Updated Canon EOS 6D Mark II Specifications [CR2]

[KeithBreazeal]

This is an entry level FF. Why would Canon load it up with goodies that the higher end bodies have?
At least you got a flippy screen.

 

[Dvash7]

If no 4K is the only way to "nerf" it and make it come in at the ~$2000 of the original 6D then so be it.
Hell, if it had no video at all and no GPS and was even lower in price I'd be over the moon!
It's an entry-level FF DSLR. If you want it to be something else, get a 5D4.

 

[Berowne]

The Specs are ok. Canon will give us another Camera, where Buttons dont wobble, layout of Settings is userfriendly and production-quality is impeccable. Who needs more?

 

[Zv]

Even if it had 4K it would be a feeble attempt at it and there would be the inevitable complaints as to it's uselessness! Canon probably thought it better to leave it out altogether. Who knows? Doesn't put me off in the slightest. I'll be glad if 4K is excluded as it would be a wasted feature. Maybe this will keep the cost reasonable too?

45 point AF system sounds pretty decent. Hopefully a couple of those are cross type

So far it's looking like what we expected it to look like.

 

[Zv]

I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Considering that my iphone 6s from 2015 does it no-problem... i would say no.

And just what size is the sensor on the 6s? I bet it doesn't take much processing power to run 4K from a piddly little sensor from a smartphone. It's a whole 'nuther story when dealing with the massive amounts of data produced by a FF sensor every second.

Same argument as why smaller sensors can do faster FPS burst.

However, in this day and age I would expect the processing power issue to have been licked. So, this does seem a little disappointing it doesn't have 4K of some sort.

 

[sanj]

I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Considering that my iphone 6s from 2015 does it no-problem... i would say no.

And just what size is the sensor on the 6s? I bet it doesn't take much processing power to run 4K from a piddly little sensor from a smartphone. It's a whole 'nuther story when dealing with the massive amounts of data produced by a FF sensor every second.

Same argument as why smaller sensors can do faster FPS burst.

However, in this day and age I would expect the processing power issue to have been licked. So, this does seem a little disappointing it doesn't have 4K of some sort.

I believe 1dc, 1dx2 or 5d4 all do not use full frame.

 

[padam]

I guess it will have UHS-I SD cards slots, which can't handle the MJPEG 4k like the 5D Mark IV anyway.

Also, it would be weird, if it had 4k with a slightly better crop factor than that camera.

And this hardware limitation will prevent continuous RAW video recording with Magic Lantern if they crack it...


Still, it is annoying because it is not something that couldn't have been included (not to mention a better, more efficient 4k codec for all the DSLRs, so you don't need those cards in the first place)
It's not like they are going to update the 6D line any time soon, with the C200 they have included some new higher-end features, but those are only slowly creeping in to the lower priced cameras.

In conclusion: if you need a Canon DSLR for 4k video, you need to buy the Mark IV and tons of cards and deal with the crop factor just to have the Canon colors and the Dual-Pixel AF.

I guess that at least the US price might not be any higher than the original 6D at its introduction. The EU price will be high though.

 

[wildwalker]

I don't believe adding 4K is as simple as people claim it to be. I would think it would take a more heavy duty processor, bigger buffer and more robust heat protection, no? All of these would significantly add to the cost of the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Well the 5DMk4 with Digic 6 can do 4K, so if the 6DMk2 has Digic 7?

My take on this is that it is a positive step. The 6D is a stills camera with a bit of video, but mainly stills. If you want video then go and buy the 5DMk4 or the C300.

I am glad that Canon spend the money on the stills parts and sacrificed the video, or we could have ended up with a body that does stills and video in a substandard way.

Of course, lets wait for the reviews on the stills capability before we get too excited.

Also, I guess these are still 'rumoured' specifications?

 

[padam]

Ever since Magic Lantern we know that all these limitations are deliberate ones, which don't make the camera 'better' in any way, it is simply crippling some of the features.
It just makes clearer differentiation between the models, which was always a marketing strategy used by Canon.

 

[dflt]

Ah, my only concern is the weeny 26 mpix sensor.

 

[Besisika]

For me it is a big fail.

And that is because of 4K

Many says "I don't care, because I never do video". How about "never say never"?
You have trouble in life and will have to sell some of you gear. You lost already half of buyers because your 6D II doesn't do 4K. Your son wants to enter photography and you want to give to him your 6D - he says no because he wants 4K. Not because you don't need 4K that he doesn't need it either. You do portraiture and you realized that you don't have enough customers and someone suggested behind the scenes in Youtube would be a good idea - but you don't do video. And so on and so on. Simply put, you never know your tomorrow need.

Some says that if you need 4K go to 5D IV. That must be a lack of understanding of the difference between 5D and 6D from a video perspective.
The main attractive feature of the 6D is its size and weight. It is not a stupidity that competitors are trying at all cost to stick to small size (even though they still fail in other domains because of it).
The future of video is camera movement and it brings your footage to the competitors level. The one that is the most popular today is handheld stabilizers. Ignoring the fact that 5D is at the heaviest size when using stabilizers is a big mistake. The issue is the number of good lenses that you can use. The lighter the body the more options you have.
Someone already listed good reasons why 4K is the key to video and I am glad he put at the top of the list the most important one, which is cropping in post, in other words zooming in post.
The approach in videography is "shoot for the edit", something that we photographers do not understand, we desperately want to get it right in camera. 4K gives you that possibility, and yet you remove it from your best camera for the job.
So you will end up with two gears; one is very heavy (shooting 4 hours on a heavier gear is more painful) and the other one without zooming in post.

