Review: Canon EOS R6 by DPReview

[Deleted member 381342]

Don't disagree with you at all. I will only watch one of his videos if I am really invested in the subject. I managed software development for 13 years as one of my careers, so I have some immunity left over for "unique" personalities. My immunity is starting to fail. My gear is supposed to ship on 7/31, so I will be able to do my own test. I have a friend that raises/trains agility/discs dogs and I will setup a time with her to run through a few routines. Good subject to test tracking and shutter lag since I know what I can do with a 1dx II. Only problem is it is blazing hot in Georgia and we would have short window so as not to overheat the dogs.

My tolerance for people is really low. Though Youtube is a little easier than real life, real life is bloody hard when I am mute sometimes or that person at the shop keeps insisting I can talk to her when my fiancé has told her no. But aye, I like watching a nice quiet review. Youtube videos are also getting really weird, like watching a 40s/50s TV show where you expect them to start telling you about how smooth the cigs from their sponsor taste.

I'll add, just to clarify. I really don't feel any ill will to the man. No one deserves that. I just can't handle tone changes and loud things.

 

[Danglin52]

Thank you for the links, the other issue with Youtube is a overall focus on video. I will maybe turn the video feature on once. I am most excited to see how the R5 does with the 100-500mm @ 400mm and 500mm to compare it to the the existing Nikon D850 with the 500mm PF and the upcoming 100-400 S lens. Basically I want to see how these combinations will compare. I know the Nikon 500mm PF will likely be the sharpest and fastest, but it still feels like investing in 'old tech'. I also need to rent a few combinations to see what the size and weight of all of them feel like. I am just back from a 16Km hike and my Z6 felt like nothing but only 6Km with my Canon 5DII and 300mm f/2.8 feels like pain.

I was all in the mood for a 200-400 f/4 + 1DXIII until I started walking to the places I want to shoot.

I have/had that combination and did a 6 mile hike with a stripped down pack down a stream in Alaska In 2015. I am older but strong and it is a lot of weight. I sold both items last week and placed orders for the R5/R6 + 100-500. I will buy back into the 200 - 400 if Canon puts it on the 600 III weight loss program and delivers an RF f4 version. They seem to have a new DO technology that may help reduce both cost and weight. Fantastic safari lens, and as sharp as any of the big whites Primes. I did order the 800 mm F 11 to test, but I suspect it will be returned.

 

[ahsanford]

You don’t think cars are like that? Ford F150 has like 6 different models, each with better features that you have to move up to get. What car available doesn’t have a base medium premium model? People want different things, and that’s why companies offer it. The r5 has everything you could want, but a lot of people don’t need all the features so R6 might offer 90 percent of what they want with the lesser cost. People forget, it’s your choice to buy it, if it doesn’t meet your needs, don’t buy it

Generally agree except for the blue part. The R5 is not the top tier -- it's just the top tier right now in a budding platform. It's the 5D 'all around really strong' camera body, but some folks want specialist hardware, like an integral grip 1-series body, an extreme detail high res body, etc.

There will be R mount cameras priced above the R5 before too long.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

It really isn't. If anything, the weight actually helps, that's why a lot of people prefer bigger and heavier cameras for filming.

I recall getting lens IS to work in the EF 85 f/1.4L IS took some act of god to put in a comically large IS setup (like from a supertele) to handle the glass movements involved.

But somehow a 28-70 f/2 without anything of the sort is an easier monster to stabilize?

I don't disagree with you -- I just don't understand. Is a floating sensor and superfast communications that much of a game changer for stabilization? Please help me understand what's happening here. I've read very little on IBIS.

Thx
- A

 

[Bert63]

They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."

Imagine if cameras were like cars, wherein you picked your base platform and then specified sensor, software features and connectivity modules. The price might be higher but at least it was due to *your* choices.

I’ve never been ‘demeaned’ by any type of purchase. Either it’s what I want or it isn’t. If it costs more to get the features I want then it’s my decision whether or not I buy it - I think that means I’m in charge instead of the other way around.

Good luck buying a car with navigation that doesn’t have leather - see what I mean?

A company couldn’t survive doing ala carte..

 

[navastronia]

Claim and deliver are different things. I expect the IBIS to be good, but I always seem to see reviewers say 'I didn't quite get as much as they claimed, but the IS is still pretty good.'

I personally find the non-IS lenses getting more benefit than IS lenses pretty baffling. Seeing the RF 28-70 f/2L on the 8 stops IBIS list is bonkers. That's a ton of glass and weight to account for, so to make that claim one wonders how they pulled that off.

- A

I read a few days ago (and don't have the source on me) that this is because the 28-70/2 and the 85/1.2 both have larger image circles than other lenses, which helps Canon's IBIS system generate better results.

EDIT: someone already said this

 

[navastronia]

One thing I would like to see Canon comment on is whether we need lens firmware updates to fully enable the dual IS. I have seen some posts on this in videos but have not been able to find anything official from Canon.

