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

[StudentOfLight]

Here is a panel discussion from last week's E3 (E3=Electronic Entertainment Expo)

The host asks the panel of highly influential folks (e.g. AngryJoe has 2.8M subscribers.) if they have 4K...

https://youtu.be/if5gwetFx9s?t=6m42s

 

[ahsanford]

As NorbR has said above, the upper mirror foam buffer configuration looks just like the 5DIV. There is no catch visible as on the 5D / 5DII / 6D / 7DII. So I would say that the chances are it doesn't have one.

I am still baffled as to why the 7DII included this feature.

This has always been a minor grumble of mine. My 5D3 VF is gorgeous and fancy and terrific, but it comes at the cost of never being able to handhold a large aperture prime and (with high confidence) nail wide open shots through the viewfinder. Zeiss's wonderful glass is effectively dead to me for that reason.

The 6D is comprehensively outgunned by the 5D3, but the 6D had some nice things 5D3 owners were jealous of -- that center -3 EV AF point and (for me especially) the ability to swap out screens. Looks like one of those just went away with the 6D2.

- A

 

[Sporgon]

Could someone explain what's leading them to conclude that the focusing screen is not interchangeable?

Check out the front views of the 6D (which does have interchangeable screens) and the 5D4 (which does not):
http://camerasize.com/compact/#682,380,ha,f

The 6D Mark II looks just like the 5D4, and does not appear to have that little latch that the 6D has to access the focus screen.

I learn something new every day. Thank you!

- A

I guess that as from the 5DIII Canon felt that the AF system was that accurate fitting a manual screen to "tweak" the focus accuracy after AF wasn't going to be necessary anymore. I don't believe that Canon have ever really given any consideration to use of genuine manual focus lenses on FF, but then there is the 7DII which introduced interchangeable screens to the 7 series. I can only assume that Canon felt that playing about with manual focus lenses and "S" screens is mainly done by hobbyists, and those people buy a lot more crop cameras than FF.

The 1D series just get (nearly) everything.

 

[smr]

The only feature that I honestly can't believe is missing is 4K video. That is going to be the Achilles heel when it comes to the market. It's a buzz word. It's a feature people think they need and, unfortunately, it absolutely needed to be included with this camera.

I don't shoot video and I very rarely even put my cameras into video mode at all, but that's not what it's about. I look at the market and I can see the trends and where the competition is at in terms of features and capability. Sadly for Canon, they don't seem to pay much attention to this...almost in a display of arrogance.

At some point Canon needs to understand that keeping a feature out because they might lose a 5D sale or cinema sale is losing them a CANON sale, above all.

I'm planing to buy this camera because of the tilt-screen, but the internet is going to blast this camera. It's 2017 and Canon doesn't seem to care about that fact.

Well Canon will be getting £2000 of my money for my 6Dmk2 so I'd say it didn't "absolutely" need to be on it, I'm sure plenty of landscape togs will be happy without the need for 4k as well.

 

[LonelyBoy]

The 80D had a big jump over the 70D. The 5D4 had a big jump over the 5D3. The 6D2 will (should) have a big jump over the 6D... but not a big jump over the 5D4. Does that make more sense?

+1

Moving to on-chip is a much bigger bump than (say) the 6D2 coming out a year later than the 5D4 with the same technology.

See this lovely plot:
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/DXOPDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV

Expect to see a similar bump from the 6D to the 6D2. The bump from moving to on-chip (presumably) will be bigger than the bump it might get from being a one year newer design, 4 less MP, etc.

- A

Right. It seemed like the post I was replying to expected that if there was improvement X from 5D3 -> 5D4, there would be the same boost X from 5D4 -> 6D2, but you only get to "bank" that boost once, either by comparing the 6D2 to the 6D, or by saying it'll be broadly similar to the 5D4, which already received that big boost compared to the 5D3. You don't get it twice (though as ever, the newest version of a sensor will often show marginal improvements over prior versions, even with no specified improvements in technology.

 

[bereninga]

Until 4K becomes more mainstream, 1080p is good enough. Even TV stations to this day don't broadcast in 1080p. By the time the 6DIII comes around, it will probably have 4K.

Someone who absolutely needs 4K for their work should probably look at the 5DIV or Sony or Panasonic GH5 instead. There's really no use in whining on a forum, and the best way to convey your dislike is with your wallet.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Playing Devils Advocate here. What if Canon, by not including UHD, just saved Sony and Nikon's bacon?

