# Updated Canon EOS 6D Mark II Specifications [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 15, 2017)

```
Below is updated specifications from various sources, so we’re not rating this [CR3] at this time. Some of this information does come from very solid sources.</p>
<p><strong>Canon EOS 6D Mark II Specifications: </strong>(specifications in italics are CR2 for the moment)</p>
<ul>
<li>26mp CMOS Sensor</li>
<li>DPAF</li>
<li>DIGIC 7</li>
<li>1080P 60p (sadly, no 4K)</li>
<li><em>45pt AF (We’re not sure if they’re all cross-type)</em></li>
<li>Wi-Fi</li>
<li>Bluetooth</li>
<li><em>NFC</em></li>
<li>3″ Vari-Angle LCD</li>
<li>Touchscreen</li>
<li><em>Approx 100% viewfinder</em></li>
<li><em>HDR Movie</em></li>
<li><em>Time Lapse Movie</em></li>
<li>A slightly taller and deeper body over the current EOS 6D.</li>
<li>New battery grip BG-E21</li>
<li>Announcement on June 29, 2017, Shipping in early August</li>
</ul>
<p>There will be more to come in the coming days.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## CanonCams (Jun 15, 2017)

Can't wait!


----------



## Hellish (Jun 15, 2017)

1080p is a JOKE

This isn't how you separate lines in 2017

iPhones have had 4k for a few iterations....


----------



## Pr0grammed_Reality (Jun 15, 2017)

Well no 4k means I will not buy this for certain and will wait for full frame mirrorless instead. Currently I have a 6d


----------



## Etienne (Jun 15, 2017)

I am amazed at difficulty Canon has offering 4K compared to other manufacturers. 
It doesn't rule this camera out for me, but 4K is expected today, it's not a headline feature.
Within a year the third iteration of the Sony A7s and A7r will likely be out, and they will both likely feature:

On sensor AF to rival Canon's DPAF
IBIS
Really good 4K
High frame rate 1080p
Amazing low light performance
and much more

The A7S II and A7R II are highly praised, and version III will of course be better. Canon should have something to line up against this, but they don't seem interested. Sure the 6D2 isn't intended to go up against the A7's, but omitting 4K signals disdain for the reality of todays expectations... expectations of which the other manufacturers seem more attuned toward.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

No 4k is going to cause forum warriors to go crazy. But most likely in reality, how many more cameras would 4k sell? Probably not enough to warrant it.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 15, 2017)

Hellish said:


> 1080p is a JOKE
> 
> This isn't how you separate lines in 2017
> 
> iPhones have had 4k for a few iterations....



Use your iphone and get wonderful 4K. My iphone 6+ does not have 4K, so how many iterations is a few? Maybe you are counting iphone 7, 8 and 9?


----------



## Macoose (Jun 15, 2017)

Looks like I'll finally move up to FF.
Can't wait to read some reviews and check out the manual.
Hopefully, there will be at least 6fps. I don't care about 4k. 
I am looking forward to the better ISO performance of FF as compared to APS-C.


M


----------



## dlee13 (Jun 15, 2017)

Specs looks really good to me, hopefully all 45 AF points are cross type. I'm eager to find out the max shutter and sync speeds when the full specs release. 

I personally don't do any video so I couldn't care less that there's no 4K.


----------



## rwvaughn (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> I am amazed at difficulty Canon has offering 4K compared to other manufacturers.
> It doesn't rule this camera out for me, but 4K is expected today, it's not a headline feature.
> Within a year the third iteration of the Sony A7s and A7r will likely be out, and they will both likely feature:
> 
> ...



I understand that there are Canon users who were hoping respectable 4K would make it into the 6Dii and 5Div. It didn't, but these cameras will still sell, and sell well. I honestly don't have that many clients who even have the ability to display 4K, and by the time I do have clients clamoring for 4K then 8K and better displays will be available. My clients won't have those latest and greatest displays even then though. 4K has not taken hold in large enough numbers for it to be a worrisome point. Yes, there are people that would like Canon to put 4K in every single model they sell, but they would argue that they have a Cinema line for that.


----------



## Etienne (Jun 15, 2017)

rwvaughn said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > I am amazed at difficulty Canon has offering 4K compared to other manufacturers.
> ...



4K is not only about delivering in 4K. I thought all videographers would understand that by now. 4K allows so many more options:

The ability to crop, and still have excellent 1080p
The ability to stabilize footage and still render in 1080p
Downsizing from 4K to 1080p results in a superior image than shooting in 1080p
Green screen delivers better edges
The ability to shoot a two person interview with one camera and still get the two-shot, and close ups on both individuals as necessary.
Extracting usable photos from 4K footage. They can be good enough to use in promo material.

Downplaying the importance of 4K because you don't deliver in 4K is missing the point. BTW ... most photographers buying these 25-50 MP stills camera rarely look at the image larger than about 2 MP. I even remember old dinosaurs saying things like "a real photographer doesn't need more than 8MP because he can frame it right when he takes the shot." Or better still ... "who needs autofocus, a real photographer can do a better job."

The omission of 4K stands out, and not in a good way.


----------



## da_guy2 (Jun 15, 2017)

I almost never shoot video, so for me, this will be a welcome upgrade.


----------



## sanj (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> rwvaughn said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



Yes yes yes yes. True.


----------



## geekyrocketguy (Jun 15, 2017)

What about GPS?!

As an astro-landscape photographer who is forever shooting in remote, off-trail places, GPS is extremely important to me.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 15, 2017)

geekyrocketguy said:


> What about GPS?!
> 
> As an astro-landscape photographer who is forever shooting in remote, off-trail places, GPS is extremely important to me.



I expected GPS to be there, maybe it will be added yet. Personally, I'd turn it off because it runs down the battery in short order. However, I also understand that some would make good use of it.

I had predicted a FF version of the 80D, but apparently the 80D has no GPS, you have to use the add-on module. Its shaping up very much like a FF 80D for a much higher starting price.


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> rwvaughn said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



This. +1

And- the new Playstation Pro and Xbox consoles will push consumer 4K viewing farther into the mainstream. It's not a fad. I know the usual Canonrumors crowd here will disagree, but given the shelf life for Canon hardware, this is really a huge mistake for video and hybrid shooters out there.


----------



## geekyrocketguy (Jun 15, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> geekyrocketguy said:
> 
> 
> > What about GPS?!
> ...



I hope you're right and it was just forgotten in this post, but will exist in the camera. 

In my experience, GPS only kills the battery quickly if the reception is poor (e.g. indoors). If I'm consistently outdoors, I can GPS log with the minimum interval time for ~2 days straight, or geotag my photos (but not log) for even longer than that.


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Hellish said:
> 
> 
> > 1080p is a JOKE
> ...



Actually, he's quite right. 1080p-only is a joke in $2K plus camera body when you can get it in an iPhone. These things should be included for the money.

P.S. The iPhone 6S and 7 both have 4K, so Hellish is correct about that.


----------



## davidj (Jun 15, 2017)

45 autofocus points is welcome news.

I'm a stills-only kind of guy, so lack of 4K wouldn't affect me should I get this camera, but my sense is that Canon has struggled to get enough processing power inside the power/heat envelope to handle 4K, which isn't good. Maybe next generation they will have caught up to where the ball is now.

I could be wrong, but isn't Canon's "modern" way of doing GPS to use a Bluetooth connection with a phone and using the phone's GPS, like the M6?


----------



## hmatthes (Jun 15, 2017)

I'm ready even though a few important details are missing. 
GPS is very important, is part of 6D, expect it on 6D2
Dual SD cards? Highly desirable but not deal breaker
4K video -- not a deal breaker, I rarely record video
45 focus points -- This is the reason to upgrade! 11 points has been horrible!
Image quality will improve, was already great. 
Dynamic range at ISO 100 for even more shadow detail... hope so!


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> No 4k is going to cause forum warriors to go crazy. But most likely in reality, how many more cameras would 4k sell? Probably not enough to warrant it.



Answer: they would sell a good deal more cameras. If forums are burning up over no 4K, it would stand to reason that many people would want to buy it, no? 

With usable full-frame or 1.3x crop 4K (with Clog) to get them excited, video and hybrid shooters would buy it like crazy. People love the Canon stills, and love their color science. 

This is Canon blatantly "protecting" their higher-end cameras. It would cost very little R&D to implement 4K in the 6DII. 

Now, cue Neuro with how Canon marketing is infallible. :


----------



## honestlo (Jun 15, 2017)

won't consider without 4K !!

This will be a camera for coming 4 years before the mark III come out.

Nowaday, almost every new smartphone and new cameera has 4K recording capability.


----------



## Matthew Saville (Jun 15, 2017)

If it has the all-cross-type AF system of the 80D, then that's not bad, but still probably not on par with the 5D3 let alone the 5D4. That, plus a lack of dual SD card slots, would make this a downright shameful upgrade to the 6D. The lack of 4K would be just a slap in the face, salt in the wound.

But hey, they haven't mentioned that it DOESN'T have dual card slots yet, and maybe the 45 pt AF is good enough for professional use. That'd put the camera in decent contention against the D750. But if a D760 came out in the next 6-12 months with 4K video, that'd be embarrassing. Not that Nikon's 4K standards / implementation are *that* enviable, though.


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 15, 2017)

dlee13 said:


> Specs looks really good to me, hopefully all 45 AF points are cross type. I'm eager to find out the max shutter and sync speeds when the full specs release.
> 
> I personally don't do any video so I couldn't care less that there's no 4K.



I've could have written this post. Other then I expect the max shutter and flash sync speeds to remain the same, aka a notch below the 5D line. Both fall into the "nice to have category" but in practice neither has been a real factor.

Good to hear about the possible 45 point AF system. Although where cameras are at today, it seems absurd to come out with a $2k camera and offer anything less.


----------



## YellowJersey (Jun 15, 2017)

Seems well suited to my needs (landscape photography that's almost always on a tripod). I'll probably be replacing my 5D mkIII with this, as the 5D mkIV is overkill and too expensive for me. But, my needs/wants are probably atypical these days, given the popularity of video. 

I don't shoot video, so I don't really care about the lack of 4k. That said, I think Canon is handing Panasonic and Sony the video market on a silver platter since people interested in a sub $4000 camera for video aren't even going to consider a C series camera as it's simply out WAAAAAAY of their price range. Hell, the Fuji GFX 50 is probably ideally suited for my needs, yet it's not an option as it's simply out of my price range. For every cinema camera Canon sells, they probably push 30 people to their competition and lose all the money from camera, lens, and accessory sales that go along with them. And yes, I know Canon is going to sell cameras regardless, but in a shrinking camera market, it can only do this for so long before Canon's imaging division finds itself in a similar position to Nikon. Canon has the potential to dominate the DSLR/mirrorless video market and they perplexingly choose not to in order to protect a niche line of cinema cameras. Seems weird, but it will come back to bite Canon, and hard.


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 15, 2017)

honestlo said:


> won't consider without 4K !!
> 
> This will be a camera for coming 4 years before the mark III come out.
> 
> Nowaday, almost every new smartphone and new cameera has 4K recording capability.



Well, a DSLR is a stills camera first and foremost. Frankly 1080p is more than fine for home videos. If anyone is serious about video then they are buying more of a dedicated video camera. The whole "right tool for the job" sort of thinking.


----------



## CanoKnight (Jun 15, 2017)

Every few years Canon tinkers with the specs, repackages the same sh** and sells it to us as an 'upgrade'. The last true novelty that I can think of that came from Canon was DPAF and that was a number of years ago. Meanwhile Sony has leapfrogged ahead with the A9. And Panasonic owns the video market in the sub $7000 category.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > No 4k is going to cause forum warriors to go crazy. But most likely in reality, how many more cameras would 4k sell? Probably not enough to warrant it.
> ...



Probably not. People clamouring for it, but the proof is in who spends money. Not forum whiners. 

Canon managed to gain marketshare with no 4k cameras. It's hard to say the market for 4k is this popular. 

Especially on DSLRs. 

It's certainly wasn't going to get better than the 5D, that's just laughable


----------



## -1 (Jun 15, 2017)

geekyrocketguy said:


> What about GPS?!
> 
> As an astro-landscape photographer who is forever shooting in remote, off-trail places, GPS is extremely important to me.



https://play.google.com/store/search?q=gpslogger&c=apps&hl=en


----------



## Orangutan (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...


+1



> Canon managed to gain marketshare with no 4k cameras. It's hard to say the market for 4k is this popular.


+1


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Hellish said:
> ...


I must have missed the part where the iPhone is made by canon or has a full frame sensor.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2017)

Sounds like a fantastic camera for the money to me, especially in another year or three.

No 4k, I don't care.
No GPS, I don't care.

Canon has another winner here in my opinion.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Those iPhone sensors are yuuuuge! On those little screens the difference between 4K and 420p is amazing.


----------



## deadwrong (Jun 15, 2017)

No 4k? Sounds like this camera is already dated.

I really want one for stills though. I cant just keep waiting for Canon to get it right. 5dIv was a big disappointment.
I like Canon, but gotta admit Sony is coming with that A7iii very shortly that will make this Camera look 5 years old.

Guess I will watch the reviews first on this one.


----------



## timmy_650 (Jun 15, 2017)

I am super happy about Spec but I am not sure if I will upgrade.I know I wont for the first 9 months but maybe when the price drops and there are refurbished models.
I am happy they are crippling the video, I have taken like 3 videos in the years I have owned my camera and I don't have the money/time to edit 4K.


----------



## Pixel (Jun 15, 2017)

I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## In-The-Dark (Jun 15, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> 45pt AF (We’re not sure if they’re all cross-type)
> Touchscreen
> Approx 100% viewfinder



Yay! If these hold true and materialize, already a very good reason to upgrade from a 6D.
Eliminates focus-and-recompose (well maybe most of it).


----------



## cerealito (Jun 15, 2017)

No 4K video means that no serious videographer will be buying this for 2000+ dollars, specially in 2017.

Some will say that _"this is a stills camera"_ , ok fine, but then why won't they give us maximum stills IQ by removing the Antialiasing filter?... _"Oh! that's in case you are shooting video"_.

see?


----------



## cellomaster27 (Jun 15, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Sounds like a fantastic camera for the money to me, especially in another year or three.
> 
> No 4k, I don't care.
> No GPS, I don't care.
> ...



I really don't care for 4K and GPS so I'm with you on this. But on the other hand, it is a bit frustrating to see canon leaving out 4K when most other companies have included 4K in so many cameras. I can understand not killing the 5D4 by leaving out 4K option but then I think they should've included the 4K on the 5D4 for the 6DII and given the 5D4 the proper 4K shooting ability.. but then there's the cinema line. idk I think the industry is very much ready for 4K for most consumers. If you are using an iMac, it would be frustrating to shoot 1080p with a 5K monitor. but then maybe ML can fix that for us. Regardless, since most people will evaluate value for bang with pure specs, canon is falling behind. I could care less. 

I'm super super excited to see 45 AF points! Much more than I expected considering the original 6D only had a measly 9 points.


----------



## cerealito (Jun 15, 2017)

Pixel said:


> I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.



Considering that my iphone 6s from 2015 does it no-problem... i would say no.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jun 15, 2017)

This is an entry level FF. Why would Canon load it up with goodies that the higher end bodies have? 
At least you got a flippy screen.


----------



## Dvash7 (Jun 15, 2017)

If no 4K is the only way to "nerf" it and make it come in at the ~$2000 of the original 6D then so be it.
Hell, if it had no video at all and no GPS and was even lower in price I'd be over the moon!
It's an entry-level FF DSLR. If you want it to be something else, get a 5D4.


----------



## Berowne (Jun 15, 2017)

The Specs are ok. Canon will give us another Camera, where Buttons dont wobble, layout of Settings is userfriendly and production-quality is impeccable. Who needs more?


----------



## Zv (Jun 15, 2017)

Even if it had 4K it would be a feeble attempt at it and there would be the inevitable complaints as to it's uselessness! Canon probably thought it better to leave it out altogether. Who knows? Doesn't put me off in the slightest. I'll be glad if 4K is excluded as it would be a wasted feature. Maybe this will keep the cost reasonable too? 

45 point AF system sounds pretty decent. Hopefully a couple of those are cross type 

So far it's looking like what we expected it to look like.


----------



## Zv (Jun 15, 2017)

cerealito said:


> Pixel said:
> 
> 
> > I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.
> ...



And just what size is the sensor on the 6s? I bet it doesn't take much processing power to run 4K from a piddly little sensor from a smartphone. It's a whole 'nuther story when dealing with the massive amounts of data produced by a FF sensor every second. 

Same argument as why smaller sensors can do faster FPS burst. 

However, in this day and age I would expect the processing power issue to have been licked. So, this does seem a little disappointing it doesn't have 4K of some sort.


----------



## sanj (Jun 15, 2017)

Zv said:


> cerealito said:
> 
> 
> > Pixel said:
> ...



I believe 1dc, 1dx2 or 5d4 all do not use full frame.


----------



## padam (Jun 15, 2017)

I guess it will have UHS-I SD cards slots, which can't handle the MJPEG 4k like the 5D Mark IV anyway.

Also, it would be weird, if it had 4k with a slightly better crop factor than that camera.

And this hardware limitation will prevent continuous RAW video recording with Magic Lantern if they crack it...


Still, it is annoying because it is not something that couldn't have been included (not to mention a better, more efficient 4k codec for all the DSLRs, so you don't need those cards in the first place)
It's not like they are going to update the 6D line any time soon, with the C200 they have included some new higher-end features, but those are only slowly creeping in to the lower priced cameras.

In conclusion: if you need a Canon DSLR for 4k video, you need to buy the Mark IV and tons of cards and deal with the crop factor just to have the Canon colors and the Dual-Pixel AF.

I guess that at least the US price might not be any higher than the original 6D at its introduction. The EU price will be high though.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Pixel said:


> I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.



Well the 5DMk4 with Digic 6 can do 4K, so if the 6DMk2 has Digic 7?

My take on this is that it is a positive step. The 6D is a stills camera with a bit of video, but mainly stills. If you want video then go and buy the 5DMk4 or the C300.

I am glad that Canon spend the money on the stills parts and sacrificed the video, or we could have ended up with a body that does stills and video in a substandard way.

Of course, lets wait for the reviews on the stills capability before we get too excited.

Also, I guess these are still 'rumoured' specifications?


----------



## padam (Jun 15, 2017)

Ever since Magic Lantern we know that all these limitations are deliberate ones, which don't make the camera 'better' in any way, it is simply crippling some of the features.
It just makes clearer differentiation between the models, which was always a marketing strategy used by Canon.


----------



## dflt (Jun 15, 2017)

Ah, my only concern is the weeny 26 mpix sensor.


----------



## Besisika (Jun 15, 2017)

For me it is a big fail.

And that is because of 4K

Many says "I don't care, because I never do video". How about "never say never"?
You have trouble in life and will have to sell some of you gear. You lost already half of buyers because your 6D II doesn't do 4K. Your son wants to enter photography and you want to give to him your 6D - he says no because he wants 4K. Not because you don't need 4K that he doesn't need it either. You do portraiture and you realized that you don't have enough customers and someone suggested behind the scenes in Youtube would be a good idea - but you don't do video. And so on and so on. Simply put, you never know your tomorrow need. 

Some says that if you need 4K go to 5D IV. That must be a lack of understanding of the difference between 5D and 6D from a video perspective.
The main attractive feature of the 6D is its size and weight. It is not a stupidity that competitors are trying at all cost to stick to small size (even though they still fail in other domains because of it).
The future of video is camera movement and it brings your footage to the competitors level. The one that is the most popular today is handheld stabilizers. Ignoring the fact that 5D is at the heaviest size when using stabilizers is a big mistake. The issue is the number of good lenses that you can use. The lighter the body the more options you have.
Someone already listed good reasons why 4K is the key to video and I am glad he put at the top of the list the most important one, which is cropping in post, in other words zooming in post.
The approach in videography is "shoot for the edit", something that we photographers do not understand, we desperately want to get it right in camera. 4K gives you that possibility, and yet you remove it from your best camera for the job.
So you will end up with two gears; one is very heavy (shooting 4 hours on a heavier gear is more painful) and the other one without zooming in post.

Finally, if you have already a 1DX II or C200, why would you buy a 6D II if it cannot do 4K?
Yes, the bulk of your videography is still tripod, monopod and sliders, but that fluid movement is something that would add 3D illusion to your footage, in particular your B-roll.
I have no doubt in my mind, a 6D II with 4K would attract (or I should say keep your existing) customers a lot more.


----------



## tomscott (Jun 15, 2017)

This is great news well speced camera.

Looking forward to the 5DMKVI dropping in price now like the III did.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Besisika said:


> Someone already listed good reasons why 4K is the key to video and I am glad he put at the top of the list the most important one, which is cropping in post, in other words zooming in post.
> The approach in videography is "shoot for the edit", something that we photographers do not understand, we desperately want to get it right in camera. 4K gives you that possibility, and yet you remove it from your best camera for the job.



Well, the video modes were never going to be better than the 5DMk4. And the idea of shooting in 4K to crop to HD is n't a great one as the 5DMk4 only does 30fps in UHD. In a world where devices don't support interlaced video so well (mobiles, tablets etc) where they are optimised for progressive, you really need to be creating 1080p50/60.

So even in the 6D had some form of UHD, I think your cropping use case might not be so useful?

What do you think?


----------



## Frodo (Jun 15, 2017)

I have a 6D (and before that a 5DII and 5D).
What I miss most on the 6D is focusing outside the centre point and the crippled auto-ISO.
What I like is image quality, relatively small size and light weight, plus GPS.
I don't need 4K video.
Provided this camera has GPS, better focusing and better auto-ISO, I'd consider an upgrade.

In terms of sensor resolution, I have some very nice 36 x 12 inch prints from my 12 MP 5D mark I, some of which have been sold.
26MP is fine, provided IQ is good.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Frodo said:


> I have a 6D (and before that a 5DII and 5D).
> What I miss most on the 6D is focusing outside the centre point and the crippled auto-ISO.
> What I like is image quality, relatively small size and light weight, plus GPS.
> I don't need 4K video.
> ...



I currently use a 5DMk2. I am interested, as you sold your 5DMk2 for the 6D, what you think of the difference between the 6d and 5DMk2 in terms of IQ and operation?


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jun 15, 2017)

Well. If those specs are accurate(and I doubt they will be 100% accurate) or even close then it should be a great entry level FF DSLR. WHICH IS WHAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE!!!!!!!. These comments about it being no good for pro work because of this or that reason are ridiculous. It isn't meant to be a pro camera FFS. And if by not implememnting 4K they can keep the price down and reliability up then that is awesome.


----------



## xps (Jun 15, 2017)

Hmmm... The specs look quite ok, except the missing 4k function. 
What do I hope it will be?
An lighter body as my 5DIV with an faster and wider AF system than the 6D has (Don´t misunderstand me, I took shots at airshows with the 6D that were muuuuch better than on the 7DII). And all cross type AF points. (A must, as nearly all cheaper bodies do have it).
And an improved image and low light quality (better than the very good existing of the 6D). 
Touchscreen like on my 5DIV.

4K would have been great, as it is a pleasure to film animals in 4k and see it on your 4k TV or monitor at home. 

But I do not think, the body will be priced lower than 2000€. I know, the marvellous D750 is lower than 1900€ here in Germany. I think Canon will try to milk the cow as much at it can be miked.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 15, 2017)

Besisika said:


> You lost already half of buyers because your 6D II doesn't do 4K.



