Anyone have any opinions on whether to M6 ii is comparable in performance and IQ to the 5 DSr? I would be shooting primarily landscape and macro...within the macro realm would be butterflies and bees...other potentially fast moving insects. Some use as well with static birds...tia.
M6 Mkii vs 5DSr for Landscape and Macro
- Thread starter astoria59
- Start date
I don't have an M6 II, but I do have an M3, 5DsR and a new R. In earlier tests, I found that my 24MP M3 was similar in IQ to my 6D mkI at low ISO values, although the 6D had better dynamic range. Neither are close to the IQ of my 5DsR. My 5DsR is sharper in real world images than my EOS R, which is 30MP, like the M6 II, but you would need big enlargements to note the difference. I suggest that the M6 II will provide resolution on good lenses similar to the R at low ISO values, but probably less dynamic range. The IQ would be adequate for all but the most testing images and large enlargements. The 30 MP will test your lenses, the 11-22mm is fine, the 15-45mm is not.
I think the biggest difference is in (1) the size and (2) form factor. I hiked east-west through the Swiss Alps and bought an M3 specially for that trip to save weight. This proved to be a good decision. An M6 II would be better. In terms of form factor, the flip out rear screen is invaluable for macro and I preferred to use my M3 over the 5DsR for outside macro shots.
To conclude, I suggest that the 5DsR will have better resolution and probably better dynamic range, but the difference will be marginal in most situations. However, you are more likely to take an M6 II hiking to capture magical landscapes.
I think the biggest difference is in (1) the size and (2) form factor. I hiked east-west through the Swiss Alps and bought an M3 specially for that trip to save weight. This proved to be a good decision. An M6 II would be better. In terms of form factor, the flip out rear screen is invaluable for macro and I preferred to use my M3 over the 5DsR for outside macro shots.
To conclude, I suggest that the 5DsR will have better resolution and probably better dynamic range, but the difference will be marginal in most situations. However, you are more likely to take an M6 II hiking to capture magical landscapes.
Upvote
0
In much agreement. I have a 5DSR and a 90D, which has the same sensor and much of the capability of the M6 II in liveview, and an M5 with a set of EOS-M lenses. In terms of IQ, it depends on whether or not you are using the whole frame or are cropping.
1. Using whole frame without cropping. The 5DSR and the 32 Mpx sensors surprising have similar DR at iso 100-200 but the FF pulls ahead as it should do at higher iso. The full 50 Mpx sensor without an AA-filter has better IQ than the full 32 Mpx anti-aliased sensor. So, for landscapes, the FF camera is better, but other considerations such as lens availability and portability come in.
2. Cropping FF to APS-C or smaller. The 32 Mpx sensor wins in terms of IQ. Its pixels are significantly smaller and can resolve more detail, despite the AA-filter. Its DR is better than that of the 5DSR at all isos because the same size of sensor is being used on both when the FF is cropped to the same size as the APS-C.
Regarding lenses, there is definitely copy variation. My 22mm/f2 is very sharp; my first copy of the 11-22mm was soft, but now replaced by a sharp one; my 15-45mm is as sharp as the 11-22mm where they overlap; and the 18-150mm is good. I use my EF lenses as well with the adapter. The AF of the 90D in M6 II liveview mode is brilliant. The 5DSR has very good AF and responsive in DSLR mode, and I find it fine for birds and dragonflies in flight.
1. Using whole frame without cropping. The 5DSR and the 32 Mpx sensors surprising have similar DR at iso 100-200 but the FF pulls ahead as it should do at higher iso. The full 50 Mpx sensor without an AA-filter has better IQ than the full 32 Mpx anti-aliased sensor. So, for landscapes, the FF camera is better, but other considerations such as lens availability and portability come in.
2. Cropping FF to APS-C or smaller. The 32 Mpx sensor wins in terms of IQ. Its pixels are significantly smaller and can resolve more detail, despite the AA-filter. Its DR is better than that of the 5DSR at all isos because the same size of sensor is being used on both when the FF is cropped to the same size as the APS-C.
Regarding lenses, there is definitely copy variation. My 22mm/f2 is very sharp; my first copy of the 11-22mm was soft, but now replaced by a sharp one; my 15-45mm is as sharp as the 11-22mm where they overlap; and the 18-150mm is good. I use my EF lenses as well with the adapter. The AF of the 90D in M6 II liveview mode is brilliant. The 5DSR has very good AF and responsive in DSLR mode, and I find it fine for birds and dragonflies in flight.
Upvote
0
I don't have a 5DSR, but I do have the Mark IV as well as the M6 Mark II. In the testing I've done the new M6 is pretty impressive on all fronts, but having said that while the image quality is very good, it is still a fair bit down the scale from what I can achieve with the 5D. In short I think it is great as a travel camera and I would have no qualms about using it for landscape in those situations (which I hope to test more thouroughly next week in fact).
If I have a choice however where the occasion would allow me to use either for landscape, it will be the 5D Mark IV.
If I have a choice however where the occasion would allow me to use either for landscape, it will be the 5D Mark IV.
Upvote
0
Landscape is not something I do very often but like to keep options open. My 5DSr is used primarily for macro and family portrait occasionally. I have found the IQ, DR is worlds apart from my 7D Mkii. The 7D is for all my action, mostly BIF. I dont mind not having a FF. I like the crop sensor bodies. I guess my concern would be will my lenses function well with the M6 ii and adapter. I would mostly use my 100mm macro IS and my 16-35 f/4 lens. While I really like m y 5DSr, it doesn't get used as much as my 7D. It is tempting to go with a smaller, lighter body. As long as the M6 ii is as capable as the 5D its no great loss for me. I am also not fond of the huge files the 5D gives me....and I never print large, so no loss there, either.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
