Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR

[zim]

I still say wait until results from retail units are analyzed, but it does not look promising.....

If it is not a significant improvement over the 6D, I will not be getting one.

I think this comes up with every model in recent years.
Do they release a new model to entice people to upgrade within that model (6D to 6D2, 5DIII to 5DIV etc)? Or is it aimed at people wanting a functional updgrade (APS-C to FF) or a second body.

Remember all the calls of 'the 5DIV is insufficient an upgrade' only to find that many pros did upgrade because of overall usability? My guess is that a lot of 6D owners will upgrade for no other reason than tilty screen and better off-centre AF and all they want is that the image quality is no worse.

In general (and not just with cameras) I tend to skip models as the model to model upgrades are insufficient to tempt me, but when you skip two models it is a different story. It's like the 7D3 rumors.... I have very little interest in it, but by the time the 7D4 comes out, I will be ready to jump.

Totally agree with skipping models but I'm waiting with great interest in the 7D3 to upgrade from 7D. It's a tough wait as it is I couldn't cope waiting for a 7D4!

 

[Orangutan]

The thing is, Aglet, you are complaining about what you want to see. Canon's objective is to give the market what the market needs. Not you.

If the 6DII is a commercial success (as even you seem to say it will) then surely that vindicates Canon's position and shows your view is is one of narrow self interest?

What i wanted to see was an improvement in IQ from this product.

This is the key part of your post: not everyone else prioritizes the same improvements that you do. A Canon 1-series will not have the IQ of a Phase1 MF, but the P1 will not have the speed/AF of the 1-series. Each model is a balance of features, cost, profit, etc.

You are entitled to your preferences, but don't disparage others who disagree.

I'm not buying one. Not even at an 80D price.

At that price I certainly would. I may even buy one in a few months when the price drops or it hits the refurb store.

 

[SecureGSM]

I never mentioned the base ISO DR being an issue. are you really that much confused?
I said the following: There is no NOISE LEVEL and COLOUR CAST advantage at HIGH ISO ( ISO 1600 and higher) in properly processed RAW images taken with 6d II over the ones taken with 6D original. I am sure that you appreciate the difference between base iSO DR and noise levels at higher ISO.

I have noticed that as well. not sure if that is due to image to image variation or the real 6D II sharpness advantage. looking at the images below, the sharpest is the 6D II, following by 5D III, then 5D IV (downsampled though), and then 6D original.

On a side note, the 6DII at least really seems sharper, both in terms of image detail and noise texture to me. Still haven't touched any RAWs myself, but if that turns out to be true, I find that fairly great.

Wait, sharpness matters? I thought it was only base ISO DR?? Now I'm confused on what constitutes IQ. ???

Seriously, that is almost too much of a difference. The 6D is so soft that I almost have to ask if focus was slightly off. If that test is legit than I'd argue that is a very significant improvement in sensor IQ for the mark II.

 

[BillB]

What i wanted to see was an improvement in IQ from this product.

And it looks like there is if you look at Secure's emails

Canon is providing the market with something that will sell and make profit. Not exactly what was wanted, and nothing it needed.

If it is not wanted, how will it sell and make a profit?
What was needed (according to pre-announcement hype) was a 6D with better AF and a tilty screen. That is what they have delivered.

You are contradicting yourself only because it did not meet your expectations. So either Canon got this model wrong or you had unrealistic expectations.
Which one was it?

Kind of an expectation-bait-and-switch. They're good at it. Lots of practice.

Do you even know what 'bait and switch' means?
What did they promise and what did they switch?

If I can follow Aglet's reasoning, he is talking about DR hopes dashed, rather that Canon promises broken. This seems to be a recurring pattern when Canon brings out a new camera (and a recurring pattern for Aglet in particular). Depending on how you feel about DPR, magic numbers purporting to measure DR appear as soon as the camera hits the street, and the fun begins, as the usual people discover horrible banding and other fatal flaws in their new Canon Camera.

Between DPR, DRones and Canon bashers, the significance of the DR number is greatly exagerrated. In the case of the 6DII, Canon did play a part in the current go around of the ongoing DR game. They may not have promised ADC on board the 6DII sensor, but given Canon's camera releases over the part couple of years, on board ADC (or more precisely an equivalent DR level) was an understanable expectation. I know I expected it.

Some people have been in Chicken Little mode on 6DII DR, but overall, I think the discussion of the 6DII here at Canon Rumors has been very informative and useful. At this point, upgrading any Full Frame digital camera is going to have marginal impact on IQ, and that impact is pretty much limited to shadow lifting when shooting at low ISO's and printing very large images. By extension, this also applies to choosing among the FF digital cameras now on the market. How many people really use their cameras to make prints larger than 12x18, for example?

 

[Mikehit]

If I can follow Aglet's reasoning, he is talking about DR hopes dashed, rather that Canon promises broken.

You may interpret it like that, but Aglet was quite clear. He accused Canon of 'bait and switch' and they have 'lots of practice'.
Canon talked about the quality of the 6D2 matching the newer cameras but did not talk about technology - and given that omitting reference to on-chip DAC raised a lot of discussion Canon were hardly being deceptive.

