Two new EOS R bodies coming in the first half of 2020 [CR3]

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
Proper technique doesn't let you shoot a handheld waterfall or a very dark scene, but IS (in all its forms) helps you do that.

We can call it lazyness (I do hear you, I don't mean to sound flippant), but one simply can't take a tripod everywhere or add light to every scene. IS helps in many, many ways.

- A
The question is, how many 1D X users shoot in such scenarios? Or do most of them shoot in scenarios that require faster shutter speeds due to subject motion?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
I would contend it was the first time someone really landed a glove on Canon strictly from the strength of a spec list.

Sony always had these Ferrari like specs, but the various A7/A9 cameras were easy to dismiss:
  • Few lenses
  • AF was a mess
  • Build quality issues, poor sealing
  • Limited third party ecosystem of stuff you could bolt on / interface with
  • Ergonomics as war crimes
  • Specs bristling with asterisks of nasty fine print, especially on compression of RAW files and true working fps
But they systematically attacked each limitation and worked it down to a point where the A7 III -- a comically loaded spec per dollar offering -- was worth trying. There was a mechanical shutter and uncompressed RAW at top fps. The lens portfolio is stronger now. The AF does not suck like it used to. (The grip is still a war crime, but maybe that's just me.)

So the question is, does Canon 'stoop to their level' and get into a spec-per-dollar war, or do they continue to lean on brand, argue 'a better-thought-through less is more' sales pitch, and innovate in the more nuanced (and potentially useful) areas that don't pop on a spec sheet: BR optics, adaptors as rear filtering opportunties, motorized auto positioning speedlite head, clever ergonomic integration of using all those DPAF points, etc.

I'm guessing it will be a bit of both.

- A
Sounds more like Jaguar than Ferrari...
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
Didn't 6D have 5DII sensor?
No.

5D Mark II sensor was 5616 x 3744 pixels

6D sensor was 5472 x 3648 pixels

The 6D also had better DR at high ISO than the 5D Mark II did. By ISO 3200 it was almost a full stop difference.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
Does that mean that 6D was "slightly better than" 5D series?
No, it just means the difference in resolution between the 20.1 MP 6D and the 23.4 MP 5D Mark III was enough to give the 6D slightly better DR at the expense of lower resolution.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,570
545
No, it just means the difference in resolution between the 20.1 MP 6D and the 23.4 MP 5D Mark III was enough to give the 6D slightly better DR at the expense of lower resolution.
you mean a full stop plus some of DR difference at ISO 6400 due to 20% less megapixels in 6D? alright :) admit. you wasn't serious.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
you mean a full stop plus some of DR difference at ISO 6400 due to 20% less megapixels in 6D? alright :) admit. you wasn't serious.
No. That full stop difference is between a 2008 5D Mark II and a 2012 6D. There's a lot of difference in 2008 and 2012 sensors, whether one is talking Canon, Nikon, Pentax, or Sony.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,570
545
No. That full stop difference is between a 2008 5D Mark II and a 2012 6D. There's a lot of difference in 2008 and 2012 sensors, whether one is talking Canon, Nikon, Pentax, or Sony.
Ok. Compare 6D vs 5D III at ISO 6400 then. I owned both. 6D sensor runs circles around 5DIII sensor at high iso. ;)
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
Ok. Compare 6D vs 5D III at ISO 6400 then. I owned both. 6D sensor runs circles around 5DIII sensor at high iso. ;)
Never have owned a 6D, but I have no complaints about the 5DIII.

The 5DIV kills the 5DIII and 6D at low ISO DR, which is where DR is most important.

20200125ss1.png


At high ISO, it's more about S/N ratio than DR, at least for me. There's not much difference between any of them there.

20200125ss2.png


Beyond that, the 6D AF system is not much better than the 5D II or 60D. The 5D III AF system is comparable to the 1D X.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarkPhalanx

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
Ok. Compare 6D vs 5D III at ISO 6400 then. I owned both. 6D sensor runs circles around 5DIII sensor at high iso. ;)
Then your 5D Mark III's sensor must have been defective. I got a 7D like that way back when. Everyone else's 7D ran circles around mine at high ISO.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
One thing I've learned after a couple of years of proposed camera specifications is this... the rumors always over project and the result consistently under delivers. People will most certainly complain for months on end upon initial release and then we'll all once again agree the final product is better than we feared. With that said, I'm less interested in a new R body and more interested in some affordable RF glass like maybe an RF 85mm f/1.4 IS.
I've found that the rumors themselves don't over project, at least not nearly to the degree that the comments stating, "I'd like this, this, and this (which are currently offered in a $6,000 model) to be included in the rumored model (that is going to sell for $750)."
 
  • Like
Reactions: StoicalEtcher

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,570
545
Then your 5D Mark III's sensor must have been defective. I got a 7D like that way back when. Everyone else's 7D ran circles around mine at high ISO.
sorry, in my use cases "a high ISO" is ISO 6400. I do not shoot higher than that. at iso 6400 6D is much better than 5D III
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
sorry, in my use cases "a high ISO" is ISO 6400. I do not shoot higher than that. at iso 6400 6D is much better than 5D III
At iso 6400 my 6D is much better than my 5D III.

There, fixed it for you.

At DxO, the 6D(s) they tested S/N ratio was not significantly different at high ISO (past ISO 800) from the 5D Mark III(s) they tested.

At ISO 6400 images from my 5D Mark III are perfectly usable for my purposes.
But then again, I don't underexpose by 4-5 stops and then expect to be able to bring the shadows up in post like some folks seem to expect.


Images shot at ISO 6400 with my 5D Mark II were just a little bit over the noise cliff.
 
Last edited:

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,570
545
At iso 6400 my 6D is much better than my 5D III.

There, fixed it for you.

At DxO, the 6D(s) they tested S/N ratio was not significantly different at high ISO (past ISO 800) from the 5D Mark III(s) they tested.

At ISO 6400 images from my 5D Mark III are perfectly usable for my purposes.
But then again, I don't underexpose by 4-5 stops and then expect to be able to bring the shadows up in post like some folks seem to expect.


Images shot at ISO 6400 with my 5D Mark II were just a little bit over the noise cliff.
Images shot at ISO 6400 with your 5D Mark II were just a little bit over your noise cliff :)
I am uncomfortable with noise levels of 5D III anywhere over ISO 4000. I do not underexpose images, do not push shadows by more that 1/3 stop typically.

lets see:



Camera ModelLow Light
ISO
Canon EOS 5D Mark II3123 - no experience.
Canon EOS 5D Mark III3652 - true to my experience
Canon EOS 6D 4070 - true to my experience
Canon EOS 1D X Mark II5189 - true to my experience
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV5011- true to my experience
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,716
938
Images shot at ISO 6400 with your 5D Mark II were just a little bit over your noise cliff :)
I am uncomfortable with noise levels of 5D III anywhere over ISO 4000. I do not underexpose images, do not push shadows by more that 1/3 stop typically.

lets see:



Camera ModelLow Light
ISO
Canon EOS 5D Mark II3123 - no experience.
Canon EOS 5D Mark III3652 - true to my experience
Canon EOS 6D 4070 - true to my experience
Canon EOS 1D X Mark II5189 - true to my experience
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV5011- true to my experience
ISO 4000 is one of the +1/3 stop ISO settings and is noisier than ISO 6400. Do some research into how Canon sensors from around 2006 until at least the 80D handles +1/3 stop and -1/3 stop ISo settings.