Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end
  

Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review
  
 
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #1 · p.5 #1 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


Finding someone who has BOTH a 6D and a 6D II to shoot the same field shots ... that might be a trick.

But if anyone is in the STL region with a 6D, I'll gladly put the 6D2 up to the task of comping with the 6D.

Bring the 5D3, also ... a field IQ shootout between those "generation back" and the 6D2 would be interesting to see.



Edited on Sep 26, 2017 at 03:43 AM · View previous versions



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:38 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #2 · p.5 #2 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


I'm not seeing any reports of it being better..? It's certainly not worse and has more pixels but no one I know who has used one sees any improvement. Which is quite sad.

As for colour score I never look at dxo summary numbers only the graphs



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:40 AM
Isaacheus
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #3 · p.5 #3 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


Haven't upgraded, so can't refer to the first part regarding iq, but I think a lot of the dissatisfied reviews were more on the point that the 6d mk2 didn't improve on the old 6d in dr; something that all the other recently released sensors did by quite a margin. I agree the difference in dr vs the original is pretty much nothing, but that's not praise considering the 6d wasn't exactly top of its class, even 4 years ago. Unless I'm missing the point of the disappointment from others?

lighthound wrote:
What seems very clear to me is the FACT that reports are starting to come in from previous owners of the original 6D that have upgraded to the 6DII are reporting a much improved IQ over it's predecessor. The ONLY one that I'm aware of that seems to think otherwise is Rob.

This BS of worse DR than it's predecessor is a pretty pathetic and laughable claim IMHO.
I challenge ANYONE to show me a side by side real world comparison between the 6D and 6DII where this MASSIVE drop in DR is even remotely perceivable in any image you choose
...Show more



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:41 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #4 · p.5 #4 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review




RustyBug wrote:
Finding someone who has BOTH a 6D and a 6D II to shoot the same field shots ... that might be a trick.

But if anyone is in the STL region with a 6D, I'll gladly put the 6D2 up to the task of comping with the 6D.



That's exactly what I did.



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:42 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #5 · p.5 #5 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


RobDickinson wrote:
That's exactly what I did.


Side by side field ... I missed those (or I forgot )




Sep 26, 2017 at 03:44 AM
Isaacheus
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #6 · p.5 #6 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


I'd be very keen to see this, especially if you can compare to a Nikon 610 or 750 in the same test. Landscapes where one is trying to preserve the highlights of the sky are a particular interest to me personally

RustyBug wrote:
Finding someone who has BOTH a 6D and a 6D II to shoot the same field shots ... that might be a trick.

But if anyone is in the STL region with a 6D, I'll gladly put the 6D2 up to the task of comping with the 6D.





Sep 26, 2017 at 03:45 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #7 · p.5 #7 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


Isaacheus wrote:

I agree the difference in dr vs the original is pretty much nothing, but that's not praise considering the 6d wasn't exactly top of its class, even 4 years ago. Unless I'm missing the point of the disappointment from others?


Yet, folks suddenly think the 6D2 should have vaulted to the top of the heap ... and are so very disappointed that it didn't.

To your point ... it wasn't the DR king back then (not built to be), and it remains not the DR king now (still not built to be).




Sep 26, 2017 at 03:48 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #8 · p.5 #8 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review




Isaacheus wrote:
I'd be very keen to see this, especially if you can compare to a Nikon 610 or 750 in the same test. Landscapes where one is trying to preserve the highlights of the sky are a particular interest to me personally



Back to the same old argument....
I've regularly shot along side Nikon users and seen how much faster and easier they can work and how much they can capture over what old school canon can.

Real world, real shooting. It makes a difference.

I just don't like the Nikon lens choices, poor live view and ergonomic.



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:49 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #9 · p.5 #9 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review




RustyBug wrote:
Side by side field ... I missed those (or I forgot )



I even hosted full raws from both at every iso. Pulled now.



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:50 AM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #10 · p.5 #10 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


5 years and $2100 hard earned cash for a camera that clearly doesn't improve on DR, and actually is noticeably worse than a $550 rebel released at the same time? That just seems to be a failure to many regardless of the apologetics, despite the other new features and improvements. Why is that hard to believe, and even better, why does it matter to those that are accepting of the release? If you like it, stop wasting time here defending your purchase and go shoot with your new toy!