 

[Luds34]

I never mentioned the base ISO DR being an issue. are you really that much confused?
I said the following: There is no NOISE LEVEL and COLOUR CAST advantage at HIGH ISO ( ISO 1600 and higher) in properly processed RAW images taken with 6d II over the ones taken with 6D original. I am sure that you appreciate the difference between base iSO DR and noise levels at higher ISO.

I have noticed that as well. not sure if that is due to image to image variation or the real 6D II sharpness advantage. looking at the images below, the sharpest is the 6D II, following by 5D III, then 5D IV (downsampled though), and then 6D original.

On a side note, the 6DII at least really seems sharper, both in terms of image detail and noise texture to me. Still haven't touched any RAWs myself, but if that turns out to be true, I find that fairly great.

Wait, sharpness matters? I thought it was only base ISO DR?? Now I'm confused on what constitutes IQ. ???

Seriously, that is almost too much of a difference. The 6D is so soft that I almost have to ask if focus was slightly off. If that test is legit than I'd argue that is a very significant improvement in sensor IQ for the mark II.

I sure do, but I think your sarcasm detection routine was off when you read my statement. Especially when my next paragraph begins with seriously as this was there to imply what I stated before was in jest. Besides, my DR jest/joke was not directed at you and was more making light (pun intended) of all the folks whom are overly obsessed with the lack of DR improvement from the orig 6d. In short, I was agreeing with you and questioning that MUCH of an improvement in sharpness as well.

Continuing the discussion... The base ISO DR is more than adequate for 99% of real world shooting. If this sharpness improvement is accurate, that has far greater implications in real world shooting.

 

[sebasan]

If I can follow Aglet's reasoning, he is talking about DR hopes dashed, rather that Canon promises broken.

You may interpret it like that, but Aglet was quite clear. He accused Canon of 'bait and switch' and they have 'lots of practice'.
Canon talked about the quality of the 6D2 matching the newer cameras but did not talk about technology - and given that omitting reference to on-chip DAC raised a lot of discussion Canon were hardly being deceptive.

When a person believe that DR(at base ISO) = IQ, what he/she says is irrelevant

 

[BPLOL]

Someone needs to update that video with the japanese guy laughing, but now he'll say how the 6D was an accident, never supposed to have better IQ than the 5DIII.

 

[Joules]

When a person believe that DR(at base ISO) = IQ, what he/she says is irrelevant

That's the reasoning which turns every negative comments into a troll and any positive comment into a fanboy. I don't think that helps much.

There shouldn't be all this belittling of others peoples desires (NOT needs, although people might confuse those themselfes). The majority of Canon's ILC lineup seems dedicated at consumers and not business photographers who earn money with their photography. So there's no reason why irrational, emotional concepts like "I want more" should be silenced. Does it really hurt anybody if someone says camera x isn't right for his or her needs? It only becomes objectionable if that person thinks their needs are the same as everybody elses and therefore the camera is objectively bad or perfect.

 

[SecureGSM]

absolutely! I was about to feed RAW test files from each camera into Focal for the sharpness analysis, but my Commercial License has just expired. I will get this sorted out in next few days.

..Continuing the discussion... The base ISO DR is more than adequate for 99% of real world shooting. If this sharpness improvement is accurate, that has far greater implications in real world shooting.

 

[Luds34]

absolutely! I was about to feed RAW test files from each camera into Focal for the sharpness analysis, but my Commercial License has just expired. I will get this sorted out in next few days.

..Continuing the discussion... The base ISO DR is more than adequate for 99% of real world shooting. If this sharpness improvement is accurate, that has far greater implications in real world shooting.

Excellent, I look forward to seeing your analysis!

I also look forward to further test shots as they come in from other sources as the camera becomes more available. Because I think we both were feeling, eluding to the fact that the sharpness improvement in those test shots look a little bit "too good to be true".

But if they indeed are representative of what we'll see with this camera than I am ecstatic and cannot wait for my copy to arrive. I keep hoping my pre-order gets out a bit earlier than the 27th estimated timeframe.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Aglet if you handled your comments better you could appear quite bright instead of looking like a fool. Just a thought. Of course you may wish to look like a fool and that's your prerogative. Reminds me of the Dilbert days/daze.

My 6D is gone and most likely there will be a 6D2 before spring for this sucker and folks will look upon me with scorn, and I, in aglet like fashion will relish it.

Jack

 

[LonelyBoy]

When a person believe that DR(at base ISO) = IQ, what he/she says is irrelevant

That's the reasoning which turns every negative comments into a troll and any positive comment into a fanboy. I don't think that helps much.

There shouldn't be all this belittling of others peoples desires (NOT needs, although people might confuse those themselfes). The majority of Canon's ILC lineup seems dedicated at consumers and not business photographers who earn money with their photography. So there's no reason why irrational, emotional concepts like "I want more" should be silenced. Does it really hurt anybody if someone says camera x isn't right for his or her needs? It only becomes objectionable if that person thinks their needs are the same as everybody elses and therefore the camera is objectively bad or perfect.