Finally, if you have already a 1DX II or C200, why would you buy a 6D II if it cannot do 4K?
Yes, the bulk of your videography is still tripod, monopod and sliders, but that fluid movement is something that would add 3D illusion to your footage, in particular your B-roll.
I have no doubt in my mind, a 6D II with 4K would attract (or I should say keep your existing) customers a lot more.

 

[tomscott]

This is great news well speced camera.

Looking forward to the 5DMKVI dropping in price now like the III did.

 

[wildwalker]

Someone already listed good reasons why 4K is the key to video and I am glad he put at the top of the list the most important one, which is cropping in post, in other words zooming in post.
The approach in videography is "shoot for the edit", something that we photographers do not understand, we desperately want to get it right in camera. 4K gives you that possibility, and yet you remove it from your best camera for the job.

Well, the video modes were never going to be better than the 5DMk4. And the idea of shooting in 4K to crop to HD is n't a great one as the 5DMk4 only does 30fps in UHD. In a world where devices don't support interlaced video so well (mobiles, tablets etc) where they are optimised for progressive, you really need to be creating 1080p50/60.

So even in the 6D had some form of UHD, I think your cropping use case might not be so useful?

What do you think?

 

[Frodo]

I have a 6D (and before that a 5DII and 5D).
What I miss most on the 6D is focusing outside the centre point and the crippled auto-ISO.
What I like is image quality, relatively small size and light weight, plus GPS.
I don't need 4K video.
Provided this camera has GPS, better focusing and better auto-ISO, I'd consider an upgrade.

In terms of sensor resolution, I have some very nice 36 x 12 inch prints from my 12 MP 5D mark I, some of which have been sold.
26MP is fine, provided IQ is good.

 

[wildwalker]

I have a 6D (and before that a 5DII and 5D).
What I miss most on the 6D is focusing outside the centre point and the crippled auto-ISO.
What I like is image quality, relatively small size and light weight, plus GPS.
I don't need 4K video.
Provided this camera has GPS, better focusing and better auto-ISO, I'd consider an upgrade.

In terms of sensor resolution, I have some very nice 36 x 12 inch prints from my 12 MP 5D mark I, some of which have been sold.
26MP is fine, provided IQ is good.

I currently use a 5DMk2. I am interested, as you sold your 5DMk2 for the 6D, what you think of the difference between the 6d and 5DMk2 in terms of IQ and operation?

 

[Aussie shooter]

Well. If those specs are accurate(and I doubt they will be 100% accurate) or even close then it should be a great entry level FF DSLR. WHICH IS WHAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE!!!!!!!. These comments about it being no good for pro work because of this or that reason are ridiculous. It isn't meant to be a pro camera FFS. And if by not implememnting 4K they can keep the price down and reliability up then that is awesome.

 

[xps]

Hmmm... The specs look quite ok, except the missing 4k function.
What do I hope it will be?
An lighter body as my 5DIV with an faster and wider AF system than the 6D has (Don´t misunderstand me, I took shots at airshows with the 6D that were muuuuch better than on the 7DII). And all cross type AF points. (A must, as nearly all cheaper bodies do have it).
And an improved image and low light quality (better than the very good existing of the 6D).
Touchscreen like on my 5DIV.

4K would have been great, as it is a pleasure to film animals in 4k and see it on your 4k TV or monitor at home.

But I do not think, the body will be priced lower than 2000€. I know, the marvellous D750 is lower than 1900€ here in Germany. I think Canon will try to milk the cow as much at it can be miked.

 

[Mikehit]

You lost already half of buyers because your 6D II doesn't do 4K.

Really?

Your son wants to enter photography and you want to give to him your 6D - he says no because he wants 4K.

Your son want to enter a PHOTO competition and refuses loan of a camera because it doesn't have 4K What an idiot. Perhaps he ought to learn what a photo is.

 

[Chaitanya]

Seriously dumb Canon as usual crippling camera to protect more "expensive" cameras. leaving out 4k on a camera that is supposed to last next 3 years on market is idiotic to say the least.

 

[Frodo]

I currently use a 5DMk2. I am interested, as you sold your 5DMk2 for the 6D, what you think of the difference between the 6d and 5DMk2 in terms of IQ and operation?

The 5dII annoyed me through banding in shadows that was difficult if not impossible to remove in post-production. This is far less of an issue with the 6D. I feel that dynamic range is better, partly because shadows can be pushed more. And high ISO quality is also better. 6400 is like 3200 on the 5DII. I also like the silent shutter as I do a lot of event photography - the silent 6D shutter is actually quieter than the M3 shutter. Plus I like the lighter, smaller body, especially when paired with the 35/2 and 85/1.8. I got used to the absence of the joystick and the more clumsy review enlarge function. I'd like a slightly higher flash synch for fill flash, but can always use high-speed synch. The centre focus point on the 6D is better than on the 5DII, but the others are just as bad.

The 6D was a lot cheaper than a 5dIII and image quality is equal or better, provided:
- focus is accurate
- there is no motion blur (I tend to shoot aperture priority with auto-ISO - this is okay if I manually set the minimum shutter speed, as the auto function gives me 1/focal length which is often insufficient to stop motion blur).
The 5DIII has undeniably better AF and more flexible auto-ISO. So sometimes I have buyer's remorse in not getting a 5DIII.
But the 6D is, in my view, a better camera than the 5DII.