not a win-win situation, in my opinion.
What I would like to see instead, is the new small EF 100-300mm F5.6L IS.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> The older generation IS is not as effective as we have today. And there's an issue typical for the EF 70-200/4L IS - the slipping AF, when both AF and manual focus stop working properly. I'm not sure if Canon fixed the design, maybe the newly produced copies do not have that problem anymore (I hope).
> However, I agree, it's one of Canon's best L zooms. The mark II version might just be bigger, heavier and more expensive, but not much better optically. So, it's not a win-win situation, in my opinion.
> What I would like to see instead, is the new small EF 100-300mm F5.6L IS.



Well, to be honest, I sold my copy exactly for that AF slippage, two repairs during warranty, so I sold it for a bargain price with full diclaimer to the new owner and he's been happy as a bug, because five years from now, he didn't experience a single issue with that lens. Guess I'm just very unlucky. But that could be remedied even in the original version. Problem with mk II would be - as you accurately pointed already - significant increase of price and a bit better IS, but sharpness is almost as good as it gets and there is a very diminishing return even with a steep price hike...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



riker said:


> Not surprisingly if u check DXOmark site (u can find sh*t there too but as a general reference it's not bad), and compare there lenses on A7RII vs 5D4, u will find that A7RII+Sony lenses beat the crap out of 5D4+Canon lenses especially in regards of sharpness (resolution) which is by far the most important value imho.



So, when you compared the a7RII + Sony lenses to the 5DsR + Canon lenses, what did you learn in regards of sharpness (resolution) which is by far the most important value iyho? Who 'beat the crap out of' who?


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



riker said:


> Not surprisingly if u check DXOmark site (u can find sh*t there too but as a general reference it's not bad), and compare there lenses on A7RII vs 5D4, u will find that A7RII+Sony lenses beat the crap out of 5D4+Canon lenses especially in regards of sharpness (resolution) which is by far the most important value imho.



If sharpness is the most important thing, tell me something: _why doesn't everyone shoot Sigma Art primes? _They are the sharpest, right? So *everyone* should use them. 

Sony's 'great' GM lenses are focus by wire, overpriced, and very uncomfortable to hold with a dainty A7/A9 standard grip. They also leave no room for your fingers. So, yes, Sony excels at some aspects of their lens design but makes horrible decisions elsewhere. (Sounds a lot like how they design their bodies. :)

Enjoy your GM glass, dude. I'll take a comfortable/solid 5D grip, ring USM and FTM mechanical focusing every. day. of. the. week. over that nonsense.

- A


----------



## Point22 (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

What? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opaq1vOs4HI&t=138s


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> What? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opaq1vOs4HI&t=138s



I'm not one to stick up for Canon marketeers riffing without a script on YouTube, but it's not _necessarily_ a contradictory statement.

One thing that hasn't been beaten up that much is the difference between the Base ISO DR and the quality of highly massaged/manipulated output. For instance, a camera that has the same DR as its predecessor but eliminates the predecessor's noise patterns/banding/etc. would conceivably allow more shadow lift before it crosses a threshold of being overcooked and looking unpleasant.

I am no noise whisperer, so I defer to the folks with a stronger theoretical (BClaff) or practical post-processing experience to speak to that. It's possible the 6D2 made strides in how much you can tweak a file despite not improving its DR.

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > The older generation IS is not as effective as we have today. And there's an issue typical for the EF 70-200/4L IS - the slipping AF, when both AF and manual focus stop working properly. I'm not sure if Canon fixed the design, maybe the newly produced copies do not have that problem anymore (I hope).
> ...



It's possible, and even probable, that they resolved a design issue with the system and your second repair got the improved part. Think of the BMW HPFPs, that would fail every few months for years until they resolved it, then replacements and new cars were fine. They do make rolling changes to lenses (and probably bodies and flashes) - my 24-105L has new-style, low-profile switches instead of the big chunky ones on the older examples. No idea if it's solved the harness/ reliability issue, but they do make changes over the years under the same lens name.


----------



## ecka (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> Point22 said:
> 
> 
> > What? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opaq1vOs4HI&t=138s
> ...



What stops you from getting some 6D2 RAW files and try to push them in photoshop? Because I did just that and the DR is really bad. As bad as 5D2 or maybe even worse, because in some shots that ugly shadow noise is visible even before I touch any sliders.

The dude from the video said that he will replace his 5D4 with 6D2. I can't decide if that's funny or sad. Maybe both. If all important design decision are made by such comedians, then no wonder why we've got a lemon.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Point22 said:
> ...


*This "Billy Wilhelm" character steals other content creator's videos.* You should not share the links to the stolen videos.

Here is the original video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv26s0BHKuQ&t=138s


----------



## Point22 (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



StudentOfLight said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



I apologize for my mistake.. Roman


----------



## Jaysheldon (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



tomscott said:


> hne said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Perhaps the way to interpret the Clarkvision post is that this is the right way to process Canon images that are pushed to the left when you can't bracket?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

6D MK II's started delivering today, so people can start discussing actual production cameras rather than 6 month old prototypes or specification sheets.

While I expect the Dynamic Range results to be the same or similar, its always better to use images from several production cameras, so at least, the results mean something.


----------



## CanonGuy (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

We are talking about lack of DR, omission of 4k etc. Meanwhile, Nikon announces d850 which will do 8K timelapses  And attached image is a frame grab from d850 RAW video (yes it's from video)!!! 

Yup one doesn't need 'DR' to be a 'good'' photographer. But I think I found my next purchase. Enough with tolerating Canon's BS (kinda hesitant to switch to Sony due to the pricier native lenses. but I am sold on the d850).


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> We are talking about lack of DR, omission of 4k etc. Meanwhile, Nikon announces d850 which will do 8K timelapses  And attached image is a frame grab from d850 RAW video (yes it's from video)!!!
> 
> Yup one doesn't need 'DR' to be a 'good'' photographer. But I think I found my next purchase. Enough with tolerating Canon's BS (kinda hesitant to switch to Sony due to the pricier native lenses. but I am sold on the d850).



So what, the 5DS/r has been able to shoot 9k time lapses for quite a while now. Go, enjoy the other side of the fence, we don't care.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> CanonGuy said:
> 
> 
> > We are talking about lack of DR, omission of 4k etc. Meanwhile, Nikon announces d850 which will do 8K timelapses  And attached image is a frame grab from d850 RAW video (yes it's from video)!!!
> ...



Grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Because it's usually fertilized by bulls**t! 

There is also quantum fence phenomenon - no matter which side of the fence you are standing on, the other one is always greener.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Point22 said:
> ...



Did you take the same shot with both cameras?



ecka said:


> The dude from the video said that he will replace his 5D4 with 6D2. I can't decide if that's funny or sad. Maybe both. If all important design decision are made by such comedians, then no wonder why we've got a lemon.



Why is either funny or sad? 
He has taken a decision based on his needs yet you still believe he is wrong. That is what is funny or sad.


----------



## freezehead (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Hector1970 said:
> 
> 
> > I'd agree forum communities are only a minor number. However I do think people read reviews before making large purchases like Full Frame cameras. Magazine reviews will be interesting. They could break this camera. It's still a fine camera but Canon have given them something specific to be unhappy about. Alit of buyers may not understand dynamic range but it's something you might reasonably to have similar to its competitors. I think it was a tactical mistake by Canon. Their next full frame mirrorless or not needs to be fairly good all over.
> ...



[quote author=Imaging Resource]
Overall, the Canon 6D Mark II is an impressive camera. It is in many ways an incremental upgrade over its predecessor, which is a bit disappointing given the amount of time that's passed between the release of the two cameras. I would have hoped for some additional improvements, such as better video recording capabilities and perhaps a more impressive viewfinder autofocus system. But what the 6D II does bring to the table is the series' patented blend of performance and price. Its image sensor is very good, Dual Pixel CMOS AF is an excellent inclusion and the new articulating touchscreen display is very useful in the field. The new features the camera includes may not be enough to make all 6D owners want to upgrade, but for users looking for a great full-frame DSLR that won't break the bank, the Canon 6D Mark II may well be an excellent option.
[/quote]

[quote author=Ken Rockwell (sort of)]
Please help feed my family by buying the 6D Mark II using the links below.
[/quote]

[quote author=TechRadar]
OUR EARLY VERDICT
Canon has made some significant improvements over the original 6D, with a fresh sensor, a faster processor, a more credible AF system and stronger burst rate heading a long list of changes. This is somewhat reflected in its asking price, which does make you wonder if it’s been elevated too far out of its 'affordable full-frame' bracket – although it's a good deal cheaper than the next full frame model in the line-up, the EOS 5D Mark IV.

FOR
• Brand new sensor and latest engine
• Brilliant handling
• Excellent connectivity options
AGAINST
• Viewfinder falls short of 100% coverage
• Absence of 4K likely to disappoint some
• No USB 3.0
[/quote]
[/quote]

Huh, I see they're so "political correct", and what they say about 6D, they can apply the same to all the new release DSLR, mirrorless cam, nothing new, everything is as expected, for example "Brand new sensor and latest engine" -> wtf is that, of course it is obviously as say in their specs, why include in PROS, because they cannot find anything new to say about this 6D2.


----------



## snoke (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



freezehead said:


> Huh, I see they're so "political correct", and what they say about 6D, they can apply the same to all the new release DSLR, mirrorless cam, nothing new, everything is as expected, for example "Brand new sensor and latest engine" -> wtf is that, of course it is obviously as say in their specs, why include in PROS, because they cannot find anything new to say about this 6D2.



Yes this right. If you not write good about Canon, Canon stop sending cameras to review. If no new camera for review, nobody buy magazine or goto website and reviewer lose money. Because Amazon, DPR too big/important, Canon can't ignore.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> freezehead said:
> 
> 
> > Huh, I see they're so "political correct", and what they say about 6D, they can apply the same to all the new release DSLR, mirrorless cam, nothing new, everything is as expected, for example "Brand new sensor and latest engine" -> wtf is that, of course it is obviously as say in their specs, why include in PROS, because they cannot find anything new to say about this 6D2.
> ...



On the contrary. Many review websites had pure clickbait titles for years (bashing Canon) for generating profit of such website. Ironic, really, that websites bash Canon for making a profit, in order for those website to create a profit


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LonelyBoy said:


> It's possible, and even probable, that they resolved a design issue with the system and your second repair got the improved part. Think of the BMW HPFPs, that would fail every few months for years until they resolved it, then replacements and new cars were fine. They do make rolling changes to lenses (and probably bodies and flashes) - my 24-105L has new-style, low-profile switches instead of the big chunky ones on the older examples. No idea if it's solved the harness/ reliability issue, but they do make changes over the years under the same lens name.



Well, whatever was that, I'm now a happy owner of 70-200/2.8 II and a new owner of that 70-200/4 IS has also been happy so far. Win-win I'd say


----------



## ecka (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Funny, because it seems like he doesn't know what he is talking about and pretends like he does. Sad, because maybe he does know that it is BS and he still has to say things like - the new sensor has one of the best DR they've seen ... the DR on this is astonishing ... 40 000 ISO is beautiful ... it has 4K, but only in time-laps mode ... the astonishing 1080p is absolutely astonishing up to the amazing 60fps ... 4K would make it larger and the price wouldn't be this low ...
Really? $2K is a low price? Seriously? 1080p astonishment? When FullHD was the thing, most of Canon advertisements were 480p/720p, so now they've stepped up? ) Where are they getting their consumer demand statistics? How does MagicLantern improve the capabilities of EOS cameras without adding any extra weight?



> Did you take the same shot with both sliders?


What both sliders?


----------



## Yasko (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I am considering buying the 6D mk II...
The news about DR made me think a little more. But it's always the same... everything about a new Canon DSLR is usually "old" or "bad"... the 6D mk II will be a great camera.

The only real issues are that EVF would have been great. May be I will wait for another EVF FF camera from Canon to come. But that one will also have its "issues", so what...

