Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

[jmoya]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

Well, no-one has explained to me how the 'crap' dynamic range of the FF 6D2 printed at A2 compares to the supposed superior dynamic range of the SL2 blown up to A2. Then dial back and how the two compare at successively smaller sized.

If you display on facebook you wil not notice the difference.
if you only present on websites like canonrumors you are highly unlikely to see the difference.
If you print at A3 you may see the difference.

 

[BillB]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

Two advantages of full frame are better high ISO performance and better quality in large prints. 6DII has better AF than the SL2 as well, and some other nice features. The 80D would be another choice. Your money, your call.

 

[Khalai]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Or does Sony finally managed to resolve overheating in prolonged recording?

Actually apparently yes, as the A9 seems to be doing just fine in that regard.

Good for them. But that's a flagship camera, that would be outright outrageous if it has issues (apart from banding under fluorescent light with electronic shutter, but that's a global problem with all electronic shutters until global shutters emerge). You are not trying to compare A9 with 6D II, aren't you?

But if you google "Sony AND 4K AND overheating" you can read until end of days...

 

[Khalai]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

If you stay at ISO 100, than in terms of DR you are correct. As soon as you raise ISO over 400 or print larger prints that "crap" 6D II will trample poor SL2 to the smithereens

That "crap" DR only applies at base ISO value. And if you expose properly and/or use exposure blending, you can avoid that altogether. Make no mistake - 6D II has good dynamic range, it's just not as good as its peers and many people (myself included) are disappointed that Canon didn't improve 6D II in that regard (such as 5D IV was improved or 80D). But that doesn't make it inherently bad camera with crap DR.

 

[CanonGuy]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

If you stay at ISO 100, than in terms of DR you are correct. As soon as you raise ISO over 400 or print larger prints that "crap" 6D II will trample poor SL2 to the smithereens

That "crap" DR only applies at base ISO value. And if you expose properly and/or use exposure blending, you can avoid that altogether. Make no mistake - 6D II has good dynamic range, it's just not as good as its peers and many people (myself included) are disappointed that Canon didn't improve 6D II in that regard (such as 5D IV was improved or 80D). But that doesn't make it inherently bad camera with crap DR.

If I have to guess, I think 80% of all the pictures are taken bellow 400 ISO. Just saying.

 

[Khalai]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

If I have to guess, I think 80% of all the pictures are taken bellow 400 ISO. Just saying.

What pictures? You mean ALL pictures in the world? Now, that's some wild guesstimating

Maybe 80% of your pictures and that's allright, everyone has different needs and shoots in different conditions. But assuming that 80% of all images taken in gerenal are below 400 is a very far stretch...

EDIT: I've just quickly reviews my Lightroom calatogue and filtered ISO speeds from around 5K of my latest photos. About third is on ISO 100-200, some on 400 and good half of my pictures are 1600-3200 ISO. Just for illustration that your 80% is definitely not everybody's 80%

 

[jmoya]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

Well, no-one has explained to me how the 'crap' dynamic range of the FF 6D2 printed at A2 compares to the supposed superior dynamic range of the SL2 blown up to A2. Then dial back and how the two compare at successively smaller sized.

If you display on facebook you wil not notice the difference.
if you only present on websites like canonrumors you are highly unlikely to see the difference.
If you print at A3 you may see the difference.

Thanks for the response. I intended to use the canon 6d mark II as my vlogging and cinematic sequences on my vlogging channel. That was the idea. But with only 1080 at 60...my canon g7x does that. But then I kept seeing all the posts saying this is not a video camera and was meant for stills. Then I thought... awesome, so atleast the DR and still will be awesome with some video features. Then I saw the DR reports...Crap...I guess it's not going to be an awesome stills camera like the previous 6d. Back to square one on using my 5d III which has a lot of noise and banding when The shadows are pulled. But I have all this L glass... I have the money to get the 1dx II but the size and weight I don't want for all the travelling and hikes I do. SMH

 

[Famateur]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

Sure:

1.) Low light performance
2.) Depth of field
3.) 45 Point AF system
4.) GPS
5.) 6.5 FPS
6.) Anti-Flicker
7.) 26MP
8.) 98% Viewfinder Coverage
9.) Battery Life (nearly triple)
10.) AFMA (not sure if SL2 has it, but I doubt it)

Base ISO dynamic range isn't everything. For those who need it above all else, there are other systems available. For most shooters, it's just one part of a much, much bigger picture. Personally, the ratio of times I wish I had better low-light performance to the times I wish I could push shadows in a scene with high dynamic range (beyond what the 6DII can do anyway) is probably 1000:1.

I know I'm not everyone, but sometimes it's easy to get caught up in specs and comparison charts and forget that the thing we're pining for affects maybe 1-2% of our shooting. Obviously, if it affects more than about 20% of your shooting, you'll be looking elsewhere than the 6DII...

