p.63 #1 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
charlyw wrote:
Did the trampled path really need to be visible? 0815 shot that you could have easily obtained by bracketing and then you wouldn't have to worry about the blown highlights at all - having blown highlights means that this isn't such an extreme shadow lift as advocated by the DR brigade anyway....
Unfortunately I had no choice in the matter of it being trampled. Creatively I am not a fan of the image if I crop the path out, although once again it comes down to personal preference. Whilst I understand what you mean regarding blown highlights and shadow lift, remember that ability to retain data in lifted shadows and dynamic range go hand in hand. That exposure was taken on a camera with almost three full stops of DR more than the 6D II - had I exposed the scene the same way on the 6DII I can't imagine I'd have had a usable result without bracketing.
I did acknowledge in my post that bracketing could have avoided any highlight clip but in case you have never been to Antelope Canyon, believe me when I say if you can avoid bracketing there you should at all costs. It's an absolute zoo. You have extraordinarily limited time in each spot to take your images, and you are constantly getting bumped by tourists, having your frame walked into, etc. Every shot I bracket in there is time wasted that could have been used on another composition. I did have to bracket some scenes that were too extreme even for the D810 but the small clipped highlight in this does not I feel detract meaningfully from the final result. Not my photo but this is pretty much what it was like in AC when I was there: http://imgur.com/ayIVPpx
p.63 #3 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
RobDickinson wrote:
I'm just astounded at the number of perfect photographers here who never encounter shooting conditions outside the dynamic range of their cameras.
I just never have encountered worthwhile shooting conditions (situations where your subject wouldn't need to be sacrificed for the benefit of using up said dynamic range) where 1 or even 2 EV more dynamic range would have meant a difference...
p.63 #4 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
RobDickinson wrote:
I'm just astounded at the number of perfect photographers here who never encounter shooting conditions outside the dynamic range of their cameras.
It must be entirely my fault and I'll endeavour to work harder at finding less contrasty scenes to shoot in the future.
For sure - an antipodean noob like you has a lot to learn.
p.63 #5 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
gfiksel wrote:
What an excellent example of how pushing the shadow has ruined otherwise a very good shot. Instead of a beautiful late night atmosphere and people admiring the fleeting moments of the sunset lights, it turned it to a brightly lit daytime bar deck.
Maybe don't do it then? fortunately your critique means nothing to me.
p.63 #6 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
charlyw wrote:
Bleh, what an uninpiring shot, looking artificial and fake - no ambience whatsoever left, could have done the same compositing, heck, every compositor would have done much better!
Maybe don't do it then? fortunately your critique means nothing to me.
p.63 #7 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
brian_sp wrote:
congrats canon
once again you are trying to catch up to nikon
always takes canon years to do
d500, that one is still in the waiting, with luck 7d3 will get close
D800-5ds
D800E-5dsr
canon still chasing the D810 though
D750- 5d4
and now, after a few years of nikon going after the retro look with the DF yet again canon has slowly finally caught up and given you the 6D2 with its 2005 retro sensor
way to go canon, you rock
You are so funny, brian
- but incorrect of course Canon did not need to chase D810. This one was no new camera but just a correction of D800 and a try to safe lost reputation by horrible product quality. Canon did not need to answer this one.
You are right that 5Ds/sr where Canon answers to D800 which let it stand shortcoming. Lets see if Nikon will last for another two years to answer the answer.
- D750 was/is a very, very late Nikon answer to Canons (meanwhile mediocre) 5D II - just without banding at ISO 6400 - and was already overcome two years before it came by 5D II and 6D. To compare it with 5D IV is just a joke.
And of course what you call "2005 retro sensor" still downs Nikons/Sonys 2014 D750 sensor in most aspects.
Moving away from photo critique and back to the actual topic, looking closely at those examples i would say the 6D2 looks pretty good in comparison to the 5D4. Perhaps the low ISO shadow-lifting performance of the 5D4 *is* better, but i'd be happy with a 6D2 that performs like this one. Especially as i tend to hit high ISO limitations much more often than low ISO ones.
Thank you! Imo this looks brilliant. I guess 6D II will be my 6D follow up in one or 1 1/2 year/s, when price gets down to a level I want to spend and Sonys alpha 7s follow ups VFs still cause alias problems for me.
p.63 #10 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Ralph Conway wrote:
Thank you! Imo this looks brilliant. I guess 6D II will be my 6D follow up in one or 1 1/2 year/s, when price gets down to a level I want to spend and Sonys alpha 7s follow ups VFs still cause alias problems for me.
Conny
They look pretty identical to me, give or take 1/3 stop here or there. Do you agree? That I suspect means it's maybe 1/2 stop better than the 6d?