Really?



Besisika said:


> Your son wants to enter photography and you want to give to him your 6D - he says no because he wants 4K.


Your son want to enter a PHOTO competition and refuses loan of a camera because it doesn't have 4K What an idiot. Perhaps he ought to learn what a photo is.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jun 15, 2017)

Seriously dumb Canon as usual crippling camera to protect more "expensive" cameras. leaving out 4k on a camera that is supposed to last next 3 years on market is idiotic to say the least.


----------



## Frodo (Jun 15, 2017)

wildwalker said:


> I currently use a 5DMk2. I am interested, as you sold your 5DMk2 for the 6D, what you think of the difference between the 6d and 5DMk2 in terms of IQ and operation?



The 5dII annoyed me through banding in shadows that was difficult if not impossible to remove in post-production. This is far less of an issue with the 6D. I feel that dynamic range is better, partly because shadows can be pushed more. And high ISO quality is also better. 6400 is like 3200 on the 5DII. I also like the silent shutter as I do a lot of event photography - the silent 6D shutter is actually quieter than the M3 shutter. Plus I like the lighter, smaller body, especially when paired with the 35/2 and 85/1.8. I got used to the absence of the joystick and the more clumsy review enlarge function. I'd like a slightly higher flash synch for fill flash, but can always use high-speed synch. The centre focus point on the 6D is better than on the 5DII, but the others are just as bad.

The 6D was a lot cheaper than a 5dIII and image quality is equal or better, provided:
- focus is accurate
- there is no motion blur (I tend to shoot aperture priority with auto-ISO - this is okay if I manually set the minimum shutter speed, as the auto function gives me 1/focal length which is often insufficient to stop motion blur).
The 5DIII has undeniably better AF and more flexible auto-ISO. So sometimes I have buyer's remorse in not getting a 5DIII.
But the 6D is, in my view, a better camera than the 5DII.


----------



## Zv (Jun 15, 2017)

sanj said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > cerealito said:
> ...



Ah! My limited knowledge of video is showing! You are quite correct of course.


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Jun 15, 2017)

Besisika said:


> For me it is a big fail.
> 
> 
> Many says "I don't care, because I never do video". How about "never say never"?
> You have trouble in life and will have to sell some of you gear. You lost already half of buyers because your 6D II doesn't do 4K. Your son wants to enter photography and you want to give to him your 6D - he says no because he wants 4K.



One can't forsee the future. For me it is important to buy something I have a need or wish for today and not what will be in the future. I buy the camera at first for me and my pleasure and not for the one who will get it used after I've sold it.

By the way:
I don 't think that the typicall 6D2 user will be the one to take 4k footage for professional usage. Someone who has to look on ones purse will happily buy a 6D2 and will be ok with filming his familiy footage in1080p which in most cases will be shown to an audience once in a lifetime because for other people such footage is mostly boring, is shakened, a lot of zooming and panning goes on, has poor audio and so on.
There is more to good looking footage than having 4k with the ability to crop it down to 1080p and deshaking possibilities. Quality is not only manifested in the number of pixels but also in the content of ones footage.
Professional footage needs more than one person doing all the stuff. Director, cameraman, cutter,... These are all skills that are needed which seldon are found in one person to take good video footage. Where is the need to show this mostly crappy kind of familiy event footage in 4k?

Why some people do complain that even smart phones does have 4k? Why just don't use the smart phone for the 4k footage? Most probably you will have it with you more often then a DSLR body. It should be sufficient at least for all this lousy family event footage. A DSLR is also not the best (in ergonomic means) body shape for taking video footage.

Ah wait, the smart phone is not comfortable to hold to do video footage or the 4k capabilities are crippled somehow. Than these people are comparing apples and pears when they expect fully functioning 4k in a DSLR which is build for stills as main purpose. These DSLR are only happen to have a video record button accidentally.
Just for having the possibilitiy to take some footage as padding. I think it was never ment to replace real video cameras. But a lot of people expect exactly this.

best regards
Frank


----------



## whatfind (Jun 15, 2017)

cerealito said:


> No 4K video means that no serious videographer will be buying this for 2000+ dollars, specially in 2017.
> 
> Some will say that _"this is a stills camera"_ , ok fine, but then why won't they give us maximum stills IQ by removing the Antialiasing filter?... _"Oh! that's in case you are shooting video"_.
> 
> see?



LMAO


fanboys here are the most strangest thing on earth. 

EVERY CAMERA they beg for Canon like _ "less function! more function we will die. " _, while Canon respond them every time with a* "higher price with less functions" * on their face.

Oh, maybe they are not Canon fanboys, might from some other companies :


----------



## JoSto (Jun 15, 2017)

One has to accept that the technology of DSLRs have reached a niveau from where it is really hard to improve. As an Example, I own the more than 5 years old 1DX and feel little to none need to upgrade to the mark 2. Just compare that to the difference between the 1dmk3 and the 1dmk4.

As the improvement of the top-of-the line bodies is stagnating there is little room for 3 FF Cameras, all three priced at very different niveaus.

If the specs are correct, the 6Dmk2 will be ~very~ strong for non-action non-sports still-shooters who care mainly about image quality. If one needs the fast framerate they can get a used 1dx or new 1dx2. Little place for the 5dmk4 here. If high-Mpx is your thing, there is already the 5dsR.

Im not into Video but from what I heared the 4k modus of the 5d4 is just a joke, so that may not be a main concern if one chooses between the 5d4 and 6d2.


----------



## IglooEater (Jun 15, 2017)

I don't do video. I don't need 4K. However I will still find it downright insulting if it's not included on a $2,000 camera


----------



## Zv (Jun 15, 2017)

I gather (like most skills) videography is just about knowing how to use the gear you have and a pro could get by with a smartphone and still churn out great work due to their knowledge of lighting, audio and most of all hiring decent actors! 

If you gave me a 10 year old DSLR I'd be fairly happy snapping away and would be confident I could get great shots in the right location at the right time. Having a FF camera just makes things a little bit easier for me not to mention a lot of fun. Do I really need 26Mpix? Nah, probably not. 20 would've been just fine. 

So I guess 4K is like that. Even if I had a 4K capable camera I would still produce the crappiest, wobbliest, low quality video ever seen because I don't frickin know what I'm doing with video! I would need to study and practice to get the most out of it. A feature is only as good as the person's ability to use it. 

So how many are genuinely bummed out that they can't do video at 4K and stills and still have change for the bus? Or are some folk just wanting a feature for the sake of it. You know 4K isn't going to improve your cat videos, right?


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Frodo said:


> wildwalker said:
> 
> 
> > I currently use a 5DMk2. I am interested, as you sold your 5DMk2 for the 6D, what you think of the difference between the 6d and 5DMk2 in terms of IQ and operation?
> ...



Thank you Frodo.


----------



## BXL (Jun 15, 2017)

Hellish said:


> 1080p is a JOKE


If you want to shoot video, get a dedicated video camera or an iPhone instead.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 15, 2017)

Besisika said:


> For me it is a big fail.
> 
> And that is because of 4K
> 
> ...



More meaningless whining by the video freaks. Let's break it down.

1) I don't buy cameras for resale value.

2) You're probably wildly overestimating the number of secondhand Canon buyers looking for 4k video - plenty of people still buy used bodies without video, or without video anywhere near what even the 6D2 is rumored to supply. It's much harder to do, and do right, and post process, than stills. (Its fans are just very, very loud.)

3) If my hypothetical son doesn't want a free camera, well, he can buy whatever he prefers. When my uncle went to teach English in China and gave me his old Ford Tempo, I didn't throw it back in his face - I was thrilled to have a free car.

4) "Shoot for the edit". Sure that would be nice. That's why when you want to shoot video, you reach for a video camera that's designed for what you want to do.

5) If you have a 1DX2 or C200, you're right, this wouldn't make a great backup video body. Canon didn't intend it for that purpose. Why not complain that the SL2 won't be suitable for that, either?

Why do you video freaks want Canon to fulfill your wish list so bad? If Sony, Fuji, and Panasonic are so much better, why not just use them?


----------



## AA (Jun 15, 2017)

No 4K would be simply unacceptable in H2 2017. This camera will not be replaced until 2021/22. That means, you would be sitting there with this thing in 2021/22 with no 4K video. WTF Canon???

No 4K = no buy.

Next stop Sony?


----------



## lightwriter (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> I am amazed at difficulty Canon has offering 4K compared to other manufacturers.
> It doesn't rule this camera out for me, but 4K is expected today, it's not a headline feature.
> Within a year the third iteration of the Sony A7s and A7r will likely be out, and they will both likely feature:
> 
> ...



I fully agree with the wish Canon would step it up as far as what seems to boneheaded limitations to their new models. That said, the 6Dii will presumably still be the "introductory" full frame in the Canon line. Comparing it to the A7 line from Sony is not exactly apples to apples.

For a person like me, who is wanting to move up from crop to full frame, those specs still look pretty good. Besides, I'm on Windows (no jokes, please), and I can't stand the way Windows looks at 4k resolution. I bought a 4k monitor and had to return it because I couldn't read text on it. There is still a huge percentage of the market that doesn't have monitors higher than 1080p.

That all said, they are really going to have to be careful of the price point on this. Right now, my money's saved and I'm ready to pull the trigger. But if it's priced too close to the 5Div, I might as well save up a few more months and get that.


----------



## Bernard (Jun 15, 2017)

wildwalker said:


> I currently use a 5DMk2. I am interested, as you sold your 5DMk2 for the 6D, what you think of the difference between the 6d and 5DMk2 in terms of IQ and operation?



In a nutshell, the 6D gives you around a stop more ISO at the high end (3200 on the 6D is like 1600 on the 5D2).
The main operational difference is that you don't get the joystick at the back.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jun 15, 2017)

AA said:


> No 4K would be simply unacceptable in H2 2017. This camera will not be replaced until 2021/22. That means, you would be sitting there with this thing in 2021/22 with no 4K video. WTF Canon???
> 
> No 4K = no buy.
> 
> Next stop Sony?



Luckily you can buy a Sony then. For me. As I travel to places like Antarctica and the Arctic and other remote places where I can not duck into a camera shop I will choose a less specd but more reliable bit of kit. One that won't let me down. Hell. I would take an entry level canon over a Sony every day of the week in that regard.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Bernard said:


> wildwalker said:
> 
> 
> > I currently use a 5DMk2. I am interested, as you sold your 5DMk2 for the 6D, what you think of the difference between the 6d and 5DMk2 in terms of IQ and operation?
> ...



Thanks Bernard, so I should see a good improvement from the 6Dmk2 over my 5DMk2. I use a variety of bodies, the 5DMk2, the 700D, the EOS-M so I don't have the joystick on all of them. But if the 6DMk2 has a touch screen, the rumours are flippy screen, but no one mentioned touch. Anyway, with touch screen the preview of photos is simple and doesn't require the joystick. Setting focus points/area is simple as well.

Does anyone know if touch screen has been muted?

Alan.


----------



## reef58 (Jun 15, 2017)

I don't do video, so I don't really care about video specs, however the lack of 4k would be pretty odd. I am not a marketing guru, but understand it some. You have a lot of talented folks out there making very good content with phones. A logical step up is a 6d. Many younger folks may not have the money to buy many tools to have the right tool for the job. They can afford one camera. This camera would likely not sell well to the above described market with no 4k. Sure it is nice for us more mature people to have several bodies or a separate video camera if need be. For a talented starving artist that is not an option likely. People don't like to switch brands. You want to get them while they are young.

That being said the camera will work fine for me, but I have 2 other bodies to fill voids.



LonelyBoy said:


> Besisika said:
> 
> 
> > For me it is a big fail.
> ...


----------



## Drum (Jun 15, 2017)

If Canon are having to protect the "Higher level" 5d and cinema lines doesn't that say something to you? what this camera does it does very well, It is designed as an ENTRY LEVEL CAMERA so it is not designed for professional level videography, people stating that a camera phone does 4k should then compare the actual output from a phone to output from a pro video cam. There is a reason for the price difference!


----------



## AA (Jun 15, 2017)

lightwriter said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > I am amazed at difficulty Canon has offering 4K compared to other manufacturers.
> ...



I'm on Windows, and run two 27" 4K screens via a surface Pro 4. They are so beautiful I almost died when I upgraded from 1080p. My GF promptly bought the same two 27" 4K screens for her setup. Believe me, once you go 4K, you'll never go back to 1080p. You can now buy 4K screens for $300. (I paid $350 for my 27" IPS screens each six months ago.)

You need to set text to 150% in Windows 10 when you use 4K screens. You won't have any issues reading text that way.That's the recommended setting. That's how it's supposed to scale. 

Not having 4K in 2017 in a full frame camera is simply unacceptable. My iPhones have been shooting 4K for years!!!! My DJI Mavic shoots 4K

WTF Canon?!


----------



## tomscott (Jun 15, 2017)

Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. If every person will shoot 4k with entry level cameras where is the evidence? There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.

How many entry level FF buyers are going to have A. a 4k or higher display and B. A machine fast enough to edit the footage. Affordable 4k displays have only been available for about 12 months.

Its a small percentage.

January 2017 screen resolution statistics show that 1366x768 which accounts for 35% of consumers.

In second place is 1920x1080 with 17%, 1440x900 6%, 2560x1440 1% 

Higher resolutions account for 6%.

This is probably the reason Canon has decided against 4k its just not popular enough in the target audience. The majority of people have 1080 displays. This camera isn't aimed toward pro video shooters its aimed at enthusiast photographers.


----------



## K (Jun 15, 2017)

I knew this would happen with the lack of 4K. (all the complaints)

What did you all expect? 4K better than the 5D4? Not happening. The 5D4's 4K is unusable. It's there in name only with the most pathetic codec ever.

I said way back when the 5D4 came out that nothing below it will exceed it on video, so if you're a video guy and unhappy with that, move on.


Canon's 1080 is fantastic. And well produced 1080 video is still relevant and amazing. BUT....it is very very clear now that Canon is *evicting *serious videographers from their DSLR line. It's now called Cinema EOS . Pay to play boys.

Canon DSLR video, since the big success of the 70D -- is going to be focused around amateur work. People happy with top notch 1080, soccer dads, hobbyists and maybe some semi-pros who do occasional vid but not regular work. 

That makes more sense to me, since I've always been anti-DSLR video from the start. DSLR is just a bad platform for video. DPAF and an articulating touch screen goes a long long way of making it reasonable for sure...but it's no where in the realm of a dedicated video camera for features, ease and use.

I GET IT...the video quality coming out of a FF DSLR rig with L glass is amazing, and rivals anything out there at a fraction of the cost. But to get the most out of it requires the camera be stationary mostly, or at least secured in a rig with focus pullers, LCD screen, lighting so forth and so on. It reminds me a little bit like medium format. It's pointless unless the entire system surrounding it is top quality and appropriate.

Sadly, with Canon obviously abandoning serious DSLR video you'd think they would up their game on the stills side but they haven't in terms of the 6D2 - which to compete on specs with Nikon, should have had the 61pt AF. We'll see if they come through with 2 slots (I seriously doubt it), and FPS of 6. 

They won't, because the flip screen and 45pt AF that has been for the most part confirmed has already used up the reasoned "available balance of generosity" on Canon's part. Expecting more at this point is unrealistic.....That and the fact that the FPS and slots haven't been leaked yet with the first batch of leaks indicates there's nothing interesting about those areas.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> rwvaughn said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...


+1


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Jun 15, 2017)

reef58 said:


> They can afford one camera.



But they can't do any Facebook, Whats App and other social media things with the camera and they even can't call their friends, so if they can't afford a camera without 4k they can't afford a camera with 4k either. They should probably better stick to their phone (jack of all trades). 

Frank


----------



## cerealito (Jun 15, 2017)

wildwalker said:


> The 6D is a stills camera with a bit of video, *but mainly stills*. If you want video then go and buy the 5DMk4 or the C300.





Photorex said:


> ... these people are comparing apples and pears when they expect fully functioning 4k in a DSLR which *is build for stills as main purpose*. These DSLR are only happen to have a video record button accidentally.



I hope we can expect no AA filter then!
After all, it would be stupid to degrade IQ of the stills (the _raison-d'être_ of this camera), only to correct the occasional moiré in 1080p videos that no one should be taking with this camera anyways  8)


----------



## AA (Jun 15, 2017)

No 4K is a real issue here. This will be a camera with an AF system that will make shooting video easy. A first for the 6D line. I've never used my 6D for videos as it was manual focus and only 30 frames per second in 1080p. I sued my Sony RX100 II for video instead. If the 6D II has proper live view AF, I WILL want to sue it for video. 1080p is unacceptable. It is intentionally dumbing down the camera. There is no reason not to include 4K here other than Canon's desire to charge more for 4K. That is so stupid. They are not competing with the their cinema line here. They are competing with Sony / Panasonic / cell phone camera! There is a reason why the camera market is shrinking. Cell phone makers make it easy for us to create 4K content. CaNikon does not. They are getting what they deserve.


----------



## K (Jun 15, 2017)

Here we go again and again. I keep hearing the term "entry level" ...

Sure, it might be Canon's FF entry point --

BUT.....

It's going to be *$2,000*. Again, repeat that, *$2,000* and no 4K, not even 4K in name only to partially pacify some. *$2,000* and highly unlikely to have data redundancy of 2 lousy SD card slots. $2,000 and mid-2017...using a rehashed AF grid from many years ago.

Canon is extremely stingy in this price bracket for FF.


----------



## AA (Jun 15, 2017)

Not having 4K is outrageous. No, I do not want to take a C300 with me when I go on vacation. Even if i could afford two cameras. I only want to take one! One can do it all. Sonys can. And Sony also has a professional video camera line "to protect".

If Canon doesn't give us proper video just to "protect" their pro video line (that came about by accident!!!), then it's time to switch to Sony. Canon will never give us proper video in their still cameras. They have never had. And it is obviously intentional. They never will. Wanna go on vacation and shoot both stills and video? Check and log around a huge extra body so Canon can make more money. Or switch to Sony and travel light / don't break your back. 

Pathetic Canon, pathetic!


----------



## smr (Jun 15, 2017)

45 focus points, new sensor at 26mp now just need 6fps and i'll buy. Dont understand the 4k moaning... if video is so inportant why not just buy a good 4k camcorder? As i will be doing stills photography and a lot of landscape with some wildlife this looks like a great upgrade for me from a 700D.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

tomscott said:


> Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. If every person will shoot 4k with entry level cameras where is the evidence? There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> 
> How many entry level FF buyers are going to have A. a 4k or higher display and B. A machine fast enough to edit the footage. Affordable 4k displays have only been available for about 12 months.
> 
> ...



I do a reasonable amount of 4K video work. I don't have a 4K monitor, you don't 'need' one because you don't need to see the pixels 1:1 to work on video, especially if you are just top and tailing them with a still (ala youtube).

I do watch them on a 4K TV though. 

It's a mute point for me as I want my stills camera to excel at stills. Canon made a big deal about video with the launch of the 5DMk2, then started the C range of cameras and started to talk less about DSLR video. The 5DMk4 shows that Canon are not serious about video in DSLR.

If the lack of 4K keeps the price of the 6DMk2 down, then it is a good thing. I would rather have the features that matter (and we don't know yet if it does) but rather than UHD I would like to see 45 AF Crosspoint focus points, DPAF, improved DR and better noise handling. This is what a DSLR is for. Video feels like it always has just been an addon that the marketing people wanted, while the quality of video from my DSLR is great, the implementation is poor, nowhere near as thought out as the stills controls.

Alan.


----------



## Bernard (Jun 15, 2017)

In my experience, cheap 4K is worse than no 4K.

The only 4K you're going to get on an SD card is low-bitrate mush.
Canon is not a company to advertise a feature that can not be used (unlike some competitors).

The alternative is to send video out to an external recorder, but then you are spending an extra $2000 in accessories.


----------



## NaviUy (Jun 15, 2017)

Okay. I know that 4k is not necessary, but honestly I'm pretty disappointed that the 6dmkii wont have it. 

I'm a hybrid shooter. I'm not a professional but I do consider myself a hobbyist. Being that I'm currently a college student, its hard to get the money to get 2 cameras. Besides carrying 2 cameras around is a drag. And I get it! Sony is an option, but they just aren't on par with the quality of canons. I heard horror stories of Sony's corrosion issues. Don't even get me started about lens selection. 

I like shooting my travel, adventure, and car videos. I like shooting with handheld gimbals. Recording in 4k, then down scaling the footage to 1080 would give me so much room to work with.

So why don't I get a 5dmk4?

This is just not compatible with what I do. Its too heavy and bulky. You could literally murder somebody with a 5dmk4. Another factor is price. I'm a broke college student. The 5dmk4 is $3.3k for the body alone. ~2k body is much easier to swallow.

I think the moral of the story is that I was hoping for the perfect hybrid/all-rounder camera. What's disappointing was that canon got so close. 4k would have been amazing to work with. They didn't even give us 1080 120p. Brought this up multiple times, but I'm a broke college student. A camera is an investment for me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking for resale value. I looking for feature longevity. There's not going to be another iteration of the 6dmk for a long while. I just don't want to wait that long.

I get it, right now its not necessary. But think about this for a second. 4k accessibility is just around the corner in my opinion.

Okay, that's just me. A single person... an anomaly right? However, I don't think I'm an anomaly. I think college students are the perfect target demographic for entry level FF DSLRS. While you older folks can afford to buy multiple cameras, us yougins can barely afford the 6dmkii. 

Yeahhhh but... what about the other broke college students who aren't hybrid shooters? Why do they care about 4k?

Well, I think majority of the people my age are hobbyist. Just because they are photo shooters doesn't mean they don't want 4k. Video projects for example are becoming more popular and many college students have perfectionist personalities. 4k would just make it... better. Personally, I'm currently staffing in a school club. I enjoy taking video and pictures of my club activities.

Another argument to bring up is...

Whats better 4k or 1080? Obviously 4k. So why would you want less. Why would you argue that 1080 is good enough. Nothing is ever enough. The time when someone believes its enough is when innovation stops.


Anyway, just my personal rant. I'm ready now... flame me ;D


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

AA said:


> No 4K is a real issue here. This will be a camera with an AF system that will make shooting video easy. A first for the 6D line. I've never used my 6D for videos as it was manual focus and only 30 frames per second in 1080p. I sued my Sony RX100 II for video instead. If the 6D II has proper live view AF, I WILL want to sue it for video. 1080p is unacceptable. It is intentionally dumbing down the camera. There is no reason not to include 4K here other than Canon's desire to charge more for 4K. That is so stupid. They are not competing with the their cinema line here. They are competing with Sony / Panasonic / cell phone camera! There is a reason why the camera market is shrinking. Cell phone makers make it easy for us to create 4K content. CaNikon does not. They are getting what they deserve.



You said that 30 frames a second on the 6D for HD was unacceptable. The 5DMk4 only does 30fps in UHD, and that is way more unacceptable. So why complain about no UHD when it would, in your eyes, be unacceptable anyway?


----------



## reef58 (Jun 15, 2017)

I guess you made their decision for them. I am an older guy but don't discount the content being produced by the social media wizards. I was mainly speaking to someone who may be a fine arts major, or a serious budding artist. They have to choose one camera why choose one in this day and age without 4k? 



Photorex said:


> reef58 said:
> 
> 
> > They can afford one camera.
> ...


----------



## K (Jun 15, 2017)

NaviUy said:


> The 5dmk4 is $3.3k for the body alone. That's my tuition for a semester. ~2k body is much easier to swallow.



Canon is pay to play bud. Sorry. 

