6dmk2 with 5dmk4 sensor; should we pay more for it?

[Mikehit]

hypothetically? i may have bought a 6dii for a couple hundred dollars more if it had the best sensor tech canon has available.

i would have bought a 5dsr if it had a real crop mode too.

this segmentation/crippling is irritating. i keep saying that i am never buying another canon dslr but now i am thinking about buying a idxii.

i may not like canon's market strategy with their camera bodies but it seems to be working for them.

Every company segments the market and if they didn't they would have one model to do everything.

i realize that camera manufacturers make different models for different purposes but what canon is doing seems different than sony. the a9, a7rii, a6500, a99 and rx100 all seem to be the best product that sony could put out for their intended purposes.

canon seems to intentionally limit the capabilities of their camera bodies to force you to buy several or a more expensive one.

Sony sensor group (who are not the same group who make the cameras) hit a rich seam with their Exmoor sensors. So let's us take that out of the equation.
Of all the non-sensor functions on Sony what capabilities so Sony have that Canon do not?
4K. And......

 

[tron]

...
It is possible I discover 4K video recording, or shadow lifting (as I do with astronomical imaging), the Canon 5 dmk4 can do it all but with Euro 4130,= for a body it is way over my budget.
...
Gerrit van der Veen, The Netherlands

Maybe you could try an existing option. There are places to order a grey import brand new 5DMkIV for much less ( <= 3000 euros ).

 

[candc]

hypothetically? i may have bought a 6dii for a couple hundred dollars more if it had the best sensor tech canon has available.

i would have bought a 5dsr if it had a real crop mode too.

this segmentation/crippling is irritating. i keep saying that i am never buying another canon dslr but now i am thinking about buying a idxii.

i may not like canon's market strategy with their camera bodies but it seems to be working for them.

Every company segments the market and if they didn't they would have one model to do everything.

i realize that camera manufacturers make different models for different purposes but what canon is doing seems different than sony. the a9, a7rii, a6500, a99 and rx100 all seem to be the best product that sony could put out for their intended purposes.

canon seems to intentionally limit the capabilities of their camera bodies to force you to buy several or a more expensive one.

Sony sensor group (who are not the same group who make the cameras) hit a rich seam with their Exmoor sensors. So let's us take that out of the equation.
Of all the non-sensor functions on Sony what capabilities so Sony have that Canon do not?
4K. And......

ibis is a big one. evf with all the features that go along with it are also. sony just doesn't seem to leave out a feature that doesn't cost them much in order to wring more money out of consumers like canon does.

 

[Larsskv]

hypothetically? i may have bought a 6dii for a couple hundred dollars more if it had the best sensor tech canon has available.

i would have bought a 5dsr if it had a real crop mode too.

this segmentation/crippling is irritating. i keep saying that i am never buying another canon dslr but now i am thinking about buying a idxii.

i may not like canon's market strategy with their camera bodies but it seems to be working for them.

Every company segments the market and if they didn't they would have one model to do everything.

i realize that camera manufacturers make different models for different purposes but what canon is doing seems different than sony. the a9, a7rii, a6500, a99 and rx100 all seem to be the best product that sony could put out for their intended purposes.

The models you mention are top of the line in their segment. Compare the Sony A7II to the A7RII, and you can see that the A7II is "crippled" in many ways- maybe not so much in sensor performance, but as I recall, the A7II is quite crippled with regards to AF capabilities. Many photographers would probably find that having "eye-AF" is more useful than increased dynamic range. The A7RII has it, and the A7II dont.

Why is Sony's product differensiation better/more acceptable than Canons?

 

[LonelyBoy]

Thanks
I do not want to buy a new camera every 2 year or so, a new camera should be good for me for next 8-10 years or so.
It is possible I discover 4K video recording, or shadow lifting (as I do with astronomical imaging), the Canon 5 dmk4 can do it all but with Euro 4130,= for a body it is way over my budget.
A 6 dmk2 with a better sensor should be the camera I'm waiting for.
Don't forget I'm asking a question: should we pay more for a 6 dmk2 with 5 dmk4 sensor? just asking, nothing more.

Gerrit van der Veen, The Netherlands

I honestly have no idea what you're asking. If there were a 6D2 with an on-chip ADC sensor, it would certainly cost more. How much more it would cost would be complete speculation. It's also irrelevant, because such a body will almost certainly not come out any time soon. If you want a body within the next year, you're stuck with the 80D, 6D2, or 5D4, or maybe a 7D3. Or switching. But the question you asked doesn't change what your options are, no matter how frustrated you are.

 

[tcmatthews]

The models you mention are top of the line in their segment. Compare the Sony A7II to the A7RII, and you can see that the A7II is "crippled" in many ways- maybe not so much in sensor performance, but as I recall, the A7II is quite crippled with regards to AF capabilities. Many photographers would probably find that having "eye-AF" is more useful than increased dynamic range. The A7RII has it, and the A7II dont.

