Canon Officially Announces the EOS 6D Mark II

[privatebydesign]

Tried to bite my tongue, but when you called a statement that is blatantly misleading without proper context a fact, I had to chime in.

Here are some unvarnished facts relevant to your assertion:

Fact: the D5 is Nikon's flagshp PJ and action camera and as such isn't designed for great DR. For this camera's users, speed matters far more than DR and resolution. Why, many or most PJs shoot jpeg, that's how important DR is to the target audience for this camera.

Fact: Nikon's flagship IQ camera is the D810. Its DR is ranked number 1 on DXO.

Fact: And this may be the most relevant to this discussion. In terms of IQ, the D5 ranks 26th among Nikon cameras. The D5's DR ranks behind every Nikon DSLR released since 2008 and even behind a Nikon Coolpix compact camera. It need not be said, but I'll say it anyway, I and very few others look to the D5 as the industry standard for best possible IQ or DR.

Fact: In a list of Canon and Nikon cameras, the 80D ranks 23 in DR, a full 1.5 stops behind the D810. It ranks behind 11 Nikon APS-C cameras.

Therefore, it may be factual that the 80D has better DR than Nikon's flagship PJ camera. However, that gets you to a ranking of 26 in DR for Nikon cameras, behind some cameras that are almost nine years old. More importantly, it puts the 80D 2.5 stops behind the SOTA D810's industry leading 14.8 stops of DR according to DXO.

Whereas, I like my 80D, and its DR is much better than any Canon camera I've previously owned, I frankly would rather have a FF camera perform closer to my D810 in DR.

Why, I'd be happy if the 6DM II even had DR that was as good as any APS-C camera on the market. Is that really asking too much?

Then get the D5 direct competitor. I was so impressed with actual hands on use and real world results I got two.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon--EOS-1D-X-Mark-II-versus-Nikon-D5-versus-Nikon-D810___1071_1062_963

 

[Nakean]

It's disappointing to see the AF points clustered so tightly around the center; was hoping for a better spread.
It is nice to see that 27 AF points support f8, and DPAF looks amazing.

Is DPAF aperture limited? How does it do in low light? Looks like I will be making liberal use of DPAF if I get one.

I agree. The spread of the 45 af points is nearly.... pointless. Lol

It looks similar to the current 9-point spread. At least they're cross type, all near the center.

This is one (another) reason I love Canon's APS-C cameras.
The spread of AF points is much superior to anything FF!

;D Ok... not seeking the "FF is better" group to flame me... I know the various advantages of FF vs APS-C.
I'm just making an accurate observation.

Paul

Exept that your wrong. Enter the Sony A9 93% AF frame coverage with eye autofocus. Bow down EVERYTHING ELSE! I shoot canon but rented this tiny beast and it's AMAZING!!!

 

[Jack Douglas]

While it clearly is amazing, and I applaud what Sony is doing, it's still the honeymoon. Every wife is initially amazing. Time will tell.

@Scott, that's great to hear. I don't regret mine.

Jack

 

[amorse]

Wait let me get this straight. So some person over on DPR claims that the 6DII has less DR than the 5DIV based on JPEGs? And now it's being touted around like it's fact that the 6DII has the same DR as the 80D?? This is all based on what scientific method may I ask? I don't see any links to any hard numbers or graphs.

People are actually canceling pre-orders over this? Hmmm maybe wait until some sensible data comes in, perhaps?

To be fair, DPR said the following in their review:

"According to Canon representatives, the 6D Mark II should outperform the original 6D (which it very evidently does) but may not offer the same kind of dynamic range and absolute resolution of the EOS 5D Mark IV."

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8979194861/the-same-but-different-canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-shooting-experience

If that comment truly comes from a canon rep (and not judgement of jpgs), then I don't blame people for waiting to see some real world results rather than preordering if dynamic range is the most critical feature to that person. I may be in the minority, but if I choose the 6D ii it'll be because I think the 6D ii is the best tool for what I'm trying to accomplish. For me, sensor quality is the most important criteria and if it is compromised I'll look at the 5D IV. I think there was reason to expect that the 6D ii could outperform the 5D IV in DR since that was the case in the 6D vs 5D III comparisons. Since that is not guaranteed at this point, I think holding off on pre-ordering is probably a good idea for people with that need.

This is a dangerously reasonable response. I'm not sure if you belong on the Canon Rumors forum.

Just to add a few comments.

I have been urging caution among those who were certain that because the 6D had slightly better sensor performance than the 5DIII that it was a given the 6DII would be better than the 5DIV. Anyone who has compared the 1DxII and the 5DIV should know that there simply isn't a lot of room between those two sensors for a 6DII sensor to slide between.

I don't understand the science behind it, but clearly the number of megapixels is no longer as big of a factor in determining sensor performance that it once was.

