p.12 #3 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
ox0312 wrote:
So, similar to 80D at F8
27 point with only two lenses (pretty limited, IMO)
-- Canon 100-400 II IS Lens
-- Canon 200-400 F4L IS Lens
Single Point (Center) with other lenses. Another advantage goes to 5D4 with all the focus points available (at f8) with most lenses.
Good to know ... but, I sure never knew that when I chose the TC 1.4X III it was going to be a pivotal component regarding AF capability. But, while the 5D4 obviously has more points ... the fact that you're still "in the game" with the TC is very welcome (not the case with the original 6D). Going from "none" to "some" (vs. "all") is definitely an improvement, imo.
p.12 #4 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
dthrog00 wrote:
Nice camera, but what good are all the extra focus points when they are limited to such a small portion of the frame? Rule of thirds anyone?
Dave
Yeah, the placement of the focus points isn't exactly the most inspiring thing I've even seen. Might have to get friendly with the back focus button at times. Although, if you shoot 4:3 or 1:1 format, they will seem like they "wider coverage". I'm not a big 3:2 fan anyway ... with 4:3 probably being my fav (if I'm not going pano). It could wind up being my default setting, hmmm.
p.12 #5 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Focus and recompose can be a viable technique for stationary subjects. Now, what happens when a subject moves and thus Servo AF has to be used ? How do you focus and recompose then ?
That is a significant problem with cameras which have AF points clustered in the frame centre..
p.12 #6 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
RustyBug wrote:
Pentax FF ... 4K video
Panasonic ... FF
Sony ... long glass AF
Substantially better image quality with the Pentax.
4K with the Panasonic.
4K and better image quality with Sony. Oh yeah, and the Sony 100-400 is coming out in one month. If you didn't get the memo, you can shoot Sony bodies with Canon glass, with good AF. If you'd like to see shots with the A7RII and Canon 500/4 II and Canon 100-400 II, including bird in flight shots, here you go:
p.12 #7 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Brea wrote:
That's odd, what kinda devices are 95% of people viewing their media on? That's right, laptops, phones. tablets. You said 4k is needed? Sure... my household barely touches the TV.
Sounds like you are a perfect person to shoot a 6DII!
p.12 #9 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
dthrog00 wrote:
Nice camera, but what good are all the extra focus points when they are limited to such a small portion of the frame? Rule of thirds anyone?
Dave
I know. Canon being Canon with more strange decisions.
p.12 #10 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
PetKal wrote:
Youtubers are already having their jollies with 6DII and Canon, and this "reviewer" is certainly something else.
He's a bit exaggerated, but I don't disagree with him. Seriously, it's like a 5DII mashup with a 60D, released in 2017, for $2K. The AF coverage is pathetic, circa 2011. The 5DII had 1080p video, circa 2008. The AF buffer is 21 shots. Really? The A9 is 240+ shots. Why upgrade from a 6D?
p.12 #12 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
scrappydog wrote:
He's a bit exaggerated, but I don't disagree with him. Seriously, it's like a 5DII mashup with a 60D, released in 2017, for $2K. The AF coverage is pathetic, circa 2011. The 5DII had 1080p video, circa 2008. The AF buffer is 21 shots. Really? The A9 is 240+ shots. Why upgrade from a 6D?
I didn't watch the whole thing, but I think I agree with your assessment, it's a lot of borrowed parts from past cameras; I'm hoping for a really good sensor in both high iso, and good low iso image quality to make it a little bit more attractive. Is there anything unique to this that has been added? It looks like there are a few things that haven't been included from the old one, like the manual focus screens and one of the video codecs
p.12 #13 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
scrappydog wrote:
Substantially better image quality with the Pentax.
4K with the Panasonic.
4K and better image quality with Sony. Oh yeah, and the Sony 100-400 is coming out in one month. If you didn't get the memo, you can shoot Sony bodies with Canon glass, with good AF. If you'd like to see shots with the A7RII and Canon 500/4 II and Canon 100-400 II, including bird in flight shots, here you go:
Like many people shoot the 6DII with big whites. Talk about cherry picking features to prove no point.
