Here is the Canon EOS R6 Mark II & Canon RF 135mm f/1.8L IS USM

[Tony5787]

If you've not been following along, some of us speculated it would have a stacked sensor because Canon's other new-ish 24MP full frame sensor is a stacked sensor. If this one isn't stacked, then it's a new design. Canon has a history of reusing sensors in different products (including much lower end products), so this is why we've been discussing it.

I don’t think people understand what a stacked sensor is then. All a stacked sensor is is a normal image sensor with DRAM built-in to improve readout speed. They could very well reuse the same 24MP imaging sensor from the R3 in a different configuration that isn’t stacked (which is probably what they did here). Sony’s done almost the exact same thing with their lineup, they offered a 24 MP sensor in the a7 III and a9/a9 II and it’s almost certainly the same imaging sensor being used in both bodies, just in different configurations.

 

[r134a]

I don’t think people understand what a stacked sensor is then. All a stacked sensor is is a normal image sensor with DRAM built-in to improve readout speed. They could very well reuse the same 24MP imaging sensor from the R3 in a different configuration that isn’t stacked (which is probably what they did here).

Well, either way they didn't. It's been announced. It's probably a very similar sensor, except at 24 megapixel. They changed the power switch, added the video switch, and updated the firmware so it's more similar to the R7 in features, and probably changed the overheat limit to squeeze more time out of it. Artificial segmentation that won't be coming to the R6 mark 1.

Pretty lame incremental upgrade, because it means the R6 is going to get left behind and never have its problems fixed.

 

[Tony5787]

On a separate note, once again we get another body that seems to prove that Canon’s RD is split into a bunch of teams that have zero coordination with one another. Every single body in their lineup has a unique control layout and it drives me up a wall. Why do they feel the need to reinvent the wheel with every new camera they release?

 

[Tony5787]

Well, either way they didn't. It's been announced. It's probably a very similar sensor, except at 24 megapixel. They changed the power switch, added the video switch, and updated the firmware so it's more similar to the R7 in features, and probably changed the overheat limit to squeeze more time out of it. Artificial segmentation that won't be coming to the R6 mark 1.

Pretty lame incremental upgrade, because it means the R6 is going to get left behind and never have its problems fixed.

I mean the R3 is also 24MP? That’s what I was getting at, they’re probably reusing the same imaging sensor but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be stacked in every incarnation. They can easily just not solder DRAM onto it and have a much cheaper, slower sensor.

 

[highdesertmesa]

I don’t think people understand what a stacked sensor is then. All a stacked sensor is is a normal image sensor with DRAM built-in to improve readout speed. They could very well reuse the same 24MP imaging sensor from the R3 in a different configuration that isn’t stacked (which is probably what they did here). Sony’s done almost the exact same thing with their lineup, they offered a 24 MP sensor in the a7 III and a9/a9 II and it’s almost certainly the same imaging sensor being used in both bodies, just in different configurations.

I mean the R3 is also 24MP? That’s what I was getting at, they’re probably reusing the same imaging sensor but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be stacked in every incarnation. They can easily just not solder DRAM onto it and have a much cheaper, slower sensor.

I don't think they used a non-stacked version of the R3 sensor (which is BSI + stacked) since it's not even BSI. DPR says it's a new FSI sensor.

 

[Tony5787]

I don't think they used a non-stacked R3 (which is BSI + stacked) here since it's not even BSI. DPR says it's a new FSI sensor.

Yeah looking at the specs the R3 is 24.1MP and the R6 II is 24.2MP so that makes sense.

 

[David - Sydney]

If you set the joystick to be able to control auto-focus point selection (The only option other than Off), pressing down on it will also re-center the the point. I find that more conveniently placed, and it frees up Set to be programmed to whatever else you want.

I hadn't thought of the pressing down on the joystick. I tend to use the rear touch screen to move the AF point if needed and use Set to re-centre. I will give it a go

 

[koenkooi]

The R7 body option shows backordered everywhere, including Canon USA. You can get one with the "kit" lens immediately from most places I checked. I was in no hurry, so I ordered an R7 body only from Canon USA ten days ago expecting to wait a while. It arrived 9 days later, much to my surprise.

The kit versions are also backordered here in .nl, I wonder if the shops split them up to sell the bodies.

