First Images & More Specifications for the Canon EOS 6D Mark II Leak

[ahsanford]

Seriously, Canon's green box is a life saver and works well. Nothing easier to do when handing your fancy camera over to a stranger to get a shot of me and the wife while on vacation.

and particularly with a flash!

I can't imagine handing over my camera/flash to a stranger in anything other than "green box" mode. It really works well!

My 'please take our picture' move is to use Av, set AF to the full 61 pt spread and set auto-ISO to an overly generous minimum shutter speed, say 1/125 for a 24-70 lens. That way I can pre-cook the composition to isolate us or include something interesting in the background.

But I've never tried a 'green box handoff' when my speedlite is in use. Thanks, I'll have to try that.

- A

 

[dmtml]

I wonder what customization options will be available for the "SET" button and the "*" button.

I'm really hoping it has the ability to have AF-ON and * be different AF modes. On my 5D IV I have the AF-ON as Single point, and * as Zone AF. For me it's almost a deal breaker feature now.

 

[bereninga]

Green box mode ftw when handing off to a non-photographer to take a photo.

 

[hbr]

Hey, don't knock the green box mode!

Seriously, Canon's green box is a life saver and works well. Nothing easier to do when handing your fancy camera over to a stranger to get a shot of me and the wife while on vacation.

I miss that on my Fuji cameras. And the X-T10, has an "auto" switch that very much does NOT do what I would like (hint: Fuji should look to Canon on this one). Here is my short PSA. One, even though it is suppose to be "full auto", it apparently still cares about the shooting mode dial in front ((S)ingle (C)ontinuous (M)anual). I shoot in M a lot for BBF. Which means if I just flip the switch to auto, it won't focus. Also, and this one kills me, it won't shoot RAW. Auto mode will override your picture setting and just shoot jpeg.

So I love the GREEN BOX!

I found out accidentally that both my 6D and my 7D II will shoot RAW in the Green Box Mode. I was teaching a friend of mine who still was using the 450D, (and only used the Green Box Mode), about using the features of the newer cameras. I changed the cameras to the Green Box Mode and handed them to her to try out. In order for her to take the photos home, I let her take the SD cards home to download the pictures. It wasn't very long before she called me and asked me what was wrong. Her computer couldn't read the files. I had her bring me the cards and sure enough the files were all .CR2 files. I was shocked!
So, although I have only shot in the "M" mode for the last 10 years, I now find the Green Box Mode useful for stills, especially on days when the sun is constantly changing from sunny to going between clouds.

 

[MayaTlab]

I'm really hoping it has the ability to have AF-ON and * be different AF modes. On my 5D IV I have the AF-ON as Single point, and * as Zone AF. For me it's almost a deal breaker feature now.

In your dreams . We already have quite enough clues that this won't go any further than a FF 80D as far as controls go (the replacement of the M-fn button by a simpler non customisable AF mode toggle button is one of them for example).

 

[Luds34]

Well DPAF appears to be in. I'd think (97% sure) we'd keep the silent shutter, which really was fairly silent on the current 6D.

I'm just assuming hoping we get the new anti-flicker and new metering system I think we first saw with the 7D2. The metering (and auto WB) both felt a little weak on the 6D, I had higher expectations. Of course nothing one couldn't compensate for or work with.

You're last two... not sure.

Sorry, Luds, that's not what I meant. I believe Isaacheus was curious was secret new feature hotness the 6D2 might get -- I was just citing past examples of those sorts of surprises.

- A

Haha, my apologies. I thought your statement seeemed odd.

 

[bdunbar79]

Who has a better idea of the current camera market? You? I think not.

Where the hell did I make a claim like that? Canon is absolutely aware of the camera market and what I'm doing is calling all of its implementation of 4K and LACK of implementation a mistake. A perfect example would be the G7X2 versus the RX100V which have the exact same sensor and price point and the Sony offers 4K and the Canon doesn't. I don't care about this stuff at all, but I know for a fact consumers shopping for cameras DO care about features like that - even if they're not going to use it or even know how to.