The point that had been made that it was "insane" that the 6D2 (i.e. FF) didn't have 4K video ... you referenced the Pentax and the Panasonic (neither of which have FF & 4K video combined either) as alternatives to achieve that specification, where Canon had not done so in the 6D2.
The Sony A7R II ... ummm, that's the same $$$ league as the 5D4 (but with only one card slot and 1/3 the battery shot rating).
So, if you buy the A7R II to achieve the requirement of FF + 4K video ... why is that any different from buying the 5D4 to achieve those same criteria (which folks are poo-pooing as unnecessary to get BOTH FF & 4K video) in a single camera body ... except you don't have to play with adapters to get things to work if you stay native with the 5D4. So, the AF on the A7R II performs better / as well as the 5D4 with Canon long glass?
Again, expecting the 6D2 (i.e. $2,0000) to have FF & 4K video ... is based on . Others, claiming "insanity" that it doesn't have it ... ummm, IDK but I don't seem to see where anyone has done that yet. Feel free to try again ... but, strike 1 on Pentax (no 4K video), strike 2 on Panasonic (no FF), Strike 3 on A7R II (priced similar to 5D4 to get that combined spec of FF + 4K video).
Feel free to take another swing at the FF + 4K video = 6D2 (or less) territory. I'm certain that many would love to know where to get FF + 4K video for $2K (or allegedly less). Surely those claiming insanity can provide the details of where to find FF + 4K video for $2K or less. I mean, to claim "insanity" that Canon didn't do it ... and not be able to back it up that others have done it ... well, that would be ... ummm, what's the word?
p.12 #14 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
RustyBug wrote:
Feel free to take another swing at the FF + 4K video = 6D2 (or less) territory. I'm certain that many would love to know where to get FF + 4K video for $2K (or allegedly less). Surely those claiming insanity can provide the details of where to find FF + 4K video for $2K or less. I mean, to claim "insanity" that Canon didn't do it ... and not be able to back it up that others have done it ... well, that would be ... ummm, what's the word?
The fact that it doesn't exist at that price point yet is irrelevant. You're comparing far older cameras to the brand new 6D2 but technology advances and companies offer more features at a lower price point. People's expectations change. Someone is eventually going to offer FF + 4k at a sub-$2k price point. It could have been Canon, but it's obviously not. The worst part is that it really isn't for any technical reason since he older DIGIC 6 in the 5D4 was already capable of 4k. It's arguable that Canon even anticipated that Magic Lantern could one day enable 4k on the 6D2 and as a result put in a hardware limit via the UHS-I slot so that higher 4k bitrates would be out of reach. The 6D2 is clearly designed to compete with the D750 while preserving as many 5D4 sales as possible.
Just because other companies aren't yet offering 4k in this segment doesn't mean that Canon should be absolved of not offering it either. People want to see innovation. The D750 replacement or the A7III will almost certainly be the camera to push the segment forward since Canon wasn't up to the task. This camera is going to sell quite well to people entrenched in the Canon ecosystem, but imagine the landscape a year from now when the Nikon and Sony offerings are on store shelves. Unless there are some pretty drastic price cuts the 6D2 is going to be a hard sell for people who are new to FF and looking to pick a system.
p.12 #15 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
It's not the number of focus points, its cramming them in 11% of the viewfinder. Compare it to the coverage of the 80D (of course it will be more expensive to cover the same portion of the image in a FF camera) which covers about 33% more of the viewfinder, but a small increase in price with a small increase in coverage gives a much much more useful focus area.
But I am giving up on the 6D2 -- it is like a poke in the eye to Canon photographers. The A7R2 with focus peaking is looking a lot better now, dont even need a $400 metabones adapter to use focus peaking and it works anywhere on the image.
p.12 #16 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
RustyBug wrote:
The point that had been made that it was "insane" that the 6D2 (i.e. FF) didn't have 4K video ... you referenced the Pentax and the Panasonic (neither of which have FF & 4K video combined either) as alternatives to achieve that specification, where Canon had not done so in the 6D2.
