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

[Ozarker]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

...the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Because most people are too stupid to figure out what their needs are? Wow. : BTW: How do you know why most people buy what they buy?

 

[neuroanatomist]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

Canon can go bankrupt today and my gear will still work and I'll still be able to get it fixed by 3rd party. Conversely the company being profitable and successful doesn't help them service gear you can buy from them new right now.

Again the argument of the company's financial success is silly, most people buy under powered apsc cameras. The argument of what meets image making needs is specially silly when considering a line such as the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Still clueless, apparently. Canon makes the critical parts 3rd parties use to fix Canon gear.

People buy what best meets their needs. To suggest that budget isn't part of that need is beyond silly, it's asinine. Who are you to say the 6D, or any product, doesn't meet peoples' needs? Since you don't determine their needs, you're nobody in that regard.

 

[Otara]

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

The thing we never get to know is exactly how it all works inside the company and the outcome.

Maybe there were torrid arguments over whether it should be old or new sensor, or whether there are signs that some in the company are seeing and others are ignoring. Maybe in time survey results will show they made a mistake and it had an measurable impact on profits, even though it was still a commercial success. We dont get to see the process and any of the internal debates and controversies, only the outcome.

Which makes many of these debates fairly pointless but it does pass the time I guess.

 

[Cthulhu]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

...the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Because most people are too stupid to figure out what their needs are? Wow. : BTW: How do you know why most people buy what they buy?

So not having an unlimited budget = being too stupid? Where did you read that in my post? You can be a very intelligent person and not an experienced photographer, a gear nerd or just have other financial priorities and end up with a camera that doesn't matches your needs.
A lot of my peers use a 6d, only a couple are actually satisfied with it -nobody is happy with it's focus system. It's a very limited camera in terms of features, it's there in virtually all customers reviews, write-ups and wish lists. Doesn't take a genius mind to know people get this camera for budgetary reasons and not because it meets their needs.

 

[justawriter]

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

I think DR is really the gas mileage of the camera market. Everyone seems to know the numbers. Everyone agrees the numbers are important. Everyone thinks the numbers should be better. But when they get into the showroom, gas mileage is about number 18 on the list of why the consumer chose a particular vehicle - right below cupholders.* That is not to say that mileage isn't the primary reason a subset of buyers pick a particular vehicle, just not for most.

Lens selection, service and repairs, IQ, price and a bunch of other reasons expressed in this thread are why Canon is likely to sell a metric sh*tload of 6DMIIs.

*Someone did do a survey of new car buyers and why they made the choice they did, and yes, cupholders were mentioned more often then gas mileage.

 

[Cthulhu]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

Canon can go bankrupt today and my gear will still work and I'll still be able to get it fixed by 3rd party. Conversely the company being profitable and successful doesn't help them service gear you can buy from them new right now.

Again the argument of the company's financial success is silly, most people buy under powered apsc cameras. The argument of what meets image making needs is specially silly when considering a line such as the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Still clueless, apparently. Canon makes the critical parts 3rd parties use to fix Canon gear.

People buy what best meets their needs. To suggest that budget isn't part of that need is beyond silly, it's asinine. Who are you to say the 6D, or any product, doesn't meet peoples' needs? Since you don't determine their needs, you're nobody in that regard.

Here's a clue: if they still make the parts to sell they'll still fix your lens. When it reaches EOL they might not accept your service request, even if it doesn't require parts. I'm close to their service center and they wouldn't look at my 300 f/4, but had no problem taking in a colleagues.

Do you always need everything spelled out for you?

 

[retroreflection]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

...the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Because most people are too stupid to figure out what their needs are? Wow. : BTW: How do you know why most people buy what they buy?

So not having an unlimited budget = being too stupid? Where did you read that in my post? You can be a very intelligent person and not an experienced photographer, a gear nerd or just have other financial priorities and end up with a camera that doesn't matches your needs.
A lot of my peers use a 6d, only a couple are actually satisfied with it -nobody is happy with it's focus system. It's a very limited camera in terms of features, it's there in virtually all customers reviews, write-ups and wish lists. Doesn't take a genius mind to know people get this camera for budgetary reasons and not because it meets their needs.

But, it seems that it does take some maturity to understand that what one wants (some say "needs") has nothing to do with what one can afford.
And, by the way, manufacturers also have to watch the budget. Price point = feature set. No crippling by evil mustache twirling types. Unless you like to cut yourself on Occam's razor.