At least I am sure I won't buy it for 2100 € here in Europe. I will wait until the price has gone down a bit and may be a special discount + promotion somewhere in 2018 or so.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> Funny, because it seems like he doesn't know what he is talking about and pretends like he does. Sad, because maybe he does know that it is BS and he still has to say things like - the new sensor has one of the best DR they've seen ... the DR on this is astonishing ... 40 000 ISO is beautiful ... it has 4K, but only in time-laps mode ... the astonishing 1080p is absolutely astonishing up to the amazing 60fps ... 4K would make it larger and the price wouldn't be this low ...
> Really? $2K is a low price? Seriously? 1080p astonishment? When FullHD was the thing, most of Canon advertisements were 480p/720p, so now they've stepped up? ) Where are they getting their consumer demand statistics? How does MagicLantern improve the capabilities of EOS cameras without adding any extra weight?



I see you've avoided the point again. The one where you are calling him sad for making a buying decision based on his needs. 



ecka said:


> What both sliders?



Ha ! Ha! I saw that and corrected it - should have said 'both cameras' (typo and auto-correct).


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Yasko said:


> I am considering buying the 6D mk II...
> The news about DR made me think a little more. But it's always the same... everything about a new Canon DSLR is usually "old" or "bad"... the 6D mk II will be a great camera.
> 
> The only real issues are that EVF would have been great. May be I will wait for another EVF FF camera from Canon to come. But that one will also have its "issues", so what...
> ...



If you want FF EVF then Sony is probably your best bet at the moment.

As for the Canon tech' being 'old' or 'bad' I would say ignore that part of it - Canon does plenty of innovating but it is not at the spec sheet end that has people going 'wow!' They concentrate on developments that enhance the usability of the camera (Dual pixel AF a recent case in point).
Sony only really survived because it took a massive gamble in creating a video-centric stills camera and they have taken a hit on usability.
So you pick your compromise and take great photos with either.


----------



## ecka (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Funny, because it seems like he doesn't know what he is talking about and pretends like he does. Sad, because maybe he does know that it is BS and he still has to say things like - the new sensor has one of the best DR they've seen ... the DR on this is astonishing ... 40 000 ISO is beautiful ... it has 4K, but only in time-laps mode ... the astonishing 1080p is absolutely astonishing up to the amazing 60fps ... 4K would make it larger and the price wouldn't be this low ...
> ...



I'm not avoiding any points. I just think that those things he said are from a different reality , the parallel Canon reality. He probably owns a pair of each Canon DSLR, so that part about switching from 5D4 to 6D2 for something is not really a lie. He basically wanted to amplify the "astonishment" with his own "sacrifice" .

I've had the 5D2 before 6D and I know how it behaves in similar lighting conditions. The low ISO noise wasn't that "in your face" straightaway out of the shadows. I needed to push the brightness up for that. Maybe it's the early RAW support problem, I hope. But I've noticed that DPR removed some of the worst DR samples from their gallery, I can't find them anymore. So, we'll see ... I still have those downloaded.


----------



## Meatcurry (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I just heard from my mums friends husbands brother that Canon are prepping a 6DS, that's a 6D2 with the 30mp sensor!!

Thats actually not a bad idea!! Are you listening Mr Maeda??


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Yasko said:


> I am considering buying the 6D mk II...
> The news about DR made me think a little more. But it's always the same... everything about a new Canon DSLR is usually "old" or "bad"... the 6D mk II will be a great camera.
> 
> The only real issues are that EVF would have been great. May be I will wait for another EVF FF camera from Canon to come. But that one will also have its "issues", so what...
> ...



What camera (or anything else) doesn't have "issues" if you define "issues" as "imperfections"? I haven't found the perfect product anywhere...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> freezehead said:
> 
> 
> > Huh, I see they're so "political correct", and what they say about 6D, they can apply the same to all the new release DSLR, mirrorless cam, nothing new, everything is as expected, for example "Brand new sensor and latest engine" -> wtf is that, of course it is obviously as say in their specs, why include in PROS, because they cannot find anything new to say about this 6D2.
> ...



Yeah, that must be it. All reviewers know the 6DII is a really crappy camera because its DR is no better than the 6D. They're forced to lie because they need to curry favor from Canon. Only the unbiased, Amazon-backed DPR is brave enough to tell the truth. 

It couldn't possibly be the case that the 6DII is a very good camera that will meet the needs of many photographers. It's unfathomable that low ISO DR might not be the most critical feature of a camera, might not even rise to the level of significance that merits discussion in a typical review. 

It's so sad that all those photographers — and there will be a LOT of them — are being tricked by evil Canon and their coerced cadre of duplicitous reviewers, despite the noble efforts of the fearlessly forthright DPR. 

At least a very few, special people like you know the truth. Hopefully, your insightful forum posts and staunch refusal to buy the crappy 6DII will shake Canon's glass tower from its foundations all the way up to the pinnacle of its boardrooms.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Meatcurry said:


> I just heard from my mums friends husbands brother that Canon are prepping a 6DS, that's a 6D2 with the 30mp sensor!!
> 
> Thats actually not a bad idea!! Are you listening Mr Maeda??



A laudable rumor! Certainly it will have 4K...


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 25, 2017)

*Astro as a special case*

I'm still interested in finding out what the dark current noise is like. The original 6D is particularly nice for astro (significantly better than the 5D-III, as the 6D has much lower dark-current-noise.) 

When shooting astro my images are typically processed to move 20+ stops of dynamic range into a 16bit, 10bit or 8bit file for print or display. For the special case of stacking of long-exposure astro, read noise at low ISO is not the be-all-and-end-all in achieving good dynamic range as dark current could end up being the predominant source of captured noise.

Here is a mediocre example of the Orion Nebula:



Orion (Reprocessed) by Omesh Singh, on Flickr


----------



## stevelee (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Yasko said:


> everything about a new Canon DSLR is usually "old" or "bad"



It's the same failure to innovate every time. They keep using the same kind of light waves that people have used since the days of the camera obscura. That introduces the challenges brought on by the laws of optics and such.


----------



## hbr (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

For those wanting to switch to the Nikon D750:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/5252259585/nikon-expands-d750-shutter-recall-yet-again-more-cameras-affected
If you look at the comments section the comments sound about the same as those on this forum, but slamming Nikon.


----------



## amorse (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



hbr said:


> For those wanting to switch to the Nikon D750:
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/5252259585/nikon-expands-d750-shutter-recall-yet-again-more-cameras-affected
> If you look at the comments section the comments sound about the same as those on this forum, but slamming Nikon.



The grass is always greener I guess. I like what Nikon has been offering in terms of sensor tech, but they have just had so much bad news of late and I really trust my Canon gear not to die on me when I need it. I'm disappointed in the 6D II's DR as well, but I would be afraid to move to Nikon with the number of problems they've had, whether it is through recalls, product cancellations, or restructuring.

Maybe the D850 will improve on some of those issues - http://www.canonrumors.com/off-brand-nikon-announces-development-of-d850/


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



amorse said:


> Maybe the D850 will improve on some of those issues - http://www.canonrumors.com/off-brand-nikon-announces-development-of-d850/



Just curious to see how good a sensor Sony will license to Nikon this time. 

I just read the D5 (and D500) were also Sony sensors after apparently some lengthy deliberation -- some folks were convinced both were Nikon home-brewed sensors.

So unless you count products that have already been one-upped by replacements (D4s is still sold new at B&H) or prestige-y bougie style pieces (Nikon Df), _all of Nikon's current FF products have Sony guts.
_
- A


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> amorse said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe the D850 will improve on some of those issues - http://www.canonrumors.com/off-brand-nikon-announces-development-of-d850/
> ...



I think it was D800 where Nikon used Sony sensors - or more exactly Sony sensors made to Nikon specifications - and they got better results than Sony cameras using Sony sensors. So I can see why people may not have been sure about the sensor's provenance but it will certainly be interesting this time round as well.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jayt567 said:


> This may be a really foolish question to some but what is the difference between 4K time lapse and regular 4k? Why would it do one but not the other? Just curious, as you may have guessed I'm not a video specialist....Thanks in advance!



Timelapse means you capture for example single frame every five seconds and then merge all those still photographs into a video file after capture. No problem with buffering, write speeds etc. While 4K video means you need to capture 24/25/30 or even 60 frames per SINGLE second, so the throughput necessary for 4K video is tremendously more demanding. Not to mention cooling, because such load will inevitably produce significant heat either from the sensor or even from imaging processor as well.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jayt567 said:


> This may be a really foolish question to some but what is the difference between 4K time lapse and regular 4k? Why would it do one but not the other? Just curious, as you may have guessed I'm not a video specialist....Thanks in advance!



I'll rough out an answer that I'm sure the more technical folks will correct:

4K time lapse is video assembled from a ton of stills, usually over a very long period of time (hours). Think one frame captured every 30 seconds for 4 hours. It can be subsequently turned into a 4K video, but that's done in post after you've assembled all the stills. The end output is not a realtime TV-like framerate 4K video recording. Time lapse is done give a sweeping sense of time and the sun/moon rises and falls, and clouds race by, etc. As it is just a collection of periodically taken stills, generating a 4K timelapse is a trivial load on a camera to perform -- it's just a lot of stills.

4K video is recording 24/30/whatever fps of 4K resolution frames like you would think of when recording a video (say on your phone). It's staggeringly more demanding on the camera, which needs to (as I understand it) record/parse/process effectively in real time.

The first one is easy to do. The second one is not. The second one is what everyone complains about when they say "Why is there no 4K on this camera?"

- A


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> The first one is easy to do. The second one is not. The second one is what everyone complains about when they say "Why is there no 4K on this camera?"
> 
> - A



Complain without understanding the problematics about throughput, encoding, capacity issues, heat dissipation etc.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > The first one is easy to do. The second one is not. The second one is what everyone complains about when they say "Why is there no 4K on this camera?"
> ...



My iPhone shoots 4K.


----------



## CanonGuy (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > The first one is easy to do. The second one is not. The second one is what everyone complains about when they say "Why is there no 4K on this camera?"
> ...



The problem is, only (in the most part) Canon omits 4k citing those issues. The other manufacturers seem to manage those issues and include 4k in their gears. 

Maybe canon shiuld fire their worthless engineers and hire some capable ones who wouldn't cite those issues and get the work done?


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Manage those issues? Well, that depends on perspective. You can find many complaint about 4K in ILC, if you google it. 

Even such popular 4K MILC such as GH4 or GH5 is definitely not without issues. Or does Sony finally managed to resolve overheating in prolonged recording? Internal electronics, batteries and storage cards are being hammered with heap of data, resulting in increased thermal dissipation and overall wear. Fujifilm has their own share of troubles with 4K in conjuction with X-Trans sensors as well. Now, don't get me wrong, Canon could definitely put 4K inside 6D II. But would you rather have quirky 4K with issues or reliable camera without 4K? There is no right or wrong, there is only less or more wrong I guess, at least according to vast interwebs


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> Or does Sony finally managed to resolve overheating in prolonged recording?



Actually apparently yes, as the A9 seems to be doing just fine in that regard.


----------



## jmoya (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.



Well, no-one has explained to me how the 'crap' dynamic range of the FF 6D2 printed at A2 compares to the supposed superior dynamic range of the SL2 blown up to A2. Then dial back and how the two compare at successively smaller sized.

If you display on facebook you wil not notice the difference.
if you only present on websites like canonrumors you are highly unlikely to see the difference. 
If you print at A3 you may see the difference.


----------



## BillB (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.



Two advantages of full frame are better high ISO performance and better quality in large prints. 6DII has better AF than the SL2 as well, and some other nice features. The 80D would be another choice. Your money, your call.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > Or does Sony finally managed to resolve overheating in prolonged recording?
> ...



Good for them. But that's a flagship camera, that would be outright outrageous if it has issues (apart from banding under fluorescent light with electronic shutter, but that's a global problem with all electronic shutters until global shutters emerge). You are not trying to compare A9 with 6D II, aren't you? 

