Canon EOS 6D Mark II Talk [CR1]

[ahsanford]

6D's current max ISO is 102,400
102,400 x 1.5 = 153,600. It will be Noisy as crap but that's Marketing for you. I would expect the ISO performance to be on par to current competitors in this segment which is about 1/3 stop better performance.

I don't think that's what the rumor meant. Usually those sort of claims don't speak to hard firmware governors of what ISO you can use so much as what the noise performance will be at a given ISO.

In other words, the rumor implies: The 6D2 will have similar noise to a 6D set at a 1.5 stops lower ISO level, or an ISO 8000-ish shot on the 6D2 will look as clean as an ISO 3200 shot on a 6D.

And that's why I don't buy that particular rumor. Canon hasn't hit a noise home run over its predecessor like that since maaaaaybe the 5D3. Why on earth should we expect that in an entry level FF rig?

- A

 

[Etienne]

6D's current max ISO is 102,400
102,400 x 1.5 = 153,600. It will be Noisy as crap but that's Marketing for you. I would expect the ISO performance to be on par to current competitors in this segment which is about 1/3 stop better performance.

I don't think that's what the rumor meant. Usually those sort of claims don't speak to hard firmware governors of what ISO you can use so much as what the noise performance will be at a given ISO.

In other words, the rumor implies: The 6D2 will have similar noise to a 6D set at a 1.5 stops lower ISO level, or an ISO 8000-ish shot on the 6D2 will look as clean as an ISO 3200 shot on a 6D.

And that's why I don't buy that particular rumor. Canon hasn't hit a noise home run over its predecessor like that since maaaaaybe the 5D3. Why on earth should we expect that in an entry level FF rig?

- A

On what the noise improvement means ... exactly!

However, there's no way of knowing whether Canon has made some sort of sensor breakthrough that would improve all their new sensors until the cameras hit the street, so it's not impossible that they have made a huge leap.

 

[StudentOfLight]

6D's current max ISO is 102,400
102,400 x 1.5 = 153,600. It will be Noisy as crap but that's Marketing for you. I would expect the ISO performance to be on par to current competitors in this segment which is about 1/3 stop better performance.

I don't think that's what the rumor meant. Usually those sort of claims don't speak to hard firmware governors of what ISO you can use so much as what the noise performance will be at a given ISO.

In other words, the rumor implies: The 6D2 will have similar noise to a 6D set at a 1.5 stops lower ISO level, or an ISO 8000-ish shot on the 6D2 will look as clean as an ISO 3200 shot on a 6D.

And that's why I don't buy that particular rumor. Canon hasn't hit a noise home run over its predecessor like that since maaaaaybe the 5D3. Why on earth should we expect that in an entry level FF rig?

- A

I was merely correcting the math originally used with bmwzimmer's approach.

I agree, my expectation is also for quoted improvements to be as you say 8,000 looking like 3,200, not just increasing the digital gain and calling it a tangible improvement.

 

[SMA SHOOTER]

Hi,

I'm enthusiastically in the camp of those who prefer fully (!) articulated LCD screens. Cameras with screens that simply hinge up or down seem aimed at people making videos who will always need horizontal images. As a still photographer, I shoot verticals as well as horizontals. Those simple "selfie" screens might as well not be there at all. I have old knees, and using a fully articulated screen (like the one on my original Canon G1X) has allowed me to get many photos that would be very difficult, if not impossible, for me to get with my 6D. Canon doesn't seem to agree, of course; it installs swiveling screens on its "prosumer" cameras but removes them from the pricier models. I was interested in the faster lens on the new G1X II, but was disgusted to find that it has only a simple swiveling screen. No sale, Canon.

Several commenters here dismiss the 6D as "entry level" or "nonprofessional." What does that mean? Back in the day, New York camera repair guy Marty Forscher used to wish for cameras as strong as hockey pucks, but unless you're really slapping them with sticks, most users would find such cameras overbuilt, overprotected, and probably overpriced. Any camera, from the lowliest Holga to the latest Phase One, can be used in a serious, even a professional way. These are all tools; the users make the difference. If you need to pound nails, buy a hammer!

 

[unfocused]

I have to say: this is sure a lot of chatter over some specs that some random person on the web made up.

I think it just expresses the passion people have for the 6D brand.

Yeah, I get that. I just want to remind people that they are debating specs that anyone on this forum could have written with just as much validity. I get the feeling that some folks are actually taking these made-up specs seriously.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

As a guy that works integrating Android builds everyday, I really really hope this is not true.
Just imagine:

• Stupid android background processes eating up the battery
• being worried about my privacy because a firmware update may or may not send data to google
• malware being distributed on back-doors or vulnerabilities and such.

