Review: Canon EOS 6D Mark II by TDP

[Canon Rumors]

<p>The-Digital-Picture has completed their review of the Canon EOS 6D Mark II, and came away pretty impressed overall. While it’s not a perfect camera body, the image quality is great as far as noise and color go, but we’re all disappointed we didn’t get a dynamic range performance bump.</p>
<p><strong>From TDP:</strong></p>

<blockquote><p>The 6D Mark II did not impress me with its AI Servo AF capabilities, its dynamic range is only adequate and I’m not a fan of the 8-way multi-controller. But, the image quality benefits, especially color and noise levels, of Canon’s full frame CMOS sensors are big, while the footprint of the 6D II remains small – as does, probably most importantly, the relative impact on your wallet. Expectations were that the 6D Mark II would deliver very impressive image quality and rapidly hit the most-popular list. It has delivered on expectations. <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-Mark-II.aspx">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p>I still haven’t used the EOS 6D Mark II enough to give my final verdict to folks, but I do like the camera so far.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
<div style="font-size:0px;height:0px;line-height:0px;margin:0;padding:0;clear:both"></div>

 

[ScottyP]

I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.

 

[jedy]

I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.

I hope you're joking 'cause otherwise this comment looks rather stupid.

I've said in another post that Canon customers need this camera to fail to hopefully give Canon a much needed wake up call and realise we won't put up with such lacklustre releases. Sadly I suspect it will sell rather well and Canon will Be laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Canon bypassed Nikon, Pentax, and other camera makers in the 1970's and 1980's with their philosophy of producing lower priced cameras that are very good, but did not include extra bells and whistles.

That philosophy has served them well over time, they are going to stick with it. They design cameras to be easy to produce and maintain, and price every feature before selecting what will be included. They have a target market and select features for that market. I know that many want it to be a different camera, but then it would also be for a different market.

The buyers targeted by this camera are buying out stock at the major camera stores, Canon is delivering them constantly, but they seem to fly off the shelves. This morning, Amazon has been out for 2 weeks, B&H has them, I did not check others.

 

[Tangent]

I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.

All kidding aside, the 5D mkIV lacks the tilt flip screen, so it's not a simple as move up and get a superset of the lower model's features. I'm irritated.

 

[Rockskipper]

I bought one, took it out of the box and looked at it, didn't even mount a lens, reboxed it and shipped it back.

After shooting with my M5, it seemed monstrous in size, though it was very light. Guess I'm not ready for a FF. I've always had Rebels and found them to be big, so will wait for a FF mirrorless, if they ever come out, or maybe even go to Sony at some point.

But as a woman I have small hands and like to stick my camera in my pocket and don't shoot for money. The M5 is a nice little camera and will be fine for as long as I want. I can put my 100-400 on it with the adaptor when I want to get close, works great. I may even get a SL2 for the meantime.

 

[Talys]

I bought one, took it out of the box and looked at it, didn't even mount a lens, reboxed it and shipped it back.

After shooting with my M5, it seemed monstrous in size, though it was very light. Guess I'm not ready for a FF. I've always had Rebels and found them to be big, so will wait for a FF mirrorless, if they ever come out, or maybe even go to Sony at some point.

But as a woman I have small hands and like to stick my camera in my pocket and don't shoot for money. The M5 is a nice little camera and will be fine for as long as I want. I can put my 100-400 on it with the adaptor when I want to get close, works great. I may even get a SL2 for the meantime.

I am sympathetic, but it was a doomed purchase for you. I mean, if a rebel was too big, there is no way a 6D would work out.

By the way, the camera is not light. I mean, sure, the body doesn't weigh much, but a camera needs a lens too, and unless you were planning on walking around with a 50/1.8, jut about anything that is paired for it, certainly anything wit an L, is going to make it feel humongous. A telephoto that would take advantage of it is going to weigh a kazillion times more than you're likely willing to carry.

