amorse said:
I'm surprised you manage this with the 6D. Which raw converter do you use ? If you are shooting unmodified JPEG then I doubt the 6DII will make much difference to that.
Upvote
0
Canon EOS 6D Mark II Poll Results
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I'm surprised you manage this with the 6D. Which raw converter do you use ? If you are shooting unmodified JPEG then I doubt the 6DII will make much difference to that.
Sporgon said:
I use Adobe Camera Raw, and often further process in photoshop to get the "look" I'm after. I don't think I have ever even taken a jpg with my 6D to be fair since post processing is (obviously) a key part of my workflow. I just want as much latitude as possible for post processing.
I'm not expecting the 6D II to shake the ground, and to be fair it doesn't need to. The 6D is an incredibly capable camera for my needs. But for those few situations where I'm deciding whether or not I can get away with a 3 stop ND grad for the sky or if I need to add another 2 stop ND grad, buying a new body is worth the money to me if I can reduce the glass/resin between my lens and my subject.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
amorse said:
Sorry, but if you are expecting the difference between the 6D and 6DII sensors to obviate the need for an extra 2-stops of attenuation (or even anywhere near a full stop), then you're not only expecting the 6DII to 'shake the ground', frankly…you're expecting the impossible.
I'm not going to call you crazy for such an expectation, but like me ol' Irish da used to say, "Wish in one hand and sh!t in the other, and see which fills up first."
Upvote
0
amorse said:
I actually just joined this forum specifically because I wanted to discuss this camera. I also know I don't shoot nearly as much as I should, but as a hobbyist its often difficult to get out and real life has a habit of getting in the way. And regardless of others opinions of whether I should be buying a camera, well... I have my reasons, plus its my money to do what I want.
So, the decision for me to buy a new camera is not one I take lightly. Unlike you amorse, my decision is actually more of a decision between the 6DII and nothing. And even though I can afford the camera, its a lot of money to spend. And part of the reason I am questioning it is because I know my current camera is more than capable and I am more than happy with it. But the combination of features and an expectation of improved IQ through better DR is what would make it worth it to me. So yea, splitting hairs about the DR because without the improvement (or enough of an improvement) the value of the the 6D2 just might not be worth the cost for me personally.
I know its a ridiculous and small thing to argue about especially since we dont know, but again, isnt that the whole point of this forum? So we have a place to discuss?
And just like you amorse, the things I enjoy shooting, I often find that the DR of the 6D isnt enough. Though for me, its usually one side of the histogram that gets clipped. Most of my shooting now involves bracketing and I feel I have become quite proficient at my blending techniques, but if I can minimize that and get the whole shot in a single frame I would be a very happy camper. So thats why I care about the DR of this new camera. If the improvement is small enough to not be readily noticeable in the real world then I have to seriously question if the features alone make this a worthwhile upgrade (for the price). And thats why I split hairs, and thats why I care about benchmarks and tests. Because its something quantifiable. The 1.5 extra stops of DR that the 5d4 has over the 6D seems like it would be noticeable improvement, but if the 6D2 clocks in somewhere lower (an unknown amount lower) that to me is questionable as to whether the improvement is noticeable.
I also am fully aware that at this point, all differences are going to be marginal at best. And even a stop and a half of extra DR won't be an earth shattering difference. But again, is it noticeable and can it impact my normal workflow and make things easier for me. I think a stop and a half might, a stop or less, I am not so sure about. So again, I split hairs because its a lot of money to spend.
Upvote
0
mashuto said:
Keep in mind that DPreview has NOT had a camera to review. All they have is some pictures of someone holding a camera at an event WHERE YOU WERE NOT ABLE TO PUT A MEMORY CARD INTO THE CAMERA! They also have a lot of comments on their forum from other people who have never touched the camera....
It is hard to evaluate image quality without an image, and that is where DPR sits..... no data, lots of opinion.
If you think about this logically, with the same (or newer) technology in the sensor, and with a slightly lower megapixel count, the expectation is that the 6D2 should have a slightly higher DR than the 5D4 (but not enough to notice outside of a calibrated lab test bench).
Anyone saying it will be 1.5 stops lower is delusional, particularly when Canon has said it will be "slightly" better than the 5D4... That said, what you want is an independent review from a respected source, not DPR, (who thinks you can get 15 bit numbers in a 14 bit file......), and that will have to wait until after the camera is released.