But if you google "Sony AND 4K AND overheating" you can read until end of days...


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.



If you stay at ISO 100, than in terms of DR you are correct. As soon as you raise ISO over 400 or print larger prints that "crap" 6D II will trample poor SL2 to the smithereens 

That "crap" DR only applies at base ISO value. And if you expose properly and/or use exposure blending, you can avoid that altogether. Make no mistake - 6D II has good dynamic range, it's just not as good as its peers and many people (myself included) are disappointed that Canon didn't improve 6D II in that regard (such as 5D IV was improved or 80D). But that doesn't make it inherently bad camera with crap DR.


----------



## CanonGuy (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> jmoya said:
> 
> 
> > So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.
> ...



If I have to guess, I think 80% of all the pictures are taken bellow 400 ISO. Just saying.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> If I have to guess, I think 80% of all the pictures are taken bellow 400 ISO. Just saying.



What pictures? You mean ALL pictures in the world? Now, that's some wild guesstimating 

Maybe 80% of your pictures and that's allright, everyone has different needs and shoots in different conditions. But assuming that 80% of all images taken in gerenal are below 400 is a very far stretch...

EDIT: I've just quickly reviews my Lightroom calatogue and filtered ISO speeds from around 5K of my latest photos. About third is on ISO 100-200, some on 400 and good half of my pictures are 1600-3200 ISO. Just for illustration that your 80% is definitely not everybody's 80%


----------



## jmoya (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> jmoya said:
> 
> 
> > So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.
> ...



Thanks for the response. I intended to use the canon 6d mark II as my vlogging and cinematic sequences on my vlogging channel. That was the idea. But with only 1080 at 60...my canon g7x does that. But then I kept seeing all the posts saying this is not a video camera and was meant for stills. Then I thought... awesome, so atleast the DR and still will be awesome with some video features. Then I saw the DR reports...Crap...I guess it's not going to be an awesome stills camera like the previous 6d. Back to square one on using my 5d III which has a lot of noise and banding when The shadows are pulled. But I have all this L glass... I have the money to get the 1dx II but the size and weight I don't want for all the travelling and hikes I do. SMH


----------



## Famateur (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.



Sure:

1.) Low light performance
2.) Depth of field
3.) 45 Point AF system
4.) GPS
5.) 6.5 FPS
6.) Anti-Flicker
7.) 26MP
8.) 98% Viewfinder Coverage
9.) Battery Life (nearly triple)
10.) AFMA (not sure if SL2 has it, but I doubt it)

Base ISO dynamic range isn't everything. For those who need it above all else, there are other systems available. For most shooters, it's just one part of a much, much bigger picture. Personally, the ratio of times I wish I had better low-light performance to the times I wish I could push shadows in a scene with high dynamic range (beyond what the 6DII can do anyway) is probably 1000:1. 

I know I'm not everyone, but sometimes it's easy to get caught up in specs and comparison charts and forget that the thing we're pining for affects maybe 1-2% of our shooting. Obviously, if it affects more than about 20% of your shooting, you'll be looking elsewhere than the 6DII...


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > jmoya said:
> ...



If you are into vlogging, a vast majority of youtube footage is still 1080 or less. And that includes nearly all video of people complaining Canon does not do 4k!


----------



## BillB (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



So far as I know, no one has ever introduced a full frame camera with 4K video for less than $3000, or $1000 more than the 6DII . The Sony that needs an external recorder for 4K video does not count.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> Thanks for the response. I intended to use the canon 6d mark II as my vlogging and cinematic sequences on my vlogging channel. That was the idea. But with only 1080 at 60...my canon g7x does that. But then I kept seeing all the posts saying this is not a video camera and was meant for stills. Then I thought... awesome, so atleast the DR and still will be awesome with some video features. Then I saw the DR reports...Crap...*I guess it's not going to be an awesome stills camera like the previous 6d.* Back to square one on using my 5d III which has a lot of noise and banding when The shadows are pulled. But I have all this L glass... I have the money to get the 1dx II but the size and weight I don't want for all the travelling and hikes I do. SMH



But 6D II is not WORSE  It has improved many things from original 6D, but DR was unfortunately not one of those things. But it will take at least same quality of images as 6D. So why would it not be awesome stills camera?


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > Khalai said:
> ...



I'm not comparing it to anything, you asked if they figured the video overheating out and I'm pointing out that their only new offering on that mount says yes.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Famateur said:


> Sure:
> 
> 1.) Low light performance
> 2.) Depth of field
> ...



+1 of course. On another thread, I've likened _DR Storm 2017_ to (say) Honda putting out a new model of a car that is now brimming with new tech but it lost a little punch in first gear compared to its predecessor. To indict the entire product for one very small aspect of its overall performance implies that's high contrast base ISO work is all you shoot. And if that's the case, go adapt your EF glass on to an A7 on a tripod and be done with it. I don't say that to be callous; you have options!

Eventually Canon will care enough about base ISO DR in this price/market point to deliver the product you want, but for whatever reason -- likely Canon's own market research -- says that you won't jump ship over this in enough numbers for the 6D2 to not be profitable.

Also, just reading the posts at other sites re: the wish list for the D850 has been enlightening. It includes a host of D810 owners who currently are packing a 14+ EV rig -- nearly medium format DR territory -- *and they still want more DR*. I get that it matters for some forms of photography, but some folks' nearly endless appetite for it is mind-boggling.

- A


----------



## scyrene (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> jayt567 said:
> 
> 
> > This may be a really foolish question to some but what is the difference between 4K time lapse and regular 4k? Why would it do one but not the other? Just curious, as you may have guessed I'm not a video specialist....Thanks in advance!
> ...



Although to be clear in this case, the camera assembles the timelapse and outputs as a regular movie file. It's a neat feature, although more limited than doing it manually with an external intervalometer and specialised software.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



CanonGuy said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > jmoya said:
> ...



You mean in general? So what? Most of the photos ever taken were taken with phone cams, and they have far worse DR than any Canon DSLR. This info is of next to no use in helping someone decide whether a given camera is good value for *them*.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> But 6D II is not WORSE  It has improved many things from original 6D, but DR was unfortunately not one of those things. But it will take at least same quality of images as 6D. So why would it not be awesome stills camera?



Keep in mind that some folks here argue that the 6D1 roundly / categorically / absolutely bested the 5D3 sensor with plots like I've shown below. : Never mind the fact that the 5D3 absolutely ate the 6D1 for lunch in almost every other metric / spec / usage consideration -- to those folks, the 6D1 was simply a better camera because the 'film' inside of it was of higher quality.

My point: for some, improvement or 'bestness' is an absolute (not relative) term. It's the best Canon sells or it's not, it improved base ISO DR or it didn't, and so on. I generally don't see the world that way, but people are free to believe what they want.

- A


----------



## x-vision (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Famateur said:


> Base ISO dynamic range isn't everything.



It sure isn't. 

However, the reason to get a FF camera in the first place is for the *superior* image quality.
That's why FF cameras command a premium. 

Think about the following for a second:
Would you buy an expensive FF camera with worse ISO/noise performance than cheaper crop cameras?
If you won't, then you understand how I feel about buying an expensive FF camera with worse dynamic range than my crop camera.

Without _unconditionally_ superior image quality, the FF premium is not worth it for me.

Lots of the 6DII users won't do post-processing ... ever. 
And many others will mostly use the 6DII at ISOs 400 and above.
For all of these users, the 6DII dynamic range at base ISO is totally irrelevant - and they will get their money's worth.

But I do shadow lifting on practically every photo taken in daylight.
So, dynamic range (DR) at base ISO matters to me a lot. 

Thus, I surely won't be paying the FF premium for inferior image quality than my 80D.
Inferior at base ISO, mind you; the 6DII will surely trash my 80D at ISOs 400 and higher. 

YMMV


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



x-vision said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > Base ISO dynamic range isn't everything.
> ...



Yeah buddy, it definitely has better IQ than the 80d. That one stop DR advantage is the only advantage the 80 will have,at any other metric it'll be handily bested. If you're in doubt pls compare the original 6d to the 80d.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

silly question time....

Since the 6D2 has more megapixels that the 6D, wouldn't resampling the 6D2 image down to the size of the 6D image result in the DR of the 6D2 image being raised up?


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Yep.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Nope.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.


----------



## x-vision (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> Yeah buddy, it definitely has better IQ than the 80d. That one stop DR advantage is the only advantage the 80 will have,at any other metric it'll be handily bested. If you're in doubt pls compare the original 6d to the 80d.



Sorry, pal, you either didn't read my post - or you didn't comprehend it.

Let me summarize/simplify it for you:
All that I said was that I'm not paying the FF premium unless image quality is better in every metric.
But since the 6DII is not better at every metric than the 80D, I'm not paying the FF premium.
I never said that the 80D has better image quality.

Was that simple/short enough for you?


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.



makes sense to me......

When I hit a static scene where I know I am going to be clipping, I turn on exposure bracketing ( 2 or 3 stops), shift exposure to where I am clipping on both ends, let er rip for the three pictures, and merge them in lightroom.... (Left image is the centre exposure of the three images, right image is the assembled lightroom image)


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



x-vision said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah buddy, it definitely has better IQ than the 80d. That one stop DR advantage is the only advantage the 80 will have,at any other metric it'll be handily bested. If you're in doubt pls compare the original 6d to the 80d.
> ...



Sure mate, except for the part where you didn't say that in your original post and definitely said you wouldn't be buying the 6d2 since it has worst image quality than your 80d...that aside it's simple enough.




> However, the reason to get a FF camera in the first place is for the *superior image quality*.
> That's why FF cameras command a premium.





> Thus, I surely won't be paying the FF premium for *inferior image quality* than my 80D.



Unless DR at ISO100 is the end all be all of image quality you're at odds with your own statements. If it is you should probably sell your 80d and buy a d7200.


----------



## ecka (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

*"dynamic range isn't everything"*
Not feeling pain isn't everything, so have some, buy a 6D2


----------



## x-vision (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> Sure mate, except for the part where you didn't say that in your original post and definitely said you wouldn't be buying the 6d2 since it has worst image quality than your 80d...that aside it's simple enough.



Look, fella, here is what I said as well:


Without _unconditionally_ superior image quality, the FF premium is not worth it for me.

The 6DII doesn't have _unconditionally_ superior image quality vs the 80D, since the 6DII dynamic range at ISOs 100-200 is worse than that of the 80D.
Therefore, I will not be paying the FF premium to get the 6DII.

My post ended with 'YMMV', which is usually interpreted as "people may have a different opinion or experience to yours". 
That is, if the FF premium for the 6DII is not worth it for me, it doesn't mean that it's not worth it for other people. 
In fact, just the opposite - I fully realize that other people may differ.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



x-vision said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > Sure mate, except for the part where you didn't say that in your original post and definitely said you wouldn't be buying the 6d2 since it has worst image quality than your 80d...that aside it's simple enough.
> ...



Listen, bloke, your argument only makes sense if the +/- 1 stop dynamic range the 80d might have over the 6d2 is enough to bring it's image quality above that of the 6d2. 

I'm not buying the 6d2 because I find it disappointing on the whole, but if I had to choose btw the two and image quality was my concern, the 6d2 will handily beat the pants of the 80d.

Or to make it short and simple for you: there's more to IQ than DR.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.



I agree with that....sort of . As I understand it the DR discussion is about the level of shadow detail and at the moment I am not sure if this is defined as whether a sensor can pick up the signal at all, or if it is about signal above noise.
If you preserve the highlights, then shadow recovery depends on the artefacts you see when you do so. Some look to a higher DR sensor to recover the shadow (no downsampling needed) but you can also do it by downsampling which mean you can 'uncover' an until-then hidden signal by effectively lowering the noise floor (which I believe this is what the astrophotographers do). 

[this is gleaned from bits-and-pieces read over the years so may be incorrect].


