# Reviews Canon 6D MK II



## candyman (Jul 27, 2017)

I just came accross this review:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/reviews/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii

Interesting: 
"In manual mode you’re forced to go into the main menu or quick menu to access exposure compensation, which is a bit of a faff. It’s possible to reassign a button to exposure compensation from the custom functions menu, but in hindsight I’d have preferred it if Canon had merged it with the ISO button as it does on its EOS 5D-series."

Good news that they made this available in the 6D MK II but was hoping it would work like with the 7D MK II


----------



## candyman (Jul 27, 2017)

And about Dynamic range:

"Our results tell us that the EOS 6D Mark II offers a 1.7EV improvement in dynamic range over the original EOS 6D at ISO 100. The 12.1EV readout at ISO 100 isn’t as impressive as the incredibly high 13.7EV figure that was previously recorded by the EOS 5D Mark IV, however. Results at ISO 3200, 6400 and 12800 drop to 8.0EV, 7.3EV and 6.9EV respectively, and it’s only when the sensitivity it pushed to ISO 51200 that the dynamic range figure drops just below 6EV.While some may have expected a slightly higher dynamic range figure at low sensitivities, I found there’s sufficient leverage when it comes to returning detail to dark, shadowed regions in real-world use as depicted in some of the sample images that support this review"


----------



## MintChocs (Jul 27, 2017)

It looks like Bill Claff got it wrong, I mean we can trust this review as it is called Trusted Reviews. There's going to be whole load of happy people who have preordered.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 27, 2017)

Not so quick. Aren't we looking at contradictory results without really knowing who's right?

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 27, 2017)

Seems like a decent review that is not biased. Now we wait for more.

Jack


----------



## Khalai (Jul 27, 2017)

candyman said:


> And about Dynamic range:
> 
> "Our results tell us that the EOS 6D Mark II offers a 1.7EV improvement in dynamic range over the original EOS 6D at ISO 100. The 12.1EV readout at ISO 100 isn’t as impressive as the incredibly high 13.7EV figure that was previously recorded by the EOS 5D Mark IV, however. Results at ISO 3200, 6400 and 12800 drop to 8.0EV, 7.3EV and 6.9EV respectively, and it’s only when the sensitivity it pushed to ISO 51200 that the dynamic range figure drops just below 6EV.While some may have expected a slightly higher dynamic range figure at low sensitivities, I found there’s sufficient leverage when it comes to returning detail to dark, shadowed regions in real-world use as depicted in some of the sample images that support this review"



Something doesn't add up. 6D is way better than 10.4 EV DR suggested in the article. It was also around value of 12, as is 6D II...


----------



## JMKE (Jul 27, 2017)

Khalai said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Indeed, trying to find the chart of the 6D to compare it. But they don't have it on their site.


----------



## BillB (Jul 27, 2017)

Khalai said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > And about Dynamic range:
> ...



FWIW, the reviews agree that the 100ISO number is lower for the 6DII than for the 5DIV, reinforcing the notion that the 6DII has off sensor ADC. What is the real world significance of these magic numbers? Who knows? Bill Claaf's methodology does not use actual images, or so I understand. I wonder what methodology was used for the other review.


----------



## snoke (Jul 27, 2017)

Khalai said:


> Something doesn't add up. 6D is way better than 10.4 EV DR suggested in the article. It was also around value of 12, as is 6D II...



10.4 better than 9.8:

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

I don't know why complain about review, very positive about 6D Mark II.



BillB said:


> FWIW, the reviews agree that the 100ISO number is lower for the 6DII than for the 5DIV, reinforcing the notion that the 6DII has off sensor ADC. What is the real world significance of these magic numbers? Who knows? Bill Claaf's methodology does not use actual images, or so I understand. I wonder what methodology was used for the other review.



It mean 6DII come with free Canon Classic Noisy Shadow.


----------



## BillF (Jul 27, 2017)

candyman said:


> And about Dynamic range:
> 
> "Our results tell us that the EOS 6D Mark II offers a 1.7EV improvement in dynamic range over the original EOS 6D at ISO 100. The 12.1EV readout at ISO 100 isn’t as impressive as the incredibly high 13.7EV figure that was previously recorded by the EOS 5D Mark IV, however. Results at ISO 3200, 6400 and 12800 drop to 8.0EV, 7.3EV and 6.9EV respectively, and it’s only when the sensitivity it pushed to ISO 51200 that the dynamic range figure drops just below 6EV.While some may have expected a slightly higher dynamic range figure at low sensitivities, I found there’s sufficient leverage when it comes to returning detail to dark, shadowed regions in real-world use as depicted in some of the sample images that support this review"



I noticed that comment also, at lunchtime today. If you look at the article again now, you will see that any reference to the original 6D has been removed - in fact that entire first sentence "Our results tell us" has gone. Retracted !


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 27, 2017)

The plot thickens..........


----------



## BillF (Jul 27, 2017)

I pointed it out on here also ...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59890647 

and someone obtained a full response from the author of the review.


----------



## BillB (Jul 27, 2017)

BillF said:


> I pointed it out on here also ...
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59890647
> 
> and someone obtained a full response from the author of the review.



Thanks for the very informative followup. It is good to see a reviewer taking a position on the practical implications of the data.


----------



## mdmphoto (Jul 28, 2017)

...All in All, this review still runs firmly against the gloomy and/or enraged pre-release pronouncements of the 6D II as a disappointing and inferior replacement....:

"...They also added later:
I should stress our original tests of the 6D dynamic range were right in the early days shortly after we'd setup our testing facility and aren't as accurate as they are now.
So not quite the big leap in DR some might have been expecting from the EOS 6D Mark II, nevertheless a figure of 12.1EV at ISO 100 isn’t what I’d describe as poor and should suffice for the majority. ..."