Edited on Sep 26, 2017 at 03:55 AM · View previous versions



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:50 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #11 · p.5 #11 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


Isaacheus wrote:
I'd be very keen to see this, especially if you can compare to a Nikon 610 or 750 in the same test. Landscapes where one is trying to preserve the highlights of the sky are a particular interest to me personally



Well, I'd say there's little point in comparing the 6D2's DR to that of the Nikon's for landscape DR purposes. That's a well established variance that is hard to not acknowledge. The only way I might consider getting close to that would be to go ISO 50 with the 6D2. Again, not exactly what it was built for. If that is truly a person's ultimate objective ... then the 6D2 isn't the tool to achieve that on the extreme levels.

But, if the contention is that Canon didn't make any improvements to the 6D2 sensor (or the contention that it is WORSE) ... then that's the shootout that I'd like to see to prove it so (or not).



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:54 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #12 · p.5 #12 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


RobDickinson wrote:
I just don't like the Nikon lens choices,


Agreed.



Sep 26, 2017 at 03:56 AM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #13 · p.5 #13 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


We have imperial results that show this, the raw sensor data doesn't lie.


Sep 26, 2017 at 03:57 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #14 · p.5 #14 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


TeamSpeed wrote:
We have imperial results that show this, the raw sensor data doesn't lie.


You mean the color response improvements and noise patterns ... or just the base ISO DR?



Sep 26, 2017 at 04:00 AM
Isaacheus
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #15 · p.5 #15 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


I'd still be keen for this, not just to have a field test with the same shots for dr purposes, but also to see how they stack up in colour, and in high iso.

What does interest me is how much difference the noise characteristics provide, against a sensor with stronger Dr, vs the original 6d, if that comparison.
But I know, back to the same argument points...

RustyBug wrote:
Well, I'd say there's little point in comparing the 6D2's DR to that of the Nikon's for landscape DR purposes. That's a well established variance that is hard to not acknowledge. The only way I might consider getting close to that would be to go ISO 50 with the 6D2. Again, not exactly what it was built for. If that is truly a person's ultimate objective ... then the 6D2 isn't the tool to achieve that on the extreme levels.

But, if the contention is that Canon didn't make any improvements to the 6D2 sensor (or the contention that it is
...Show more



Sep 26, 2017 at 04:12 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #16 · p.5 #16 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


Isaacheus wrote:
I'd still be keen for this, not just to have a field test with the same shots for dr purposes, but also to see how they stack up in colour, and in high iso.

What does interest me is how much difference the noise characteristics provide, against a sensor with stronger Dr, vs the original 6d, if that comparison.
But I know, back to the same argument points...



Yeah, if you are truly interested to honestly learn of the WHOLE camera ... color, high ISO, noise pattern, etc., I think you'd find it meritable information. But for those who are looking for the one trick pony of base ISO DR ... not much to learn that we don't already know ... i.e. it's not the DR King.



Sep 26, 2017 at 04:21 AM
Isaacheus
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #17 · p.5 #17 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


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

RustyBug wrote:
Yeah, if you are truly interested to honestly learn of the WHOLE camera ... color, high ISO, noise pattern, etc., I think you'd find it meritable information. But for those who are looking for the one trick pony of base ISO DR ... not much to learn that we don't already know ... i.e. it's not the DR King.




Sep 26, 2017 at 04:52 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #18 · p.5 #18 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


It's canons old off sensor adc tech but with dual pixel stuff. A whole new sensor


Sep 26, 2017 at 05:54 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #19 · p.5 #19 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


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.
...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.




Sep 26, 2017 at 12:10 PM
Desbris
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #20 · p.5 #20 · Canon 6D Mark II DXOMark Sensor Review


I used the 6D II for a full day of shooting. From various types of photography of landscape to fast action and portraits etc, as I mentioned in my previous post it is a decent camera and that's it. It's why I definitely will not buy one, but I had to test it for myself to be sure.

Flippy screen is good, but they always are. I've used 5D IV multiple times and it is much better than the 6D II but obviously it is more expensive, though grey market prices now for a 5D IV are really low.

Like others have mentioned swapping over to Nikon is tempting however the hassle of it all and the fact I don't like the lenses or ergonomics as much as Canon is what holds me back. But wow, that D850 is incredible, and it is a shame Canon doesn't have a camera to match it.



Sep 26, 2017 at 12:53 PM
1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password