TDP: EOS 6D Mark II Image Quality and analysis

mukul

EOS T7i
Jan 16, 2014
71
0
Brian has added the Noise test result
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=1140

and his comments on the Noise performance on review page
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-Mark-II.aspx

He seems to be convinced that noise performance of 6D2 is very comparable to 5D4 although later has higher resolution

Vs 5D4 @6400
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=1140&Test=0&ISO=6400&CameraComp=1074&TestComp=0&ISOComp=6400

and also 6d2 @6400 seems to be a bit better than 1Dx2 @12800
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=1140&Test=0&ISO=6400&CameraComp=1041&TestComp=0&ISOComp=12800
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,227
416
And a significant improvement over the 80D (especially 800 and above).

So for all those complaining about the superiority of the 80D, and how the 6DII uses 'old technology'....I just don't see it.
 

Aussie shooter

@brett.guy.photography
Dec 6, 2016
486
486
Starting to look like a brilliant astro outfit and even a decent wildlife rig that won't cost a fortune
 

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,066
579
Turku, Finland
Mikehit said:
And a significant improvement over the 80D (especially 800 and above).

So for all those complaining about the superiority of the 80D, and how the 6DII uses 'old technology'....I just don't see it.
I don't think anybody has complained about 6D2 *high* ISO compared to the 80D... The former has the expected 1 1/3-ish stop advantage simply due to the 2.5x larger surface area. The whole controversy is about low-ISO DR (mostly shadow lifting) where the 80D definitely appears to have the lead.

Edit: Here's Bryan's comparison of the 6D2 and 5D4 underexposed and pushed three stops. The difference is notable. There's no -3EV version for the 80D but at -2EV the 6D2 and the 80D appear to be roughly equal.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,153
390
Mikehit said:
And a significant improvement over the 80D (especially 800 and above).

So for all those complaining about the superiority of the 80D, and how the 6DII uses 'old technology'....I just don't see it.
I'm not sure that these results are all that different from the earlier DPR results. It may be more a matter of interpretation and spin. All that DPR really cares about is gross shadow lifting, at least in their "landscape" scoring. This would seem to be comparable to Brian C's comparison of underexposed images where the 5DIV has an advantage in noise level. The difference may be that DPR goes into its usual Chicken Little mode, complete with its magic DR numbers, while Brian C evaluates this difference in a broader context, without the spurious numerical ratings.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,227
416
Sharlin said:
The whole controversy is about low-ISO DR (mostly shadow lifting) where the 80D definitely appears to have the lead.
I looked at those on Brian's comparison and to me the 6D2 looks equal if not better. The 80D may have the advantage per pixel or whatever, but when looking at outputs the benefits of FF seems to override the technological advaentage of the APS-C.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,153
390
Mikehit said:
Sharlin said:
The whole controversy is about low-ISO DR (mostly shadow lifting) where the 80D definitely appears to have the lead.
I looked at those on Brian's comparison and to me the 6D2 looks equal if not better. The 80D may have the advantage per pixel or whatever, but when looking at outputs the benefits of FF seems to override the technological advaentage of the APS-C.
Often, the important question is not whether there is any measurable difference in shadow noise under some specific conditions, but whether there is any practical significance to that difference. Brian C used DPP in processing his images, which is likely as good as it gets for 6DII images, in these early days for that camera. TDP of course used something else, for reasons best known to themselves.
 

daphins

EOS M50
Jun 15, 2017
41
0
Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.

BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.

The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.
 

The Supplanter

EOS T7i
Aug 1, 2015
60
7
daphins said:
Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.

BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.

The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.
Glad to read some real-world testimonies. I would imagine the 6DII would be a nice improvement over the 70D as well. I'm really itching to pair the 6DII with the 16-35 f/4L.
 

9VIII

EOR R
Feb 8, 2013
1,843
0
The biggest difference I can see is the 6D2 has red noise and the 5D4 has blue/green noise.

As long as nothing shows banding (which I have yet to see from any recent camera) it should be fine.