Why is Sony's product differensiation better/more acceptable than Canons?

True in hindsight but the do not forget the A7II was released in Nov 2014 and the A7rII was released June 2015. So it is very likely the A7II had the best available at the time. The A7II also did not autofocus in continuous mode with Canon cameras but they corrected that late 2015 in a firmware update. The A7II does not have 4K either.

This is in many ways different than what Canon does.

 

[Mikehit]

The models you mention are top of the line in their segment. Compare the Sony A7II to the A7RII, and you can see that the A7II is "crippled" in many ways- maybe not so much in sensor performance, but as I recall, the A7II is quite crippled with regards to AF capabilities. Many photographers would probably find that having "eye-AF" is more useful than increased dynamic range. The A7RII has it, and the A7II dont.

Why is Sony's product differensiation better/more acceptable than Canons?

True in hindsight but the do not forget the A7II was released in Nov 2014 and the A7rII was released June 2015. So it is very likely the A7II had the best available at the time. The A7II also did not autofocus in continuous mode with Canon cameras but they corrected that late 2015 in a firmware update. The A7II does not have 4K either.

This is in many ways different than what Canon does.

If I recall correctly, Sony faced criticism at the time because the Rii corrected the omissions that people felt the A7ii should have had on release an people criticised Sony for (a) releasing a half-baked product or (b) profiting from early adopters. Both held validity because of the short timeline between the two releases.
Which sounds pretty much like criticisms aimed at Canon

 

[Loswr]

Don't forget I'm asking a question: should we pay more for a 6 dmk2 with 5 dmk4 sensor? just asking, nothing more.

That's like asking, "Should we pay more for a unicorn than a horse?" :

 

[LonelyBoy]

Don't forget I'm asking a question: should we pay more for a 6 dmk2 with 5 dmk4 sensor? just asking, nothing more.

That's like asking, "Should we pay more for a unicorn than a horse?" :

Unless you're a virgin female, what would you even do with a unicorn?

 

[tcmatthews]

I do not like the size of the 5 series bodies. But I think that if the 5D iV had a flip screen and true 4K support it would look much more attractive to me. But I would still have a hard time pulling the trigger on a camera that truly does not fit my hands.

If they put all the features of the 5D IV, true 4K, minus the dual cards support, and a flip screen in a 6D body next year. I would likely pay the going price of the 5D IV. I would prefer it around $2500-$2800. Which is all I would ever consider buying the 5D IV for.

That said it would need to have SD UHSII or something simular to support 4K adequately.

As to pay more for the IV sensor sure $200-$400 with SD UHSII .

 

[Larsskv]

The models you mention are top of the line in their segment. Compare the Sony A7II to the A7RII, and you can see that the A7II is "crippled" in many ways- maybe not so much in sensor performance, but as I recall, the A7II is quite crippled with regards to AF capabilities. Many photographers would probably find that having "eye-AF" is more useful than increased dynamic range. The A7RII has it, and the A7II dont.

Why is Sony's product differensiation better/more acceptable than Canons?

True in hindsight but the do not forget the A7II was released in Nov 2014 and the A7rII was released June 2015. So it is very likely the A7II had the best available at the time. The A7II also did not autofocus in continuous mode with Canon cameras but they corrected that late 2015 in a firmware update. The A7II does not have 4K either.

This is in many ways different than what Canon does.

On the other hand, Sony released their A7-cameras within a short period of time, upgrading so fast that the newest and best, was only newest and best for a few months. This release-better-and-better-models-within-short-time tactic was first shown in the Sony RX1. A few months after the release of the RX1, and when the hype had started to slow down, Sony released the RX1-R. The same was true with the A7, and the release of the A7R a bit later, and than again with the A7II and A7RII.

Contrary to Sony-buyers, Canon-buyers can feel reasured, that paying a premium gives them a top of the line product for the forseeable future, and Canon seems to do the major upgrades to their top of the line models before the lower models. The 1DX was upgraded before the 5DIII, and the 5DIII before the 6D. I haven't heard of 1DX buyers that felt cheated because the 5DIII had better features than the 1DX...

 

[LonelyBoy]

I do not like the size of the 5 series bodies. But I think that if the 5D iV had a flip screen and true 4K support it would look much more attractive to me. But I would still have a hard time pulling the trigger on a camera that truly does not fit my hands.

If they put all the features of the 5D IV, true 4K, minus the dual cards support, and a flip screen in a 6D body next year. I would likely pay the going price of the 5D IV. I would prefer it around $2500-$2800. Which is all I would ever consider buying the 5D IV for.

That said it would need to have SD UHSII or something simular to support 4K adequately.

As to pay more for the IV sensor sure $200-$400 with SD UHSII .