But that isn't unique to Canon - just remember, FF lenses are all going to be significantly bigger and heavier than APSC counterparts, and pro lenses are designed to allow in more light, and weather abuse, so will be many times heavier.

Keep in mind too that as you go higher end, the focal range also narrows. So, a consumer APSC lens will go 55-250mm or even from 20-300mm, or more. A pro EF lens will be like 24-70mm or 70-200mm (and weigh three to ten times more), meaning you'll need to carry at least two lenses if you want to shoot a variety of focal ranges. Also, the reach is 1.6x less, so if you were used to shooting faraway subjects at 300mm, to get the same magnification FF you need 480mm -- and that's going to be huge.

 

[stevelee]

I bought one, took it out of the box and looked at it, didn't even mount a lens, reboxed it and shipped it back.

After shooting with my M5, it seemed monstrous in size, though it was very light. Guess I'm not ready for a FF. I've always had Rebels and found them to be big, so will wait for a FF mirrorless, if they ever come out, or maybe even go to Sony at some point.

But as a woman I have small hands and like to stick my camera in my pocket and don't shoot for money. The M5 is a nice little camera and will be fine for as long as I want. I can put my 100-400 on it with the adaptor when I want to get close, works great. I may even get a SL2 for the meantime.

I have a G7X II that I use for travel. It takes amazingly good pictures for its size. I just printed out a couple of 13" x 19" prints for framing to hang in my hallway. It zooms in only to 100mm equivalent, but has enough additional resolution over the S120 it replaced to make up for it. I use my rebel mostly on a tripod, so the extra weight of the 6D2 shouldn't bother me.

 

[Deleted member 379512]

I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.

All kidding aside, the 5D mkIV lacks the tilt flip screen, so it's not a simple as move up and get a superset of the lower model's features. I'm irritated.

This has been the most irritating part, I have a 6d now, and really like the flip screens and tilt screens that my friends have on their cameras, so was all lined up for this. Unfortunately, I had mistakenly assumed that the iq would improve too.

There really any option with Canon if one wants better iq than the original 6d, and a flip/tilt screen. I just wonder how many people are in the same as I am

 

[Talys]

That's is the funniest conclusion I've ever read... . This camera in many respects has worse IQ and worse video quality than the original 6D from five years ago! It is the Canon 6D'oh . You've gotta be an idiot to pay $2,000 for it. If you wanted 2007 DR, 2010 video and a 2010 APS-C AF system, you could pick something up from eBay for a fraction of the price.

Except, Bryan doesn't say that it has inferior IQ or video quality than the 6D at all. How do you get that, out of:

How do the Canon EOS 6D Mark II noise levels compare the original 6D? Despite the increased resolution, the 6D II's noise levels are very slightly improved at the pixel level. Downsizing the 6D II images to 6D pixel dimensions will give an additional advantage to the 6D II results.

He goes on to say that IQ in isolation is probably not enough to motivate an upgrade from 6D to II, and that noise levels are pretty close to 5DIV.

You can disagree with the review, but please don't make things up.

Like you.. I am also thinking about buying Sony but what adapter are you recommending for your Canon lens that would not frustrate with one focusing , delay, etc with different lenses? Or are you thinking of ditching Canon lens and opt for Zeiss and other lens to go with Sony?

Why would you do that? Canon lens not only have excellent value retention, but they sell very quickly and easily on the second-hand market. I've gotten 70% back on my original purchase price for lenses that were 10 years old, for heavens sake. Just sell them, and buy Sony FE glass. There's no way that EF lens will outperform native Sony lenses, not to mention ergonomics and all that.

 

[dak723]

That's is the funniest conclusion I've ever read... . This camera in many respects has worse IQ and worse video quality than the original 6D from five years ago! It is the Canon 6D'oh . You've gotta be an idiot to pay $2,000 for it. If you wanted 2007 DR, 2010 video and a 2010 APS-C AF system, you could pick something up from eBay for a fraction of the price.