Look to competitors who offer what you need. They are in your price range, and don't buy into the exaggerated hype about Canon superiority. Yes, Canon is in my opinion the the best - but they're not *that *much better.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

NaviUy said:


> I think college students are the perfect target demographic for entry level FF DSLRS.



Lol...yeah, all those 'broke college students' who's mommy and daddy are paying their Ivy League tuition.


----------



## NaviUy (Jun 15, 2017)

K said:


> NaviUy said:
> 
> 
> > The 5dmk4 is $3.3k for the body alone. That's my tuition for a semester. ~2k body is much easier to swallow.
> ...



I hate that your right. But even disregarding the price, there is still so much benefits in having 4k in the 6d.


----------



## JMKE (Jun 15, 2017)

Finally its coming. Its gaining a bit in size. I was hoping it would be a bit lighter with th use of different material. (The D750 seems pretty lightweight as well).

Anyone knows if its gonna use the same battery's?


----------



## Etienne (Jun 15, 2017)

The absence of 4K is a strong signal that Canon wants to discourage videographers from using their non-Cinema cameras. This means that I won't trust even the quality of the 1080p that the 6D2 can produce until I see a full review of this camera. The 1080p might be soft, full of moire and aliasing, or have high rolling shutter, among other problems. 

The 6D2 will not be a pre-order for me. I'll have to wait for full reviews.


----------



## NaviUy (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> NaviUy said:
> 
> 
> > I think college students are the perfect target demographic for entry level FF DSLRS.
> ...




I mean... I'm not going to a Ivy League, but my parents sure as hell ain't buying me a camera ;D.

Neither are a lot of my friends. Many of my friends are on a nonprofit organizations media team. A lot of them are currently shooting on 6d and rent cameras when they actually need to do video shoots. I believe 4k on 6d would eliminate the need to pay ~$100+ in rentals.


----------



## cnc (Jun 15, 2017)

Right ON.


----------



## much (Jun 15, 2017)

No 4k.... Ummm thank you Canon I was waiting for this... Now i'm considering panasonic or sony

happy 6d owner


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

JMKE said:


> Finally its coming. Its gaining a bit in size. I was hoping it would be a bit lighter with th use of different material. (The D750 seems pretty lightweight as well).
> 
> Anyone knows if its gonna use the same battery's?



They have been using the same battery (LPE-6) for ages and it is the battery for everything bigger than a rebel (except the 1 series)... I really can not see them changing it....

As to the slight jump in size, why? The electronics will have shrunk and with the newer (finer) fabrication technologies it should consume less power.... The first thing that "pops up" to mind is a built in flash.... but it could also be more space for a bigger AF sensor or for more heat handling ability (4K?)....

It will be interesting to see what actually happens....


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

much said:


> No 4k.... Ummm thank you Canon I was waiting for this... Now i'm considering panasonic or sony
> 
> happy 6d owner



And you know this how? The specs are not out yet... wait till then to panic.......


----------



## leadin2 (Jun 15, 2017)

wildwalker said:


> Bernard said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



5D2 has joystick. I usually use it for live view. Might not be important since 6D2 has touch screen.


----------



## EduPortas (Jun 15, 2017)

This a premium camera. It should have 4k.

Otherwise, I don't see any reason to move from an original 6D to this second model.

We'll see. Hope the rumors are wrong in this case.


----------



## ctrl (Jun 15, 2017)

No 4K, great for my wallet


----------



## leadin2 (Jun 15, 2017)

I don't do video now but would love to try 4K one day. If no 4K, I hope Canon price it right (which we know won't happen). I'll wait for the rest of the specs and reviews.


----------



## -pekr- (Jun 15, 2017)

My take on the 4K issue is, that it is not about Canon wanting to protect their higher market, but about the state of the Canon technology. We've got on-chip ADC only with the laste incarnations of the DSLRs. Who knows, what Canon's FAB is in comparison to SONY's?

That means, that Canon wanting to provide only a solid stuff, plays the catch-up game, and have currently no technology, of how to easily provide their DSLR line with really solid 4K performance/IQ?

Just curious ....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> My take on the 4K issue is, that it is not about Canon wanting to protect their higher market, but about the state of the Canon technology. We've got on-chip ADC only with the laste incarnations of the DSLRs. Who knows, what Canon's FAB is in comparison to SONY's?
> 
> That means, that Canon wanting to provide only a solid stuff, plays the catch-up game, and have currently no technology, of how to easily provide their DSLR line with really solid 4K performance/IQ?
> 
> Just curious ....



Possibly. Could be a marketing decision. But Canon does have a history of deciding what they think is best for their target market, and giving them just that (and a history of making those decisions correctly, as far as the overall ILC market is concerned). There is some logic to the argument that if 4K can be implemented but only with low quality, then it shouldn't be done. It's not just the low-end cameras. For example, the 6D has in-camera HDR (as does my EOS M)...but the 1D X does not. Certainly, Canon _could_ include that feature in the 1-series. But they decided the target market for the 1-series either didn't want it, or shouldn't use it.


----------



## K (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> The absence of 4K is a strong signal that Canon wants to discourage videographers from using their non-Cinema cameras.




Exactly.

Sad thing is, with the exit from the video side of things - one would think they'd stack up on the stills capabilities. Nope. 

FF camera for soccer-dad video? $2,000? Hmmm.

Surely, the stuck-in-Canon system users will buy this rig to subsidize its existence for those who want FF but don't care for any substantial specs.

Based on the leaked specs thus far, the 6D2 shaping up to be a big time loser in terms of consumer value. Canon is so good in all the other lines, on this one they fall short.


----------



## photogdan (Jun 15, 2017)

tomscott said:


> Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. If every person will shoot 4k with entry level cameras where is the evidence? There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> 
> How many entry level FF buyers are going to have A. a 4k or higher display and B. A machine fast enough to edit the footage. Affordable 4k displays have only been available for about 12 months.
> 
> ...



I agree, 4k shouldn't be a deal breaker. I don't shoot video but maybe that's because it's a hassle for a casual video shooter on my 6D. I think people just want the option since every other manufacturer offers it. Sort of a "me too" option when debating with Sony fanboys. The lack of 4k is more embarrassing for some of the Canon faithful more than anything else. 

The articulating screen, along with higher resolution was at the top of my wishlist. I'm a bit disappointed with 26MP but I didn't expect them to trump the 5D4. Continued low-light capability is also a major factor for me so I get why 26MP is the choice. As long as it's priced like an entry-level FF DSLR, I'll be onboard. I believe most owners of the 6D will be too because no one purchased that camera for it's video capability.

I really like my Canon glass. Switching seems like such a painful and expensive option.


----------



## CanonCams (Jun 15, 2017)

photogdan said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. If every person will shoot 4k with entry level cameras where is the evidence? There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> ...



Coming from the 80D, the 6D MK II seems up my alley for a entry level FF. 4K doesn't have any interest for me.

They are saying the price will be just around 2k, or just under it.

Can't wait.


----------



## preppyak (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> No 4k is going to cause forum warriors to go crazy. But most likely in reality, how many more cameras would 4k sell? Probably not enough to warrant it.


Remember that this is a camera system. With DPAF and 4k, Canon would actually have a pretty legit camera to compete with the Sony A7-line and the GH5. And at a price point that is comparable. Because right now there are a lot of people who bought Canon lenses during the 5DII era and are adapting them to these cameras.

I know as one of them, I was hoping the 6dII was the camera that would bring me back to the system. All it had to do was match specs of cameras released 3 years ago (4k at 24/30fps, 1080 at 96fps) and I think a lot of people would have moved back for the all-around appeal.

Now, knowing that Canon wont release a 6DIII for years, i dont see much point in waiting or hoping


----------



## preppyak (Jun 15, 2017)

tomscott said:


> Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. If every person will shoot 4k with entry level cameras where is the evidence? There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> 
> How many entry level FF buyers are going to have A. a 4k or higher display and B. A machine fast enough to edit the footage. Affordable 4k displays have only been available for about 12 months.
> 
> ...


I can tell you dont shoot video if you are quoting screen size as a legitimate stat. As has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, 4k is more than just total resolution. The ability to downscale and crop and maintain 1080 image quality is key.

But most importantly, Canon has delivered some really shitty 1080 video quality in the last half decade. At at time when Panasonic and Sony were delivering quality 4k, Canon is struggling with 1080. Them adding 4k would be a signal that they've figured out their codec issues. Because I know they have in their Cine line. It'd also be a signal for higher frame rates at 1080. The GH4 does 96fps, the GH5 can do 180fps, and 60fps in 4k. 

Seems pretty clear Sony is gonna figure out how to match Canons auto focus abilities before Canon decides to spec a camera competitively


----------



## photogdan (Jun 15, 2017)

CanonCams said:


> photogdan said:
> 
> 
> > tomscott said:
> ...



Yeah, I went from 70D to 6D. Huge difference. I expect you'll notice a huge difference too. I much prefer FF although I have an M5 and my kids have a couple of M3's. I got the M5 for those times when I want to travel light, Problem is I rarely use it. I use the same lenses on the M5 as I do the 6D so the difference in size and weight isn't that much of a factor.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 15, 2017)

Besisika said:


> For me it is a big fail.
> 
> And that is because of 4K
> 
> ...


I know what you mean I paid BMW £ 45K for my 5 Series with a turbo charged 2.0l engine but on my Mini Cooper that cost £ 19K they only gave me a 1.5l engine don't BMW know Honda put a 2.0l engine in the Civic. 

Never understood the rational of 4K video in a DSLR, 4K is compromised in such offering as the most important part is the compression & codec, the broadcasters set minimum standards and these "toys" don't hit it including the Sony A7S II otherwise why would Sony make the FS7 or the F55 or the F65! 

The majority of Canon 6D users don't shoot video period, Canon know that because they do their research so why should the majority pay for something they don't need or use?


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > My take on the 4K issue is, that it is not about Canon wanting to protect their higher market, but about the state of the Canon technology. We've got on-chip ADC only with the laste incarnations of the DSLRs. Who knows, what Canon's FAB is in comparison to SONY's?
> ...



Personally, I was expecting to see 4K appear first on the Rebels.... Obviously compressed to death and not at 60Fps.... I think that for most people the quality really does not matter, all they want are some short clips. The number of people shooting a quality video will be quite low, but well represented here on CR


----------



## Etienne (Jun 15, 2017)

4K cannot be ignored, and with DPAF delivering the dream of reliable video autofocus it is only natural that videographers want it now, especially in full frame. 

The intimacy of an f/1.4 portrait lens on a FF is so tantalizing, but it is notoriously difficult to focus. Getting a 4K option with DPAF in full frame would not in anyway replace or compete with the cinema line, but it would add the ability get that full frame intimate look for key shots. 

Also, when travelling light, and/or alone, multiple cameras is not always possible. The idea that you should always have and use the perfect camera for the job, say 6D for stills and bring a C300 for video, is not only unrealistic, but bringing an excess of equipment can prevent you from getting the shots. Virtually every free lancer will have dealt with this issue. Having a compact stills/video/low light/ shallow DOF all in one camera is the needed too, and the right tool for the one-man-band freelancer ... even if they have to up the price.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> My take on the 4K issue is, that it is not about Canon wanting to protect their higher market, but about the state of the Canon technology. We've got on-chip ADC only with the laste incarnations of the DSLRs. Who knows, what Canon's FAB is in comparison to SONY's?
> 
> That means, that Canon wanting to provide only a solid stuff, plays the catch-up game, and have currently no technology, of how to easily provide their DSLR line with really solid 4K performance/IQ?
> 
> Just curious ....



I think you're right.

Canon simply donsn't have the technology outside of the video line, which are all vented and fan driven cameras.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> The majority of Canon 6D users don't shoot video period, Canon know that because they do their research so why should the majority pay for something they don't need or use?



I think it's a combination of this, and the fact that canon simply doesn't have a 4K solution that isn't MJPEG that can go into a DSLR.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

I would clearly join the WTF is canon thinking if they had a 4K solution that was compact, sealed from the environment and running on other DSLR's.

all they have right now is a hack job that lives side by side to the 1080p video stream from the sensor through DIGIC.

Face reality: canon can "do" 4K from the current cameras, only by scraping a windowed JPEG from the sensor 30/60 times a second by bypassing the video stream that encompasses the h.264 encoder, HDMI, etc entirely. It's easy and efficient to do in software and requires no additional camera hardware to pull it off.

Those saying that canon is deliberately crippling, or "could do it easily" are living in some kind of fantasy land that doesn't exist.

Their broadcast 4K solutions in the CINI line are done using single and dual DIGIC DV chips entirely different than the DIGIC's found in stills cameras - and they run hot and consume far more power than DIGIC's in stills.

Canon simply doesn't have it. Why is another question and for that - I agree with the 4K frothing at the teeth fans, they should. They are big enough with a large enough R&D budget that unless they have a locked in deal with TI for DIGIC. TI has no direct 4k or better effecient h.264 encoders. Period. Why they don't is beyond the pale as well. the ones they do have are heatsinked m'f'ers. if you look at the history of TI's encoders, you very clearly see a parallel march in canon's video support progression in DSLR's.

They could swap DryOS over to snapdragon SoC's without much problem (that's what DryOS was all about!!) if TI isn't giving them what they need. DryOS has it's own HAL (hardware abstraction layer) 

However, for whatever reason they don't. Complaining about it isn't going to get it on a camera, if you really need a hybrid solution, get a Sony. Maybe that will make canon wake up after a while.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> 4K cannot be ignored, and with DPAF delivering the dream of reliable video autofocus it is only natural that videographers want it now, especially in full frame.



Who said they are ignoring it? They just don't think it is important to the target market of the 6D2 and 5DIV - and given the amount of research they do to find out what people need, I trust their experience rather than your 'I want everything in one camera at the same price' view'. 




Etienne said:


> The intimacy of an f/1.4 portrait lens on a FF is so tantalizing, but it is notoriously difficult to focus. Getting a 4K option with DPAF in full frame would not in anyway replace or compete with the cinema line, but it would add the ability get that full frame intimate look for key shots.


Are you talking stills or video?
Do Sony offer 4K full frame vdieo with DPAF? Just asking. If not, why not go over to Sony and complain about their lack of technology?




Etienne said:


> Also, when travelling light, and/or alone, multiple cameras is not always possible. The idea that you should always have and use the perfect camera for the job, say 6D for stills and bring a C300 for video, is not only unrealistic, but bringing an excess of equipment can prevent you from getting the shots.


Which camera offers that 'one camera fits everything' role? Does Sony? Panasonic?



Etienne said:


> Virtually every free lancer will have dealt with this issue. Having a compact stills/video/low light/ shallow DOF all in one camera is the needed too, and the right tool for the one-man-band freelancer ... even if they have to up the price.


Which camera offers this?

The reason I ask 'which camera...' above is to see if one camera does do everything you want, and does everything to the highest level you would want. Please do enlighten me which camera is the one you would prefer given a free choice.


----------



## cerealito (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> I would clearly join the WTF is canon thinking if they had a 4K solution that was compact, sealed from the environment and running on other DSLR's.
> 
> all they have right now is a hack job that lives side by side to the 1080p video stream from the sensor through DIGIC.
> 
> ...



This actually makes *a lot* of sense.


----------



## reef58 (Jun 15, 2017)

Responding as I found the lack of 4k curious. I couldn't care less myself about 4k. I am really just thinking out loud. The 6d is an entry full frame. You would think something basic in this day and age such as 4k would lure buyers to the brand. Look at it this way, if you are coming from a phone and your interest is to break into a DSLR to do stills and video would you choose the 6d? Keeping in mind you have never owned a DSLR and don't own lenses? I suspect most of the younger generation and older people new to the game are going to choose a camera with 4k.

That being said I suspect the 6d target audience is the enthusiast who has owned cameras and wants to venture into full frame digital for the first time, and likely leans stills only. 



Mikehit said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > 4K cannot be ignored, and with DPAF delivering the dream of reliable video autofocus it is only natural that videographers want it now, especially in full frame.
> ...


----------



## hmatthes (Jun 15, 2017)

EduPortas said:


> This a premium camera. It should have 4k.
> 
> Otherwise, I don't see any reason to move from an original 6D to this second model.
> 
> We'll see. Hope the rumors are wrong in this case.



"I don't see any reason..." -- You are kidding I assume! Or may I assume you have not used a 6D?
I love the image quality of my 6D and I am 95+% stills -- I have better video solutions.
*The REAL reason to upgrade is the focus system. 11 points versus 45 points is HUGE for stills photographers.* If they make it easier to select the points (my 70D was far better than the 6D in this regard) I'll order on day One.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

preppyak said:


> Remember that this is a camera system. With DPAF and 4k, Canon would actually have a pretty legit camera to compete with the Sony A7-line and the GH5.



So Canon should include 4K in an attempt to compete with cameras and manufacturers who they are already vastly outselling? Yeah, that makes sense. :


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> 4K cannot be ignored



They're not. They're just not putting it in the 6DII.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 15, 2017)

EduPortas said:


> This a premium camera. It should have 4k.
> 
> Otherwise, I don't see any reason to move from an original 6D to this second model.
> 
> We'll see. Hope the rumors are wrong in this case.



On-chip ADC = considerably better sensor
Night and day upgrade to the AF system
Bump in resolution and fps 
Tilty-flippy touchscreen with DPAF

You're right, the 6D2 is shaping up to be junk. :

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Personally, I was expecting to see 4K appear first on the Rebels.... Obviously compressed to death and not at 60Fps.... I think that for most people the quality really does not matter, all they want are some short clips.



In that case, why is 4K necessary?


----------



## IglooEater (Jun 15, 2017)

It might bear repeating that no 4K is still a _rumor_. Save your blood pressure for the actual release is my advice.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

IglooEater said:


> It might bear repeating that no 4K is still a _rumor_. Save your blood pressure for the actual release is my advice.



Spoilsport.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 15, 2017)

Wow, I forgot how frantically the spec-update threads grow!

Still no word on:

Max shutter speed 
Flash sync
FPS, buffer, etc. 
Dual vs single slots
GPS

So there's still a lot of good stuff we haven't seen. 

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

hmatthes said:


> EduPortas said:
> 
> 
> > This a premium camera. It should have 4k.
> ...



focus system, maybe faster fps, maybe better viewfinder, full articulated screen .. it will be a GREAT camera for those upgrading from 70D and 80D's which is probably canon's main focus with this camera.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 15, 2017)

So the forum experts have declared the 6DII Dead on Arrival because it might not have 4K video. 

Meanwhile, there is some high school kid out there with a T3i making videos and putting them up on You Tube that will ultimately earn her more fame and fortune than anyone here could ever dream of. 

Some people use the tools at hand to realize their dreams. Others blame the tools for their own failure. Nothing changes.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

unfocused said:


> So the forum experts have declared the 6DII Dead on Arrival because it might not have 4K video.
> 
> Meanwhile, there is some high school kid out there with a T3i making videos and putting them up on You Tube that will ultimately earn her more fame and fortune than anyone here could ever dream of.
> 
> Some people use the tools at hand to realize their dreams. Others blame the tools for their own failure. Nothing changes.



claiming a camera doesn't have what you need, and that canon missed the obvious market and you know better - makes you sound more pro everytime.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

unfocused said:


> So the forum experts have declared the 6DII Dead on Arrival because it might not have 4K video.



The same 'experts' have declared each new Canon camera DoA before they were each announced.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > So the forum experts have declared the 6DII Dead on Arrival because it might not have 4K video.
> ...



Yes. I remember all the wailing when the 6D was introduced. Didn't stop it from becoming Amazon's best selling full frame camera though, did it?


----------



## amorse (Jun 15, 2017)

Is it not possible that they left 4K out of the 6D since (from my very limited understanding) the lower resolution of the 6D II's sensor relative to the 5D IV could result in the 6D II having a better crop ratio? That could make the 6D's 4K look superior to the 5D IV? (honest question).

I have a 6D and I don't think I have ever even switched it into video mode. For me, I'd be even happier if they removed video entirely from the 6D and reduced the price! Why does every product need to be everything to everyone? 

The biggest question I have for the 6D II is dynamic range, low light performance, and weather sealing. If those are on par with (or better than!) the 5D IV then I'd be very likely to buy the 6DII (maybe wishful thinking).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

unfocused said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Who cares if lots of people buy it? If it doesn't have 2 card slots, 'K' won't buy it. If it doesn't have 4K, douglaurent and his 50 friends won't buy it either. *Canon: you have been warned.*


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 15, 2017)

I dont think Canon has any worries. 

The current camera was pretty sound and by moving to 45 AF points, the flippy screen, 26MP for many just those three will see them upgrade. I would like to think the metering system is upgraded and they retain GPS if that happens it will be a big hit especially given the pricing of the 5D MKIV which for many is too expensive. 

Ive already emailed my local dealer to add me to the list.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 15, 2017)

An off-topic comment: I hate the look of 4K. 

The ultra-realism destroys the illusion for me. Television shows broadcast in high definition somehow destroy the invisible curtain between viewer and actor and the actors all look small and insignificant and kind of silly. 

But then, when they moved from film to video, I had the same reaction. Maybe I'll get used to it.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 15, 2017)

amorse said:


> ...For me, I'd be even happier if they removed video entirely from the 6D and reduced the price! Why does every product need to be everything to everyone?...



Oh Noooo!!!! Not that discussion again!!! Maybe I can short-circuit it: Removing video won't reduce costs. It increases the cost because any added expense is minimal and more than offset by the increased sales.


----------



## Skywise (Jun 15, 2017)

As a Canon 6D owner and use it to shoot a good chunk of video - While the new sensor may be good the DPAF is making me think of upgrading. 

I wonder if they're planning on adding a stereo mic similar to the rebel line now. (I have a Rode Stereo mic I use but it'd be nice to not always have to get that setup/carry it around)


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2017)

tomscott said:


> Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. If every person will shoot 4k with entry level cameras where is the evidence? There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> 
> How many entry level FF buyers are going to have A. a 4k or higher display and B. A machine fast enough to edit the footage. Affordable 4k displays have only been available for about 12 months.
> 
> ...



It boils down to this, Tom. They have champagne taste and a beer budget. They want a Cinema camera that also takes stills for $2k or under. Then they want to compare such a rig to an iPhone's output. They want a cool running Ferrari for the price of a Ford with overheating problems.

To top it all off they just want to complain and act as though *they* are the market and know what is best for Canon. Them personally. Forget the fact that Canon must turn a profit. They just want what they want, but aren't able or willing to pay for it. It doesn't matter that the camera might not be reliable due to overheating. It doesn't matter that the thing won't be weather sealed because it has to vent the heat to somewhere. They are "artists" and demand the best video of fluffy they can get without forking over the money to do it.

These whiners are always there. They think $2,000 is a king's ransom and demand to have the king of all rigs for it. They are just plain silly people. Silly, tantrum throwing children.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > So the forum experts have declared the 6DII Dead on Arrival because it might not have 4K video.
> ...



If it isn't superior to the 1DX2 and D5 in every conceivable way, then it means Canon is *******! I won't like it or want it, but Canon's marketing people (they use Jedi mind tricks) will talk me into buying one.... It will have inferior AF, an inferior sensor (anything below 20 stops of DR is unusable), and will not write to dual cards.... I will hate it, yet for some inexplicable reason, I will carry it with me every day and despite the severe limitations of the camera, I will still use it to try and take pictures, despite knowing that if I had gotten a D750 that all would be well.... OH WOE IS ME!!!!!!!


