MayaTlab
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II | |
RogerZoul wrote:
MayaTlab wrote:
PetKal wrote:
I am with Rusty in regard to the method of AF point selection/movement: the Canon camera joysticks I've found awkward and annoying, particularly if the AF points are not red-lit. Therefore, I've been using the old two rotary dial method to move the AF point around. It's faster and less erratic. However, there is no free lunch there either. Since I shoot mostly in M exposure mode, sometimes I inadvertently change exposure when trying to move the AF point fast and shoot fast. I do not have a good countermeasure for that problem, although having well lit AF points would help. And so would a more robust and positive pushbutton for activating the AF point selection.
Alternatively, Canon should pay more attention to the joystick design. Those of us who photograph any sort of action would benefit from better method of moving AF points around fast and dependably.
Using the wheels can be a decent alternative in slower situations indeed. But when you want to change the AF point in the middle of tracking a subject, it's inadequate. As perfectible as they may be Canon's joysticks are better in that regard. But I agree that Canon should strive to improve their haptic feedback and operational qualities.
And when you spend the money to put in a 45 points AF system and 6,5 fps, it's just stupid to not give a camera a coherent control scheme to manage that.
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.
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.
|
