Here are more Canon EOS R6 Specifications [CR2]

[padam]

Sony’s mirrorless AF has been better than canons. I am hoping that this camera changes that.
The current R series is not better than the older A73 in terms of autofocus.

I think the low-light AF is better on the EOS R compared to the A7III
While I do think face detect looses the subject sometimes, as long as I keep it in single-point, it works really well.
Not a sports camera, but for most situations, it does the job pretty well overall.

Looking at the 1DX III A9II AF comparison video, you can see a big improvement though, I expect the R6 to be similar.

Here in this test the A7III focuses on the wrong eye on many of the pictures, is that normal?
The EOS R just has a much higher hit rate, and that's with an f/1.2 lens instead of f/1.4.

It is not that easy to compare, because they might behave differently with various lenses, but overall, I don't think the A7III is "walking over" the EOS R in terms of autofocus (the A9/A9II is a different story)

 

[herein2020]

By recording limit do you mean the 29 minute 59 seconds thing? You shouldn't need to ask that; it's a tax thing. Certain large markets tax "video cameras" at a much higher rate and the primary definition is whether it can record 30 minutes or more at a go. Don't bother asking this about any brand's cameras that are not dedicated video cameras.

Yes that's what I mean and I should absolutely ask that; the GH5, GH5s, and S1H does not have recording limits. Panasonic simply released different firmware for European markets which is absolutely the way it should be; the rest of the world shouldn't have a recording limit because of some country's tax laws.

Additionally, it is my understanding this import duty has been removed in the EU: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-8-2016-001277-ASW_LT.html?redirect but I am no lawyer so I can't verify it is actually removed.

If Panasonic can do it then Canon can certainly do it as well.

 

[herein2020]

Waveform is something I'm really curious about too. I switched from a 5D Mark IV to a Panasonic S1 a year ago and am unsure about whether I'd want to move to the R5 if it doesn't have a waveform overlay. The lack of that feature in the 1DX Mark III has me worried

Yes, especially when exposing CLOG, you really need a WFM to do it properly in WDR scenarios. Of course there is the external monitor option, but that's more gear to lug around and set up, and it's not practical on a gimbal.

 

[Whowe]

This list is just a pre-order list that I will fine tune based on reviews during the period of pre-order to ship. It is easier to get on the list up front rather than see a positive review and want to change your pre-order. I am hoping to have a two week trip to GTNP/YNP in late September/early October and would like to have the gear available for the trip. In wildlife photography you shoot in a wide variety of situations, environment and lighting that push the gear requirement. If possible, I will always choose a zoom combination over primes for the versatility IF I can get the IQ, low light performance & reach required for the shot. I shoot the 200-400 w/1.4 integrated TC (f5.6 @560mm) when using a tripod and the 100-400 II + 1.4x TC when I need something handheld. Because the 100-400 is a f5.6 a and f8 with the TC it is slow but workable for handheld shooting in dim conditions. Since the 100-500 is F7.1 + 1.4x tC will be f10, the 800mm becomes a reasonable option @ f11. I don't see any situations other than high noon on a bright sunny day when I would even consider using the 800mm + 1.4x. This is especially true when you consider the lack of separation you will have based on DOF @f16. My bet is that my choice will be the 100-500 + 1.4x TC over the 800mm, but I won't know until I see the reviews OR have it in my has to test. If I don't like it, I will return to the vendor within the return policy.

I wouldn't place any bets on a non-L prime being shaper than an L zoom until I saw the tests, UNLESS it is something like the EF 400mm f4 DO IS II @ $6k plus. You are probably correct on lighter weight based on the experience with the 400 DO. In addition, I might eliminate the TC but the 100-500 is a much more versatile / usable lens than the 800mm. If I had to choose only 1 lens of the 2, it would be the 100-500 + 1.4x TC unless I was a full time birder. There is also the issue of the 800mm@ f11 for birders shooting in forest conditions. I did't do all of the math, but I would only need to crop the R5 + 100-500mm image 18-20% to equal the FOV of the 800mm. With 40-45 mp, that would still leave a 30mp file.

