Canon EOS R6 Mark II – Here are some more specifications

[usern4cr]

Genuine question from a non-video guy. Why would you want to record audio in slow motion video?

1) When viewing movies at 2x slowed down speed, the days when you just played back audio an octave lower/higher are gone. Well known software can play audio at various speeds while keeping the same pitch. There are plenty of times when there is audio without much, if any, speech going on. In those cases the played back audio, at the same pitch, would sound natural enough.
2) There will be times when you want to play back 120fps movies at 120fps, based on future technology becoming more mainstream, and having the audio gives you that ability.
3) You could play back the 120fps movie at normal 60fps speed (no slow motion) by 2x downsampling time-wise the video & audio, and then you're getting the same video with sound as if it was 60fps to start with. But when there's something you want to show in slow motion, you still have the slow motion smooth video for it and the "as good as you can make it" audio to go with it.
4) Audio takes almost no storage compared to video, so why not record it? It won't make much difference to the storage needed. And then you can get the marketing buzz at the very least.

 

[SUNDOG04]

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.

For those of us interested in primarily landscape, Canon bodies are overpriced. Although I think they are better overall. Sony has a 33mp sensor a7 IV for the same price as an R6 and the Nikon Z7 II Iis just $400 more. Unless something changes drastically I all but wrote off Canon mirrorless….higher cost bodies, not neediing f1.2 lenses for landscape or cheaper lenses they are crappy without correction. No in between lenses, no choice of third party. My Canon gear still performes perfectly, but unless something changes, Canon is not in my future. I have not given up yet.

 

[unfocused]

For those of us interested in primarily landscape, Canon bodies are overpriced. Although I think they are better overall. Sony has a 33mp sensor a7 IV for the same price as an R6 and the Nikon Z7 II Iis just $400 more. Unless something changes drastically I all but wrote off Canon mirrorless….higher cost bodies, not neediing f1.2 lenses for landscape or cheaper lenses they are crappy without correction. No in between lenses, no choice of third party. My Canon gear still performes perfectly, but unless something changes, Canon is not in my future. I have not given up yet.

The 30mp R seems like it would be a good option. At $1,600 it's far less expensive, can use any EF lens with an adapter and if you aren't shooting sports, birds in flight or other fast action, it performs very well. Right now you can buy it new for less than a refurbished model.

 

[mpb001]

For those of us interested in primarily landscape, Canon bodies are overpriced. Although I think they are better overall. Sony has a 33mp sensor a7 IV for the same price as an R6 and the Nikon Z7 II Iis just $400 more. Unless something changes drastically I all but wrote off Canon mirrorless….higher cost bodies, not neediing f1.2 lenses for landscape or cheaper lenses they are crappy without correction. No in between lenses, no choice of third party. My Canon gear still performes perfectly, but unless something changes, Canon is not in my future. I have not given up yet.

I do like Canon and do not really want to switch. I guess there really isn’t enough of a compelling reason to upgrade. I wont buy any mirrorless without IBIS and no less than 30 MP. For now and into the near future my 5DIV can accommodate all of my photo needs.

 

[Tirmite]

This is exactly where I'm at. Spec-wise the R6 would be great for me but I know I'm going to really miss that top LCD (Coming off a 5D MkIII). Clicked on this hoping it might be making it on, looks like we're going to be disappointed

I can't say what's right for you or others, but I don't miss the top LCD at all. I shoot with a 1Dx MkII, R bodies (the 30MP first mirrorless), an R5, and an R6. All the info you need is either in the viewfinder or right there on the rear LCD and much larger and better illuminated (white numbers and letters on a black field vs. a dimly lit, tiny LCD grayish background with black text). Yes, we get used to having a top LCD, but it's really not a big deal in practical terms since the EVF in a mirrorless offers so much info (and it's customizable whereas the top LCD isn't) and since the top LCD's on Canon's mirrorless bodies tend to be quite small, especially compared to the rear screen which is just the twist-of-your-wrist away from quick viewing. The R6 Mark I is a nice camera and I'm sure the Mark II will be even better. My R6 is permanently dedicated to the 28-70mm since that lens does not have built in IS. I've never regretted not having a top LCD. Rarely use my R5. Just don't NEED that much resolution for 99% of the things I shoot but got it in case I wanted to do 4K 120 fps or maybe 8K or maybe architectural, but I have dedicated Sony A7r bodies for that type of work. Haven't found "the perfect" one camera yet, just like the perfect car. But at that price point the R6 is a very decent camera and I could have 2 or 3 R bodies or R6 bodies for what a "flagship" model costs and to me it makes more sense to have multiple bodies that maybe are missing a bell or a whistle instead of just ONE body that supposedly does everything well.... and that's arguable. ALSO... with computational software like Topaz's Gigapixel, you can effectively double your resolution if you need to print LARGE and it really is impressive. So 20-24 megapixels is plently for all but the most demanding jobs or projects. Pay about a couple hundred bucks (think I paid $150 for a bundle that includes a de-noise program and a sharpening program, too) for software and save hundreds or thousands by purchasing a camera with less MP's. Point being: don't talk yourself out of an R6. Rent one and play with it. I bet you'll never miss that one fairly insignificant feature.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I shoot with a 1Dx MkII... Pay a couple hundred bucks for that software and save hundreds or thousands by purchasing a camera with less MP's.

