p.48 #1 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Lots of very good cameras now selling for $1999 or less. But please don't expect this category to perform similar to those costing $3000-3500. Just wait and see. In the meantime there's lots of wishful thinking out there.
p.48 #2 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
garyvot wrote:
"The 6D still works like a champ."
It sure does.
Prior to this announcement, I don't believe I noticed complaints about the 6D's sensor and its "limited" dynamic range. Image quality has always been considered a strength of the 6D.
For me, this underscores how tedious this obsession over one particular sensor metric has become. Even if the 6D2 merely matches the image quality of its predecessor, it will still meet the needs of the majority of photographers.
The dedicated landscape shooters for whom extended dynamic range at base ISO might occasionally be important are unlikely to choose a 26Mp camera in any case, I think....Show more →
I just hope I never came off as someone complaining about my 6D's sensor or that I was really pissed off about the supposed DR performance of the 6D2. So any possible complaining I may have seemed to do was really down to trying to make a purchase decision.
And I do happen to be a landscape shooter. But I like Canon and have been shooting with them for years, and the 6D was the choice for me that allowed me to stay with Canon and go full frame at a price that worked for me (especially as I am just a hobbyist who doesnt get out to shoot nearly enough).
So I know that for pure landscape shooters, Canon may not be the best choice, but I also believe that most of the differences are only things pros really *need* and that only other serious photographers would be able to tell the differences. Nobody is ever going to look at my shots and say, ew, I bet you shot that on a crappy canon with limited DR.
But for me, it would still be nice to have more... so I hoped the 6D2 would slot in right where the original 6D did, but it doesnt seem to be the case. And thats ok, its just a bit disappointing and means it may not be worth it for me to upgrade right now. Of course, we dont even know yet, so I cancelled my preorder because we dont know, and Ill wait. Worst case, I just get one when it becomes available again. No skin off my back to wait a small amount of extra time. And the point about the 6D was that if I dont spring for the 6D2, the 6D hasnt suddenly become terrible. Its still as good as its always been.
p.48 #3 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Patlezinc wrote:
I did not realise it was a 110% Canon fanboy forum here.
Am I free to decide what is important to me as a potential buyer?
Seems that I need to think like some guys here, and if not I am a troll...
I have a 6d and Canon/Sigma glasses, so the 6d II interest(ed) me.
Good if it performs well above 400iso. But at this moment I will not spend 2000$ because of this, simply because it represents 2% of my shots.
I am disappointed. Can I?
I am far from a Canon fan boy - I have Olympus and Panasonic cameras and use all of them for different tings. But to say that the 6D2 is 'far behind' everything else flies in the face of reason.
First of all you did not state your particular requirements - if you shoot solely at ISO 100/200 then it may not suit your needs. But even then there are very, very few cases where the dynamic range of the 6D2 is insufficient but the dynamic range of (for example) the D810 fits the bill perfectly.
Secondly, if you go 400 and above the 6D is almost as good as any camera out there, and the 6D2 is likely to exceed the 6D.
Sure you can be disappointed, but when someone comes new to the forum and makes bald statements like 'the 6D2 is far behind all other cameras' be prepared for some flak. Old timers get away with that sort of thing because people understand their requirements from a history of posting. Internet forums are no different to any other social groups.
p.48 #6 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Patlezinc wrote:
Not being agree with you is being a troll?
Nice forum...
My apologies for my rude comment. I had simply noticed, in each of your 3 post, that there were hints of you being just another Sony fanboy trolling. I understand your frustrations with Canon and assure you that you're not alone.
And yes, this is a nice forum, great actually, with some fantastic members. Most of whom are not as rough around the edges as I.
p.48 #8 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Flowernut wrote:
I'm getting to the point I don't care what it does, I want the flip screen. really could have used it today for flowers.
I was taking wildflower photos all day yesterday with a 5Ds and a 17mm tilt-shift. I thought about having a nice flip screen more than once. I hope to get my pre-order soon.
p.48 #10 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Lars Leber wrote:
I was taking wildflower photos all day yesterday with a 5Ds and a 17mm tilt-shift. I thought about having a nice flip screen more than once. I hope to get my pre-order soon.
p.48 #12 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Mashuto wrote:
I just hope I never came off as someone complaining about my 6D's sensor or that I was really pissed off about the supposed DR performance of the 6D2. So any possible complaining I may have seemed to do was really down to trying to make a purchase decision.
And I do happen to be a landscape shooter. But I like Canon and have been shooting with them for years, and the 6D was the choice for me that allowed me to stay with Canon and go full frame at a price that worked for me (especially as I am just a hobbyist who doesnt get out to shoot nearly enough).
So I know that for pure landscape shooters, Canon may not be the best choice, but I also believe that most of the differences are only things pros really *need* and that only other serious photographers would be able to tell the differences. Nobody is ever going to look at my shots and say, ew, I bet you shot that on a crappy canon with limited DR.
But for me, it would still be nice to have more... so I hoped the 6D2 would slot in right where the original 6D did, but it doesnt seem to be the case. And thats ok, its just a bit disappointing and means it may not be worth it for me to upgrade right now. Of course, we dont even know yet, so I cancelled my preorder because we dont know, and Ill wait. Worst case, I just get one when it becomes available again. No skin off my back to wait a small amount of extra time. And the point about the 6D was that if I dont spring for the 6D2, the 6D hasnt suddenly become terrible. Its still as good as its always been....Show more →
Not at all... I just quoted you because your comment happened to trigger this thought, but my comment was not directed toward you specifically.
