The Canon EOS R6 has shown up for certification

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
680
678
Hamburg, Germany
It actually annoys me very much, if cameras get video focussed to a point where it compromises stills quality. For example if full rows of pixels are skipped and will be interpolated in the image just to reserve pixels for autofocus. That introduces banding for example that only goes away with the help of the firmware.
Seriously, where are these "BUT MUH STILLS!11!!" folks coming from suddenly?

DPAF means EVERY pixel on a Canon sensor can perform AF tasks. There's no such thing as pixels reserved for AF that need to be interpolated later.

And please. What is this compromise you people think of, that makes stills capabilities suffer when video is advanced in a mirrorless body.

Can we get a faceplam emoji?
 

usern4cr

EOS 80D
Sep 2, 2018
187
138
Kentucky, USA
It actually annoys me very much, if cameras get video focussed to a point where it compromises stills quality. For example if full rows of pixels are skipped and will be interpolated in the image just to reserve pixels for autofocus. That introduces banding for example that only goes away with the help of the firmware.

It seems video was the main reason for manufacturers to switch from DSLRs to mirrorless cameras. Of course there are occasions when I appreciate the option to take a video, but than that video blocks my camera. I can't take a photo at the same time unless I do a 4K or 8K frame grab.

The Olympics (if they ever happen again) are a good example. If you take a video of a 100 metre sprint, you loose te chance to take photos of the sprint. So I really can't use the video option very often anyway unless I carry two cameras with me.
You think video causes full rows of pixels to be skipped just for AF pixels?
You think video was the main reason manufacturers switched from DSLR to mirrorless?
You think you should be able to record video and then simultaneously take a non-frame grab unrelated photo at the same time on the same camera?

Oh, man, where do these things come from? :rolleyes: :ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Joules and SteveC

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
204
65
USA
Mixed media is just a fact of life now. Just since we got married 20 years ago, for example, it went from 'can you beleive they can afford a videographer for their wedding?" to 'so many people are having a videographer maybe I should get one" to "you're choosing THAT videographer? oh...not as good as ours...: This is based on actual conversations we've overhead with varous sets of friends getting married in the intervening years.

Heck, even just a few years ago FB was actual typed posts. Now its 80% images, 15% video and 5% words. Youtube. IG VIDEO, live streaming, twitch,....

You can look back and see how image sensors and processors limited the first digital cameras. They couldn't do video, because they couldn't process it or store it. Resolution wars started and to get the megapixel crown the manufacturers had to push technology on support hardware to be able to deal with it. Then, it broke through to the point where video and stills were possible in one body. And beyond possible, but so aligned in hardware needs that it would be apply the famous cripple hammer to not enable both.

The same happened to mobile phones. Very few people lament they day they could still find true innovation in "calling only" cellular devices. (At least until they have kids that they want to isolate from the horrors of social media and texting ;) ).

Just gotta roll with it. Video and stills are forever intertwined. And they will be in whatever comes after ILC cameras too. Harry Potter moving 3D photos are nearly here!

Brian
 

Stig Nygaard

7DII & G5XII
Jul 10, 2013
36
39
Copenhagen
www.flickr.com
It actually annoys me very much, if cameras get video focussed to a point where it compromises stills quality. For example if full rows of pixels are skipped and will be interpolated in the image just to reserve pixels for autofocus. That introduces banding for example that only goes away with the help of the firmware.
1) Why is that especially related to video? Autofocus matters just as much for photography as for video. If not more for photography (Prof video is often done with manual focusing because you either want focus fixed, or want very smooth controlled focus changes).
2) There's no banding with Canon's Dualpixel AF that needs to be repaired by firmware. Every pixel has two "sub-pixels" and can can thus be used for focusing. That's one of the smart things about Canon's Dualpixel AF technology.
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
155
222
Honestly, you don't want a stills camera, you want a video recorder. I am getting more and more puzzled if anyone today still shoots stills. If you really love video so much why not buy a proper video camera? It looks like with the new R5 hype mainly trying to grab the video crowd, not really releasing any stills capabilities I should really be leaving canon and go to any company that still makes a proper stills camera, if there are any left? I shoot zero video yet I feel I'm only ever hearing more and more about "video specs" I honestly could care less! What do I need to do to find a stills camera, do any still exist?
I actually am buying a proper video camera; either a C200 or a C300 mark II. All I need the R6 for is gimbal work, and b-roll. The R5 and R6 are still far from true video cameras, even if they implement everything on my wishlist which by the way the S1H and the GH5 and the GH5S already has all of this and the S1 is not far behind, but even if they implement all of it; it still will not have:

Integrated XLR inputs
Integrated ND filters
Proper Cinema Body (Easier to rig up with accessories)
Longer battery life
Better Cooling
etc. etc.