I actually still have a slight preference for the old sensors. In my (admittedly very limited) opinion the 1DX renders skin tone better than the 1DX2.
At base ISO I wouldn't consider the 6D2 to be at a disadvantage to anything else on the market, sometimes I still prefer the look of 5D2 samples (it really makes the reds "pop" and gives a "punchy" image).

The most interesting question in my mind is how much Dual Pixel AF is affecting the image. Would it look significantly different without DPAF?
It'll be interesting to see if the 5Dsr2 keeps whole pixels or adopts split pixels.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,962
1,174
119
daphins said:
Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.

BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.

The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.
And there in lies the point all the measurbators, testers, forum pundits, pixel peepers, pretentious idiots, and clickbate authors miss entirely, the target market are "blown away" with how good it is!
 

dcm

Good or bad - it's not the gear.
Apr 18, 2013
742
79
privatebydesign said:
daphins said:
Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.

BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.

The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.
And there in lies the point all the measurbators, testers, forum pundits, pixel peepers, pretentious idiots, and clickbate authors miss entirely, the target market are "blown away" with how good it is!
Exactly the same response I had when I upgraded from a T2i to the 6D a few years ago. The target market is likely pretty much the same.
 

daphins

EOS M50
Jun 15, 2017
41
0
The Supplanter said:
daphins said:
Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.

BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.

The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.
Glad to read some real-world testimonies. I would imagine the 6DII would be a nice improvement over the 70D as well. I'm really itching to pair the 6DII with the 16-35 f/4L.
It'll be an amazing. I used my 16-35 f2.8L this weekend and my new refurb 70-200 2.L8 IS. Best shots I've ever gotten, and cleanup was a cinch.

I'm not a pro, but I'm an architect and have pretty damn high standards for imagery. I'm very happy with the purchase, and the touch screen is amazing. Thought about getting a 6D a year ago. Glad I waited :)
 

Aglet

EOR R
Feb 26, 2012
1,726
15
AB
I haven't had a thorough look at Bryan's test shots for the 6d2 but what I've looked at so far I did not see some of the faint vertical noise striation I've seen in other images posted online at various ISO.
This may be individual sensor variability...

Noise character on Bryans noise comparison shots looked more workable.

hmmm... ???
 

jeffa4444

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 28, 2013
1,437
88
65
Been using the 6D MKII for just over 1 month and so far not found it to be too different image quality wise to the 6D except for the better sharpness especially with good L glass.
The flippy screen has been a god send in low tripod positions now I dont have to link up my iphone to trigger the camera & view the image.
Not seen any banding so far so that is an improvement over the 6D but I have to agree one thing with testers the new sensor does not really move the game on to the 6D in terms of low light / shadows noise which really should have been the case in 5 years of development change given the camera cost £ 1,999 body only in the UK.

All the improvements it does have are beneficial and Im sure I will be using it for yesrs to come along side my 5DS which is a great studio camera (and for landscape).
 

Frodo

EOS RP
Nov 3, 2012
289
14
privatebydesign said:
daphins said:
Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.

BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.

The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.
And there in lies the point all the measurbators, testers, forum pundits, pixel peepers, pretentious idiots, and clickbate authors miss entirely, the target market are "blown away" with how good it is!
If the target market is those upgrading from a crop sensor camera you are right.
However, I consider it quite reasonable to compare the 6DII with equivalent (i.e. FF) cameras. From an image quality perspective, there is no incentive for me to upgrade my 6D.
And while I agree that low ISO DR is not everything, the TDP comparison of +3EV images between the 6DII and 5DIV, shows that the criticism is valid. For me, as a landscape photographer, often shooting on tripods, DR is important. As I often shoot moving water and foliage, HDR from multiple images often causes ghosting that I'd like to avoid.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,962
1,174
119
Frodo said:
privatebydesign said:
daphins said:
Took mine out in the wild for the first time this weekend.

BLOWN away by the jump from a 60D. I need it would be better, but holy hell and I floored. I looked at my old 60D LR photos and even at low ISO in broad daylight they had a TON more noise.

