Plus, EVF in wildlife really eats battery, with every glimpse through the tele lens if something is happen - for hours. So you have to carry much more replacement batteries with you.
Upvote
0
Here is the Canon EOS R6
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Aussie shooter
https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
I like that one. I may just give it a goTell her the new camera delivers better images of her in her new clothesI am fortunate, I am married with a girl that already had her first camera when she was six and since then never stopped with photography. So I do not have to explain my investments in new gear...
Upvote
0
Regarding DR I am somewhat pessimistic, because 1d3 got Dxomark score, and it is clearly "behind the competition". So it is unlikely R6 to have 14+ stops of DR. I am predicting 13 dot something.
May be new R6 ( and R5 ) have ISO bracketing.
May be new R6 ( and R5 ) have ISO bracketing.
Upvote
0
Here is an explanation why the DxO score of the 1D-X III is worse than the Mk II:
https://petapixel.com/2020/06/24/this-is-why-the-canon-1d-x-mark-iii-scored-so-badly-on-dxomark/
Canon simply shifted their focus on low-light performance, which makes sense for such an action camera. People shooting landscapes with low ISO settings are not exactly the target users of such a camera. This is a nice example how pure lab results can create misconceptions.
Btw I always had the eery feeling that the DxO guys are secretly smirking when they managed again to create a stir on the internet about "bad" Canon technology...
Upvote
0
The discussion is all about specs. One big differences in my eyes is how a camera works. as i made my switch to FF (from 20D) i tested a lot of cameras and systems and the difference is big in terms of Feeling and Usability (which will mainly be preference things). I hated how the Fujis and especialy Olympus M43 worked so i switched to sony. But Canon is somehow awesome. I dont know if its because i grew up with Contax and Canon but i like it very much. The camera was never in my way taking a picture (the Sony a7II sometimes is) - i hope you get what i mean - im not a native english speaker.
Upvote
0
No, the Nikon Z6s is already rumoured to have the same sensor with a new processor to have 4k60p video, A7III used a similar sensor so the A7IV is expected to be the same as well, and it will cost more than 2000$, so it will match the EOS R6.
Going to 30MP will not make sense from a video perspective in a budget model.
Each test is done in different conditions that's why I don't link them, I did my own with the EOS R and I know what ISO I am fine with. That's what everyone should do, these graphs are worth a look, maybe better than DXO, but they are really not something to 'follow by heart'.
Take a look at this for instance. The old 36MP Sony sensor in a Pentax DSLR body looks to have better usable dynamic range than the brand spanking new 61MP A7RIV. Does that show anywhere in the graphs? No, absolutely not.
Yes that's why I don't expect the R1 to be a 1DX III mirrorless, it's going to evolve more.
By the way, we don't know the full specs, if it is a different sensor, than it might not do FF 4k 60p, it might do it cropped.
Upvote
0
With those specs you will have to wait at least 12 months unless Sony or Nikon will drop similar product at much lower price.
Upvote
0
Here is an explanation why the DxO score of the 1D-X III is worse than the Mk II:
https://petapixel.com/2020/06/24/this-is-why-the-canon-1d-x-mark-iii-scored-so-badly-on-dxomark/
Canon simply shifted their focus on low-light performance, which makes sense for such an action camera. People shooting landscapes with low ISO settings are not exactly the target users of such a camera. This is a nice example how pure lab results can create misconceptions.
Btw I always had the eery feeling that the DxO guys are secretly smirking when they managed again to create a stir on the internet about "bad" Canon technology...
DxO performed the tests using the e-shutter, so all files are 12-bit instead of 14-bit, which will skew the results.
Upvote
0
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
Upvote
0
For me, the R5 and R6 both have some form of annoyance. The R6 looks great but lacks a top-down screen or locking button for the dial. The R5 - no mode selection dial.
I don't understand why they made the top screens inverted and so damn hard to read. Sure , I can press the light-up button but it's tiny, not very bright and the buttons are too close to the light one and in a rush you can end up mashing other things.
With the dial they could have easily integrated a power switch into it and put it on the left instead.
It's like with the touch bar, it feels Canon tried to be different 'just because' when it wasn't necessary and in many cases caused a loss of fluidity in when shooting.
I am tied between which one I'd go for as in practise it's all about usability in stressful situations instead pf mp. I change my burst mode more than I do my shooting mode so a screen is useful but enough to miss it? No idea. I can imagine further iterations having further top-down changes. The 5D4 was practically perfect in that regard so I'm surprised they changed things around as they have.
I don't understand why they made the top screens inverted and so damn hard to read. Sure , I can press the light-up button but it's tiny, not very bright and the buttons are too close to the light one and in a rush you can end up mashing other things.