If you ever experienced ANY kind of instability in your phone or the apps it runs, try to imagine how frustrating it would be to have the same kind of nasty bugs in your canon camera. Are you willing to lose a shot because 'the review app' just crashed on you and you have to 'kill it' using the task manager?

Android has it's place in the phone industry because it supports a very large set of devices and peripherals, but it does so in exchange for slow integration of changes, fragmentation of the OS. Android is great for general-purpose devices (such as smartphones), but for specific-purpose devices nothing trumps specific-purpose operating systems.

When was the last time your camera's DryOS (or any of its apps) crashed on you?
Can you say the same about your android phone (and its apps)?

Time and again I hear how good the ergonomics of Canon are (this includes the OS). Compare them to those of Sony or Samsung (that have already started using android).
Canon, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

+10 million...

I have wished for years that my phones, tablets, etc could be as simple and stable as my cameras. (I have NEVER wished my camera could be as unstable and problematic as my phones and tablets.) The camera powers up instantly, never fails and is as reliable as one could expect. It's a CAMERA. There is NO NEED for it to do anything else other than possibly connect to WiFi, etc. On a camera, the interface needs to be as simple, efficient and stable as possible. Android would only serve to waste CPU, memory and screen resources at the cost of DECREASED STABLITY and BATTERY LIFE.

I'm an IT guy and I hate working on my phone. (iPhone or Android, they both suck.)

Other than a marketing gimmick I see so need for Android on a DSLR. Put Android on one P&S for the folks that think it's the coolest thing ever and leave it at that!

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I have to say: this is sure a lot of chatter over some specs that some random person on the web made up.

I think it just expresses the passion people have for the 6D brand.

Yeah, I get that. I just want to remind people that they are debating specs that anyone on this forum could have written with just as much validity. I get the feeling that some folks are actually taking these made-up specs seriously.

Guys, part of this site is about rumors. So it's fun to debate possible features, real or not.

 

[unfocused]

Canon hasn't hit a noise home run over its predecessor like that since maaaaaybe the 5D3.

That's not true. Not only was the 5DIII a significant improvement over the 5DII, but the 7DII is a huge leap over the original 7D. I'm amazed at how good the higher ISO performance is on the 7DII. Is it in 5DIII territory? No, but it's much closer than I expected.

And, judging by reports from owners of the 5D S, the higher ISO performance of that camera is also much better than people expected.

 

[JohanCruyff]

As a guy that works integrating Android builds everyday, I really really hope this is not true.
Just imagine:

• Stupid android background processes eating up the battery
• being worried about my privacy because a firmware update may or may not send data to google
• malware being distributed on back-doors or vulnerabilities and such.

If you ever experienced ANY kind of instability in your phone or the apps it runs, try to imagine how frustrating it would be to have the same kind of nasty bugs in your canon camera. Are you willing to lose a shot because 'the review app' just crashed on you and you have to 'kill it' using the task manager?

Android has it's place in the phone industry because it supports a very large set of devices and peripherals, but it does so in exchange for slow integration of changes, fragmentation of the OS. Android is great for general-purpose devices (such as smartphones), but for specific-purpose devices nothing trumps specific-purpose operating systems.

When was the last time your camera's DryOS (or any of its apps) crashed on you?
Can you say the same about your android phone (and its apps)?

Time and again I hear how good the ergonomics of Canon are (this includes the OS). Compare them to those of Sony or Samsung (that have already started using android).
Canon, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

+10 million...

I have wished for years that my phones, tablets, etc could be as simple and stable as my cameras. (I have NEVER wished my camera could be as unstable and problematic as my phones and tablets.) The camera powers up instantly, never fails and is as reliable as one could expect. It's a CAMERA. There is NO NEED for it to do anything else other than possibly connect to WiFi, etc. On a camera, the interface needs to be as simple, efficient and stable as possible. Android would only serve to waste CPU, memory and screen resources at the cost of DECREASED STABLITY and BATTERY LIFE.

I'm an IT guy and I hate working on my phone. (iPhone or Android, they both suck.)

Other than a marketing gimmick I see so need for Android on a DSLR. Put Android on one P&S for the folks that think it's the coolest thing ever and leave it at that!

I don't remember my ancient B/W mobile (Nokia 3310, maybe) phone ever crashed.
So, let's hope that a Mobile-OS heavily downgraded (without phone calls, 100,000 apps etc.) will be stable as much as a simple, ancient, mobile NOT_SMART phone used to be.

 

[heptagon]

1.5 stops better high ISO? In RAW? No way!

In cooked JPEG - quite possible with additional processing power in easy scenes.

 

[Famateur]

I'm enthusiastically in the camp of those who prefer fully (!) articulated LCD screens.

+1!

Several commenters here dismiss the 6D as "entry level" or "nonprofessional." What does that mean?

