# 6dmk2 with 5dmk4 sensor; should we pay more for it?



## garret (Aug 11, 2017)

If Canon want to survive in the entry-full-size camera market, Canon must make version of the 6 dmk2 with the sensor from the 5 dmk4 including 4K video and high DR, not in 4 years , but next year/ ASAP.

Would you pay more for this camera and how much? 

I think Canon should lower the price right now for the current 6 dmk2 by 200 $ and ask $2250 for the <6 D mk2R> version, I would willingly pay for it.

Garret, the Netherlands


----------



## Khristo (Aug 11, 2017)

They kinda seem to be surviving...


----------



## Talys (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> If Canon want to survive in the entry-full-size camera market, Canon must make version of the 6 dmk2 with the sensor from the 5 dmk4 including 4K video and high DR, not in 4 years , but next year/ ASAP.
> 
> Would you pay more for this camera and how much?
> 
> ...



Why not just get rid of the 6DMkII, put a flippy screen on the 5DMkIV, and sell it for $2,250? 

Ok, now, in all seriousness, I think there would just be too many cameras in Canon's lineup. $2,000 is simply a price point, and it's a fine one for entry level FF, sitting slightly above 7Dx in price. We can debate "how good" the sensor should be in that offering, of course. 

I do not think that it makes any financial sense for Canon to put the 5DIV sensor into the 6DII, because people who just do still photography and don't care about dual cards or weather sealing, which I suspect is a fair number of people, will just never consider 5DIV if there is a $2250 offering that fulfills their needs. And I'm pretty sure that just like $2,000 is a price point, $3,300 is also a price point that Canon in its market research has identified as the optimal price to maximize its profits.

Since 5DIV is extremely popular, I think that they are pricing it correctly; and as long as it is selling well (not to mention the best-selling FF camera...), there is not really any incentive for Canon to reduce its price, or transfer its best features into much cheaper cameras.

Or put another way, there are plenty of people who don't think $3,300 is too much to pay for the 5DIV.


----------



## Maximilian (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> If Canon want to survive in the entry-full-size camera market, Canon must make version of the 6 dmk2 with the sensor from the 5 dmk4 including 4K video and high DR, not in 4 years , but next year/ ASAP.
> ...


Hi garret!

Do you know the numbers of sales/preorders of the 6DMkII as it is now? (I don't.)
So I cannot make any assumptions on verbalizations like "_want to survive_", "_must make_" and so on.

Even if sales numbers would show that the 6DMkII would be DOA - something I really don't believe - I suppose that implementing major changes to this body - like the change of the sensor unit and therefore the whole main board would take almost the same development efforts and time as building up a whole new body. 
So if this is not already in the development pipeline you could wait as long as for the introduction of the 6DMkIII.

And with this conclusion the rest of your post is obsolete. 
The only thing that could happen is that we'll see early high rebates on the 6DMkII if the sales numbers weren't right in the opinion of Canon.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 11, 2017)

Canon have a lot of experience at selling cameras. They know that current 6D owners currently have four choices.

a) buy the 6D II even though it's not as high spec as we'd like
b) buy the 5D IV even though it's more expensive than we'd want
c) switch to another brand (unlikely for those of us with lens investment)
d) stay with what we have and wait for another couple of years (because we won't see a 6D III or whatever for AT LEAST 2 more years, probably double that)

Canon will have done this plan in far more detail with market research to back this up.

Companies like Canon simply don't launch a new product based on gut feeling about how well it will sell. There is considerable research.

So, let me correct the original statement.

If Canon want to survive in the entry-full-size camera market, Canon must make version of the 6 dmk2 with the sensor from the 5 dmk4 including 4K video and high DR, not in 4 years , but next year/ ASAP. I want a 5D Mark IV but I can't afford it. And somehow this is Canon's fault.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> If Canon want to survive in the entry-full-size camera market, Canon must make version of the 6 dmk2 with the sensor from the 5 dmk4 including 4K video and high DR, not in 4 years , but next year/ ASAP.



You have some massive assumptions, there. Do you have any evidence to back up what you say they have to do?
Do you know the cost of putting the 5D4 sensor in there? I don't.


----------



## garret (Aug 11, 2017)

> Do you know the numbers of sales/preorders of the 6DMkII as it is now? (I don't.)



Not only numbers are important... also which user is buying the 6dmk2? and we never will know.

I have still a 10 year old Canon 30D and was waiting for the 6 dmk2 for use in the next 10 year... now I leave the 6 dmk2, maybe I want the 80 D , but 4K video is very tempting as I have recently bought a LG 4K OLED TV,
then Canon is for me a dead end.

