Canon EOS 6D Mark II Talk [CR1]

[douglaurent]

My shopping message to Canon just was: I only bought 1 instead of 2 1DX2 and 1 instead of 3 5D4 - because of their lack of innovation, or better said: lack of including what their competitors already sell.

People like you should finally realize that those missing features are not a favor to customers so they are not confused with too many new functions. The one and only purpose is to spread features over as many new products over the longest possible time, so you spend more money. They try to squeeze as much out of it as possible, so it's fair that customers give the pressure back and demand as many realistic features as possible.

The message Canon heard was that you bought a 1DX II and a 5DIV. They neither know nor care about what you didn't buy, and by purchasing two high-end bodies, you told them, "Good job, Canon!"

People like you should finally realize that Canon doesn't give a rat's ass about what you don't buy. Feel free to demand that Canon incorporate the features you want. Then you can hold back the tide with your bare hands. Then count backwards from infinity. All of those have about equal chances of success.

It seems at least you care what I think. And I know lots of people think and feel the same, they just don't spend time to write public lists. Without customer feedback, market leading companies tend to sleep.

Canon does steal a lot of pros time these years because they need workarounds, and Canon makes a lot of pros carry around more stuff than necessary because you need 2-4 cameras instead of 1-2 to do allround jobs. So this is not just some random complaining, it's a business necessity to tell Canon not to hold back much needed features and products.

Personally I don't even complain about the prices, and would pay $1000 more if a 5D4 had an articulating screen. I would pay lots more if it was mirrorless. They just need to release it.

 

[scyrene]

I think you're right; a lot of the noise about 4K is from people who are obsessed with ticking boxes on spec sheets, not people who actually use the feature.

ding ding ding ding! We have a winner!

Wtf??? People who want 4K use it. It is not a spec sheet thing. Are you guys really that ignorant or are you just being bloody minded.

*Some* people. Do you honestly think every hyperbolic 'a camera is useles without 4K' post on here is born of a genuine need? Just like all the other complaints about DR or whatever - they are definitely 100% objective statements, and not at all twisted ideas of what features are valuable to most customers based on a lack of familiarity with how photography works? Come off it. Sure, there are plenty of reasonable people here who make a good case for 4K - and most people are not opposed to it even though it's now being portrayed that way. But you must accept that some people are just cluelessly whining about stuff they've never used (and never will).

 

[scyrene]

I've been lurking around this forum for a long, long time, waiting for news, learning new things and admiring people's pictures.

So I just wanted to log in for once and say that the endless, nasty threads like this are why I don't participate. Someone posts a hyperbolic complaint, someone chimes in to say that person is a moron, and on and on it goes for pages. It's really awful.

It's a shame you're put off. I'm afraid that's how internet forums are though (and there are many worse than here) - although I would say, threads like this are at the sharp end. There are lots of friendlier ones where people post photos or ask for technical advice.

However, should posts that are demonstrably untrue be left unchallenged? There are people who will visit that might not know, and leave with incorrect assumptions. Is it better to be unfailingly polite whilst letting wrongheadedness prevail? Not that everything can be proven one way or another, of course.

 

[Mikehit]

That's the whole point, without some positive surprise and logical acting by Canon it would take until the next decade until they offer features that many already consider basics for their work.

The best thing would be if Canon NEVER does release a camera with mirror again, as it hardly makes sense anymore. They should simply start by releasing mirrorless versions of the 5D4 and 1DX2, with - most important - the same old mount and no stupid new mount! This is something Canon could release next year, and they would be everyone's darling again.

Is mirrorless really 'basic for your work' or just that you like the way it works?

How many times does this need repeating before you understand it instead of merely repeating what you have already said. Every manufacturer has a target market and Canon's key market is action, sports and wildlife.Pperformance of mirrorless autofocus systems is not yet as good as DSLRs and Canon will turn 1DX and 5D into mirrorless cameras as and when they have mirrorless AF technology to match that of DSLRs.
No amount of wishful bleating by your or anyone else will change that.

 

[douglaurent]

My shopping message to Canon just was: I only bought 1 instead of 2 1DX2 and 1 instead of 3 5D4 - because of their lack of innovation, or better said: lack of including what their competitors already sell.

People like you should finally realize that those missing features are not a favor to customers so they are not confused with too many new functions. The one and only purpose is to spread features over as many new products over the longest possible time, so you spend more money. They try to squeeze as much out of it as possible, so it's fair that customers give the pressure back and demand as many realistic features as possible.

The message Canon heard was that you bought a 1DX II and a 5DIV. They neither know nor care about what you didn't buy, and by purchasing two high-end bodies, you told them, "Good job, Canon!"

