Upgrade to m6 ii or RP for family memories in low light

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
Thanks. I care a lot about low light but the reason for considering the m6 ii is being able to record 4k. Shame I cannot get it all.
Which of these are you prioritizing over the other -- stills shooting at low ISO's or 4K video?

As others have stated, the RP wouldn't autofocus all that well in 4K since it doesn't use dual pixel autofocus in 4K. I believe it's also a 1.7x crop in 4K. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong). So even the RF 35mm F1.8, you're at about 60mm full-frame equivalent. That is not wide at all, if wider than 60mm is what you'd need.

Personally, and this is just my opinion, I'm not a fan of 4K in this class of camera. For family videos, vacations, etc., I think the look of 1080p shot at 60fps with a shutter of 1/60th, and aperture set for desired DoF, with Auto ISO for exposure is the way to go. I have the original M6 and video shot with those settings is awesome. I rented an M6 II for a week to see what 4K was like. It's an excellent camera, but after comparing video on my M6 taken with the settings described above, compared to M6II 4K at less frame rate, I much preferred the 1080/60p. Again, all subjective.

For stills, yeah you may want to see if you can get your hands on them to do your own high ISO comparison. I was *this* close to buying an RP the other day. It's currently $999 with the EF lens adapter included, which I would have paid $100 for, so basically $899 for a full-frame camera. That's just awesome. I read and watched a huge amount of reviews and while the camera was generally universally loved at that price point, the one thing that kept coming up in my research was the high ISO performance was not what you might expect from a full-frame sensor. Now this is just a bunch of random web reviewers, but it came up enough that it made me hesitate. If I'm going to upgrade for the purpose of high ISO performance, I want the ISO performance to be stellar in comparison to what I'm getting now with my M6, which I think is pretty excellent already. I didn't get the impression it was going to be a *huge* upgrade in high ISO IQ going from my M6 to the RP. I decided to wait for the next R camera, whenever that is.
 
Last edited:

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
517
305
Which of these are you prioritizing over the other -- stills shooting at low ISO's or 4K video?

As others have stated, the RP wouldn't autofocus all that well in 4K since it doesn't use dual pixel autofocus in 4K. I believe it's also a 1.7x crop in 4K. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong). [..]
You're correct. I would even go as far as saying AF doesn't work at all in 4k mode, I have no successful clips in 4k with AF. With the RF f/1.2 lenses it will keeping doing ear-nose-ear-nose-ear-nose-ear-nose-ear-nose-ear-nose-ear, while in 1080p it stays locked onto the pupil.

A quick test on the M6II shows that AF in 4k works, but I feel it's slower than 1080p. Needs more testing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
Thanks for the additional input on the 4K autofocus.

Re: High ISO noise, I have no doubt the RP is a solid performer, probably excellent. The original post though was asking what camera to upgrade to from an M50 specifically for the purpose of High ISO noise performance and 4K video. I was just passing along the results of my own research. The question is... going from an M50 which has good noise performance already, would he see a *significant* improvement when going to an RP that would make it worth the cost of the upgrade. I'm not convinced, not because the RP is bad, but because the M50 is a great starting point.

When I read things like this from Imaging Resource, it gives me pause:

"That ISO performance is the only weak spot in the camera's overall capability for its audience, as even for a full frame sensor, it lags behind other cameras. ... ISO 6400 has what I perceive to be pretty obvious noise. From that point and higher, the RP just doesn't look great. ISO 6400 used to be the standard for "good" ISO performance, but technology has advanced considerably and I generally expect pretty clean images at least to that point now,... So while we can cut the RP a lot of slack for being made for a more entry-level audience, the fact still remains that it is a full frame sensor, and I expect high performance from a full frame sensor regardless of its target audience. Here, the RP just doesn't quite cut it."


Also from another review:

"The biggest drawback of Canon re-using the EOS 6D Mark II’s sensor is its relatively limited low-ISO dynamic range. This means that you can’t dig as much detail out of the shadows from raw files before being confronted by unsightly noise, compared to other full-frame sensors or even modern APS-C sensors."