----------



## amorse (Jun 15, 2017)

unfocused said:


> amorse said:
> 
> 
> > ...For me, I'd be even happier if they removed video entirely from the 6D and reduced the price! Why does every product need to be everything to everyone?...
> ...



Certainly understood that removing video wouldn't reduce the price - to be clear, I was being facetious in my previous post. My point is 4K video (and video in general) isn't important to at least some DLSR buyers, and obviously canon seems to agree with that sentiment if they feel that they can release a "premium" product without 4K today when competing cameras have it. Since Canon is the one investing money to determine what the market wants, I'm inclined to think it is a conscious decision not to include 4K based on what they think will sell.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

amorse said:


> The biggest question I have for the 6D II is dynamic range, low light performance, and weather sealing. If those are on par with (or better than!) the 5D IV then I'd be very likely to buy the 6DII (maybe wishful thinking).



2 out of 3 maybe. it wont' have the same weathersealing.


----------



## jmoya (Jun 15, 2017)

seriously... no 4k! my dji mavic pro has 4k and it freaking flys in the sky. What a joke!


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

jmoya said:


> seriously... no 4k! my dji mavic pro has 4k and it freaking flys in the sky. What a joke!


Yes, but it has 4 large cooling fans.......


----------



## RandomRazr (Jun 15, 2017)

amorse said:


> Is it not possible that they left 4K out of the 6D since (from my very limited understanding) the lower resolution of the 6D II's sensor relative to the 5D IV could result in the 6D II having a better crop ratio? That could make the 6D's 4K look superior to the 5D IV? (honest question).
> 
> I have a 6D and I don't think I have ever even switched it into video mode. For me, I'd be even happier if they removed video entirely from the 6D and reduced the price! Why does every product need to be everything to everyone?
> 
> The biggest question I have for the 6D II is dynamic range, low light performance, and weather sealing. If those are on par with (or better than!) the 5D IV then I'd be very likely to buy the 6DII (maybe wishful thinking).



why woud they make the 6D II better at anything then the 5D IV in your theory of specs? that makes no sense in ur head?


----------



## Dvash7 (Jun 15, 2017)

Wow, at this point I hope it doesn't have video at all just so you 4K freaks would blow a gasket!


----------



## masterpix (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> I am amazed at difficulty Canon has offering 4K compared to other manufacturers.
> It doesn't rule this camera out for me, but 4K is expected today, it's not a headline feature.
> Within a year the third iteration of the Sony A7s and A7r will likely be out, and they will both likely feature:
> 
> ...



I believe that is the 5Dmk4 is for. it is like the Rebel vs the XXD or the 7D, wonderful cameras but lesser features for the lesser price. Unlike Sony, Canon offers several "levels" of cameras to suite everyone needs (as Nikon also does by the way)


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

RandomRazr said:


> why woud they make the 6D II better at anything then the 5D IV in your theory of specs?



With sensors, the tech is continuously evolving, albeit at a slower rate now.... as a general rule, the latest release has the best tech and therefore, the best sensor. Some notable examples of this have been when the 60D came out with a better sensor than the 7D, and the 80D with a better sensor than the 7D2, and the 6D with a better sensor than the 5D2... Of course, the sensor is only one component and the higher models usually have better AF, frame rates, sealing, ergonomics, etc....


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Just reading the supposed specification again.

The spec includes HDR. Sooooo what flavour of HDR would that be, and will there be a premium for having this function?

Don't you need C-Log for HDR on the 5D? Or does it support HLG or PQ10 out of the box?


----------



## Jerryrigged (Jun 15, 2017)

Canon can release anything they want, and buyers have lots of options. For me personally, I have a 5D4, two 6Ds, and a Sony A6500. I've mostly shot photography, but recently started shooting wedding video. I'm still probably 70% Photo, and 30% video. So, for me, the 5D4 is great, with awesome photo and video quality. I also use my 6Ds for some video, stationary on a tripod, with no need for autofocus. I really wanted a second or third camera - ideally a Canon camera that could make use of all my L glass. Unfortunately, it seemed the best option for me was the Sony A6500 (APSC). It shoots great 4K and 120 fps 1080p. I was thinking of maybe the 80D, but no 4K (not very future-proof), and APSC (prefer full-frame for photos). I would love to have a 6D that shot 4K with dual-pixel autofocus. It would have been a great complement for BOTH photo and video. I still might consider it given dual-pixel AF, and awesome photo quality. However, with no 4K, it would not be very future-proof.


----------



## daphins (Jun 15, 2017)

I'm fine with no 4K. It SHOULD be available on a $2,000 camera, but it's not a deal breaker for me.

Canon seems to take the approach of quality over quantity. They're not going to give you the most camera for your money, but they'll give you the best camera for your money.

I'm fine with that.


----------



## amorse (Jun 15, 2017)

RandomRazr said:


> amorse said:
> 
> 
> > Is it not possible that they left 4K out of the 6D since (from my very limited understanding) the lower resolution of the 6D II's sensor relative to the 5D IV could result in the 6D II having a better crop ratio? That could make the 6D's 4K look superior to the 5D IV? (honest question).
> ...



No, I think there is certainly reason to believe that the 6D II will be better than the 5D IV in some areas, but the 5D IV is a more expensive/advanced product which means that it will obviously need a feature set to justify the higher price. How they choose to distinguish the two products is yet to be seen (other than 4K obviously), but I think we can take some cues between looking at the different feature set of the 5D III and 6D.

The 6D had better low light performance and better dynamic range than the 5D III and was released after the 5D III, so I don't think it is unreasonable to wonder if that could be the case here too. Weather sealing on par with a 5D IV is pretty unlikely, I'll admit, but that is the only key feature I really wish I could get from the 5D IV at the 6D price point with 6D features. Again, my needs aren't everyones needs so this is all wishful thinking.


----------



## amorse (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> amorse said:
> 
> 
> > The biggest question I have for the 6D II is dynamic range, low light performance, and weather sealing. If those are on par with (or better than!) the 5D IV then I'd be very likely to buy the 6DII (maybe wishful thinking).
> ...



That's my thinking too - wishful thinking. I just hope the weather sealing isn't worse than the current 6D... my camera gets rained on pretty frequently and I'm alway a bit nervous about how much is too much...


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

daphins said:


> I'm fine with no 4K. It SHOULD be available on a $2,000 camera



I'm curious on this.
there's no $2000 full frame camera with 4K video right now, so why would a 6D Mark II which will probably be heavily discounted in it's lifetime SHOULD have it?

the A7III will probably have it, but it's a sony.. it doesn't really matter much and the way sony pricing is going, there's no guarantee it doesn't take a jump up in price.

the Pentax K1 is around $2000, it doesn't have 4K. the A7II doesn't. the D750/D610,etc don't have it.

future proofing? there's no such thing with camera technology. Not even your lenses are future proofed.


----------



## amorse (Jun 15, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> RandomRazr said:
> 
> 
> > why woud they make the 6D II better at anything then the 5D IV in your theory of specs?
> ...



With sensors, the tech is continuously evolving, albeit at a slower rate now.... as a general rule, the latest release has the best tech and therefore, the best sensor. Some notable examples of this have been when the 60D came out with a better sensor than the 7D, and the 80D with a better sensor than the 7D2, and the 6D with a better sensor than the 5D2... Of course, the sensor is only one component and the higher models usually have better AF, frame rates, sealing, ergonomics, etc....
[/quote]

I can't help but wonder if this will be true for the 6D II and 5D IV as well, and maybe this is one of the reasons the 6D II didn't get 4K. Comparing the two cameras the 6D II would have a bunch of advantages over the 5D IV such as: tilting screen, higher dynamic range, better low light performance, lower price... Add 4K with a better crop ratio to that mix and you could make the argument that the 6D may be a bit too competitive with the 5D IV market. 

Obviously that is assuming that the 6D would have a better 4K crop ratio than the 5D IV - I was curious if this would be the case since the pixel density on the 6D II is less than that of the 5D IV. I was under the impression that the 5D IV didn't use the full sensor for 4K capture because it would be too processor intensive to capture that and convert it down to 4K from full sensor resolution. As a result I thought the 5D IV only used the centre of the sensor, and if the 6D II had the same system for 4K, having a lower resolution sensor could mean that the pixels used for capture were more spread out resulting in a lower crop factor. I have no idea if this was the case since I really don't use video - really just curious.


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. If every person will shoot 4k with entry level cameras where is the evidence? There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> ...



Maybe us 4K folks just have higher standards than you guys. We understand you'll take everything Canon gives you and like it, but we tend to think a little bit differently. 

Also, please see the earlier postings about how 4K acquisition is mostly used to create higher quality 1080p content. Since Canon is an imaging company, one would think they would want to put their best foot forward here.


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 15, 2017)

amorse said:


> Is it not possible that they left 4K out of the 6D since (from my very limited understanding) the lower resolution of the 6D II's sensor relative to the 5D IV could result in the 6D II having a better crop ratio? That could make the 6D's 4K look superior to the 5D IV? (honest question).



That was the first thought that hit my mind when I first heard about the rough crop factor of the 5D4. One can only assume the 6D would be lower res and therefore could have a more reasonable crop factor. It would not surprise if that was a factor, but it certainly would not have been the driving reason.



amorse said:


> I have a 6D and I don't think I have ever even switched it into video mode. For me, I'd be even happier if they removed video entirely from the 6D and reduced the price! Why does every product need to be everything to everyone?
> 
> The biggest question I have for the 6D II is dynamic range, low light performance, and weather sealing. If those are on par with (or better than!) the 5D IV then I'd be very likely to buy the 6DII (maybe wishful thinking).



I have an old M with an external mic, flash bracket, magic lantern, etc. for the few times I'm shooting some family home video stuff. However I've used the 6D in a pinch and have been reasonably happy with the results.

I don't think your questions are that big. Realistically we've seen the DR benefit with the latest sensors (80D, 5D4) etc, we can expect a similar bump on the new 6D2. Ditto on low light. Nothing ground breaking, but I'd expect an improvement, maybe as much as a half stop? Probably more along the lines that it will render noise better. And weather sealing? I can almost guarantee that will not change. I expect the same weather sealing, build quality of the current 6D and xxD line. What you are hoping for is reserved for the "pro" line (7D, 5D, 1D).


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

masterpix said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > I am amazed at difficulty Canon has offering 4K compared to other manufacturers.
> ...



This argument would hold water if the 5DIV had stellar 4K but as we all know, it doesn't.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

amorse said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > RandomRazr said:
> ...



I can't help but wonder if this will be true for the 6D II and 5D IV as well, and maybe this is one of the reasons the 6D II didn't get 4K. Comparing the two cameras the 6D II would have a bunch of advantages over the 5D IV such as: tilting screen, higher dynamic range, better low light performance, lower price... Add 4K with a better crop ratio to that mix and you could make the argument that the 6D may be a bit too competitive with the 5D IV market
[/quote]

except both the 5D Mark IV and the 1DX Mark II required heat sinks to pull off 4k MJEG.

and just because it happened in the past doesn't necessary mean it will happen in the future. the 77D sensor is of lower quality than the 80D sensor.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> masterpix said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



if you can't figure out your way around a 1.7 crop or MJPEG, then perhaps you need a toy video camera first.

or need to use your phone more or something.

neither issue with the 5D Mark IV is insurmountable.


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



It's made by people who specialize in delivering usable features people want.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > transpo1 said:
> ...



4K on a tiny sensor and a 46MBit/sec bitrate and mono sound is what people want. 

Got it.

then use it and why are you here?


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

Pixel said:


> I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.



Nah- it would be easy for them to include the processing- hence the reasoning behind the MJPEG 4K format. They're just protecting their higher-end cameras.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> Pixel said:
> 
> 
> > I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.
> ...



and where's your design proof - with canon technology, not another brand.

prove it.

you make these baseless statements as if they are fact.


----------



## dak723 (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > transpo1 said:
> ...



If you don't understand that an iphone's construction and the totally different sensor size make any type of 4K comparison with a DSLR totally ridiculous, then you should take 15 minutes and research it on the internet.


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 15, 2017)

unfocused said:


> An off-topic comment: I hate the look of 4K.
> 
> The ultra-realism destroys the illusion for me. Television shows broadcast in high definition somehow destroy the invisible curtain between viewer and actor and the actors all look small and insignificant and kind of silly.
> 
> But then, when they moved from film to video, I had the same reaction. Maybe I'll get used to it.



That and all the CGI now days. It gets to the point that what you are watching is so far from realistic that you disconnect and no longer fear for the safety of the characters.

A few years ago I read an interesting article where I reviewer went and saw all the various versions of one of the Hobbit movies that came out. I believe there were 3 levels? The 24 fps long time cinema standard, some fancy 60 fps version and of course some crazy 3D version. And that is exactly what the reviewer said, only the 24 fps version was worth seeing... all the magic was gone in the other versions. He said he observed it in the audience and their reactions as well. Peter Jackson just got too consumed by the tech I guess. Kind of like when George Lucas ruined the original Star Wars triology in the later 90's when he re released them with those added CGI scenes. The Han Solo, Jaba the Hut scene that was added back was one of the worse things I had ever witnessed.

I have not watched a lot of 4k content, but I can say that the higher resolutions (aka 1080p) have not been the "ruiner" for me as much as the high frame rates. I think the motion blur at the de facto standard cinema 24 fps is one of the best things for maintaining "movie magic". Just my humble opinion of course and as I see more 4k content I'll change my tune. I do hear ya on the whole digital look/feel these days.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 15, 2017)

tomscott said:


> Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. If every person will shoot 4k with entry level cameras where is the evidence? There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.



"So many people" is a couple of dozen people on forums, half of whom really want to shoot 4k eventually and can't stand the thought of a body that will "hold them back" when they actually start.


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

xps said:


> Hmmm... The specs look quite ok, except the missing 4k function.
> What do I hope it will be?
> An lighter body as my 5DIV with an faster and wider AF system than the 6D has (Don´t misunderstand me, I took shots at airshows with the 6D that were muuuuch better than on the 7DII). And all cross type AF points. (A must, as nearly all cheaper bodies do have it).
> And an improved image and low light quality (better than the very good existing of the 6D).
> ...



We all know that's what Canon is good at- milking cows. Also, color science. Not 4K video for sure.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> A few years ago I read an interesting article where I reviewer went and saw all the various versions of one of the Hobbit movies that came out. I believe there were 3 levels? The 24 fps long time cinema standard, some fancy 60 fps version and of course some crazy 3D version. And that is exactly what the reviewer said, only the 24 fps version was worth seeing...



Well that reviewer was wrong, I was invited by Dolby to see the 3D version, which used 6 projectors and was 48 fps. I was AMAZING (Oh yeah, it had Atmos sound as well, which really added to the experience).

What you have to remember with UHD content is that it is supposed to be immersive, that is why a HD 42" screen and a UHD 83" screen have the same viewing distance.

What you also have to remember, is that the way UHD content is shot, is not the same, so early content that was up-scaled HD didn't always work very well.

I work with both HD and UHD every day (and still SD as well) and UHD, when done correctly, is amazing. Like ANY video format, if its bad, its bad.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > tomscott said:
> ...



It isn't that you guys have higher standards. The problem is that you guys don't want to pay for the tech you demand. You want Canon to produce a product in a $2k or under, primarily, stills camera that isn't going to be reliable producing the 4K video you want, but can't or won't pay for. In other words, you want Canon to lower its standards and put overheating junk on the market. :'( Then you'd complain about that too.

If the video end of the business isn't profitable enough to afford the correct tools for the job then the problem is your business, not Canon's.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



He's here complaining because he doesn't understand anything much.


----------



## jmoya (Jun 15, 2017)

The made the dynamic range better on the 6d than on the mark 5d III


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

No 4k is ridiculous. The 6D is from 2012, it is 5 years old.

If the 2017 6D MII doesn't have 4k, you will have to wait until 2022 6D MIII for 4k.

Do you know how ridiculous that is when every smartphone out there is doing 4k video.

And don't say that it's a smaller sensor on an iPhone. It's completely irrelevant. Canon does line skipping and cropping, it requires the exact same processing power as an iPhone to do on a Canon. 

Canon just doesn't want to put fast chips in their cameras since they make their own old 22nm chips with their own outdated japanese lithography machines while the smartphones are using state of the art 10nm ARM ASML chips from Qualcomm that don't overheat and deliver far more processing power.


----------



## transpo1 (Jun 15, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > transpo1 said:
> ...



As always, I'm on here fighting the losing battle to open your minds. Unfortunately, the conservative CanonFanboy mindset cannot at this time comprehend the future of video and stills hybrid shooting.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> I must have missed the part where the iPhone is made by canon or has a full frame sensor.



Canon does line skipping for video, and cropping. It does not use all the pixels, it does not downsample. Canon doesn't have a single full frame camera doing full frame video or downsampling from a full frame sensor. *They just skip lines.* So your argument makes no sense.

The only reason Canon doesn't have 4k is because they want to use their own chips instead of chips from the competition. Canon uses their own chips in their cameras, made by their own (outdated) lithography techniques.

Those smartphone chips are using state of the art 10nm chips from qualcomm and samsung.
*that is why the can do 4k, even at 60FPS nowadays
*that is why they don't overheat

It's purely about money for Canon, Canon refuses to use 3rd party chips and will continue to refuse, because that is the mindset in Japan. Protectionism at all cost, even if it means shooting in your own foot.


----------



## Andries (Jun 15, 2017)

I just love all the buzz of the 6D2 not having 4K ;D A lot of people are bitching and moaning about it, saying they won't buy if it doesn't have 4K.

Wel, fine by me ! 

That just means that when I order one, the wait might be less long as a lot of videographers will not order any. If those people jump ship to Sony, well, maybe I could even score some nice glass when they sell their Canon gear. I have been waiting for an 'affordable' and very capable FF stills camera for some time and it looks like Canon is about to deliver just that 8)


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

tomscott said:


> Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.



Little 4k content? Are you insane? Do you know what youtube is? There are tens of thousands of 4k videos.

Everyone with an iPhone or newer Android phone is shooting 4k.


----------



## jmoya (Jun 15, 2017)

It would be nice to have 120fps at 1080p or even 720p. 60fps at 1080 is pretty poor. my g7x mark I does that and I bought it for $350 a few months back. I even sold one of my canon 5d mark III bodies a few weeks back in anticipation of this 6d mark II. Kinda making me regret my decision.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> Canon does line skipping for video, and cropping. It does not use all the pixels, it does not downsample. Canon doesn't have a single full frame camera doing full frame video or downsampling from a full frame sensor. *They just skip lines.* So your argument makes no sense.



Well on a DSLR that is 20+MP, you have to throw something away. A UHD frame is 8Mp, so you have to reduce the pixel count somehow. Best way, with least processing is to take alternate pixels or lines, or just use the centre 8Mp of the sensor (but you get a serious crop factor).

Also, in general terms stills (from Canon) are 4:3 and video is 16:9, so you won't generally get a 'full frame' video as the height is always less due to the aspect ratios.

Yes you can get 4K from a phone, but 3840x2160 pixels doesn't mean true 4K, it depends on what information was used to created that, and some phones have terrible variable frame rates, and the compression is very high.

I think we all knew the video of the new 6D would be sub 5DMk4. And that does not have great UHD support, so we shouldn't be surprised.

I guess your only option, if you don't want to buy the new 6D, is to see what Canon's first mirror less offering is, maybe that is where they are thinking about 4k due to the lack of mirror?

Alan.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> ...



And I bet 6D 1080 beats mobile phone 4k


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> ...



I do a lot of 4K gaming, so have quite a few 4K and 2K videos on my channel. You forgot GoPro as well, probably one of the earliest platforms doing affordable (but only 15fps) UHD.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

jmoya said:


> It would be nice to have 120fps at 1080p or even 720p. 60fps at 1080 is pretty poor. my g7x mark I does that and I bought it for $350 a few months back. I even sold one of my canon 5d mark III bodies a few weeks back in anticipation of this 6d mark II. Kinda making me regret my decision.



Why? if you want to do slowmo use software renders that can do that, these days they don't just frame multiply, they work out all the motion vectors and do proper frame blending to produce fantastic results.


----------



## testthewest (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > Its funny how 4k is a deal breaker for so many people. There is still so little 4k content yet its been on the scene for 3 years.
> ...



Tens of thousands is nothing against millions that are not. 4k on youtube is a rareity. Youtube is also not a place for high quality videos - nobody expects them there, internet connections often aren't even good enough, it is simply a wasted effort.
And I'll be honest: If 4k meant higher price, I'd rather not have it. And since 4k needs higher hardware specs just for it, I will cost more to produce.


----------



## smr (Jun 15, 2017)

Still don't understand the 4k moaning... what's the primary purpose of a DSLR? If you're that bothered about video just get a 4K recorder of another device/brand/camera?


----------



## Etienne (Jun 15, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > 4K cannot be ignored, and with DPAF delivering the dream of reliable video autofocus it is only natural that videographers want it now, especially in full frame.
> ...



The point is that the technology appears to be available, or at least tantalizingly close.

Someone probably snarkily asked "What camera does that?" when someone suggested they wanted their high resolution photos immediately. Fortunately people with vision were'nt so snarky.

Set the bar high, and we'll get there. And frankly, I think Sony will get there before Canon.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

testthewest said:


> internet connections often aren't even good enough, it is simply a wasted effort.



what? do you people live in the same universe as the rest of us?

15Mb/s (2MB/s)...is the minimum netflix recommends for 4k...I can't think of a single developed nation that doesn't have these internet speeds



testthewest said:


> Youtube is also not a place for high quality videos - nobody expects them there



again, do you people live in the same universe as the rest of us

Youtube is not the place for 4k? Youtube has a 4k prominently displayed in their filter at the top of the page!

I filtered out 4k videos, there are millions on youtube currently.


----------



## hbr (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> As always, I'm on here fighting the losing battle to open your minds. Unfortunately, the conservative CanonFanboy mindset cannot at this time comprehend the future of video and stills hybrid shooting.



It doesn't matter if you win or lose. When the 6D2 arrives you will get what Canon gives you. You can either buy it or not. Easy solution to the argument.


----------



## Etienne (Jun 15, 2017)

unfocused said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Well, there you go. Living on past laurels. Didn't that work out well for Blackberry, who dominated the world cell phone market and is now all but extinct; and Nortel, who shared the world network switching market with Cisco, but is now bankrupt.

Your competitors don't sleep. They want to eat your lunch.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> If the 2017 6D MII doesn't have 4k, you will have to wait until 2022 6D MIII for 4k.



Right, because Canon doesn't make any 4K-capable cameras. 




Nininini said:


> It's purely about money for Canon, Canon refuses to use 3rd party chips and will continue to refuse, because that is the mindset in Japan. Protectionism at all cost, even if it means shooting in your own foot.



And have they shot themselves in the foot? Last I checked, they were the #1 global ILC market leader and have been for >14 years. Or did you mean they _will_ shoot themselves in the foot, at some unspecified future time. Gee, with clairvoyance like that, you must be filthy rich from lottery winnings. 




Nininini said:


> Everyone with an iPhone or newer Android phone is shooting 4k.



Wow...clairvoyant, _and_ you speak for everyone. Well, aren't you special. :


----------



## hmatthes (Jun 15, 2017)

*Pre-announcement trolls always amuse me with their bitching. * Easy to tell the real buyers from the trolls.

Real buyers state realistic desires without any "threats"... "if it doesn't do 8K at 120 fps, I'll move to GoPro..."
Let's be real folks: buyers own lenses and spare batteries and speed lights etc. -- real buyers may pass on a new body that doesn't meet their needs. Or buy a used 5D-III instead of a new 6D-II.