People like you should finally realize that Canon doesn't give a rat's ass about what you don't buy. Feel free to demand that Canon incorporate the features you want. Then you can hold back the tide with your bare hands. Then count backwards from infinity. All of those have about equal chances of success.

DUDE; YES CANON APS-C LENSES CAN'T BE ATTACHED BECAUSE OF THIS; AND THIS IS WHY CANON SHOULD CHANGE THE MECHANICS OF NEW CAMERAS AND LENSES, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT!!!

All other camera and lens manufacturers show it's possible to build it differently!!!

Because other manufacturers do it differently, that's better? You prefer lenses being larger than they need to be? They could solve in a second the incompatibility of current EF-S lenses with FF bodies? They should come out with a third mount comprising FF-compatible lenses that aren't really compatible except with crop modes?

Shout some more, dude...it really helps convince people of your point and makes you sound super duper smart.

New Canon APS-C that fit on FF will not be much larger because they are 5mm less long on the inside.

In general, the glass of any existing APS-C lens would not touch the mirror when it folds up to the corner of the sensor, which is what I meant. It's the plastics of the lens bottoms, and the thick mirror plate that will touch each other at some point. If it's build differently, it can work.

Even if Canon does not change the inside of their FF cameras, they could start to release new dedicated APS-C lenses that will fit to FF, which would be a great extra business for them. They could even only rehouse old glass and it might work.

Remember this topic comes from the fact that the 5D4 has an 1.74x crop in full frame mode, and if nothing extremely surprisingly happens, the 6D2 won't be much different. So Canon might not offer 4K FF filming until 2020 and just offers cropped 4K - but at the same time they don't have one cropped lens that is suitable for it. People would have to spend 3000 bucks for an 11-24/4, just to be able to go as wide as a 19mm equivalent. That can't be a serious modern camera/lens lineup.

 

[scyrene]

Personally I don't even complain about the prices, and would pay $1000 more if a 5D4 had an articulating screen. I would pay lots more if it was mirrorless. They just need to release it.

Simple question: do you think Canon would gain more customers than it loses if they charged $1000 more having released the 5D4 as a mirrorless camera? Take a step back, calm down, and *think*. One of the biggest complaints on these forums and elsewhere has been the 5D4's high introductory price. I've seen no complaints about the presence of a mirror. Do you think there's such a huge unspoken groundswell of desire for a mirrorless equivalent that all those people would pay that much more for it?

Or can you actually see that your needs are not mainstream? That doesn't make them wrong. But releasing a camera that doesn't sell well because *most* people don't want to pay that much for what it is would be a poor business decision. Can you see that?

 

[Memdroid]

Wow... Dougs requests borders on ridiculous.. Why someone want to put a crop lens on a FF body is beyond me.

 

[Mikehit]

Wow... Dougs requests borders on ridiculous.. Why someone want to put a crop lens on a FF body is beyond me.

As far as I can tell he wants to put a crop lens on FF body so he can use the sensor in crop mode. Or add another step in PP by cropping it in post processing.
Probably 'just because he can'.

 

[Etienne]

Wow... Dougs requests borders on ridiculous.. Why someone want to put a crop lens on a FF body is beyond me.

As far as I can tell he wants to put a crop lens on FF body so he can use the sensor in crop mode. Or add another step in PP by cropping it in post processing.
Probably 'just because he can'.

Well when the 4K video mode is already at (or smaller than) the 1.6x crop for APS-C, you have to ask "why not"?

And not every APS-C body from Canon works with EF-S lenses. I think that the 20D is the first APS-C DSLR from Canon that is safe for EF-S lenses, the 10D, D30 and D60 are not.

With some EF-S lenses there are "hardware hacks" you can do to remove the back rubber bit from the part of the lens that protrudes backwards so that the mirror doesn't hit the lens.

Imagine for a moment that the M5 was full-frame and had the same 4K video mode as the 5D4. You could safely use EF-S lenses with that camera because the mount is the same and there is no mirror to hit the part of the lens that protrudes backwards.

Some people have been using APS-C lenses on Canon FF bodies for quite a while. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, 12-24 f/4, and 14-20 f/2 have all been used on full-frame bodies.

I am actually considering the Tokina 14-20 f/2 for both FF and Crop. At 20mm it is a full-frame f/2 prime, for dirt cheap. How can you beat that?

And you can use it on a C-series camera as a fast wide zoom, and on the 5D4 as a fast wide zoom for 4K.

There's no good reason for Canon to persist with the EF-S mount. After all these years they still haven't produced a set of reasonable EF-S primes. Abandon it, and produce any future APS-C lenses with an EF mount ... That's far more useful.

