And depending on how pissed off people get over this,
So.... I'm now clinging to the 0.002% of hope. At least it's an improvement from yesterday.
I'm not "pi$$ed" off" by it, but it sure is a head-scratcher as to whether this is going to be reality going forward, or somehow it is not representative of what Canon will be putting in our hands.
Those who have been long time users of Canon know that many upgrade models are met with a degree of "meh" by a lot of folks as Canon methodically / strategically plods along at their own pace of improvement. I wasn't shooting Canon when the 1D2 > 1D2 N (although I have both of those bodies) released, so I don't know what the sentiment was back then.
That said, the current (and hopefully somehow unrepresentative ray: ) response to the the prospect of the unimproved IQ of the 6D2 is being felt much more strongly than the "meh" of minor or modest improvements that get labeled as "not class leading" or "not innovative". Not class leading, not expected. Not innovative, not expected. Not improved IQ, not expected. The first two seem to be business as usual as "meh". The (current info) one seems to be NOT business as usual and has some eyes popping wide open for a lot of folks ... some seemingly popping right out of their head.
I thought the 6D2 was going to fit my goals like the missing piece of a jigsaw puzzle. But ... IF ... this IQ holds true, then I'll probably do something different. I like the IQ of my 80D at base ISO (but it's crop limits UWA, etc.) so I may simply pick up something in the 11mm range to offset that ... giving pause to see A) if the 6D2 is really as we are seeing here, and B) to see if Canon responds with a 6D2 N of sorts (if A holds true).
Those who have know I've shot the SLR/C for my FF (until the 80D IQ came along), know I'm long in the tooth overdue for a new FF. I really thought the 6D2 was going to be "the one" for me. At the moment, even the flippy screen doesn't override the drop in base ISO IQ from the 80D level down to the 6D2 level for me.
Like Dave, I haven't thrown out the 6D2 just yet ... but, I must acknowledge that alternative plans are being considered while waiting to learn if our concerns are indeed reality.
Up to ISO 400 included the 80D outperforms the 6D2. At ISO 800 both are the same. From ISO 1600 and up the 6D2 takes the leadership.
Anyway, the max. difference amounts to about 1.3 EV at ISO 25600, which is very logical, since both use similar sensor technology (except for the "minor" detail of how the data is readed). This is also the maximum difference predicted by the sensors relative sizes (log2(1.6^2) EV). But the 6D2 needs a huge ISO setting to mask its noisy sensor read.
In other words, the 6D2 needs at least ISO 800 to get advantage of the full frame size. Any crop camera with a decent sensor defeats it. I'd only trade a 80D for a 6D2 for shallower depth of field, for wider angle with FF lenses, or to exclusively shoot at high ISO.
The 80D (btw the the first Canon camera with on-chip ADC) is perfectly one of the most hard rivals the 6D2 currently has. Perhaps Canon forgot that potential 5D4 buyers can also look at the 80D ;-)
Jul 09, 2017 at 10:59 AM
Previous versions of cgarcia's message #14100553 « Official: Canon Announces the EOS 6D Mark II »
ray: ) response to the the prospect of the unimproved IQ of the 6D2 is being felt much more strongly than the "meh" of minor or modest improvements that get labeled as "not class leading" or "not innovative". Not class leading, not expected. Not innovative, not expected. Not improved IQ, not expected. The first two seem to be business as usual as "meh". The (current info) one seems to be NOT business as usual and has some eyes popping wide open for a lot of folks ... some seemingly popping right out of their head.