More Detailed Specifications for the Canon EOS 6D Mark II
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
WOW, it never ceases to amaze and entertain me; well, OTOH maybe the entertainment value for me is also diminishing. 
:-\
Jack
:-\Jack
Upvote
0
Am I the only one on the forum that was hoping for 120fps?... I think a nice slow mo of your Son or Daughter scoring that winning penalty after extra time would be great to have.
4k.. meh!.. but 120fps.. there's so much I could have done with that.
4k.. meh!.. but 120fps.. there's so much I could have done with that.
Upvote
0
rfdesigner said:
I'm w/ you. If there's no 4K, 120fps would've been darn sweet.
A couple of other changes from the 6D vs 6DII:
- No ALL-I video compression in 6DII, but 6D has it. I honestly didn't even know this existed until yesterday, so I guess I personally don't care. Other video folks who do care though will prob be annoyed about this. Here's a thread on CR about ALL-I vs IPB: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13707.0
- LCD - 6DII brightness can't be controlled and there's no anti-reflective coating. 6D had both of those things.
Upvote
0
MayaTlab said:
No, you were clear, but probably wrong. No, I didn't watch the video, because nothing is as frustrating as sitting at a computer, slack-jawed and passively watching a video. But I flipped through it a bit to give you the benefit of the doubt, and no, I'm not convinced. Yes, the 6D has the same screws holding in that front part. It also has the release tab above the mirror assembly inside the lens mount that people noticed was missing from the 6D2. Yes? That part is a moving part. It has engineering requirements higher than a part identified as non-user parts, like those screws on all the bodies. No, it is not simpler to make the thing pull off with a tab than it is to "permanently" close it, and your points about light and dust are examples of why that's not the case. Those are examples of reasons why it's harder to engineer the removable focus screen. Now, we don't know for completely sure why the 6D got it and the 6D2 didn't, but it's probably the fancier OVF.
Upvote
0
traveller said:
It has been proven time and again that at normal viewing distances, 4K is hardly noticable from HD. Even on compute screens, the amount of 4K material is pitifully low. So actually what you are doing is predicting a marketing trend and in technology that is a dangerous move.
Anyone remember what happened to hi-res music formats? SACD , Audio-DVD, 24-bit 192 digital? Blu-ray audio? Most people have not even heard of these. In fact they preferred the portability of MP3 and many cannot tell the difference in the normal listening so will not spend moolah on the hi-res stuff.
4K is new. It is the new mega-pixel war. No-one really knows how the public perceive it because sales are driven by the manufacturers making products with a fancy spec sheet not what the public actually thinks they need.
Upvote
0
Mikehit said:
Eh... people made the same stupid claims about HD. Apple made the same stupid claim about resolution, until suddenly "Retina" mattered. Apple also made a similar stupid claim where 3.5" was the "perfect size", until 4" was the "perfect size", and now it's what, 4.7" or 5.5"? I can see 4k as clearly better than 1080p, but I hardly call it essential. It's going to be on my next TV by default, because it's going to be a good 65" screen and those are all 4k these days. Similarly though, my current TV has 3D, which I've never used. As did my last TV (where 3D was also never used). It seems 3D is now gone.
I believe 4k will be more successful though. For one, old (film) content can be restored and remastered into 4k, and any movies or TV shows shot in 4k+ can be released in 4k. The problem (a problem, besides the glasses) with 3D was that if it wasn't shot in 3D, there was no way to turn an old 2D film into 3D, so the content was much more limited than 4k will be. You can colorize Casablanca, you can release a 4k version of Casablanca, but you can't make a 3D Casablanca.
HDR is another feature that will be interesting to see if it's the next HD or the next 3D.
Upvote
0
What 'claims' did I make? I merely questioned the value of 4k to the market based on experience in a similar technology market.
Tablet screens are different because of the viewing distance, as are computer screens. traveller's comments were about TVs.