 

[Mikehit]

Abandon it, and produce any future APS-C lenses with an EF mount ... That's far more useful.

I am still confused as to why. Why not buy a EF lens instead?
Tokina have put a FF lens assembly on a EF-S mount so why not ask them to make it in EF?

It comes down to the earlier discussion about sales. If people are happy buying EF-S cameras with EF-S mounts then why should Canon re-tool their production lines?

 

[Luds34]

I think you're right; a lot of the noise about 4K is from people who are obsessed with ticking boxes on spec sheets, not people who actually use the feature.

ding ding ding ding! We have a winner!

All of the complaining about adding video, or 4K, to DSLRs is coming from people who don't understand video, and can't grasp the benefits it brings even for photographers. Probably the same people who said "don't put this amateur auto-focus thing in my camera, I'm a pro I can manual focus" over 30 years ago.

Who said anything about video as a whole? We're speaking 4k specifically. Aka, 1080p is more then good enough for the "weekend warrior" who wants to grab some quick, family fun moments. The idea that one is taking photos one moment, then switches over to grab some video with the built in mic, whatever lens is mounted, NEEDS 4k video is borderline laughable. If one NEEDS 4k then they are shooting some serious content and are kitting out their camera as a serious video capturing rig. I'm the least serious person when it comes to capturing video. Aka, I'm the guy just grabbing some home videos. And even I got a dedicated little video rig, external mic in the flash hot shoe, L bracket for stability, zoom lens with IS attached at all times, etc.

In short, using your stills camera to grab some quick video here in there is fine, but at that point you're already operating in "amateur hour" and 1080p is more then good enough.

 

[Sator]

The best thing would be if Canon NEVER does release a camera with mirror again, as it hardly makes sense anymore. They should simply start by releasing mirrorless versions of the 5D4 and 1DX2, with - most important - the same old mount and no stupid new mount! This is something Canon could release next year, and they would be everyone's darling again.

This must be the dumbest statement I've read in a long time.

People seem to think that the mirror on a DSLR is some sort of fashion accessory about as photographically useful as a vanity mirror. If you've been using it to put on makeup all this time...it's time someone pulled you aside to tell you it actually serves an important function. It feeds light to a dedicated off-focal plane PDAF sensor.

Mirrorless cameras should really be more honestly called AF-sensorless cameras because they have had this dedicated PDAF sensor ripped out of them. It is the height of foolishness to expect a camera to function as well without that extra AF-sensor.

Now, you can argue for the benefits of a fixed semi-translucent pellicle mirror of a kind Canon pioneered a long time ago, as a means of eliminating mirror shock, but to suggest that the mirror and the dedicated PDAF sensor are just pointless fashion accessories is abject ignorance. The bigger the rant and the more sweeping the certainty of the soapbox opinion, the more you can assured it is based on gross misinformation.

 

[Etienne]

Abandon it, and produce any future APS-C lenses with an EF mount ... That's far more useful.

I am still confused as to why. Why not buy a EF lens instead?
Tokina have put a FF lens assembly on a EF-S mount so why not ask them to make it in EF?

It comes down to the earlier discussion about sales. If people are happy buying EF-S cameras with EF-S mounts then why should Canon re-tool their production lines?

The Tokina lenses are EF mount NOT EF-S.
They are made for APS-C sized sensors, but at the long end of the zoom they cover FF sensor, so people with FF cameras also use them on those cameras.
The EF-S mount itself offers no significant advantage.

 

[Mikehit]

The Tokina lenses are EF mount NOT EF-S.
They are made for APS-C sized sensors, but at the long end of the zoom they cover FF sensor, so people with FF cameras also use them on those cameras.
The EF-S mount itself offers no significant advantage.

I stand corrected (I should have known that as I have tried out a couple of Tokina lenses!)
I still fail to see why you would want to put on a FF body a third party lens that you can only use over part of the range. It just seems a very odd shaped stick with which to beat Canon.

 

[Sator]

Performance of mirrorless autofocus systems is not yet as good as DSLRs and Canon will turn 1DX and 5D into mirrorless cameras as and when they have mirrorless AF technology to match that of DSLRs.

Absolutely correct and well said. When you rip that dedicated off-focal plane DPAF sensor out, the camera AF simply doesn't function as well. It is not as good with shooting action. It is not as good at low light AF. It is not able to focus well with long telephoto lenses. There is EVF lag shooting action.

The main reason people indulge in full frame mirrorless is as a novelty pursued as an end in itself. APS-C mirrorless has come a long way, but it will take some time before full frame mirrorless is able to match the performance of a current model DSLR.