So what you're saying is you'd like a better camera for less money. Shocking.

 

[amorse]

Would I pay more for a 6D II with a 5D IV sensor? Yes - absolutely. How much more? No idea - I've gone a different direction and moved away from considering the 6D II.

I had an original 6D which I used and loved. It was a great camera and took great photos for my needs. I take photos of almost exclusively landscapes and nearly always on a tripod. My biggest desires for improvement on the 6D were increased base ISO dynamic range, improved weather sealing, increased resolution, and maybe further improvements in low light capabilities (in that order). I certainly understand that these are not what everyone else needs, and I concede that the discussions on DR are splitting hairs for the most part. However, I did find myself lifting shadows on maybe 50% of the photos I took, and I almost always used ND grads or bracketing to overcome the challenge.

When the 6D II was announced I was thinking I would see maybe 3 of my 4 desired improvements over the 6D, and while this seemed to be true, it was not the 3 I expected! In the end I weighed my options and felt the 5D IV was a better fit, so I picked one up last week.

Since I sold my 6D to pick up the 5D IV I couldn't do direct comparisons, but I will say that my initial reactions for the 5D IV have been extremely positive! I have found the files produced suit my need very well and I have no complaints. Anecdotally, I have found that the 5D IV handled scenes where I had expected dynamic range challenges much better than I expected, so I'm happy.

If the 6D II had the 5D IV sensor I probably would have picked one up instead and saved some money. In the end, however, the 5D IV is a more robust camera which satisfies all my needs and gives me loads of room to grow as a photographer - although there can be no doubt that my skill needs more improvement than my camera does . Regardless, I'm a happy camper!

 

[Larsskv]

Would I pay more for a 6D II with a 5D IV sensor? Yes - absolutely. How much more? No idea - I've gone a different direction and moved away from considering the 6D II.

I had an original 6D which I used and loved. It was a great camera and took great photos for my needs. I take photos of almost exclusively landscapes and nearly always on a tripod. My biggest desires for improvement on the 6D were increased base ISO dynamic range, improved weather sealing, increased resolution, and maybe further improvements in low light capabilities (in that order). I certainly understand that these are not what everyone else needs, and I concede that the discussions on DR are splitting hairs for the most part. However, I did find myself lifting shadows on maybe 50% of the photos I took, and I almost always used ND grads or bracketing to overcome the challenge.

When the 6D II was announced I was thinking I would see maybe 3 of my 4 desired improvements over the 6D, and while this seemed to be true, it was not the 3 I expected! In the end I weighed my options and felt the 5D IV was a better fit, so I picked one up last week.

Since I sold my 6D to pick up the 5D IV I couldn't do direct comparisons, but I will say that my initial reactions for the 5D IV have been extremely positive! I have found the files produced suit my need very well and I have no complaints. Anecdotally, I have found that the 5D IV handled scenes where I had expected dynamic range challenges much better than I expected, so I'm happy.

If the 6D II had the 5D IV sensor I probably would have picked one up instead and saved some money. In the end, however, the 5D IV is a more robust camera which satisfies all my needs and gives me loads of room to grow as a photographer - although there can be no doubt that my skill needs more improvement than my camera does . Regardless, I'm a happy camper!

I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV?

Holding "back" on the 6DII is sort of fair towards the 5DIV buyers...

 

[LonelyBoy]

I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV?

Holding "back" on the 6DII is sort of fair towards the 5DIV buyers...

That way of thinking would be the path to unhappiness with any purchase. The better way to think of it would be feeling lucky for having had another six months with a camera that made you happy. That would be like buying a new car, then being upset that the next model, a year later, had newer features. Or that you buy a TV, and then the next year they're bigger, cheaper, and better.

 

[MayaTlab]

And in this estimate psychological markers come into play: the simplest of these, and one everyone is aware of, is that 1,999 sounds so much cheaper than 2,001, so if they had put the 5D4 sensor in there instead of the current one and launched at $2,200 it is probable they would not have hit sales targets

That only concerns less than 30% of the world. In the eurozone, for example, it's at €2099 at least (except on Amazon, which already discounts it on a weird intermittent basis). In Japan, it's above 200 000 yens.

 

[reef58]

Would I pay more for a 6D II with a 5D IV sensor? Yes - absolutely. How much more? No idea - I've gone a different direction and moved away from considering the 6D II.

I had an original 6D which I used and loved. It was a great camera and took great photos for my needs. I take photos of almost exclusively landscapes and nearly always on a tripod. My biggest desires for improvement on the 6D were increased base ISO dynamic range, improved weather sealing, increased resolution, and maybe further improvements in low light capabilities (in that order). I certainly understand that these are not what everyone else needs, and I concede that the discussions on DR are splitting hairs for the most part. However, I did find myself lifting shadows on maybe 50% of the photos I took, and I almost always used ND grads or bracketing to overcome the challenge.