It would literally cost more to get a C300 or C200 on a proper gimbal than the $2499 for the R6. Also, you need a crew when you start putting cinema cameras on a gimbal. I can run and gun solo by locking down the Cinema camera on a tripod or handheld, gimbal the R6, or handhold the R6 for B-roll, b-cam etc. I would also use the R6 for weddings, smaller events, etc and use the C series for corporate work, commercial work, larger events like presentations / speakers, etc where it needs to roll for hours without changing batteries.

Your R5 not releasing any stills capabilities is a topic that has been beaten to death. The R5 and R6 are both going to be great hybrid cameras that will take awesome stills and have class leading video specs at the same time. Video is the future and the future is now, stills only shooters just need to get used to it. Also if you are a typical stills only pro shooter you are leaving a lot of money on the table by not shooting video.
 
Last edited:

slclick

Cyclist, photog, drummer & sardonic haiku writer
Dec 17, 2013
4,021
1,901
I'm a stills only shooter but I am now in the camp (possibly a very small campground with only space for a tiny bikepacking tent) of not debating the video thing. Whatever. I just want to see final specs on various new bodies. You know, the R5 and all the other perceived R# unicorns coming in the next couple years. Line them up, let me pick which one suits my styles.

I'll go into the menu system and setup 'My Menu' with no video and skip all other BS and see what I want to see. It's pretty easy. I've been doing it that way for 8 years on my 5D3.

What I don't like is all the video centric arguments which has folks telling us we have to start accepting it because soon we won't be shooting stills and will be choosing frame grabs instead. Rubbish..

But wow, I am amazed at all the soothsayers who can disagree endlessly over vaporware and unreleased models. Rumor chit chat is one thing, vitriol and soapbox posturing is another. None of us knows sh*t about the R6 yet. Canon has done what exactly? Bluetoooth certification? Nothing to work with.
 

joestopper

Rrr...
Feb 4, 2020
204
185
If you are taking landscapes and are then relying on 60% more pixels to allow for cropping you are not doing your equipment justice and you are not seeing the shot in front of you. Sure there are always isolated instances where a preconceived image framing or aspect ratio doesn't fit with the format ratio you happen to have, but even so there are few instances where stitching can't work in landscapes to mitigate that kind of thing.

As for post processing, that has got nothing to do with it, digital capture, like negatives, requires processing, just take a look at any of your RAW files with dcraw to confirm that! Our eyes see things in a completely different way to the way digital sensors record scenes and people have always made adjustments to the way the chemistry or electronics record the scene to better present the photographers vision. Would I show you an unprocessed canister of film and ask for your opinion of my images?

I stand by my comment, if you are relying on 60% more pixels to correct your crop in post you are doing something wrong.


Few professionals regularly crop photos 35% because they didn't compose properly in the first place, but yes they do crop. I've seen sports shooters crop landscape orientation to portrait orientation and still get the cover of SI with 18mp cameras, and the last thing they were talking about was wishing they had more mp.

My reply to your comment stands, if you are getting home and realizing the landscape image in front of you actually needs cropping 40% you are doing something wrong. That's the equivalent of shooting with a medium format digital to get 135 format images, or paying for and carrying ff gear to get crop camera IQ. Why is that considered so condescending? It is factually correct.
I agree. A photographer who is regularly cropping 40% is doing something wrong..All those pixels thrown away could have been used for better IQ. Having said that, cropping can certainly be typical for some (BIF etc).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape
Dec 6, 2018
175
291
I agree. A photographer who is regularly cropping 40% is doing something wrong..All those pixels thrown away could have been used for better IQ. Having said that, cropping can certainly be typical for some (BIF etc).
As a user of the 5DS and EOS R, I would put a question mark by your reply.

I know I could use a 135mm to fill a frame more than using a 50mm and cropping, but with variations in depth of field between certain lenses, some photographers may have something up their sleeve that works for their needs. Hard to say for sure .. I don't have the answer for that.
 

AEWest

EOS 80D
Jan 30, 2020
152
169
I agree. A photographer who is regularly cropping 40% is doing something wrong..All those pixels thrown away could have been used for better IQ. Having said that, cropping can certainly be typical for some (BIF etc).
I'm not sure which photographer is regularly cropping 40% of their images. A figment of someone's imagination.
 

slclick

Cyclist, photog, drummer & sardonic haiku writer
Dec 17, 2013
4,021
1,901
When you sink your teeth into a meaty subject like a 40% crop, it's understandable how hard it is to let go.