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

Well, no-one has explained to me how the 'crap' dynamic range of the FF 6D2 printed at A2 compares to the supposed superior dynamic range of the SL2 blown up to A2. Then dial back and how the two compare at successively smaller sized.

If you display on facebook you wil not notice the difference.
if you only present on websites like canonrumors you are highly unlikely to see the difference.
If you print at A3 you may see the difference.

Thanks for the response. I intended to use the canon 6d mark II as my vlogging and cinematic sequences on my vlogging channel. That was the idea. But with only 1080 at 60...my canon g7x does that. But then I kept seeing all the posts saying this is not a video camera and was meant for stills. Then I thought... awesome, so atleast the DR and still will be awesome with some video features. Then I saw the DR reports...Crap...I guess it's not going to be an awesome stills camera like the previous 6d. Back to square one on using my 5d III which has a lot of noise and banding when The shadows are pulled. But I have all this L glass... I have the money to get the 1dx II but the size and weight I don't want for all the travelling and hikes I do. SMH

If you are into vlogging, a vast majority of youtube footage is still 1080 or less. And that includes nearly all video of people complaining Canon does not do 4k!

 

[BillB]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

The first one is easy to do. The second one is not. The second one is what everyone complains about when they say "Why is there no 4K on this camera?"

- A

Complain without understanding the problematics about throughput, encoding, capacity issues, heat dissipation etc.

The problem is, only (in the most part) Canon omits 4k citing those issues. The other manufacturers seem to manage those issues and include 4k in their gears.

Maybe canon shiuld fire their worthless engineers and hire some capable ones who wouldn't cite those issues and get the work done?

So far as I know, no one has ever introduced a full frame camera with 4K video for less than $3000, or $1000 more than the 6DII . The Sony that needs an external recorder for 4K video does not count.

 

[Khalai]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Thanks for the response. I intended to use the canon 6d mark II as my vlogging and cinematic sequences on my vlogging channel. That was the idea. But with only 1080 at 60...my canon g7x does that. But then I kept seeing all the posts saying this is not a video camera and was meant for stills. Then I thought... awesome, so atleast the DR and still will be awesome with some video features. Then I saw the DR reports...Crap...I guess it's not going to be an awesome stills camera like the previous 6d. Back to square one on using my 5d III which has a lot of noise and banding when The shadows are pulled. But I have all this L glass... I have the money to get the 1dx II but the size and weight I don't want for all the travelling and hikes I do. SMH

But 6D II is not WORSE It has improved many things from original 6D, but DR was unfortunately not one of those things. But it will take at least same quality of images as 6D. So why would it not be awesome stills camera?

 

[Cthulhu]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Or does Sony finally managed to resolve overheating in prolonged recording?

Actually apparently yes, as the A9 seems to be doing just fine in that regard.

Good for them. But that's a flagship camera, that would be outright outrageous if it has issues (apart from banding under fluorescent light with electronic shutter, but that's a global problem with all electronic shutters until global shutters emerge). You are not trying to compare A9 with 6D II, aren't you?

But if you google "Sony AND 4K AND overheating" you can read until end of days...

I'm not comparing it to anything, you asked if they figured the video overheating out and I'm pointing out that their only new offering on that mount says yes.

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Sure:

1.) Low light performance
2.) Depth of field
3.) 45 Point AF system
4.) GPS
5.) 6.5 FPS
6.) Anti-Flicker
7.) 26MP
8.) 98% Viewfinder Coverage
9.) Battery Life (nearly triple)
10.) AFMA (not sure if SL2 has it, but I doubt it)

+1 of course. On another thread, I've likened DR Storm 2017 to (say) Honda putting out a new model of a car that is now brimming with new tech but it lost a little punch in first gear compared to its predecessor. To indict the entire product for one very small aspect of its overall performance implies that's high contrast base ISO work is all you shoot. And if that's the case, go adapt your EF glass on to an A7 on a tripod and be done with it. I don't say that to be callous; you have options!

Eventually Canon will care enough about base ISO DR in this price/market point to deliver the product you want, but for whatever reason -- likely Canon's own market research -- says that you won't jump ship over this in enough numbers for the 6D2 to not be profitable.

Also, just reading the posts at other sites re: the wish list for the D850 has been enlightening. It includes a host of D810 owners who currently are packing a 14+ EV rig -- nearly medium format DR territory -- and they still want more DR. I get that it matters for some forms of photography, but some folks' nearly endless appetite for it is mind-boggling.

- A

 

[scyrene]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

This may be a really foolish question to some but what is the difference between 4K time lapse and regular 4k? Why would it do one but not the other? Just curious, as you may have guessed I'm not a video specialist....Thanks in advance!