I believe the R5 may also has crop modes, like the 5DS. With EVF, this will allow you to see the full cropped frame in camera while shooting and give you the extra reach on the 100-500.

 

[Bahrd]

any rumoured specs on that bad boy?

It will have an 8k vertical video mode - for those who will make signage ads...

 

[TAF]

Humm; save $1500 and get half the resolution, but probably better low light performance.

Decisions...

 

[Drcampbellicu]

AF performance has been reviewed widely for these 2 cameras before and after updates and it’s been consistent that Sony has better AF for mirrorless
Canon fell behind and we all hope they will catch up with the new models.

QUOTE="padam, post: 837568, member: 376398"]
I think the low-light AF is better on the EOS R compared to the A7III
While I do think face detect looses the subject sometimes, as long as I keep it in single-point, it works really well.
Not a sports camera, but for most situations, it does the job pretty well overall.

Looking at the 1DX III A9II AF comparison video, you can see a big improvement though, I expect the R6 to be similar.

Here in this test the A7III focuses on the wrong eye on many of the pictures, is that normal?
The EOS R just has a much higher hit rate, and that's with an f/1.2 lens instead of f/1.4.

It is not that easy to compare, because they might behave differently with various lenses, but overall, I don't think the A7III is "walking over" the EOS R in terms of autofocus (the A9/A9II is a different story)
[/QUOTE]

 

[NoNaCannon]

Any news on data rates of the video files on either of the new cameras?

 

[Danglin52]

I believe the R5 may also has crop modes, like the 5DS. With EVF, this will allow you to see the full cropped frame in camera while shooting and give you the extra reach on the 100-500.

I am really hoping for a crop feature since it would be a plus to save time in post and let you see the framing during capture. I know several wildlife guys that have used the 5dS in crop mode and got some great photos. They tell me the challenge using the 5dS are frame rate and overall processing throughput. They like the results when they can get the capture. I hope the R5 45mp is true so that I we plenty of pixels to work with on the crop. It is always better to fill the frame with the image, but cropping to a 30mp image is still a win. .

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I am really hoping for a crop feature since it would be a plus to save time in post and let you see the framing during capture. I know several wildlife guys that have used the 5dS in crop mode and got some great photos. They tell me the challenge using the 5dS are frame rate and overall processing throughput. They like the results when they can get the capture. I hope the R5 45mp is true so that I we plenty of pixels to work with on the crop. It is always better to fill the frame with the image, but cropping to a 30mp image is still a win. .

I expect it to be a lot like the EOS R, not the 5Ds. The R accepts adapted Canon crop lenses and automatically goes into APS-C crop mode or you can set it manually.

 

[Czardoom]

I have zero loyalty towards either brand. I'm looking to upgrade from a fixed-lens Panasonic FZ1000, and a7 III and Canon R6 are the primary contenders. Main purpose is travel photography, I don't care about videos at all.
Before Canon appeared in the picture I was planning to buy a7 III with Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 for about $3k total. It looks like similar set of R6 + Canon RF 24-70MM F2.8L lens will be about $4,7k - over a 50% premium, with not much to justify it at least in terms of specs for my use case. At below $2k with attractively priced option for 24-105 f/4 kit lens it could be worth considering, but at $2,5k body-only + more expensive lenses, it would have to crush Sony in terms of image quality.

If you have a chance, I would rent the cameras that you are interested in. Basing an expansive purchase on internet forum opinion or a spec list is not the best way to go about it. Comparing specs is especially misleading as a spec may or may not really work very well. All cameras, for example, have a dust removal system, but some users will tell you that one brand will have lots of dust issues while another has never or rarely had an issue. The same can be said for many specs.

