Canon EOS 6D High Resolution Photo and Video Samples

[unadog]

Don't go overboard analyzing JPEGs posted online.

Start with RAW, and do similar processing so that you know what you get.

One might have sharpening set at "5", one at "0". Those are just samples that conform to some unknown desire of the shooter to portray what they wanted to portray. A mood, etc.

I am NOT saying Canon will be better, or worse, or anything. We jsut need a lot more info.

Michael

 

[Michael7]

The nikon sample just slaughters the canon.

 

[meli]

as long as i remember Canon's samples were always subpar, so lets refrain criticism for now

 

[Marsu42]

because tourists use MF often?

Well, actually that's not that improbable because many tourists carry a small travel tripod for shots like the Canon samples. So if they don't mf (... magic lantern with focus peaking, please) they have at least time to use live view and contrast af.

 

[floex712]

Here are 100% crops taken with both the Nikon D600 and Canon 6D using 135mm & 85mm portrait lenses @ f3.2

The Nikon D600 is so far out performing the Canon 6D in my opinion. I'm giving the Canon a fair chance and waiting for more reviews from other outlets and not just Nikon or Canon themselves but so far, it looks like I'm headed to Nikon.

 

[hmmm]

I think what Canon did with the baobob series is kinda cool. That equatorial vertical milky way rising out of the baobobs is really quite good.

If you look at the baobob branches of the daylight shot against the sky, the edges are not sharp -- similar to the model's facial details. I agree with the opinion that not much sharpening was applied in cooking the jpeg compared to the Nikon.

 

[zrz2005101]

In my eyes the D600 crushed the 6D in that sample comparison, and it you look at the sample taken by 40mm f2.8 STM at f3.5, it's still not quite as good as D600. I compared it with my 1Ds Mark III and the 1Ds Mark III dominated 6D as well. Even with 1Ds Mark II, it still has crisper, more details in its shots. What is happening Canon????? The new camera with the newest technology can't even outperform an 8 years old camera? And don't say oh the ISO performance has gone up, yes it has, but like the 5D2, it's almost useless in sports, not too great for performance shots either, so what's with the high ISO??? You can also push 1ds II and 1ds III's ISO and they are only half a stop below the 5D mark II

 

[Scumbag]

Here are 100% crops taken with both the Nikon D600 and Canon 6D using 135mm & 85mm portrait lenses @ f3.2

The Canon photo is slightly out of focus. It's focused on the hair over her forehead, the right eye is just out of focus, and the left eye is worse. Sharpening is not going to help.

Newsflash!!! EF135mm F/2 front focuses on Canon 6D.

 

[zrz2005101]

Using Dpreview's sample to avoid production model differences, here's a comparison.
6D vs D600 vs 1ds Mark III
top left=D600 ISO100 85mm f1.8G @f3.2 (from nikon image)
top right=1Ds Mark III ISO400 85mm f1.8 @f2.8 (from Dpreview)
bottom left=6D ISO200 135mm f2L @f3.2 (from Canon image)
bottom right=1Ds Mark III ISO800 85mm f1.8 @f3.2 (from Dpreview)

 

[zrz2005101]

Here are 100% crops taken with both the Nikon D600 and Canon 6D using 135mm & 85mm portrait lenses @ f3.2

The Canon photo is slightly out of focus. It's focused on the hair over her forehead, the right eye is just out of focus, and the left eye is worse. Sharpening is not going to help.

Newsflash!!! EF135mm F/2 front focuses on Canon 6D.

Then I have to say that Canon fails big time. Astonished that their photographer took an OOF shot and even posted on the web. Even more it has been used as one of the most important samples for the newly announced camera, fail fail fail

 

[zrz2005101]

Here is a comparison of my 1Ds Mark II and the 6D's other sample pic.
I used standard style which is defaulted at 3 0 0 0, 70-200mm f2.8 IS at f4.5
6D is set at 2 0 0 0 portrait style 40mm f2.8STM at f3.5

I can guarantee you that 70-200mm IS at f4.5 is not sharper than the 40mm f2.8 at 3.5

 

[WSMyles]

Anyone actually looked at the EXIF metadata and filesizes?