Garret


----------



## YuengLinger (Aug 11, 2017)

I can never tell, when somebody has only a few posts, if they have poor English skills or are just trolling in exactly the same style as about ten others who come and go. Or if it's just a new account for the same two or three that use the same "Canon fail soon" language.

Nice way to introduce oneself.


----------



## garret (Aug 11, 2017)

[quote I want a 5D Mark IV but I can't afford it. And somehow this is Canon's fault.][/quote] 

Here in the Netherlands a 80D body cost Euro 1019,= the 6 Dmk2 body Euro 2130,= the 5 Dmk4 body Euro 4130,= 
for me that's a huge difference between each model.

If I want just imaging- no 4K video- I can have the 80D plus the 100-400mm mk2 plus the 16-35mm F4 or just a 5 dmk4 body, (lenses with a focal length between them I already own).


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> > I want a 5D Mark IV but I can't afford it. And somehow this is Canon's fault.]
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So have you given thought to what you can do with a 6D2 that you can't do with an 80D?


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 11, 2017)

@garret, what you're describing is the 6DIII  What else is Canon supposed to do when in four years time the 6DII is due to be replaced ? 

Just as the 5DV will have a flip screen. 

But to answer your question I would guess that given the overall projected sales of the 6DII over its production lifetime, the amount of people who would be willing to pay more for the 5DIV sensor would be minuscule, and not worth Canon bothering with.


----------



## Maximilian (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> > Do you know the numbers of sales/preorders of the 6DMkII as it is now? (I don't.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hi garret! 

I don't want to muzzle you and I don't take your opinion as trolling. 
I also don't want to argue you into doing something. 

Reading your comment quoted above, I'd like to give you the following advices:

please make up your mind, if FF will enhance your photography to a new level, otherwise stay with APS-C and save money
if you decide for FF please note that the money spend on the body is just the beginning. You want to get high performance glass as well
If you think Canon does not offer, what you want/need, jump boat
if you think 4K is tempting, think how important video is to you. If it's not your main topic, HD is more than enough. Do you want to see each hair inside the pore on the nose? Me not! And your model surely not, as well
If you now still use a 30D as main body, let me tell you that whatever body you choose today you will see significant improvement on IQ, especially when you go above ISO 800

So please don't go that much after narcissistic reviews or some ridiculous scores, trying to make a world out of a less than 5% difference.
Better think which system offers you the best ergonomics and comfort and then try out a new body yourself. You will be very positively surprised and not willing to skip another generation.
Good luck with your decisions.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> > Do you know the numbers of sales/preorders of the 6DMkII as it is now? (I don't.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Putting 1080P on a 4k TV is not a "dead end", any more than the fact that when I get my next TV it will have 4k and... mostly display 1080p, _or less_, because that's most of what's available. For example, all football games. It might be nice to make your videos be 4k, but are you prepared for the rest of 4k video production? I've never done it (or any video, really), but my understanding is it requires a ferociously powerful desktop and isn't really something you just pick up on a whim.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> > can never tell, when somebody has only a few posts, if they have poor English skills or are just trolling in exactly the same style as about ten others who come and go. Or if it's just a new account for the same two or three that use the same "Canon fail soon" language
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you want Astro, then the 7D2 seems to be an excellent tool. Have you seen the Clarkvison website where he compares different camera for astronomical photography?


But back to your question. I would pay more for it, yes especially at a difference of only $200.
But the camera is not aimed at me it is aimed at the general market and one of the toughest jobs out there is calculating (more accurately, guessing) what the market will pay. And in this estimate psychological markers come into play: the simplest of these, and one everyone is aware of, is that 1,999 sounds so much cheaper than 2,001, so if they had put the 5D4 sensor in there instead of the current one and launched at $2,200 it is probable they would not have hit sales targets, not met their cashflow forecasts and had to sell the remaining units at a lower than expected profit margin. And bear in mind, a 10% drop in cost (which is what you are proposing) is in the region of a 25-30% drop in profits for a typical company. 
On simple decisions of 'what would people pay' and 'how much can we cram into it at that price', the company will survive or fail. 

So would I buy it? Very probably. Would it be successful for Canon? Canon obviously decided it would not be.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> Don't forget I'm *asking* a question: should we pay more for a 6 dmk2 with 5 dmk4 sensor? just asking, nothing more.
> 
> Gerrit van der Veen, The Netherlands



That sounds different t your original question. 
In your OP you were asking 'would you pay more'
Here you seem to be asking 'if Canon had put the 5D4 sensor in there instead of the current sensor, would they be justified in charging more'.