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



x-vision said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > Sure mate, except for the part where you didn't say that in your original post and definitely said you wouldn't be buying the 6d2 since it has worst image quality than your 80d...that aside it's simple enough.
> ...


I rather doubt that you are going to find a camera with unconditionally better IQ..... there is a lot that goes into image quality, and you will find that glass and AF system are far more important than sensor....


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > freezehead said:
> ...



Clickbait is everywhere. Ads here. Titles there. But for some serious photography website (almost no clickbait ads), Canon stop sending review camera when start be critical of Canon.


----------



## BillB (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.
> ...



This issue seems to be at least partly a product of DPR's terminology and magic numbers used to describe how well the files produced by various cameras will respond to shadow lifting, which is a post processing technique, as is file downsizing. There are 5EV shadow lifts and there is screen DR and print DR, all of which generate images and magic numbers of dubious significance, which are very useful in generating all sorts of Internet craziness while attracting attention to DPR. 

To me, it ultimately comes down to print quality, which does depend on post processing as well as what comes out of the camera.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.
> ...



This is the point, and the one that is misunderstood regarding "DR". It would seem that many people think that a higher "DR" camera such as the 810D can capture more EV range including highlights, which of course it can't. It's capturing pretty much the same EV range, it's just a question of when the shadow detail becomes a noisy mess, ultimately losing all tonality and definition. We don't discuss highlight in the same way because "highlight headroom" ( the ability to describe differing very light, almost white tones just before blowing out) is more subtle and much less noticeable than the other end of the scale. 

Downsampling reduces noise, moving the lower acceptable point lower down, so we have greater "DR". But the "DR" at capture hasn't changed. You are right in that it is the way that dynamic range is defined; it's rather ambiguous.

So many things happen to an image when we downsample, this increase in "DR" is just one of them.

As a practical photographer I prefer to think in terms of EV range, and then the EV latitude for processing. The EV range for all these cameras, format for format is pretty much the same, it's the EV latitude in processing that differs, and it looks like the 6DII has the same latitude as the 5DII, III, 6D etc. For the vast majority of people that won't make any difference to their images at all. Just don't under expose !


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> +1 of course. On another thread, I've likened _DR Storm 2017_ to (say) Honda putting out a new model of a car that is now brimming with new tech but it lost a little punch in first gear compared to its predecessor.



No, new Honda have less MPG than old Honda. MPG is something almost nobody care about but for small number it important. Nobody who buy Ferrari care about MPG


----------



## tomscott (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I have to say im going to eat my words here. After looking at early RAW files I thought it looked promising.

BUT...

dpreview have launched a gallery of images which you can download the RAW and JPGs.

You can find the images here: 
https://www.dpreview.com/samples/5865039367/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-sample-photos

This image caught my eye on the home page, as im a wedding/event photographer.







Download link here
http://download.dpreview.com/canon_eos6dmkii/IMG_0528.CR2

Although this image is not typically how I would shoot a pre-wedding (I assume this image is, could just be a snapshot). If I was shooting into sunset like this I would be using some sort of illumination be that flash or a large reflector.

Sometimes you dont have the time or the means if you are on holiday etc which is what this camera is aimed at - the enthusiast.

Obviously hugely underexposed, protecting the highlights. I know from experience that highlight retention is pretty good in canon files and less so with the shadows so probably would have shot this the opposite way round protecting the shadows, as these are the subjects. 

I would have shot with an extra stop or stop and a half giving much more room to play with. It would seem it was a photographers decision to shoot this underexposed with -1.33 stops dialed in, which makes me think this was on purpose or they dont shoot Canon cameras regularly. But is a really easy mistake to make and one anyone could.

Anyway... Its a great test for anyone looking to shoot these type of images especially at base ISO. 

Lift the shadows and up the exposure as preference and there is very little latitude here. It took me a good 10-15 mins to get the the point they have in the processed image above. Creating a good balance between exposure and acceptable noise.

An easy way to remove this issue is to crush the deep shadow which is what they seem to have done in the preview but with a bit of tinkering you can get there.

Colour noise with purple muddy shadows are also prominent very quickly and so is the pattern noise. 

I found myself using an old profile I would use with my 5DMKIII to remove the noise and colour issues. Pretty aggressive 30 on the luminescence noise slider, 50 on the colour slider and 90 on the smoothness slider. Looks acceptable, using this sort of aggression on an ISO 100 files makes it quite soft.

I ended up with an acceptable image but it took a lot of work to get there. It can be done just like the 5DMKIII but you end up spending more time processing. 

So I would say the early negative comments are valid. The 5DMKIV would give you more room.

What I will say...

Expose properly or use lighting etc and the files are excellent just like the 5DMKIII. Its that 1-5% of images that you may need the help and is the difference between a keeper and a binner.

It is disappointing that its very similar to a 5 year old camera, even if it is still excellent.

You just have to ask yourself would I ever shoot like this. I only really had issue with my 5DMKIII while traveling because I didnt have access to my lighting gear because it would have been too heavy.

At the end of the day even with this image pulled it still doesn't look great because you cant create light where it didnt exist in the first place. You cant bend the laws of physics. You have to introduce light to balance exposure.

I would say - skills like lighting are much more important than worrying about 1-2 stops of DR. I also understand why people are upset. The 5DMKIV would have produced a usable image here, although it still wouldn't be an ideal situation IMO.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> Clickbait is everywhere. Ads here. Titles there. But for some serious photography website (almost no clickbait ads), Canon stop sending review camera when start be critical of Canon.



Bollocks. That would create s**tstorm on the web, word would get spread quickly and Canon would receive pretty hefty backfire for that.

Look at Intel for example. Even the reviewers, who are openly critical against Intel still receive early samples and engineering samples? Why? Good advertising for both parties, simple as that.



tomscott said:


> I have to say im going to eat my words here. After looking at early RAW files I thought it looked promising.
> 
> BUT...
> 
> ...



Honestly, that'd downright badly exposed picture to begin with. DR latitude should not replace poor exposure metering and lack of proper lightning. Such backlit shot would be unusable with any camera out there...


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> I've had the 5D2 before 6D and I know how it behaves in similar lighting conditions. The low ISO noise wasn't that "in your face" straightaway out of the shadows. I needed to push the brightness up for that. Maybe it's the early RAW support problem, I hope. But I've noticed that DPR removed some of the worst DR samples from their gallery, I can't find them anymore. So, we'll see ... I still have those downloaded.



I would just be cautious of drawing too many negative conclusions from the various downloadable RAW samples at low ISO floating about: I have yet to find one which I would consider to be exposed optimally for a Canon of this type in raw. In other words there is more highlight room available than the photographer has used. This makes a huge difference to these "off chip ADC" Canons as I am sure you are aware. 

I'm pretty sure the 6DII is not worse than the 5DII.



tomscott said:


> I have to say im going to eat my words here. After looking at early RAW files I thought it looked promising.
> 
> BUT...



Same comments as above Tom; I'd like to see some optimally exposed 6DII shots in high contrast situations. Looking at the few blown highlights around the sun in that wedding shot I think that may be an impossible exposure. 



Khalai said:


> Honestly, that'd downright badly exposed picture to begin with. DR latitude should not replace poor exposure metering and lack of proper lightning. Such backlit shot would be unusable with any camera out there...



Agreed, or at least the exposure compromise has been too much towards the impossible highlights.


----------



## tomscott (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

It is interesting to see what you can do and completely agree would be a binner and it is funny they would post an image like that to show how bad the camera is 

On the same merit I was hoping like the 7DMKII 5DSR 5DMKIV and 80d the old purple shadow cast and colour noise would be a thing of the past but its not.

We are 20 odd pages in and everyone's arguing but nobody has posted an image.

Plenty out there have a go 

Quite a few good high contrast images in the DP image slideshow IMG_0741.CR2 is worth a look.

Like I said the files look very familiar almost feel exactly like the 5DMKIII.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Depends what you want your muck ups to look like, but make no mistake this file is not exposed optimally, a -1.33 EC was dialed in yet there is at least one stop of head room unused!

Here is my two minute play in LR, mind you I prefer a 'natural' look over the radioactive HDR style Dan is trying to portray as optimal.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



hbr said:


> For those wanting to switch to the Nikon D750:
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/5252259585/nikon-expands-d750-shutter-recall-yet-again-more-cameras-affected
> If you look at the comments section the comments sound about the same as those on this forum, but slamming Nikon.



The Nikon D600 had a shutter problem as well (sensor oil splatter), and the D4 & D800 had a lockup problem.


----------



## Luds34 (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.
> ...



Very well put. This is my understanding as well.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> Depends what you want your muck ups to look like, but make no mistake this file is not exposed optimally, a -1.33 EC was dialed in yet there is at least one stop of head room unused!
> 
> Here is my two minute play in LR, mind you I prefer a 'natural' look over the radioactive HDR style Dan is trying to portray as optimal.



Private, I just had a sense of deja vu ! 

However this time they allowed downloading of the raw mis-exposure. I presume the flash failed here ? Also the horizon is well off but the image is already so tight around the dog's feet it can't be levelled. 

This is a very similar situation to the infamous 5Ds image; underexposed in very low light. Under normal conditions I am sure that the RGB values of 25 - 28 around the girl's neck would easily lift without showing undue noise. However in this case it has made even the bride's face and neck look bad.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Here is a Before/After, to me the IQ is looking pretty sterling. But then I am results driven not click driven....


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Depends what you want your muck ups to look like, but make no mistake this file is not exposed optimally, a -1.33 EC was dialed in yet there is at least one stop of head room unused!
> ...



Yep! 

Mind you, one thing I have learnt is never say "can't", you just need to look at the problem a different way.......

1.1 degree clockwise horizon correction to include dogs 'feet'.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> Here is a Before/After, to me the IQ is looking pretty sterling. But then I am results driven not click driven....



I agree that's responded to noise reduction pretty well, but I still think that underexposing in an already dark situation is very misleading as far as the camera's capabilities are concerned. 

Shot with the same exposure a D810 is still going to have poor tonality in the guy's blue suit. It's just a bad exposure, full stop.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Clever sod, mine's 1.2 

;D


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> Here is a Before/After, to me the IQ is looking pretty sterling. But then I am results driven not click driven....



What you do to this?

Edge of stone to water and water and the dog...

Yes, you clean up some noise but push down here, pop up there.. will download and try.


----------



## ecka (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



tomscott said:


> It is interesting to see what you can do and completely agree would be a binner and it is funny they would post an image like that to show how bad the camera is
> 
> On the same merit I was hoping like the 7DMKII 5DSR 5DMKIV and 80d the old purple shadow cast and colour noise would be a thing of the past but its not.
> 
> ...



Let me remind you that DPR may not like us to repost their sample images without prior permission.

Did you try the IMG_0087 ?


----------



## Khalai (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> Let me remind you that DPR may not like us to repost their sample images without prior permission.



Shhh! Don't tell them then


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a Before/After, to me the IQ is looking pretty sterling. But then I am results driven not click driven....
> ...



I just applied an adjustment brush to the darks. Global was WB and NR, nothing else.


----------



## ecka (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Let me remind you that DPR may not like us to repost their sample images without prior permission.
> ...



OK, I won't.


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



I see why you need NR. Suit becomes bad. Don't notice noise so much on SRGB screen but AdobeRGB screen yes.

-100 Highlights, +50 shadow, noise gone. but too dark?


----------



## ecka (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Same here. ISO 100 image with a ton of noise reduction  similar to what I usually do to ISO 6400+ images


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



DPReview have a consistent history of posting deliberately badly exposed Canon images then holding them up and saying _"look how bad it is"_. It is bullish!t, they are liars and cheats and are doing a severe disservice to people who don't realize what DPReview are doing.

On the specific issue of use, I'd argue the reposts fall clearly under the education exclusion in the copyright law. Even if they objected, which they wouldn't because any click is a good click, they'd have difficulty proving infringement on 'samples' they post for download and comparison purposes.