Two reasons. Now, Sony and Nikon don't have to include UHD, and perhaps increase the margins on bodies that directly compete with the 6Dx line. Or, if Sony and Nikon believe that they can mop up this entry level FF sector, they can include UHD, and and be quids in (said that without any knowledge of costs of course).

Alan.

Well, that will be interesting to see, won't it? Given the reaction to the "unacceptable" 4k on the 5D4 (I have no personal idea), I suspect it's not possible to do what people want at the price point they expect, currently. It'll be fun to see the reaction if a hypothetical D760 comes out without 4k though, even with the benefit of another year or two of technology.

 

[Sharlin]

? Buffer (the bitrate required is essentially the same as the 80D but the DiGIC 7 is faster)

The buffer is a legit outstanding question. Although I don't think it has anything to do with the Digic chip (processing power determines frame rate not buffer storage). Honestly it's just how much memory they put in it for the buffer. Being a 6D series, I'm guessing it won't be anything substantial and if you're shooting RAW it will probably fill up quite quickly. That's one clear advantage the 7D/5D/1D cameras get, large, deep buffers.

True, the DiGIC reference was a bit of a red herring. However, the burst length depends critically on not just buffer size but also on buffer flush / card write speed. The faster the camera is able to write frames from the buffer to the card, the slower the buffer fills.

Did the 80D improve over the 70D in this regard? I enjoyed having the 7 fps when I owned a 70D, but I feel like the buffer filled after just a second and a half or so.

It did. The 80D captures about three seconds of RAWs at 7fps even though the resolution is higher. I think this is mostly due to improved card write speed (roughly twice as fast as the 70D and getting close to the limits of the best SD UHS-I cards). Presumably the 6D2 will also get speed boost in that regard.

 

[Loswr]

I guess that as from the 5DIII Canon felt that the AF system was that accurate fitting a manual screen to "tweak" the focus accuracy after AF wasn't going to be necessary anymore. I don't believe that Canon have ever really given any consideration to use of genuine manual focus lenses on FF, but then there is the 7DII which introduced interchangeable screens to the 7 series. I can only assume that Canon felt that playing about with manual focus lenses and "S" screens is mainly done by hobbyists, and those people buy a lot more crop cameras than FF.

The 1D series just get (nearly) everything.

I'm not sure I agree with that. I suspect that there were initial technical issues with having both a transmissive LCD and a swappable focus screen right next to it. My guess is there was an expensive solution to the problem, which they implemented in the 1D X. By the time of the 7DII, they had found a way to make it more cost effective - perhaps that solution is more feasible with smaller screens? Or perhaps Canon just decided not to include it in the 6DII for differentiation reasons, like AF point-linked spot metering.

As for the 1-series getting nearly everything, even though the 1D X has the transmissive LCD, supports interchangeable focus screens, and is physically compatible with the Ec-S high-precision screen...Canon has chosen to not support the -S screen in the firmware for the 1D X (i.e. provide the needed exposure adjustment), which makes the option to swap out a focusing screen useless to me.

 

[tr573]

Could someone explain what's leading them to conclude that the focusing screen is not interchangeable?

Check out the front views of the 6D (which does have interchangeable screens) and the 5D4 (which does not):
http://camerasize.com/compact/#682,380,ha,f

The 6D Mark II looks just like the 5D4, and does not appear to have that little latch that the 6D has to access the focus screen.

Oooph. My enthusiasm for this camera just went out the window.

Can anyone with experience speak to the ease and quality of third-party solutions on the 5D IV or anything else that doesn't have the interchangeable option natively? The more detail the merrier. I've googled but it's hard to find decent info.

Third party focus screens are generally well reviewed (they are just cut to fit from real Canon 1D models) , but if the camera doesn't officially support it, then it doesn't have a C.Fn to compensate the meter for it. So you have to do it manually.

 

[TedBedlam]

As a 30% video guy (Panasonic but looking to find better custoner service) who passed on the 5dIV due to its memory intensive codec, I'm curious to see what the video color space is (perhaps it's already been leaked and I'm too poor a reader to notice).

I'd also like to hear opinions on the electronic IBIS - enjoyed the addition the one time I rented a GH5 but that's significantly different tech. Low light video performance and use of the full sensor (no crop factor) would make this a worthy B-camera in a pinch.

Full disclosure - never shot canon (looking to convert for customer service and second shooter markets), probably buying the 6DMKII for photos regardless of video specs

 

[leadin2]

The 80D had a big jump over the 70D. The 5D4 had a big jump over the 5D3. The 6D2 will (should) have a big jump over the 6D... but not a big jump over the 5D4. Does that make more sense?

+1

Moving to on-chip is a much bigger bump than (say) the 6D2 coming out a year later than the 5D4 with the same technology.