 

[neuroanatomist]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

Canon can go bankrupt today and my gear will still work and I'll still be able to get it fixed by 3rd party. Conversely the company being profitable and successful doesn't help them service gear you can buy from them new right now.

Again the argument of the company's financial success is silly, most people buy under powered apsc cameras. The argument of what meets image making needs is specially silly when considering a line such as the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Still clueless, apparently. Canon makes the critical parts 3rd parties use to fix Canon gear.

People buy what best meets their needs. To suggest that budget isn't part of that need is beyond silly, it's asinine. Who are you to say the 6D, or any product, doesn't meet peoples' needs? Since you don't determine their needs, you're nobody in that regard.

Here's a clue: if they still make the parts to sell they'll still fix your lens. When it reaches EOL they might not accept your service request, even if it doesn't require parts. I'm close to their service center and they wouldn't look at my 300 f/4, but had no problem taking in a colleagues.

Do you always need everything spelled out for you?

Yes, please spell out for me how a company that has gone bankrupt and is no longer around will still be making parts for your lenses.

Sheesh, there are some really inane posts on this forum, but you're achieving a whole new level of imbecility. Erm...congratulations? :

 

[Cthulhu]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

Canon can go bankrupt today and my gear will still work and I'll still be able to get it fixed by 3rd party. Conversely the company being profitable and successful doesn't help them service gear you can buy from them new right now.

Again the argument of the company's financial success is silly, most people buy under powered apsc cameras. The argument of what meets image making needs is specially silly when considering a line such as the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Still clueless, apparently. Canon makes the critical parts 3rd parties use to fix Canon gear.

People buy what best meets their needs. To suggest that budget isn't part of that need is beyond silly, it's asinine. Who are you to say the 6D, or any product, doesn't meet peoples' needs? Since you don't determine their needs, you're nobody in that regard.

Here's a clue: if they still make the parts to sell they'll still fix your lens. When it reaches EOL they might not accept your service request, even if it doesn't require parts. I'm close to their service center and they wouldn't look at my 300 f/4, but had no problem taking in a colleagues.

Do you always need everything spelled out for you?

Yes, please spell out for me how a company that has gone bankrupt and is no longer around will still be making parts for your lenses.

Sheesh, there are some really inane posts on this forum, but you're achieving a whole new level of imbecility. Erm...congratulations? :

When did I ever make that point? Your inclination to ad-hominem and putting words into peoples mouths when you have nothing relevant to say is really unappealing.
You need to get out of your basement more often.

 

[neuroanatomist]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

Canon can go bankrupt today and my gear will still work and I'll still be able to get it fixed by 3rd party. Conversely the company being profitable and successful doesn't help them service gear you can buy from them new right now.

Again the argument of the company's financial success is silly, most people buy under powered apsc cameras. The argument of what meets image making needs is specially silly when considering a line such as the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Still clueless, apparently. Canon makes the critical parts 3rd parties use to fix Canon gear.

People buy what best meets their needs. To suggest that budget isn't part of that need is beyond silly, it's asinine. Who are you to say the 6D, or any product, doesn't meet peoples' needs? Since you don't determine their needs, you're nobody in that regard.

Here's a clue: if they still make the parts to sell they'll still fix your lens. When it reaches EOL they might not accept your service request, even if it doesn't require parts. I'm close to their service center and they wouldn't look at my 300 f/4, but had no problem taking in a colleagues.

Do you always need everything spelled out for you?

Yes, please spell out for me how a company that has gone bankrupt and is no longer around will still be making parts for your lenses.

Sheesh, there are some really inane posts on this forum, but you're achieving a whole new level of imbecility. Erm...congratulations? :

When did I ever make that point? Your inclination to ad-hominem and putting words into peoples mouths when you have nothing relevant to say is really unappealing.
You need to get out of your basement more often.

Your putting words into others' mouths is what started this discussion (see the deepest nested quote of yours, an argument no one here has made). 'Gone bankrupt' and 'still make the parts' were also your words, nice oxymoron there.

It's unfortunate that you have poor metacognition, but try not to take your flaws out on others. Clearly, there's no point in further discussion. I tire of the battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. Have a nice day.

 

[Cthulhu]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

...the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Because most people are too stupid to figure out what their needs are? Wow. : BTW: How do you know why most people buy what they buy?