The Sony A7R II ... ummm, that's the same $$$ league as the 5D4 (but with only one card slot and 1/3 the battery shot rating).
So, if you buy the A7R II to achieve the requirement of FF + 4K video ... why is that any different from buying the 5D4 to achieve those same criteria (which folks are poo-pooing as unnecessary to get BOTH FF & 4K video) in a single camera body ... except you don't have to play with adapters to get things to work if you stay native with the 5D4. So, the AF on the A7R II performs better / as well as the 5D4 with Canon long glass?
Again, expecting the 6D2 (i.e. $2,0000) to have FF & 4K video ... is based on . Others, claiming "insanity" that it doesn't have it ... ummm, IDK but I don't seem to see where anyone has done that yet. Feel free to try again ... but, strike 1 on Pentax (no 4K video), strike 2 on Panasonic (no FF), Strike 3 on A7R II (priced similar to 5D4 to get that combined spec of FF + 4K video).
Feel free to take another swing at the FF + 4K video = 6D2 (or less) territory. I'm certain that many would love to know where to get FF + 4K video for $2K (or allegedly less). Surely those claiming insanity can provide the details of where to find FF + 4K video for $2K or less. I mean, to claim "insanity" that Canon didn't do it ... and not be able to back it up that others have done it ... well, that would be ... ummm, what's the word?
I have a great idea - if you want to take video, there are some great video cameras out there that take terrific video, but probably doesn't take terrific photos. Likewise, why would you use a quality still-camera to take video, or expect a 6DM2, a lower-end, but still very good quality FF camera to have the same video quality skills that the top Canons have?
p.12 #17 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
billsamuels wrote:
I have a great idea - if you want to take video, there are some great video cameras out there that take terrific video, but probably doesn't take terrific photos. Likewise, why would you use a quality still-camera to take video, or expect a 6DM2, a lower-end, but still very good quality FF camera to have the same video quality skills that the top Canons have?
Buy the right tools for the right job!!!
Why haul around two sets of gear unnecessarily? 4k is going to become a standard feature in entry-level FF bodies whether Canon likes it or not. Unless they decide to innovate like they did with the 5D2 they're going to be stuck responding to the competition. Someone else put it best: every four years Canon releases a two year old body.
p.12 #18 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
It is understandable that people are confused about the 6D II, especially for such a high price point. $2000 is not a budget camera by any means and therefore some of the features lacking from this camera is rather questionable. But, Canon know they have many followers and many people invested in their gear that they can continue to get away with uninspiring, slightly updated cameras.
p.12 #19 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
In my case 6D was a camera that helped me to earn money. Easier and better than itīs (my) predecessor 5D II. The price tag of 2000 (intro price) was a very fair offer imo. So is the 2000 level of 6D II that will go down to 1500 within a year like always.
Canon has many followers because they offer the right tool for individual needs, too.
We are not all stupid.
I started with 3000 (D60) to use digital bodies in "pro" (means earning money with it) photographie. Via 30D, 50D, 5D II to 6D Canon provided me all the last 15 years a better tool for my biz at an affordable price tag.
I really do not understand the "problem". 2000$ for a pro usable tool imo is a "bargain"!
When I spend 3000 for the D60 in 2002 I saved 1500 - 2500 a year in less costs for film and development (of contact prints in main) and hundreds of hours in scanning and cleaning time.
If one does not want to spend the money Canon asks for the 6D II, just buy a consumer body. My SL 1 works excellent for 75% to 90% of what I shoot.
p.12 #20 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
MSantiago wrote:
The worst part is that it really isn't for any technical reason since he older DIGIC 6 in the 5D4 was already capable of 4k.
You have to cool it, typically by heat sink and/or a metal body. Otherwise you end up with something like some of the Sony mirrorless cameras that run for a while recording 4K and then shut down due to overheating.
People want to see innovation.
You have absolutely no evidence for that. It's true that some people who like gadgets like innovation. Others just have a list of minimum requirements and then mark on price, reliability etc. If someone like that doesn't need 4K, it won't enter into their purchasing decision.
Given the lack of 4K content in many places, many people don't have a suitable display device and just don't care.
