Here is the Canon EOS R6
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
“Hearsay” doesn’t mean unreliable or untrustworthy or self serving. It means second hand reports. Which is what it sounds like you’re asking for.
Upvote
0
Aussie shooter
https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
The biggest selling point of the 7d2 was its price. And only the R6 can match that. Everything is a compromise. The R5 certainly matches in resolution but the R6 is a damn fine offering for a 7d user to step up to FF. IF and the IF is very important, the EVF is quick enough and the build quality is god enough(obviously it won't match the 7d2 or R5 but as long as it is good ENOUGH)
Upvote
0
If it's $2k-$2.5k, 20MP, Robust and fast AF, decent buffer along with the 12fps then this will be the go to wildlife mirrorless camera for many people. The 600 and 800 STM primes are telling me Canon really wants the bulk of the bird and wildlife shooters to come in on their R system now. Even on a low budget you can use EF-S lenses without any issue. IF this is priced right it may be Canon's best mid-range seller.
Upvote
0
Really depends on the purpose of the camera. I am hoping that R6 is a low light beast and will truly rock at low light. I see a scenario where I am shooting the R5 (40+ max) during the best lighting conditions and then switching to the R6 when the light is marginal and even 1 stop can make a difference. This is especially true if shooting the 600 / 800 f11. I am not convinced the f11 lenses will work for me (DOF as well as speed), but I am going to order the 800mm and give it a try. I just sold my 200-400 f4 (weight NOT dissatisfaction with the lens) and will probably buy or rent a big white when I want to get serious. The idea of a light, packable 800mm has appeal when I wan tot go light or can live with the tradeoffs. The 100-500 + 1.4x TC should take care of anything up to 700mm as long as it matches the performance of the 100-400 II. I have 1dx II 20mp file prints in 30x45 and even a 40x60 hanging on my wall that look just fine - and I am very picky about IQ. The quality of large prints from a 20mp file depends on the camera, lens, amount of crop, lighting conditions and the photographer choosing the optimal settings.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The only real world strong point for the 7d2 is the speedy af. The sensor completely sucked without the firmware ISO tricks, hell it was worse than the 70D which came before it for many types of photography let alone what the 80 and now 90D have. Mind you Canon has not sold all that many 7D2's really, one of their lowest sellers. The Build quality was never needed by most of the people that have one, the 7d2 is one of Canons largest mistakes to hit the market.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
what "both"? we were talking about the 7D - which only has AF down to F/8 - and certainly does not have animal / bird eye AF .. iTR only works on heads.
While you'll lose around 1.6x reach, you'll gain - far better and more precise AF. No microadjustment necessary and more accurate focus. Also, it's faster than the 7D. Better video too. I mean the only things the 7D will have on it is better battery life, OVF and weather sealing/build quality.
Upvote
0
Facts. It's not the same sensors because each camera they make has a different sensor in them that is your's after you purchase it.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
If hearsay is apples to apples comparisons by a third party with nothing to gain or lose in the reporting, then yes I'd rather have hearsay than a company claiming they've improved dynamic range up to x stops. I just can see any manufacturer reporting any metric for dynamic range and have that be valuable without something to compare it to.
Then again, looking at the improvements in that metric over recent bodies, I'd be pretty content if the R5/R6 kept pace with the 5DIV, so maybe I'm not the target demographic for reporting that improvement either.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
The negatives about the R6 are not that big of a deal to me.
- No top LCD/Dial. I can live with the fixed mode dial, but I really like the implementation in the EOS R. I think the only tradeoff is the slight change in ergonomics. I've got the EOS R/R5 method ingrained by now... so will just have to remember to twist this separate mode dial on the R6.
- Inferior Bluetooth radio. Don't think I use the smartphone app enough for this to bother me. If the R5 turns out to be much more usable than we are used to, I might change my mind on this.
- 20MP resolution. Perfectly happy with 20MP. Media stays digital so no prints, and I don't do heavy cropping. Also, it's right around that size where it could use the full sensor where there would be no crop in video. Although it does appear that there will be oversampling from 5K. So maybe they could've squeezed a few more MP's in there if they were going to oversample it anyway. All that said, I still plan to get an R5 so if for some reason I feel like I need more resolution... then I'll just use the R5
- No RAW video. I will actually shoot in IPB most of the time. And then there's the R5 if RAW is needed.
- In Body Image Stabilization, and available in all recording formats. I expect a lot more keepers for photo and video. Also, the more I can reduce using a tripod or a gimbal the better.
- 4K60P. This would be a lot more impressive if the R5 didn't steal all the headlines. This would have been the first Full frame uncropped 4K60p hybrid camera.
- FHD120P. I would almost never use the HD720p @120 in all previous Canon cameras because it was just too soft and it's only manual focus.
- No Crop in all video formats. Feels so liberating to not have to use workarounds when crop comes in to play.
- Dual UHS-II Card Slots. I'm fine with one card, but I find dual card slots convenient. I don't use one to backup the other. I use it to conveniently keep shooting once one card fills up.
- Better EVF. Resolution is better, but hoping for less lag.
- 12/20 FPS Shutter as opposed to the R's 8FPS (5 in servo)
- 10-bit internal (I think). The EOS R records 8-bit internal, but can record 10 bit with an external recorder.
- Newer AF technologies. Similar to R5. Animal AF. Head AF, I assume, is not the elimination of Eye AF, but I suspect the AF will stay on the head when it loses the eye. So in instances where your subject spins around it should lock on the back of the head. And DPAF will be available in high frame rate mode!
- Zebras. I was fine without it, ignoring blown highlights for the sake of properly exposed subjects. But I will definitely use it going forward.
- Better Battery. This is assuming the newer high capacity battery is only compatible with the R5/R6. Point is moot if it happens to be backward compatible with older cameras.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