The mkii is silky smooth. I was exited that my L lenses would now actually produce non-cropped photos, and added low-light performance. I was in no way prepared for the serous cleanup of noise.
And there in lies the point all the measurbators, testers, forum pundits, pixel peepers, pretentious idiots, and clickbate authors miss entirely, the target market are "blown away" with how good it is!
If the target market is those upgrading from a crop sensor camera you are right.
However, I consider it quite reasonable to compare the 6DII with equivalent (i.e. FF) cameras. From an image quality perspective, there is no incentive for me to upgrade my 6D.
And while I agree that low ISO DR is not everything, the TDP comparison of +3EV images between the 6DII and 5DIV, shows that the criticism is valid. For me, as a landscape photographer, often shooting on tripods, DR is important. As I often shoot moving water and foliage, HDR from multiple images often causes ghosting that I'd like to avoid.
Unlike so many here I don't presume to know the results of all the market research Canon did before making the decisions that resulted in the 6D MkII, I don't know who they consider to be the target market but I'd be surprised if Canon expected huge numbers of 6D owners to upgrade. I would think they would like 6D owners who have outgrown their current bodies to be looking at a much broader feature set and capability as found in the 5 series, but that is because it seems obvious to me.

What I do know is I haven't yet seen a write up by a dissatisfied 6D MkII purchaser, indeed considering the very broad range of user skills and experience that covers it seems remarkable to me that such a comparatively simple camera can please such a wide range of users.

Another anacdotal observation, I know two people that recently bought 6's, both moved 'up' from crop DSLR's, both also bought M5's. Both use the M5's a lot more than their 6's.
 

Frodo

EOS RP
Nov 3, 2012
289
14
Hey PBD
I don't disagree that Canon's primary market is crop sensor upgraders.
Just that the comparison of the 6DII should be vs other FF cameras, not crop sensors.
In spite of all this, there is plenty of scope for experienced photographers (like myself) to buy the 6DII. I moved from a 300D to a 20D to a 5D, to 5DII to 6D. Dustin Abbott wrote an excellent blog saying why he bought a 6D rather than 5DIII.
And, finally, having seen that, I've compared my 6D to my M3 image quality and the gain is just a little shadow detail. Other than DoF, FF has little benefit over an equivalent MP crop camera. I'm now considering a 5DS as my next camera - quite a bit cheaper than 5DIV.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,962
1,174
119
Frodo said:
Hey PBD
I don't disagree that Canon's primary market is crop sensor upgraders.
Just that the comparison of the 6DII should be vs other FF cameras, not crop sensors.
In spite of all this, there is plenty of scope for experienced photographers (like myself) to buy the 6DII. I moved from a 300D to a 20D to a 5D, to 5DII to 6D. Dustin Abbott wrote an excellent blog saying why he bought a 6D rather than 5DIII.
And, finally, having seen that, I've compared my 6D to my M3 image quality and the gain is just a little shadow detail. Other than DoF, FF has little benefit over an equivalent MP crop camera. I'm now considering a 5DS as my next camera - quite a bit cheaper than 5DIV.
Yes, but have you been following Tom's posts across threads and linked to in the post above yours? His actual use of the camera and his experienced impressions of it are kinda making arm chair analysis's like you look kinda irrelevant.

Same with jeffa444, another very experienced camera user who moved from a 6D and has a 5DS yet is really liking the 6D MkII http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=33197.msg685018#msg685018

Now I am not trying to change your mind or opinion, of course you are welcome to both, but your opinion has little value when compared to actual users from various upgrade paths, not just more modest crop cameras, that as far as I can see are universally loving the camera and the output from the 6D MkII.

If I were you I'd seriously look at my reason for doing the photography and the actual output I am making, the 6D MkII and 5DS are entirely different beasts with very different strengths and weaknesses, if you are in the market for one I don't see how you could swap that out for the other. I could understand owning both, but not comparing them to do the same job.