So not having an unlimited budget = being too stupid? Where did you read that in my post? You can be a very intelligent person and not an experienced photographer, a gear nerd or just have other financial priorities and end up with a camera that doesn't matches your needs.
A lot of my peers use a 6d, only a couple are actually satisfied with it -nobody is happy with it's focus system. It's a very limited camera in terms of features, it's there in virtually all customers reviews, write-ups and wish lists. Doesn't take a genius mind to know people get this camera for budgetary reasons and not because it meets their needs.

But, it seems that it does take some maturity to understand that what one wants (some say "needs") has nothing to do with what one can afford.
And, by the way, manufacturers also have to watch the budget. Price point = feature set. No crippling by evil mustache twirling types. Unless you like to cut yourself on Occam's razor.

Yes, it does call for some level of maturity to stick to what you can afford. I've had a 6d when what I really wanted (needed for my subject matter) was a 1dx, same when I had a 5dmk3.
It goes both ways I guess, I've seen plenty of people shooting 1dxs on walkabouts or their kids playing, I think that fits your example better.

 

[Cthulhu]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

Canon can go bankrupt today and my gear will still work and I'll still be able to get it fixed by 3rd party. Conversely the company being profitable and successful doesn't help them service gear you can buy from them new right now.

Again the argument of the company's financial success is silly, most people buy under powered apsc cameras. The argument of what meets image making needs is specially silly when considering a line such as the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Still clueless, apparently. Canon makes the critical parts 3rd parties use to fix Canon gear.

People buy what best meets their needs. To suggest that budget isn't part of that need is beyond silly, it's asinine. Who are you to say the 6D, or any product, doesn't meet peoples' needs? Since you don't determine their needs, you're nobody in that regard.

Here's a clue: if they still make the parts to sell they'll still fix your lens. When it reaches EOL they might not accept your service request, even if it doesn't require parts. I'm close to their service center and they wouldn't look at my 300 f/4, but had no problem taking in a colleagues.

Do you always need everything spelled out for you?

Yes, please spell out for me how a company that has gone bankrupt and is no longer around will still be making parts for your lenses.

Sheesh, there are some really inane posts on this forum, but you're achieving a whole new level of imbecility. Erm...congratulations? :

When did I ever make that point? Your inclination to ad-hominem and putting words into peoples mouths when you have nothing relevant to say is really unappealing.
You need to get out of your basement more often.

Your putting words into others' mouths is what started this discussion (see the deepest nested quote of yours, an argument no one here has made). 'Gone bankrupt' and 'still make the parts' were also your words, nice oxymoron there.

It's unfortunate that you have poor metacognition, but try not to take your flaws out on others. Clearly, there's no point in further discussion. I tire of the battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. Have a nice day.

Battle of wits? Jeezus, you really need out that basement asap. A daily stroll would do you wonders.

You're mixing and matching two parts of unrelated sentences in different posts to try to make a point toargue against. That's just pathetic.

 

[Ozarker]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

...the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Because most people are too stupid to figure out what their needs are? Wow. : BTW: How do you know why most people buy what they buy?

Doesn't take a genius mind to know people get this camera for budgetary reasons

There you go again.

So, how many peers do you have that use a 6D? Two? Fifty? How many is a lot? There are many people on this forum who were and are very satisfied with the camera.

But there you go again, lumping everyone into the same group because you think your "peers" represent everyone.

 

[Fleetie]

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

I'm not sure why people are weighing up the pros and cons of buying a second-hand 5D3 versus a new 6D2, because here in the UK at least, Jessops are currently selling both for EXACTLY THE SAME PRICE, £1999.

If, and it's perhaps a big "if", the 6D2's sensor is only about as good as that of the 5D3, then as long as you're not really interested in the tilty-flippy screen, wi-fi, GPS, etc., the 5D3 is an easy choice.

I have the 5D3 (bought on the very first day of availability in the UK, and firmware never upgraded (!!!)), and I don't consider the 5D4 upgrade to be worth the £3500. I'm skipping that generation. I got an M5 as a lower-weight option, and I'll await the 5D5 or the full-frame mirrorless with interest.

I have to say I am surprised if it really is true that the 6D2's sensor is "worse" than that of the 6D. Maybe just differently-optimised.

 

[mahdi_mak2000]

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

OK....

6dmk2 is 2000USD

5dmk4 is 3400USD

A7rII is 2300USD+ 400 USD metabones V =2700

should I get A7rII or wait for A7III?

 

[mahdi_mak2000]

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

In the metadata the images were taken on the 14th July still makes me wonder if it was a pre production unless it is stated it was a final production model.

I find it very hard to believe they could make a worse sensor when the 6Ds sensor wasn't the best when it was released. If they indeed have and these results are true then I have no words. Certainly an injustice to consumers.