Jul 24, 2017 at 06:40 AM
Guest
Guest
p.63 #11 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
PhilDrinkwater wrote:
They look pretty identical to me, give or take 1/3 stop here or there. Do you agree? That I suspect means it's maybe 1/2 stop better than the 6d?
I barely see any difference. To my eyes they are equal. Maybe I'm blind. It reminds me of DR issue - to someone 14EV is not enough, to someone 11EV is more than desired
p.63 #12 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Aztatlan wrote:
Every shot I bracket in there is time wasted that could have been used on another composition.
I find that it is easy enough to simply set up the camera to shoot the three set bracketed shot. Particularly if you arrange the order so your shortest shutter is the first shot, then any variance between it and the second shot is the shortest possible. Set the bracket wide enough between the first two, and the third is essentially throw away. One button push, "click,click ... click" and you're on to the next one. The extra 1.5 seconds involved (say times 60 images = 90 seconds) really doesn't alter your time management that significantly.
That's not to say you should have bracketed, and the convenience of ISO invariance wasn't welcome ... but, rather to say don't let that small amount of time preclude you from doing what may provide for an even better resulting (in some, not all cases) files to work with.
And yes, AC presents a time management challenge in ways that is hard to understand / comprehend if you've never been there. I shot AC with my Kodak SLR/C, C/Y 35-70/3.4 and a full size tripod, during the last tour of the day.
p.63 #14 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
AlexDROP wrote:
I barely see any difference. To my eyes they are equal. Maybe I'm blind. It reminds me of DR issue - to someone 14EV is not enough, to someone 11EV is more than desired
Between the 5d4 and 6d2 or 6d and 6d2?
I see small differences, but it is like 1/3 stop here or there ie. not relevant in any way.
p.63 #15 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
PhilDrinkwater wrote:
They look pretty identical to me, give or take 1/3 stop here or there. Do you agree? That I suspect means it's maybe 1/2 stop better than the 6d?
There is no mention of whether the test has been normalised or not (i.e., same shutter speed on both cameras, just like DP review), there is no mention of the light source's white point, Adobe's default noise reduction settings may not be ideal for both cameras, and the raw files aren't available, so I wouldn't consider this test particularly useful.
p.63 #16 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
MayaTlab wrote:
There is no mention of whether the test has been normalised or not (i.e., same shutter speed on both cameras, just like DP review), there is no mention of the light source's white point, Adobe's default noise reduction settings may not be ideal for both cameras, and the raw files aren't available, so I wouldn't consider this test particularly useful.
p.63 #17 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Ralph Conway wrote:
You are so funny, brian
- but incorrect of course Canon did not need to chase D810. This one was no new camera but just a correction of D800 and a try to safe lost reputation by horrible product quality. Canon did not need to answer this one.
You are right that 5Ds/sr where Canon answers to D800 which let it stand shortcoming. Lets see if Nikon will last for another two years to answer the answer.
- D750 was/is a very, very late Nikon answer to Canons (meanwhile mediocre) 5D II - just without banding at ISO 6400 - and was already overcome two years before it came by 5D II and 6D. To compare it with 5D IV is just a joke.
And of course what you call "2005 retro sensor" still downs Nikons/Sonys 2014 D750 sensor in most aspects. ...Show more →
Yeah. I don't get the d750 / 5d4 comparison. They are totally different cameras at different levels of market. Some photographers may notice no difference, but they aren't comparable for sure.
p.63 #18 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Ralph Conway wrote:
Hy Phil, what about the missing 0.18% rest of your shots?
Concerning your pic: great shot! But shadows are pushed much to strong. There is no way, that the human eye is able to catch this kind of range in one visual moment, imo. Your shot does not give me any feeling of looking "right". And this does not come from "messy 5D III shadows" but just from overdone shadow recoverment.
Maybe it is just my underdeveloped brain that lets me feel a shadow push more than 1.5 to 2 stops as unrealistic.
Conny
I was thinking about this .. and maybe it is because we're not used to seeing it. If you think about it, when you take a shot in a room with a backlit window, the window will be virtually white if you're exposing for a subject in the middle of the room.
That's not how our eyes see it. They see the detail through the window AND the subject in the room.
I do think perception and what we're used to is really relevant.
Realistically, if you saw the scene I posted, I think your eye (brain) would perceive it very like that which I show. I think we're just not used to seeing that in photos ... yet. The two other "critiques" that were posted about the photo kind of demonstrate that.
Interesting discussion .. and thanks for your candor whilst remaining polite
Jul 24, 2017 at 11:36 AM
Guest
Guest
p.63 #19 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II
Speaking of natural look of HDR capable camera shots. This is taken with Fuji GFX 50. Does such a camera open new possibilities for a creative capture? IF a photographer is skilled enough to catch and use them - yes.
fortunately your critique means nothing to me. 
