Hands on Field Test of the Canon EOS 6D Mark II

[Canon Rumors]

The folks at The Camera Store in Calgary, Canada have completed their hands-on field test of the brand new Canon EOS 6D Mark II.</p>
<p><strong>Description:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>The original Canon 6D was the entry to full-frame shooting for many photographers, but it’s been getting a little long in the tooth. The new version brings a number of features from the excellent 80D, along with a controversial new sensor. Is the 6D series still a great entry point into full frame? Chris Niccolls and Jordan Drake went to shoot BTS of a commercial film shoot to find out!</p>

<p>Special thanks to DDG (www.ddg.tv) John Cameron (www.metaproductions.ca), and Dave Patrick at Jet1</p></blockquote>
<p>I generally think these guys are about the most honest reviewers out there and they have come away feeling the EOS 6D Mark II is a bit of a mixed bag. The feature set, usability and low light performance are to be commended, but the lack of 4K video and the lack of dynamic range improvement seem to be weighing heavily on this camera.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
<div style="font-size:0px;height:0px;line-height:0px;margin:0;padding:0;clear:both"></div>

 

[BeenThere]

A disappointment in several respects. Low light performance is good, but DR is behind the curve and no better than a Rebel Camera. I'm not a video guy, but the reviewer was sorely disappointed in the 6D2 video performance. Seems more like a FF Rebel than anything else.

 

[tomscott]

Chris is a great reviewer and clearly passionate. But its clear he is disappointed and expects disappointment from Canon.

He still sees the positives but is not afraid to point out the negatives.

Its obvious that in every review since the original 6D he has been disappointed with canon products apart from the original 6D and the 80D.

I decided to watch most of the canon DSLR reviews of the last 5 year and a few things stand out. Lack of innovation, refusing to compete, low DR, amazing handling, familiar, nothing revolutionary, solid dependable cameras but not pushing the envelope, amazing video AF but engineered softness and poor frame rates.

Ok the DR of the 6DMKII at 100 ISO isnt the best but at this price point the 80D and XXXDs outperforming it is a bummer when the sensor is so much bigger and you expect quality. Im not a 100 shooter most of my work is action and low light but must be disappointing for the landscapers who bought the original 6D and would be looking at this as an upgrade because lets be fair if your not a 6D owner im not sure who would buy this camera. Its made itself niche instead of the obvious entry level product.

Canon Giveth and Canon Taketh Away.

Its a strange time to be a Canon fan some cameras knocking it out the park like the 5DMKIV and 80D others on the borderline 7DMKII and others simply head scratching 6DMKII.

 

[transpo1]

Chris and Jordan give honest, straightforward reviews. Takeaways:

Improved AF, low-light, resolution, handling and disappointing dynamic range. No 4K, no headphone jack, and lower bit-rate 1080p than the original 6D. Jordan's words on video are "Artificial handicapping."

 

[stevelee]

Seems more like a FF Rebel than anything else.

You say that like it is something bad. I take really nice pictures with my old T3i. Perhaps I don't really need to upgrade at all. I started to buy an 80D but decided to wait for the 6D II.

When I travel I hardly feel limited by the G7X II, and haven't wished I had more gear along. When I was young I was rather serious about photography, and it got in my way on trips. They were more about taking pictures than doing and experiencing things. So I went about a decade leaving cameras at home. I traveled on four continents and got used to not lugging equipment around and mor importantly not being preoccupied.

So my DSLR choice comes down to what features I need for very different sorts of photography. So I look at what I do now and consider the limitations I would like to get beyond if I decide on purchasing more stuff. Until recently that involved buying lenses. Since my best ones are EF, I can go FF without losing anything, thou I realize their roles will change.

 

[woodman411]

Chris Nicols reviews are not very in-depth, compare his reviews to Bryan Carnathan (the-digital-picture.com) and Dustin Abbott. In fact, some of Chris' information is incorrect - for example, he mentions benefitting from anti-flicker under large venues (warehouses, stadiums, etc), implying the only benefit of anti-flicker is under sodium vapor. He does mention fluorescents, but that's only to point out the mixed lighting. If he knew anti-flicker actually benefits under fluorescents, he would have mentioned under *almost any indoor lighting* one could benefit from anti-flicker, not just large venues. That's kinda important. And he doesn't even mention anti-flicker in his 5d4 review.

 

[deadwrong]

UGH! Ok that was the final nail on the coffin. NOT buying this camera.