See this lovely plot:
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/DXOPDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV

Expect to see a similar bump from the 6D to the 6D2. The bump from moving to on-chip (presumably) will be bigger than the bump it might get from being a one year newer design, 4 less MP, etc.

- A

Right. It seemed like the post I was replying to expected that if there was improvement X from 5D3 -> 5D4, there would be the same boost X from 5D4 -> 6D2, but you only get to "bank" that boost once, either by comparing the 6D2 to the 6D, or by saying it'll be broadly similar to the 5D4, which already received that big boost compared to the 5D3. You don't get it twice (though as ever, the newest version of a sensor will often show marginal improvements over prior versions, even with no specified improvements in technology.

Those lovely charts just sparked my desire to upgrade once again. For my 5D2, everything is an upgrade except....did anyone mention about USB 2.0 in 6D2?

 

[LSXPhotog]

It's crazy that I say one thing is a big mistake with the camera and people jump down my throat and go nuts...even if I'm a dedicated Canon shooter. When you look at a camera, STOP LOOKING AT IT LIKE YOU'RE THE ONLY PERSON THAT MATTERS AND CAMERAS ARE MADE FOR YOU!!! LMAO, this place is incredible.

The only feature that I honestly can't believe is missing is 4K video. That is going to be the Achilles heel when it comes to the market. It's a buzz word. It's a feature people think they need and, unfortunately, it absolutely needed to be included with this camera.

Why? No other camera at this price point has 4k. Anyone spending $2,000 on a body already knows that - and if they are looking for it they sure as hell won't find it anywhere else either.

So why, exactly, will it be an 'Achilles heel'?

Really? No 4K at this price point? The APS-C Nikon D500 ($1900) and D7500 ($1250) have it. The full-frame A7S ($2000) has it. In APS-C, the A6500 ($1300), X-T2 ($1600), A6300 ($900), X-T20 ($900) all have it. Then basically every micro four thirds camera since 2015 has featured 4K. Cameras like the GH4/GH5 and the OMD-1 MkII have the benefit of using a speed booster to replicate the look of larger sensor depth of field and crop factor too. Granted, sensor size has a major influence on heat and performance, but Sony is about to bring out the A73 this month with 4K and it will likely be in the $1700 range. If you don't believe it's going to hurt sales, you have blinders on.

terms of features and capability.

What 4k capability at $2,000?

See the above massive list of options under $2000 that shoot 4K.

Sadly for Canon, they don't seem to pay much attention to this...almost in a display of arrogance.

They are obviously clearly no more arrogant than Sony, Nikon or anyone else.

Again, Sony and Nikon are on the 4K train. The D750 came out before the 4K craze was a big thing and all of their prosumer and professional DSLRs have featured 4K since last year.

At some point Canon needs to understand that keeping a feature out because they might lose a 5D sale or cinema sale is losing them a CANON sale, above all.

Losing sale to...what exactly?

Already proving your argument wrong by having a much better idea of the current camera market, please reevaluate your stance. Canon is limiting video features in its cameras, everyone knows that. My 5D Mark IV and 1DXII shoot MJPEG only in 4K and have no option for a more efficient codec for those shooting video that DON'T want to grab stills out of a video and are more concerned with storage.

 

[MayaTlab]

I'm not sure I agree with that. I suspect that there were initial technical issues with having both a transmissive LCD and a swappable focus screen right next to it. My guess is there was an expensive solution to the problem, which they implemented in the 1D X. By the time of the 7DII, they had found a way to make it more cost effective - perhaps that solution is more feasible with smaller screens?

Nikon cameras have had transmissive LCDs since eons ago and replaceable focusing screens as well. My D700 was like that. I don't think that there is any technological limitation at all at any price point.
The 5DIII's focusing screen is actually swappable just like previous Canon cameras and uses the same mechanism, it's just harder to do (you have to remove the protecting piece in front of it, it's retained by a few screws).
I have no idea why Canon decided to add this protecting part in front of the swappable mechanism.

 

[bdunbar79]

It's crazy that I say one thing is a big mistake with the camera and people jump down my throat and go nuts...even if I'm a dedicated Canon shooter. When you look at a camera, STOP LOOKING AT IT LIKE YOU'RE THE ONLY PERSON THAT MATTERS AND CAMERAS ARE MADE FOR YOU!!! LMAO, this place is incredible.

The only feature that I honestly can't believe is missing is 4K video. That is going to be the Achilles heel when it comes to the market. It's a buzz word. It's a feature people think they need and, unfortunately, it absolutely needed to be included with this camera.

