p.57 #1 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
AlexDROP wrote:
It means 6DII intentionally overexposes due to lack of latitude in shadows recovery ability (low DR factor) resulting in real world photography as clipped highlights and noisy shadows
Or that real 6DII base ISO is more than 100 (close to 125-140 I suppose).
Or the converse ... that to achieve an equivalent exposure, the D750 needs two more stops of light, or lifted in post by two additional stops.
p.57 #2 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Kolbasz wrote:
I considered this, but cannot find it for the $500 more price you mention. Plus, I am a little drawn to the flippy screen and likely will not see the benefit for the added investment at this point of my photo journey (read: novice)
If you're into landscape photography and want a "flippy" screen, even a Nikon D5300 will serve you better than the Canon 6D2. If you spend most of your time at ISO 100 and f/8, pair a Nikon D5300 with a Tokina 11-20 f/2.8, or 12-28 f/4, and you'll have a kit that will deliver absolutely stunning results.
p.57 #3 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
matthewsaville wrote:
If you're into landscape photography and want a "flippy" screen, even a Nikon D5300 will serve you better than the Canon 6D2. If you spend most of your time at ISO 100 and f/8, pair a Nikon D5300 with a Tokina 11-20 f/2.8, or 12-28 f/4, and you'll have a kit that will deliver absolutely stunning results.
My main subject is family stuff, inside outside, around the house, on trips at parties, kids sports, etc. Nothing insane, just regular dad stuff.
Surely this camera is way too much for all that, but the thought is get something good that I can grow into, gain skills and maybe one day expand to make it a hobby. I love photography, but I am just not very good at it. I want to learn and excel. Back when my t2i worked, I upgraded my kit lens to the 24-105 and added the tamron and 50mm with the intention that one day I would go full frame. The t2i breaking simply accelerated this decision.
Maybe if I never bought these other lenses, I would not even be here and I would have bought the 80D last year...
p.57 #4 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Kolbasz wrote:
My main subject is family stuff, inside outside, around the house, on trips at parties, kids sports, etc. Nothing insane, just regular dad stuff.
Surely this camera is way too much for all that, but the thought is get something good that I can grow into, gain skills and maybe one day expand to make it a hobby. I love photography, but I am just not very good at it. I want to learn and excel. Back when my t2i worked, I upgraded my kit lens to the 24-105 and added the tamron and 50mm with the intention that one day I would go full frame. The t2i breaking simply accelerated this decision.
Maybe if I never bought these other lenses, I would not even be here and I would have bought the 80D last year......Show more →
It does get a lot more difficult to give advice when you're also shooting things that require decent autofocus, and low-light image quality, because indeed that is where a camera like the 6D2 will pull far, far ahead of a beginner body like the Nikon D5300. Which is why it's such a shame that Canon couldn't continue the trend they've had with the 80D and 1DX2 and 5D4, with base ISO dynamic range getting better and better.
My advice, then? Get an 80D! That 24-105 is fantastic, just pair it with an APS-C landscape lens like the Tokinas I mentioned, and the 80D will serve you well. Forget about full-frame, for what you do; the 80D has both the image quality for landscapes, and the focusing power for people and candids. If you feel like you're "bumping into the limitations of APS-C" then you can breathe new life into your 80D with a 1.4 prime. That'll give you a whopping 3 stops better ISO and shallower DOF to play with, versus the 24-105, and probably allow you to use the 80D until a 6D3 comes along, or a 5D4 becomes feasible.
Jul 21, 2017 at 03:13 PM
Guest
Guest
p.57 #5 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
If I'm allowed to give an advice, I would think you'd better pair with 6DII cuz of improved AF and FPS for those things you described. And def you won't notice DR issue as a hard deal when and IF you post process your raw files
Kolbasz wrote:
My main subject is family stuff, inside outside, around the house, on trips at parties, kids sports, etc. Nothing insane, just regular dad stuff.
Surely this camera is way too much for all that, but the thought is get something good that I can grow into, gain skills and maybe one day expand to make it a hobby. I love photography, but I am just not very good at it. I want to learn and excel. Back when my t2i worked, I upgraded my kit lens to the 24-105 and added the tamron and 50mm with the intention that one day I would go full frame. The t2i breaking simply accelerated this decision.
Maybe if I never bought these other lenses, I would not even be here and I would have bought the 80D last year......Show more →
p.57 #7 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
AlexDROP wrote:
If I'm allowed to give an advice, I would think you'd better pair with 6DII cuz of improved AF and FPS for those things you described. And def you won't notice DR issue as a hard deal when and IF you post process your raw files
The 6D2 might give better results from a properly exposed image up at ISO 6400, but what many people don't realize in this whole "battle" of dynamic range and "shadow-digging", is that while you're highly unlikely to need to boost an ISO 100 image +4-5 stops, it's actually quite common for folks to need to boost their ISO 800-1600 images +1-2 stops or more. Partly because people all shoot in Manual and don't look at their histograms in dark indoor conditions, so they regularly get fooled by the brightness of their LCD.