Also, people need to keep some perspective here. Given the current state of the art when it comes to sensor performance, it would be healthy if we all recognized that we are deep in the realm of theoretical, rather than practical, differences.

There are a few practical differences. For instance the new 16-35 f/2.8 has 4 stops of vignetting that extends a third of the way into the frame. That means every single shot you take with that lens will need to have the shadows pushed 3-4 stops. The DR becomes incredibly important when shooting with that lens.

If I recall correctly, the 3-4 stops of vignetting are at 16mm and F2.8, not surprisingly, and the amount of vignetting decreases rather quickly zooming in from 16mm and stopping down from F2.8. While the vignetting is clearly not desirable, I am not sure that I would say that it is incredibly important to eliminate all vignetting at 16mm and F2.8 with a 3-4 stop shadow push. It is simply not true that every single shot you take with that lens will need to have the shadows pushed 3-4 stops.

I agree in that not every shot will see this issue, but some will. Very high DR isn't a feature set that makes every shot better, but neither is being able to shoot 16 frames per second. Both have a place and niche where they make a very real difference, and neither are critical to all situations.

Even moving beyond the 16-35 at f2.8, I want more DR for a similar reason. I use the 16-35 f4 and am usually shooting anywhere between f8 and f16 (no vignetting under normal circumstances). I frequently take very wide (16mm) long exposures using the Lee big stopper which creates a lot of vignetting. If it happens to be a landscape with any bright sky in the shot, the corners could need a significant push to level out the vignetting. Even using ND graduated filters to level out the exposure, I still find myself having to push the shadows in parts of the image quite a bit, or clip the highlights.

Bottom line, I think there are practical scenarios where significantly improved DR is an asset worth making a purchasing decision on - I don't think this is simply touting specs for the sake of being rated higher than the competition. With that said, it's all speculation until we see some real world results.

 

[Tangent]

I found this statement from Canon :

Low light shooting has been further improved thanks to the EOS 6D Mark II using similar sensor technology as found on the award-winning EOS 5D Mark IV and EOS-1D X Mark II DSLRs.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/news/canon_launches_the_eos_6d_mark_ii.do?utm_source=newsletter_june_5_17

Still looking forward to more real world samples and test results, naturally.

 

[bholliman]

The specs look great!

It appears to be a nice upgrade over the 6D as it should be, but a step-up from the 5D MkIII as well in most respects. I have a friend who has been looking to buy a 5D MkIII refurb for the same price ($1999 USD), I told him I would go with the 6D MkII. The only significant (to me) negatives compared with the 5D Mk III are (1) lack of dual memory cards, (2) lack of joystick and (3) 45 AF points instead of 61 [but more cross type] and (4) reduced AF point spread. Lots of plusses for the 6D MkII.

 

[Mikehit]

I could justify the 6Dii if it was literally the old 6D with a big boost in sensor quality.

No camera is gong to have a big boost in sensor quality over the 6D. Sensor technology has pretty much stalled in the last 5 years and it is all about compromises.

 

[Billybob]

Tried to bite my tongue, but when you called a statement that is blatantly misleading without proper context a fact, I had to chime in.

Here are some unvarnished facts relevant to your assertion:

Fact: the D5 is Nikon's flagshp PJ and action camera and as such isn't designed for great DR. For this camera's users, speed matters far more than DR and resolution. Why, many or most PJs shoot jpeg, that's how important DR is to the target audience for this camera.

Fact: Nikon's flagship IQ camera is the D810. Its DR is ranked number 1 on DXO.

Fact: And this may be the most relevant to this discussion. In terms of IQ, the D5 ranks 26th among Nikon cameras. The D5's DR ranks behind every Nikon DSLR released since 2008 and even behind a Nikon Coolpix compact camera. It need not be said, but I'll say it anyway, I and very few others look to the D5 as the industry standard for best possible IQ or DR.

Fact: In a list of Canon and Nikon cameras, the 80D ranks 23 in DR, a full 1.5 stops behind the D810. It ranks behind 11 Nikon APS-C cameras.

Therefore, it may be factual that the 80D has better DR than Nikon's flagship PJ camera. However, that gets you to a ranking of 26 in DR for Nikon cameras, behind some cameras that are almost nine years old. More importantly, it puts the 80D 2.5 stops behind the SOTA D810's industry leading 14.8 stops of DR according to DXO.

Whereas, I like my 80D, and its DR is much better than any Canon camera I've previously owned, I frankly would rather have a FF camera perform closer to my D810 in DR.

Why, I'd be happy if the 6DM II even had DR that was as good as any APS-C camera on the market. Is that really asking too much?