*Trolls don't buy anything except the closeout obsolete specials at Walmart and Best Buys.*

If Canon fails to do something I need, I'd think long and hard about which brand would treat me better.

Cameras and Lenses are tools, not magic. My backup SL-1 does everything my 6D does but at slightly lower IQ when using the same glass.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > Everyone with an iPhone or newer Android phone is shooting 4k.
> ...



Clairvoyant? Smartphones have had 4k for several years now. It's standard on any mid to highend phone.

Nothing to do clairvoyance. 4k is now the standard.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 15, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> RandomRazr said:
> 
> 
> > why woud they make the 6D II better at anything then the 5D IV in your theory of specs?
> ...


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > If the 2017 6D MII doesn't have 4k, you will have to wait until 2022 6D MIII for 4k.
> ...



So your excuse for Canon refusing to incorporate 4k in a $2000 body, is that you can just buy the $6000 body.

Man, what a great idea, just tell people to buy $6000+ bodies, Canon should hire you. This strategy will work out swell.

ILC sales having dropped year after year because smartphones are shooting great video should be ignored, just tell Canon users to drop $6000 on a body. How "clairvoyant".


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...


I know of one phone manufacturer that is working on 8K video on a phone and has a working 6K prototype....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Show us your *evidence* that Canon is 'sleeping'. Note that not providing a feature that you think they should doesn't constitute 'evidence'. Canon sells more ILCs than anyone else. That's not past, that's current. 

In 2016, Canon was granted the third most US patents of any company (3,665 of them)...that's more than Intel, Microsoft, Apple, or Google. That's planning for the future. 

But hey, you think the 6DII should have 4K. If it doesn't, Canon is *******. Yeah, your logic is impeccable. I bet you won a lot of debate club competitions. :


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> So your excuse for Canon refusing to incorporate 4k in a $2000 body, is that you can just buy the $6000 body.



Why would I have to make excuses? If you are speaking for everyone, and everyone should be shooting 4K, a lack of 4K video means no one will buy the 6DII. Somehow, I expect Canon will manage to sell a few of them. :


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > If the 2017 6D MII doesn't have 4k, you will have to wait until 2022 6D MIII for 4k.
> ...


I will probably get a 6D2. I would prefer that it had 4K video and I am surprised that it does not. Canon does seem to be very late to the game with that feature, particularly since phones, P/S cameras, and action cameras (like GoPro) have had it for many years now.... Like I said, I would prefer it, but it is not a dealbreaker. Perhaps they will include it when they finally come out with a mirrorless FF camera.... Perhaps I shall wait until then....

It is becoming one of those features that consumers demand, both the high end shooters who do weddings and production work, and the "masses" who are shooting little league, soccer, and birthday parties. I would even argue that it is a more important feature to have in the Rebels than the higher end bodies.... Most of the time Canon gets things right, but this time I think that they got it wrong.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> a lack of 4K video means no one will buy the 6DII. Somehow, I expect Canon will manage to sell a few of them. :




No one said the 6D II won't sell. There are clearly people only interested in taking pictures not video, several people in this thread have made that clear.

But, a large and growing userbase is using video. And having 4k in a $2000 body should be expected.

For reference, smartphones have had 4k for over 4 years now. The first smartphones being able to record 4k were the Samsung Note 3 and Acer Liquid S2 *from 2013.*

4k is no longer new tech, it is now accepted as the standard.

And this idea that it's different for full frame sensors is a bunch of baloney, since Canon does line skipping and cropping instead of downsampling.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



I will care if there has a hybrid viewfinder - or it's full frame with an EVF / mirrorless.

Otherwise I could give a rats ass to it.

because a DSLR simply has to be the most awkward form factors possible for any sort of real world video shooting.


----------



## Etienne (Jun 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Derail the conversation all you want, but 4K is like power steering in cars, it's expected and it's useful. Maybe stills is all you need, but more creative people want to expand and branch out, and you certainly seem to resent anyone who expects more. The future dream is 8K, 4K is not extraordinary, except of course to hard-nosed photo-only purists.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> And having 4k in a $2000 body should be expected.



By whom? Let me guess, you're speaking for everyone again. Obviously, you are better at market research than Canon. You just continue to prove how special you really are!


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > a lack of 4K video means no one will buy the 6DII. Somehow, I expect Canon will manage to sell a few of them. :
> ...



actually looking right now, there is no $2000 or less full frame camera with 4K.

so I'm curious on your SHOULD be expected, because no one else is doing it either. no guarantees the A7 will shoot 4k and if it does, no guarantees it's $2000 or less either.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> because a DSLR simply has to be the most awkward form factors possible for any sort of real world video shooting.



Shooting video on a dslr is just as easy as on a smartphone. All I touch on my DSLR during video is exposure comp / white balance (Q button) and turning off and non servo AF. All you need to do is click the screen to pull focus.

There is one exception where shooting video on DSLR doesn't work well, and that is in extremely bright sunlight. It is hard to see the screen and an EVF doesn't have this problem. 

I actually anticipate that e ink will be incorporated into cameras one day. 

The newest smartphones have an E-ink screen on the back which uses little to no power and is perfectly readable in sunlight, there is no reason why this can't eventually be done on a camera's flippy screen. One side with a normal screen, the back side with E-ink for bright condition. Smartphones are already doing this.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > because a DSLR simply has to be the most awkward form factors possible for any sort of real world video shooting.
> ...



really? i didn't realize you had a smartphone that weighed around 2-5lbs and was front heavy under most circumstances. that must be a total bitch on your pocket.

Also with your smartphone, you have no choice. you don't have a viewfinder. with ILC"s you do have a choice. you can be smart if you need a hybrid and get an EVF based solution, or you can be less wise and yell at a wall for an OVF based DSLR to mungle through video.

e-ink screens for color totally suck pond water. it's not even a realistic solution, not to mention horrid refresh rates.

and there's not a whole slew of smartphone that have a back screen for e-ink anyways, nice try.


----------



## Reloaderx (Jun 15, 2017)

I don't think I'll use 4k video either, but it really should be a feature of a camera at this price level in this day and age. BUT, no 4k is just a rumor right now so everyone just needs to relax.

What I would hope:

4k 30fps with a high crop - satisfies the forum warriors and keyboard spec commandos, but doesn't threaten their upper models (this is THE reason why we won't get good 4k. Canon does not have a technical problem with this)

Better image quality, whether it is sharpness, color depth, or high ISO quality then the 5DmkIV. Believe it or not, this is not unrealistic.

Single card slot, no weather sealing, no RAW or cLOG video. While we'd want all these features, Canon has to make the 6DmkII inferior to the 5DmkIV somehow. Pros tend to pixel peep less than consumers, but value more functional stuff like dual card slots and weather sealing. With that distinction drawn, it becomes possible for Canon to loosen up the reins on other features.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> because a DSLR simply has to be the most awkward form factors possible for any sort of real world video shooting.



I have one word for you.... iPad


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > because a DSLR simply has to be the most awkward form factors possible for any sort of real world video shooting.
> ...



LOL. to be honest I'd rather hold an ipad out in front looking at the screen versus a 2-5lb DSLR kit shooting video.

screen's bigger and easier to see as well.


----------



## Bernard (Jun 15, 2017)

I've said it before, and I'll probably need to say it again.

Low bitrate 4K recorded onto an SD card is useless.
Sure, lots of phones and cameras offer it, but it looks terrible. Why bother?


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



I have a camera with EVF and my DSLR which has a mirror. 

I actually don't like shooting video through the EVF, because you can't see what happens around you when you stare through the EVF. If you know exactly what you're shooting beforehand, an EVF works, but if you are shooting unscripted video, you lack any spacial awareness with an EVF, you have no idea what happens around you and that's not good.

It is handy during bright sun, of course it is, seeing something is better than nothing.

But screens are continuously improving, due to the prevalence of smartphones. E ink is iimproving. Eventually we'll get screens that are perfectly readable in bright sunny conditions,and it will make this whole EVF vs Mirror debate pointless.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



You make a statement with a clear implication, I ask for evidence to support that implication, and _I'm_ the one the derailing the conversation? If you expect 4K and the 6DII doesn't have it, don't buy one. But if you're going to draw an analogy between lack of 4K on some dSLR models and corporate failure and bankruptcy for Canon, but not back up that assertion with evidence, you're just spewing crap out of an orifice not biologically intended for that purpose. 

Not that that's unusual around here.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...



e-ink hasn't improved in ages. it's the same techology has it's always been. it's simply getting a higher dot pitch. it still has to erase the entire screen on a change.

.. seriously.. nice try really.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



Really, you'd prefer an iPad over a DSLR with a flippy screen and manual focus? I understand the argument that some say an EVF is better for video than a mirror (I think EVF lack spacial awareness, but ok).

But come on...pick up any light crop DSLR with a flippy screen and you will have much more fun doing video than an iPad.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> e-ink hasn't improved in ages. it's the same techology has it's always been. it's simply getting a higher dot pitch. it still has to erase the entire screen on a change.
> 
> .. seriously.. nice try really.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2V9iuTW3sA


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 15, 2017)

Bernard said:


> I've said it before, and I'll probably need to say it again.
> 
> Low bitrate 4K recorded onto an SD card is useless.
> Sure, lots of phones and cameras offer it, but it looks terrible. Why bother?



Modern SD Cards can do write speeds over 100Mbs. For modern codecs (h265(hevc)) this is a great bit rate for UHD. Broadcasters are looking at contribution HEVC bit rates of 70-80 Mb/s, and DTH of 25-30. So if you can do 80Mb/s HEVC UHD then that is good enough for broadcasters, so it should be good enough for us.

Canon's MJPEG is a light compression, so requires much higher bit rates. Probably 180Mb/s is what a broadcaster would be looking at.


----------



## Yasko (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



So the PCs from the 60s are still the "same" principal technology as of today, only the transistors have become "a bit" smaller


----------



## EduPortas (Jun 15, 2017)

hmatthes said:


> EduPortas said:
> 
> 
> > This a premium camera. It should have 4k.
> ...



I did in fact own a 6D for about a year. Produced paid work with it. Even today, I consider

it a very good camera. Those eleven AF point were enough because I never intended to use it for sports.

And no one can deny that it has superb low light capabilities and ergonomics. 

I don't consider a better AF system a reason to upgrade on this particular camera. 

Now if it were to have an upgraded AF module, DPAF, and 4K it would be a no brainer. But Canon, apparently, force

you to choose the more expensive 5D model to get them all in one package. 

As another person said before it's "pay to play" in Canonland.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

30 fps color video e ink

This is imo, the future. These screens use a* fraction* of the power consumption of regular screens, they don't flicker, they are *perfectly readable in sunlight*.

It's not perfect yet, but it's getting better daily.

Imagine live view on a DSLR being perfectly readable in bright sunlight. And battery life being exponentially higher. At night it can turn on a backlight. Imagine a double sided flippy screen.

Think about how stupid the current tech we use is today, even though there is light all around us, we use tons of battery life to power LCD's backlight. I am super excited about e ink that just uses the light available, just like colored paper does.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aEYT79-vuo


----------



## Bernard (Jun 15, 2017)

wildwalker said:


> Broadcasters are looking at contribution HEVC bit rates of 70-80 Mb/s, and DTH of 25-30. So if you can do 80Mb/s HEVC UHD then that is good enough for broadcasters, so it should be good enough for us.



H265 is an output CODEC. It's fine to use after you've done all your editing and grading and colour correction and compositing, etc. It's not good for acquisition.
It's the same thing as RAW vs. JPEG for stills. JPEG is fine as a display format, but it's not flexible enough for shooting. It's too brittle. You can't manipulate the image without throwing-out a lot of information.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> Someone probably snarkily asked "What camera does that?" when someone suggested they wanted their high resolution photos immediately. Fortunately people with vision were'nt so snarky.



I asked that question. If there is a camera that does it all then fine. If there is not a camera that does it all then you have to ask why - and the most obvious reason is that different companies prioritise different things. I wonder if the people complaining about Canons 'unwillingness' to provide full 4k video go onto Sony forums and complain about the things Sony don't do well? 
They may reply 'but I don't own Sony, I own Canon and want them to give me the good things Sony provide'. Fair enough as a wishlist, but when you buy into a system you are also buying into their sense of priorities and if their priorities are no longer the same as yours then you have a choice. By all means state what you would like to see but don't stay with Canon then whine about 'nerfing' and 'crippling' and 'protecting their higher models'. 
People have complained that the 5DIV us too expensive, especially without 4K. Well, if Canon put 4K into it they would charge even more in which case those people would not buy it anyway. Tough life, ain't it.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 15, 2017)

EduPortas said:


> hmatthes said:
> 
> 
> > EduPortas said:
> ...



Um... it is "pay to play" everywhere. Always has been. Always will be. Canon doesn't force anyone to do anything.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 15, 2017)

Nininini said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > e-ink hasn't improved in ages. it's the same techology has it's always been. it's simply getting a higher dot pitch. it still has to erase the entire screen on a change.
> ...



and it looks absolutely horrid. same as it's always been.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 15, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



Looks fine to me.

Outside in sunlight it looks miles better than OLED or LCD.

OLED and LCD are great for TV sets that are shielded from environmental light, they are terrible in sunlight. E Ink remains perfectly readable in sunlight.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 15, 2017)

Etienne said:


> Derail the conversation all you want, but 4K is like power steering in cars, it's expected and it's useful. Maybe stills is all you need, but more creative people want to expand and branch out, and you certainly seem to resent anyone who expects more. The future dream is 8K, 4K is not extraordinary, except of course to hard-nosed photo-only purists.



If only you had the vaguest idea how much I loved having no power steering on my old Civic. Seriously.


----------



## EduPortas (Jun 16, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> EduPortas said:
> 
> 
> > hmatthes said:
> ...



You are correct. And that's why thousands of buyers are fragmenting to other brands.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 16, 2017)

EduPortas said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > EduPortas said:
> ...



Another statement based on zero facts and zero statistics. For some reason many on here just absolutely hate data.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 16, 2017)

EduPortas said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > EduPortas said:
> ...



Yes, thousands are leaving, but millions are staying and an undetermined number are coming....

To make it personal, I want 4K, I am unwilling to pay for a 5D4, I will get a 6D2 anyway and still be happy....


----------



## scyrene (Jun 16, 2017)

EduPortas said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > EduPortas said:
> ...



Lol!


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 16, 2017)

EduPortas said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > EduPortas said:
> ...



Because the other brands don't have the "pay to play" business model. : 

Besides, Canon eats their lunch every single day. Like I said: It is "pay to play" everywhere... including over at Sony, Nikon, Fuji, etc... None of these threatens Canon's market share. None.

So, when are you going to jump ship? Answer: Never.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 16, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> None of these threatens Canon's market share. None.
> 
> So, when are you going to jump ship? Answer: Never



Actually, they all threaten Canon's market share..... just like the toy poodle down the road threatens me when I walk past..... And Canon is probably just as intimidated


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

EduPortas said:


> You are correct. And that's why thousands of buyers are fragmenting to other brands.



I just knew there was a logical reason that Canon has been gaining even more market share and further cementing their position as ILC market leader. Thanks for clarifying!!


----------



## tr573 (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...



To be fair, you said everyone with a phone is "shooting" 4k, not "has access to" 4k.

Personally my phone is set to 1080p still because I don't need 4k video clips of my kids doing dumb kid stuff eating all the space on it.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

tr573 said:


> To be fair, you said everyone with a phone is "shooting" 4k, not "has access to" 4k.
> 
> Personally my phone is set to 1080p still because I don't need 4k video clips of my kids doing dumb kid stuff eating all the space on it.



I've shot 0s of footage on my current phone. Maybe a minute on my previous phone. That, I believe, is the total of my "videography".


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

tr573 said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



No, you're wrong. Nini speaks for everyone, and Nini says everyone shoots 4K. Therefore you do, and so do I. Even if we don't.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

tr573 said:


> To be fair, you said everyone with a phone is "shooting" 4k, not "has access to" 4k.



Ok fine, you knew what I meant, the point is that 4k is omnipresent on smartphones and is the new video standard.

_(and let's not pretend smartphones are not related to the ILC market, most video being shot right now is being shot on a smartphone, smartphones and online distribution platforms like youtube and netflix are in fact determining the codec and distribution standards for video in 2017)_

-4k video recording is the standard on every mid to high-end smartphone
-4k is the standard for all new TV
-4k is the main selling points of the latest consoles
-4k is supported by the biggest video distribution sites like youtube and netflix

1080p no longer is the standard

It is incredibly hard to justify what canon is doing leaving out 4k on brand new cameras. And not just on the 6D, the 80D doesn't have it, new 7D will probably not have it, none of the rebels have it.

It's especially annoying for people because these cameras are expensive, and aren't refreshed yearly like smartphones. 

If you're still stuck with that 6D Mark II in 2020, where everyone and their mom is shooting in 4k, you're going to look back on your camera and really be disappointed if you need to shoot any video. You'll also have a really hard time if you ever need to resell your camera.

If canon was using the full sensor for video canon might have an excuse, but they are cropping and line skipping, there is no excuse for leaving out 4k.


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> -4k video recording is the standard on every mid to high-end smartphone
> -4k is the standard for all new TV
> -4k is the main selling points of the latest consoles
> -4k is supported by the biggest video distribution sites like youtube and netflix
> ...



Easy there on the "standard". I know you hip, cool, kids really like the interwebs and all, but last I checked "the standard", broadcast television isn't there yet.

Please don't confuse the "latest greatest tech" with "the current standard". The compact disk was invented in the 70's. It became the standard more then 25 years later.

You want 4k, great, but stop calling it the standard. It is clearly not "the standard" anywhere. It's become nauseating. A thread on the 6D2 has turned into how we all can't live without 4k content in our lives. I truly question how many of you "can't live without 4k" folks actually ever leave the house and shoot (stills or video). Or gasp, what did you do a few years ago, pre 4k days... did you just choose not to create any content at all?


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> tr573 said:
> 
> 
> > To be fair, you said everyone with a phone is "shooting" 4k, not "has access to" 4k.
> ...



Here's what you want. Now shut up.  https://www.adorama.com/ptonebs40.html


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > -4k video recording is the standard on every mid to high-end smartphone
> ...



Do you want me to do a comparison between the influence of companies pushing 4k:

-Youtube / Android / Google
-Apple
-Sony
-Microsoft Xbox One X
-Samsung
-Netflix
-Amazon Prime
-Nvidia
-AMD

And traditional media like TV channels?


----------



## dak723 (Jun 16, 2017)

Etienne said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



Yes, 4K is like power steering in cars...except my power steering doesn't overheat my car and my power steering isn't limited to only a few minutes of use at a time. So, in other words, no real comparison.

Implying that you need 4K or the latest technology in order to be creative clearly indicates that you have no idea what creativity is all about. Just admit that you want the latest technology because that's what you are interested in. Which is fine. But don't insult those of us who disagree with you and insinuate that it has anything to do with creativity - it does not.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> -4k video recording is the standard on every mid to high-end smartphone
> -4k is the standard for all new TV
> -4k is the main selling points of the latest consoles
> -4k is supported by the biggest video distribution sites like youtube and netflix
> ...



Cable/satellite television? Blu-Ray? DVD (which still outsells Blu-Ray)? Good to know that 4K is the standard. 




Nininini said:


> It is incredibly hard to justify what canon is doing leaving out 4k on brand new cameras. And not just on the 6D, the 80D doesn't have it, new 7D will probably not have it, none of the rebels have it.



What's with this fixation you have on a need to justify things? I don't have to justify Canon's choices, and for damn sure they don't. They pick the features to include. Customers choose to buy the cameras, or not. It's that simple. So far, customers continue to choose Canon over all other brands. If that changes, feel free to come back and say, "I told you so." I'm still waiting for the DRones to say that, but they've been oddly silent in that regard. Maybe you'll have better luck, or maybe you'll end up looking just as foolish.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > -4k video recording is the standard on every mid to high-end smartphone
> ...


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

DVD btw? just how deep in denial are you

DVD is 480p, are you recording stuff in 480p?

of all users on this forum, you never make any sense whatsoever


----------



## lgn55063 (Jun 16, 2017)

I have been reading comments sorted from all backgrounds, amateur and professional levels for a few years now. I love photographing stills of ballroom dancing. I have been using crop cameras for several years and am looking forward to my first full-frame format camera. I am considering the 6DMarkII camera, if it comes with at least 6 fps. When I want videos, I use a Canon portable video camera. Can someone please explain why 4k is so important in a "stills" camera? Thank you.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

lgn55063 said:


> When I want videos, I use a Canon portable video camera.
> 
> Can someone please explain why 4k is so important in a "stills" camera?



I had to actually look up what a _"Canon portable video camera"_ means.

Last time I saw a camcorder out in the wild was probably 10 years ago.

I hope that answers your question.


----------



## TeT (Jun 16, 2017)

Don't know which is worse, this Nininini guy or the PPL who shoot in the dark underexposed and bump the exposure to compare images...


----------



## lgn55063 (Jun 16, 2017)

Yes the portable video camera is older, like I am, but both of us can still "work it.." and have not had any complaints.. : I also shoot video using my cell phone..(current age android!)...


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

lgn55063 said:


> Yes the portable video camera is older, like I am, but both of us can still "work it.." and have not had any complaints.. : I also shoot video using my cell phone..(current age android!)...



That's great, but the reality is that camcorders no longer sell, and cameras haven't been "stills cameras" like you call them, in ages. They are used for still, and just as much for video.

In fact the biggest market for DSLR isn't even stills, it's youtubers. Canon specifically markets to vloggers / youtubers. 

Those people are not buying camcorders, they don't care about camcorders, most of them wouldn't even know what a camcorder is.

The world has changed my friend, ILC haven't been "stills cameras" in a long time. They are stills+video.

And many people within Canon *get it*, but many people within Canon do not. They didn't understand why people wanted WiFi, they didn't understand why people wanted flippy screens, they don't understand why people want 120fps, why they want 4k, why they want online sharing, they do.not.get.it.

Especially their division in Japan didn't get it. Some at Canon are starting to get it, but many of their old upper management is still completely ignorant about what is going on in this fast moving world.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/video-creator-kits


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

TeT said:


> Don't know which is worse, this Nininini guy or the PPL who shoot in the dark underexposed and bump the exposure to compare images...



I think people like you who are stuck in the past are actually the worst. It's people like you who ran kodak and nokia into the ground. 

People with no vision and awareness about tech whatsoever. People who still think DVD and DVD resolution are sufficient. (the ignorance about video in this thread is plain ridiculous)

Thank God tech companies ignore people like you, and thank God some at Canon have started to change, it's a shame that Canon still has an upper management filled wtih people like you, with no vision whatsoever, stuck in the past.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jun 16, 2017)

Not having 4K is a bummer, but I'm personally more upset that it isn't 2.7K with an MJPEG codec like the 5D4.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 16, 2017)

Checked the listings of TVs at Best buy

4K - 203 models
2K - 83 models
720p - 23 models

gee whiz Batman, I wonder what resolution of TV most people are buying.......


----------



## TeT (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> TeT said:
> 
> 
> > Don't know which is worse, this Nininini guy or the PPL who shoot in the dark underexposed and bump the exposure to compare images...
> ...



I made no comment about any tech past present or future. I simply stated that I find you to be annoying and wondered out loud as to how annoying you actually were, now I know.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 16, 2017)

Also, even if you intend to display at 2K, it is nice to shoot at a higher resolution (2.7K) and then through software, do a "steadycam" to the video and crop it to 2K.... gives a lot smoother results, particularly if you are shooting from a canoe


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

TeT said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > TeT said:
> ...