----------



## tomscott (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Khalai said:
> ...



What is the benefit tho? Just stupid.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > snoke said:
> ...



No just a 1.77 exposure reduction to the brush. This is a very easy file to get a usable and natural looking result from.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



tomscott said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



Clicks.

That is money, Amazon own DPReview they want clicks and sales, doesn't matter what brand, just click and buy.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > snoke said:
> ...



22 isn't a ton of NR. The image is easy to work with even though DPReview deliberately messed it up.

To be sure, this image has a -1.33 EC, the heavy lifting is a +1.7 exposure lift to the darker areas. If they had put the camera in Highlight Tone Priority and left the EC alone this image would be perfect out of the camera.


----------



## ecka (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Then DPR bashing Canon (a company with the biggest market share) are hurting Amazon .


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



You mess up dog shoulder with EV+1.77. Not natural.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > snoke said:
> ...



In your opinion. It is a subjective adjustment that took a few seconds, if you want to change the dogs shoulder make a small adjustment brush, none of this is difficult or time consuming.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ecka said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > tomscott said:
> ...



That doesn't matter, people will still click Amazon via DPReview, it doesn't matter if they buy the Canon or a Fuji etc it is just about sales. Garbage like this generates clicks, clicks generate sales, sales generate the income. It is no more complicated than that.


----------



## ecka (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



The thing is that no amount of Canon crap would make me buy Fuji crap. I'll just keep my old camera


----------



## ecka (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



When I'm lazy it's like this


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> In your opinion. It is a subjective adjustment that took a few seconds, if you want to change the dogs shoulder make a small adjustment brush, none of this is difficult or time consuming.



Don't like brush. Bad side effect.

Try Exposure +0.7, Highlights -100, Shadows +45, NR luminance +50.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> If you preserve the highlights, then shadow recovery depends on the artefacts you see when you do so. Some look to a higher DR sensor to recover the shadow (no downsampling needed) but you can also do it by downsampling which mean you can 'uncover' an until-then hidden signal by effectively lowering the noise floor (*which I believe this is what the astrophotographers do*).



Just to clarify, while astrophotographers do lower the noise floor, it's generally not done through downsampling, but rather through averaging multiple exposures (and subtracting averaged dark frames).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> DPReview have a consistent history of posting deliberately badly exposed Canon images then holding them up and saying _"look how bad it is"_. It is bullish!t, they are liars and cheats and are doing a severe disservice to people who don't realize what DPReview are doing.



Then again, DxO had been publishing data showing Canon sensors performing worse than their competitors for years before DPR started their 5-stop pushes. Neither seem to have affected Canon's market dominance.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Tried my dirty fast exposure blending. I processed the RAW into two separate TIFF/16bpp files, one for shadows, one for highlights and then use EasyPanel to create luminosity masks. Three layers bleding. Time to complete was under 5 minutes. It's far from ideal, but on a smaller print, it should still be "usable" enough.


----------



## x-vision (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> 22 isn't a ton of NR. The image is easy to work with even though DPReview deliberately messed it up.



And if the camera had better DR, you wouldn't have to do that.
Or, the image would have looked even better after your (skillful) post-processing.

Overall, what you've shown here is that the dynamic range deficiencies of the 6DII are not an issue for someone as skillful as you.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



x-vision said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > 22 isn't a ton of NR. The image is easy to work with even though DPReview deliberately messed it up.
> ...



This wouldn't be an issue, if the image was exposed better to start with. Processing bad input image will only produce mediocre result at best. You have to have good input image to make a great output. And even Sony sensor would have had trouble with that exposure.

I just tried playing with sliders to find clipping points. Black clipping point is at +1,5 EV while white clipping point is at -2.33 EV. That's huge dynamic range in that scene and EVERY current camera out there would have had trouble capturing that scene. The optimal way to capture all detail in such scene is exposure bracketing and then exposure blending in post. GND filter is not an option here for obvious reasons. They shoul've capture same scene with e.g. A7r II, so we could play with both files alongside each other. My guess is that even Sony would have crumbled upon heavier edits as that scene is simply too much for any sensor currently out there...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> I just tried playing with sliders to find clipping points. Black clipping point is at +1,5 EV while white clipping point is at -2.33 EV. That's huge dynamic range in that scene and EVERY current camera out there would have had trouble capturing that scene. The optimal way to capture all detail in such scene is exposure bracketing and then exposure blending in post. GND filter is not an option here for obvious reasons. They shoul've capture same scene with e.g. A7r II, so we could play with both files alongside each other. My guess is that even Sony would have crumbled upon heavier edits as that scene is simply too much for any sensor currently out there...



But hey, sometimes that one stop of DR makes all the difference. Just like how sometimes a broken analog clock shows the correct time of day...for 2 of the 1,440 minutes.


----------



## x-vision (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> This wouldn't be an issue, if the image was exposed better to start with.



Yes ... but it wasn't. 

S**t happens, so sometime you need to fix things that weren't supposed to happen.

And this is precisely where having more DR is really useful.


----------



## SteveM (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I'd have to agree with that Neuro, every extra stop of DR makes a difference. I seem to have spent a lifetime, when shooting a client on a sunny day, either using off camera flash or mostly simply re-composing to avoid the harsh highlight. The higher the DR of a camera the less I have to do that....little by little maybe. The extra DR of the 5D MklV was one of the principal reasons I upgraded from the 5D mklll. It was that or I was closely monitoring Nikon's D750 to cover high DR situations. So, thank you Canon for the 5D MklV it saved some money and hassle.
Ultimately I could get by without 14 stops of DR, I have done for a long time with the 5D, then the mkll and then the mklll. It just makes life a little easier, expands the options a tiny bit. The 6D mkll will do a job and do it well, a little extra DR would just make life a little easier.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



x-vision said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > This wouldn't be an issue, if the image was exposed better to start with.
> ...



That still doesn't make it an honest representation of what a skilled photographer can do with a 6D2, which is how it's being interpreted. And, I believe, how it was intended to be interpreted.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LonelyBoy said:


> x-vision said:
> 
> 
> > Khalai said:
> ...



It may be an honest representation of _how DPR intended_ the image to be interpreted.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



x-vision said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > This wouldn't be an issue, if the image was exposed better to start with.
> ...



Sure, more DR is always useful. Unless, like at that scene, DR is simple too much to handle for ANY camera. You would either need fill-in flash, reflector or expose for the skin tones. That photo is simply botched up and no camera could have saved it in the first place...


----------



## Khalai (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



SteveM said:


> I'd have to agree with that Neuro, every extra stop of DR makes a difference. I seem to have spent a lifetime, when shooting a client on a sunny day, either using off camera flash or mostly simply re-composing to avoid the harsh highlight. The higher the DR of a camera the less I have to do that....little by little maybe. The extra DR of the 5D MklV was one of the principal reasons I upgraded from the 5D mklll. It was that or I was closely monitoring Nikon's D750 to cover high DR situations. So, thank you Canon for the 5D MklV it saved some money and hassle.
> Ultimately I could get by without 14 stops of DR, I have done for a long time with the 5D, then the mkll and then the mklll. It just makes life a little easier, expands the options a tiny bit. The 6D mkll will do a job and do it well, a little extra DR would just make life a little easier.



Neuro was VERY sarcastic in that post


----------



## jmoya (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...


 I tried downloading the RAW files and was not able to open any of them in LR. How were you able to do this?


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> Sure, more DR is always useful. Unless, like at that scene, DR is simple too much to handle for ANY camera. You would either need fill-in flash, reflector or expose for the skin tones. That photo is simply botched up and no camera could have saved it in the first place...



+1. I'm a 99% of the time available light guy, _and even I_ would bring a speedlite to portraiture like that. 

No faux HDR shadow-lifted nonsense will balance the background without sucking the color/soul/feel of that moment out of the shot. It's a parlour trick for that application.

A working photographer friend of mine had a whale of time finding a wedding photographer for his own wedding. He knew the time/location of the ceremony would be a bright blowout of a scene to shoot, so he asked prospective wedding photogs he was interviewing how they'd manage the background lighting. Some actually told him to not sweat it -- 'this camera has such latitude that I can just lift the shadows and rein in the highlights. You'll look great.'

He then crossed that photographer's name off of his list and called the next one. 8)

- A


----------



## candyman (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > snoke said:
> ...




Get the latest version of LR:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/lightroom-downloads.html


----------



## x-vision (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



LonelyBoy said:


> That still doesn't make it an honest representation of what *a skilled photographer* can do with a 6D2 ...



Heh. Pretty sure that skilled photogs can deal with even worse dynamic range than what the 6DII has.

Ironically (?), it's the non-skilled photogs that benefit the most from extra DR, better ISO, etc..


----------



## Khalai (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> +1. I'm a 99% of the time available light guy, _and even I_ would bring a speedlite to portraiture like that.
> 
> No faux HDR shadow-lifted nonsense will balance the background without sucking the color/soul/feel of that moment out of the shot. It's a parlour trick for that application.
> 
> ...



I've always received weird looks, why the hell am I using my 600EX unit in broad daylight around noon. Simple demonstration with on flash and off flash make those looks vanish in an instant. Or my wife helps me with holding up 3 ft reflector for me. Or both. Or just simply expose for the skin tones...

Attached photo - fooling with my Zeiss, straight against the sun, -0.5 EV in post, +40 shadows in post. Could not care less about DR...


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

It's dead easy to make a perfectly decent camera look bad as far as noise / shadow recovery is concerned. The key is to under expose in already low light, when the light is "thin" - fewer photons flying about. Raise your image, then add plenty of saturation and vibrance. This is what I call "data abuse". There's a reason why that image has been processed to have a psychedelic, almost radio active glow, it's got nothing to do with the photographer's lack of taste or inability to post process, it's there to exaggerate the "problem".

Here's a shot from the Pentax K5II that has, according to DXO, 14.5 stops of DR. OK, it's a lot better than the off-chip ADC Canon's could do, but it still looks bad, but only because of how I have dealt with it. Given good light and sensible PP this camera can easily raise 5 stops.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> Agreed, or at least the exposure compromise has been too much towards the impossible highlights.



It is such an ugly, pointless picture, I don't know what I would expose for. The rocks?

(This was in response to the vertical section of the sunset picture. I had not seen the wedding scene it was taken from. Clearly, the original is still a bad picture, so there is no solution to the problem. At the very least, move the people and dog somewhere for better composition.)


----------



## jmoya (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I'm getting mine in tomorrow. I'll be doing a short unboxing and some file comparison at high ISO between the 5D III and new 6d mark II. Video will be up over the weekend on my youtube channel. Jorge moya. I plan on using it as my cinematic sequence camera on Malaysia and Bali vlogs in 3 weeks. Fingers crossed!!! I need dynamic range like most of you do.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



stevelee said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Agreed, or at least the exposure compromise has been too much towards the impossible highlights.
> ...



It's a perfect picture for DPR - it exaggerates a "weakness" in the 6DII 

I'd have exposed to hold most of the sky, with just a natural blow out around the sun, and then filled with on camera flash bounced into a reflector held by my assistant. Failing that a guest, or catering staff, last resort direct fill. To try and use the camera's latitude to pull off a shot like that on their big day if you were being paid for it is just naff.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> stevelee said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



Good points. I think the gravel and the concrete bother me more than the exposure problems. If you fill in the light on the subjects, then maybe they can recede into obscurity. Even without those competing elements, just having the sunset and the people on opposite ends of the picture bothers me too. Where should I look? What is this picture about? No maybe good exposure would make up a little for the composition. But decent composition would have had a better shot at taking away from the exposure problems.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



stevelee said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > stevelee said:
> ...



You are right, the composition is about on par with the exposure


----------



## riker (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Hflm said:


> riker said:
> 
> 
> > WAAAAAIT wait wait. So I'm an ex-Canon-fanboy, using Canon digital since D60 (2002 or 2003?) 5d3 now. I always respected Sony for their innovation and great cameras, but as a whole system I felt it pretty lacking and was convinced that people changing from Canon to A7 and using adapters are simply retards. Still think so.
> ...