Don't get me wrong. At $999 even I am still considering getting an RP! It would be a great smaller / lighter body for travel compared to my 5D II. I may rent an RP in the next week or two to kick the tires myself. Nothing beats personal experience and using the camera in your own environment.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,346
325
"The biggest drawback of Canon re-using the EOS 6D Mark II’s sensor is its relatively limited low-ISO dynamic range. This means that you can’t dig as much detail out of the shadows from raw files before being confronted by unsightly noise, compared to other full-frame sensors or even modern APS-C sensors."

that's low ISO, not High ISO. e.g. ISO 100 DR - which is no longer an issue past ISO 400..

HIgh ISO is as good as with 6D / 6D II. very good.

HIgh ISO M50 vs RP:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS M50,Canon EOS RP

who are you kidding? 1.5 stop difference at ISO 6400.

and you are correct: Nothing beats personal experience and using the camera in your own environment.
 

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
I just rented an RP for next weekend. It's been on my mind and I'm curious to see how it stacks up against my (much) older 5D II. Looking forward to doing some real world side-by-side comparisons between the RP, 5D II, and M6.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeavyPiper

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
517
305
I just rented an RP for next weekend. It's been on my mind and I'm curious to see how it stacks up against my (much) older 5D II. Looking forward to doing some real world side-by-side comparisons between the RP, 5D II, and M6.
Did you also rent the EG-E1 grip? With relative large lenses like the RF f/1.2 ones, the RP rubs against the spot where my ringfinger joins my hand and creates a hot spot. With the EG-E1 attached I have no issues with large lenses. It's permanently attached to my RP. I rented the Canon 100-400 last week and it handled great with the RP+grip. In context: I have regular sized hands for my 182cm/6 feet of length.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
Did you also rent the EG-E1 grip?
I just rented the RP and the standard EF adapter. If I wind up buying an RP, I'd definitely look into the grip at your recommendation. I have relatively small hands, so the RP should generally be a good fit for me.

This rental is really just to check out image quality with the glass I already own (I'm sure it's going to be great). I have a decent collection of EF lenses that should allow me to have some good fun with it. I actually can't wait! It'll be here Friday. (y)(y)
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,414
792
Did you also rent the EG-E1 grip? With relative large lenses like the RF f/1.2 ones, the RP rubs against the spot where my ringfinger joins my hand and creates a hot spot. With the EG-E1 attached I have no issues with large lenses. It's permanently attached to my RP. I rented the Canon 100-400 last week and it handled great with the RP+grip. In context: I have regular sized hands for my 182cm/6 feet of length.
I wonder if RRS EOS RP base plate is a good substitute for EG-E1.
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
517
305
I wonder if RRS EOS RP base plate is a good substitute for EG-E1.
Judging from the product page the bottom is less thick than the EG-E1, but probably thick enough to wrap your pinkie finger around.
 

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
So my rental RP came a day early so I've had a day to get some first impressions. I still have the entire weekend and through Tuesday to give it a good workout, but wanted to post some quick thoughts.

Firstly, the RP is spectacular. The image quality is way better than I expected, especially at this price point ($999 U.S. including the EF / RF adapter).

In daylight, portraits and general "people photography" like family, vacations, etc with a fast EF-prime are, quite honestly, unbelievable. I got photographs yesterday of the family that came out better than anything I've taken before. Now that is in huge part to the excellent autofocus system and especially eye-detect AF I like to shoot as wide open as I can. With an 85mm F1.8 on my 5D Mark II, I generally need to shoot around F3.2 to get enough DoF for a running toddler, and even then, with the 5D II, my hit rate of shots that are focused on the eye is not great. I've missed plenty of otherwise great photos due to narrow DoF and being focused elsewhere. The RP with eye-detect AF was virtually flawless. I was able to shoot at F2.0 and get pretty much 100% hit rate on the eye! Pretty amazing. For that reason alone, I'm considering buying an RP.

To directly answer the original poster's question, the RP's low light, high-ISO performance is excellent. I did several low-light side-by-side tests with my M6 (close enough to your M50) and also my 5D Mark II. As you would expect, both full-frame cameras did better in extreme low-light situations. That said, the M6 held its own even better than I thought it would. Up until ISO 1600, all three cameras produced generally similar results in very low light. At ISO 3200 and above, I started to see what I would call significant improvements with the full-frame cameras. Though the M6 still produced perfectly good images even at that high ISO range. It's just that the full-framers were even cleaner. If your primary goal was solely better high ISO performance, I think you'd like the RP and would be happy with the improvement in high ISO performance.