It has nothing to do with that. You don't like what I write.

You've said in the past that you never shoot video on your cameras, that you don't get youtube videos, that you don't get unboxing videos.

You don't understand the market, that's your problem. Not mine.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...



Half those companies are not 'pushing' 4K, they are reluctantly accepting and playing along to a false narrative. 4K capture might make a lot of sense for some people, for most people delivery, distribution, editing, storage, bandwidth and available options are simply years away. That is simply a fact.

For instance very few shows are available on Netflix in 4k and those that are cost more, even if you have the cable bandwidth to watch it, which most people don't.

Or Apple, the 4th generation (current) Apple TV does not even support 4k.

YouTube might have 4k and 8K options, very few people can stream them.

4k is being foist upon us by tv manufacturers as the new big thing, minutes after 3D/1080/720 was the new big thing, nobody is keeping up with 4k tv's which have less than 20% market penetration in the USA anyway. So apart from the fact that very few people can download the rare sources of 4k only 20% have the ability to view it! To say it is essential in anything at this time is entirely fallacious. Yes it will gradually take over, but not for years in many of the forms we currently view video. Don't forget the bigger push is on demand tv and that is entirely at the whim of internet delivery companies which are years and years behind the bandwidth needed for reliable widespread 4k delivery.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 16, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Checked the listings of TVs at Best buy
> 
> 4K - 203 models
> 2K - 83 models
> ...



You are overlooking the life cycle. Sure, many new buyers are probably buying 4K, although Best Buy wouldn't be carrying 23 models of 720p tvs if they weren't selling them. But how often does the average consumer replace their tv. I'm not talking about forum nerds, I'm talking about average Joe. Average Joe doesn't replace his tv until the old one breaks, so even after all 720p and 2k tvs quit being sold, they will still be a big part of the market, likely the majority for years to come.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> You don't understand the market, that's your problem. Not mine.



and yet you do.. a forum warrior knows the global market better than multi-billion dollar companies that make it their business to know what their clients want in far more greater detail then you ever could.

Got it.


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > Luds34 said:
> ...



name them


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 16, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Checked the listings of TVs at Best buy
> 
> 4K - 203 models
> 2K - 83 models
> ...



the 1080 and 720p models that are dirt cheap and they can afford and can't tell the difference with anyways.


----------



## TeT (Jun 16, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Checked the listings of TVs at Best buy
> 
> 4K - 203 models
> 2K - 83 models
> ...



There is a ton of better than 1080P content out there now. A lot of network stuff and broadcast TV as well. gee whiz is right


----------



## Nininini (Jun 16, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > You don't understand the market, that's your problem. Not mine.
> ...



Yeah, because those "billion dollar" Japanese zombie companies are doing so great. How many of those Japanese companies are on the verge of bankruptcy at his moment? 

Who is going to buy up Toshiba's chip division again?

Oh...it's tech companies who realize the importance of a connected world and aren't stuck in the past. Apple and Amazon.

6 years in a row of decreasing ILC sales for Japanese ILC manufacturers, in a world of youtube and netflix with massive amounts of video content being created. What a great result.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 16, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Checked the listings of TVs at Best buy
> 
> 4K - 203 models
> 2K - 83 models
> ...



top selling tv's in amazon:

1. 720p
2. 1080p
3. 4k
4. 4k
5. 720p
6. 1080p
7. 720p
8. 1080p
9. 720p
10. 720p

50% 720p
30% 1080p
20% 4K

that seems to match up with some other adaptation statistics that someone else brought up earlier.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...



and your point is?

you sit here and claim you know the industry .. okay.. where's your CV?

you know the global market. really? you sure? 

pretty arrogant of you. I doubt you even have a clue about your own native market let alone the global market.


----------



## TeT (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> TeT said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...



I don't shoot video because I suck at it and enjoy taking pictures. I don't get unboxing videos because I think taking a video of oneself unpacking something is ridiculous. Youtube is fine, especially if you are looking for how to do something. (don't recall in what context I dissed Youtube)

I do understand the market, I don't have a problem with what you write, I just find your delivery annoying.

It is ok to be annoying. I certainly am. I was just pointing it out.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > You don't understand the market, that's your problem. Not mine.
> ...



Well, what did you expect. It's all in the name, and the homophone can't disguise it. 

*nin·ny* ˈninē/ _noun informal_: a foolish person.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...



I did. Learn to read.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 16, 2017)

Thanks, Canon, for focusing on still photographers and bloggers, and not kowtowing to the 4k obsessed crowd!


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 16, 2017)

unfocused said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Checked the listings of TVs at Best buy
> ...



No, I am not overlooking the life cycle. I have absolutely no doubt that the vast majority of televisions in homes right now are 2K..... What I said (according to the CRTC, in Canada 4K is 80 to 90 percent of sales) is that people are now buying mostly 4K models....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> DVD btw? just how deep in denial are you
> 
> DVD is 480p, are you recording stuff in 480p?
> 
> of all users on this forum, you never make any sense whatsoever



Revenue from DVD sales is vastly larger than revenue from all 4K content, regardless of delivery medium. I'm sorry that facts don't make sense to you.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> I have absolutely no doubt that the vast majority of televisions in homes right now are 2K..... What I said (and industry sales numbers back this up, depending on the source 4K is 80 to 90 percent of sales) is that people are now buying mostly 4K models....



And replete native 4K content to display on those TVs will come. Eventually. Just like 4K will come to all levels of Canon ILCs. Eventually. 

Hmmmm...I just thought of something. Maybe those two facts aren't entirely unrelated?? Whaddyathink?!?


----------



## unfocused (Jun 16, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Of course there is also the question of how many people are paying the up charge to get 4K content. Many of those 4K tv buyers are probably streaming shows at lower resolution.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 16, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



well canada is a pretty small market .. worldwide:





4K is still not anywhere close to the shipment totals of the other formats

not to mention all the other non 4k tv's that were already purchased and still being purchased.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> I think people like you who are stuck in the past are actually the worst. It's people like you who ran kodak and nokia into the ground.



Not the first time you've brought up Nokia and Kodak. The thing is, those are examples of companies failing to anticipate and react to a paradigm shift. 

Flip phone → Smartphone

Film → Digital

480 → 720 → 1080 → 2K → 4K → 8K → 

Sorry, I'm unable to spot the paradigm shift on that last line. Can you point it out to me, please?


----------



## unfocused (Jun 16, 2017)

So, it sounds like the only complaints about the 6D II will be the lack of 4K and the absence of a second card slot. If that's the case, it will be much better received than the original 6D and could actually eclipse the 6D in sales if the price is reasonable.


----------



## weixing (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...


Hi,
Many companies are pushing 4K, why? Because they can and want you to buy their products even you don't need or unable to take advantage of it.... you know this is what salesman best at. 

I can see movie/tv production might need it, but for average consumer, they might not see the difference... unless they normally watch their video up close.

Anyway, this 4k vs 1080p is the new megapixel war... 

Have a nice day.

PS: I recently bought a sennheiser headphone and I thought the sound quality will improve greatly when compared to my cheaper philips earpiece, but the improvement is not that obvious... :


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

unfocused said:


> So, it sounds like the only complaints about the 6D II will be the lack of 4K and the absence of a second card slot. If that's the case, it will be much better received than the original 6D and could actually eclipse the 6D in sales if the price is reasonable.



Haven't you been paying attention to these threads? Without 4K, dual card slots, and more AF points than there are stars in the sky, the 6DII is dead. Just plain dead.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 16, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > I have absolutely no doubt that the vast majority of televisions in homes right now are 2K..... What I said (and industry sales numbers back this up, depending on the source 4K is 80 to 90 percent of sales) is that people are now buying mostly 4K models....
> ...


You could be right...... eventually


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 16, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > So, it sounds like the only complaints about the 6D II will be the lack of 4K and the absence of a second card slot. If that's the case, it will be much better received than the original 6D and could actually eclipse the 6D in sales if the price is reasonable.
> ...



The dual card slots, I couldn't care less about... if they are there, I will use them, if not, meh......

AF points? 11 sucks! 65 is pie in the sky and is not going to happen. Anything in the 30-40 range would be a good number to expect.....

4K? My opinion is that it is about time, but what I really want to see is 2.7K. Everything shoots 2K or better... A camera at the level of the 6D2 should be able to do better than a rebel or a P/S.... I am hoping that when the real specs come out, 2.7K will be there.....


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 16, 2017)

unfocused said:


> So, it sounds like the only complaints about the 6D II will be the lack of 4K and the absence of a second card slot. If that's the case, it will be much better received than the original 6D and could actually eclipse the 6D in sales if the price is reasonable.



I love it, and that's the irony. As "awful" as the current 6D is/was spec wise, somehow it manage to sell a heck of a lot of copies. There seems to be a lot of buzz on this next iteration... aka maybe it is poised to sell well too???

Maybe... just maybe a camera is more than a spec sheet. I know I know, crazy talk. Like maybe the difference between 1/4000 and 1/8000 max shutter speed is one of those things that in the real world of shooting (heaven forbid folks actually take pictures with cameras and not argue specsmanship on the interwebs) doesn't matter 99.9% of the time. 

In anycase, easy/careful there with rational, common sense comments. They have no place on this forum.


----------



## SweOz (Jun 16, 2017)

It’s getting very tiering that every discussion thread regarding Canon SLR cameras is turned into a discussion about video ability of the same camera, there are far better systems for videographer than DSLRs which were designed for a very different task. 
I have used the 6D for 4 years now for stills, mainly people and sports photography and I’m very pleased with the IQ. Have also used the 5D Mark III for sports. 
I only see two major disadvantages with the 6D, AF system is too rudimentary (centre point excellent though) and FPS is at least 2FPS too low on the 6D. 
Even if only these two shortcomings were upgraded on the 6D MII I’ll order one as soon as they are available in Australia.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> Do you want me to do a comparison between the influence of companies pushing 4k:
> 
> -Youtube / Android / Google
> -Apple
> ...



None of these do Live TV. In the UK Sky have some UHD services, and the bandwidth requirements are huge. No one will get UHD on terrestrial networks anytime soon due to the fact they would have to switch off all the other channels.

Yes there is a lot of UHD content, most movies are shot UHD, and that is because most cinemas now support 2k or 4k. Yes you can buy UHD TVs for the home, but you will have to either buy UHD content or tolerate the low bandwidth offerings of Netflix (unless you don't mind downloading a whole movie first).

UHD is nowhere near the 'norm' in the broadcast industry. Most channels across the globe are still MPEG2 SD. The UK is lucky, we have a lot of HD content, and some of the Asian countries also have a lot of HD content. Small areas like Japan, Singapore etc can afford to replace all of their infrastructure to get UHD to the home, larger regions like the US and Russia, this will take years.

I agree that if you can, you should capture in UHD, even if you process to HD. But, and here is the but, the 5DMk4 doesn't do UHD Properly (30fps is not a broadcast UHD standard that anyone uses) so it was I think quite normal to assume that the 6D MK2 was never going to beat that.

Any sub version of what the 5DMk2 can do was just going to be worse. I am sure you understand that the 6DMk2 is not going to trump the 5DMk4 in almost any areas.

For anyone wanting to shoot video, I guess they will have to consider an alternative way.


----------



## hbr (Jun 16, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Haven't you been paying attention to these threads? Without 4K, dual card slots, and more AF points than there are stars in the sky, the 6DII is dead. Just plain dead.



And if it turns out not to be a Full Frame mirror less as another rumor site suggested then Canon is *******!


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> _(and let's not pretend smartphones are not related to the ILC market, most video being shot right now is being shot on a smartphone, smartphones and online distribution platforms like youtube and netflix are in fact determining the codec and distribution standards for video in 2017)_
> 
> -4k video recording is the standard on every mid to high-end smartphone
> -4k is the standard for all new TV
> ...



You've just destroyed your own argument: most video is being shot on smartphone, and most phones have 4K. How many people will leave home with a camera but no phone? Virtually none. So they have 4K available in their phone so why do they need it in their camera?


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> In fact the biggest market for DSLR isn't even stills, it's youtubers. Canon specifically markets to vloggers / youtubers.



You have made a clear statement there - do you have any facts to support it? Or are we going to have another 'Trump' moment where you admit it was wrong 'but we know what you meant'?


----------



## Berowne (Jun 16, 2017)

Will the 6DII replace both, 6D and 5DIII? If so, the next move will perhaps be to replace 5DS and 5DSr with a successor or to stop Marketing the 5DS because of poorer sales figures compared to the 5DSr. I think we will soon see Canon offering only 4 different FF-Cameras instead of 6.


----------



## vscd (Jun 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > In fact the biggest market for DSLR isn't even stills, it's youtubers. Canon specifically markets to vloggers / youtubers.
> ...



+1


----------



## rwvaughn (Jun 16, 2017)

AA said:


> No 4K would be simply unacceptable in H2 2017. This camera will not be replaced until 2021/22. That means, you would be sitting there with this thing in 2021/22 with no 4K video. WTF Canon???
> 
> No 4K = no buy.
> 
> Next stop Sony?




LOL Your new Sony will have been made obsolete about 6 times over (once every 9 months) between now and 2021. Try and sell the body to keep up with Sony's "advances"... good luck with that it's a pennies on the dollar proposition. And, heaven forbid you drop and break it for a lack of true professional support meant you had to buy a new body as Sony doesn't repair their products.


----------



## 9VIII (Jun 16, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Emerging markets are probably still demanding HDTV's, those markets are getting pretty big, western nations will have a much higher percentage of 4K saturation.


----------



## NaviUy (Jun 16, 2017)

rwvaughn said:


> AA said:
> 
> 
> > No 4K would be simply unacceptable in H2 2017. This camera will not be replaced until 2021/22. That means, you would be sitting there with this thing in 2021/22 with no 4K video. WTF Canon???
> ...



TBH thats kind of better than not having any innovation. I mean... I definitely don't want to wait another 5 years for 4k.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> Do you want me to do a comparison between the influence of companies pushing 4k:
> 
> -Youtube / Android / Google
> -Apple
> ...



There was a time when I could have made an equal list of companies "pushing" 3d. Many of the companies would be the same, interestingly. For all of their "influence" no one cared. For all of the units shipped (my current TV and previous TV had 3d) most consumers did not care, did not buy glasses, did not buy 3DBRs, and home 3d is almost gone. Unlike 3d, I do believe 4k will just become the default for TVs being built as old fabs are turned off, but a huge number of them will never display 1080p, let alone 4k.

"The next big thing" is sometimes hype. Most people on the street don't find BR worth it over DVD, which boggles my mind as much as an audiophile being shocked that people are fine with MP3, but there it is. My next TV will be 4k, but the amount of content I'll be interested in for it is... I'm not replacing my original XB1 with a 4k model. I can't remember if Netflix will stream 4k to HTPCs or if it's restricted to "devices" like HDR. I'm not remotely interested in the "content" on YouTube. Football is not broadcast in 4k... or 1080p...

Speaking of, you might love to cavalierly dismiss broadcast TV as obsolete, but the "influencers" you spoke of would kill for a market like the NFL's. When one of your "influencers" has the rights to stream 4k NFL games to my house, there will be a compelling case for 4k being "standard".


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > In fact the biggest market for DSLR isn't even stills, it's youtubers. Canon specifically markets to vloggers / youtubers.
> ...



I spend a LOT of time on youtube. And while some users definately use DSLRs, I would say the majority are using a bridge style camera, or a fixed lens camera for their work. They are cheap, have lots of functionality and produce good enough video.

I don't have figures on the split between people using DSLRs for video and people using DSLRs for stills, but, I would bet my shirt on Canons biggest market NOT being youtubers.

Professional photographers, when you lump in News gathering, fashion, events, sport, wedding/portrait is a large sector, even in countries where social media such as youtube is still in it's infancy. Then throw in all the amateurs and you have way more stills photographers than youtubers.

Will this change? if youtubers get a product that does hi quality video (without stills even) at a good price, they won't care about DSLR market products. Canon might supply a few high profile youtubers with kit, the same as Sony do for monitors, nVidia do for graphics etc, but this will be a relatively small number.


----------



## wildwalker (Jun 16, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > Do you want me to do a comparison between the influence of companies pushing 4k:
> ...



UHD is primarily for cinema. However large screen devices that offer high resolution are great for pubs, clubs, sportsbars etc. For anyone replacing a TV, they may well buy a UHD screen to future proof themselves, but that does not mean they will consume or purchase any UHD content.

The Broadcast industry in the UK is providing UHD for some services, but its a real bandwidth hog, especially for bandwidth limited transport systems such as DTT (terrestrial). The current thinking is that HDR might swoop in and (for sometime at least) steal the limelight from UHD. HDR(with WCG) looks good, its easy to differentiate from standard HD, and it has almost no extra overhead in terms of bandwidth. HDR is applicable to both HD and UHD as the colourspace can be applied to either standard.

BUT UHD is not the standard, nor is 1080P either, for broadcast Satellite, Cable or Terrestrial systems it is 1080i.

If you have OTT services then yes you can get 1080p.

2K is not a thing in europe and nor is 480p, our SD services are 576i.


----------



## indiehorse (Jun 16, 2017)

If I were a videographer seriously considering buying a 6D mk ii, I think I'd like a headphone jack and some kind of audio monitoring. I'd probably have a bunch of other concerns and requirements, but I'm not a videographer, so I don't know what they are.

I think it's telling that the 4k brigade seem only concerned about 4k. Seems like the equivalent of a stills photographer who's only concerned about megapixel count.

(Hi, I'm new here)


----------



## Proscribo (Jun 16, 2017)

indiehorse said:


> If I were a videographer seriously considering buying a 6D mk ii, I think I'd like a headphone jack and some kind of audio monitoring. I'd probably have a bunch of other concerns and requirements, but I'm not a videographer, so I don't know what they are.
> 
> *I think it's telling that the 4k brigade seem only concerned about 4k. Seems like the equivalent of a stills photographer who's only concerned about megapixel count.*
> 
> (Hi, I'm new here)


Indeed. It's very obvious when people argue that "this and that camera should have 4K because my iphone has 4k!". Well, uh, to put it bluntly that iphone makes crappy "4K" video, not even going into the sound department, yet all they care is the label on the device that says 4K...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

indiehorse said:


> (Hi, I'm new here)



Welcome!


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 16, 2017)

indiehorse said:


> If I were a videographer seriously considering buying a 6D mk ii, I think I'd like a headphone jack and some kind of audio monitoring. I'd probably have a bunch of other concerns and requirements, but I'm not a videographer, so I don't know what they are.
> 
> I think it's telling that the 4k brigade seem only concerned about 4k. Seems like the equivalent of a stills photographer who's only concerned about megapixel count.
> 
> (Hi, I'm new here)



Indeed, welcome.

I can tell you are new: you are applying logic in a forum and admitting you don't know something.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

indiehorse said:


> If I were a videographer seriously considering buying a 6D mk ii, I think I'd like a headphone jack and some kind of audio monitoring. I'd probably have a bunch of other concerns and requirements, but I'm not a videographer, so I don't know what they are.
> 
> I think it's telling that the 4k brigade seem only concerned about 4k. Seems like the equivalent of a stills photographer who's only concerned about megapixel count.
> 
> (Hi, I'm new here)



Heckuva solid first post! 8)


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 16, 2017)

Berowne said:


> Will the 6DII replace both, 6D and 5DIII? If so, the next move will perhaps be to replace 5DS and 5DSr with a successor or to stop Marketing the 5DS because of poorer sales figures compared to the 5DSr. I think we will soon see Canon offering only 4 different FF-Cameras instead of 6.


As a 5DS owner I deliberately chose it over the 5DSr because I believe any camera that shoots video should have an OPLF. Why you ask? Because unlike stills moire looks worse when your panning a camera and this shows up such as in dark materials punctuated with lighter colours. We rent high end movie cameras such as the Red Weapon & Arri Alexa and regardless they all have OPLF filters added yet the sharpness is not questioned and Ive found exactly the same with the 5DS (which Ive tested using the CIPA high resolution chart we have). 
Frankly I doubt a single person could reliably and repeatedly tell the difference in sharpness putting all the other factors into consideration such as lighting, shutter speed, ISO etc.


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> indiehorse said:
> 
> 
> > If I were a videographer seriously considering buying a 6D mk ii, I think I'd like a headphone jack and some kind of audio monitoring. I'd probably have a bunch of other concerns and requirements, but I'm not a videographer, so I don't know what they are.
> ...



Touché! 

Thanks for the laugh this morning.


----------



## Tanispyre (Jun 16, 2017)

I want to know if it will keep the interchangeable screens so I can get a matte screen for use with my manual focus fast primes.


----------



## CrispyCanon (Jun 16, 2017)

Out of all the ways that Canon could have handicapped the 6D2, no 4K is one of the better choices.(the 6D had to be made less than the 5D4 considering its price point).
Even if it had 4K, it could not be as good as that n the 5D4, which by the way is unusable. I am all for innovation above all but in the real world, I want to buy the 6D2 and no 4K is fine.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 16, 2017)

9VIII said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...


Emerging markets are buying more 4K high end TV cameras than Western countries. In China they ONLY want 4K, in India 4K is huge. The mistake people make is equating 4K origination with 4K transmission. Over-sampling gives a better HDTV signal than a pure HDTV originated signal which means transmission pipe losses are less and therefor the HDTV signal is better preserved with more detail.


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Jun 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> most video is being shot on smartphone, and most phones have 4K. How many people will leave home with a camera but no phone? Virtually none. So they have 4K available in their phone so why do they need it in their camera?


+1

One example I want to pick up:
If I want to have someone for my own wedding doing stills photography and video footage I won't have only one person doing that job with one camera. I rather would have two persons one doing the stills part and one doing the video part. One person alone probably can do both jobs but will I be satisfied with the outcome? When he/she is doing video he/she will miss some important moments to capture as still and vice versea.

People who are doing professional stills and video work will for sure use the best possible camera which will do the job accordingly. Currently this means that you need two differnet bodies one for each of the jobs. Everything else is dreamed by now.

Conclusion: It is not needed at all that a 6D2 or any other manufacturers 2k$ DSLR needs to be a jack-of-all-trades camera. I and probably even the DSLR producers themself eventually regret that this video thing has found its way into DSLRs at all. (cite: "The spirits that I called" from Goethes "The Sorcerer's Apprentice")

When the 4k fans argumenting that even their smartphones do have 4k why they then don't simply use their phones? Because its not fully implemented (but 4k is the new standard, right?). But then there is the expectation that a 2k$ DSLR should provide full 4k support (which is only given in much more expensive equipment) without any quirks. Dream on and wake up again in 5 or 10 years. 

Frank


----------



## DonPolo (Jun 16, 2017)

I'm new here as well... so take it easy on me please. 

As a videographer and photographer "the dream" is something that is a direct competitor of Sony a7S II. There really is nothing out there that does compete in the same price range and size. I've been shooting Canon for years now, and although I can look at the C100 through C300 for video work, I'm no ready to pay the price of admission. Plus in my case, a camera that also takes stills is the best of both worlds for my work flow (that way I can be the second shooter and capture B-roll at the same time). 

To be honest, based on what happens with the specs, I may have to look at what Sony has to offer even if it comes with all the cons that everyone has already listed in previous posts. I just dread having to get rid of my gear to move to Sony or another platform. 