With the dial they could have easily integrated a power switch into it and put it on the left instead.
It's like with the touch bar, it feels Canon tried to be different 'just because' when it wasn't necessary and in many cases caused a loss of fluidity in when shooting.
I am tied between which one I'd go for as in practise it's all about usability in stressful situations instead pf mp. I change my burst mode more than I do my shooting mode so a screen is useful but enough to miss it? No idea. I can imagine further iterations having further top-down changes. The 5D4 was practically perfect in that regard so I'm surprised they changed things around as they have.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
1) As I predicted, the R6 line is in competition with the A7s line (rather than simply continuing the 6D line).
2) If the 1DX Mk. III and the 5D Mk. IV are any indication, the R6 won't perform much better in low light than the R5. See: chart below, wherein there's barely 1/3 a stop of difference between the two, and only from ISO 50 to ISO 320.
View attachment 191174
3) If Canon releases a good vertical grip with the R6, what's to stop most shooters from using it instead of the (eventual) R1?
in short: A lesser quality of build and level of weather resistance.
Upvote
0
I would like the R6 to have a bit higher resolution sensor than the 20Mp that is now predicted; I'm primarily taking pictures and not doing video stuff a lot so R5 is very nice and has a nice high resolution, but I don't really need the fancy video specs but I will need to pay for them. Perhaps 5D mk V will be nice as well (when it comes... ;-) )
Upvote
0
At this point, all is a compromise, not everyone wants a dial on the left size or a bigger top LCD to take even more space away from other things. I used to think it was useless, but I do find it useful know and don't have any problems with visibility, I don't even need it to light up so I just changed that to push the rear LCD to max. brightness, so that I can see it much better in the daytime.
As far as the touch bar goes, I think it was put in there, because it was designed to be a lower-end model than the R5 or R6, so they gave it inferior controls (even though the base is there in terms of body design). Sad, but probably true.
To do the 5D IV ergonomics, they need the same amount of space, which they don't have but the cameras have also gotten 'smarter' so they need to change things further, and inevitably not everyone will be happy with that.
The whole video is about looking at files taken with both cameras, there are many others in the channel including other Sony cameras, I did own two of them and the files do behave like that, I am just surprised how much better the Pentax does in comparison, it seems like a great camera that no one actually cares about. Using a big body to house the electronics may have the advantage of generating less noise, so the RAW files will not be as "cooked" as with mirrorless cameras (he also looks at the original A7R against the K1, similar sensor but quite different results)
Upvote
0
I appreciate the video you linked. What it shows is more a comparison of how differently those 2 cameras perform in terms of raising an image several stops, which isn't something most people do all that often. I don't think it illustrates noise patterns of 2 cameras at equivalent ISOs in normally exposed images, which is what I'm interested in. Here's an image comparison done in the same conditions. The noise in the 5D mk. IV may appear slightly more colorful, but there's no great difference in these pictures, which is exactly what the data I posted earlier shows.
I think the evidence demonstrates that idea that the 1DX-line delivers better high ISO performance than the 5D-line is basically a superstition. Fortunately for us, it means for low light work, we can all get by with cheaper cameras
Upvote
0
Why don't you post some of your professional work and show us how the pros really do it? I'd love to see.
Upvote
0
20MP will leave very small room for cropping but at the same time it will give you excellent high ISO performance. Similar to 1Dx3 i suspect JPGs straight from camera at ISO 10 000 be perfectly usable which is a dream for wedding/event photographer shooting in low light very often.
Most people even pros are shooting for web these days where 20MP is more than enough. For prints: i got excellent 48''prints from my first 8MP Canon 350D so 20MP is still plenty unless you really go with extremely large prints which you don't.
Besides if anyone really need more MP there will be R5 available.
Personally im more interested in video performance of R6 though. Currently using for video Sony A7III with Batis 25 in Super 35 4k24p mode. Need 4k60p. R6 with 35 1.8 could be decent replacement. If Sony(old Canon) won't bother to make A74 in next 6 months and give it 4k60p i think Canon R6 be my new video camera for 2021.
Most people even pros are shooting for web these days where 20MP is more than enough. For prints: i got excellent 48''prints from my first 8MP Canon 350D so 20MP is still plenty unless you really go with extremely large prints which you don't.
Besides if anyone really need more MP there will be R5 available.
Personally im more interested in video performance of R6 though. Currently using for video Sony A7III with Batis 25 in Super 35 4k24p mode. Need 4k60p. R6 with 35 1.8 could be decent replacement. If Sony(old Canon) won't bother to make A74 in next 6 months and give it 4k60p i think Canon R6 be my new video camera for 2021.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
