RustyBug Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
Isaacheus wrote:
Yeah, I mean, right off the bat, it's not a camera that suits what I'm wanting, namely with the dr as it is. But I am curious about the rest, whether Canon have used new tech, or if it's more a tweak of the same tech as in the 6d original.
I've also seen various reviews showing both worse and slightly better high iso quality, so I'd also like to know where Canon were aiming the camera, or, if has been suggested elsewhere, they are really are just trying to separate the 5dmk4 further by iq and save sales here.
Something I don't think there will be direct answers to though
...Show more →
+1 ... if the base ISO DR is someone's all important criteria to be the end all, do all basis for their determining whether or not to buy the 6D2, they don't need to even bother looking at the 6D2 anymore than they looked at the the 6D to be their base ISO, king of DR body. It just isn't that tool. Wasn't in the 6D, isn't in the 6D2. That's been very well established that the 6D series is not the landscapers tool of choice for base ISO DR.
As to the reviews showing worse & better results ... I think there are plenty of variables that go into that which influence it. My .02 from my own personal torture testing is that it holds up better than my previous experience with the 6D, most notably in the area of color and noise pattern.
For some, they couldn't give a rat's behind about color or noise pattern when doing their reviews and don't bother to give credence to how they need to adapt their processing to render them as well as they could. Also, some reviewers are using Adobe products for their processing vs. using Canon's DPP4 for processing.
Personally, I'm going with DPP4 and seeing the noise being handled very nicely via the match of Canon's 6D2 and DPP4 (i.e. same engineering group) > then taking the TIFF into PS for further processing. Those wanting to use LR products or other products may yield different results.
My .02 on the noise is that the 6D2 has a different palette, than the 6D. Thus, it takes a bit of study to learn how to better approach harnessing the difference. One size fits all processing, imo is not the mark of finding out what the file can do. Many reviewers, simply apply their standard processes without really studying how to achieve optimal results with the different product, and decry the results to be inferior by using their previous ways or a product not mated for it (i.e. Adobe). I get that folks want to continue to use their preferred workflow ... but, imo that merely says that the workflow being applied yields a given result. To me, that is a different matter from the result than can be attained. Thus, we get variation in +/- reports / results.
The color balance of the 6D2 has been shifted somewhat (blue channel most notably), and imo that has some influence on the noise pattern in the higher ISO arena.
If someone is asking for a recommendation for the base ISO DR king ... I'll be the first to tell them to look elsewhere. It is what it is (although ISO 50 turns out some respectable results if you can afford the extra stop) in the base DR arena.
As to the rest ... I think it has improved color (as does DXO) and a better noise pattern.
If you are truly considering the 6D2, then I'd suggest taking it for a lap around the block. Rent one, or take advantage of the stellar return policy that certain retailers have. I know that with all the news about the base ISO DR, I was expecting to return my 6D2 that I had pre-ordered. Yet, once I started shooting with it ... screw that, I'm keeping it. Is it the base ISO DR king ... nope, not a chance. I could have ponied up the extra $$$ for the 5D4 ... but, I simply took to a very quick liking to shooting the 6D2 (ergonomics and flippy screen) better and was pleased with its IQ and what I could do with it both high & low.
If the 5D4 had the flippy screen ... I'd probably be shooting the 5D4 long before the 6D2 ever came out. The utility of the flippy screen has its value. The greater DR of the base ISO has its value. Unfortunately, there is nowhere that a person can go right now to have both. Sure, some cameras have tilt screens, and the K-1 has its telescoping legs (restrictive range), but other than the Sony SLT A99, there is no FF with fully articulating display.
Imo, the 6D series (original & II ) was never built to be the base ISO DR king ... they are built for something else. Understand if that fits into your general use plans, it is a very worthy camera to consider. If your needs are truly on the extreme DR side of things then look elsewhere.
If I were to characterize the 6D2 ... Goldilocks, not King of DR.
I bought the 6D ... returned it.
I bought the 6D2 ... kept it.
If your only measure of a camera (sensor) is the base ISO DR ... don't bother looking at the 6D or the 6D2. Get a Pentax K-1.
|