Also, how much of the retina screen is about 4k (or whatever) and how much is about the actual quality of the screen? The two have developed hand in hand and it is hard to tell which is the element that makes people go 'wow'
But your comment "It's going to be on my next TV by default, because it's going to be a good 65" screen and those are all 4k these days" just proves my point: you are buying 4k because all the models you will be interested in will probably be 4k. If there was a price differential then my guess is people will decide HD is enough - if prices are comparable of course they will go for 4k.
So in the current market, I would venture that video is a minority technology for ILC cameras and 4k will not be the major differentiator for the average consumer because with so little TV content at 4k they have little reason to hunt out a 4k TV unless (as you say) 'they all have it'.
Tablet screens are different because of the viewing distance, as are computer screens. traveller's comments were about TVs.
Also, how much of the retina screen is about 4k (or whatever) and how much is about the actual quality of the screen? The two have developed hand in hand and it is hard to tell which is the element that makes people go 'wow'
But your comment "It's going to be on my next TV by default, because it's going to be a good 65" screen and those are all 4k these days" just proves my point: you are buying 4k because all the models you will be interested in will probably be 4k. If there was a price differential then my guess is people will decide HD is enough - if prices are comparable of course they will go for 4k.
So in the current market, I would venture that video is a minority technology for ILC cameras and 4k will not be the major differentiator for the average consumer because with so little TV content at 4k they have little reason to hunt out a 4k TV unless (as you say) 'they all have it'.
Upvote
0
Mikehit said:
You specifically brought up the "hardly makes a difference" claim. Just like the claim that high-DPI screens didn't matter for phones and tablets, until they suddenly did matter (when Apple offered them). Do you think Apple is suddenly going to go back to 320x480? Do you think TVs are going to go back to 1080p in large sizes? 3D did go away (completely now, I think). I really don't believe 4k will go away.
Heck, it wasn't that long ago people were claiming that 720p was plenty and even 1080p was a waste. At least no one keeps peddling that one.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Mikehit said:
I'm looking at 55" TVs, the 1080p version is $100 less than the 4K version. Our family room layout is such that only by sitting on the front edge of the chaise would one be close enough to perceive a difference with 4K – IOW, no real benefit. So I have to decide if a 3rd HDMI input is worth $100 (my older, smaller 1080p TVs have four inputs, but that's a gripe for another day).
Upvote
0
LonelyBoy said:
4K is rapidly becoming a no cost feature of TV's. I think there a real question as to whether 4K video will ever become a no cost, or even low cost, feature of Full Frame DSLR's, not to mention the processing chores associated with producing high quality 4K output. Is there a market? For sure, but how big is it, really?
Upvote
0
Really, did you just admit that it is possible for Canon to make a mistake?! Can I have that on record ;Dneuroanatomist said:
neuroanatomist said:
I think the point here is that we are on the Canon Rumors forum. Once you accept that, you may also believe that it is reasonable for people to express their opinions without needing:
[list type=decimal]
[*]to carry out a multi-million dollar market research exercise
[*]to have the benefit of hindsight
[/list]
Otherwise, this would be called the "American Marketing Association - Historical Review Forum".
What is your point? It seems to always be the same: that we shouldn't express any opinion that is critical of Canon's decisons, as they are the experts and they know best. What are we meant to be discussing on this forum, how great is Canon and their latest product, how we have all pre-ordered and are eagerly awaiting shipment?
Perhaps a more reasonable approach, might be for you to actually state your reasons why you hold a counter opinion, rather than constantly resorting to "you are not qualified to comment" or "you have no evidence because the events you predict have yet to occur". It might also be slightly more interesting to read.
In response to your final comment ("i.e. 14+ years of ILC market leadership to suggest that Canon generally makes the correct marketing decisions"), the phrase "past performance is not indicative of future results" comes to mind. Remember when IBM owned computing, or Pan-Am ruled the skies? Market share alone is no guarantee of future dominance and history is littered with examples of companies that have misjudged the future direction of the market and fallen by the wayside. One day, Canon will almost certainly join that list. Because I own and enjoy Canon photographic equipment, I hope that day is far off, but sometimes I worry when I see the conservative decisions they make...