Well you might want to read the comments in other threads from folks who have bought and used the camera. They all find that the IQ is better, the noise much easier to reduce, that the camera is an improvement in almost all aspects over the original 6D. Sure, the improvements may be small, but there has never been a large improvement from one camera generation to the next - and images from pretty much any FF camera brand are essentially the same. So, who's the idiot now?

 

[dak723]

Just sell them, and buy Sony FE glass. There's no way that EF lens will outperform native Sony lenses, not to mention ergonomics and all that.

Well, maybe not. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II and the two kit lenses (28-70mm & 24-70mm) both perform very poorly away from the image center due to the short flange distance of the Sony. My Canon lenses performed much better with adapter - at least in terms of image quality. I understand that the higher end Sony lenses are a big improvement over their kit lenses, but the kit lenses are all that many can afford.

 

[ScottyP]

I'm infuriated. I was going to upgrade from 6d1 to 6d2 but no more. I am going to show Canon what I think of this lackluster incremental progress. Now I'm going to buy a 5d4 instead! Ha! Feel the burn, Canon.

I hope you're joking 'cause otherwise this comment looks rather stupid.

I've said in another post that Canon customers need this camera to fail to hopefully give Canon a much needed wake up call and realise we won't put up with such lacklustre releases. Sadly I suspect it will sell rather well and Canon will Be laughing all the way to the bank.

Now that you mention it, one thing that never fails to make one "look stupid" is to take something literally that was clearly intended ironically. To break it down for you, it would clearly be helping Canon, not hurting them, to forego giving them $2,000.00 and to instead give them $3,200.00. Read it out loud to yourself if it helps.

 

[candc]

Just sell them, and buy Sony FE glass. There's no way that EF lens will outperform native Sony lenses, not to mention ergonomics and all that.

Well, maybe not. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II and the two kit lenses (28-70mm & 24-70mm) both perform very poorly away from the image center due to the short flange distance of the Sony. My Canon lenses performed much better with adapter - at least in terms of image quality. I understand that the higher end Sony lenses are a big improvement over their kit lenses, but the kit lenses are all that many can afford.

I keep asking people about the use of adapters and some (many) have stories like
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2015-10-16-a7r2-5dsr/index.htm
[I don't recommend using that site in general ]

i've gotten good results using the metabones IV adaptor on the a7rii. i did not see the edge softness that kr did in his comparison. i compared the canon 16-35 f/4 to the sony version and found the canon better. the sony is about equal at 16 but the canon is clearly better at 35. af is good with normal fl lenses but drops off as fl increases into the supertele range.

 

[HarryFilm]

After all this kafuffle about the 6Dmk2,
why not just upgrade to a Canon 5Dmk4
or Canon 1DxMk2? The price really isn't
all that much higher and you can always
LEASE the camera and top-notch lenses for
about $300 to $600 per month for 18 to 24
months and do a $600 to $1000 buyout at
the end of the lease!

Look for audio/production houses in your area
and ask THEM where they LEASE their gear from!

 

[Joules]

After all this kafuffle about the 6Dmk2,
why not just upgrade to a Canon 5Dmk4

Because it is significantly more expensive, a bit heavier and lacks the Vari Angle screen, for example. It is simply overkill for a lot of people. And I'm probably not alone in thinking that paying about 60% more (Comparing the price of 2100€ for the 6D II and the 3300€ for the 5D IV in German online stores) when the current 6D II price is already slightly above my budget isn't an option for a hobby.

I'd rather save money and get the 80D or D750 as a replacement for my T3i, both of which would still be a deal better in every aspect that is relevant for me. But the Vari Angle screen is pretty damn high on my priorities list and full-frame is more attractive than staying on the APS-C side of things, so right now the 6D II looks more decent in my eyes. It also has been available from Amazon for "just" 1859€, which puts it close enough to the other two and further apart from the 5D IV.

 

[Aglet]

The 6d2 has image quality that will be mostly usable by most people who will buy it.
It certainly does not come even close enough for a few of us.