Thanks, appreciate ur answer, at least someone with experience.

1) Pls remember that I never said the Sony system is better than Canon, I said that till now Canon was clearly better (one reason was the huge lack of Sony lenses), but have come to a point where Sony kinda making it equal and the _progress_ their lens department did the last 2-3 years is HUGE. (So at the and u seemed to be opposing me and then concluded the same.)

2A) Taking DXOmark sharpness numbers and comparing popular lenses (especially ones I use) with 5D4 and A7R2 (they are the competing models, not 5DsR which btw sucks in DR, sensitivity, nosie, etc.), I see the following:
*5D4* | *A7R2*
50/1.8 *20 | 26*
85/1.8 *21 | 40*
70-200/2.8 *26 | 38*
70-200/4 *21 | 35*
Unfortunately there are no Sony numbers yet for 16-35/2.8, 100-400 and 300/2.8 which I would love to see.
Those are big differences I believe. If you tell me you don't see real life differences between say 21 and 35 in case of the 70-200/4...well...what can I say...hard to believe but can't prove otherwise.

2B) I'm also mentioning that looking at the innovation curve and the past few years, we can easily see Sony numbers getting better, A7R3 is probably not that far away, while 5D5 is very far away, 70-200/4II is not even on the horizon, nextgen small and light 85/1.8 is nowhere, etc. (I'm sure the 85/1.4 will rock tho but that's gonna be an expensive and heavy lens.) Sony launched 50/1.4 AND 50/1.8, 85/1.4 AND 85/1.8 within 12 months!!! How awesome is that alone not mentioning all the other lenses?! (and they do perform)
(Sony will start launching super telephoto lenses and attack the sports segment long before Canon surprises us with anything big. A9 is shooting [email protected] while 1Dx2 [email protected] Just saying but this is a different topic.)

3) I forgot 

Riker


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> The optimal way to capture all detail in such scene is exposure bracketing and then exposure blending in post.



Hah! Say this like easy. Not here. Need soft reflector.



> GND filter is not an option here for obvious reasons. They shoul've capture same scene with e.g. A7r II, so we could play with both files alongside each other. My guess is that even Sony would have crumbled upon heavier edits as that scene is simply too much for any sensor currently out there...



What limit edit is noise on man clothes. Sony have cleaner shadows. Better for edit like this.


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> I tried downloading the RAW files and was not able to open any of them in LR. How were you able to do this?



Convert CR2 to DNG. Adobe DNG Converter FTW.


----------



## snoke (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



ahsanford said:


> +1. I'm a 99% of the time available light guy, _and even I_ would bring a speedlite to portraiture like that.



Ha! I want see what you can do with speedlite for photo.

You can do test shoot like this for compare?

Lake, sea, bay close to you?

You know people can be models for you? Dog optional


----------



## Khalai (Jul 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> What limit edit is noise on man clothes. Sony have cleaner shadows. Better for edit like this.



Sure, result will be still abysmal photo with a bit cleaner shadows. Polish a turd, it's still a turd


----------



## snoke (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> Sure, result will be still abysmal photo with a bit cleaner shadows. Polish a turd, it's still a turd



Picture interesting. Almost exact to rules.

Sun near top left thirds corner. Sky/water close to top third. Rising angle from bottom right to left third. People close to right third line. Lead eye from people to sun. People looking left. Technically photo good.

But you think turd. ok.

Maybe photographer walk in surprise from dog so take this?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > Sure, result will be still abysmal photo with a bit cleaner shadows. Polish a turd, it's still a turd
> ...



Just goes to show what 'rules' do for your photography. I agree, it is a turd.


----------



## Luds34 (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > Khalai said:
> ...



While I don't like the composition, I think calling it "awful" is a bit harsh. It's better than 95% of the photos one sees just browsing social networks. And that's just from a composition standpoint. That's leaving out motion blur or harsh direct flash, poor white balance... the list goes on.

With that said, here's my constructive critique. I don't like how the guy's face overlaps the woman. In fact I don't like how much the guy dominates the portrait (blocks a lot of the bride). Another big distractor to me is the lines from the horizon and the concrete land. They make this natural arrow the points to the left. My eyes naturally follow them as they converge.

To me, if the photographer's shooting position is just rotated to his/her left in the realm of 30 to 45 degrees it becomes a much better picture. Sure you lose the sun, but you still get the sky (and you help alleviate your DR issues to boot) and now the concrete land line becomes more level, you separate the bride and groom faces, the guy and dog are actually looking more towards the camera, and you get rid of the grooms chest literally chopping the bride in half.

Besides the rotation, I might add to pan down just a bit, push the horizon closer to the top third line and give some breathing room to the feet, heaven forbid they print the photo and want to frame it and NOT cut of their legs in a real picture frame.

It's all subjective and hindsight is 20/20. But I think "awful" is too harsh and I couldn't in good conscience say that to the photographer. Even the portrait session of a wedding day is very much run and gun because of the limited time.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Losing the sun would be a good thing, no longer having dueling subjects.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > Khalai said:
> ...



Is that the rule of turds?


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



stevelee said:


> Losing the sun would be a good thing, no longer having dueling subjects.



But how would you know it was a sunset?


----------



## Khalai (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> stevelee said:
> 
> 
> > Losing the sun would be a good thing, no longer having dueling subjects.
> ...



Simple, add watermark with "#sunsetphotowithpoorexposure_availablelightwithnoflash"


----------



## Point22 (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> It's dead easy to make a perfectly decent camera look bad as far as noise / shadow recovery is concerned. The key is to under expose in already low light, when the light is "thin" - fewer photons flying about. Raise your image, then add plenty of saturation and vibrance. This is what I call "data abuse". There's a reason why that image has been processed to have a psychedelic, almost radio active glow, it's got nothing to do with the photographer's lack of taste or inability to post process, it's there to exaggerate the "problem".
> 
> Here's a shot from the Pentax K5II that has, according to DXO, 14.5 stops of DR. OK, it's a lot better than the off-chip ADC Canon's could do, but it still looks bad, but only because of how I have dealt with it. Given good light and sensible PP this camera can easily raise 5 stops.


 And this it?


----------



## Point22 (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > It's dead easy to make a perfectly decent camera look bad as far as noise / shadow recovery is concerned. The key is to under expose in already low light, when the light is "thin" - fewer photons flying about. Raise your image, then add plenty of saturation and vibrance. This is what I call "data abuse". There's a reason why that image has been processed to have a psychedelic, almost radio active glow, it's got nothing to do with the photographer's lack of taste or inability to post process, it's there to exaggerate the "problem".
> ...


 ISO 12 800 and 25 600


----------



## Point22 (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> Here is a Before/After, to me the IQ is looking pretty sterling. But then I am results driven not click driven....


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Luds34 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > snoke said:
> ...



But then... but then the result wouldn't be as awful for the sensor, so they couldn't do _that_.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> stevelee said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



the dead eye look is a giveaway that it's a shot that should be tossed out.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

We are talking from a photographic point of view. The client doesn't give a damn if they think the picture is romantic and reminds them of the day- which brings us back to the question of whether 1 stop DR matters at all if the photographer finds the camera nicer to use.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> stevelee said:
> 
> 
> > Losing the sun would be a good thing, no longer having dueling subjects.
> ...



As opposed to a sunrise?


----------



## BillB (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> We are talking from a photographic point of view. The client doesn't give a damn if they think the picture is romantic and reminds them of the day- which brings us back to the question of whether 1 stop DR matters at all if the photographer finds the camera nicer to use.



OK, so where does that leave us?

There are people interested in the subject of the photograph and aren't overly critical of photographic quality

There are people who know how to expose properly and use Lightroom effectively

There are people interested in 5 EV shadow lifts

There are people who want all the low ISO shadow lifting capability they can get.

There are people who can really use cleaner shadows than Canon can deliver


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Pretty much....


----------



## Lord_Zeppelin (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I haven't posted on this forum in a few years, and I'm far far from being a great pro, as photography is not my primary job, but this is the same garbage that went on with the first 6D, and with pretty much every camera in recent memory. You've got a review site looking for clicks, a product that isn't a complete homerun in literally EVERY aspect, and a bunch of people shouting opinions and insults at each other. This happened with the Nikon that had the oil splatter...the ergonomics on the Alphas, the controls on the Fuji...literally EVERY camera.

When the first 6D came out, this thread was about the focus points and lack of cross-type vs. the next level of body up, and the comparable Nikon, etc. And you know what happened? The camera shipped, still sold well, and has been adopted well, despite the pages upon pages of posts arguing about it. 

Does this camera have the dynamic range of some others? Probably not. Is it as bad as the reactionary fools are making it seem? nope. Same way the 6D was. Were a few shots missed on the fringe with the original because of the narrow focus field and lack of cross type? Probably. Did it matter at the end of the day? nope. Would you have been better off working on fundamentals instead of relying on the fringe use of the camera? Yep. 

I'm not trying to defend Canon, but really, they're not going to give you the Lexus for the price of the highest trim level Camry. 

My 6D has served me very well over the years...and I'll be jumpin' on a 6D2 as soon as I can sell the old one. And I can guarantee that 90% of the shots I miss will be because of me, and not the camera's shortcomings, just as it always has been, whether it was a Nikon N70 or ELAN IIe or the AE-1 I learned to shoot on. Sometimes I feel like people want the camera to make them amazing photographers...when it couldn't be further from the truth.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Lord_Zeppelin said:


> I haven't posted on this forum in a few years



I can see why...your logical and practical approach to these issues are really out of place around here. 

Well done!


----------



## Lord_Zeppelin (Jul 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Lord_Zeppelin said:
> 
> 
> > I haven't posted on this forum in a few years
> ...



Ha...I wish it were that. It's more of a time thing...a baby and crazy work schedule has eaten most of my time for photography as a whole, let alone an arguing a discussion forum... 
I've been relegated to mostly iPhoneography...


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Lord_Zeppelin said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Lord_Zeppelin said:
> ...



If only I could have my babies back. Do take advantage of the opportunity. 

Jack


----------



## jmoya (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > It's dead easy to make a perfectly decent camera look bad as far as noise / shadow recovery is concerned. The key is to under expose in already low light, when the light is "thin" - fewer photons flying about. Raise your image, then add plenty of saturation and vibrance. This is what I call "data abuse". There's a reason why that image has been processed to have a psychedelic, almost radio active glow, it's got nothing to do with the photographer's lack of taste or inability to post process, it's there to exaggerate the "problem".
> ...



How are you opening files in Raw? I can't seem to open them unless I first convert to a tiff.


----------



## jmoya (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> It's dead easy to make a perfectly decent camera look bad as far as noise / shadow recovery is concerned. The key is to under expose in already low light, when the light is "thin" - fewer photons flying about. Raise your image, then add plenty of saturation and vibrance. This is what I call "data abuse". There's a reason why that image has been processed to have a psychedelic, almost radio active glow, it's got nothing to do with the photographer's lack of taste or inability to post process, it's there to exaggerate the "problem".
> 
> Here's a shot from the Pentax K5II that has, according to DXO, 14.5 stops of DR. OK, it's a lot better than the off-chip ADC Canon's could do, but it still looks bad, but only because of how I have dealt with it. Given good light and sensible PP this camera can easily raise 5 stops.


How are you opening thesee in lightroom? I tried and the files can't be opening. My 5d3 files open just fine?


----------



## Khalai (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> How are you opening thesee in lightroom? I tried and the files can't be opening. My 5d3 files open just fine?



You need latest ACR module ver. 9.12. or latest Lightroom update ver. 6.12 or updated CC version.


----------



## candyman (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Khalai said:


> jmoya said:
> 
> 
> > How are you opening thesee in lightroom? I tried and the files can't be opening. My 5d3 files open just fine?
> ...