Upvote
0
Hornet said:
This forum does not represent the typical Canon consumer (we are almost the opposite), plus forums are notorious for the amount of trolling that happens. Every time a new camera is released, you get a barrage of "death of Canon" and "I am leaving now" comments.... and despite the amount of noise these people make, they are an insignificant minority.
Think of it as driving on a multi-lane highway between two cities..... you see 100,000 cars.... 99,999 are driving well and one is a total idiot.... which one do you remember? The same holds for the trolls and the fanboys. Statistically, they are insignificant, lost in their own noise.... they just do not matter!
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
I really hope I don't sound all doom and gloom here. And I know there is absolutely no way to know for certain how much of an improvement it will be over the 6D. But for me its the one unknown, and even though it might only be marginal differences in IQ, its important to me in determining whether the value of the camera is worth the price, and since I preordered, I am especially interested.
I dont think anyone said it would be 1.5 stops lower than the 5D4. I mentioned 1.5 stops since according to dxomark, the 5D4 has 1.5 stops of DR improvement over the original 6D. According to the one quote from the DPReview article that came from a canon rep, the 6D2 wouldnt have the same DR capabilities of the 5D4. So my interpretation is that the 6D2 will have less than 1.5 stops of improvement over the 6D. How much, I dont know. If the difference in DR between the 6D2 and the 5D4 is not noticeable outside a lab test, that would be good for me. My hope is that it is noticeable when stacked up against the original 6D.
Where did canon say it would be slightly better than the 5d4?
Anyways, I know its all speculation and there is no way to know until real world reviews start coming out. I also wasnt taking anything from that article as gospel, its just without much else to go on and the fact that they spoke to a canon rep... well, you know. My reason for discussing this is just because I already preordered, and its the one unknown sticking spot that might make me hesitate.
And really, not even remotely trying to imply that image quality on this camera will suck. Only speculating on how much of an improvement over the original 6D I can expect or hope for.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
I didn't think that was expecting one stop improvement is impossible based on comparing DR improvements between between the 5D III and the 5D IV. Comparing the 5D III and the 5D IV, nearly every review I can find is indicating improvements in DR of nearly 2 stops. Recognizing some outlets have their own biases, are there are reasonable comparisons that show improvements from mark III to mark IV was less than one stop? I'm not trying to call you out here, I'm honestly trying to inform my decision. If the improvement is less than one stop, then it isn't worth me upgrading.
If the ADC changes gave the 5D IV such an improvement, I didn't think it was unreasonable to expect a similar change for the 6D II, but if the improvements between the 5D III and 5D IV were severely overstated, then I do need to reconsider buying.
Upvote
0
One rep says worse.... one rep says slightly better.... one says 5D4 was 1.5 stops better than the 5D3 and that the 6D2 will not be 1.5 stops better than the 6D, but the 6D was already better than the 5D3, so it is possible that the improvement of the 6D2 over the 6D could be less than 1.5 stops and still have a higher DR than the 5D4....mashuto said:
The thing is, both are going to use the same technology and are very close together in time.... I doubt that any of us will be able to detect the difference, but until independent tests are done, it is all speculation....
Upvote
0
amorse said:
A few thoughts on all of this:
1) See DR plot of all Canon FF rigs over time from DXO. DR is not a place you get mega-bumps in performance with the next gen. Moving to on-chip has been a decent bump, yes, but I'd still keep your feet on the ground. We will still be compositing/blending or using ND grads for a very long time.
2) Base ISO DR is lovely, but some of us brave the world without a tripod sometimes.
When you walk to the right w.r.t. ISO on a DR chart, these cameras are even closer than this forum might imply. Again: Canon is squeezing out small, incremental improvements, and that should be the expectation here.I am not trying to talk someone out of their priorities, but I am arguing that purchasing for DR reasons seems is a very expensive give-to-get relationship.
- A
Attachments
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
And I know that what you are saying is probably the reality. And I would be pretty happy if that was the case. That to me would probably be worth it.
But I have $2000 on the line right now and nothing concrete to go on regarding that. And maybe preordering wasnt the best idea. But... again, I have my reasons. Hence the speculation. Plus its hard sometimes to stay completely out of the crazy hype (or anti-hype) trains that go around, and that seem to be especially rampant with the announcement of this camera.
ahsanford said:A few thoughts on all of this:
1) See DR plot of all Canon FF rigs over time from DXO. DR is not a place you get mega-bumps in performance with the next gen. Moving to on-chip has been a decent bump, yes, but I'd still keep your feet on the ground. We will still be compositing/blending or using ND grads for a very long time.