Please Canon, give us something good... even if we don't get 4K... at the very least give us an 80D with a full frame sensor that does well in low light at reasonable price point.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 16, 2017)

The day will come when I eat my bitter words, but 14 years of using CF and SD cards in Asia and the USA, all kinds of weather, I've never had one fail. When I do have an occasional important and/or paid session, I use a backup card to CMA, but most of the time I don't like dealing with two of them. I guess I could always leave an SD card in and format it each time I put the CF back in. 

(I did have a thumb-drive get corrupted once, but was able to recover with the SanDisk tool. About 10 years ago.)

(Maybe I got a little discouraged by how the 5DIII was slowed down when the SD card was in the slot. I haven't noticed that happening on the 5DIV, but most of the time I don't bother with the SD slot on it either.)

In other words, I can't get worked up about the lack of a second card slot. While it's a nice feature, for sure, I wonder how many people truly develop the habit of using it. 

For the level of photographer the 6DII has been developed for, once we get beyond people who are more obsessed with specs than taking photos, I don't see a second slot or 4K as any issue whatsoever. This might be the most popular, widely sold FF camera yet.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jun 16, 2017)

The easiest option is to simply not buy and move on. 

I bought a 5D4 strictly for stills work and timelapse, and tried to integrate it into some of the video projects I'm working on this year, but I realized that it just isn't at the level I'm used to especially when I've been working with other equipment that is much easier and flexible to use, even as a b-cam, so I sold it off once the project was closed and paid. The crop factor wasn't the issue, but the significant rolling shutter, lack of log/framerates/video assist features and MJPEG was too much to compromise against having native lens performance and DPAF. I know log was later addressed, but required a send-in and downtime. If the 6DII offered 4K that is even more limiting than what the 5DIV offered, it would merely be a spec sheet item at that point. These bodies are meant to excel for stills photography, so it simply was not a good fit for me or anyone else doing more than a 70/30 video/stills ratio.

It doesn't matter what Canon is doing, or what their corporate strategy is. I find the best choices that allow me to maximize my performance envelope. When I was cross shopping a cinema system last year, I found Canon's EOS Cinema line equally under-speced and overpriced compared to the competition, so I went with the competition. Canon today doesn't have the products to support that vision for me other than its lens lineup which has support on almost all of the competitor's systems, so I continue to expand my EF lens setup which continue to sit on all of its competitor's bodies. This is the best fit for me. YMMV.

You can't appeal to the user base here as a whole, because they simply have more ammunition in the debate dept. than you do, and it is a fact that Canon has the largest market-share vs the competition. But honestly, does it matter? What matters is that your acquisition process will have more creative breadth and tools at your disposable than those who opt to stay with Canon's current offerings and and you will be able to produce a higher end deliverable. 

At the end of the day, that is the only thing that matters...


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 16, 2017)

And think of all the photojournalists and wedding and fashion photographers over the years who survived and thrived with a single roll of film in their cameras. No backup slot!

Never had a CF/SD card fail, but I do remember torn sprocket holes, film covers popping open, worrying about X-rays...

If Canon only served those photographers with "vision," they'd be out of business fast.


----------



## EduPortas (Jun 16, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> EduPortas said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



There is no god-given law that says Canon will always be the company that sells the most cameras.

As a Canon buyer, I would gladly stay with them if they release products that I consider a good value.

If they don't, I'll jump ship. I'm pretty sure other buyers think as I do.

A premium camera released during the second half of 2017 with no flavor of 4k is not a good value for me.

This ain't a cheap hobby.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 16, 2017)

Come to think of it, why would photographers with "vision" be getting down in the mud on gear forums?

They don't have the time! They are out taking photos!


----------



## Maiaibing (Jun 16, 2017)

YuengLinger said:


> The day will come when I eat my bitter words, but 14 years of using CF and SD cards in Asia and the USA, all kinds of weather, I've never had one fail. When I do have an occasional important and/or paid session, I use a backup card to CMA, but most of the time I don't like dealing with two of them. I guess I could always leave an SD card in and format it each time I put the CF back in.
> 
> (I did have a thumb-drive get corrupted once, but was able to recover with the SanDisk tool. About 10 years ago.)


+1

The - by far - biggest risk of loosing your pictures is when you take the card medium out of your camera. Medium can be lost, damaged, suffer magnetic exposure, get washed, get stolen etc. etc. This is the risk to reduce first and foremost.


----------



## tr573 (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> lgn55063 said:
> 
> 
> > When I want videos, I use a Canon portable video camera.
> ...



You're going to hate me, but (not joking) there were 2 different parents recording my daughters preschool "graduation" ceremony with camcorders today.

Edit: The rest of them were using smartphones to video. The few people (like myself) that had ILC's were only taking still with them. Personally I can't stand using my SLR for video - I think , like has been said a few times here, that it's an incredibly kludgy and non-ergonomic platform for video. It gives people who can't afford 10k$ cameras large sensor video if they want it, but at the cost of being very lousy to use.


----------



## FramerMCB (Jun 16, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > -4k video recording is the standard on every mid to high-end smartphone
> ...


A++


----------



## ethanz (Jun 16, 2017)

I keep seeing this being called a premium camera, but I don't think I've ever seen the 6D as a premium camera. It's an entry level full frame; middle of the road camera compared to Canon's whole line up. If you want something more, spend the money.


----------



## FramerMCB (Jun 16, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > tr573 said:
> ...



Too funny!!! Watch out or this will git ya...!


----------



## FramerMCB (Jun 16, 2017)

indiehorse said:


> If I were a videographer seriously considering buying a 6D mk ii, I think I'd like a headphone jack and some kind of audio monitoring. I'd probably have a bunch of other concerns and requirements, but I'm not a videographer, so I don't know what they are.
> 
> I think it's telling that the 4k brigade seem only concerned about 4k. Seems like the equivalent of a stills photographer who's only concerned about megapixel count.
> 
> (Hi, I'm new here)



Welcome to Canon Rumors (and the Forum)!!! I hope you have "thick skin". And a good sense of amusement and keen wit. You will need it here. 

I will never understand people who will complain about a product before it's even available, and one which, no one is forcing them to buy. And go on and on and on with their drumbeat and defend their position to the nth degree. 

I do completely understand wanting a product that fits one's particular desires/needs. However wanting a new camera model to have 4k because you think it should, because you think that's whats hip (you feel REQUIRED) today, because the "marketplace demands this", to my mind, just shows a selfish arrogance combined with an entitlement attitude. (This is in reference to those making blanket statements about tech, adopted tech, the marketplace, etc. With no facts. These are considered specious arguments.)

There's no point debating whether it should have 4k or not. It will have whatever specs Canon gave it. Comment on it, be chagrined by it, or not. Then move on. Buy something else. And for those of us who could care less about 4k. No need to bash other's desire for it. But this endless back and forth betwixt ya'll while entertaining at first has become tedious and overly boorish.

Let's extend some grace to one another and recognize (as other's have mentioned/alluded-to) that many have different needs for a camera. At heart, Canon makes DSLR's for photographers (not videographers). They make Cinema cameras of various stripes for videographers (not photographers). A true 'video' person making documentaries what-have-you, will typically rather use a Cinema lens for their video rig. However as these are not cheap, might make due with L glass instead, or STM, or third-party manual offerings, depending on need and budget. If you are a stills photographer who likes or appreciates the ability to shoot video with the same device. Then having video in camera is a bonus. 

If you want 'everything' in your camera get a Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, Nikon, or Olympus - but understand and know each of these brands will have limitations and constraints of one kind or another too. Each to their own. But I don't understand this mindset of constant bickering. It has infected society at large. Everyone is divided over so many things. Crazy. We all bleed red last I checked.


----------



## BurningPlatform (Jun 16, 2017)

I think the decision is easy. If you need 4k, you do not buy 6Dmk2. If you want 4k, you probably won't buy a 6dmk2 either, depending how much you want it vs. how much you really need it. Otherwise, it is the photo specs that are important. Fortunately it is a voluntary choice.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jun 16, 2017)

YuengLinger said:


> And think of all the photojournalists and wedding and fashion photographers over the years who survived and thrived with a single roll of film in their cameras. No backup slot!
> 
> Never had a CF/SD card fail, but I do remember torn sprocket holes, film covers popping open, worrying about X-rays...
> 
> If Canon only served those photographers with "vision," they'd be out of business fast.



I wasn't asking them to cater to my singular vision, it is just that their camera systems don't tick the boxes that I need today, so I shop elsewhere. I still continue to contribute to their bottom line via lens purchases. I'm not so misguided as to rid myself of Canon entirely to make a point, so to speak. I simply buy the pieces from the manufacturers that work best together that best suit my need. Simple as that..


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 16, 2017)

The real amazing thing is that as soon as Canon releases a camera, how many video shooters suddenly are created.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 16, 2017)

FramerMCB said:


> indiehorse said:
> 
> 
> > If I were a videographer seriously considering buying a 6D mk ii, I think I'd like a headphone jack and some kind of audio monitoring. I'd probably have a bunch of other concerns and requirements, but I'm not a videographer, so I don't know what they are.
> ...


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 16, 2017)

bdunbar79 said:


> The real amazing thing is that as soon as Canon releases a camera, how many video shooters suddenly are created.



100% ;D ;D ;D


----------



## timmy_650 (Jun 16, 2017)

I was thinking about 4K. And the people I personally know who have and use 4K in some way. 1 family friend tv is streams 4k but movie room is still 1080 but they are overly rich (he just brought a plane). Then one other friend who is a graphic designer and 4k on this "computer" set up. But that is it so 2 out of 30 people I know well enough to know. I know a lot of people with 4k stuff like iphone but can't use 4k. They could 4K video but the iphone screen is only 1080 at best, so they couldn't watch 4k.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

jayphotoworks said:


> I wasn't asking them to cater to my singular vision, it is just that their camera systems don't tick the boxes that I need today, so I shop elsewhere. I still continue to contribute to their bottom line via lens purchases. I'm not so misguided as to rid myself of Canon entirely to make a point, so to speak. I simply buy the pieces from the manufacturers that work best together that best suit my need. Simple as that..



That is a reasonable response. What is much less reasonable (and the cause of much derision on this website and beyond) is the response of "Canon's [product] does not meat my personal preferences, therefor it is crap, Canon is crap, you're all stupid for buying crap, and doooooooom!".

Also not reasonable is "Nikon's D750 is awesome. Therefor, Canon needs to match it for features and price, and if they don't, I'm going to throw a temper tantrum instead of buying the D750 because I don't really want a Nikon."


----------



## dak723 (Jun 16, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> indiehorse said:
> 
> 
> > (Hi, I'm new here)
> ...



...and run away as fast as you can!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

timmy_650 said:


> I was thinking about 4K. And the people I personally know who have and use 4K in some way. 1 family friend tv is streams 4k but movie room is still 1080 but they are overly rich (he just brought a plane). Then one other friend who is a graphic designer and 4k on this "computer" set up. But that is it so 2 out of 30 people I know well enough to know. I know a lot of people with 4k stuff like iphone but can't use 4k. They could 4K video but the iphone screen is only 1080 at best, so they couldn't watch 4k.



There's a huge difference between "I have a 4k screen somewhere" and "when I shoot video, it needs to be in 4k". My mother is going to be getting a new TV soon, and it'll be 4k. There's a strong chance she'll never put a 4k stream on it, but when you can get a good 65" Samsung 4k for $900, why not?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

tr573 said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > lgn55063 said:
> ...



+1

It's the end of the school year, and with three young kids there are many concerts, plays, and other events to be captured. At all of them, there are generally a couple of parents with a camcorder, a couple with a dSLR, maybe one with a MILC, and the rest are using their phones. 

Personally, I prefer to use the right tool for a job. The camcorder is the ideal tool for casual video capture – compact, easy to hold, ample optical zoom (so I can get the whole band or just my daughter and her violin), mini-hotshoe mounted shotgun mic (selectable coverage so I can hear the whole band or just my daughter and her violin). The dSLR is the ideal tool for stills, full frame with an f/2.8 zoom gives good quality images in the poor lighting typical for such events. 

Sure,, you could build a house with a combination hammer/screwdriver:






...but neither is very effective.


----------



## timmy_650 (Jun 16, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> timmy_650 said:
> 
> 
> > I was thinking about 4K. And the people I personally know who have and use 4K in some way. 1 family friend tv is streams 4k but movie room is still 1080 but they are overly rich (he just brought a plane). Then one other friend who is a graphic designer and 4k on this "computer" set up. But that is it so 2 out of 30 people I know well enough to know. I know a lot of people with 4k stuff like iphone but can't use 4k. They could 4K video but the iphone screen is only 1080 at best, so they couldn't watch 4k.
> ...



That is my point the normal person hasn't adopted 4k yet. That use of 4k is a specialized area and it has it great benefits. But I don't see it has something that everyone needs or most people.


----------



## PureClassA (Jun 16, 2017)

This is fantastic 5D3 replacement. Mine is on it's way out, albeit, slowly. It has some internal water damage but it still works great right now. I considered the 5D4 but bought a 1DX2 instead last year. The 6D2 looks like an incredible machine provided the specs listed turn out to be relatively correct and Canon can keep the price at $2000 again


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 16, 2017)

tr573 said:


> You're going to hate me, but (not joking) there were 2 different parents recording my daughters preschool "graduation" ceremony with camcorders today.
> 
> Edit: The rest of them were using smartphones to video. The few people (like myself) that had ILC's were only taking still with them. Personally I can't stand using my SLR for video - I think , like has been said a few times here, that it's an incredibly kludgy and non-ergonomic platform for video. It gives people who can't afford 10k$ cameras large sensor video if they want it, but at the cost of being very lousy to use.



There were three tripods set up during my daughters' piano recital. Two had camcorders, and the third was mine with a DSLR. The two tripods in front were in the front row, and being the largest, mine was raised full height (>6 ft) in the back with a clear shot of the performers on a raised stage. I also had separate mics/portable recorder placed near the piano for audio. Camera audio was only used to sync the audio to the video. It works well enough. I shoot stills with a second DSLR, and leave the one doing video largely untouched. I might change the framing from time to time, but that's it.

I used to use a dedicated camcorder (Canon HV20) but keeping the DSLR/camcorder that used different media/batteries was a pain. Having a backup camera that can do video as good as a consumer camcorder simplified a lot of things.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

Random Orbits said:


> I used to use a dedicated camcorder (Canon HV20) but keeping the DSLR/camcorder that used different media/batteries was a pain. Having a backup camera that can do video as good as a consumer camcorder simplified a lot of things.



I suppose I could use my EOS M2 for video... But my Vixia HF M41 does a great job, is much easier to hand hold, uses SD cards (along with internal flash memory), and for handheld or moving subjects, the AF makes life easy. If I replace my M2 with an M6 (which is looking likely), I may shoot more video on an ILC (not that I shoot all that much video either way).


----------



## Jopa (Jun 16, 2017)

bdunbar79 said:


> The real amazing thing is that as soon as Canon releases a camera, how many video shooters suddenly are created.



I think it's not about 4k or video in general. People on forums do not buy cameras for video or photo. If you think that photography is about taking pictures you are plain wrong! _People buy cameras to discuss them_ and complain of the forums. Sometimes no purchase required at all. All is required is to read what others say and start your own complain!


----------



## malarcky (Jun 16, 2017)

I have a hard time with the subject matter of this camera's announcement of features being dominated by the lack of 4K video. This kind of thing happens every time a new camera comes out, especially a Canon.

If you think about what people wanted in a new 6D, you would go back to the expectorate "full frame 80D". That's what we have here, and I can't be more excited. This same thing happens all the time with the announcements of new models. No one has been applauding anything, as a rule, they just want to whine about the lack of 4K. I told myself that I would be fine with the new 6d MkII being a full frame 80D, and this is what we have here.The flippy touch screen is there, and the focusing system has been expanded to include DP raw.

This camera is going to be a winner, and the people who are complaining about the lack of 4K are really being a little bit ridiculous in having the 80D full frame everyone was clambering for, but they claim they won't budge because of 4K. My response to them is that if they want 4K, buy a video camera, or don't complain that a stills camera doesn't magically transform into a super duper video camera. I feel like I'm getting a better stills camera because there wasn't a lot of R&D going for the implementation of something I would never use, and didn't want in the first place.

I have a t3i, a 70D, an 80D, and a 6D. All three of these cameras offer video capabilities. I feel like I have spent unnecessary money funding the research of video implementation because I don't shoot video. I spent $1,300 on a Canon Elura DV Camcorder back in 2000, that equates to about $1,850 in today's dollars. I was capturing stills from the video at a 370KB JPG. I felt like I was getting sub par quality JPG stills from the video, and that's basically what the 4K naysayers are doing here. I bought the Elura as a camcorder, not a stills camera, so the 1/3 MB JPG's were a bonus, albeit a sub par one.

Come back here in three or four months, and you will see about the same thing that you see on the 5D MkIV threads, and people will be praising the low ISO performance and other qualities of this new camera, (I expect that anyway) and there will be few people complaining about the lack of 4K, as the stills will be the main focus of the discussion, as they should be.

I understand the disappointment about the 4K, but it is not going to be a deal breaker, and I would bet money that this camera does a lot better than the 6d in the volume of sales. A full frame 80D is all I want, and I will expect the picture quality to be better than the 80D, so it's going to be a winner.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

malarcky said:


> No one has been applauding anything, as a rule, they just want to whine about the lack of 4K.



To be fair, a lot of people have expressed excitement about a tilty-flippy FF body with DPAF, on-chip DAC, and 45 AF points, at (probably) a very reasonable price.

It's just the half-dozen or so whiners whine very loudly and start twenty-page arguments over 4k.


----------



## reef58 (Jun 16, 2017)

My point early in the thread is I found the lack of 4k curious even though I don't care about it. I was looking at this from the perspective of someone buying their first DSLR and the 6d2 being a contender. I think the lack of 4k will be a negative. Most people buying TV's now are looking at 4k sets. I am not hip on the industry, but are companies making announcements of 1080p TV sets in this day and age? I must plead ignorance on that, but would be surprised if they did.




Luds34 said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > -4k video recording is the standard on every mid to high-end smartphone
> ...


----------



## Billybob (Jun 16, 2017)

malarcky said:


> I have a hard time with the subject matter of this camera's announcement of features being dominated by the lack of 4K video. This kind of thing happens every time a new camera comes out, especially a Canon.
> ...



I too have struggled with page after page of 4K back and forth. Folks, the 6D is a budget camera that happens to be full frame. Showing my (digital) age, I remember when the price of entry for full frame photography was over $3k, and that price was considered revolutionary. When the 6D came out, no one cared that it was "crippled" relative to top-end APS-C offerings. We were all simply wowed that we could finally shoot full-frame at such a low price point. That the camera was compact and had better IQ than the 5DIII (yes, better in that the 6D had less banding, better high-ISO performance and lower noise in general) was simply a bonus.

Yet, here are so many demanding a specific feature be included in this budget offering. Sorry, I just don't get it. 

For the 6D replacement, if it can keep up with the 80D, it is a winner, and will actually be a bit better than a budget offering. I have an 80D and absolutely love it. I would like to have an XD camera to take full advantage of my full-frame glass (like the 24-70L II, 100-400L II, and potentially the 11-24L). I'd love it if it improved on the the 5D IV's DR, and matched the 80D's burst rate. However, coming close to those levels would be fine. The Canon is a second system for me, so I'm not in the market to purchase a $3k plus camera. However, there are many enthusiasts who are similar situated in that they are also budget limited who would love to try FF frame but fine the current 6D too limited. introducing a 6DII that is feature parity with the 80D would draw a slew of folks off the fence. 

Even without 4K. That's who this camera is for.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2017)

reef58 said:


> Most people buying TV's now are looking at 4k sets. I am not hip on the industry, but are companies making announcements of 1080p TV sets in this day and age? I must plead ignorance on that, but would be surprised if they did.



No, they're advertising 4K sets, and touting their ability to *upscale content* to 4K resolution. They have to, because so little native 4K content is available. 

I wonder how many photographers routinely view and display their images at 200% or even higher zoom settings on their monitors?


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 16, 2017)

reef58 said:


> My point early in the thread is I found the lack of 4k curious even though I don't care about it. I was looking at this from the perspective of someone buying their first DSLR and the 6d2 being a contender.



A first time DSLR buyer spending $2,500 plus lenses? How many would do that?


----------



## testthewest (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> testthewest said:
> 
> 
> > internet connections often aren't even good enough, it is simply a wasted effort.
> ...



You arrogant little brat. This world (not even this universe) is a bit bigger than your US city you live and can enjoy cheap, good internet. Most of the population of this universe DOES NOT live there. And just because there is a filter, it does mean nothing. None of the channels I watch offers 4K regularly because it is simply not needed on a normal monitor. It makes no difference to get an upvote, HD is enough for that. At least iof I look at the trending videos, they don't have 4K. It is just not needed.

And now back with you, in your little wealthy bubble and boast more how much you have.


----------



## mnclayshooter (Jun 16, 2017)

There's pretty clearly two distinct groups of commentors (and potential 6DII users) on here, and then a bit of gray hybrid between:

A) Pro's (or wannabe's) that think 4k is critical in a DSLR... (editorial - why a "pro" is using a 6DII for paid work vs a 1D___ is a little worthy of discussion). 
B) the rest of us that use our entry-level FF camera for taking casual vacation photos, occasional "paid" work and rarely, if ever, shoot video. 

A/B's) Those who occasionally want video capability and a great stills camera and occasionally do a little paid/volunteer work for public consumption. 


Basically - the gist of my post is that if you're lamenting the apparent lack of 4k in an entry-level FF camera, you might be barking up the wrong tree. That's what dedicated video cameras and higher-end PRO dslr's are for.


----------



## mnclayshooter (Jun 16, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> reef58 said:
> 
> 
> > Most people buying TV's now are looking at 4k sets. I am not hip on the industry, but are companies making announcements of 1080p TV sets in this day and age? I must plead ignorance on that, but would be surprised if they did.
> ...



exactly. Take a spin through almost any retailer and find any for-purchase 4k media, let alone anything broadcast or delivered via wire. There's not much yet. Hardly enough to call it "standard".


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 16, 2017)

Nininini said:


> testthewest said:
> 
> 
> > internet connections often aren't even good enough, it is simply a wasted effort.
> ...



in alot of cases in rural america you can't get these speeds. usually around 1mb/sec is about all you can get via DSL.

I guess the USA isn't a developed nation.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 16, 2017)

reef58 said:


> I was looking at this from the perspective of someone buying their first DSLR and the 6d2 being a contender. I think the lack of 4k will be a negative.



I don't believe for a second that most people looking to buy their first DSLR will be:

1) looking at a 6D Mk II; or

2) worrying about whether they'll be able to shoot at better-than-broadcast-quality videos with whatever they do end up with.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 16, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > testthewest said:
> ...



Since we are talking about viewing 4K, I wonder how much it matters that 4K may be available on streaming services. After all, the majority of people are viewing videos on phones and other mobile devices. Can anyone see a difference in 4K at that size?


----------



## Takingshots (Jun 16, 2017)

Wow so many want 4k for this camera... Don't think Canon is listening.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jun 16, 2017)

Ok, here's a question.

All of you complaining that it won't do 4K, well, that would no doubt have added to the cost, who knows how much, but let's do a quick poll.

Would you pay $50 more for 4k? $100 more? $200 more?


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Nininini said:
> 
> 
> > testthewest said:
> ...



What percentage of people is that? Very, very low, depending on which numbers you use. This is not a situation of Manhattan and LA assuming the rest of the country is identical. I grew up in a rural farmhouse that still had an outhouse on site (it hadn't been used in ages, of course, but there was still an OUTHOUSE there), and it's had cable broadband for well over a decade. That town has a population about a tenth of the number of posts Neuro has.