Yes.
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/lightroom-downloads.html


Click in this page on the link; Adobe photoshop Lightroom 6
It opens all the releases of MAC and Windows.
Choose your platform (MAC or windows) and the latest update version 6.12


----------



## Aglet (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.



It seems intuitive but, well, no, that's not exactly correct and has been pointed out by more technically savvy posters in the past.
Noise-dithered data-acquisition that is downsampled can actually record up to one extra bit of information. Specific dither signals and processing could increase that amount.

(just) clipped + noise = not always clipped and extra signal information can be extracted.
more applicable at the low end than the high in photographic applications

YMMV depending on how clipped, particular dither signal (noise), and amount of downsampling done in post processing.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Aglet said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.
> ...



This has been debated ad nauseam, trouble is whilst you might be technically correct nobody has ever posted a Stouffer wedge actually illustrating the concept. The theory breaks down either because of the relatively limited downsample and/or the difference in the noise floor, might technically be there, the differences aren't observable in regular sized images viewed at regular distances.

I'd love somebody to actually post some visual proof of the theory, but nobody ever has.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Aglet said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Well, sort of... Yes, the DR of the downsampled 6DII image will be higher, but downsampling doesn't change the DR when the image is captured. IMO, it's the latter that matters – if you have a 13-stop scene, and 12 stops of DR, you've clipped one or both sides. If you then downsample that image until you have 13 stops of DR, you don't get back what you clipped at capture.
> ...



I'm well aware of the theory. Which RAW converter do I use for that process? Does the RAW software from ABC have CSI's _enhance_ button? :

Guess what? I can also reduce sensor noise with Peltier cooling. Which ILC has that feature? Sony? ABC? 

There are some technically savvy people on this forum, some are more practical, some skilled, some artistic, and some with various combinations of those attributes...and there's you.


----------



## Point22 (Jul 28, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

First issue 6D2 need firmware update 

6D mark ii + Tamron SP 85 f1.8 VC USD


----------



## dcm (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> First issue 6D2 need firmware update
> 
> 6D mark ii + Tamron SP 85 f1.8 VC USD



Similar to the 1DX2 - I think it was related to peripheral illumination corrections with non-Canon Lenses. Solution is to turn it off.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=29352.msg595767#msg595767


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



dcm said:


> Point22 said:
> 
> 
> > First issue 6D2 need firmware update
> ...



Yes, not exactly a Canon issue as a Tamron issue for faking the camera into thinking it has a different lens on it. How exactly is that Canon's fault, Point22?


----------



## Point22 (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



dcm said:


> Point22 said:
> 
> 
> > First issue 6D2 need firmware update
> ...


As you write  ( 5D4 + Art too )


----------



## Point22 (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> dcm said:
> 
> 
> > Point22 said:
> ...


 camera knows he is there. 85 tamron and not canon glass or?


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > dcm said:
> ...



Can't you just shoot in RAW and generate your jpgs with lightroom or DPP?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > dcm said:
> ...



No the communication is not single leveled and Tamron do not collaborate or buy registration codes from Canon, Zeiss do. 

The Tamron spoofs a specific Canon lens code to the camera, not the name, the camera applies corrections to the image as would be appropriate for the lens it believes, and is being told, is mounted. It is a Tamron issue not a Canon one.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> First issue 6D2 need firmware update
> 
> 6D mark ii + Tamron SP 85 f1.8 VC USD



Perhaps the camera needs a wetware update.


----------



## snoke (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> How are you opening files in Raw? I can't seem to open them unless I first convert to a tiff.



Use Adobe DNG Converter.


----------



## Point22 (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Point22 said:
> 
> 
> > First issue 6D2 need firmware update
> ...


 Yeah maybe


----------



## Aglet (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



privatebydesign said:


> Aglet said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


yes, while technically feasible I haven't seen it done in a photographic way either, not counting what DxOmark does to achieve their "print" number... I'd like to SEE that result too.
It's far simpler to demonstrate in a one-dimensional data array.

If anyone has a Stouffer wedge it would be interesting to see the test done. a 25% linear scaling should be adequate to demonstrate an effect and shooting it with a Canon camera, cuz the dithering noise is already built-in; it's just an under-utilized _feature_ of the system.
Over-sampling the source data helps too... so shoot 4 or more shots, scale, then average them. but I'd rather see it demo'd w-o mutliple exposures being used, just the down-sampling by scaling and some careful NR applied.

I don't think ABC cameras have enough low ISO noise to do this trick as effectively. And Canon cameras with FPN won't work very well either as the FPN would get reinforced at some scaling ratios.


----------



## Aglet (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> I'm well aware of the theory. Which RAW converter do I use for that process? Does the RAW software from ABC have CSI's _enhance_ button? :



well, you should be able to figure that out, shouldn't you, Dr. Brainiac? 
12 or 14 bit raw file, work it in a 16 (or more) bit space.
Downscale, filter, done.
So... ACR & PS or pretty much anything working in 16bit or more per channel should do just fine. 
Duh! : It's not _neuro_-science! LOL




> Guess what? I can also reduce sensor noise with Peltier cooling. Which ILC has that feature? Sony? ABC?



Maybe you should _sit_ on a peltier cooler, it might reduce the fixed pattern noise out of you as well. ;D




> There are some technically savvy people on this forum, some are more practical, some skilled, some artistic, and some with various combinations of those attributes...and there's you.



...yes... all of the above. Good looks, humor and personality too.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Aglet said:


> Maybe you should _sit_ on a peltier cooler, it might reduce the fixed pattern noise out of you as well. ;D
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Humor and personality? Yes, that's what you showed right there.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Aglet said:


> ...yes... all of the above. Good looks, humor and personality too.



Yes, but to be a typical photographer, you should be using the most common camera and take pictures of the most popular subject.... And Canon is ******* if they don't compete with the iPhone, and doubly ******* without adding "cat mode" to the dial beside the green box.....


----------



## jmoya (Jul 30, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



snoke said:


> jmoya said:
> 
> 
> > How are you opening files in Raw? I can't seem to open them unless I first convert to a tiff.
> ...


Thanks. I upgraded to the new Lightroom 6.12 and can now open the files.


----------



## bclaff (Jul 30, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Aglet said:


> ...If anyone has a Stouffer wedge it would be interesting to see the test done. ....


Many years ago when I was developing the Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR) test I used Stouffer wedges.
I'll try to drag one out and do a test but ...
I can assure you that the test target I developed for PDR produces equivalent results.
(I devised it because I could not depend on my contributors to have a Stouffer wedge.)
The PDR target has 77 "magenta" patches.
This color is chosen to make the red, green, and blue channels more equally exposed. 
Since the channels are processed separately the fact that it is not "gray" is not material.

Regards


----------



## Point22 (Jul 30, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



bclaff said:


> Aglet said:
> 
> 
> > ...If anyone has a Stouffer wedge it would be interesting to see the test done. ....
> ...


Now I would like the answer.. Mr bclaff is this 11,8DR or 8-9 PDR ?? Thx


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 30, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

not bad at all for a "low DR" sensor  except for the noticeable horisontal banding in shadow areas.


----------



## x-vision (Jul 30, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> Now I would like the answer..



Look at all the noise on the plastic container in the middle of the photo. Or on the TV screen.

This noise is the reason why the 6DII dynamic range measures lower than the 5DIV, for example.

Apply some noise reduction to see how this noise cleans up.
The 6DII's noise is reported to be more random than that of the 5DIII and original 6D.
So, it should clean up better.


----------



## bclaff (Jul 30, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> ...
> Now I would like the answer.. Mr bclaff is this 11,8DR or 8-9 PDR ?? Thx


Jpeg images don't have PDR.
You can use raw data to determine PDR.
If I inspected the raw file for that image I'm confident it would have no more than 9.11 stops of PDR.
The blacks are slightly crushed in that image to hide the fact that noise would be apparent.
Not a complaint just an observation, we crush black at some level on almost all images.
FWIW, I have no problem with this amount of PDR as I rarely have issues with high dynamic range scenes.


----------



## IglooEater (Jul 30, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Point22 said:


> bclaff said:
> 
> 
> > Aglet said:
> ...



I'd be interested in seeing the same from say a 6D or a 5D III. That looks way more malleable than I'll ever need.


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I just took a picture at 160 ISO
I got a strange result in LR when using the graduaded filter to bring down the highlights and exposure in the sky.
The clouds become pink....

I am puzzled. It seems I do not have a good copy of this camera.

What do you think? 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/chl2j77x23nvk7t/IMG_0134.CR2?dl=0

EDIT: if you try the same steps in LR with 100 ISO you don't have pink color in the sky. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1u5l62ezto6nwm9/IMG_0133.CR2?dl=0


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I don't know if you intended to show the two shots but you posted the same link twice


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> I don't know if you intended to show the two shots but you posted the same link twice


Thank you Mike. Just corrected.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

The links have different names in your post but I am seeing the same photo.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

If I cut and paste the name of the second link it works - looks like you change the link test without actually changing the URL in your link definition

As for the pink - it looks like the photos were taken at different angles so maybe it is something to do with light directionality. I believe some lenses have coatings that act a bit like polarising so maybe this is the reason?


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> The links have different names in your post but I am seeing the same photo.


I do not use dropbox often. It acts a little bit strange but now I succeeded to put the right link for the 100 ISO file.


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Mikehit said:


> If I cut and paste the name of the second link it works - looks like you change the link test without actually changing the URL in your link definition
> 
> As for the pink - it looks like the photos were taken at different angles so maybe it is something to do with light directionality. I believe some lenses have coatings that act a bit like polarising so maybe this is the reason?




Wait ...I will put the same photo angle but at 100 ISO - file _133


EDIT: I don't succeed to make this file downloable. It is there in dropbox but without the 'paperclip' allthough I can download it from dropbox. It will take me some time to figure it out....


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Dropbox may not be used to displaying raw files from the 6DII yet !

My only comment on the low iso shot is that image 106 shows why you shouldn't under expose these Canons if you want to pp the image afterwards. I recon that if you had shot the frame with the intention of lightening up / softening shadows in pp you are a good 2 stops under where you could have been, and this makes a massive difference to the dark tones. 

Image 134 where you have pushed the exposure further to the right is just fine. (Aside from the slightly odd tint in the sky ?). If you lift those blacks beyond what any normal person would want to do to the image it is perfectly fine. 

I'd happily use one, but no way would I under exposed with it, as you can a Nikon.


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I do not know what to do...  
The file is there in Dropbox. I can download it myself form Dropbox but the public link reports a 404 - the file isn't there. But it is there!


I will try until the link works.


In the 100 ISO you can add the gradual filter and decrease the highlights in the sky without the clouds become pink. It seems something odd with the 160 iso...?


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> Dropbox may not be used to displaying raw files from the 6DII yet !
> 
> My only comment on the low iso shot is that image 106 shows why you shouldn't under expose these Canons if you want to pp the image afterwards. I recon that if you had shot the frame with the intention of lightening up / softening shadows in pp you are a good 2 stops under where you could have been, and this makes a massive difference to the dark tones.
> 
> ...




You are right about the first 3 images. I did some late evening shots not using appropriate settings. Maybe I need to delete them here from the forum.


The _134 and _133 photos however are exposed normal. And there is an odd pink appearance in ths sky for the 160 ISO. That is something I do not understand. I mean one should be able to make some pp on highlights without the effect of clouds becoming pink....


----------



## tomteb (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

New hands on testing by thecamerastore TV:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNrpuUES3Sw
They do not show figures, but also take on the DR subject and compare it to 5D mark IV and the latest Rebel...


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I am getting crazy from dropbox. The file is uploaded but still reports a 404 error when using the link to download.


Here are two screencaptures


- file _0133 at 100 ISO with heavily reduced higlights in the sky using the gradual filter
- file _0134 at 160 ISO - copied the photo setting for reduced highlights


No other settings were applied. All settings left to default


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

*@candyman* – could be LR (wouldn't be the first time Adobe handled new files badly), I'd try in DPP to see if you get the same issue. If so, contact Canon. Else, contact Adobe.