What you cannot grasp, and I don't know why, is that lack of implementation of those things you listed, is likely NOT a mistake. Not a mistake. Else Canon would have implemented them. I don't know why you can't get this?

 

[dcm]

Never really used Green Box mode myself. When I upgraded from 6D to 1DX2 I didn't miss it at all. I started with a Canon A-1 when they introduced P mode to the industry (before green box). P mode always been sufficient for me when I hand a camera off - I still can dial in ISO, exposure compensation, metering mode, etc. and flip the lock on. I sometimes use P mode when I need a quick shot or flash, but most of the time I'm in M or Av modes.

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/blogs/2013/20131029_winston_pmode_blog.shtml

 

[rrcphoto]

Who has a better idea of the current camera market? You? I think not.

Where the hell did I make a claim like that? Canon is absolutely aware of the camera market and what I'm doing is calling all of its implementation of 4K and LACK of implementation a mistake.

so in other words, you think you have a better idea of the camera market, otherwise it wouldn't be a mistake, simply product segmentation that canon feels the market can handle.

canon most likely knows just exactly how much R&D it would require to implement "a better implementation of 4K" is has obviously deemed it not worth it.

Since their marketshare jumped 5% with very little 4K products actually shipping at the time - it's pretty likely they knew exactly what they are doing, and you do not.

 

[ahsanford]

canon most likely knows just exactly how much R&D it would require to implement "a better implementation of 4K" is has obviously deemed it not worth it.

I'm no video person at all, but is there any chance Canon has internal standards of what they consider to be the minimum quality / stabilty / performance expectations of 4K (as a company) and that 6D2 simply couldn't handle it?

Perhaps some other requirements that weren't cost related -- say, making it as light/compact as possible -- trumped 4K in the initial design stages, and then when they tried to run 4K with that design it ran too hot, wasn't stable, required a different internal design, componentry, etc. At that Canon point might have just said, small and light is more important than 4K in this segment, so we're going to stick with what we have at 1080.

I'm not being a Canon apologist here, but it's possible this wasn't just about cost or protecting the attractiveness of the 5D4, right?

- A

 

[LonelyBoy]

canon most likely knows just exactly how much R&D it would require to implement "a better implementation of 4K" is has obviously deemed it not worth it.

I'm no video person at all, but is there any chance Canon has internal standards of what they consider to be the minimum quality / stabilty / performance expectations of 4K (as a company) and that 6D2 simply couldn't handle it?

Perhaps some other requirements that weren't cost related -- say, making it as light/compact as possible -- trumped 4K in the initial design stages, and then when they tried to run 4K with that design it ran too hot, wasn't stable, required a different internal design, componentry, etc. At that Canon point might have just said, small and light is more important than 4K in this segment, so we're going to stick with what we have at 1080.

I'm not being a Canon apologist here, but it's possible this wasn't just about cost or protecting the attractiveness of the 5D4, right?

- A

I would assume very much that Canon's internal quality requirements are the sticking point here. It's not, I'm sure, that they can't do 4k, but they don't want a pile of fine print on the press release, they don't want cameras overheating and shutting down, and they'll want a certain bitrate/ codec/ whatever to put their name on it.

In another post somewhere recently here I called Canon a "conservative" company and I think that's correct - their approach will be to follow, implement features after others, but make better implementations prizing stability over splash. It'll be frustrating for people who want all the shiniest new features, but it's nice for people who want a very stable, reliable camera system. This goes back to the talk of the USB port choice on the 6D2 earlier in this thread - I'd assume that Canon will be literally the last camera company to start rolling out the Type C connectors. Sony will be the first.

 

[rrcphoto]

canon most likely knows just exactly how much R&D it would require to implement "a better implementation of 4K" is has obviously deemed it not worth it.

I'm no video person at all, but is there any chance Canon has internal standards of what they consider to be the minimum quality / stabilty / performance expectations of 4K (as a company) and that 6D2 simply couldn't handle it?