That said, and this is the only reason I haven't already bought a new RP based on my experience, is that size-wise, you still have to use RF glass or adapted EF glass, and those lenses are nowhere near as small as the equivalent M-series lenses. I guess I thought the smaller size of the RP body itself would make the entire package seem significantly smaller compared my 5D, but it didn't feel all that different. The trinity of EF L 2.8 glass (16-35, 24-70, 70-200) on the RP felt very well balanced but overall it's still a sizeable hefty package. Some RF glass is slightly smaller / lighter, but the high-end RF lenses are still large and heavy.

Also given how much older the 5D II is, I was pleasantly surprised to see how well it did at high ISOs compared to the RP. In my brief tests, the 5D II was pretty close to if not equal to the RP up to ISO 3200. I'll do much more testing this weekend. That was just in my initial couple of examples.

So hopefully that helps. If size is important, then "in general" I would recommend staying with the M-series. The high-ISO IQ of the M-series may not be quite up to full-frame standards, but is still excellent, and the small form factor makes a huge difference to general usability. The RP will require significantly larger and heavier lenses. I love my M6 and it will easily remain my most used camera. That said, you would likely see a fairly big improvement in high-ISO performance in extreme low-light situations if you got an RP.

For me, I'll have to play with it all weekend. If the high-ISO performance of the RP proves to be significantly better than my 5D II after a weekend's worth of testing, then I'll likely get it. If the RP is generally similar to the 5D II, it will be a tougher decision. The eye-detect AF may tilt the scales. I'll have to see after a few more days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeavyPiper

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
517
305
So my rental RP came a day early so I've had a day to get some first impressions. [..] With an 85mm F1.8 [..]
The EF 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent candidate for DLO! I recommend doing the following:
  1. Install the lens profiles for the EF lenses you are going to try. It's limited to 5 profiles, I recommend choosing 'bad' lenses first. You need EOS utility for that.
  2. Enable all 3 corrections settings in the 'Lens abberations' menu.
  3. If using JPG, no further steps needed.
  4. If you're using RAW, install the latest DPP from Canon
    1. Select a picture, View -> 'Edit Image Window'
    2. On the right hand side, in 'Tool Palette', click the top left tab, the only with a lens icon
    3. See if "Digital Lens Optimizer" is enabled and has data. If not, click the circle arrow to select and download the profiles
    4. Check the before and after by toggling the checkbox
    5. File -> 'Convert and Save' or 'Batch Process'
    6. Import TIFF(s) into whichever editor you normally use
For me, the 85 f/1.8, 50 f/1.8 STM and 28 f/1.8 benefit the most from DLO. The purple fringing is usually completely gone and sharpness gets a nice, natural looking boost.
Since LR lacks a profile for the RP, I used the hack to use the 6D2 profile. That improved colours a bit, but I still prefer the DPP colours. I still hate the time spent converting them, about 40 seconds per photo. I use the batch option and go do something else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
The EF 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent candidate for DLO! I recommend doing the following:
  1. Install the lens profiles for the EF lenses you are going to try. It's limited to 5 profiles, I recommend choosing 'bad' lenses first. You need EOS utility for that.
  2. Enable all 3 corrections settings in the 'Lens abberations' menu.
  3. If using JPG, no further steps needed.
  4. If you're using RAW, install the latest DPP from Canon
    1. Select a picture, View -> 'Edit Image Window'
    2. On the right hand side, in 'Tool Palette', click the top left tab, the only with a lens icon
    3. See if "Digital Lens Optimizer" is enabled and has data. If not, click the circle arrow to select and download the profiles
    4. Check the before and after by toggling the checkbox
    5. File -> 'Convert and Save' or 'Batch Process'
    6. Import TIFF(s) into whichever editor you normally use
For me, the 85 f/1.8, 50 f/1.8 STM and 28 f/1.8 benefit the most from DLO. The purple fringing is usually completely gone and sharpness gets a nice, natural looking boost.
Since LR lacks a profile for the RP, I used the hack to use the 6D2 profile. That improved colours a bit, but I still prefer the DPP colours. I still hate the time spent converting them, about 40 seconds per photo. I use the batch option and go do something else.
Yep, I've been using DLO on my lenses through DPP. I'm not a super-high-volume shooter, so I don't mind doing images individually as I only process a few select photos from any given photoshoot.

