Canon EOS R6 Mark II – Here are some more specifications

[Skux]

Why wouldn't they use the R3's sensor? They used the 1DX mk III's sensor in the R6.

Canon is not going to sell the distinguishing feature of the R3 for the price of an R6.

 

[jam05]

The EOS R3 has a stacked sensor. The first thing any insider would note other than resolution is if its a stacked or normal CMOS sensor. If they know the resolution they definitely would know if its a stacked sensor as in the R3. Quite sure admin will do a follow up.

 

[KiagiJ]

I don’t really understand the logic in using a 24 mp sensor in this camera. It seems to me that 30 mp is now the standard for midrange cameras. They had a 30 mp sensor in the 5DIV in 2016. Come on Canon.

Low megapixels is not a negative, it's a positive and desirable aspect for low light event or portrait photographers to get the cleanest high iso images. I chose an R6 over an R5 to get better low light performance, it's a superior camera in this one regard, just like the 6D was over the 5d mk iii. The 6 series has always been about great low light performance, it's always been a superior low light series that's somehow usually overlooked as a worse than 5 series camera, to me it's a better camera for my uses (low light), and cheaper so it's a win win. I just hope with the higher R6 II's 24 megapixels it'll be as iso clean as the R6

 

[Czardoom]

Releasing a R6 mk ii doesn't necessarily mean that Canon wants R6 users to upgrade. It just means they're upping their options available to new customers, current DSLR shooters who are about to switch to DSLM and most of all to have a more competitive offer compared to the competition. And therefore, a Mkii makes sense even if there are only small changes.

- stacked BSI 24mp sensor
- slightly better ergonomics (that new R7 dial comes to mind)
- maybe better EVF resolution
- no record time limitation

All great updates which make the camera more competitive but certainly not enough to justify most R6 users to upgrade. R6 users might upgrade to R6 mk iii in some years...

I think to be more accurate (at least in my opinion) Canon doesn't expect R6 users to upgrade - or any camera owner to upgrade to the next generation of the same camera line. And the same is true for Nikon, and most other brands. Because next generation upgrades are always small and incremental. It's always about new users, users upgrading from a different camera line, or photographers who use their camera so much that it is nearing the end of it's shutter life span, or needs replacement for other reasons. Many forum dwellers don't seem to get this.

I think an earlier poster may have been on track when they said it may be a quicker cycle than usual, to reposition the lineup to make room for the R8. If it does have the R3 sensor, expect the price to be pushed up a notch. This will allow for more room below price wise for the R8.

 

[Czardoom]

I have played the R7 at Canon showroom, I really don’t understand why the heck they move the sub-dial to the upper of the camera, just like the multi function bar of R

Because that is where your thumb is. Pretty simple and works great.

 

[mpb001]

Low megapixels is not a negative, it's a positive and desirable aspect for low light event or portrait photographers to get the cleanest high iso images. I chose an R6 over an R5 to get better low light performance, it's a superior camera in this one regard, just like the 6D was over the 5d mk iii. The 6 series has always been about great low light performance, it's always been a superior low light series that's somehow usually overlooked as a worse than 5 series camera, to me it's a better camera for my uses (low light), and cheaper so it's a win win. I just hope with the higher R6 II's 24 megapixels it'll be as iso clean as the R6

I agree that the camera will be a general use camera but not a winner for landscapes and currently Canon does not have a higher mp camera between the R6 and R5 for people who want more resolution without spending $4000 for an R5.

 

[Czardoom]

I don’t really understand the logic in using a 24 mp sensor in this camera. It seems to me that 30 mp is now the standard for midrange cameras. They had a 30 mp sensor in the 5DIV in 2016. Come on Canon.

Lots of 24 MP cameras out there, both mid range and higher. Nikon Z6, Sony A9, Lumix S1 and S5, and of course Canon R3. If you want more MPs, there are plenty of choices, too. Not everyone wants or needs more than 24 (or even 20) MPs. Clearly there is no standard, which is a good thing because people want a choice.

 

[mpb001]

The logic would be internal - if it's the R3 sensor, there's no extra development cost. Just like them using the 1DxIII sensor in the R6. I don't think their perspective is the same as a consumer's.