I suspect they would charge more and that that increase in cost would be justified.


----------



## Maximilian (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> ...
> Don't forget I'm *asking* a question: should we pay more for a 6 dmk2 with 5 dmk4 sensor? just asking, nothing more.
> 
> Gerrit van der Veen, The Netherlands



And I already answered in my first post:


Maximilian said:


> ...
> *And with this conclusion the rest of your post is obsolete. *
> The only thing that could happen is that we'll see early high rebates on the 6DMkII if the sales numbers weren't right in the opinion of Canon.


----------



## Larsskv (Aug 11, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Canon have a lot of experience at selling cameras. [...]
> 
> So, let me correct the original statement.
> 
> If Canon want to survive in the entry-full-size camera market, Canon must make version of the 6 dmk2 with the sensor from the 5 dmk4 including 4K video and high DR, not in 4 years , but next year/ ASAP. I want a 5D Mark IV but I can't afford it. And somehow this is Canon's fault.



+1. 

I understand that people want the best sensor available in the 6DII, but I also understand that Canon wants people to buy the 5DIV over the 6DII. 

Personally, I think Canon has given 6DII the features that the market they are aming at will appreciate, and I expect 6DII owners to be happy owners, just at the 6D owners are. 

Dynamic range seem to matter a lot more in forums and many reviews, than it does in real world use. Ergonomics, handling, ease of use, high ISO-capabilities and lenses are way more important to most photografers, than DR and 5 stops shadow lifting capabilities.


----------



## candc (Aug 11, 2017)

hypothetically? i may have bought a 6dii for a couple hundred dollars more if it had the best sensor tech canon has available. 

i would have bought a 5dsr if it had a real crop mode too. 

this segmentation/crippling is irritating. i keep saying that i am never buying another canon dslr but now i am thinking about buying a idxii.

i may not like canon's market strategy with their camera bodies but it seems to be working for them.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 11, 2017)

candc said:


> hypothetically? i may have bought a 6dii for a couple hundred dollars more if it had the best sensor tech canon has available.
> 
> i would have bought a 5dsr if it had a real crop mode too.
> 
> ...



Every company segments the market and if they didn't they would have one model to do everything.


----------



## candc (Aug 11, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > hypothetically? i may have bought a 6dii for a couple hundred dollars more if it had the best sensor tech canon has available.
> ...



i realize that camera manufacturers make different models for different purposes but what canon is doing seems different than sony. the a9, a7rii, a6500, a99 and rx100 all seem to be the best product that sony could put out for their intended purposes.

canon seems to intentionally limit the capabilities of their camera bodies to force you to buy several or a more expensive one.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 11, 2017)

candc said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > candc said:
> ...



Sony sensor group (who are not the same group who make the cameras) hit a rich seam with their Exmoor sensors. So let's us take that out of the equation. 
Of all the non-sensor functions on Sony what capabilities so Sony have that Canon do not?
4K. And......


----------



## tron (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> ...
> It is possible I discover 4K video recording, or shadow lifting (as I do with astronomical imaging), the Canon 5 dmk4 can do it all but with Euro 4130,= for a body it is way over my budget.
> ...
> Gerrit van der Veen, The Netherlands


Maybe you could try an existing option. There are places to order a grey import brand new 5DMkIV for much less ( <= 3000 euros ).


----------



## candc (Aug 11, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



ibis is a big one. evf with all the features that go along with it are also. sony just doesn't seem to leave out a feature that doesn't cost them much in order to wring more money out of consumers like canon does.


----------



## Larsskv (Aug 11, 2017)

candc said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > candc said:
> ...



The models you mention are top of the line in their segment. Compare the Sony A7II to the A7RII, and you can see that the A7II is "crippled" in many ways- maybe not so much in sensor performance, but as I recall, the A7II is quite crippled with regards to AF capabilities. Many photographers would probably find that having "eye-AF" is more useful than increased dynamic range. The A7RII has it, and the A7II dont.

Why is Sony's product differensiation better/more acceptable than Canons?


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> Thanks
> I do not want to buy a new camera every 2 year or so, a new camera should be good for me for next 8-10 years or so.
> It is possible I discover 4K video recording, or shadow lifting (as I do with astronomical imaging), the Canon 5 dmk4 can do it all but with Euro 4130,= for a body it is way over my budget.
> A 6 dmk2 with a better sensor should be the camera I'm waiting for.
> ...