I'm really impressed with the RP so far. I'm about to go out right now and and do some wildlife with my 400mm F5.6L. I've been successfully hand-holding that lens on my M6, so it should be even easier with the RP.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,029
120
So hopefully that helps. If size is important, then "in general" I would recommend staying with the M-series. The high-ISO IQ of the M-series may not be quite up to full-frame standards, but is still excellent, and the small form factor makes a huge difference to general usability. The RP will require significantly larger and heavier lenses.
This is true and I would co-sign. However, I've had success handholding the RP/35 1.8 as low as 0.3 sec. Coupled with the f1.8 aperture, you can all but shoot in the dark with this thing. ISO remains usable up to 12,800 (although for best IQ I would stick to 3200 or lower - and I've found that is doable even in dark rooms due to the stability of the IS!). And it is still a smaller package than a FF DSLR and L zoom lens. As good as the M6 is, FF will crush it (a crop sensor) every time when it comes to low light shooting...

Ultimately it's a size vs IQ decision for the OP - that said, the M6 will still deliver strong results, especially with the new 32mm 1.4 that came out. The RP's larger sensor will, however, set itself apart in low-light venues where flash is not desired/permitted.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

OneSnark

Canon Fanboy
Aug 20, 2019
36
14
I have both the M6II and the RP, but not the RF24-105. I like them both very much, but they feel like two very different cameras. The M6II feels more responsive than the RP, but the RP already felt more responsive than the M50 I traded it, so for you it will be a gain either way.

The autofocus tracking on the M6II seems to do a better job as well, on the RP it likes to jump to something next to where you point it at. My RP refused to focus on my daughter when she was lined up with a bunch of other toddlers at the edge of a swimming pool. The focus point kept moving to the child left or right of her.

For low light performance the RP looks a lot better when viewed at 200%, but I haven't done a proper comparison with 2 similarly framed and exposed shots.

For bigger lenses the RP is the clear winner, I used an EF100-400mm lens this weekend on both the M6 and RP, the ergonomics on the RP won out. But the M6II had more reach and 14fps, so for faraway, well-lit deer it performed quite well.

You can't beat the RF50 and RF85 for sharpness and f/1.2, but the M6II with the 32mm and sigma 56mm is a decent enough substitute that is a lot smaller and lighter. Purse vs backpack.

If you're into 4k, the M6II has actual working autofocus, the RP doesn't do DPAF in 4k and the contrast detect is slow, jittery and hunts a lot.

The size difference is also substantial, the M6II is already bigger than the M50. See the picture below of RP+grip + adapter + 50mm f/1.8 vs M6II + sigma 56mm.
View attachment 187472
This is an awesome and very informative thread. Thank you all for your viewpoints.

For me, (your mileage may vary); in my next body I would like "the latest" in mirrorless.
That sounds like the M6 - II. I am also a fan of a small form factor, as well as APS-C. I am not bothered by the EVF in the hotshoe; since if I need flash - - - > I probably will grab my DSLR anyway - - -> and it will be dark enough that I don't really need an EVF vs using the back screen.

BUT as others have indicated. . . lenses are a factor. EF lenses (I have a SACK of EF lenses) sound too big for the M6 for walkabout purposes. I hear everybody about the 22 and 35 "M" primes. To be brutally honest. . . I shot primes for a number of years, and they were a pain for travel photography. I have a bunch of primes (24, 35, 50, 85; multiple flavors); and now I find that unless I am doing a specific shoot. . . .the zooms (16-35/2.8 and 24-105/4) are all I am willing to carry. The "M" zooms are basically molasses; I don't see any fast zooms (or even F4 zooms) on the "M" horizon.

My eye then turns to the RP. Basically the same price as the M6-II once you accessorize. But the lenses. . . . aside from the 24-105 -> Canon is focusing on the 2.8 Trinity which is way, way, out of my price range. Considering I have an EF24-105 4L; the RF 24-105 sounds.. . .like a repeat. But EF's on a RP are not quite the same insane as on a M6-II

- - - - -
Ok. . .thanks for letting me rant.
- - - - -

You know, marketing is fascinating thing. Everyone tells me that DSLR's are dead. Which means the EF line is . . . not worthy of investment. Shame. The 100/2.8L is at a nice no-brainer price. And the 90D is not that expensive either. So. . .thanks marketing. . . I am not buying either.