I think its worth waiting for more reviews and the camera getting into more hands.

It has happened before the 5DSr was also slated because of pre production images that to this day have not been updated on the site and are constantly said to be poor results when most of the people that have used it know its an incredible camera.

Just wait it out.

they had 5 years to make a better product. I think they gonna make progress in 1 month?

 

[Cthulhu]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

...the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Because most people are too stupid to figure out what their needs are? Wow. : BTW: How do you know why most people buy what they buy?

Doesn't take a genius mind to know people get this camera for budgetary reasons

There you go again.

So, how many peers do you have that use a 6D? Two? Fifty? How many is a lot? There are many people on this forum who were and are very satisfied with the camera.

But there you go again, lumping everyone into the same group because you think your "peers" represent everyone.

Definitely not 50. It's not that popular among working pros. But hey, stay on the argument and prove me wrong, create a poll that asks if money was no object which FF would you get, a 6dmk2, a 5dmk4 or a Sony A9.
Again, you don't need to be a genius to know the 6dmk2 won't be the winner.

 

[100]

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

I also love how people throw Canon's profitability and commercial success as a "pro" in choosing a camera, as if they're shareholders. None of that will help your images.

That whooshing sound you hear is the concept sailing right over your head. That's not the argument being made, at all.

In fact, the argument is true even superficially as you incorrectly state it – a profitable, successful company is more likely to be around in the future, to service your gear if needed. Broken gear that you can't get fixed doesn't take good pictures. But that's not really the point.

The argument isn't that people take better images because of Canon's commercial success, it's that Canon's commercial success exists because they make products that a majority of buyers believe best meet their image-making needs.

...the 6d, a line that proves most people buy what they can afford and not what really meets their needs.

Because most people are too stupid to figure out what their needs are? Wow. : BTW: How do you know why most people buy what they buy?

Doesn't take a genius mind to know people get this camera for budgetary reasons

There you go again.

So, how many peers do you have that use a 6D? Two? Fifty? How many is a lot? There are many people on this forum who were and are very satisfied with the camera.

But there you go again, lumping everyone into the same group because you think your "peers" represent everyone.

Definitely not 50. It's not that popular among working pros. But hey, stay on the argument and prove me wrong, create a poll that asks if money was no object which FF would you get, a 6dmk2, a 5dmk4 or a Sony A9.
Again, you don't need to be a genius to know the 6dmk2 won't be the winner.

Why should people have to prove you wrong?
You claim something, the burden of proof is on you.
Without proof, it’s just your opinion.
A nobody on the internet with an unfounded opinion…
You don’t have to be a genius to know you have a credibility issue.

 

[SteveM]

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

I'm surprised at the results out now, I can only hope the results from the cameras on the shelves in a weeks time are better. Were I in the market to upgrade right now, the 5D mklll is on sale at Wex in the U.K. for the same price as the new 6D mkll. Can't see that stock lasting long.
Incidentally, Nikon are playing 'chess' with their customers as well, there are a lot of angry bunnies in relation to the D7500, and the eventual D750 release is expected to be contentious as well. 'The Company giveth, and the Company taketh away.'
End of the road for useful innovation with the 'stills' camera? From a selfish perspective, the current 'stills' cameras have everything I'll ever need. I just wonder if, once I acquire the 7D mklll, I'll need to upgrade again within the next 10 years?

 

[BillB]

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

I'm surprised at the results out now, I can only hope the results from the cameras on the shelves in a weeks time are better. Were I in the market to upgrade right now, the 5D mklll is on sale at Wex in the U.K. for the same price as the new 6D mkll. Can't see that stock lasting long.
Incidentally, Nikon are playing 'chess' with their customers as well, there are a lot of angry bunnies in relation to the D7500, and the eventual D750 release is expected to be contentious as well. 'The Company giveth, and the Company taketh away.'
End of the road for useful innovation with the 'stills' camera? From a selfish perspective, the current 'stills' cameras have everything I'll ever need. I just wonder if, once I acquire the 7D mklll, I'll need to upgrade again within the next 10 years?

There is also the question of what people will be using stills cameras for in the future. My guess is that fewer and fewer people will be doing much printing, and that more and more it will be about video display of still images, which may tend to reinforce the belief that the current cameras are good enough. Not a comfortable prospect for either the camera manufacturers or people trying to generate clicks on their websites. On the other hand, it may free up time for those of us who spend too much time on the internet.