Here are more Canon EOS R6 Specifications [CR2]

[Besisika]

Could you explain that, I find it hard to understand what you shoot where 1/8000 is a regular requirement.

A regular requirement is an overstatement, but occasionally, yes possible. Those who shoot at 1.4 would need it at mid day.
I used to shoot wide open back in the day. Below photo was taken at F16 (1/6400th, F2.0). Her shoulder was overexposed so I fixed it in post.
I do not shoot wide open any longer, but I remember shooting batman at 1/8000th at 2.8 in order to get contrasty look using reflections on cars as source of bokeh. I started at 1/3200th f2.8 but there were too many bokeh so I stepped down to 1/8000th to get rid of the majority. After 5 or 6 shots my 1200W strobe began to falter and I stopped, but the few I got were good enough.
It is a mater of taste but I do not understand people shooting at 1.4 midday, outdoor. Again, I used to shoot at 2.0, but don't do that any longer. Nowadays, the widest I shoot is 3.5 when outdoor. Indoors, I can go down to 1.6. I would re-take below photo at 5.6 if I could.
I wouldn't need a 1/8000th, but some people might and you never know who asks for it.

https://flic.kr/p/WiVqRr

 

[privatebydesign]

Full sun at f/1.2 can necessitate 1/8000 even at ISO 100. Sunny 16 tells us that 1/8000 could be useful even at f/1.4, and in a sandy/snowy environment, even moreso.

1/8000 is useful to have, and if the R6 doesn't have it, it will be an issue for some shooters.

While it may be lame to call a camera "crippled" for any reason, especially in this day and age (honestly, can we be done with that?), I don't see the purpose in defending a hereto-unannounced product in the case that it's missing a feature some people use.

After posting my question earlier I looked at my LR library EXIF, I have 100,070 images in it and 365 images shot at 1/8000, that's 0.36%. Indeed all shutter speeds above 1/4000 (1/5,000 - 1/16,000) were 1,287, or less than 1.3%. In almost all of those situations it was because the shutter speed was set to auto in bright situations many where there are reflections off water (that throw the EV off anyway), I could have lowered ISO in the majority of those situations.

Now I agree it is something nice to have on rare occasions but that wasn't my question, I asked what ryebread what they shot that necessitated that capability to the point that the camera wasn't worth buying without it. Most of us have shot in sun and wanted narrow dof, but in my experience it isn't a particularly pleasing look and I have't seen anybody that specializes in it, is there another case use?

 

[PhotonShark]

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

Would love GPS on these bodies, although not that hopeful.

Short of an included GPS, I really wish Canon (and other manufacturers) would allow a Bluetooth link with stand alone GPS receivers.

 

[privatebydesign]

This out of camera image would be a typical 1/16,000 exposure from me, because the light changed rapidly as the surfers came into shade from a hillside I tried auto exposure in Av mode. The camera chose 1/16,000 and obviously was thrown by the white water, this is full Caribbean sun at 10 in the morning.

Now if I was still shooting surfers in the Caribbean I'd want a camera that shoots 1/8,000 though back then I was limited to 200 iso and I could go at least two stops lower on that and I need at least one stop more exposure anyway.

Like I say, yes there are case uses for needing, not wanting, actually needing 1/8,000, I just wondered what ryebread's were.

 

[navastronia]

This out of camera image would be a typical 1/16,000 exposure from me, because the light changed rapidly as the surfers came into shade from a hillside I tried auto exposure in Av mode. The camera chose 1/16,000 and obviously was thrown by the white water, this is full Caribbean sun at 10 in the morning.

Now if I was still shooting surfers in the Caribbean I'd want a camera that shoots 1/8,000 though back then I was limited to 200 iso and I could go at least two stops lower on that and I need at least one stop more exposure anyway.

Like I say, yes there are case uses for needing, not wanting, actually needing 1/8,000, I just wondered what ryebread's were.

I understood your post as the kind of rhetorical question I see here often when discussing new Canon launches, e.g., forumers reactively ask "why do you actually need (attribute)?" (e.g., 24p) when someone complains that Canon has left a feature out of a product.

I apologize if I was wrong about your question -- although, even if that wasn't the sentiment behind it, I certainly doubt that kind of thinking has gone away, here, generally.

 

[privatebydesign]

I understood your post as the kind of rhetorical question I see here often when discussing new Canon launches, e.g., forumers reactively ask "why do you actually need (attribute)?" (e.g., 24p) when someone complains that Canon has left a feature out of a product.

I apologize if I was wrong about your question, although even if that wasn't the sentiment behind your comment, I certainly doubt that kind of thinking has gone away, here, generally.

You are right, we are on the same page. Like 24p, 4K, >35mp etc etc, I understand desires, flip screens, WiFi, AF point linked spot metering etc but to write off lower order cameras because they don’t have a very specific technical feature with limited practical applications that is normally only seen on higher end more expensive bodies begs the simple enquiry. Heck I’m happy to learn!

 

[Aussie shooter]

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

Never once used GPS. First thing that gets turned off

 

[privatebydesign]

Never once used GPS. First thing that gets turned off

I never saw the interest in it until I had it. because it integrates so well with Lightroom I just use it as another search term now and wouldn't be without it.

 

[Aussie shooter]

I never saw the interest in it until I had it. because it integrates so well with Lightroom I just use it as another search term now and wouldn't be without it.

Fair enough. I guess with the way I use lightroom it doesn't seem to be something I need

 

[Ralph Conway]

Sorry for not including an /s tag. I thought the emojis where enough to convey the sarcasm.