Seriouisly, the directions threads go when thet's nothing to discuss. I'd much rather have crickets than blather.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jedy and unfocused

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
155
222
Mixed media is just a fact of life now. Just since we got married 20 years ago, for example, it went from 'can you beleive they can afford a videographer for their wedding?" to 'so many people are having a videographer maybe I should get one" to "you're choosing THAT videographer? oh...not as good as ours...: This is based on actual conversations we've overhead with varous sets of friends getting married in the intervening years.

Heck, even just a few years ago FB was actual typed posts. Now its 80% images, 15% video and 5% words. Youtube. IG VIDEO, live streaming, twitch,....

You can look back and see how image sensors and processors limited the first digital cameras. They couldn't do video, because they couldn't process it or store it. Resolution wars started and to get the megapixel crown the manufacturers had to push technology on support hardware to be able to deal with it. Then, it broke through to the point where video and stills were possible in one body. And beyond possible, but so aligned in hardware needs that it would be apply the famous cripple hammer to not enable both.

The same happened to mobile phones. Very few people lament they day they could still find true innovation in "calling only" cellular devices. (At least until they have kids that they want to isolate from the horrors of social media and texting ;) ).

Just gotta roll with it. Video and stills are forever intertwined. And they will be in whatever comes after ILC cameras too. Harry Potter moving 3D photos are nearly here!

Brian
You want to know what the most popular photographer is at the events I have been shooting lately? The photo booth with the green screen and the Canon Rebel on a tripod that instantly txts the pictures to everyone's cell phones so that they can post it to their Facebook before they walk away. And I'm not just talking birthday parties, and promotion ceremonies, I'm talking big budget corporate events.

The big thing now is customers want to livestream their events, weddings, birthday parties, etc. I can see this getting even more popular after the pandemic because fewer people will be willing to fly or congregate so they will want their loved ones to watch the event live from anywhere in the world and they will want to record their speeches and the activities for everyone to watch later.

Even with the pandemic I am still booked through November and that's mainly thanks to video. Want to record a corporate message for your employees? No problem, while I'm there could I take a professional corporate headshot for their website? No problem...guess who they will remember (and hire) the next time the need video and photography for their next conference?

Video is here to stay...I still love photography and wish it wasn't fading as fast as it is, but from a business perspective if I don't offer these services someone else will. Absolutely nothing wrong with being a stills only shooter, I would love to stick to stills, but that's just not the future.
 

AJ

EOS 7D MK II
Sep 11, 2010
641
50
I'm not sure which photographer is regularly cropping 40% of their images. A figment of someone's imagination.
It's common in stock photography. The photographer frames it one way, and the graphic designer wants it differently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia
Dec 6, 2018
175
291
It's common in stock photography. The photographer frames it one way, and the graphic designer wants it differently.
You reminded me why I crop often after photographing with the 5DS .. surprised it escaped my memory, replying to someone else above.

Sometimes I want a landscape oriented print of a redwood grove. But at times, I may want a vertical oriented 20 x 30 of mostly one massive redwood tree from the center. One shot with the 5DS accomplishes both, cropping and not cropping.

It's something I do often. The attached is the reverse. A tall photo where I cropped the other way and didn't want to show the other trees or upper trunk as much as the woman and closer detail of the lower trunk bark and burls.
Buffalo_Chip_2000mdv.jpg
 

Pape

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 31, 2018
553
336
Urgh i was thinking buy 90d today but this darn R6 bugs me ,i guess i need wait and see what it will be :p
Eveyone knows iso perfomance cant be improved ,and still they talk about low light beast.
What if it means it can just focus on dimmer than any ILC becore like f 19.
Could be focusing faster with 100-500mm x2 than 7d2 with 100-400.
So no more 7d never.
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
155
222
You reminded me why I crop often after photographing with the 5DS .. surprised it escaped my memory, replying to someone else above.
I crop all of my footage now except real estate footage because my camera shoots in a 3:2 aspect ratio and Instagram is optimized for a 4:5 ratio and in my services contracts that I submit to my customers part of all of my packages (except real estate) is that I will provide a social media version of the images. That's why I'm hoping the R5 and R6 will provide some kind of in display gridlines for non sensor native resolutions so that I can frame the composition properly in camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris.Chapterten