With that in mind, I'd still say that the 6D2 falls behind a camera like the 80D, if you're shooting up until about 1600 *AND* wind up having to push your images 1-2 stops. The 6D2 really only pulls ahead of the 80D at about 1600-3200.
The moral of the story is, learn to nail your exposures no matter what camera you buy, if you're buying a Canon. And if you plan on doing more shooting at ISO 100-800 than 1600-6400, an 80D makes a better well-rounded camera than the 6D2.
p.57 #8 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
matthewsaville wrote:
Forget the "closest competitor", the 6D2 falls short of *dozens* of Nikon bodies, DX and FX, going back 8-10 years...
8 - 10 years ... ? I do not care about crop bodies. Concerning FF Nikon did not had a real competitor against 5D, 5D II, 5D III, 6D. First competing body was 600/610 and both are long behind 6D imo. D 700 was already a generation back, when introduced. Since three years there is D750 now competing with 5D III and 6D wich both came 2.5 years earlier. But product quality here (like with D800/810, D600/610) is again a no go compared to 5D II/III/IV and 6D. And 750 was even more expensive than 6D/6D II when introduced. Yes, Nikon fixed the price problem to make it a possible competitor against 6D. Future will show, if Canon can hold itīs quality standard with 6D II and if Nikon might be able to reach this standard. DR is not everything that makes a camera a great tool. Construction failures that cause permanent sensor dirt and shutter failures are less acceptable in my opinion than 1 or 1.5 stops less dynamic range at low ISO settings.
p.57 #9 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
matthewsaville wrote:
The 6D2 might give better results from a properly exposed image up at ISO 6400, but what many people don't realize in this whole "battle" of dynamic range and "shadow-digging", is that while you're highly unlikely to need to boost an ISO 100 image +4-5 stops, it's actually quite common for folks to need to boost their ISO 800-1600 images +1-2 stops or more. Partly because people all shoot in Manual and don't look at their histograms in dark indoor conditions, so they regularly get fooled by the brightness of their LCD.
With that in mind, I'd still say that the 6D2 falls behind a camera like the 80D, if you're shooting up until about 1600 *AND* wind up having to push your images 1-2 stops. The 6D2 really only pulls ahead of the 80D at about 1600-3200.
The moral of the story is, learn to nail your exposures no matter what camera you buy, if you're buying a Canon. And if you plan on doing more shooting at ISO 100-800 than 1600-6400, an 80D makes a better well-rounded camera than the 6D2....Show more →
+ 100
I decided for 6D because it offered best IQ at ISO 3600, 6400 and absolutely usable 12.800. Because that was what I needed. I shoot events and people without flash to catch the atmosphere. - 3EV at center AF point was and still is a bargain for me. In my opinion 6D II looks like an excellent camera. But I am disapointed, too. Not because of DR, no 4K video or the still missing joystick.
I would have loved to see Canon going the route, they started with 6D and enhancing AF to -4 EV and usable high ISO to 50k or higher AND get better IQ again. I guess they could have done this by freezing resolution instead of increasing it to 26 MP what nobody really needs in a high ISO body.
p.57 #10 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
matthewsaville wrote:
... it's actually quite common for folks to need to boost their ISO 800-1600 images +1-2 stops or more. Partly because people all shoot in Manual and don't look at their histograms in dark indoor conditions, so they regularly get fooled by the brightness of their LCD.
"people all" do something the same way? I don't think so.
p.57 #11 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Ralph Conway wrote:
8 - 10 years ... ? I do not care about crop bodies. Concerning FF Nikon did not had a real competitor against 5D, 5D II, 5D III, 6D. First competing body was 600/610 and both are long behind 6D imo. D 700 was already a generation back, when introduced. Since three years there is D750 now competing with 5D III and 6D wich both came 2.5 years earlier. But product quality here (like with D800/810, D600/610) is again a no go compared to 5D II/III/IV and 6D. And 750 was even more expensive than 6D/6D II when introduced. Yes, Nikon fixed the price problem to make it a possible competitor against 6D. Future will show, if Canon can hold itīs quality standard with 6D II and if Nikon might be able to reach this standard. DR is not everything that makes a camera a great tool. Construction failures that cause permanent sensor dirt and shutter failures are less acceptable in my opinion than 1 or 1.5 stops less dynamic range at low ISO settings.
You're doing a lot of referring to Nikon being "long behind", and "reach this standard", but I was talking purely about dynamic range at ISO 100. If for no reason other than the fact that this particular forum is heavily oriented at landscape photography, I think that of all places, it should be a worthwhile discussion HERE on FM.