By contrast, the mirrorless options basically should be purchased with at least one native lens. . . . which in the "M" line is limited; and RF line is pricey (since I
buy with the body)

Good. That's means I can spend my coin on other things.
 

Cat_Interceptor

M6 II fanboy
Oct 20, 2019
14
13
alliancemotorsport.org
BUT as others have indicated. . . lenses are a factor. EF lenses (I have a SACK of EF lenses) sound too big for the M6 for walkabout purposes.
I have to disagree. EF lenses come in sorts of sizes and shapes so you can just use the ones you feel suit it.

But as for me, I was forced due to camera failure to use the M6 II in a professional situation due to a camera failure and in absolutely no was it an issue even with something like a 400 2.8. It's just different and just needs a bit of time to get used to. It's pretty much to the point my 100-400 II is living on the camera.

What I will say negative is annoyingly, to get the absolute most out of any lens on the M6 II you need to download lens profiles and the M6 II only seems to allow for three at a time. Which doesnt seem right to me so I'll need to check if that's right or I'm missing something. Also it doesnt seem to like my 70-200 IS 2.8 L v1. It appears to work perfectly well with a v2 soo....... *shrug* dont know whats going on there.

In regards to the dead mirrorslapper, I'm not sure what I'll do. It's an old 1D mk IV so I could get it repired or get a second hand 1D X - I'd prefer to get another mirrorless but given that camera works for a living in harsh enviroments I cant. This is where I'm like FFS Canon get your damn pro line R's out already esp a real 7D II replacement.... we NEED this camera 6 months ago
 
Last edited:

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
517
305
[..]
What I will say negative is annoyingly, to get the absolute most out of any lens on the M6 II you need to download lens profiles and the M6 II only seems to allow for three at a time. Which doesnt seem right to me so I'll need to check if that's right or I'm missing something.[..]
You're not missing something, Canon choose to limit the M series to 3 profiles. My RP takes 5. I'm slowly getting used to swapping out the profiles before I head out. It helps that I take most of my pictures with the 32mm f/1.4 :)
 

OneSnark

Canon Fanboy
Aug 20, 2019
36
14
I have to disagree. EF lenses come in sorts of sizes and shapes so you can just use the ones you feel suit it.

But as for me, I was forced due to camera failure to use the M6 II in a professional situation due to a camera failure and in absolutely no was it an issue even with something like a 400 2.8. It's just different and just needs a bit of time to get used to. It's pretty much to the point my 100-400 II is living on the camera.

{snip}
I would have no qualms about putting on a 100-400/4L on the M6 for an airshow. . .or an EF fast prime for some portraits shots. Heck - - - those lenses are not even IN my "go bag" for my dslr because of the size. But for day-to-day walkabout zoom; I would really want a (relatively fast) native zoom. If the walkabout lens is an EF24-105/4L - - -I suspect I should be looking at the RP and not the M6-II.

If I am being honest - - considering the current RP discount makes the "base kit" cheaper than the M6 - - I probably should buy a RP just to find out what all the fuss about full frame is about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,029
120
You know, marketing is fascinating thing. Everyone tells me that DSLR's are dead. Which means the EF line is . . . not worthy of investment. Shame. The 100/2.8L is at a nice no-brainer price.
DSLRs are NOT dead by any means. That said, its days may now be numbered (as much as it pains me to say it - but the market appears to be heading in that direction).

I feel for those looking at the EF series though and questioning whether it's worth the long-term investment. The prices of the RF lenses are sky-high for the moment but eventually they will begin to fall as more bodies are released. This may end up further depressing the secondhand market for EF lenses (even if they still can be used via adapter on the R cameras - the native versions will always be better).
 

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
Update: Today was my 4th day with my rental RP and I'm happy to report that after evaluating it all weekend... I bought one! This camera is awesome and really exceeded my expectations. It has to be one of the best values in cameras today, a mirrorless full-frame for under $1,000 with EF adapter included. That's just amazing. It may not be the camera for everyone, but for me it's got everything I need. Depending on my "portability" and IQ needs, I can happily bounce back and forth between the RP and the M6 to fit what I'm doing for the day. The new RP should be here Tuesday, right when my rental goes back, and I look forward to getting the new one all set up. (y) (y)