Here are more specifications for the Canon EOS R6
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
I hope whatever is in store for the R5 we don't know about yet, is in store for the R6 as well.Also, we are still supposed to have something special left for stills, at least for the R5 but maybe for the R6 also. But anyway, for me the hype is over since the price reveal. Or my poverty reality reveal
Also gonna take the Samyang 85 instead of the Canon 85 since I hoped for 1:1 macro and not 1:2, for an f2 I find it inbetween everthing... missing every purpose. Not a real Macro, not a real portrait (f2 is still ok, but not really for me). So Nothing for me
Upvote
0
Aussie shooter
https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
That has already been mentioned. This was 'new' informationNo mention of ibis, or video features
Upvote
0
Not sure how you reached this conclusion? An assumed equivalency to the 1DXIII?
The only information I've seen is that the AF system is like the R5. That's still not enough information so I don't know where you get "no DPAF in 4K".
Upvote
0
OK, sorry, I got that wrong. Let's hope Canon didn't hit the R6 with their magical hammer then.
Upvote
0
Also, we are still supposed to have something special left for stills, at least for the R5 but maybe for the R6 also. But anyway, for me the hype is over since the price reveal. Or my poverty reality reveal
Also gonna take the Samyang 85 instead of the Canon 85 since I hoped for 1:1 macro and not 1:2, for an f2 I find it inbetween everthing... missing every purpose. Not a real Macro, not a real portrait (f2 is still ok, but not really for me). So Nothing for me
I'll be keeping my EF macro lenses for now as well if I decide to go with an R5 or R6. I am curious to see how well the IBIS helps when using the MP-E65 lens, as it should help get some higher magnification shots hand-held.
The 100mm f/2.8L IS is my go to for macro work now though
Upvote
0
Aussie shooter
https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
It's more of a mythical hammer than a magical hammer. They have just prioritized reliability over 'specs' and if they have not been able to implement something well then they don't implement it. Of course their is differentiation but that is not a cripple hammer. If they can put good features in a camera there has been a camera with those features in it.
Upvote
0
Aussie shooter
https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
I think that is confirmed now with the words 'based on the flagship sensor'. I know I read it somewhere on one of these threads
Upvote
0
Nokishita posted some thing that confirmed it.
I beg to differ, and I think most people do as well. The lack of 24p recording in many recent models was just one of many, many examples. Differentiation is fine, one can't expect to purchase a flagship body new for $500, but when stuff is disabled in FW for ??? reasons, then that's just plain crippling.
Upvote
0
Aussie shooter
https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
I think you need to understand the difference between a cripple hammer and a poor decision based on logical thoughts. It was a camera aimed at people who have no idea of how to do video and therefore had the frame rate that most people would use. They were probably thinking that if someone knows enough to want the 'cinematic look'(whatever that is) that they would probably want a decent video camera anyway and would not be looking at the super low end bits of kit. They were wrong and rectified it. That is NOT what the supposed cripple hammer is
Upvote
0
Aussie shooter
https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
Interesting. But I did note it said the R6 sensor was based on the sensor from the 1Dx2!!!! That seems odd considering I doubt the 1dx2 sensor can do what the R6 is able to do. Surely they meant the 1dx3. Overall though. freaking phenomonal!!!
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)