This is Canon's designation, just as they consider the 5DMKIII a "Prosumer" camera, despite the fact that it is largely used by professionals. I fully agree that the 6D meets the needs of many professionals. The decisions of which features to include, however, will be based on where Canon wants to position the camera in the market. For the Mark I, that was "entry level full frame." If Canon intends to position the Mark II a bit higher, the feature set (and price) will reflect that.

Regarding articulating screens, to this point, Canon has considered it an amateur/enthusiast feature, so it's more plausible that it would appear in the "entry level" full frame body -- especially considering Nikon added one to the D750. I doubt Canon will be influenced by Nikon on this feature, but it would be nice to see an articulating screen introduced for the 6DII.

 

[pedro]

1.5 stops better high ISO? In RAW? No way!

In cooked JPEG - quite possible with additional processing power in easy scenes.

I'm always in for surprises. But if I read the sound comments of our experts here in the forum, 1/3 to 1/2 a stop would be a huge step forward already, given the current tech. Sorry for comparing apples to oranges now: in comparison to an a7s we talk about 24 MP vs 12 MP, and a different sensor tech as well. Anyway, if a 24 MP 6DII would deliever an 1.5 stops improvement in RAW, this would be fantastic. 3200ish ISO 8000, 6400ish ISO 18000 and 12800ish ISO 31000. Bring it on, put the same sensor into the 5DIV and I am a happy camper...;-)

 

[NancyP]

I am going to say that the feature that saved my plastic 6D from oblivion is an L bracket, always on the camera. I was hiking over rocky ground and rocky stream, slipped and fell, camera in hand landed on the lower left corner HARD. Nice dent/scrape in outside edge of L bracket and in skin of owner - camera functioned perfectly. So there's another way to get durability Just don't drop it onto the non-covered end....

 

[heptagon]

1.5 stops better high ISO? In RAW? No way!

In cooked JPEG - quite possible with additional processing power in easy scenes.

I'm always in for surprises. But if I read the sound comments of our experts here in the forum, 1/3 to 1/2 a stop would be a huge step forward already, given the current tech. Sorry for comparing apples to oranges now: in comparison to an a7s we talk about 24 MP vs 12 MP, and a different sensor tech as well. Anyway, if a 24 MP 6DII would deliever an 1.5 stops improvement in RAW, this would be fantastic. 3200ish ISO 8000, 6400ish ISO 18000 and 12800ish ISO 31000. Bring it on, put the same sensor into the 5DIV and I am a happy camper...;-)

Well, current sensors have about 50% quantum efficiency and 3 electrons of read noise.

Imagine you could double the quantum efficiency to 100% (which is the limit), you would gain 1 stop. (1 stop = doubling of light collected).

Then at these very low numbers we're at poisson noise and I don't have the numbers at hand but 3 electrons is not much. You need 100 electrons to get a signal-to-noise ratio of 10 with a perfect sensor. With 3 electrons of read noise that would be a signal-to-noise ratio of 100/13 = 7.7. Not much less. Not much to gain here either. And that's the limit for a single sensor camera. A physical limit which no amount of research or marketing can break.

But image processing is an area where significant gains should be obtainable. Intelligent algorithms which guess what was photographed and "paint" it for you without noise. What you see after noise reduction is not the original image, but an image painted by an algorithm showing what that algorithm "thinks" is in the picture. Improve that algorithm a lot and you can fish out more details and improve the subjective image quality by some stops.

 

[infared]

So ....I do not have a smart phone (I have a wireless phone...but not web, etc.). I like to be where I am, not acting out my addiction in public. ) To each his own. But ...i am dumb about this stuff....You sound like the right guy to ask...so...could you help me out here. If the camera has an Android OS...that will exclude mac users from utilizing there phones, iPads, etc. for remote control..etc. ...and obviously the whole menu system would change, too. Is that correct?
I am a Mack guy....(no iPhone, though)....but this would be a very foreign menu to me ...right?
Thanks for the help.

Thanks for the help!
No, I do not think any Android device (in this case a Camera) would make it impossible to be remote controlled through an iPhone or iPad. There's nothing inherent to Android that prevents it from 'talking' to other operating systems. It's just a matter of writing the appropriate software to allow this communication. Even if Canon would chose the Android path, they would still have good reasons to allow remote controlling from Apple devices.

Regarding the menu system, yes, if they switched operating systems the menus would most likely change instantly as a consequence...

 

[davidmurray]

Has Canon eliminated FPN (fixed pattern noise)?
Has Canon reduced shadow noise to the levels of Sony/Nikon?
If Canon can do the above, will the IQ at base ISO equal that of Sony/Nikon in both noise and DR?

