I'm very excited for this! I don't think I need the R5. The 6 should be a good upgrade from my r
Upvote
0
I hope whatever is in store for the R5 we don't know about yet, is in store for the R6 as well.Also, we are still supposed to have something special left for stills, at least for the R5 but maybe for the R6 also. But anyway, for me the hype is over since the price reveal. Or my poverty reality reveal
Also gonna take the Samyang 85 instead of the Canon 85 since I hoped for 1:1 macro and not 1:2, for an f2 I find it inbetween everthing... missing every purpose. Not a real Macro, not a real portrait (f2 is still ok, but not really for me). So Nothing for me
That has already been mentioned. This was 'new' informationNo mention of ibis, or video features
and probably no DPAF in FF 4K recording (like the 1DX3).
and probably no DPAF in FF 4K recording (like the 1DX3).
OK, sorry, I got that wrong. Let's hope Canon didn't hit the R6 with their magical hammer then.This misconception will just never die, will it? The 1DX3 has DPAF in FF 4K/RAW 30/25/24fps. Only 60/50fps full-frame 4K/RAW modes don't have AF. Which is not especially surprising given the massive amount of data that needs to be handled.
Also, we are still supposed to have something special left for stills, at least for the R5 but maybe for the R6 also. But anyway, for me the hype is over since the price reveal. Or my poverty reality reveal
Also gonna take the Samyang 85 instead of the Canon 85 since I hoped for 1:1 macro and not 1:2, for an f2 I find it inbetween everthing... missing every purpose. Not a real Macro, not a real portrait (f2 is still ok, but not really for me). So Nothing for me
It's more of a mythical hammer than a magical hammer. They have just prioritized reliability over 'specs' and if they have not been able to implement something well then they don't implement it. Of course their is differentiation but that is not a cripple hammer. If they can put good features in a camera there has been a camera with those features in it.OK, sorry, I got that wrong. Let's hope Canon didn't hit the R6 with their magical hammer then.
I think that is confirmed now with the words 'based on the flagship sensor'. I know I read it somewhere on one of these threadsWonder if they'll be putting the 1DX III sensor in this.
I think that is confirmed now with the words 'based on the flagship sensor'. I know I read it somewhere on one of these threads
Nokishita posted some thing that confirmed it.Wonder if they'll be putting the 1DX III sensor in this.
I beg to differ, and I think most people do as well. The lack of 24p recording in many recent models was just one of many, many examples. Differentiation is fine, one can't expect to purchase a flagship body new for $500, but when stuff is disabled in FW for ??? reasons, then that's just plain crippling.It's more of a mythical hammer than a magical hammer. They have just prioritized reliability over 'specs' and if they have not been able to implement something well then they don't implement it. Of course their is differentiation but that is not a cripple hammer. If they can put good features in a camera there has been a camera with those features in it.
I think you need to understand the difference between a cripple hammer and a poor decision based on logical thoughts. It was a camera aimed at people who have no idea of how to do video and therefore had the frame rate that most people would use. They were probably thinking that if someone knows enough to want the 'cinematic look'(whatever that is) that they would probably want a decent video camera anyway and would not be looking at the super low end bits of kit. They were wrong and rectified it. That is NOT what the supposed cripple hammer isNokishita posted some thing that confirmed it.
I beg to differ, and I think most people do as well. The lack of 24p recording in many recent models was just one of many, many examples. Differentiation is fine, one can't expect to purchase a flagship body new for $500, but when stuff is disabled in FW for ??? reasons, then that's just plain crippling.
Interesting. But I did note it said the R6 sensor was based on the sensor from the 1Dx2!!!! That seems odd considering I doubt the 1dx2 sensor can do what the R6 is able to do. Surely they meant the 1dx3. Overall though. freaking phenomonal!!!
Interesting. But I did note it said the R6 sensor was based on the sensor from the 1Dx2!!!! That seems odd considering I doubt the 1dx2 sensor can do what the R6 is able to do. Surely they meant the 1dx3. Overall though. freaking phenomonal!!!