Then get the D5 direct competitor. I was so impressed with actual hands on use and real world results I got two.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon--EOS-1D-X-Mark-II-versus-Nikon-D5-versus-Nikon-D810___1071_1062_963

I'd love the D5's competitor. But I can get a Nikon FF camera with great DR for about $1500 (I actually did), which is, what, $4500 less than that 1D camera you were referring to?

I'd rather get that DR in a compact, sub $2k package like the 6D then buy a big bulky behemoth that is way overdesigned for my intended purposes. I mean that I almost never have a need to shoot fast action in near darkness in bursts of 15-17fps.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Tried to bite my tongue, but when you called a statement that is blatantly misleading without proper context a fact, I had to chime in.

Here are some unvarnished facts relevant to your assertion:

Fact: the D5 is Nikon's flagshp PJ and action camera and as such isn't designed for great DR. For this camera's users, speed matters far more than DR and resolution. Why, many or most PJs shoot jpeg, that's how important DR is to the target audience for this camera.

Fact: Nikon's flagship IQ camera is the D810. Its DR is ranked number 1 on DXO.

Fact: And this may be the most relevant to this discussion. In terms of IQ, the D5 ranks 26th among Nikon cameras. The D5's DR ranks behind every Nikon DSLR released since 2008 and even behind a Nikon Coolpix compact camera. It need not be said, but I'll say it anyway, I and very few others look to the D5 as the industry standard for best possible IQ or DR.

Fact: In a list of Canon and Nikon cameras, the 80D ranks 23 in DR, a full 1.5 stops behind the D810. It ranks behind 11 Nikon APS-C cameras.

Therefore, it may be factual that the 80D has better DR than Nikon's flagship PJ camera. However, that gets you to a ranking of 26 in DR for Nikon cameras, behind some cameras that are almost nine years old. More importantly, it puts the 80D 2.5 stops behind the SOTA D810's industry leading 14.8 stops of DR according to DXO.

Whereas, I like my 80D, and its DR is much better than any Canon camera I've previously owned, I frankly would rather have a FF camera perform closer to my D810 in DR.

Why, I'd be happy if the 6DM II even had DR that was as good as any APS-C camera on the market. Is that really asking too much?

Fact: DR is important when Nikon and Sony are ahead. DR is not important when they are not. This is because it is not and never was about DR; it is and was about finding something - anything - to criticize.

Fact: We don't have any real data on the 6D2's DR, just vague comments. Let's see what the actual data shows before we start frothing at the mouth, maybe?

So yeah, it's a lot more about emotion than fact. Need a tissue?

 

[neuroanatomist]

...the D5 is Nikon's flagshp PJ and action camera and as such isn't designed for great DR. For this camera's users, speed matters far more than DR and resolution.

Well, you've swallowed DPR's rationale excuse hook, line and sinker. But since you brought up 'target market', do you believe that the 6DII is targeted primarily at those seeking the absolute best IQ? Given that they've kitted it with a variable aperture non-L zoom, it seems Canon disagrees. Oh well, there are lots of forum dwellers who think they know more than Canon about building and selling ILCs.

More importantly, it puts the 80D 2.5 stops behind the SOTA D810's industry leading 14.8 stops of DR according to DXO.

Do you believe that the D810 can capture 14.8-stops of DR? Well, lots of people swallow that BS hook, line and sinker, too.

In any case...

Fact: we have no data on the 6DII's DR, but if the 6DII doesn't meet your needs, don't buy it. I certainly have no intention of buying one.

 

[tmroper]

It's disappointing to see the AF points clustered so tightly around the center; was hoping for a better spread.
It is nice to see that 27 AF points support f8, and DPAF looks amazing.

Is DPAF aperture limited? How does it do in low light? Looks like I will be making liberal use of DPAF if I get one.

I agree. The spread of the 45 af points is nearly.... pointless. Lol

It looks similar to the current 9-point spread. At least they're cross type, all near the center.

I've been using an old film EOS 1N a little bit, and even that has more horizontal reach with its five AF points. Granted, it has no vertical points, but I don't see the point of cramming so many into such a small area. It's like a step backwards, and likely very annoying to use, when manually selecting the points.

 

[transpo1]

And a hands-on preview video is up from Kai Wong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0crokqG2uYg

Recommend everyone on this forum watches it from 5:52 on His analogy is great. https://youtu.be/0crokqG2uYg?t=5m52s

 

[snappy604]

hehe even Kai goes 'why?!' on the no 4k ;-)

 

[neuroanatomist]

And a hands-on preview video is up from Kai Wong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0crokqG2uYg

Recommend everyone on this forum watches it from 5:52 on His analogy is great. https://youtu.be/0crokqG2uYg?t=5m52s

You've made your point so effectively, that I don't even have to watch the video to understand how critically important 4K video capability is in this day and age.

 

[quod]

No camera is gong to have a big boost in sensor quality over the 6D. Sensor technology has pretty much stalled in the last 5 years and it is all about compromises.