----------



## Isaacheus (Jul 28, 2017)

From the nikon d750 review on the same site, they state that has 12.9ev dynamic range at iso 50 (and say this is the same as the d810), so not sure I'd take the dynamic range figures on the 6dmk2 as gospel yet, not until other reviews also show improved results

http://www.trustedreviews.com/reviews/nikon-d750-image-quality-performance-and-verdict-page-2


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 28, 2017)

Yes, I agree, reserve judgment.

Jack


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 28, 2017)

Has anyone updated tests to a production camera, preferably several of them. Those preliminary figures all likely came from the same pre-production camera. The figures should be the same, but until there is production information, its preliminary and not worth umpteen pages of discussion.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 28, 2017)

Isaacheus said:


> From the nikon d750 review on the same site, they state that has 12.9ev dynamic range at iso 50 (and say this is the same as the d810), so not sure I'd take the dynamic range figures on the 6dmk2 as gospel yet, not until other reviews also show improved results
> 
> http://www.trustedreviews.com/reviews/nikon-d750-image-quality-performance-and-verdict-page-2



ISO 50 is an artificially darkened setting and always results in a loss of quality.


----------



## Isaacheus (Jul 28, 2017)

9VIII said:


> Isaacheus said:
> 
> 
> > From the nikon d750 review on the same site, they state that has 12.9ev dynamic range at iso 50 (and say this is the same as the d810), so not sure I'd take the dynamic range figures on the 6dmk2 as gospel yet, not until other reviews also show improved results
> ...



Yeah, but I couldn't see any reference to iso 100. I was under the impression that iso 50 usually had the same/similar dr to iso 100 due to this darkening being taken from iso 100. At the very least, it doesn't seem to be consistent with other reviews, as far as I can tell


----------



## Sharlin (Jul 28, 2017)

Isaacheus said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > ISO 50 is an artificially darkened setting and always results in a loss of quality.
> ...



At least the D810 sensor has a "true" base ISO of 64 (as measured by full well capacity) so ISO 50 can actually have 2/3 stops more DR than ISO 100 (and this is reflected by the chart at photonstophotos). The D750 does seem to have the same DR at ISO 50 and ISO 100 however.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 28, 2017)

Sharlin said:


> Isaacheus said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...



The 5DIV is also real iso 64 when set to 100 is it not ?


----------



## Sharlin (Jul 28, 2017)

Sporgon said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > At least the D810 sensor has a "true" base ISO of 64 (as measured by full well capacity) so ISO 50 can actually have 2/3 stops more DR than ISO 100 (and this is reflected by the chart at photonstophotos). The D750 does seem to have the same DR at ISO 50 and ISO 100 however.
> ...



At least according to DXO measurements, yeah, but that's a different thing. The 5D4 sensor saturates at (nominal) ISO 100, whereas the D810 DR increases down to (nominal) ISO 64, indicating that the sensor doesn't use all of its well capacity at ISO 100. Witness the behavior in this chart.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Aug 14, 2017)

A truly stupid review pulled out of the author's butt. hahaha It's as if they made everything up after shooting with the camera for an afternoon in a park.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 14, 2017)

According to Bill Claff, it is 80, multiples of 80: 80, 160, 320, 640, ....

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm



Sporgon said:


> The 5DIV is also real iso 64 when set to 100 is it not ?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 14, 2017)

This is just a casual uninformed thought. Is it possible that with sensor development Canon might experiment with lower level cameras to see the +,- and public reaction with the particular trade-offs they have made, and we know there are always trade offs?

A recent observation by another member of the 1DX2's great high ISO capability made me think of the D5 and how Nikon was "forced" to trade off low ISO DR to compete with Canon. 

Personally, when I hear field tests confirming the 6D2 has good high ISO, I'm thrilled since I have had the 6D practically glued to 1250 and would have loved higher ISO quality for my wildlife shooting. Canon knows we're not all dedicated landscapers.

Jack


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 15, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> This is just a casual uninformed thought. Is it possible that with sensor development Canon might experiment with lower level cameras to see the +,- and public reaction with the particular trade-offs they have made, and we know there are always trade offs?
> 
> A recent observation by another member of the 1DX2's great high ISO capability made me think of the D5 and how Nikon was "forced" to trade off low ISO DR to compete with Canon.
> 
> ...



Have the reports been for improvement in high iso or just got results at high iso. A number of the ones I've seen state that it is as good as the 6d, but I haven't seen thing suggesting better, and one or two have shown potentially worse performance (raws rather than out of camera jpeg, I believe the newer camera is better for the jpegs). If the results show an improvement of say a close to a stop around 1600 - 12800, that would make the lack of dr improvement at iso 100 far more understable


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 15, 2017)

Isaacheus said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > This is just a casual uninformed thought. Is it possible that with sensor development Canon might experiment with lower level cameras to see the +,- and public reaction with the particular trade-offs they have made, and we know there are always trade offs?
> ...



From comments, I understand the noise is more easily dealt with and that's aided by 6 more MPs, which isn't exactly trivial. I sold the 6D not because of any dissatisfaction with it's high ISO performance but because I appreciate all the great features added to an already very good camera. I don't see why the features aren't valued more but the whiners got the jump and rained on the party and spread discontent.

Jack


----------