I still think that it will be a general use camera. I have been a devoted Canon user for a long time but I will probably just start renting other cameras to see which will give me higher quality landscape photos without spending $4000 for an R5. A 30-33 mp Canon would fit the bill but Im not seeing that like I am with Sony or upcoming Nikon models.

 

[Czardoom]

I agree that the camera will be a general use camera but not a winner for landscapes and currently Canon does not have a higher mp camera between the R6 and R5 for people who want more resolution without spending $4000 for an R5.

Unless you are printing large prints, 20 or 24 MPs is completely fine for landscapes, in my opinion (and that's what I shoot most). Sold plenty of 8x10 and 11x14 prints using my old 6 MP camera. Can obviously print bigger with my shots taken with my old 6D. The idea that you need mnore MPS for landscape is just another one of those internet fairy tales, unless, of course, you are printing BIG. My opinion of course.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

If that would be R6C, with 24 mpx , 6K raw , cinema line, then I would think again…

Yeah, I have no need for an R6 II, but an R6 C would be awfully tempting.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

If you can shed some more light that'd be awesome. I was considering a refurb R6.

Other than freezing, the rest of the complaints only pertain to video.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Thinking about what pictures you can make with any kind of todays DSLR or MILC I wouldn't call any of those "trash".
When that sensor was released with the 6D2 people were sceptic, but it turned out to be quite good.
Today I would call it "outdated", but still okay. TBH, it is one reason why I didn't buy an RP and hope for a Mk II of such a wonderfully small FF body.
"Trash" is definitely too extreme.

I am not sure what people expect for $1K USD.
I think it is a very good value.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

They aren't going to use the R3's sensor, this is Canon we're talking about lol.

The R6 uses the same sensor and image processor from the 1DX III.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I agree that the camera will be a general use camera but not a winner for landscapes and currently Canon does not have a higher mp camera between the R6 and R5 for people who want more resolution without spending $4000 for an R5.

If it was not for the supply shortage, the R5 should be down to $3,000 by now.

 

[JoeP]

I am still hesitating to switch from DSLR to mirrorless since I am often hiking and need long battery times and also GPS.

Will the R6MarkII show GPS as it had been added also to the latest 5DMarkIV ?
Will battery life / power consumption improve ?
Will it have a BSI sensor like the R3 ?

Also, having the off/on button on the right to use the camera (as in R7) basically only with the right fingers would be a nice-to-have.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I am still hesitating to switch from DSLR to mirrorless since I am often hiking and need long battery times and also GPS.

Will the R6MarkII show GPS as it had been added also to the latest 5DMarkIV ?
Will battery life / power consumption improve ?

It is not technically feasible to get DSLR battery life from a mirrorless camera.

 

[navastronia]

Canon is not going to sell the distinguishing feature of the R3 for the price of an R6.

The 1DX mk III and the R6 share a sensor. The 1DX mk III costs about as much as the R3.

The distinguishing features of the R3 are its eye-autofocus, body/handling, and toughness, btw.

 

[Avenger 2.0]

I have played the R7 at Canon showroom, I really don’t understand why the heck they move the sub-dial to the upper of the camera, just like the multi function bar of R

I must say, I was very sceptical about this too with the R7. But now after using it for a week, I'm used to it and it also feels like the best place for it. I hope they'll continue this trend and also put it on other bodies like that. The R multi function unfortunately I never get really used to. I've put mine on AF / Image browsing so it's still kind of useful in the rare cases I need it.

 

[Avenger 2.0]

Likely Canon is producing a new 24mpix sensor for the R6II (with dual card & ibis) and a lower entry level body R8/R9 (single card, no ibis) and give it the R7 level AF upgrade. I do not believe they will reuse the same R3 sensor in the R6II (it's just too soon). Also I do not believe in a RII.

The R and RP were just Canons first try. With R5, R6, R7, R10 no update to them is needed. Maybe a cheap full-frame with single card and no ibis might still appear, but since R10 has a ~1000€/$ price tag, ~1600€/$ would be the minimum I guess. However doubt they will get a higher mpix sensor then the R6 (maybe they will even reuse the R6 20mpix sensor for it).

 

[JoeP]

It is not technically feasible to get DSLR battery life from a mirrorless camera.

What about GPS ?

(Somewhat shorter battery life like 50% is OK - but 300 images from one battery is rather little ...)