MayaTlab
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.9 #6 · Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II | |
RogerZoul wrote:
While I agree with you in principle, I must say that if my objective was to get a buyer to pay more for better features, assuming I have a line of similar products to sell to a range of buyers based on price, then it makes perfect sense to charge more for better control schemes and to charge less for not-so-good control schemes. This is the world we live in. If you put the good stuff in the lower-level models, then you have no justification to charge more for the high-level models. Not everyone is willing and/or able to afford the top-end models.
...Show more →
I disagree because it makes a product's design internally incoherent to the point of not knowing what it's meant to be for. What does the 6DII stands for ? And no, "entry-level FF", or "amateur FF" isn't a proper answer to that question, because it isn't centred on the end goal and the user perspective.
For every single application I can think of, this camera has a more or less significant caveat that diminishes its potential, and very often that caveat doesn't come from real, tangible differences, but from pure arbitrary decisions. Let's take video for example. All right, it hasn't got 4K. Let's pass on it. Personally I'm a little tired of the people moaning about 4K and never asking for better DR, codecs, workflow, tools, etc., but never mind. Well, it's got DPAF, so it might be a good one man operation video camera ? Well, if that's the case, then why hasn't it got exposure aids ? That's design incoherence at its best. You're spending money to build into your shiny new camera DPAF, but then you seriously reduce its value to the end user by limiting its application potential ? That's just stupid. Another example : the 6DII has got a worse 1080p codec than the original 6D. That's not a question of reducing costs. It's just about arbitrary selection of features, even if in the end it means that the 6DII is a poor video camera, full stop.
This camera was designed by a committee looking at excel spreadsheets, powerpoint slides and a specification list, trying to see what they could squeeze in relative to the D750 and 5DIV, instead of by a competent design team asking themselves "let's make a great camera for x application" and going full beans to design a coherent camera to meet that application.
So, again, I ask the question : what does the 6DII stands for, as a product ? I've seen a few of the videos online, including some interviews of Canon employees trying to explain who this camera is for. None of them gave a similar answer, which is quite clearly a demonstration that they're struggling to know what it's meant for.
Thankfully for Canon all camera manufacturers are incompetent at designing cameras, with a few exceptions in niche markets, so relatively speaking the 6DII remains a pretty well designed camera.
An example, just for fun's sake, of sheer incompetence at work : on the D7500, Nikon simply forgot to put in DOF preview with the OVF. Yep, you read it right : you can't have DOF preview with the OVF, full stop. For... reasons ?
Edited on Jun 30, 2017 at 05:57 AM · View previous versions
|