----------



## MayaTlab (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



candyman said:


> - file _0133 at 100 ISO with heavily reduced higlights in the sky using the gradual filter
> - file _0134 at 160 ISO - copied the photo setting for reduced highlights



The ISO 160 shot is clipped in the highlights, according to Rawdigger, in the blue channel, and in one of the two green channels (that's weird to me, I thought that the two green channels usually clip at the same time ? But maybe there is something I don't understand here). 

Then, this is combined with Adobe's particularly rubbish profiling of the camera. If you switch to the "camera neutral" profile, for example, you will see a noticeable improvement. If you export the file as DNG and import it in Capture One (which doesn't support the 6DII yet, so it's only going to get better in C1), the pink issue becomes quite negligible.

The following photo (your ISO 160 shot) has the same settings applied, except that one uses the "camera neutral" profile, the other "Adobe standard".


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> *@candyman* – could be LR (wouldn't be the first time Adobe handled new files badly), I'd try in DPP to see if you get the same issue. If so, contact Canon. Else, contact Adobe.




Thank you Neuro for your suggesting.
I opened both files in DPP 4.6.30. I don't work that often with DPP so I am not sure how to partially process an area of an image in DPP. But I decreased the highlights and brightness in both images and the _0134 image does not have pink clouds like it has in LR.
It really looks like it is an error in LR 6.12 on the 6D MKII processing. But, I am not an Adobe & processing specialist. I am not convinced yet.....I want to...... since I hate to retrun the camera


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> *@candyman* – could be LR (wouldn't be the first time Adobe handled new files badly), I'd try in DPP to see if you get the same issue. If so, contact Canon. Else, contact Adobe.



+1,

It'll be the raw converter not the camera. I thought this was all part of the pleasure in being a very early adopter !


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I am not so much a shadow lifter and DRone but interesting to compare DPP and LR in this regard


First Lightroom
Second DPP


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



MayaTlab said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > - file _0133 at 100 ISO with heavily reduced higlights in the sky using the gradual filter
> ...




I am not sure what you mean. Can you give me more information?


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



candyman said:


> I am not so much a shadow lifter and DRone but interesting to compare DPP and LR in this regard
> 
> 
> First Lightroom
> Second DPP




Large amount of noise reduction been applied in the DPP image


----------



## MayaTlab (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



candyman said:


> MayaTlab said:
> 
> 
> > candyman said:
> ...



At the bottom of the develop module, you can change the default profile that LR applies to your picture :


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



MayaTlab said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > MayaTlab said:
> ...


I see. Thank you.
There is some positive effect noticeable when changing to Neutral profile.


----------



## candyman (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > I am not so much a shadow lifter and DRone but interesting to compare DPP and LR in this regard
> ...


Yes, you are right. I forgot to set it back to default. :-\ It fooled me   
The result in DPP is less good than in LR after I set all settings to default except shadow lifting.
It seems that is difficult, at this stage, to give a proper judgement on files if processing software is not yet optimized for the task. The burden of an early adopter.
I still have doubts about returning the camera. I am not looking for better IQ than 6D but certainly not for worse. I just want to have a confirmation of at least same IQ as the 6D. For ME the added features are a reason to upgrade but only if IQ did not get worse.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



candyman said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > candyman said:
> ...



Looks to me as if it is on par with the 6D at low ISO, slightly better at high iso.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



bclaff said:


> Aglet said:
> 
> 
> > ...If anyone has a Stouffer wedge it would be interesting to see the test done. ....
> ...


Bclaff 
Excuse my ignorance can you please describe your testing procedure so I can better understand your readings. 
During this week I'm going to test the camera using an Arri Dynamic Range Test Chart and their automatic analysis software. The chart can be used in both 16x9 mode and 4:3, the camera must be aligned to the markings on the chart to take in two identification marks to perform accurate analysis. The set-up requires setting the luminance of the sphere, the camera at ISO 100 and elimination of stray ambient light. 
The camera will have an 85mm lens and the image will be converted as a TIFF for reading in the software. 
The software can provide an OECF graph, saturation (clipping), noise floor (black level) S/N (dB) and line average. The OECF is measured to a reference set certificate.


----------



## derekmccoy (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



candyman said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > candyman said:
> ...



The extra MP makes up for the slightly "worse" IQ at low ISO with shadow lift. When the 24MP 6D2 image is resized to 20MP to match the 6D, I doubt you'll see a difference.


----------



## bclaff (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jeffa4444 said:


> bclaff said:
> 
> 
> > Aglet said:
> ...


You should start by following the Further Reading links below the Photographic Dynamic Range chart


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



bclaff said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > bclaff said:
> ...


One last question did you test a single camera or multiple cameras. I ask this because we have found variance across a group of cameras admittedly not a great variance but certainly enough to affect the difference you show between the 6D & the 6D MKII.


----------



## bclaff (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jeffa4444 said:


> bclaff said:
> 
> 
> > jeffa4444 said:
> ...


I often test only one camera.
But I have tested up to eight and found very little sample variation.
Also, FWIW, the results cross-check against read noise data which is very very consistent.


----------



## jmoya (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Head over to my channel. I did a comparison edit in lightroom between the canon 5d3 and canon 6d mark II.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCPsJARvqzA&t=211s


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 31, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> Head over to my channel. I did a comparison edit in lightroom between the canon 5d3 and canon 6d mark II.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCPsJARvqzA&t=211s



Thanks for that!

Jack


----------



## Cthulhu (Aug 1, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



jmoya said:


> Head over to my channel. I did a comparison edit in lightroom between the canon 5d3 and canon 6d mark II.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCPsJARvqzA&t=211s



Nice work. I'd be interested in seeing what happens if you raise that shadows slider all the way.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 1, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Cthulhu said:


> I'd be interested in seeing what happens if you raise that shadows slider all the way.



And then color everything orange and add purple pokadots.

You can do really weird stuff with Photoshop and to an extent Lightroom.


----------



## derekmccoy (Aug 1, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



stevelee said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > I'd be interested in seeing what happens if you raise that shadows slider all the way.
> ...



He has a point. You can raise the shadows on a 5D4 all the way, along with a 3 stop push and it still holds up.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 1, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



derekmccoy said:


> stevelee said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...



True, but then look at just how much lighter even two stops made in the image. Only people who are wanting to produce cartoon-like images will want to go further. Credit to him for being realistic. 

There is an issue for the people that want to shoot wide open on a 24/1.4 and then enable lens correction and then also raise shadows two stops. Those people should use Nikon 

Maybe it's Adobe's fault for all this "5 stop lift" nonsense ;D


----------



## Khalai (Aug 1, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> Maybe it's Adobe's fault for all this "5 stop lift" nonsense ;D



If you merge RAW files into single DNG HDR file, you can lift up to 10 EV stops in LR


----------



## Cthulhu (Aug 1, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> He has a point. You can raise the shadows on a 5D4 all the way, along with a 3 stop push and it still holds up.



True, but then look at just how much lighter even two stops made in the image. Only people who are wanting to produce cartoon-like images will want to go further. Credit to him for being realistic. 

There is an issue for the people that want to shoot wide open on a 24/1.4 and then enable lens correction and then also raise shadows two stops. Those people should use Nikon 

Maybe it's Adobe's fault for all this "5 stop lift" nonsense ;D
[/quote]

Realistic...not sure about that. Maybe for that particular situation, but then again maybe you want to lift shadows without blowing out the main subject. You can fall into that situation in any aperture or focal length, it's the contrast and lighting in the scene that matters and you're not always able to control that. 
If you do pet photography, for example, you'll be constantly facing high contrast subjects who won't blend or expose well with their surroundings and your best bet will be to underexpose to save detail and bring it out in post, always at high shutter speeds. You could always shoot Nikon or Sony, but then again you might want your subjects to look less like aliens, specially if a human is also in the frame.

At any rate that wasn't my point, my point was to find out the actual capacities of the camera and what you can actually expect in though situations. Everybody already knew you could lift two stops on a 5dmk3.


----------



## Lord_Zeppelin (Aug 2, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Sporgon said:


> True, but then look at just how much lighter even two stops made in the image. Only people who are wanting to produce cartoon-like images will want to go further. Credit to him for being realistic.
> 
> There is an issue for the people that want to shoot wide open on a 24/1.4 and then enable lens correction and then also raise shadows two stops. Those people should use Nikon
> 
> Maybe it's Adobe's fault for all this "5 stop lift" nonsense ;D



I feel like you're touching on part of the overall issue with the perception of what photography is - the Instagram effect. People are used to seeing these faux ultra-HDR images that work on small but super high pixel density displays (iPhone, etc), which deteriorate rapidly when you get to 8x10 size or a 13" laptop, etc. There is this expectation that the sharp, HDR look is not only normal, but easily achieved among the majority of smartphone users whose have a mostly false, inflated sense that they are better photographers than they are because of how easy a smartphone makes it and the ease of the apps. They move over to SLR photography, and then want the images to come out the same without knowing exposure methods, and just click one button and voila, it looks perfect and gets likes. They don't know the work that goes into being an advanced amateur or pro. 

And can you blame people? The Instagram look is admittedly very good, it's easy to achieve, it's fun to share, and it looks closer to how the eyes see things versus how the camera sees it - so it's much more relateable. Notice the amount of people here and on the DPR thread that are saying the wedding photo in question is a "toss" - because it is. Can you lift it and salvage something out of it? Sure...but it is still going to be a secondary level image out of the hundreds shot for that wedding, and isn't going to be one of the cover images of the album. Trying to make it something it isn't, and then complaining the camera isn't making it a better photo, is unreasonable. 

Market maturity and product life cycle also play a huge role here - the timings and launch of products and software currently is "ship it then patch it" as a rule. I'm sure half of the issues with the banding and such will be fixed via firmware, DPP profile, and eventually third party profiles for LR and it's ilk over the course of the first 6 months it's actually on the market.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 2, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

Lord_Zeppelin, I suspect you are right. 

It is unfortunate that these threads end up containing material that is time wasting so today this one gets _unnotified_ even though there have been many good contributions, such as yours. I will again be checking the 6D2 reviews and surveying the scene before a possible purchase in the spring. By then all the hype and emotion and DRoning will have subsided.

Jack


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 2, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Jack Douglas said:


> Lord_Zeppelin, I suspect you are right.
> 
> It is unfortunate that these threads end up containing material that is time wasting so today this one gets _unnotified_ even though there have been many good contributions, such as yours. I will again be checking the 6D2 reviews and surveying the scene before a possible purchase in the spring. By then all the hype and emotion and DRoning will have subsided.
> 
> Jack



If I have interpreted all the online comments properly, only an idiot would buy a 6D2.

Therefore, having an almost complete lack of sense, once the price drops on the 6D2 and/or the initial rush is over and they can keep one on the store shelves, I will probably get one. Since I do not know what I am doing, I will take lots of pictures and enjoy the camera.


----------



## Lord_Zeppelin (Aug 2, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Don Haines said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Lord_Zeppelin, I suspect you are right.
> ...


Well stated. I fall into that category too...ha!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Spock said:


> Lord_Zeppelin said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Regarding that: How do you feel?


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



neuroanatomist said:


> Regarding that: How do you feel?



He has gone into his post-purchase state of Pon Farr until the urges subside. Then and only then can he give a rational decision on how he truly feels.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



Spock said:


> I can tell you that I agree with Canon's design philosophy, That the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.



Perfect. Well played.


----------



## wsmith96 (Aug 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*



stevelee said:


> Spock said:
> 
> 
> > I can tell you that I agree with Canon's design philosophy, That the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
> ...



+1 lol


----------



## wsmith96 (Aug 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images*

I went ahead and sold my 6D in anticipation of the mark II performance and to get the maximum dollars back before the flood if used gear. The feature upgrades make this a needed improvement over the original. Waiting on the price drop around November, until then I snagged an 80D.


----------