This is terrible Canon WTF.

 

[AdamBotond]

Jordan's words on video are "Artificial handicapping."

This is something that Canon has taken to a new level over the years. 5 years ago, the original 6D was considered to have one of the best sensor in the Canon lineup with good DR. Since then, Canon has introduced their on chip ADC, improving IQ at low iso in various models. Yet, they refused to use this tech in the successor, so they just turned a strength to a weakness in terms of DR. You want more DR? Go for 5Ds(R) or 5D IV. This is what you call artifical handicapping. Much like the 1/4000 shutter, the 1/180 flash sync, etc. Not too elegant way to push buyers towards 5D IV (or 5Ds/R).

 

[Mikehit]

Chris Nicols reviews are not very in-depth, compare his reviews to Bryan Carnathan (the-digital-picture.com) and Dustin Abbott. In fact, some of Chris' information is incorrect - for example, he mentions benefitting from anti-flicker under large venues (warehouses, stadiums, etc), implying the only benefit of anti-flicker is under sodium vapor. He does mention fluorescents, but that's only to point out the mixed lighting. If he knew anti-flicker actually benefits under fluorescents, he would have mentioned under *almost any indoor lighting* one could benefit from anti-flicker, not just large venues. That's kinda important. And he doesn't even mention anti-flicker in his 5d4 review.

For goodness' sake. Do you really think people would draw that nitpicking inference? Yet you turn it into a comment that Chris gives false information.

'The 7D2 AF is good enough to photograph horses'
'Oh, does that mean I can't photograph birds'.

 

[Don Haines]

Seems more like a FF Rebel than anything else.

It IS a FF Rebel.... This is the entry level FF camera....

 

[Chris_BC]

I would say this convinces me more than ever that Canon has too many camera models. At least because they appear to have a strong desire to differentiate them for various reasons, such that certain models get certain handicaps. Presumably they opted to hamstring the 6D II in some ways so as not to cannibalize 5D IV sales. I'm a 5DsR owner, so I hope this worse than usual choice results in them learning a lesson for the II version there, and in general.

 

[woodman411]

Chris Nicols reviews are not very in-depth, compare his reviews to Bryan Carnathan (the-digital-picture.com) and Dustin Abbott. In fact, some of Chris' information is incorrect - for example, he mentions benefitting from anti-flicker under large venues (warehouses, stadiums, etc), implying the only benefit of anti-flicker is under sodium vapor. He does mention fluorescents, but that's only to point out the mixed lighting. If he knew anti-flicker actually benefits under fluorescents, he would have mentioned under *almost any indoor lighting* one could benefit from anti-flicker, not just large venues. That's kinda important. And he doesn't even mention anti-flicker in his 5d4 review.

For goodness' sake. Do you really think people would draw that nitpicking inference? Yet you turn it into a comment that Chris gives false information.

'The 7D2 AF is good enough to photograph horses'
'Oh, does that mean I can't photograph birds'.

If you didn't know anything about anti-flicker, and you saw Chris' 5d4 and 6d2 review, what would you think of that feature? I would think a) it's not that important since he doesn't even mention it in the 5d4 review, and b) the only benefits are in a large venue. In reality, anti-flicker is a significant feature, and is used in almost any indoor shots. So in this case, yes, it is false information. But my point isn't to nitpick Chris's review - it was just an example to the lack of depth. Compare his information of anti-flicker to Bryan Carnthan, just one example.

 

[JoSto]

If one doesn't do video, the 6d2 remains a very strong camera. I shoot Canon for many years now and I never felt limited with Cameras that do "just" 12 Stops of DR.

On the other hand I have a very serious problem when I get the feeling that the camera was limited or "crippled" by design. I felt this so strong when i owned a 60D. Even when I don't need that feature I cant stand the feeling to be limited by purpose. I now have a 7d2 and bought a used 1dx just weeks ago. They doesn't have that much DR, i knew that when I bought both cameras, but I just dont care.

The 1dx has just 18mpix, just 11.9EV DR and a 6 year old focus/image sensor but the thing I love most are the many settings, buttons, tweakable options and the feeling not being limited by a tool.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

Personally, I was hoping to buy one of these to build a light-weight travel kit around. Waiting for more reviews before I decide but so far things don't seem to be going in the right direction.