Upvote
0
Mikehit said:
It's been proven time and again that 1080p is no-where close to reaching the limits of human vision: http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/lum-hyperacuity/index.html
All the marketing around 1080p was total hogwash. It was effective because they were taking one aspect of human vision and acting like it's the absolute limitation for everything when in reality virtually nothing that you will ever look at falls under that limitation.
Everyone can see for themselves how much resolution you can actually use.
If you can see the stair-stepping effect of the pixels used in your display then you need more resolution: http://www.testufo.com/#test=aliasing-visibility&foreground=FFFFFF&background=000000&antialiasing=0&thickness=3
It's not hard to figure out how much more resolution you can use. Measure your current viewing distance and then measure how much farther back you need to be in order to make pixels blend together.
Then multiply the pixel density of your display by the same number of times that you had to multiply your viewing distance: https://www.sven.de/dpi/
4K isn't even close the being enough pixels to out perform your ability to see details (on an average screen from an average viewing distance).
People also don't commonly build multi-thousand dollar "home music" rooms, where the "home theater" is almost expected for anyone in the middle class or higher. The importance that people place on visual quality is an order of magnitude higher than the importance of audio quality.
4K has a market, and so will 8K. The Japanese are going to be broadcasting in 8K come 2020.
1080p is being phased out and everyone should be thankful for that because the idea of hundred million dollar moveis being recorded at the same resolution as 15 year old TV's is horrendous. What's worse is all the 3D stuff means "professional" movie theaters currently offer the worst visual quality you can possibly get. Right now Youtube actually provides better image quality than "Digital IMAX".
That has got to change.
(And action movies should be shot at 120fps, almost all of the effect of explosions is lost at 24fps.)
Upvote
0
Funny how one can enjoy something, like thoroughly enjoy something, and then at a later date describe it as garbage. Do we really need the biggest/best of everything to be happy. Seems research shows that those with the comfortable least are the happiest. I'm not immune but I try hard to not get constantly caught up in this syndrome. I'm convinced that the 6D2 will be a very nice upgrade for me. Yes, all you trolls, Canon has sucked this fool in and I will continue to be happy. And I'm fine with you being happy with your XYZ.
Jack
And I'm fine with you being happy with your XYZ. Jack
Upvote
0
traveller said:
Before the 5D Mk II, Canon had no Cinema EOS. The 5D Mk II was the genesis of that product line. The quotes in relation to Henry Ford and Steve Jobs fit perfectly alongside the 5D Mk II and video capability. Problem is we all expect Canon to do that again. Maybe we consider that the 5D Mk II video features and success was a fluke by Canon and it didn't expect the video to be so popular. Maybe the video feature was thought of as nice to have and result of doing "Live Preview" on the back of the camera, not as first grade feature?
I don't see what problem is with no 4K. Most people who complain about it will never use it, just want it for spec masturbation. If you want to shoot 4K and want to use your EF lenses without buying Cinema EOS, wait for Sony A7III later this year. Same price (or cheaper) than 6D Mk II and it will do 4K. With all of the bits added to shooting video, body differences between 6D Mk II and A7III won't make much difference for ergonomics people.
If 4K is important to someone they won't buy 6D Mk II. Simple. Canon will know if it is important or not in 6 or 12 months when they know sales numbers for this camera and competitors'. Move on.
Upvote
0
Jack Douglas said:Funny how one can enjoy something, like thoroughly enjoy something, and then at a later date describe it as garbage. Do we really need the biggest/best of everything to be happy. Seems research shows that those with the comfortable least are the happiest. I'm not immune but I try hard to not get constantly caught up in this syndrome. I'm convinced that the 6D2 will be a very nice upgrade for me. Yes, all you trolls, Canon has sucked this fool in and I will continue to be happy.
Jack
I'm with ya there. Quite happy with what I have, my lowly 1080p TV and "ancient" 6D are doing just fine! When the time comes I'll be happy to upgrade to the MkII, even if that's a year or more from now. The cameras these days far surpass my own capabilities and I'd rather worry about my skills (or lack there of) than the specs sheets of cameras. Life is pretty good right now. I think we forget just how good it is!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