I honestly have no idea what you're asking. If there were a 6D2 with an on-chip ADC sensor, it would certainly cost more. How much more it would cost would be complete speculation. It's also irrelevant, because such a body will almost certainly not come out any time soon. If you want a body within the next year, you're stuck with the 80D, 6D2, or 5D4, or maybe a 7D3. Or switching. But the question you asked doesn't change what your options are, no matter how frustrated you are.


----------



## tcmatthews (Aug 11, 2017)

Larsskv said:


> The models you mention are top of the line in their segment. Compare the Sony A7II to the A7RII, and you can see that the A7II is "crippled" in many ways- maybe not so much in sensor performance, but as I recall, the A7II is quite crippled with regards to AF capabilities. Many photographers would probably find that having "eye-AF" is more useful than increased dynamic range. The A7RII has it, and the A7II dont.
> 
> Why is Sony's product differensiation better/more acceptable than Canons?



True in hindsight but the do not forget the A7II was released in Nov 2014 and the A7rII was released June 2015. So it is very likely the A7II had the best available at the time. The A7II also did not autofocus in continuous mode with Canon cameras but they corrected that late 2015 in a firmware update. The A7II does not have 4K either.

This is in many ways different than what Canon does.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 11, 2017)

tcmatthews said:


> Larsskv said:
> 
> 
> > The models you mention are top of the line in their segment. Compare the Sony A7II to the A7RII, and you can see that the A7II is "crippled" in many ways- maybe not so much in sensor performance, but as I recall, the A7II is quite crippled with regards to AF capabilities. Many photographers would probably find that having "eye-AF" is more useful than increased dynamic range. The A7RII has it, and the A7II dont.
> ...



If I recall correctly, Sony faced criticism at the time because the Rii corrected the omissions that people felt the A7ii should have had on release an people criticised Sony for (a) releasing a half-baked product or (b) profiting from early adopters. Both held validity because of the short timeline between the two releases.
Which sounds pretty much like criticisms aimed at Canon


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> Don't forget I'm *asking* a question: should we pay more for a 6 dmk2 with 5 dmk4 sensor? just asking, nothing more.



That's like asking, "Should we pay more for a unicorn than a horse?" :


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 11, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> garret said:
> 
> 
> > Don't forget I'm *asking* a question: should we pay more for a 6 dmk2 with 5 dmk4 sensor? just asking, nothing more.
> ...



Unless you're a virgin female, what would you even do with a unicorn?


----------



## tcmatthews (Aug 11, 2017)

I do not like the size of the 5 series bodies. But I think that if the 5D iV had a flip screen and true 4K support it would look much more attractive to me. But I would still have a hard time pulling the trigger on a camera that truly does not fit my hands. 

If they put all the features of the 5D IV, true 4K, minus the dual cards support, and a flip screen in a 6D body next year. I would likely pay the going price of the 5D IV. I would prefer it around $2500-$2800. Which is all I would ever consider buying the 5D IV for. 

That said it would need to have SD UHSII or something simular to support 4K adequately. 

As to pay more for the IV sensor sure $200-$400 with SD UHSII .


----------



## Larsskv (Aug 11, 2017)

tcmatthews said:


> Larsskv said:
> 
> 
> > The models you mention are top of the line in their segment. Compare the Sony A7II to the A7RII, and you can see that the A7II is "crippled" in many ways- maybe not so much in sensor performance, but as I recall, the A7II is quite crippled with regards to AF capabilities. Many photographers would probably find that having "eye-AF" is more useful than increased dynamic range. The A7RII has it, and the A7II dont.
> ...



On the other hand, Sony released their A7-cameras within a short period of time, upgrading so fast that the newest and best, was only newest and best for a few months. This release-better-and-better-models-within-short-time tactic was first shown in the Sony RX1. A few months after the release of the RX1, and when the hype had started to slow down, Sony released the RX1-R. The same was true with the A7, and the release of the A7R a bit later, and than again with the A7II and A7RII.

Contrary to Sony-buyers, Canon-buyers can feel reasured, that paying a premium gives them a top of the line product for the forseeable future, and Canon seems to do the major upgrades to their top of the line models before the lower models. The 1DX was upgraded before the 5DIII, and the 5DIII before the 6D. I haven't heard of 1DX buyers that felt cheated because the 5DIII had better features than the 1DX...