Now I saw them

 

[koenkooi]

I never saw the interest in it until I had it. because it integrates so well with Lightroom I just use it as another search term now and wouldn't be without it.

That's how I use it as well, and when exporting I have LR name the files with date and location to make them easier to identify later on: 20180926 0959 Canada Vancouver - Canon EOS M - EF-M11-22mm f-4-5.6 IS STM at 22 mm - IMG_3517 -_.jpg

If I could go back in time, I'd bribe the EXIF committee to add support for timezones. Since I don't know how to time-travel, I hope Canon adds an option to derive the timezone from the location.

 

[Fischer]

But my Sony A7R IV with 60mpixel is truely A LOT better for product photography in the studio. The level of detail is simply impressive (given good light and sharp lenses). It allows for way cleaner cutouts and way better retouching. And the possibilites that comes with the room to crop is also very handy for event-photography.

The improved post processing options of a high megapixel count is too often underrated. The advantage for cropping is evident - and very handy. Even when you can control the situation extra pixels allow you to i.e. use a 50mm lens like a 85mm lens or a 24mm like a 35mm lens - something I often rely on when just taking one prime to go instead of carrying a bag around.

 

[Fischer]

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

GPS is leaving cameras. It costs money and everyone has a mobile phone that can do the tracking anyway. I'd like to have it too, but I can see why its a dead end for camera makers to include it until they start connecting what you are shooting to the web in realtime.

 

[Th0msky]

Would it be worth to buy the R6 together with the build-in ND rf-ef adapter and stick with EF lenses? Or are RF lenses that much better to just stick with those and buy a polarpro ND filter with any stepup rings? Because I will need some sort of ND filters for my run & gun stuff and a 24-105 f4 lens

 

[BillB]

Full sun at f/1.2 can necessitate 1/8000 even at ISO 100. Sunny 16 tells us that 1/8000 could be useful even at f/1.4, and in a sandy/snowy environment, even moreso.

1/8000 is useful to have, and if the R6 doesn't have it, it will be an issue for some shooters.

While it may be lame to call a camera "crippled" for any reason, especially in this day and age (honestly, can we be done with that?), I don't see the purpose in defending a hereto-unannounced product in the case that it's missing a feature some people use.

Some people manage to make do with neutral density filters.

 

[peters]

The improved post processing options of a high megapixel count is too often underrated.

ha, jeah indeed
And its not even important if you actualy deliver the product shots in this resolution or in a lower resolution. The Cutout and retouch is so much more detailed, cleaner and easier - its a better end result with less hussle
But of course good light, low ISO, sharp lenses and perfect focus is very important to actualy get a perfectly sharp 60mp image. Things that would be okay at 20mp are suddenly visible at 60mp.

 

[Twinix]

Would it be worth to buy the R6 together with the build-in ND rf-ef adapter and stick with EF lenses? Or are RF lenses that much better to just stick with those and buy a polarpro ND filter with any stepup rings? Because I will need some sort of ND filters for my run & gun stuff and a 24-105 f4 lens

I’m in the same situation, and my question is to you: Do you want to adjust the ND filter whilst filming or use the control ring to adjust ISO?
For me, right now I got the Xa50 (I need XLR, c100 ii to old and c200 not right now for me) and that has internal ND, and I adjust the gain (ISO) to get the right exposure. Another question for you: Do you need ND anyways to shoot at the aperture you want?
Sorry for not knowing/answering your questions directly, but thats my thoughts being in the same situation more or less. I love having the sunhood on, so I might go for the adapter (so I get “internal”, variable ND), but at the same time I would like to get native lens + control ring.

 

[Th0msky]

I’m in the same situation, and my question is to you: Do you want to adjust the ND filter whilst filming or use the control ring to adjust ISO?
For me, right now I got the Xa50 (I need XLR, c100 ii to old and c200 not right now for me) and that has internal ND, and I adjust the gain (ISO) to get the right exposure. Another question for you: Do you need ND anyways to shoot at the aperture you want?
Sorry for not knowing/answering your questions directly, but thats my thoughts being in the same situation more or less. I love having the sunhood on, so I might go for the adapter (so I get “internal”, variable ND), but at the same time I would like to get native lens + control ring.

I'm a videographer and I am going to buy the R6 for video. I'm not interested in the photography side whatsoever. So for me, I want to shoot outside with my fastest apertures possible (like f1.4-4) and I very likely will have to use ND filters in those cases in order to keep right exposure.

 

[Stig Nygaard]

GPS is leaving cameras. It costs money and everyone has a mobile phone that can do the tracking anyway. I'd like to have it too, but I can see why its a dead end for camera makers to include it until they start connecting what you are shooting to the web in realtime.

Except the smartphone solution works like shit. At least that's my experience so far. It works better with an external gps-device and synchronize geolocation in post-processing even though it is extra work in an already too time-consuming post-process and feels like going 6-8 years back in time to before I purchased the EOS 7DII and Powershot S100 :-/ ...
My new experience is from G5XII and EOS 90D (I'm going to sell the 90D again).

 

[Besisika]

Some people manage to make do with neutral density filters.

True. I used ND filter on my old canon 135mm 2.0 and got a lot of failures when shooting backlit late in the afternoon.
I am planning on getting the adapter with built-in variable ND. I hope it would deliver better result, given that the ND is not on the front of the lens.
What ND do you use that you prefer it over HSS?