As such, and even if you don't care about APS-C, my point still stands: Even the ~10 year old Nikon D3 has equal or better dynamic range than the 6Dmk2.
I'd rather not spend time discussing which camera actually "competes" with which, because I think doing so is pedantic at best, but suffice it to say that for the most part Nikon has offered more features in cheaper cameras than Canon, at any price range of full-frame. Especially for aspiring professionals who want dual card slots and/or flagship autofocus in an affordable body. But, I know everybody has their own personal priorities when buying a camera, so I won't go there.
I will say one last thing, though: for every engineering / quality control "epic fail" that you care to point out under Nikon's rug, ...I'll be happy to point out an equally bad one in Canon's closet. My favorite one? The *2005* Canon 5D mirror falling out due to "poor glue", ...which wasn't fully admitted / rectified until 10 years later in 2015. By that standard, Nikon was downright heroic for owning up to the D600's defect so quickly, and taking the problem so seriously that they delivered a whole new camera roughly 1 year later.
I don't want to make excuses for either company's closet skeletons, though; pretty much every mass-produced product these days could desperately use better QC, from cameras to microwaves.
p.57 #12 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
matthewsaville wrote:
... it's actually quite common for folks to need to boost their ISO 800-1600 images +1-2 stops or more. Partly because people all shoot in Manual and don't look at their histograms in dark indoor conditions, so they regularly get fooled by the brightness of their LCD.
jcolwell wrote:
"people all" do something the same way? I don't think so.
I could say that almost everyone uses the RGB histogram and sets exposure according to the brightest channel, but I would be wrong.
p.57 #14 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
jcolwell wrote:
"people all" do something the same way? I don't think so.
If you're going to argue that even a small handful of people like to shoot in P/A/S modes in the dark, instead of M, your argument still doesn't *disprove* my point, because in my experience once you get to -1EV or -2EV light levels, in-camera metering tends to fail at proper exposure quite frequently too.
If you're simply trying to say that I'm wrong about "all" people not checking their histogram in low light, then I hope to god you are right! Indeed, plenty of people use their histograms much of the time. But in low-light journalism especially, I do see a lot of folks forgetting to check. That was all I meant to point out. Pushing an ISO 800 shot 1-2 stops is FAR more common than you'd think.
p.57 #15 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
I guess the whole exercise is teaching me that you can no longer preorder with the idea it will be an improved version. The 16-35III was my first disappointment with vignetting, the 24-104mm which while "improved" did not seem to warrant replacing version 1 and now the 6dii. I'm holding off unitl we get some more hands on production model reports. Gee I want the flip screen bad.
p.57 #16 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
The only thing that can save the 6D2 now is if Canon plans on dropping the price down to around $1,200 new within the next year. At that price, the sensor could be forgiven, and the rest of the body appreciated for the upgrades. Seeing as how the list price at launch was cheaper than the 6Dc at launch, this may have been part of the plan all along. Save money on parts and R&D by recycling parts from other cameras (AF module and screen). Save money on sensor costs by using old fabs that have been paid off long ago.
p.57 #17 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Flowernut wrote:
I guess the whole exercise is teaching me that you can no longer preorder with the idea it will be an improved version. The 16-35III was my first disappointment with vignetting, the 24-104mm which while "improved" did not seem to warrant replacing version 1 and now the 6dii. I'm holding off unitl we get some more hands on production model reports. Gee I want the flip screen bad.
p.57 #18 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
matthewsaville wrote:
... it's actually quite common for folks to need to boost their ISO 800-1600 images +1-2 stops or more. Partly because people all shoot in Manual and don't look at their histograms in dark indoor conditions, so they regularly get fooled by the brightness of their LCD.
jcolwell wrote:
"people all" do something the same way? I don't think so.
matthewsaville wrote:
If you're going to argue that even a small handful of people like to shoot in P/A/S modes in the dark, instead of M, your argument still doesn't *disprove* my point, because in my experience once you get to -1EV or -2EV light levels, in-camera metering tends to fail at proper exposure quite frequently too.
If you're simply trying to say that I'm wrong about "all" people not checking their histogram in low light, then I hope to god you are right! Indeed, plenty of people use their histograms much of the time. But in low-light journalism especially, I do see a lot of folks forgetting to check. That was all I meant to point out. Pushing an ISO 800 shot 1-2 stops is FAR more common than you'd think. ...Show more →
Wow.
Most people I know that shoot performance and events in low light do check the histogram, including me. To state that "all people" do something the same way is silly. Anything. They don't. In this particular case, I can see how somebody might do what you describe once, but not more often, if they're competent and mindful photographers.