Why? No other camera at this price point has 4k. Anyone spending $2,000 on a body already knows that - and if they are looking for it they sure as hell won't find it anywhere else either.

So why, exactly, will it be an 'Achilles heel'?

Really? No 4K at this price point? The APS-C Nikon D500 ($1900) and D7500 ($1250) have it. The full-frame A7S ($2000) has it. In APS-C, the A6500 ($1300), X-T2 ($1600), A6300 ($900), X-T20 ($900) all have it. Then basically every micro four thirds camera since 2015 has featured 4K. Cameras like the GH4/GH5 and the OMD-1 MkII have the benefit of using a speed booster to replicate the look of larger sensor depth of field and crop factor too. Granted, sensor size has a major influence on heat and performance, but Sony is about to bring out the A73 this month with 4K and it will likely be in the $1700 range. If you don't believe it's going to hurt sales, you have blinders on.

terms of features and capability.

What 4k capability at $2,000?

See the above massive list of options under $2000 that shoot 4K.

Sadly for Canon, they don't seem to pay much attention to this...almost in a display of arrogance.

They are obviously clearly no more arrogant than Sony, Nikon or anyone else.

Again, Sony and Nikon are on the 4K train. The D750 came out before the 4K craze was a big thing and all of their prosumer and professional DSLRs have featured 4K since last year.

At some point Canon needs to understand that keeping a feature out because they might lose a 5D sale or cinema sale is losing them a CANON sale, above all.

Losing sale to...what exactly?

Already proving your argument wrong by having a much better idea of the current camera market, please reevaluate your stance. Canon is limiting video features in its cameras, everyone knows that. My 5D Mark IV and 1DXII shoot MJPEG only in 4K and have no option for a more efficient codec for those shooting video that DON'T want to grab stills out of a video and are more concerned with storage.

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

 

[LSXPhotog]

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.

 

[cdcooker]

Still only has C1 and C2 on the mode dial. How difficult to have 3?! Even some PowerShot models have 3!

Why Canon sticks with mini USB plug, while everybody goes to micro USB long time ago?! It is Canon who force me to keep a separate mini USB around in my house!

Apparently, there is no in-camera charging either.

 

[tron]

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.

Where on earth did you see the same price point?

B&H Sony RX100V $998 G7XII $679.99

AMAZON.DE RX100V 1031.99 euros G7XII 548.00 (sale from 685)

 

[crazyrunner33]

As a 30% video guy (Panasonic but looking to find better custoner service) who passed on the 5dIV due to its memory intensive codec, I'm curious to see what the video color space is (perhaps it's already been leaked and I'm too poor a reader to notice).

I'd also like to hear opinions on the electronic IBIS - enjoyed the addition the one time I rented a GH5 but that's significantly different tech. Low light video performance and use of the full sensor (no crop factor) would make this a worthy B-camera in a pinch.

Full disclosure - never shot canon (looking to convert for customer service and second shooter markets), probably buying the 6DMKII for photos regardless of video specs

The electronic IBIS(it has been used on a couple other Canon products) is comparable to warp stabilizer on After Effects, but with no ability to adjust it after the fact. The color space is almost guaranteed to be 8 bit 4:2:0 H.264 like almost every other Canon DSLR, most Canon DSLR H.264 codecs have been very muddy. The 1080p on the 5D Mark III was so muddy that 480p RAW upscaled to 1080 looked better than the H.264 1080 encoding from in camera.

 

[TedBedlam]

As a 30% video guy (Panasonic but looking to find better custoner service) who passed on the 5dIV due to its memory intensive codec, I'm curious to see what the video color space is (perhaps it's already been leaked and I'm too poor a reader to notice).

I'd also like to hear opinions on the electronic IBIS - enjoyed the addition the one time I rented a GH5 but that's significantly different tech. Low light video performance and use of the full sensor (no crop factor) would make this a worthy B-camera in a pinch.

Full disclosure - never shot canon (looking to convert for customer service and second shooter markets), probably buying the 6DMKII for photos regardless of video specs

The electronic IBIS(it has been used on a couple other Canon products) is comparable to warp stabilizer on After Effects, but with no ability to adjust it after the fact. The color space is almost guaranteed to be 8 bit 4:2:0 H.264 like almost every other Canon DSLR, most Canon DSLR H.264 codecs have been very muddy. The 1080p on the 5D Mark III was so muddy that 480p RAW upscaled to 1080 looked better than the H.264 1080 encoding from in camera.

Thanks! Doesn't really change much in my decision making but would have been nice.

...and that E-IBIS seems pretty bowser.