Generally speaking, when Canon's designers intentionally nerf their product releases it's in the area of features that require annoying work-arounds but don't significantly lower the quality of the final product. (ie. dual cards, MJPEG, intervalometer, etc.) At this price point I don't have a problem with Canon protecting their pro lines. I'm generally willing to pay more for convenience. In this case I'm not sure it's just a feature set.

If Canon had to choose between excellent low light performance and file malleability then I suppose that's something I may not like but would accept. The majority of users would probably get more benefit from the higher ISO's especially if they are using slow glass.

However, If they intentionally didn't use the best sensor tech they had available that's a different thing entirely and in my opinion would be very troubling.

I generally expose my images properly and I don't need to do three stop shadow lifts but if I can't change mid tones a couple of stops to get the tone curve I want then the camera is a non-starter for me. The samples I've seen so far indicate that might be a problem. BTDT and I'm not going back now that there are Canon cameras with excellent sensors. I shouldn't have to go to APSC to get a decent travel camera. I own a 1DX2 and a 7D2 so I don't want to buy a 5D4 just for this.

I understand that my needs/problems are mine but I can't be the only one that's looking for a high quality lightweight full frame from Canon.

 

[Skywise]

Disappointing for me - I fully understand nerfing the product to protect the higher priced products and it's not a stopper for me as a "prosumer hobbyist". I can live without the dual cards and while the lack of 4k was disappointing but the other features were good enough coming from a 6D (better AF, better ISO, DPAF and built in IS for video) that it looked like a reasonable upgrade.

But if they've killed the bandwidth on the 1080 and the DR is WORSE than the 6D - two things which directly impact IQ and, let's face facts, for all the features were talking about IQ is the entire point. I'm not THAT good of a photographer and frequently try to correct my mistakes in LR in RAW (I've done some fantastic saves with that too)

Why should I upgrade? Why would an APS-C shooter migrate from the 80d?!

I'm looking at the 5DIV now but the 4k there isn't supposedly that great either and I don't need all the other features of it for an extra $1k.

So I guess I'm in a holding position for the next 5 years...

 

[docsmith]

Ok...not to disparage the Camera Store, as I really do like their reviews, but they are tech guys and love new stuff. They put an emphasis on bells and whistles that might only be used by a few and de-emphasize common things that will be used by all.

I find it mildly disappointing that the 6DII did not receive a sensor upgrade. But there are real world factors that come into play in decisions like this that are beyond intentional nerfing a product. Such as cost and availability of the new sensors. Could be that the new sensor line is projected to be maxed out or is significantly more expensive so Canon turned to the old sensor line.

Are we really going to get too bent out of shape? The original 6D sensor has been claimed to be better than the 5DIII sensor (which I still shoot). In 6 months this camera will be available for $1,500-$1,600, half that of the 5DIV. At a point, it isn't "nerfing" it is building a camera to hit a certain market at a certain price point. You can't put all high end materials into your entry level product. Then it wouldn't be entry level.

 

[Mikehit]

But if they've killed the bandwidth on the 1080 and the DR is WORSE than the 6D
Why should I upgrade? Why would an APS-C shooter migrate from the 80d?!

The DR is reputedly worse at 200 and below only. If you don't need the full DR that others offer then you are more disappointed by the idea than any limitations on your photography.

The 80D may in theory have more DR at base ISO but you are also looking at the fact the quality of pixels on a FF sensor is better so it depends on how much you crop.

 

[rrcphoto]

Ok...not to disparage the Camera Store, as I really do like their reviews, but they are tech guys and love new stuff. They put an emphasis on bells and whistles that might only be used by a few and de-emphasize common things that will be used by all.

I feel the same about them.

 

[ExodistPhotography]

Everyone harps on the DR. Keep in mind the DR is EXACTLY the same as the older 5D3. A DSLR that has turned out more photos that have won more awards then any other camera ever made. IMHO if you can not take an amazing photo with this camera, its not the camera. Its the photographer. Everyone I know that has purchased this camera so far loves it. As far as all those who are complaining saying they will not buy it.. Its the last nail canon. .blaa blaa. Just cry more. You would never have bought it even if it had 20 stops of DR, Clean images at ISO 51,000 and 4k down sampled from full sensor readout and all priced under $1000 bucks.. Just my thoughts..

 

[woodman411]

Ok...not to disparage the Camera Store, as I really do like their reviews, but they are tech guys and love new stuff. They put an emphasis on bells and whistles that might only be used by a few and de-emphasize common things that will be used by all.

I feel the same about them.

Agreed.