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 11, 2017)

tcmatthews said:


> I do not like the size of the 5 series bodies. But I think that if the 5D iV had a flip screen and true 4K support it would look much more attractive to me. But I would still have a hard time pulling the trigger on a camera that truly does not fit my hands.
> 
> If they put all the features of the 5D IV, true 4K, minus the dual cards support, and a flip screen in a 6D body next year. I would likely pay the going price of the 5D IV. I would prefer it around $2500-$2800. Which is all I would ever consider buying the 5D IV for.
> 
> ...



So what you're saying is you'd like a better camera for less money. Shocking.


----------



## amorse (Aug 11, 2017)

Would I pay more for a 6D II with a 5D IV sensor? Yes - absolutely. How much more? No idea - I've gone a different direction and moved away from considering the 6D II.

I had an original 6D which I used and loved. It was a great camera and took great photos for my needs. I take photos of almost exclusively landscapes and nearly always on a tripod. My biggest desires for improvement on the 6D were increased base ISO dynamic range, improved weather sealing, increased resolution, and maybe further improvements in low light capabilities (in that order). I certainly understand that these are not what everyone else needs, and I concede that the discussions on DR are splitting hairs for the most part. However, I did find myself lifting shadows on maybe 50% of the photos I took, and I almost always used ND grads or bracketing to overcome the challenge. 

When the 6D II was announced I was thinking I would see maybe 3 of my 4 desired improvements over the 6D, and while this seemed to be true, it was not the 3 I expected! In the end I weighed my options and felt the 5D IV was a better fit, so I picked one up last week. 

Since I sold my 6D to pick up the 5D IV I couldn't do direct comparisons, but I will say that my initial reactions for the 5D IV have been extremely positive! I have found the files produced suit my need very well and I have no complaints. Anecdotally, I have found that the 5D IV handled scenes where I had expected dynamic range challenges much better than I expected, so I'm happy.

If the 6D II had the 5D IV sensor I probably would have picked one up instead and saved some money. In the end, however, the 5D IV is a more robust camera which satisfies all my needs and gives me loads of room to grow as a photographer - although there can be no doubt that my skill needs more improvement than my camera does . Regardless, I'm a happy camper!


----------



## Larsskv (Aug 11, 2017)

amorse said:


> Would I pay more for a 6D II with a 5D IV sensor? Yes - absolutely. How much more? No idea - I've gone a different direction and moved away from considering the 6D II.
> 
> I had an original 6D which I used and loved. It was a great camera and took great photos for my needs. I take photos of almost exclusively landscapes and nearly always on a tripod. My biggest desires for improvement on the 6D were increased base ISO dynamic range, improved weather sealing, increased resolution, and maybe further improvements in low light capabilities (in that order). I certainly understand that these are not what everyone else needs, and I concede that the discussions on DR are splitting hairs for the most part. However, I did find myself lifting shadows on maybe 50% of the photos I took, and I almost always used ND grads or bracketing to overcome the challenge.
> 
> ...



I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV? 

Holding "back" on the 6DII is sort of fair towards the 5DIV buyers...


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 11, 2017)

Larsskv said:


> I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV?
> 
> Holding "back" on the 6DII is sort of fair towards the 5DIV buyers...



That way of thinking would be the path to unhappiness with any purchase. The better way to think of it would be feeling lucky for having had another six months with a camera that made you happy. That would be like buying a new car, then being upset that the next model, a year later, had newer features. Or that you buy a TV, and then the next year they're bigger, cheaper, and better.


----------



## MayaTlab (Aug 11, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> And in this estimate psychological markers come into play: the simplest of these, and one everyone is aware of, is that 1,999 sounds so much cheaper than 2,001, so if they had put the 5D4 sensor in there instead of the current one and launched at $2,200 it is probable they would not have hit sales targets



That only concerns less than 30% of the world. In the eurozone, for example, it's at €2099 at least (except on Amazon, which already discounts it on a weird intermittent basis). In Japan, it's above 200 000 yens.


----------



## reef58 (Aug 11, 2017)

Larsskv said:


> amorse said:
> 
> 
> > Would I pay more for a 6D II with a 5D IV sensor? Yes - absolutely. How much more? No idea - I've gone a different direction and moved away from considering the 6D II.
> ...



Maybe my new cheap laptop can go back to a 386 processor so I don't feel cheated about the $4000 laptop I bought 10 years ago. I am not sure why people feel retroactively cheated on products especially ones that are obsolete in short order. That is part of the deal. If you feel comfortable with your purchase when you bought it don't worry about what happens in 6 months. If you do then you will forever be living in fear of the next product announcement.

To the OP yes I would pay more. I would probably pay close to 5d4 prices as I want the tilt screen and the image quality. I would pay even more for a 5d4 with a tilt screen. 5k.