2) Base ISO DR is lovely, but some of us brave the world without a tripod sometimes.
I am not trying to talk someone out of their priorities, but I am arguing that purchasing for DR reasons seems is a very expensive give-to-get relationship.
- A
I know I am not who you were replying to, but a lot of that applies to me to. And I know the changes are going to be marginal. I just want them to be noticeable. I am also not expecting to have to suddenly stop bracketing. But any improvement there where I can squeeze more out of individual images will be very welcome to me.
Im also probably psyching myself up about this a bit since there is just no way to know right now anyways. But, I preordered and just am hoping I will get most if not everything I want right now, and this is just one spot that we still dont know. And for me the preorder isnt just about DR. I preordered because of everything else it offers, but with the hope and expectation that there would be a noticeable difference in IQ and DR even if it is just marginal. That to me makes it a complete package worth the preorder price. The DR and IQ stuff is just sort of like the last little bump in the value equation to me.
Upvote
0
I watch a lot of pictures (many of them landscapes) in websites like 500px, 1x, juzaphotos, etc, and many of the best landscapes photos (where DR seems to be more important) are taken with Nikon cameras (fifty fifty with Canon maybe) and when you read the description, the most of those pictures are blending from two or three frames of bracketing exposures. Draw your own conclusion.
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:amorse said:
A few thoughts on all of this:
1) See DR plot of all Canon FF rigs over time from DXO. DR is not a place you get mega-bumps in performance with the next gen. Moving to on-chip has been a decent bump, yes, but I'd still keep your feet on the ground. We will still be compositing/blending or using ND grads for a very long time.
2) Base ISO DR is lovely, but some of us brave the world without a tripod sometimes.
I am not trying to talk someone out of their priorities, but I am arguing that purchasing for DR reasons seems is a very expensive give-to-get relationship.
- A
Absolutely fair points, no doubt my needs are not everyones needs. I agree - and would go a step further on the low light point. The current generation 6D's low light dynamic range bests even the Nikon D810 at ISOs 1000 and above according to DXOmark (I know how much we love that resource here). I have always been shocked by the low light performance of the 6D, and I use it a lot for starscapes. I haven't had any issues with clipping in starscapes, however. It's base ISO DR during sunrise or sunset that I'm having challenges with, and while I don't expect to give up my ND grads any time soon, I can justify the purchase if I get the extra latitude.
Upvote
0
mashuto said:
Privatebydesign put this very well on another thread: if with your current camera you are running into issues of unsatisfactory noise and tone in your shadows then you will see a significant improvement in the 6DII. It won't make much difference to highlights per se, other than if you under expose more to preserve them, but if you do suffer from poor IQ in raised shadows it rather suggests that you are under exposing anyway, or to be more precise not ETTR as much as you could. With the 2012 ACR process on a 5DII I can raise the shadow slider nearly 100% without any shadow IQ issues, but no way can I lift mid tones (exposure) as well. On the 2012 process I didn't find much of an improvement with the 6D, which was a bit of a bummer as I bought the 6D before I changed to the latest process.
Given the way I shoot, and I think that after 12 years of using the 5D and 8 years of the 5DII I am able to optimise the exposure for these cameras, I know that I would be able to see the difference in the overall IQ that a 6DII or 5DIV would offer in difficult lighting conditions, but I'm not sure anyone else would see the difference in my images !
Upvote
0
amorse said:
Honestly I think people are making WAY too much of a random comment from a Canon PR rep. It would be shocking to me if a rep said "oh yeah, this is going to be way better than the still-very-recent 5D4". They'll have some way to justify it - like four fewer mpx. That's enough to say "not quite up to par", even if it doesn't make a whole lot of difference. It seems very unlikely they'll go back to an off-chip ADC in a camera like this, but everyone is twisted into knots because of a Canon PR rep and then DPR.
It's absurd. The SL2 might (might) still have an old-style sensor. The 6D2 won't, or I'll eat a whole lot of crow. Everyone should relax.
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:mashuto said:
I appreciate the reply and didn't want to talk you out of anything.
The passage above is vital -- it shows your head is screwed-on correctly.
I think you'll be delighted with your 6D2.
- A
+1
Upvote
0
Similar threads