I'll rough out an answer that I'm sure the more technical folks will correct:

4K time lapse is video assembled from a ton of stills, usually over a very long period of time (hours). Think one frame captured every 30 seconds for 4 hours. It can be subsequently turned into a 4K video, but that's done in post after you've assembled all the stills.

Although to be clear in this case, the camera assembles the timelapse and outputs as a regular movie file. It's a neat feature, although more limited than doing it manually with an external intervalometer and specialised software.

 

[scyrene]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

So can someone explain what the reason would be for me to spend 2k on the 6d mark II or get the $549 sl2 now that the 6d mark II has crap dynamic range coming from a full frame. Might as well get a aps-c. Both have the same resolution and same video features and same flippy screen. It's not like the dynamic range coming from the 6d II is worth it.

If you stay at ISO 100, than in terms of DR you are correct. As soon as you raise ISO over 400 or print larger prints that "crap" 6D II will trample poor SL2 to the smithereens

That "crap" DR only applies at base ISO value. And if you expose properly and/or use exposure blending, you can avoid that altogether. Make no mistake - 6D II has good dynamic range, it's just not as good as its peers and many people (myself included) are disappointed that Canon didn't improve 6D II in that regard (such as 5D IV was improved or 80D). But that doesn't make it inherently bad camera with crap DR.

If I have to guess, I think 80% of all the pictures are taken bellow 400 ISO. Just saying.

You mean in general? So what? Most of the photos ever taken were taken with phone cams, and they have far worse DR than any Canon DSLR. This info is of next to no use in helping someone decide whether a given camera is good value for *them*.

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

But 6D II is not WORSE It has improved many things from original 6D, but DR was unfortunately not one of those things. But it will take at least same quality of images as 6D. So why would it not be awesome stills camera?

Keep in mind that some folks here argue that the 6D1 roundly / categorically / absolutely bested the 5D3 sensor with plots like I've shown below. : Never mind the fact that the 5D3 absolutely ate the 6D1 for lunch in almost every other metric / spec / usage consideration -- to those folks, the 6D1 was simply a better camera because the 'film' inside of it was of higher quality.

My point: for some, improvement or 'bestness' is an absolute (not relative) term. It's the best Canon sells or it's not, it improved base ISO DR or it didn't, and so on. I generally don't see the world that way, but people are free to believe what they want.

- A

 

[x-vision]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Base ISO dynamic range isn't everything.

It sure isn't.

However, the reason to get a FF camera in the first place is for the superior image quality.
That's why FF cameras command a premium.

Think about the following for a second:
Would you buy an expensive FF camera with worse ISO/noise performance than cheaper crop cameras?
If you won't, then you understand how I feel about buying an expensive FF camera with worse dynamic range than my crop camera.

Without unconditionally superior image quality, the FF premium is not worth it for me.

Lots of the 6DII users won't do post-processing ... ever.
And many others will mostly use the 6DII at ISOs 400 and above.
For all of these users, the 6DII dynamic range at base ISO is totally irrelevant - and they will get their money's worth.

But I do shadow lifting on practically every photo taken in daylight.
So, dynamic range (DR) at base ISO matters to me a lot.

Thus, I surely won't be paying the FF premium for inferior image quality than my 80D.
Inferior at base ISO, mind you; the 6DII will surely trash my 80D at ISOs 400 and higher.

YMMV

 

[Cthulhu]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Base ISO dynamic range isn't everything.

It sure isn't.

However, the reason to get a FF camera in the first place is for the superior image quality.
That's why FF cameras command a premium.

Think about the following for a second:
Would you buy an expensive FF camera with worse ISO/noise performance than cheaper crop cameras?
If you won't, then you understand how I feel about buying an expensive FF camera with worse dynamic range than my crop camera.

Without unconditionally superior image quality, the FF premium is not worth it for me.

Lots of the 6DII users won't do post-processing ... ever.
And many others will mostly use the 6DII at ISOs 400 and above.
For all of these users, the 6DII dynamic range at base ISO is totally irrelevant - and they will get their money's worth.

But I do shadow lifting on practically every photo taken in daylight.
So, dynamic range (DR) at base ISO matters to me a lot.

Thus, I surely won't be paying the FF premium for inferior image quality than my 80D.
Inferior at base ISO, mind you; the 6DII will surely trash my 80D at ISOs 400 and higher.

YMMV

Yeah buddy, it definitely has better IQ than the 80d. That one stop DR advantage is the only advantage the 80 will have,at any other metric it'll be handily bested. If you're in doubt pls compare the original 6d to the 80d.

 

[Don Haines]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

silly question time....

Since the 6D2 has more megapixels that the 6D, wouldn't resampling the 6D2 image down to the size of the 6D image result in the DR of the 6D2 image being raised up?