----------



## amorse (Aug 11, 2017)

Larsskv said:


> I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV?
> 
> Holding "back" on the 6DII is sort of fair towards the 5DIV buyers...



I understand the logic behind that sentiment, but to offer a counter point I do think that the needs of camera buyers are very different, and the best option for any buyer will always depend on what is on the market at that time. The 6D II will excel over the 5D IV in some ways, and I'm sure there could be a few 5D IV buyers out there who may see the 6D II as a better solution than the 5D IV in hindsight. For instance, if someone really needs the tilty screen on a full frame camera they may have just bought the 5D IV thinking that Canon wouldn't introduce the feature. 

I waited for the 6D II to be released so that I could compare it to the 5D IV and make my decision. I half debated waiting for the 5DSR II, but lost my patience. In the end, buying any camera early in its lifecycle runs the risk of being outperformed by later (if even lower grade) models in some ways. But to be fair, taking that early buying risk also offers the advantage of having the new product earlier - if I knew what the 6D II would offer a year ago I could have made my choice then and bought the 5D IV and had been using the camera for a year at this point. 

By that logic I think you could make the argument that 7D II buyers could feel cheated by the great performance of the 80D, so there is always the risk that a lower end model will out perform a high end model in some ways.


----------



## tron (Aug 11, 2017)

amorse said:


> Larsskv said:
> 
> 
> > I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV?
> ...


+1 You get the better product 1 year earlier and enjoy its advantages. The fact that an even newer product will appear does not change much since it will have slight advantage (6D vs 5D3 in low light iso) tops vs. the much bigger advantage that the early buying provided (see 5D4 vs 5D3).


----------



## unfocused (Aug 11, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > garret said:
> ...



Pretty sexist comment. 

Honestly, who wouldn't want a horse with a badass pointy horn?


----------



## dak723 (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> If Canon want to survive in the entry-full-size camera market, Canon must make version of the 6 dmk2 with the sensor from the 5 dmk4 including 4K video and high DR, not in 4 years , but next year/ ASAP.
> 
> Would you pay more for this camera and how much?
> 
> ...



Would I pay more? - No.

Do I care that the 6D II does not have the 5D IV sensor? - No. The original 6D took great pics, and the vast majority (if not all) of those that have bought the camera and posted their opinions report that the 6D II's IQ is better and the images are far easier to clean up and work with in post processing than the original 6D. There is no reason not to get this camera, in my opinion.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 11, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Putting 1080P on a 4k TV is not a "dead end", any more than the fact that when I get my next TV it will have 4k and... mostly display 1080p, _or less_, because that's most of what's available. For example, all football games. It might be nice to make your videos be 4k, but are you prepared for the rest of 4k video production? I've never done it (or any video, really), but my understanding is it requires a ferociously powerful desktop and isn't really something you just pick up on a whim.



4k TVs scale 1080p, 1080i, and 720p quite nicely. They need to, since as you say most programming we watch is in one of those forms. For a lot of us, much of what we watch is 1080i that has been compressed for cable. It can look surprisingly good, especially at normal viewing distances. DVD video is 720x480 compressed for data rate. The pixels are interpreted by the player to stretch the picture back out to 16x9 ratio. Blu-Ray discs can do 1080p and have a much higher bitrate. Internet streaming is still rather compressed, whether 1080i or 4K. So, overall, it is a wonder that video looks as good as it does most of the time. That is a triumph of technology.

I have shot 4K video only with my iPhone. Nothing else I have will shoot it. I've never tried to produce a 4K end product from it, and I don't know what I would do with it if I had it, other than have it on my computer. The one project I shot with my phone was of pick-up basketball games last summer. Since the iPhone doesn't have optical zoom, I used the extra resolution to allow cropping that amounted to what I would have zoomed in for if I used more sophisticated equipment. It came out looking pretty good, and still not too bad after YouTube mangled, er processed, it for their system.

As for hardware and software, I have an almost-3-year-old 5K iMac with an i7 processor and a lot of memory and SSD space. I use Final Cut Pro X for editing, just because I'm more familiar with it than with Premiere. (I do better color correction with Premiere, though, because it is more Adobeish.) The iMac hands the 4K material quite well. I leave all the options on for background processing. By the time I have finished a small project, it has filled up almost the whole free space on my SSD with work files (almost half a terabyte). Those are promptly deleted when I'm done. I don't know how the performance might be with a slower processor, less memory, and maybe more important, a mechanical hard drive instead of a large SSD. I don't want to find out.