To me this makes sense because all my lenses are from pre R5/R6. Canon has had to update the firmware on the R and RP to fully support the lenses that came after the bodies were released.

So unless these early reviews are also getting firmware updates for the lens we may yet still see more improvement.

I found the posted video where the Canon rep talks IBIS and lens OIS confusing for a related reason. The host claims that only RF glass allows IBIS and OIS to "coordinate," but also claims that IBIS and OIS will still work in tandem with non-RF glass adapted to the cameras.

What gives?

 

[padam]

I recall getting lens IS to work in the EF 85 f/1.4L IS took some act of god to put in a comically large IS setup (like from a supertele) to handle the glass movements involved.

But somehow a 28-70 f/2 without anything of the sort is an easier monster to stabilize?

I don't disagree with you -- I just don't understand. Is a floating sensor and superfast communications that much of a game changer for stabilization? Please help me understand what's happening here. I've read very little on IBIS.

Thx
- A

They are giving the quoted figures for still images, where the aim is to simply keep the image as still as possible. And with lenses not longer than 85mm, the IBIS alone may do a very good job with that as long as the setup is quite steady to start with. Yes this IBIS seems more powerful than an 85mm f/1.4 IS in the lens, which is admittedly older technology.
Even though there IS in some RF lenses as well, it might not be able to push this 8-stop figure any further, than what the IBIS can do all by itself in the optimal configuration.

On the other hand, the stabilisation probably works differently in video, where there is camera movement and the aim is different (make it more natural, less jittery), where it is probably good to have lens stabilisation as well as the IBIS or even some digital IS might be helpful, too.
Without actual tests it is hard to judge.

I found the posted video where the Canon rep talks IBIS and lens OIS confusing for a related reason. The host claims that only RF glass allows IBIS and OIS to "coordinate," but also claims that IBIS and OIS will still work in tandem with non-RF glass adapted to the cameras.

What gives?

What they probably mean is that for non-RF lenses it is not a Dual Sensing IS system (as shown on that graph), there is no back and forth communication with the processor and the two gyro sensors in the lens and the body, just adds a bit of extra support to the optical IS in the EF lens. (While they claim they provide the same quoted figures for the amount of stops, it may still be better as it might correct for more axis)

It is not clear to me, what happens with EF lenses without an IS, but I guess with RF lenses it works much better.

Maybe in the 5D Mark V, they will do an IBIS specifically optimised for EF lenses, just like Sony did with the A-mount A99II in comparison to the E-mount A7RII

 

[Keith_Reeder]

I’ve never been ‘demeaned’ by any type of purchase. Either it’s what I want or it isn’t. If it costs more to get the features I want then it’s my decision whether or not I buy it - I think that means I’m in charge instead of the other way around.

Yep.

It always amazes me how personally people take a camera company's decisions - it isn't your friend, and it owes you absolutely nothing - and as you rightly say, we have the final say here: we buy or we don't.

I can't decide whether it's arrogance or immaturity that makes people think that Canon (or anyone else) is obligated to build them their own perfect camera, but entitlement is a tiresome, irritating and depressingly pervasive, personality trait.

Nobody is that important.

 

[Deleted member 381342]

I have/had that combination and did a 6 mile hike with a stripped down pack down a stream in Alaska In 2015. I am older but strong and it is a lot of weight. I sold both items last week and placed orders for the R5/R6 + 100-500. I will buy back into the 200 - 400 if Canon puts it on the 600 III weight loss program and delivers an RF f4 version. They seem to have a new DO technology that may help reduce both cost and weight. Fantastic safari lens, and as sharp as any of the big whites Primes. I did order the 800 mm F 11 to test, but I suspect it will be returned.

I have not yet seen a DO or PF zoom. At least not a professional lens. I think we’ll see a 500mm f/4 do L first as that is the oldest of the big white.

 

[Ozarker]

They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."

Imagine if cameras were like cars, wherein you picked your base platform and then specified sensor, software features and connectivity modules. The price might be higher but at least it was due to *your* choices.

But isn't it just like cars? Extra features on cars these days are mostly sold in options "packages". Sometimes one has to choose gaining something over losing something else when purchasing a car. Sometimes one has to purchase a whole option's package to get the one feature one wants. Sounds exactly like cars to me. They are all labeled Canon (Mustang), but have differing levels of features for a different price. I can order a Mustang Saleen, but then I might have to give up cloth seats (I prefer) for leather (I don't like) just to have the engine/transmission/suspension package I want. Heck, even the air fryer I have comes with different features at different prices. The, why are some Hot Wheels $.94 and then some are $7.99?

 

[Danglin52]

I have not yet seen a DO or PF zoom. At least not a professional lens. I think we’ll see a 500mm f/4 do L first as that is the oldest of the big white.

I hope you are correct. Based on what they did with the 400 & 600 III + move to DO they should be able to reduce weight. I don’t think they will be able to reduce quite as much as the III’s percent wise since they took out quite a bit with the 500 II. I would even be happy with an f5,6 as long as IQ wasL quality.