I shoot the A7RII. Yes, it *does* have a big boost in sensor quality over anything Canon. Sorry dude, but I shoot both systems. No speculation here.

 

[dak723]

No camera is gong to have a big boost in sensor quality over the 6D. Sensor technology has pretty much stalled in the last 5 years and it is all about compromises.

I shoot the A7RII. Yes, it *does* have a big boost in sensor quality over anything Canon. Sorry dude, but I shoot both systems. No speculation here.

Sorry dude, but I tried the Sony A7 And the A7II with the intent of replacing my 6D. There was no practical difference in DR and the Canon had better color and contrast. No speculation here!

 

[RiceCanon]

I love my 6D! I'm impressed with the new features of the 6Dii and will most likely get one. DR is very important to me because I would like to do a little less exposure blending in post if possible. Really hope to see real world reviews showing a meaningful improvement in DR over the 6D.

 

[ShootTheStars12]

Reposting this now that the camera has been officially announced:

I think I am the ideal target for this camera. I started out with an SL1 and learned the ropes of DSLR's with that camera. I now am ready to upgrade to a FF camera. To me, 4K video would've been nice, but I don't really care too much. I care about fantastic pictures, and the 4K timelapse feature sounds like a lot of fun to me!

I was hoping some experts here could help me out deciding between this 6D II and the Pentax K-1. I travel a lot, and love getting great travel shots, landscapes, and I am dying to do astrophotography. Those are my main uses. What are the opinions here on the pros and cons of these 2 budget-friendly (sorta?) cameras for me?

@ ShootTheStars12 I moved to Canon (only superficially attached to Nikon) for various reasons, a main one being glass and once significantly attached to and loving the glass, that seals it for me, especially since I love, for example, the 400DO II (wildlife). If I was primarily landscape and wide I'd certainly be more seriously considering other cameras (but keeping in mind ergonomics, servicing, batter life etc.) Small/light matters little when using big lenses but when walking for many hours shooting wide, light becomes desirable. Others will have more to say.

Jack

Thank you Jack. I'm in good shape and still in my 20's, so I'm dumb enough to not care about the weight at this point lol. I am interested to hear more opinions about the 6d II vs the Pentax K-1

 

[scyrene]

here it is. very approximated, compensated for 95% OVF of 6D II ( inner grey rectangle - 6d II - viewfinder view, outer grey rectangle - same, but compensated for 95% OVF coverage, aligned with 5d IV viewfinder view, red rectangles - 6d II AF zones, blue - 5d IV AF zones, light blue little squares - 6D, original, 11 points AF system spread...) your comments, Scotty??

You failed to note that the outer points on the 5D-IV are not cross-type, so cross-type coverage is very similar. The 5D-IV does have a slight advantage in vertical spread for the central group of AF points.

This demonstrates nicely why the outer AF points aren't cross-type even in Canon's flagship AF system. They're simply too far in the periphery for reliable vertical phase information.

Noo, you misunderstand, apparently it's just silly...

Actually, let me explain: no one was expecting such a silly move with 6DII AF spread from Canon. It was almost given to expect at least a little wider AF points spread. It is so obvious, that no one even gave it a single doubt.

LOL. Amazing how all these new or fairly new CR accounts suddenly care about a feature that nobody had even mentioned in the preceding months - namely AF point spread :

They've upgraded almost every feature of this camera's predecessor, but clearly it's DOA according to these guys. There's not enough eye-roll emojis in the world.

: : :

 

[Don Haines]

Reposting this now that the camera has been officially announced:

I think I am the ideal target for this camera. I started out with an SL1 and learned the ropes of DSLR's with that camera. I now am ready to upgrade to a FF camera. To me, 4K video would've been nice, but I don't really care too much. I care about fantastic pictures, and the 4K timelapse feature sounds like a lot of fun to me!

I was hoping some experts here could help me out deciding between this 6D II and the Pentax K-1. I travel a lot, and love getting great travel shots, landscapes, and I am dying to do astrophotography. Those are my main uses. What are the opinions here on the pros and cons of these 2 budget-friendly (sorta?) cameras for me?

If you are thinking of astrophotograpy, (things like Milky Way shots), The three important things are tripod, low noise camera body, and fast lens.

With your tripod, you want STURDY! You can attach weights to the tripod (camera bag, etc) to make it more stable, and if you want to go crazy enough, you can even get a tracking head for it so that you can do longer exposures without stars turning into lines.....

For a low noise camera, realistically, you want a FF camera because it gathers 2 1/2 times more light than a crop camera. It does not matter much what the brand is, the most recent cameras are all similar....

For a lens, you want FAST. The faster the lens, the faster exposure you can get away with, or the lower ISO (less noise). There are some wide to medium angle F1.4 lenses out now that are very nice....