Anyhow, when done editing, I produced 720p video rendered in Compressor. It does that in less time than the video duration. With my old Mac Pro, I used to go to bed after I put Compressor to work. Now I just get some water or take a bathroom break. The audience for that video project is more interested in seeing ASAP how well the players did, rather than how well I corrected colors, etc. So then I can send the video on to YouTube for them to ticker with, and the video is available on line some time during the night while I sleep.

So my point is that 4K video editing is not beyond the means of a person of comfortable middle-class income (the sort of folk who debate the merits of $2,000-$3,500 cameras). But for home and hobbyist use, lack of 4K should rarely be a deal breaker. The extra resolution can come in handy for editing in lieu of having a good telephoto lens. But shooting 1080p video can still give you more quality to work with than what you are used to seeing commercially. The photographic advantage the latter will normally have will be in terms of lighting, color, etc., much more so than effective resolution by the time it gets to your TV.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 11, 2017)

Some of the discussion here seems to assume that Canon's target audience for the 6D2 consists largely of present 6D owners considering an upgrade. Clearly that represents a segment of people posting on the forum, but I doubt that is so huge a concern to Canon marketing. Indeed, they could well be more interested that 6D owners see the 5D4 as the next upgrade.

My guess is that somewhat more of the potential market consists of those of us among the great unwashed who are looking for some nudge to consider buying our first non-film full-frame camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 11, 2017)

stevelee said:


> Some of the discussion here seems to assume that Canon's target audience for the 6D2 consists largely of present 6D owners considering an upgrade. Clearly that represents a segment of people posting on the forum, but I doubt that is so huge a concern to Canon marketing. Indeed, they could well be more interested that 6D owners see the 5D4 as the next upgrade.
> 
> My guess is that somewhat more of the potential market consists of those of us among the great unwashed who are looking for some nudge to consider buying our first non-film full-frame camera.



Exactly. Thus the lower price point.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 11, 2017)

unfocused said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



By legend, only a virgin female can approach/ tame/ ride a unicorn. Everyone else can't. Therefor, a unicorn is useless to anyone else. And go ahead, argue with me about whether that's accurate.

Be careful throwing around accusations of sexism.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 11, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> By legend, only a virgin female can approach/ tame/ ride a unicorn. Everyone else can't. Therefor, a unicorn is useless to anyone else. And go ahead, argue with me about whether that's accurate.



Voldemort found a use for unicorns. Are you suggesting that Tom Riddle was a virgin female?


----------



## Larsskv (Aug 11, 2017)

reef58 said:


> Larsskv said:
> 
> 
> > amorse said:
> ...



You seem to overlook the fact that the 5DIV is a higher end model, that it is newly released, and is expected to be the main 5D model for another 4 years.

Canons price policy and upgrade strategy worked on me. When the 1DXII was released, I maxed out on my credit card because I knew the 5DIV and 6DII would not outperform it in any significant matter, and it would be the best Canon FF till 2020. Why should I wait and see how the next model would look like?


----------



## rrcphoto (Aug 11, 2017)

garret said:


> If Canon want to survive in the entry-full-size camera market, Canon must make version of the 6 dmk2 with the sensor from the 5 dmk4 including 4K video and high DR, not in 4 years , but next year/ ASAP.



LOL.
and you know this.. how?

you're probably right that it would have cost more, but it's really not happening.

and no, canon doesn't need it to survive.


----------



## Talys (Aug 11, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > By legend, only a virgin female can approach/ tame/ ride a unicorn. Everyone else can't. Therefor, a unicorn is useless to anyone else. And go ahead, argue with me about whether that's accurate.
> ...



Well, _obviously_.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 11, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > By legend, only a virgin female can approach/ tame/ ride a unicorn. Everyone else can't. Therefor, a unicorn is useless to anyone else. And go ahead, argue with me about whether that's accurate.
> ...



I have paid zero attention to that franchise, so other than the name Voldemort I have no idea what you're on about. I'm talking tradition legend, which did hold that unicorns were only available to virgin females. Whatever interpretation modern writers choose to put on tradition is fine for them, but I'm not going to hold them on par with traditional legends.

When I think vampires, I don't think sparkly skin, either.


----------



## BillB (Aug 11, 2017)

candc said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > candc said:
> ...



And how many Sony cameras that you listed were at the $2000 price point, or anywhere near it?


----------



## tcmatthews (Aug 12, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> tcmatthews said:
> 
> 
> > I do not like the size of the 5 series bodies. But I think that if the 5D iV had a flip screen and true 4K support it would look much more attractive to me. But I would still have a hard time pulling the trigger on a camera that truly does not fit my hands.
> ...