I understand and respect the benefits of higher dynamic range. It just feels to me that some people (not necessarily you) have fixated on this to the exclusion of everything else.
Also, I do think there are some Canon-haters who seize on every perceived deficiency to "prove" their grievance against the brand, using ever more hyperbolic language. It is tiresome to go through this with every new camera model.
I don't know if the 6D Mark II will do the same, but I get the strong sense that debates like the one here really are taking place in a bubble, and that Canon has a pretty good handle on the needs and wants of the broader buying public.
p.48 #14 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
In a studio it certainly shouldn't have any effect. In studios you have complete control over lighting so should never have too much dynamic range unless you engineer it so.
Whenever we talk about dynamic range it's not always relevant to every shooting situation..
RustyBug wrote:
Honest question ... how would that alter how you shoot in studio?
p.48 #15 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
RobDickinson wrote:
In a studio it certainly shouldn't have any effect. In studios you have complete control over lighting so should never have too much dynamic range unless you engineer it so.
Whenever we talk about dynamic range it's not always relevant to every shooting situation..
Gotcha, that's mostly what I thought.
That was kinda my point about shooting flowers. Someone was actually shooting non-extreme DR photography with a camera. Such blasphemy.
On the flip side ... more DR could that let you shoot faster SS to contend with wind / movement and intentionally underexpose & lift. It could ... or you could use a wind break and expose optimally or use lighting / reflector. In that regard, it does afford additional latitude in the ability to alter how you shoot.
But, if all the marbles are on the table ... which one are you going to choose for maximum IQ? Kinda depends if you have the ability to control the wind or not, and if you are using lights / reflectors or not.
I understand it allows you to do things differently ... but, I'm not certain that, that is necessarily the better route when the objective is presented in the context of obtaining optimal IQ. Does it afford a greater convenience ... sure thing, but I'm not sure that the convenience is always the path to the better result. That's where different strokes for different folks will come into play with what their requirements are / are not.
p.48 #16 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
From a landscape point of view it allows me to shoot with less setting up and additional time, so I can get more shots, not having to bracket and deal with that, or avoid using a grad filter that could cause iq loss flare or whatever.
RustyBug wrote:
Gotcha, that's mostly what I thought.
That was kinda my point about shooting flowers. Someone was actually shooting non-extreme DR photography with a camera. Such blasphemy.
On the flip side ... more DR could that let you shoot faster SS to contend with wind / movement and intentionally underexpose & lift. It could ... or you could use a wind break and expose optimally or use lighting / reflector. In that regard, it does afford additional latitude in the ability to alter how you shoot.
But, if all the marbles are on the table ... which one are you going to choose for maximum IQ? Kinda depends if you have the ability to control the wind or not, and if you are using lights / reflectors or not.
I understand it allows you to do things differently ... but, I'm not certain that, that is necessarily the better route when the objective is presented in the context of obtaining optimal IQ. Does it afford a greater convenience ... sure thing, but I'm not sure that the convenience is always the path to the better result. That's where different strokes for different folks will come into play with what they requirements are / are not. ...Show more →
p.48 #17 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Yes, it has been well noted that the extra DR is preferred by many landscape photographers for their preferences the same ... just that there is a bit more to photography than just landscape, where it may not be perceived as such a "critical" benefit ... more blasphemy.
Besides, not all landscape photography is relegated to extreme DR situations ... although it seems to be very en vogue currently.
p.48 #18 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
RustyBug wrote:
Yes, it has been well noted that the extra DR is preferred by many landscape photographers for their preferences the same ... just that there is a bit more to photography than just landscape, where it may not be perceived as such a "critical" benefit ... more blasphemy.
Besides, not all landscape photography is relegated to extreme DR situations ... although it seems to be very en vogue currently.
It's also very useful for flash photography, especially outdoors at night when there are intermediate-to-far areas of interest which can't be illuminated.
p.48 #19 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
TCS TV on their live program spoke about their 6D2 testing. They were initially so confused about the poor DR they were seeing in the files after they had already sent the camera back to Canon that they asked Canon to send them another one. They then tested the second one against t7i and 5D4 and both out performed the 6D2 for shadow lifting details and noise. https://www.facebook.com/TheCameraStore/videos/10154977822526359/
The 6D2 part starts at around 32min mark.
Just one more piece of data that seems to reinforce that the DR is what initial tests have been showing. They even say that moving anything around in the files (highlights, midtones or shadows) was difficult and the files broke down quickly.
Anyways, take from it what you want, they were using LR to compare and those were Tiffs out of DPP so not direct RAWs in LR.
I will add that they do have a lot of positives to say about it. They say the high-ISO performance is basically a wash with the 5D4 but they weren't seeing any sort of improvement over the 5D4.
p.48 #20 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
snapsy wrote:
It's also very useful for flash photography, especially outdoors at night when there are intermediate-to-far areas of interest which can't be illuminated.
Now that's a refreshingly different point I've heard in a while made regarding the benefit of more DR for lifting shadows.
... not using it for -247,521 EV underexposure of 456,876 EV Dynamic Range scene shooting straight into the sun. 