The D600 portrait is 10.5MB compared to the 6D's 4.6MB. It's hardly surprising that the brunette's features are mushed up considering how much compression has been forced on the image for the web. The DoF is also very thin and appears not to be in the vertical plane.

Is there some unwritten rule of web advertising that only poorly taken, poorly processed images of marginal subjects are allowed to be published as samples? Virtually all Canon and Nikon "samples" are worse than the images posted by denizens of this forum with a caption "how can I fix this photo?"

It's hard to say much about the shadow noise when the image has been compressed this heavily

 

[zrz2005101]

Don't go overboard analyzing JPEGs posted online.

Start with RAW, and do similar processing so that you know what you get.

One might have sharpening set at "5", one at "0". Those are just samples that conform to some unknown desire of the shooter to portray what they wanted to portray. A mood, etc.

I am NOT saying Canon will be better, or worse, or anything. We jsut need a lot more info.

Michael

I just checked with my DPP and Capture NX
The 6D's portrait using 135L is at 0 0 0 0 neutral style exposure compensation +0.3EV
And D600 in Capture NX showed that it is at 4 0 0 0 portrait style exposure compensation +0.7EV

That gave some light into the 6D...I guess

 

[Gcon]

Image 5 [Portrait] = cute girl. Absolutely horrible image quality. Don't tell me it's a front-focus issue. It's Canon's own website - as if they would post images of front-focused images. If they do then they need to sort themselves out ASAP. It's probably that the 6D can't focus to save itself. FAIL!

Image 6 [Portrait] = eyes are soft. Hair on the top of the head is sharper. Another "horrible focus abilities" issue? FAIL!

Image 2 [Madagascar] = horrible perspective, and bad CA on the RHS. FAIL!

Image 1 [Baobab] = nice image but IQ doesn't impress. Barely a pass.


2005 called (original 5D), and said it wants its AF system back!!!

Canon is so full of fail now, that it's unbelievable.

 

[joemod]

Canon has posted a bunch of images and videos made with the new Canon EOS 6D. As suspected, their results are terrific.

Says who that they are terrific? Canon or CR admin?

 

[mchubi]

Well, looking at that womans portrait I felt quite disappointed about 6D combined with an L-lense. With my 7d and 15-85IS USM I get sharper images! 6D can do it better, as it is shown in portrait of that little girl on canons sample site. And still even this one is far from glorius! I think it was taken by a click and shoot tourist walking by... If not, shame on canon!

Anyway, I spent 2 minutes of my time and ran a little high-pass sharpening combined with rising contrast on that failed womans portrait. Ways better, as you can see below in the first row! (After that I got a little snotty and did the same to the nikon-image - just the other way around. * g * Perhaps those canon samples got a little sabotage?! Ehm...)

Well, Nikon MIGHT do a better job here. But couldn't it be possible that the Nikon-sample got a little postprocessing as well? Combined with a good out-of-cam picture it would not be a surprise that this beats the canon-crap-sample.

After all, those are not exact the same photographies. Different angle, different light and so on. For a fair comparison you NEED the same circumstances and published raws here. This is not given, so push those sample into the dustbin.

 

[unadog]

Anyway, I spent 2 minutes of my time and ran a little high-pass sharpening combined with rising contrast on that failed womans portrait. Ways better, as you can see below in the first row! (After that I got a little snotty and did the same to the nikon-image - just the other way around. * g * Perhaps those canon samples got a little sabotage .....

.... This is not given, so push those sample into the dustbin.

 

[K-amps]

Why the hell would Canon sabotage the shots of the 6D on their site? Why compress it so badly ? Where is their head?

 

[Marsu42]

Why the hell would Canon sabotage the shots of the 6D on their site? Why compress it so badly ? Where is their head?

Probably Canon figures no one will buy the 6d because of stellar sample shots anyway? Those who care about pixels are probably those who won't buy the 6d because of the bad spec/price ratio. And landscape tourists will look at the 17-40L shots @iso100 figuring that ff+gps+wifi will come in handy no matter what the d600 does.

 

[Canon-F1]

let us believe the 6D is as good as the 5D MK2 on low iso.

then maybe it´s best for now to compare the D600 to the 5D MK2.
how well fares the 5D MK2 against the D600.....

there should be enough good 5D MK2 pictures.

;D