 

[Etienne]

The Tokina lenses are EF mount NOT EF-S.
They are made for APS-C sized sensors, but at the long end of the zoom they cover FF sensor, so people with FF cameras also use them on those cameras.
The EF-S mount itself offers no significant advantage.

I stand corrected (I should have known that as I have tried out a couple of Tokina lenses!)
I still fail to see why you would want to put on a FF body a third party lens that you can only use over part of the range. It just seems a very odd shaped stick with which to beat Canon.

Seriously?
An enormous number of FF camera users also have crop sensor cameras.
You can't see the advantage of being able to use a 20mm f/2 (that costs only $600) on a full frame camera? You can't see the advantage of being able to carry that one lens and pop it onto a crop camera and get a 22-32mm f/2 ?

And how many FF 20mm f/2 lenses do you know about?

Canon could produce just as versatile a lens in EF mount, but not in EF-S because it will not even attach to the FF body. They did this because they designed EF-S lenses to protrude too far into the camera body.

 

[d]

Canon could produce just as versatile a lens in EF mount, but not in EF-S because it will not even attach to the FF body. They did this because they designed EF-S lenses to protrude too far into the camera body.

Another way to look at it is that Canon designed EF-S lenses to protrude exactly the right distance into their crop-sensored EF-S mount bodies...

 

[Sarpedon]

I've been lurking around this forum for a long, long time, waiting for news, learning new things and admiring people's pictures.

So I just wanted to log in for once and say that the endless, nasty threads like this are why I don't participate. Someone posts a hyperbolic complaint, someone chimes in to say that person is a moron, and on and on it goes for pages. It's really awful.

It's a shame you're put off. I'm afraid that's how internet forums are though (and there are many worse than here) - although I would say, threads like this are at the sharp end. There are lots of friendlier ones where people post photos or ask for technical advice.

However, should posts that are demonstrably untrue be left unchallenged? There are people who will visit that might not know, and leave with incorrect assumptions. Is it better to be unfailingly polite whilst letting wrongheadedness prevail? Not that everything can be proven one way or another, of course.

Oh not at all. It's the tone and content of those responses I object to. There's just no need to insult people when you're disabusing them of a misconception, there's no need to be curt and condescending. It seems to me that the people who post those hyperbolic comments (Cannon is terrible because of X!) tend to be new or newish to this forum. So why not calmly point out that they're wrong (or calmly say that you disagree when it's not a matter of fact) and ask them to post more carefully in the future? And if the newbies come in screaming at people and calling them names they should be warned and then banned if they keep at it. I also think that there are some people in this forum - some of the more prolific posters - who either get off on condescending to other people or who can't control their own anger because they've had these arguments so many times. And, frankly, I think the moderators could do a better job.

I get that this is an internet forum and I'm basically pissing into the wind, but it's just frustrating because this is the best place for Canon info on the web, and there are a lot of good photographers and nice people here, and the newbies and a few of the folks who post constantly are ruining it.

 

[d]

Oh not at all. It's the tone and content of those responses I object to. There's just no need to insult people when you're disabusing them of a misconception, there's no need to be curt and condescending. It seems to me that the people who post those hyperbolic comments (Cannon is terrible because of X!) tend to be new or newish to this forum. So why not calmly point out that they're wrong (or calmly say that you disagree when it's not a matter of fact) and ask them to post more carefully in the future? And if the newbies come in screaming at people and calling them names they should be warned and then banned if they keep at it. I also think that there are some people in this forum - some of the more prolific posters - who either get off on condescending to other people or who can't control their own anger because they've had these arguments so many times. And, frankly, I think the moderators could do a better job.

I get that this is an internet forum and I'm basically pissing into the wind, but it's just frustrating because this is the best place for Canon info on the web, and there are a lot of good photographers and nice people here, and the newbies and a few of the folks who post constantly are ruining it.

The opinion is held that many of the "newbies" here are likely repeat members reposting under new user names in order to antagonise other members or promote their preferred, alternative branded cameras. The more suspicious might suggest some of them are paid by other camera companies to do so.

I believe you can block posts from members you don't wish to read, so perhaps you could try that feature?

Cheers,
d.

 

[Mikehit]

They did this because they designed EF-S lenses to protrude too far into the camera body.

And they did that to enable them to make smaller lenses and take full advantage of the fact that they needed to project a smaller image circle. In fact, APS-C is hobbled by its original need to mount EF lenses, back in the day there were no decent EF-S lenses and the mount had to be big enough to take EF lenses.
So actually you have the history the wrong way round.