Am I the only person tiring of the constant bitching and negativity from this anti-Canon person?
Admittedly I don't post often, but I read every other day, and I'd prefer positivity about what Canon is doing than constant negativity about what a bitter person perceives is wrong with Canon cameras.
If Canon products really are that bad why does he even bother?

 

[Luds34]

...
Swivel LCD
No.. I want it robust, swivel LCDs are a real vulnerability.
...

Now, what makes a well-designed swivel screen any more vulnerable to damage vs. fixed?

+1.
There are a lot of complaints about swivel LCDs when reading specifications, but in real life they doesn't seem to be more vulnerable than fixed ones.

For me, a tiltable screen would be just so great for landscape work. It makes composing very comfortable, even when the camera is sitting on a small tripod or very near to the ground (for cool perspectives).

I would be willing to give a lot of features of my 6D away for a tiltable screen.

I agree. I live without the swivel screen 90-some percent of the time. However, coming back from my BWCA trip recently in which my only tripod was a tiny little Pedco UltraPod II, it was a pain trying to compose my long exposure shots and really made me long for my 70D.

 

[Steve]

Android: No. OS fragmentation, background power sucking, etc. are not a good idea for tool that needs to be reliable/stable/consistent, and it's a massive step away from Canon calling the shots menu/organization-wise. Canon's menus aren't sexy and that's why I love them. They are intelligently designed, efficient, and photographer-workflow oriented.

There is virtually no possibility at all of Canon switching to an open source OS to run their cameras. They like to have 100% control over every aspect of the design and only barely tolerate stuff like ML. That said, if they *did* switch to Android for some bizarre reason, it would likely be a very stripped down version that still had tight controls over what was possible and would likely lock out most of the OS functionality for the end user. It would be unbelievably stupid for them to just install Lollipop or whatever and let people go hog wild on the Play Store.

DPAF in Canon's entry-level FF rig? I thought it was supposed to be stripped down to keep the entry cost lower. Not buying this either. DPAF will go to the 5D and 1D lines, but not the 6D I think.

It was introduced on the 70D, and will almost certainly be included on the 80D. The 6D isn't really "entry level" in any meaningful way and is definitely closer to the prosumer crops. I obviously don't have numbers to hand but I'd bet a decent amount of money the 6D is pretty low on the list of first time DSLR purchases. DPAF is probably going to be a given on every non-Rebel/Kiss camera going forward would be my guess.

 

[Luds34]

I would strongly prefer that they keep the interchangeable screens because my 6D has the Eg-S now, much better.

I have the Eg-S arriving tomorrow and am a bit excited. How do you like it? Is it easy enough to swap out? I do 99% autofocus, however I liked the idea of being able to confirm with my eye. I shoot a lot of shots at f/1.4, f/2 and sometimes I think I'm in focus and don't find out until later when I'm reviewing in LR.

All my lenses are f/2.8 and faster except for two, and one them is the Tamron 150-600. Hopefully the viewfinder isn't too dark for my eyes with the new focus screen. Of course the Tamron gets used almost exclusively outdoors and in good light so...

 

[davidmurray]

1.5 stops better high ISO? In RAW? No way!

In cooked JPEG - quite possible with additional processing power in easy scenes.

I'm always in for surprises. But if I read the sound comments of our experts here in the forum, 1/3 to 1/2 a stop would be a huge step forward already, given the current tech. Sorry for comparing apples to oranges now: in comparison to an a7s we talk about 24 MP vs 12 MP, and a different sensor tech as well. Anyway, if a 24 MP 6DII would deliever an 1.5 stops improvement in RAW, this would be fantastic. 3200ish ISO 8000, 6400ish ISO 18000 and 12800ish ISO 31000. Bring it on, put the same sensor into the 5DIV and I am a happy camper...;-)

Well, current sensors have about 50% quantum efficiency and 3 electrons of read noise.

Imagine you could double the quantum efficiency to 100% (which is the limit), you would gain 1 stop. (1 stop = doubling of light collected).

Then at these very low numbers we're at poisson noise and I don't have the numbers at hand but 3 electrons is not much. You need 100 electrons to get a signal-to-noise ratio of 10 with a perfect sensor. With 3 electrons of read noise that would be a signal-to-noise ratio of 100/13 = 7.7. Not much less. Not much to gain here either. And that's the limit for a single sensor camera. A physical limit which no amount of research or marketing can break.

But image processing is an area where significant gains should be obtainable. Intelligent algorithms which guess what was photographed and "paint" it for you without noise. What you see after noise reduction is not the original image, but an image painted by an algorithm showing what that algorithm "thinks" is in the picture. Improve that algorithm a lot and you can fish out more details and improve the subjective image quality by some stops.

Thanks for that really interesting post. Interesting to look at this from the physics perspective.