Here is the Canon EOS R6

Twinix

C100 III + R6?
May 6, 2020
90
54
Norway
So Now @Canon Rumors Guy has spoiled just about everything, thursday will be about the intangibles:

What do the shots look like?
How are Canon positioning these cameras?
Are there some functions we're unaware of?
What's the ISO sensitivity like?
How much?

Spec leaks are exciting, but I'm still interested in how Canon play this launch out. It's weird that they're doing youtube things - seems like more of a flex than normal.
Thursday will be dedicated to watching the stream, and after that infomercials, reviews, tests, streams discussing it etc. And seeing the final price, calculating rig costs etc for fun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

YuengLinger

Sufficiently Pixilated
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,035
1,320
USA
20MP is not "fine". Its low resolution and unless applied to specific 1DXII or III its now outdated. Canon must have a ton of low resolution 20MP sensors left and will sell them to rubes.
More months of lockdown don't improve everybody's outlook, including mine. Still, we take a deep breath and carry on.
 

YuengLinger

Sufficiently Pixilated
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,035
1,320
USA
then you can't work with 24MP either.

Canon has 20, 26, 32, 45MP mirrorless full frame cameras. Are you actually complaining that one camera doesn't match a particular use case?

and I've printed far larger with 8MP so I have no clue where you are coming from. When you print larger, the observer distance also increases, which decrease the DPI necessary for the print. People forget and "Not sure how often this needs to be repeated" .. that observer distance is a huge factor in both printing and critically viewing their images.
Being able to crop tightly enough for iris recognition on a bystander a mile away is the goal. You know, like spy satellites!
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
267
364
You would bring that "toy" into the studio? " Virtually any professional shoot" Do you even know what professional equipment is for fashion? You are the rube I'm talking about. You show up for work with toys and wonder why most photogs don't make it. Its skills and equipment. Buy a real camera. https://www.phaseone.com/en/Photography/IQ-Digital-Backs/IQ4
You make absolutely no sense at all, I do shoot fashion among many other things and my work has been published in multiple magazines...yes I shoot with a 5DIV which has 30MP but it is way overkill, I could just as easily have created the exact same images with 20MP. By the time you get done setting up the footage for the magazine layout you are rarely using more than 8MP anyway.

I also have my work hanging on 6 story tall buildings in the downtown area where I live to showcase high rise luxury buildings that are about to be built..guess what they were shot with, a 20MP drone camera. For one project they created an entire artistic gallery to pre-sell $20M USD+ luxury condos for rich buyers, the entire gallery was covered in large highly detailed wall prints.....once again all shot with a tiny 20MP drone camera with a 1" sensor.

I'm not defending Canon's choice of sensor, and I think I know exactly why they did it...to save on costs by reusing an already amazing sensor from the 1DXIII while also providing the perfect sensor size for high quality video; I also believe there are scenarios where 20MP is not sufficient, mainly scenarios where you need to do a lot of cropping and recomposing in post to make up for a bad seating position or composition that you could not control like at fashion shows, for fashion shows I've needed every MP from my 5DIV at times because the organizers placed us in terrible positions and we had to make it work anyway; but calling a fantastic camera body with a 1DXIII sensor a toy just makes you look really ignorant.
 

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
315
233
TBH this does seem like a almost 7Dmk II replacement.
What? No not even in the same league other than FPS.

The 7D2 is so popular because of its speed, build and pixel density. It puts 18MP onto the area that the R6 puts 9.

In response the R6 brings... Speed. One out of three ain't good.

It's not about cropping on facial hair, it's about pixels on duck when even big whites with TC don't fill the frame. This isn't fashion photography where you can take a step nearer the subject to full the frame.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sobrien

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D
Feb 7, 2019
246
229
UK
And it depends on what your definition of 'wall art' is. Sure. If you are printing massive prints then it wont do. But most prints are NOT massive and 20mo is more than enough to print at A# size or eben somewhat larger
Definitely. The vast majority of big prints are supposed to be viewed from a distance anyway. 20mp is plenty.

I really question the skills of photographers who moan about megapixels. Same as if you saw a builder trying to screw in a 6 inch coach bolt with mini screwdriver. Wrong tool.
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
267
364
Four years ago before my divorce from Canon I would have been begging Canon to take my money for this. But today I have such a wonderful camera in the Lumix S1, my reaction is eh.. good for Canon. They are very late to the game but better late than never. I will keep my fantastic S1. Can I see myself ever getting this ? I don't know. The video quality won't be on par with the S1 but it will have decent AF-C. So maybe one day when the price has dropped sufficiently and I am in a need of a B-cam with good AF-C I may consider. But I don't see that happening anytime soon. Plus my S1 is utterly fantastic.
I came very close to divorcing Canon myself because I really needed video features that Canon refused to provide. I almost gave up hope when the EOS R was released with 1 card slot and that awful function bar. But my GH5 is just so good that it kept me from filing the Canon divorce papers and gave me time to wait for Canon to get their act together.