Is that how it works with the 20 MP 1D X II?

 

[mpmark]

For those of us interested in primarily landscape, Canon bodies are overpriced. Although I think they are better overall. Sony has a 33mp sensor a7 IV for the same price as an R6 and the Nikon Z7 II Iis just $400 more. Unless something changes drastically I all but wrote off Canon mirrorless….higher cost bodies, not neediing f1.2 lenses for landscape or cheaper lenses they are crappy without correction. No in between lenses, no choice of third party. My Canon gear still performes perfectly, but unless something changes, Canon is not in my future. I have not given up yet.

As a wildlife photographer, the cameras are absolutely worth the price, compared to a A1 or Z9 its a bargain! I use the R5 for wildlife and I've tried other systems, nothing can touch the AF. If I was a landscape photographer the R5 is overkill with the AF system. I'd get a GFX setup and never look back.

 

[Tirmite]

Is that how it works with the 20 MP 1D X II?

HA! Well, that's how it works with any file from any of my cameras when a client wants to print something large. These days that rarely happens since most viewing is on devices or small screens. But I get your humor! I love the 1Dx's and wished for a "studio" version for years until Gigapixel AI came out and I realized 20-24MP's is just fine for almost anything these days, especially when you can double the "preceived" resolution with a little software magic. Paying nearly $7K for that body was painful, though. I purchased the R6 hoping it might be a good backup for the 1Dx. It's a great little camera but you DO get what you pay for. The 1Dx has incredible focusing speed and accuracy, short lag time when the shutter is tripped, batteries that last a long time, built like a tank, etc. Recently picked up a second one sold by Canon USA for $4,000 that was "refurbished". It was absolutely flawless with a shutter count of less than 1000 actuations, so I'm pretty much convinced they were just liquidating what was in the warehouse. At that price it was a bargain and those bodies are perfect for EF white lenses that have noit been replaced by RF lenses yet.

 

[Chig]

I've been considering the R7 or the R6 as a replacement of my 7Dmark ii and if the R6 has a BSI stacked sensor and the better auto focus from the R3 & R7 and perhaps 30fps electronic then I'd probably buy it instead of the R7 as this would be better for my bird photography

 

[David - Sydney]

1) When viewing movies at 2x slowed down speed, the days when you just played back audio an octave higher are gone. Well known software can play audio at various speeds while keeping the same pitch. There are plenty of times when there is audio without much, if any, speech going on. In those cases the played back audio, at the same pitch, would sound natural enough.
2) There will be times when you want to play back 120fps movies at 120fps, based on future technology becoming more mainstream, and having the audio gives you that ability.
3) You could play back the 120fps movie at normal 60fps speed (no slow motion) by 2x downsampling time-wise the video & audio, and then you're getting the same video with sound as if it was 60fps to start with. But when there's something you want to show in slow motion, you still have the slow motion smooth video for it and the "as good as you can make it" audio to go with it.
4) Audio takes almost no storage compared to video, so why not record it? It won't make much difference to the storage needed. And then you can get the marketing buzz at the very least.

Is the sound issue because canon records the file as 4K/30 for playback purposes?

 

[Franklyok]

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

And ofcause it would be nice if Canon would cooperate with netflix. So with the ”Netflix approved” award on day 1 would help the sales a lot.

 

[AlanF]

I've been considering the R7 or the R6 as a replacement of my 7Dmark ii and if the R6 has a BSI stacked sensor and the better auto focus from the R3 & R7 and perhaps 30fps electronic then I'd probably buy it instead of the R7 as this would be better for my bird photography

If you are a "birds in flight nutter" then maybe the R7 is not the best for you, though it is pretty good, but if you are mainly perched birds the the R7 is remarkable. I wouldn't swap my R5 for a 24 Mpx R6 II for BIF as the R5 has unerring AF and the extra pixels mean I can use a shorter, lighter lens for the fast erratic flying critters.