Yes shocking. But you miss the fact I think the 5D IV is over priced for its features. It feels like i am hyperextending my thumb when using my 7D II so i really do not like the Ergos. I have no problem with the thumb stick it is just in a bad position for my hand. The 5D IV is a good camera but if i had anything to criticise it on is the lack of flip screen and 4K H.264 with full sensor readout. Just 4k H.264 would have shut many of the haters up. But I am not its target market. So what do I know.

For me the show stopper for the 6D II was the lack SD UHSII. Not even a Magic lantern hack will improve the 6D II video. I shoot Canon and Sony DR is not why i sold my 6D. I never felt lacking with the DR of the 6D compared to the Sony.


----------



## Talys (Aug 12, 2017)

tcmatthews said:


> Yes shocking. But you miss the fact I think the 5D IV is over priced for its features.



When the market agrees with you and stops buying 5DIV, Canon will lower its price. As long as it's the best-selling full frame camera, _at any price point_, the price will remain about where it is.

Of course, the 5DIV isn't even a year old. I'm sure there will be sales and instant rebates around Black Friday/Christmas, but I doubt to the degree that would entice you, seeing that there are things you don't like about 5DIV anyways. Don't get me wrong -- I'm not really fond of 5DIV's ergonomics (just a little too big for my hands), and I would like a flippy screen too. However, that just makes me think that the 5DIV isn't the right camera for me, not that it's overpriced.



tcmatthews said:


> For me the show stopper for the 6D II was the lack SD UHSII. Not even a Magic lantern hack will improve the 6D II video. I shoot Canon and Sony DR is not why i sold my 6D. I never felt lacking with the DR of the 6D compared to the Sony.



I don't think the 6DII will appeal to people who want to shoot a lot of video. The feature set is clearly not targeted to them. Should Canon have a Full Frame, entry-level videographer's DSLR offering? Maybe, but it's not 6DII.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 14, 2017)

tcmatthews said:


> Yes shocking. But you miss the fact I think the 5D IV is over priced for its features.



As Taly says, price is set by what people are willing to pay, and by the market in general, not whether you can afford it.

I'd like a 600mm f4mkII but I am not willing to pay that - it doesn't mean its overpriced. Am I being pedantic? Yes. But given that this is an internet forum where we can only see what you write, with no non-verbal cues, this sort of comment jut makes someone sound petty.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 16, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> tcmatthews said:
> 
> 
> > Yes shocking. But you miss the fact I think the 5D IV is over priced for its features.
> ...



He was saying that "he thinks" the 5DIV is overpriced, and everyone is entitled to their opinion - that's how we all make judgements about what to buy. For me the 5DIV was an uninspiring camera that offered nothing that I needed to upgrade from my 5DSR. That doesn't mean it is a bad camera, it just means it wasn't the right camera for me.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 17, 2017)

tcmatthews said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > tcmatthews said:
> ...



Ok? So the 5D4 doesn't work for you. I haven't bought one yet either, but you can take literally any product ever and say it should be nicer for less money. Cameras, cars, TVs, laptops, phones, anything. Literally. Everyone always says it's a little overpriced and should also be better. It's meaningless blather from people who have unrealistic notions of what things cost.


----------



## tron (Aug 17, 2017)

Which amount is considered overpriced for 5D4? The 4K of the official price or the 3K of grey import models? I am talking about European prices. I see that in US/Canada the prices are much more reasonable (both official and grey import).


----------



## johnhenry (Aug 23, 2017)

The specs on the 6D II are a bit mixed and disappointing in others.

No large increase in pixels, no 4K video. Frame rate is still MUCH less than even the 7D I


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 23, 2017)

johnhenry said:


> The specs on the 6D II are a bit mixed and disappointing in others.
> 
> No large increase in pixels, no 4K video. Frame rate is still MUCH less than even the 7D I



The 6D was created as an alternative to the 7D series to give photographers the choice of going either sports/ action (AF and high frame rate) or landscape (FF and image quality). Now you expect it to be a FF 7D. I suggest you get a dose of reality.

And do you really consider 6.5 fps to be 'MUCH' (especially capitalised) lower than 8 fps. 

Hyperbole makes you look like a fool.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Aug 29, 2017)

Tokyotim said:


> New member here. Frustrated with my 6dm2. Only posting this so I can start my own topic. Nothing to see here. Move along...



Another user registering to complain? Color me surprised... :


----------