When the 6D II was announced I was thinking I would see maybe 3 of my 4 desired improvements over the 6D, and while this seemed to be true, it was not the 3 I expected! In the end I weighed my options and felt the 5D IV was a better fit, so I picked one up last week.

Since I sold my 6D to pick up the 5D IV I couldn't do direct comparisons, but I will say that my initial reactions for the 5D IV have been extremely positive! I have found the files produced suit my need very well and I have no complaints. Anecdotally, I have found that the 5D IV handled scenes where I had expected dynamic range challenges much better than I expected, so I'm happy.

If the 6D II had the 5D IV sensor I probably would have picked one up instead and saved some money. In the end, however, the 5D IV is a more robust camera which satisfies all my needs and gives me loads of room to grow as a photographer - although there can be no doubt that my skill needs more improvement than my camera does . Regardless, I'm a happy camper!

I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV?

Holding "back" on the 6DII is sort of fair towards the 5DIV buyers...

Maybe my new cheap laptop can go back to a 386 processor so I don't feel cheated about the $4000 laptop I bought 10 years ago. I am not sure why people feel retroactively cheated on products especially ones that are obsolete in short order. That is part of the deal. If you feel comfortable with your purchase when you bought it don't worry about what happens in 6 months. If you do then you will forever be living in fear of the next product announcement.

To the OP yes I would pay more. I would probably pay close to 5d4 prices as I want the tilt screen and the image quality. I would pay even more for a 5d4 with a tilt screen. 5k.

 

[amorse]

I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV?

Holding "back" on the 6DII is sort of fair towards the 5DIV buyers...

I understand the logic behind that sentiment, but to offer a counter point I do think that the needs of camera buyers are very different, and the best option for any buyer will always depend on what is on the market at that time. The 6D II will excel over the 5D IV in some ways, and I'm sure there could be a few 5D IV buyers out there who may see the 6D II as a better solution than the 5D IV in hindsight. For instance, if someone really needs the tilty screen on a full frame camera they may have just bought the 5D IV thinking that Canon wouldn't introduce the feature.

I waited for the 6D II to be released so that I could compare it to the 5D IV and make my decision. I half debated waiting for the 5DSR II, but lost my patience. In the end, buying any camera early in its lifecycle runs the risk of being outperformed by later (if even lower grade) models in some ways. But to be fair, taking that early buying risk also offers the advantage of having the new product earlier - if I knew what the 6D II would offer a year ago I could have made my choice then and bought the 5D IV and had been using the camera for a year at this point.

By that logic I think you could make the argument that 7D II buyers could feel cheated by the great performance of the 80D, so there is always the risk that a lower end model will out perform a high end model in some ways.

 

[tron]

I am glad you enjoy your 5DIV. But, picture yourself this. You paid up for the 5DIV 6 months ago, and when the 6DII came, it could give you all you wanted and needed. Wouldn't´t you feel a bit cheated for paying the premium for the 5DIV?

Holding "back" on the 6DII is sort of fair towards the 5DIV buyers...

I understand the logic behind that sentiment, but to offer a counter point I do think that the needs of camera buyers are very different, and the best option for any buyer will always depend on what is on the market at that time. The 6D II will excel over the 5D IV in some ways, and I'm sure there could be a few 5D IV buyers out there who may see the 6D II as a better solution than the 5D IV in hindsight. For instance, if someone really needs the tilty screen on a full frame camera they may have just bought the 5D IV thinking that Canon wouldn't introduce the feature.

I waited for the 6D II to be released so that I could compare it to the 5D IV and make my decision. I half debated waiting for the 5DSR II, but lost my patience. In the end, buying any camera early in its lifecycle runs the risk of being outperformed by later (if even lower grade) models in some ways. But to be fair, taking that early buying risk also offers the advantage of having the new product earlier - if I knew what the 6D II would offer a year ago I could have made my choice then and bought the 5D IV and had been using the camera for a year at this point.

By that logic I think you could make the argument that 7D II buyers could feel cheated by the great performance of the 80D, so there is always the risk that a lower end model will out perform a high end model in some ways.

+1 You get the better product 1 year earlier and enjoy its advantages. The fact that an even newer product will appear does not change much since it will have slight advantage (6D vs 5D3 in low light iso) tops vs. the much bigger advantage that the early buying provided (see 5D4 vs 5D3).

 

[unfocused]

Don't forget I'm asking a question: should we pay more for a 6 dmk2 with 5 dmk4 sensor? just asking, nothing more.

That's like asking, "Should we pay more for a unicorn than a horse?" :

Unless you're a virgin female, what would you even do with a unicorn?

Pretty sexist comment.

Honestly, who wouldn't want a horse with a badass pointy horn?