Perhaps some other requirements that weren't cost related -- say, making it as light/compact as possible -- trumped 4K in the initial design stages, and then when they tried to run 4K with that design it ran too hot, wasn't stable, required a different internal design, componentry, etc. At that Canon point might have just said, small and light is more important than 4K in this segment, so we're going to stick with what we have at 1080.

I'm not being a Canon apologist here, but it's possible this wasn't just about cost or protecting the attractiveness of the 5D4, right?

- A

it's impossible to know how hard it would be to put a "proper implementation of 4K" into a canon DSLR. Since they've never done it.

to implement the 4K that is in the 5D / 1DX .. ie: MJPEG, then most likely better heat sinking, increased weight of the camera, etc would be the counter to providing 4K MJJPEG. is it possible I'm sure, but we don't know the thermal dynamics and difficulties of doing so

 

[rrcphoto]

I called Canon a "conservative" company and I think that's correct

I doubt it. it's just what they consider important. type C USB? not important really. I mean you really have to be anal retentive to get up in arms over that. for example, they were the first with lan ports in the pro sports cameras.

Canon was the first with a full frame camera that shot 4K .. by around a year actually. it actually wasn't until around 3 years after the 1DC that another full frame camera shot and recorded 4K internally.

their liveview / touchscreen system is second to none, except some may argue panasonic's is a better UI/UX for liveview / LCD experience.
DPAF,etc - extremely innovative.

I think some people just place different priorities on cameras than canon does.

 

[BillB]

canon most likely knows just exactly how much R&D it would require to implement "a better implementation of 4K" is has obviously deemed it not worth it.

I'm no video person at all, but is there any chance Canon has internal standards of what they consider to be the minimum quality / stabilty / performance expectations of 4K (as a company) and that 6D2 simply couldn't handle it?

Perhaps some other requirements that weren't cost related -- say, making it as light/compact as possible -- trumped 4K in the initial design stages, and then when they tried to run 4K with that design it ran too hot, wasn't stable, required a different internal design, componentry, etc. At that Canon point might have just said, small and light is more important than 4K in this segment, so we're going to stick with what we have at 1080.

I'm not being a Canon apologist here, but it's possible this wasn't just about cost or protecting the attractiveness of the 5D4, right?

- A

I would be surprised if Canon did not have a pretty well defined roadmap for implementing 4K capabilities, and think it likely that the 6DII was designed from the beginning in the context of that roadmap. I would guess that the inclusion of 4K in the 6DII was ruled out from the beginning, or at least very early in the process, and that the protection of the 5DIV had very little to do with it. Technical feasibility, implementation costs and assessment of potential demand are all factors that would have been considered.

Judging by the 6DII's features, it seems to me that Canon's strategy was to produce a camera with very user friendly 1080 video capability that would be attractive to potential buyers who just wanted to make good quality video with no hassles. 4k was not part of that concept, especially at the $2000 price point.

 

[Loswr]

I would be surprised if Canon did not have a pretty well defined roadmap for implementing 4K capabilities, and think it likely that the 6DII was designed from the beginning in the context of that roadmap. I would guess that the inclusion of 4K in the 6DII was ruled out from the beginning, or at least very early in the process, and that the protection of the 5DIV had very little to do with it. Technical feasibility, implementation costs and assessment of potential demand are all factors that would have been considered.

Naaah. They just sat in their big office thinking of how they could best screw over a handful of internet trolls.

"Kon'nichiwa, Maeda-san. Could we consider omitting 4K from the new 6D Mark II?"

 

[transpo1]

I would be surprised if Canon did not have a pretty well defined roadmap for implementing 4K capabilities, and think it likely that the 6DII was designed from the beginning in the context of that roadmap. I would guess that the inclusion of 4K in the 6DII was ruled out from the beginning, or at least very early in the process, and that the protection of the 5DIV had very little to do with it. Technical feasibility, implementation costs and assessment of potential demand are all factors that would have been considered.

Naaah. They just sat in their big office thinking of how they could best screw over a handful of internet trolls.