It is fair to say "the USA" has access to those speeds, even if it's frustrating for a couple of percent of people who really don't have the infrastructure for it outside their doors. Nothing is universal.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Ok, here's a question.
> 
> All of you complaining that it won't do 4K, well, that would no doubt have added to the cost, who knows how much, but let's do a quick poll.
> 
> Would you pay $50 more for 4k? $100 more? $200 more?



Probably $0. I've never shot a second of video with a DSLR and have no intention to in the future. Why would I pay $50 for a huge video file I don't want? I'd sooner take a $100 rebate to have video completely removed and the switch reprogrammed to be something useful.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

Takingshots said:


> Wow so many want 4k for this camera... Don't think Canon is listening.



How many people? Please provide citations. I've seen a dozen or so people very loudly exclaiming on this thread and a few others, but not a whole lot of actual different people.


----------



## tr573 (Jun 16, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Nininini said:
> ...



Luckily , the FCC publishes reports on just such a thing

Key findings include the following:

10 percent of all Americans (34 million people) lack access to 25 Mbps/3 Mbps service. 
39 percent of rural Americans (23 million people) lack access to 25 Mbps/3 Mbps.
By contrast, only 4 percent of urban Americans lack access to 25 Mbps/3 Mbps broadband.
The availability of fixed terrestrial services in rural America continues to lag behind urban America at all speeds: 20 percent lack access even to service at 4 Mbps/1 Mbps, down only 1 percent from 2011, and 31 percent lack access to 10 Mbps/1 Mbps, down only 4 percent from 2011.
41 percent of Americans living on Tribal lands (1.6 million people) lack access to 25 Mbps/3 Mbps broadband
68 percent living in rural areas of Tribal lands (1.3 million people) lack access.
66 percent of Americans living in U.S. territories (2.6 million people) lack access to 25 Mbps/3 Mbps broadband.
98 percent of those living in rural territorial areas (1.1 million people) lack access.
Americans living in rural and urban areas adopt broadband at similar rates where 25 Mbps/ 3 Mbps service is available, 28 percent in rural areas and 30 percent in urban areas.
While an increasing number of schools have high-speed connections, approximately 41 percent of schools, representing 47 percent of the nation’s students, lack the connectivity to meet the Commission’s short-term goal of 100 Mbps per 1,000 students/staff.

https://www.fcc.gov/reports-research/reports/broadband-progress-reports/2016-broadband-progress-report


----------



## IglooEater (Jun 16, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Ok, here's a question.
> 
> All of you complaining that it won't do 4K, well, that would no doubt have added to the cost, who knows how much, but let's do a quick poll.
> 
> Would you pay $50 more for 4k? $100 more? $200 more?



I'd be quite ready to pay $100 more. Seriously, and I don't shoot video at all. I'd rather be a bit more out of pocket and have that bragging right. As I said a while back, the notion of not having some form of 4K on a $2,000 camera in 2017 is just insulting. I know it's just a spec sheet thing, but I've still got a little pride. Besides, I'll probably get my $100 back when I sell it in 2022, when 1080 will be looking long in the tooth.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 16, 2017)

tr573 said:


> Luckily , the FCC publishes reports on just such a thing
> 
> Key findings include the following:
> 
> ...



In other words (per your numbers) 90% of America has access to broadband. That would be a massive, colossal majority in most contexts. Now, that is for the 25mb downstream necessary for 4k; if we're talking about bandwidth to stream normal content, that can drop as low as 4% without access to 4mb downstream. Is 25mb downstream better? Obviously. However, it is completely disingenuous to display the numbers as you did, with the implication that 10% of America is constrained to dial-up.


----------



## ken (Jun 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> reef58 said:
> 
> 
> > My point early in the thread is I found the lack of 4k curious even though I don't care about it. I was looking at this from the perspective of someone buying their first DSLR and the 6d2 being a contender.
> ...



I can't say how many first time DSLR buyers would do that, but I spent close to that for my first DSLR, the 6D with kit lens. (The EF24-105mm IS) I also acquired several L-series lenses at the same time. I wanted to go full frame to take advantage of the best of the Canon lens system. So happy I did... closing in on 20K photos taken with the 6D. (I also acquired a Sony a6000 since then, which I use probably half as much as my 6D.)

As an engineer, I studied the options for a long time before jumping in. The Nikon D600 was the main competitor at the time but had that unresolved oil spot issue that they eventually addressed by releasing the D610. I still think it was the right "first time" DSLR for me. I could afford it (and I get that not everyone can). I think anyone thinking about buying a DSLR for the first time should research what they want to shoot, what lenses they will need for those goals, and make sure they're buying into the ecosystem they'll be happy with (and can afford) because... the glass is where the real money goes. The camera body is but one component.

I've continued to grow my L-series glass collection, and I'm really excited about the 6Dii. 4K would have been nice but it's in no way a deal killer, as I've rarely shot video at all on my 6D. (I have a Gopro. Even with it, I don't always use 4K mode. Tradeoffs...) 

For me, I bought into the Canon ecosystem not because I'm a Canon fanboy, but because of what the complete system offers. I will likely trade up to the 6Dii. But when the specs come out, if it isn't all I hoped, I might wait for prices to come down a bit on the 5Div. It would be a harder decision to abandon the investment in glass to move to a non-Canon system, but I guess it could happen some day. Camera bodies... man, there will always be new bodies. The body is that part that really changes quickly. I suspect in a year or so Canon will have a full frame mirrorless that supports EF lenses. So I'd even consider upgrading again if it seems worth it. That's just technology... it's going to keep on changing. 

If I were looking for my first DSLR and could afford it, and I was primarily interested in photography (over videography) the 6Dii would have my laser focus right now. But so would a comparable Nikon, or a comparable Sony... You just have to jump in somewhere and don't waste time looking back.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 16, 2017)

IglooEater said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, here's a question.
> ...



Perhaps the problem isn't with the camera, but with the world you inhabit? I don't mean to be confrontational, but the whole 'bragging rights' thing is bizarre to me. Who are you bragging to about 4K? Who is listening, and who cares? Anyone who knows about it wouldn't just accept that 4K is enough (i.e. they'd know that some devices that 'do' 4K, like phones, do it so poorly that it's not worth the label), and those who don't won't care either way. Sounds like teenage boys comparing the size of their manhood, but even less worthwhile.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> reef58 said:
> 
> 
> > My point early in the thread is I found the lack of 4k curious even though I don't care about it. I was looking at this from the perspective of someone buying their first DSLR and the 6d2 being a contender.
> ...



Millions! And that's just in Shanghai!


----------



## tr573 (Jun 16, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> tr573 said:
> 
> 
> > Luckily , the FCC publishes reports on just such a thing
> ...



As I did what? I copied and pasted the report findings summary from the fcc page so people could read it without clicking through if they were so inclined. Those aren't my words, they're some bureaucrats words. 

You asked for the info on the topic, I found it and put it here, exactly as I found it, and suddenly I have an agenda in opposition to you.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 16, 2017)

One of the projects that I worked on was bringing the internet to remote communities..... we would fly in, set up a ground station, a router, and high speed internet would arrive at the community.... 20Mbps (bits, not bytes) to be shared between several hundred people.....

So yes, I do believe that there are lots of remote areas where the bandwidth is pathetic.....


----------



## snappy604 (Jun 16, 2017)

While not a deal breaker for me, I certainly think they should have 4k by now. Doesn't have to have the quality of a dedicated video rig, but it should have the option. 

It's mindboggling that much of the SLR competition have it, phones have 4k, gopros and DJIs have 4k... yet an offerring from canon that is $2k+ doesn't.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 16, 2017)

snappy604 said:


> While not a deal breaker for me, I certainly think they should have 4k by now. Doesn't have to have the quality of a dedicated video rig, but it should have the option.
> 
> It's mindboggling that much of the SLR competition have it, phones have 4k, gopros and DJIs have 4k... yet an offerring from canon that is $2k+ doesn't.



Yes, It's mind boggling how many FF cameras under 2,500 USD have 4K video. Like None. Now ask yourself why.


----------



## malarcky (Jun 17, 2017)

I almost didn't buy a certain smartphone because I knew I'd be wasting money on the camera part of it. I wanted a phone. The same goes with a still camera. I was hoping that Canon would offer a purist line of still cameras that had no video capabilities at all. That hasn't happened, but they are offering strictly video cameras, although, just like my Elura back in 2000, they are probably still offering still capturing ability on their "dedicated" video cameras. 

It's a waste of money for me to pay for the R&D of the still cameras to offer something that I don't need, or want. On the other side of the coin, everyone was complaining about the 4k capture codec for the 5D MkIV while I would be only interested in capturing stills out of the video, and an 8MB jpg would be nice to be able to extract from the video. I still would love to see a purist line of cameras for the stills only shooter.


----------



## Hellish (Jun 17, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Ok, here's a question.
> 
> All of you complaining that it won't do 4K, well, that would no doubt have added to the cost, who knows how much, but let's do a quick poll.
> 
> Would you pay $50 more for 4k? $100 more? $200 more?



I bought the 1DX2 when realistically I would of been fine with 5D3 if stills was the only need, so ~$4,000


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 17, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> One of the projects that I worked on was bringing the internet to remote communities..... we would fly in, set up a ground station, a router, and high speed internet would arrive at the community.... 20Mbps (bits, not bytes) to be shared between several hundred people.....
> 
> So yes, I do believe that there are lots of remote areas where the bandwidth is pathetic.....



Yes, there are a lot of remote _areas _with pathetic bandwidth. I've never argued that that's not the case. I'm arguing that that's a small portion of the American _population_. Most of which, notedly, now lives in cities, and that trend is only increasing.


----------



## malarcky (Jun 17, 2017)

I don't mean to sound like I'm disrupting the thread, but aren't we getting a bit way off topic debating the access of network bandwidth when it comes to the feature sets of a brand new camera body offering?

I just don't think the debate about worldwide bandwidth availability is helping us with the conclusion of the 4k video capabilities of this camera, or not. I don't even think it should have 4k capabilities, and it looks like it won't have it. Is there something I'm missing here? Again, I am just asking if we've gotten way off topic here. That seems to be a topic for another day, in a different forum. I'm all for this topic, don't get me wrong, but it seems a bit off topic is all I'm saying here.


----------



## BillB (Jun 17, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Takingshots said:
> 
> 
> > Wow so many want 4k for this camera... Don't think Canon is listening.
> ...



Canon decided that it would not put 4K in the 6DII. Some people said Canon should have put 4K in the 6DII. Over and over again. Life will go on. I may buy a buy a 6DII. Sometime. Or not.


----------



## Busted Knuckles (Jun 17, 2017)

da_guy2 said:


> I almost never shoot video, so for me, this will be a welcome upgrade.



So wouldn't a 5dIII be a better fit? Likely pick one up for less, etc? Certainly if the focus is not all cross points the stills shooter I think would be challenged to look past a 5dIII


----------



## IglooEater (Jun 17, 2017)

scyrene said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > jolyonralph said:
> ...



Lol fair enough. Bragging right was perhaps not the most astute turn of phrase in this context. I mean that in the same way, when you buy a car, you can show your buddies the sweet features, not as self-inflation, but as in "isn't this cool". Like, do I need a little sprayer to pop out and squirt the headlights? Heck no. Is it way cool? Absolutely. 
Who is listening? Who cares? All the dozen or so of photographers I know. Anyone gets absolutely any new piece of gear, and we're all admiring it, examining its features, trying it out, (Incidentally, your teenage boys analogy doesn't actually work in my case ???) etc.
Of course 4K isn't enough, duh. Having CLog, 500 MB/sec, ProRes, etc just make it better. I never said I wanted a crippled, ultracompressed 20mb/sec crappy 4K. 
Is it a total waste of money? Yup, but so is coffee, and most of us spend more than that on coffee every year. (me too)
Lack of 4K wouldn't affect my purchase.


----------



## malarcky (Jun 17, 2017)

Busted Knuckles said:


> da_guy2 said:
> 
> 
> > I almost never shoot video, so for me, this will be a welcome upgrade.
> ...



The flippy touch screen with DP raw would be the move I would make over the MkIII. That's just me though. I really love the touch screen.


----------



## Busted Knuckles (Jun 17, 2017)

So how does this really compare the 5dIII?

DPAF - for what if not video?

Autofocus? IF they are all cross type a whopping 4 points over 5dIII?

Twisty Flippy - Like that but it challenges the weather sealing.

Would have to have some appreciable DR/IQ?

Going to be very interested in how it really compares to a 5dIII for the stills shooter.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 17, 2017)

Busted Knuckles said:


> So how does this really compare the 5dIII?
> 
> DPAF - for what if not video?
> 
> ...



It likely won't be any more weather sealed than its predecessor. It probably will have superior DR. The comparison is one that doesn't really matter, though, because Canon isn't going to try to sell the 6D2 to 5D3 owners, and the 5D3 will be off the market about when the 6D2 hits the market, so almost no one will be comparing them against each other.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 17, 2017)

Takingshots said:


> Don't think Canon is listening.



Canon _is_ listening.And five voices count for NOTHING.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 17, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> So yes, I do believe that there are lots of remote areas where the bandwidth is pathetic...


Even here in the UK there are innumerable "not-spots" for wi-fi coverage - my last four UK holidays (one of which ended yesterday} saw me effectively devoid of wi-fi connectivity.


----------



## malarcky (Jun 17, 2017)

"Autofocus? IF they are all cross type a whopping 4 points over 5dIII?"

The 6D now has just 11 points.


----------



## BillB (Jun 17, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Busted Knuckles said:
> 
> 
> > So how does this really compare the 5dIII?
> ...



Possible 6DII sensor advantage in Dynamic Range, maybe also high ISO, practical significance unknown. Practical significance of any differences in AF performance also unknown. AF performance of both cameras should be pretty good.


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 17, 2017)

malarcky said:


> I don't mean to sound like I'm disrupting the thread, but aren't we getting a bit way off topic debating the access of network bandwidth when it comes to the feature sets of a brand new camera body offering?
> 
> I just don't think the debate about worldwide bandwidth availability is helping us with the conclusion of the 4k video capabilities of this camera, or not. I don't even think it should have 4k capabilities, and it looks like it won't have it. Is there something I'm missing here? Again, I am just asking if we've gotten way off topic here. That seems to be a topic for another day, in a different forum. I'm all for this topic, don't get me wrong, but it seems a bit off topic is all I'm saying here.



And the 15 pages of why a camera MUST have 4k isn't off topic? 

The thread is about the 6D2 and it's specs/features. The train came off the tracks very early on when it switched to why 4k is the end all be all. Saying we're "off topic" is a bit late at this point.


----------



## Talys (Jun 17, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Ok, here's a question.
> 
> All of you complaining that it won't do 4K, well, that would no doubt have added to the cost, who knows how much, but let's do a quick poll.
> 
> Would you pay $50 more for 4k? $100 more? $200 more?



I will never, ever use my camera to take videos. So $200? No. Not even $100. $50? Why not, I guess, if there were two versions of the camera.

I want the best possible camera to take stills at the best possible enthusiast price -- videos be damned. If I want to take high quality videos, as I have in the past for other purposes, I'm happy to spend lots of money to buy a different device for that. Sure, it would be nice if the lens were interchangeable, but the body/form factor should be ideal for shooting video, not stills. If I want to take videos for fun, my Galaxy S8 works great.

6D2 looks great to me, though. It's exactly what I'm looking for. It will be a buy-at-launch product, barring some catastrophic failing like poor IQ.

By the way, for those comparing to 5D3 -- a lot of the tech features like wifi/bluetooth have improved vastly over time. It might not matter to some, but to me, the 80D and 77D have a great featureset, and I'd love to see some of that on 6D -- which is to say, a FF that's not the price of a 5D4, which is just more than I want to spend on a body.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 17, 2017)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > So yes, I do believe that there are lots of remote areas where the bandwidth is pathetic...
> ...


You should gone visit Canada.... we have enough area without phone coverage that you could fit Europe into it......


----------



## IglooEater (Jun 17, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Keith_Reeder said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Ha that's true enough. I actually know someone who still had party line about 20 years ago. _party line_ (edit: after asking, turns out it was less than 10 years ago)


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 17, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Keith_Reeder said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Heck, a couple of years ago my now-wife dragged me to a couple of weddings that were out in remote areas with no cell coverage. One was in California. We live in Texas and there are certainly places cell coverage is spotty or absent. It's that way, though, because there are very few people there. I assume it's the same for Canada - large _areas_ without coverage, few _people_ without coverage.


----------



## reef58 (Jun 17, 2017)

Focusing vs image quality. At this point I would take the 6d. If I needed an action camera neither.



Busted Knuckles said:


> da_guy2 said:
> 
> 
> > I almost never shoot video, so for me, this will be a welcome upgrade.
> ...


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 17, 2017)

IglooEater said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Keith_Reeder said:
> ...


We still are on a party line at the cottage, but to be fair, the cell reception there is fantastic... interestingly enough, I live in our nations capital and I have one bar of phone signal strength at home, and my Internet download speed recently upgraded all the way to 2 Mb per second.


----------



## reef58 (Jun 17, 2017)

Why would they not look at the 6d2? It is pretty much the starting line for a full frame camera. What are they looking at in a full frame? 

Again, I could not care less about 4k and whether my camera has 4k. I would prefer better stills quality and no video. I am not so sure I am the target market for the 6d though. I am thinking about the college art major who is serious about being an artist, and similar folks. If money were not an object then the 5d(r,sr,mk4) would be the choice. It sounds like the 6d won't have 4k in 2017, but also in 2020.



Keith_Reeder said:


> reef58 said:
> 
> 
> > I was looking at this from the perspective of someone buying their first DSLR and the 6d2 being a contender. I think the lack of 4k will be a negative.
> ...


----------



## CanonLITA (Jun 17, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> You should gone visit Canada.... we have enough area without phone coverage that you could fit Europe into it......



One more reason to love Canada


----------



## CanonLITA (Jun 17, 2017)

Question to CR experts: Is there any way to authomatically hide any post that includes the word "4K"?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 17, 2017)

reef58 said:


> Why would they not look at the 6d2? It is pretty much the starting line for a full frame camera. What are they looking at in a full frame?



Because most people simply do not enter the DSLR world with a newly-released FF camera. The "gateway drug" for most is the xxxD/Rebel line.

Not to say that _some_ folk won't go straight into FF, but most new DSLR users won't know anything about the relevance of sensor size to image quality, high ISO noise etc. and will simply buy whatever they're offered by the salesman.


----------



## dak723 (Jun 17, 2017)

Keith_Reeder said:


> reef58 said:
> 
> 
> > Why would they not look at the 6d2? It is pretty much the starting line for a full frame camera. What are they looking at in a full frame?
> ...



Or more likely, most folks start with the rebel line because:
A) It is much cheaper.
B) There is no reason to buy FF because crop will give you virtually identical image quality for most photo situations (daylight shots, vacation pics, family gathering snapshots, photos not printed over 8"x 10", etc.).


----------



## reef58 (Jun 17, 2017)

I guess you are missing my point completely. Someone must be looking at the 6d2 or otherwise it would have 0 sales. Those looking at the 6d2 are likely new to full frame cameras. When they are comparing full frame camera and making a decision to buy one whether or not the camera has 4k is likely to be a consideration.



dak723 said:


> Keith_Reeder said:
> 
> 
> > reef58 said:
> ...


----------



## BillB (Jun 17, 2017)

dak723 said:


> Keith_Reeder said:
> 
> 
> > reef58 said:
> ...



Interesting point. How far into photography is the typical 6DII buyer going to be? Crop DSLR owner? Skilled in post processing? FF DSLR owner? None of the above?


----------



## Hornet (Jun 17, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > rwvaughn said:
> ...



Not shooting 4K just because it's not mainstream makes no sense to me. Why wouldn't you want to preserve special moments at the highest possible quality for enjoyment in the future?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 17, 2017)

reef58 said:


> I guess you are missing my point completely. Someone must be looking at the 6d2 or otherwise it would have 0 sales. Those looking at the 6d2 are likely new to full frame cameras. When they are comparing full frame camera and making a decision to buy one whether or not the camera has 4k is likely to be a consideration.



Those looking at the 6DII are quite likely to be new to _full frame_ cameras. But, they are quite likely not new to dSLRs, rather they are likely APS-C dSLR owners looking to upgrade. But that wasn't your point – it was your contention that the 6DII — a $2900 camera + lens kit — would appeal to first-time dSLR buyers. 



reef58 said:


> I was looking at this from the perspective of someone buying their first DSLR and the 6d2 being a contender.



So it seems like you're completely missing _your own_ point…


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 17, 2017)

Hornet said:


> Not shooting 4K just because it's not mainstream makes no sense to me. Why wouldn't you want to preserve special moments at the highest possible quality for enjoyment in the future?



Perhaps because you lack access to sufficient computing power to edit 4K video. Perhaps because you lack sufficient storage space for the increased file size. 

Since 'the highest possible quality' is important to you, I presume you're shooting your home movies on a Red Weapon 8K. Otherwise, you're sacrificing your future enjoyment of those special moments.


----------



## ethanz (Jun 17, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Hornet said:
> 
> 
> > Not shooting 4K just because it's not mainstream makes no sense to me. Why wouldn't you want to preserve special moments at the highest possible quality for enjoyment in the future?
> ...



Yeah, 4K video files, at least the ones from my 1DX are massive. I delete them as soon as I'm done with them. Only store 1080 files.


----------



## ScottyP (Jun 17, 2017)

Good FF stills camera. They met my main requirement with the AF improvement. Assuming it has at least as good high ISO performance I am a buyer.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 18, 2017)

IglooEater said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > IglooEater said:
> ...



Fair enough, that makes more sense


----------



## scyrene (Jun 18, 2017)

Hornet said:


> Not shooting 4K just because it's not mainstream makes no sense to me. Why wouldn't you want to preserve special moments at the highest possible quality for enjoyment in the future?



Your point has merit, but it's pretty niche or even beside the point for most people.

It's just my experience, for fwiw, I have never met anyone who looked at an old family photograph or home movie and said 'if only it was higher resolution'. I *think* most people care about the (emotional) content of an image or video than its technical aspects. The conversation 'I love how high res this baby video is, much better than the HD one you took two years ago' just seems utterly implausible - only a tiny subset of device users (namely enthusiasts/geeks) care about or even understand these things. That's not to say that higher resolution is of no value, just that it's only important to a tiny minority.

I persuaded my parents to get a 4K tv when they were upgrading recently, but I couldn't put into terms they'd understand why it was better (the most persuasive argument was, and I think still is, that it's more future-proof, but there's essentially no 4K content here for them to take advantage of, and even when there is, I doubt they will notice - they care what the shows are, not what resolution they're filmed in, and I think this is typical for most consumers).


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 19, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > I used to use a dedicated camcorder (Canon HV20) but keeping the DSLR/camcorder that used different media/batteries was a pain. Having a backup camera that can do video as good as a consumer camcorder simplified a lot of things.
> ...



The HV20 was one of the earlier consumer camcorders that had 1080i. It recorded onto digital tape. When I built my current desktop years ago, I had to get a dedicated firewire card to interface with the HV20 because they no longer made motherboards with that port native, and it could only download the file to the computer at 1x tape speed. I was definitely NOT sad to put that on Ebay.

The M1 took over for a while but has been replaced with the 7DII. I got the camcorder so the wife could take videos of the kids, but that didn't really happen, so now I'm responsible for both video and stills. And, I find, it's much easier to allocate funds for a camcorder for an upgrade of the 2nd body.


----------