I love everything Panasonic did with the S1 and S1H but I just couldn't bring myself to settle for their terrible AF or having to buy all new lenses, also color grading GH5 video footage made me hesitate since what I can get right out of camera with Canon is amazing.

As much as I love the idea of the S1 the only part of your post that I don't agree with is the video quality. I think the R6 video quality will at a minimum be on par with the S1 and more than likely it will be much better considering it will use Canon's color science and will output 4:2:2 10 bit and use CLOG (hopefully CLOG3), that combined with Canon's AF will result in pretty incredible video quality and more keeper footage thanks to their DPAF AF. As a matter of a fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the R6's video quality isn't on par or better than the S1H which is insane considering the fact that the R5 is another step up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanoKnight
Feb 15, 2020
329
240
You make absolutely no sense at all, I do shoot fashion among many other things and my work has been published in multiple magazines...yes I shoot with a 5DIV which has 30MP but it is way overkill, I could just as easily have created the exact same images with 20MP. By the time you get done setting up the footage for the magazine layout you are rarely using more than 8MP anyway.

I also have my work hanging on 6 story tall buildings in the downtown area where I live to showcase high rise luxury buildings that are about to be built..guess what they were shot with, a 20MP drone camera. For one project they created an entire artistic gallery to pre-sell $20M USD+ luxury condos for rich buyers, the entire gallery was covered in large highly detailed wall prints.....once again all shot with a tiny 20MP drone camera with a 1" sensor.

I'm not defending Canon's choice of sensor, and I think I know exactly why they did it...to save on costs by reusing an already amazing sensor from the 1DXIII while also providing the perfect sensor size for high quality video; I also believe there are scenarios where 20MP is not sufficient, mainly scenarios where you need to do a lot of cropping and recomposing in post to make up for a bad seating position or composition that you could not control like at fashion shows, for fashion shows I've needed every MP from my 5DIV at times because the organizers placed us in terrible positions and we had to make it work anyway; but calling a fantastic camera body with a 1DXIII sensor a toy just makes you look really ignorant.
Agreed! I know many fashion photographers that were previously using 40-50mp hassleblad cameras who then switched to the 1dx line of cameras with 20mp sensors. With fashion in particular a great deal of the work being done is for digital these days... there really isn't a need for a huge number of megapixels. Who is to say what is a 'real' camera or a 'toy'. What a load of crap!
 

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,062
701
2499 launch price - 2299 September / October. Place your bets! hahaha
With this type of feature set, it is much less likely to see a quick price drop (compared to the EOS R where this happened), the A7III kept a steady price for quite a long time as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: martin_

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
267
364
Agreed! I know many fashion photographers that were previously using 40-50mp hassleblad cameras who then switched to the 1dx line of cameras with 20mp sensors. With fashion in particular a great deal of the work being done is for digital these days... there really isn't a need for a huge number of megapixels. Who is to say what is a 'real' camera or a 'toy'. What a load of crap!
Hasselblad and other medium format camera makers sold the dream that bigger is better and for a long time photographers were buying it; thinking their images would be better as well. But the reality is that everything has done a complete 180 thanks to cell phones; almost everything is digital now and if it's not properly viewable on a tiny cell phone screen its not going to get much visibility. Even before cell phones, if you created a composition with an attractive woman, great hair and makeup, perfect lighting, and interesting scenery no one would care what camera captured the moment. These days you don't even have to do that, cell phone pics of well known "influencers' get seen by millions while masterpieces created by the top photographers in the world will be lucky to be viewed by thousands.

I still have to take a deep breath sometimes as I crop some of my large landscapes down to cell phone optimized ratios; I feel like the appreciation of truly large prints and majestic landscapes is a dying breed. It's almost pointless now to even think about stitching together a panorama, since you know no one will ever see it in its full resolution form. Which is why I watch closely to see people's reasons for saying 20MP isn't enough and I rarely agree unless cropping and recomposing is the reason why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris.Chapterten

sagtor

I'm New Here
Jun 29, 2020
11
29
Definitely. The vast majority of big prints are supposed to be viewed from a distance anyway. 20mp is plenty.