 

[koch1948]

Generally agree except for the blue part. The R5 is not the top tier -- it's just the top tier right now in a budding platform. It's the 5D 'all around really strong' camera body, but some folks want specialist hardware, like an integral grip 1-series body, an extreme detail high res body, etc.

There will be R mount cameras priced above the R5 before too long.

- A

Priced above will be the R5 high MP version and the 1DXIII equivalent...... Maybe these will be named the EOS R5s and EOS R1. My guess is the high MP EOS R5 version may not be that far off, but the flagship "R" equivalent to the EOS-1D X Mark III could be late fall 2021 at the earliest and possibly into 2022.

 

[Baron_Karza]

I found the posted video where the Canon rep talks IBIS and lens OIS confusing for a related reason. The host claims that only RF glass allows IBIS and OIS to "coordinate," but also claims that IBIS and OIS will still work in tandem with non-RF glass adapted to the cameras.

What gives?

I saw that video too.

That makes me wonder if IBIS will work with another brand lens that has no stabilization.
I'm not asking if the body and another brand lens will communicate.
What I am asking is, will there be any difference with IBIS turned on and then turned off - both times with a non Canon non stabilized lens?

 

[navastronia]

I saw that video too.

That makes me wonder if IBIS will work with another brand lens that has no stabilization.
I'm not asking if the body and another brand lens will communicate.
What I am asking is, will there be any difference with IBIS turned on and then turned off - both times with a non Canon non stabilized lens?

I think the answer to that question has to be "yes," if only because if it isn't, Canon is severely handicapping any photographer, and especially filmmaker (IBIS is a critical part of handheld filmmaking for anyone who doesn't own a gimbal), who doesn't pony up for RF glass.

 

[exige24]

That was a lovely review. Though a lot of the time I kept thinking about how massive the 85mm f/1.2 looks on the R5 and how much bigger it was on the R. It is like Canon's lens designers where completely out of step with the body designers. Nikon's f/1.8's are all slower and less exciting, but they live up to the smaller mirrorless system.

I'd take the Canon 85 1.2 over the "mirrorless" Nikkon 1.8 even if it were twice as large. What a joke of a lens. I'm taking pictures not losing weight. Haha

 

[Baron_Karza]

I think the answer to that question has to be "yes," if only because if it isn't, Canon is severely handicapping any photographer, and especially filmmaker (IBIS is a critical part of handheld filmmaking for anyone who doesn't own a gimbal), who doesn't pony up for RF glass.

I hope so. The way the official Canon videos explain it makes me wonder. There's one that says something like: "It will still stabilize with non IS EF lens with the adapter because the camera and the lens speak natively the same language". Will, for example, a Tamron lens with non-VC lens mounted on an R5/R6 still allow the body alone to benefit from IBIS? Does the Tamron speak the correct native language?

 

[Ozarker]

I think the answer to that question has to be "yes," if only because if it isn't, Canon is severely handicapping any photographer, and especially filmmaker (IBIS is a critical part of handheld filmmaking for anyone who doesn't own a gimbal), who doesn't pony up for RF glass.

It will work as long as the camera knows the focal length of the lens. If the third party lens has electronics, then it reports that focal length to the camera. The question is: Do MF lenses with no electronics work with IBIS in a canon camera? In the case of Olympus, there is the ability to manually enter the focal length of the non-electronic lens into the camera for the sake of IBIS precision. Does the Canon have that feature? That remains to be seen, however, even without entering that focal length into my Olympus, the IBIS still works well. It is most important with longer focal lengths, in my opinion.

 

[Danglin52]

Priced above will be the R5 high MP version and the 1DXIII equivalent...... Maybe these will be named the EOS R5s and EOS R1. My guess is the high MP EOS R5 version may not be that far off, but the flagship "R" equivalent to the EOS-1D X Mark III could be late fall 2021 at the earliest and possibly into 2022.

Depending on where the R1 is in the development cycle, they may announce prior to the Olympics with copies in the hands of select photographers.

 

[Ozarker]

I hope so. The way the official Canon videos explain it makes me wonder. There's one that says something like: "It will still stabilize with non IS EF lens with the adapter because the camera and the lens speak natively the same language". Will, for example, a Tamron lens with non-VC lens mounted on an R5/R6 still allow the body alone to benefit from IBIS? Does the Tamron speak the correct native language?

It will work as long as the camera knows the focal length of the lens. If the third party lens has electronics, then it reports that focal length to the camera. The question is: Do MF lenses with no electronics work with IBIS in a canon camera? In the case of Olympus, there is the ability to manually enter the focal length of the non-electronic lens into the camera for the sake of IBIS precision. Does the Canon have that feature? That remains to be seen, however, even without entering that focal length into my Olympus, the IBIS still works well. It is most important with longer focal lengths, in my opinion. My Tamron VC lens reports to my R. The camera knows which lens is mounted. I see no reason why a non-VC lens wouldn't.