 

[mxwphoto]

I'm a 5DIII shooter looking to switch to mirrorless. Was looking at the R6 but - illogically and emotionally, I admit - couldn't justify the downgrade, however slight, in MP. I have no problem with resolution of my current camera but felt odd to spend money on a new camera just to go backwards. If they do bump up the R6II to ~24, that probably seals the deal for me. Seems like an awesome stills camera otherwise.

You only think of it being backwards looking at the megapixel spec. Try shooting with R6 with fast glass and editing the files.

I went from a 5D II and was hesitant about giving up OVF, but once I tried the R6, firstly the AF just blew me away. Keeper rates at f1.2 on fast moving subjects went from a prayer for luck to about 80%+ (in servo AF no less) with hardly any effort, and my goodness the amount you can push that file in the shadows and highlights is night and day.

Once you experience it, that 4mp difference will be the last thing on your mind.

 

[Bob Howland]

You only think of it being backwards looking at the megapixel spec. Try shooting with R6 with fast glass and editing the files.

I went from a 5D II and was hesitant about giving up OVF, but once I tried the R6, firstly the AF just blew me away. Keeper rates at f1.2 on fast moving subjects went from a prayer for luck to about 80%+ (in servo AF no less) with hardly any effort, and my goodness the amount you can push that file in the shadows and highlights is night and day.

Once you experience it, that 4mp difference will be the last thing on your mind.

Going from the 5D AF to the 5D3 AF was a revelation as well. Going from the 5D3 AF to the R7 AF has been much more problematic. I not accustomed to and don't particularly like the whole idea of focus tracking. I'm not chasing overactive 5-year olds trying to keep their eyes in focus. And very often what I want in focus isn't the closest thing to me.

 

[john1970]

Going from the 5D AF to the 5D3 AF was a revelation as well. Going from the 5D3 AF to the R7 AF has been much more problematic. I not accustomed to and don't particularly like the whole idea of focus tracking. I'm not chasing overactive 5-year olds trying to keep their eyes in focus. And very often what I want in focus isn't the closest thing to me.

Hi Bob,

Have you tried using Spot AF or 1-Point AF with the AE lock button assigned as Register/recall shooting function? I have this enabled on my R3 and it allows me to move the AF point to wherever I want in the frame and simply lock focus by pressing the AE lock button. I use this function a lot when I do not need focus tracking or when I want to manually determine where the focus point should be.

Good luck,

John

 

[bradpaulp]

I wonder what the record limit / heat limit will look like on the new version.

The 29:59 limit doesn’t bother me as much as the “you need to cool your camera for 10 minutes to get 10 minutes more recording”.

 

[LeeBabySimms]

We have three R6's that we've rung out for wedding work. Such a great camera. I'd welcome a few more megapickles. 24 seems like a golilocks amount. My 6k Apple monitor can't take anymore - they'd be wasted.

Regarding the top screen, the R6 is faster than the R5 to go from mode to mode. It's one click on the big knob, while on the R5 you have to press MODE, then twist. Milleseconds actually count when you're shooting a sparkler exit and need to go from C1 (set for Av & Auto ISO) to M where you're brining the light.

I had every 5D and 7D prior to the R6 and NEVER miss the info screen. Actually prefer the cleaner retro look of the R6, in addition to the faster mode change.

 

[Jupiter_GP]

I miss the fact that when I connect an additional preview monitor to HDMI, so that the camera can continue to record on cards. Only an external recorder in the current version. Better to have it recorded in the camera, and if necessary, also on an external recorder. Not everyone needs 10bits for HDMi. In the Sony A7III I connect the HDMI cable and I can still record on cards, and not in the R6. Stupid. Maybe it will be enough for them to do it in the new firmwer. Maybe 8 bits, whatever it is.

 

[AlanF]

Regarding the top screen, the R6 is faster than the R5 to go from mode to mode. It's one click on the big knob, while on the R5 you have to press MODE, then twist. Milleseconds actually count when you're shooting a sparkler exit and need to go from C1 (set for Av & Auto ISO) to M where you're brining the light.

The R5 is faster to change mode if you customise the buttons. Th M-fn on mine is programmed is to toggle through C1, C2, C3 and current setting. Because of that, I find the R6 and R7 clunkier and slower for mode change than the R5 as it takes just lifting and tapping with one finger, and I have more than 10 years of muscle memory of turning a mechanical mode dial.

 

[scyrene]

Do people change mode a lot? Genuine question.