While I have not tried the Sony A7 III, I did try both the A7 and the A7 II. My brief experience was quite enough to never consider Sony again - but, as I mentioned, that is just my opinion and you may not agree if you try one. I have both Canon and Olympus cameras - and in my opinion, They both have superior color to Sony and far better ergonomics. Both Sonys I tried underexposed the pics - one by a full stop, the other by 1 1/2 stops. Again, personal opinion, but the EVF was definitely inferior. While I didn't shoot any video, the Sony IBIS is reported by some to create a jitter effect with some video. The dust issue I mentioned, is also Sony's. Since you are looking at a Sigma lens, you wouldn't experience what might be the worst aspect of Sony - and that is their notoriously de-centered lenses. Their kit lenses - not at all inexpensive - were very poor. I tried two - and they were very poor away from the center. Reveiws agreed with my experience.

Again, that is just my opinion. Some of my favorite pro photographers use Sony and love them. Try them for yourself. That's my advice.

 

[PhotonShark]

I'd venture 20mp has every bit as much of a place in the amateur arena as the pro arena, how many amateurs regularly need more than 20mp? As always there are exceptions and specific use cases but the vast majority of people shoot for screen and email and maybe a modest sized print, all easily handled by 20mp.

I used to get some great pictures on my 30D which was an 8.2mp camera. The only thing I would venture is that Canon is trying to move consumers towards FF. Putting an EF-S lens onto 20mp gives 7.8mp which is a little on the low side. I would have guessed that 26mp was more of the sweet spot. That allows a 10.1mp image on EF-S which is enough for 4K video and a reasonable image for stills.

 

[martin_]

It will be my first own camera. My bet is that the price will be $ 2300 (body only), although I would like $ 2000. I am from Argentina, which will be more expensive for me, but I am sure it will be worth it. I also hope that Sigma or Tamron will release their 24-70 2.8 IS RF, if that happens it will be part of my kit.

 

[JeffP]

Anyone know "No top-down screen" means the R6 has fixed (no vari-angle tilt) LCD screen on the back or that referes to the LCD screen that shows setting on the top?

No Top Down screen refers to the screen on top of the camera. It will have a dial like the RP to adjust aperture, shutter etc

 

[Skux]

Would be keen to know if it can do 4k with EF-S lenses.

 

[navastronia]

I used to get some great pictures on my 30D which was an 8.2mp camera. The only thing I would venture is that Canon is trying to move consumers towards FF. Putting an EF-S lens onto 20mp gives 7.8mp which is a little on the low side. I would have guessed that 26mp was more of the sweet spot. That allows a 10.1mp image on EF-S which is enough for 4K video and a reasonable image for stills.

Would be keen to know if it can do 4k with EF-S lenses.

DCI 4K is about 8.8mp, so if PhotonShark's math is correct, and EF-S lenses mounted on a 20mp body only have access to 7.8mp, then 4K would not be possible without the camera interpolating some data to make up for lacking resolution. Even 4K UHD (16:9 aspect ratio) requires 8.3mp.

 

[Maarten]

I'm curious how it's stills will be since most of the leaked specs are aimed on video

 

[Dermax22]

The R6 Specs looks really good!
The only thing missing for me is GPS. - what do you think?

 

[Fast351]

Humm; save $1500 and get half the resolution, but probably better low light performance.

Decisions...

That's what is boils down to for me as well. The extra money would solely be for a higher MP sensor. Not sure that it's worth it to me.

Some of the other features (top down screen, better build Q) would be nice, but not worth the money. I don't do video so that has very little value to me. I think the fact that the EVF and AF systems will be the same as the big brother has sealed the R6 as the winner for me. It's just a question of pricing now. If the R5 and R6 are only $1K apart then the decision gets harder, but I think the $3999/$2499 thinking sounds about right to me. Hope the R6 is a little cheaper, but a couple hundred bucks won't change the decision.

 

[Max TT]

"No raw video mode"

Does that mean no raw video mode internally and externally?

Or just internal?