"Kon'nichiwa, Maeda-san. Could we consider omitting 4K from the new 6D Mark II?"

I'm quite sure they have a roadmap, and it's entirely possible that they couldn't include 4K on the 6DII, even with a Digic 7 chip. Maybe there was an overheating issue, or some other issue. The rigidity of their process and their thinking could just be an issue- perhaps they still use a waterfall strategy instead of an Agile approach in their product design. This might prohibit them from making quick course corrections and adding the latest tech- the 5DIV still having the older HDMI spec, for instance. It's also possible that in addition to that, they didn't WANT to.

By the way- by calling us "trolls," you're doing a disservice to everyone on here who legitimately loves Canon products and wants them to beef up their video specs. Something to think about.

 

[Jack Douglas]

The solution is simple. Just ignore and don't respond to comments that you feel are unjustified or ignorant. Opinions are just opinions. Or, debate the same old stuff over and over and ....

Jack

 

[rrcphoto]

I would be surprised if Canon did not have a pretty well defined roadmap for implementing 4K capabilities, and think it likely that the 6DII was designed from the beginning in the context of that roadmap. I would guess that the inclusion of 4K in the 6DII was ruled out from the beginning, or at least very early in the process, and that the protection of the 5DIV had very little to do with it. Technical feasibility, implementation costs and assessment of potential demand are all factors that would have been considered.

Naaah. They just sat in their big office thinking of how they could best screw over a handful of internet trolls.

"Kon'nichiwa, Maeda-san. Could we consider omitting 4K from the new 6D Mark II?"

I'm quite sure they have a roadmap, and it's entirely possible that they couldn't include 4K on the 6DII, even with a Digic 7 chip. Maybe there was an overheating issue, or some other issue. The rigidity of their process and their thinking could just be an issue- perhaps they still use a waterfall strategy instead of an Agile approach in their product design. This might prohibit them from making quick course corrections and adding the latest tech- the 5DIV still having the older HDMI spec, for instance. It's also possible that in addition to that, they didn't WANT to.

By the way- by calling us "trolls," you're doing a disservice to everyone on here who legitimately loves Canon products and wants them to beef up their video specs. Something to think about.

for a 1 / 5D series camera it takes over 3 years from initial conception to production. it'll still be something similar for the 6D.

complaining about video won't do diddly to canon's plans. you want to complain to canon. write to them, write on their own forums, etc. here? means nothing.

 

[Keith_Reeder]

but I know for a fact some unknown number of consumers shopping for cameras DO care about features like that and many obviously don't.

Fixed it for you...

 

[ahsanford]

I'm getting more and more convinced each day that folks that use video will never ever be happy with their video specs in a non-video-dedicated rig like an SLR / mirrorless setup.

With all the speculation in the (seemingly endless) run-up to the 5D4 announcement, some were dead set we'd get 4K, others thought Canon might withhold it to keep folks buying much pricier options up the line, etc. I had a nutty theory it would have 4K good to go from day one but Canon would only announce it as a 1080 rig, secretly firmware locking out 4K to protect pricier products. Then, if the 5D masses revolted from no 4K on the 5D4, Canon could unlock it as a gift from the firmware gods.

But the 5D4 got 4K and everyone lived happily ever after.

I kid. Canon conjured up a fourth route we hadn't seriously considered: 4K made the spec list so the villagers won't come at them with torches and pitchforks, but the specifics of the 4K let some folks down. How did people respond? People just found the next level deeper of unreasonable expectations to be upset about.

By the time a FF readout / 1:1 crop 4K rig comes out for Canon at a $2-3k price point, I'd imagine the developments in smaller sensored space (the GH line comes to mind) will have video folks wondering where the 6k/8k is, let alone what they wanted last year.

Hence, my argument: they will never ever be happy with their specs. (Not from Canon at least.) I don't personally have a problem with that -- unreasonable expectations folks are fine -- until they imply their position/logic/worldview is the only position/logic/worldview. Then I tune out.

- A