It (finally) does have a lot of other good features on it in a nice compact body that will make it more fun and possibly easier to use, whether you're a green-box-shooter, pro, or somewhere in between.

That said, what you're getting for the introductory price is not a bargain by any stretch when compared to the competition.
When the street price hits something around $1500us for a new 6d2 body... then you're getting a reasonable deal, IMO.

If you don't NEED it right now, don't buy it. Promo pricing is likely to begin by the holidays, likely in the form of discounted kits if that works for you. Could be next spring before we see reduced MSRP for body-alone. Watch out for open-box and refurb deals which are often pretty good.

 

[Talys]

After all this kafuffle about the 6Dmk2,
why not just upgrade to a Canon 5Dmk4
or Canon 1DxMk2? The price really isn't
all that much higher and you can always
LEASE the camera and top-notch lenses for
about $300 to $600 per month for 18 to 24
months and do a $600 to $1000 buyout at
the end of the lease!

Look for audio/production houses in your area
and ask THEM where they LEASE their gear from!

For me, it's tilty flippy, which I really can't live without since many of my photos make my camera inaccessible (too high) without a ladder. No fully articulating screen means that I have to use a field monitor; the biggest problem with those is that I have to carry and charge another bag of batteries.

Deal-killers aside, the 5DIV price is a disincentive (though not a deal killer), the size makes 5DIV less comfortable to handhold, and now that I've used it, and 6DII Bluetooth trigger is pretty damn awesome.

The opposite can be said, though, too: "Why would I bother with the 5DIV?" Call it my skill level or the type of shots I take (I don't do sunsets or night shots, really), but I don't think I'd really benefit from a fraction of an EV of DR. I will never shoot videos beyond cute baby raccoons in my back yard that I would be happy with cell-phone quality shots of, and I would never give up size for more weather sealing, because when it's not nice out, I'd rather stay in.

To be perfectly honest, the 80D is an ideal camera for me, with one fault -- I often have ceiling constraints, where I can't get a shot as wide as I want it, because I can't raise the camera any higher. This happens especially on-site. And I can't shoot any wider without distortion, which is unacceptable. Now, these shots are infrequent, but 6DII neatly fixes it.

Dynamic range isn't really an issue for me professionally, because nearly all of the photos have a requirement for the subject to be cut out (transparent background), or against white with natural shadows. The subjects themselves just don't have anything close to the color range that would challenge the hardware.

From a hobby perspective, the low light benefits are nice too.

For me, 6DII is just a nice blend of features, full frame, and price, with sufficient image quality that I'm happy with the shots that I take.

 

[RGF]

sounds like Canon was successful with the camera. Provide an entry level FF that would not steal sales from the more expensive and more profitable 5D M4.

 

[Talys]

Just sell them, and buy Sony FE glass. There's no way that EF lens will outperform native Sony lenses, not to mention ergonomics and all that.

Well, maybe not. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II and the two kit lenses (28-70mm & 24-70mm) both perform very poorly away from the image center due to the short flange distance of the Sony. My Canon lenses performed much better with adapter - at least in terms of image quality. I understand that the higher end Sony lenses are a big improvement over their kit lenses, but the kit lenses are all that many can afford.

I keep asking people about the use of adapters and some (many) have stories like
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2015-10-16-a7r2-5dsr/index.htm
[I don't recommend using that site in general ]

I will freely admit to having no experience in this respect, so I could be totally wrong.

I was kind of assuming that the original Canon lens would be expensive glass, that would get traded in for expensive Sony glass, though. It doesn't really make any sense at all to me to trade in a 6D + 24-70/4 and 70-200II... for a Sony a7RII + kit lens

I am constantly amazed at how much people will offer me for my used (high-end) Canon lenses. I do keep them in perfect condition -- they're sold with no defects, with all the original packaging, and they're pretty much indistinguishable from new. Still, there are very few things in the technology/electronics world that retain value like that, over a period of 5-10 years. I think good Canon glass is one of the best investments when it comes to professional tools.