 

[koenkooi]

On a separate note, once again we get another body that seems to prove that Canon’s RD is split into a bunch of teams that have zero coordination with one another. Every single body in their lineup has a unique control layout and it drives me up a wall. Why do they feel the need to reinvent the wheel with every new camera they release?

No, they are managed by Oprah: "You get a layout, you get a layout, EVERYONE GETS A LAYOUT!!!"

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The ideal scenario for both tilt and flip is the combined option that the Z9/A7RV/S1H has.

The Z9 can't really flip like the A7RV and S1H can, but I do get your point.
I hope the Canon copies the S1H.
It has been out quite a while.

 

[Benjamin_L]

I wonder if the R5 gets a big firmware update soon to incorporate all the new features the R7/10/6II have. Also no one mentioning horse/airplane/train autofocus? And the new speedlight can't be used on the R5 it seems, right?

 

[koenkooi]

[...] And the new speedlight can't be used on the R5 it seems, right?

The EL-5 lacks the normal hot shoe connections, so it can only be used on an R3, R7 or R6II.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I mean the R3 is also 24MP? That’s what I was getting at, they’re probably reusing the same imaging sensor but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be stacked in every incarnation. They can easily just not solder DRAM onto it and have a much cheaper, slower sensor.

So they what…just flipped the R3’s BSI photodiode die over to get the FSI sensor for the R6II?

Sorry, try again…

 

[twoheadedboy]

I did an overlay photo with the RF 50mm 1.2, matching the mounts and it seems identical. So probably 77mm

B&H is showing 82mm, which matches the non-IS Sigma.

 

[yankiefrankie]

This upgrade makes sense. Canon needed a more compelling midrange camera to put them more in line with the competition. I doubt that any/many of the firmware changes will make their way to the R5 and original R6, but what about the R3? As the R3 is the premier sports and action camera it should not be outdone by the R6 ii.

It would make sense for Canon to add to the R3 via firmware:
- 40 FPS in 12bit RAW mode
- Pre-buffer shooting
- Intelligent Auto subject detection

 

[koenkooi]

This upgrade makes sense. Canon needed a more compelling midrange camera to put them more in line with the competition. I doubt that any/many of the firmware changes will make their way to the R5 and original R6, but what about the R3? As the R3 is the premier sports and action camera it should not be outdone by the R6 ii.

It would make sense for Canon to add to the R3 via firmware:
- 40 FPS in 12bit RAW mode
- Pre-buffer shooting
- Intelligent Auto subject detection

Seeing that the R3 recently gained AF/AE locked 195fps, I wonder how fast it can actually shoot with AF and AE active. Assuming you need every other frame for AF/AE that would be 90-ish fps. That also assumes that the digic X can actually AF/AE that fast.

 

[yankiefrankie]

Seeing that the R3 recently gained AF/AE locked 195fps, I wonder how fast it can actually shoot with AF and AE active. Assuming you need every other frame for AF/AE that would be 90-ish fps. That also assumes that the digic X can actually AF/AE that fast.

I would think the R3 would be able to at least match the R6 ii's 40FPS with AF/AE.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I would think the R3 would be able to at least match the R6 ii's 40FPS with AF/AE.

Possibly via firmware update, but honestly I find 30 fps to be plenty!

 

[entoman]

Still has the flippy and no tilt, too bad. Canon, would you please drop the flippy and incorporate a tilting screen. Or, add the tilt feature within the flippy that way photographers (not just content creators) will be happy.

I think most of us (?) would probably prefer a screen that tilted up/down and remained on-axis with the lens, which makes action much easier to follow when using a tele or macro lens. Panasonic, Fujifilm and now Sony have proven that this can easily be combined with a reversible flippy screen at no extra cost. When all options can be incorporated into a single fairly simple and durable mechanism, thus meeting the demands of all types of user, there real is no excuse for it being omitted.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Panasonic, Fujifilm and now Sony have proven that this can easily be combined with a reversible flippy screen at no extra cost.

Presumably, you mean at no extra cost to the customer. A more complicated mechanism will most likely cost more to manufacture, which means lower profit. Seems that Canon does not feel sufficiently compelled by the feature being available in competitor cameras to sacrifice their own profit.