I really question the skills of photographers who moan about megapixels. Same as if you saw a builder trying to screw in a 6 inch coach bolt with mini screwdriver. Wrong tool.
That's nice. Now tell that to the services offering prints for sale. They don't let you. I don't know how many million times I have to repeat myself. This isn't about printing your own poster at your fine art print store. This is about printing for sale. Not for gigs, not for yourself. You can't print anything larger than 15 inch with 20mp. It won't be accepted. It's called quality standards. It may be enough for you. It's not for most print services. 15-16 inches is the most you can do with 20mp. And that's nothing.
 

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
315
233
If 20mp is not enough, then you need a different camera. Like the other one Canon is releasing.

Duh.
Where's the R6S with 45MP and no video modes?

Oh you mean the R5; then I'd have to pay for expensive trinkets like 8K video that are of ZERO use to me. It's like trying to buy a car in the 90s when the only way to get metallic paint was to buy the Luxe pack with $3000 of accessories.

Canon just can't shake the mindset that the cheaper camera has to be inferior across all specs, rather than providing genuine options and letting the market show its preference.
 
Last edited:

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,802
944
UK
www.flickr.com
It's simply about physics: tiny pixels = less light per pixel, less DR because of their small capacity, lower signal-to-noise ratio, and added to this you unfortunately need faster shutter speeds to freeze motion on the pixel level. You also lose more actively photon collecting area in total on the sensor, because each pixel adds some dead zones due to its electronics etc. Another fact based on physics is diffraction blur, so the optimum aperture is smaller with smaller pixels if you want to convert their full potential into an image. You lose then depth of field, which e.g. can be limiting in classic landscape/cityscape photography. This is no argument against high MP FF cameras: they CAN make sense, if you shoot with a lot of light and can live with a smaller DoF, then you have an additional advantage that you can crop massively if you need. In fact, I use a 7D2 for wildlife which equals a 45 MP FF sensor, but this crop camera really needs much light (ok, it is old technology, too).

As a science journalist I am currently dealing with smartphone camera technology in depth and therefore I am extremely aware about the physical limits of small pixels. In smartphones, a lot of algorithms have to turn a huge loss of real image information into heavily post-processed images. One of the latest trends is adding artificial image content from data bases to sort of fill-in losses. Such tweaked images are not my personal idea about photography, I have to say.
Is it not the case that for sensors of the same generation, of the same physical size but different resolutions, that outputting still images to the same dimensions (i.e. printing or viewing the whole image at the same size), none of the disadvantages of smaller pixels are visible? I.e. the issues with diffraction, motion blur, etc are only greater with a higher resolution sensor when viewing 100% because you are magnifying them more? I take your point about losing a little bit of light gathering area by subdividing the sensor more but in practice that seems not to make a noticeable difference. A lot of people seem to cling to the belief that 'lower res = better high ISO' but there's precious little evidence of it, for stills.

With regard to phone cameras, surely the big issue is that the sensors are very much smaller, so they gather much less light overall.
 

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D
Feb 7, 2019
246
229
UK
That's nice. Now tell that to the services offering prints for sale. They don't let you. I don't know how many million times I have to repeat myself. This isn't about printing your own poster at your fine art print store. This is about printing for sale. Not for gigs, not for yourself. You can't print anything larger than 15 inch with 20mp. It won't be accepted. It's called quality standards. It may be enough for you. It's not for most print services. 15-16 inches is the most you can do with 20mp. And that's nothing.
Which bring me back to my original point.

If you’re that much of a professional then you should absolutely know, without any hesitation that this camera IS THE WRONG TOOL FOR THE JOB.

I wouldn’t take a 50mm lens for bird photography. So why would you take a 20mp body for large print, fine detail work..?
 

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D
Feb 7, 2019
246
229
UK
But then I'd have to pay for expensive trinkets like 8K video that are of ZERO use to me.

I don't understand why Canon have to aggressively delineate their cameras so much. I can't afford an R5 so I looked at the R6, but Canon's decision to restrict it to 20MP means I'm not going to buy it and hence not buy any RF lenses in the near future.

So instead of protecting the R5 from being cannibalised they actually lost a sale, due to marketing's insistence on the R6 being inferior. I'll just keep on plodding with a pair of 1DX for another few years.
It’s not restricted to 20mp. It’s sensor has 20mp.

8k and high resolution go hand in hand. Can you imagine the shit storm people would kick up if Canon released a 50mp body with no 8k..?

If you can’t afford an R5, then you can’t afford to take the pictures you want to. Simple as that. I can’t afford a 600mm f4, doesn’t mean I moan that a 100-400mm doesn’t have more reach..