You mean exactly what Aglet has been doing all this time?

 

[Joules]

You mean exactly what Aglet has been doing all this time?

Yeah, pretty much. Although he reads like an up and down. At times he has me at the "Switch to ABC" side, and then he's going over the top and giving Neuro the fodder to bring me back to the "Canon can't go wrong" side. This forum is pretty heated at times, as far as I can tell from reading it way too much. That's why I wanted to point out one aspect that fuels it mor than necessary in my opinion. That topic is pretty off though.

Too bad renting stuff is so expensive, I'd love to get a grip on the differences between Canon and ABC IQ myself.

 

[snoke]

The majority of Canon's ILC lineup seems dedicated at consumers and not business photographers who earn money with their photography.

When you see the number of professional photographers using Canon and that this is more than all of the other brands combined, you get a feeling for what the value of that statement is worth. But do those professionals make more for Canon than all of the consumers? Better question. Think also about how much effort (and cost!) Canon puts into supporting Olympics, etc.

 

[Joules]

The majority of Canon's ILC lineup seems dedicated at consumers and not business photographers who earn money with their photography.

When you see the number of professional photographers using Canon and that this is more than all of the other brands combined, you get a feeling for what the value of that statement is worth. But do those professionals make more for Canon than all of the consumers? Better question. Think also about how much effort (and cost!) Canon puts into supporting Olympics, etc.

Yeah, I'm well aware that consumer business is way less relevant for most companies than professional business.

The point I was trying to make was losely along the lines of "Many people who use Canon don't do it in a professional context and therefore might be irrationally influenced in their buying decisions. I don't see that as a reason to call their opinions irrelevant". Might still be a weak point, it certainly doesn't matter anyway. It's way too nice and easy to but people into boxes on the internet Off topic anyway, so here you go, you win.

 

[Loswr]

The majority of Canon's ILC lineup seems dedicated at consumers and not business photographers who earn money with their photography.

Yeah, so few pros using Canon at the Super Bowl and other major sporting events.

[quote author=Canon USA]
The sidelines of the big game were lined with photographers using Canon EOS Digital SLR cameras and iconic white lenses. Canon is honored that more than 75 percent of professional photographers covering the game utilized Canon DSLR cameras and EF lenses to capture and share the memorable moments of the gridiron matchup. Canon broadcast lenses were also used extensively to deliver the game to more than 111 million television viewers.
[/quote]

 

[Sporgon]

When a person believe that DR(at base ISO) = IQ, what he/she says is irrelevant

That's the reasoning which turns every negative comments into a troll and any positive comment into a fanboy. I don't think that helps much.

There shouldn't be all this belittling of others peoples desires (NOT needs, although people might confuse those themselfes). The majority of Canon's ILC lineup seems dedicated at consumers and not business photographers who earn money with their photography. So there's no reason why irrational, emotional concepts like "I want more" should be silenced. Does it really hurt anybody if someone says camera x isn't right for his or her needs? It only becomes objectionable if that person thinks their needs are the same as everybody elses and therefore the camera is objectively bad or perfect.

But stating that DR=IQ without any context or qualifications is silly. That means that you should be able to see poorer image quality in a low ISO shot from a lower DR camera where everything is sitting where it should be on the response 'curve' of the sensor. And you can't, format for format, mp for mp, output for output.

 

[Joules]

The majority of Canon's ILC lineup seems dedicated at consumers and not business photographers who earn money with their photography.

Yeah, so few pros using Canon at the Super Bowl and other major sporting events.

Yeah, I made a poor statement there. From my perspective, the 7D, 5D and 1D series are the only one aiming at mostly professional customers, whereas the rest of the lineup (Which consits of more than 3 cameras and is therefore the majority) is mostly aimed at people who do photography as a hobby, like myself. My point was that those people might be less rational and more emotional, as consumers are often. But that alone doesn't make their opinion irrelevant for me, like the post I quoted suggested. Is that something you disagree on?

i might still word it poorly, or I simply might be wrong. I'm not saying that professional Canon users are rare or that they are less or equaly relevant to Canon than the consumers. I'm just trying to say that I personally don't see it as helpfull to throw labels like irrelevant or troll or fanboy at anybody who has some irrational desires.

@ sporgon: I fully agree, it seems silly. That's why I said earlier that Aglets post don't feel too convincing to me when he's going over the top with the weight he put's on some issues. But his opinion isn't irrelevant to me, at least it's part of the reason for me to finally get an account here and get some proper input on why the 6DII isn't as disapointing as some perspectives might make it out to be. So, his negativity has driven me to better evaluate the situation and therefore made me still consider the 6DII as the upgrade for my old T3i.

If I'm not getting anything proper accros here, it's fine, I'll better give up before getting stumped by neuro

 

[Jack Douglas]

Opposing opinions lead to debate and debate flushes out the truth. That's assuming the statements are rational and relevant and not a broken record. In that case they accomplish the opposite and are at most good for a laugh. OK, an honest mistake or misunderstood concept stated emphatically is not the problem, it's, well, you know ... Every new camera and it's the same old nonsense.

Jack