More Detailed Specifications for the Canon EOS 6D Mark II

[Loswr]

barely any better than D750 from Nikon, seriously castrated camera from dumbCanon.

 

[Loswr]

It's a question of cost. The latch mechanism is cheap enough, but the screen itself has to be aligned within a few microns. That's tough to do in a high-volume camera.

Yet Canon somehow found a way to pull off this engineering phenomenon in the 6D1. :

And (as I pointed out earlier) in the 40D/50D/60D, all of which were much higher volume sellers than entry-level FF cameras.

Well, some people talk out of their mouths, and some talk out of...other orifices.

 

[ahsanford]

And (as I pointed out earlier) in the 40D/50D/60D, all of which were much higher volume sellers than entry-level FF cameras.

Well, some people talk out of their mouths, and some talk out of...other orifices.

My only guess here with the 6D2 -- and this is just a guess -- we're getting a transmissive screen in return for the focusing screen takeaway. Same thing happened when the 5D3 lost its ability to change screens, right?

- A

 

[Loswr]

And (as I pointed out earlier) in the 40D/50D/60D, all of which were much higher volume sellers than entry-level FF cameras.

Well, some people talk out of their mouths, and some talk out of...other orifices.

My only guess here with the 6D2 -- and this is just a guess -- we're getting a transmissive screen in return for the focusing screen takeaway. Same thing happened when the 5D3 lost its ability to change screens, right?

Yes, and the 60D -> 70D. At first, only the 1D X had a transmissive LCD and swappable screens...but then the 7DII got both. So...for the 6DII it may just be a take-away, as you put it.

 

[ahsanford]

My only guess here with the 6D2 -- and this is just a guess -- we're getting a transmissive screen in return for the focusing screen takeaway. Same thing happened when the 5D3 lost its ability to change screens, right?

Yes, and the 60D -> 70D. At first, only the 1D X had a transmissive LCD and swappable screens...but then the 7DII got both. So...for the 6DII it may just be a take-away, as you put it.

Sorry! When I said takeaway, I meant nothing at all -- swappable screens yanked and no upgrade in any other way. I'd consider transmissive screens something and not nothing, so it wouldn't be a pure takeaway in my book.

- A

 

[Loswr]

My only guess here with the 6D2 -- and this is just a guess -- we're getting a transmissive screen in return for the focusing screen takeaway. Same thing happened when the 5D3 lost its ability to change screens, right?

Yes, and the 60D -> 70D. At first, only the 1D X had a transmissive LCD and swappable screens...but then the 7DII got both. So...for the 6DII it may just be a take-away, as you put it.

Sorry! When I said takeaway, I meant nothing at all -- swappable screens yanked and no upgrade in any other way. I'd consider transmissive screens something and not nothing, so it wouldn't be a pure takeaway in my book.

I agree it seems (to me) a worthwhile trade-off - I prefer the additional information of a transmissive LCD over swappable screens, and more importantly with the recent bodies having so many focus points, the ability to not always see all those focus points.

But given that they included both the transmissive LCD and swappable screens on the similarly-priced 7DII, to not include both on the 6DII (and the more expensive 5DIV) does seem like 'nerfing' on Canon's part. Or if you prefer, product differentiation – as it now stands, only the top-of-the-line APS-C and FF bodies have both capabilities.

 

[ahsanford]

But given that they included both the transmissive LCD and swappable screens on the similarly-priced 7DII, to not include both on the 6DII (and the more expensive 5DIV) does seem like 'nerfing' on Canon's part. Or if you prefer, product differentiation – as it now stands, only the top-of-the-line APS-C and FF bodies have both capabilities.

On this feature, it's more modernization than nerfing / segmentation / differentiation to me. One might argue, just as you said, the added AF points create clutter in the VF than a transmissive screen would manage.

I just see the 6D2 catching up to the 5D line with this decision. Yes, it's a takeaway to folks who handhold their 6D1 with Zeiss glass, but to the other (guessing) 98% of the 6D1 masses, this should (correctly) be seen as an upgrade.

- A

 

[BXL]

Mirrorless is too slow and fuzzy for that. It's fine for static work, but not when your subject is moving around.

Mirrorless is too slow? Straight out of camera (Fuji X100) and the subject was moving around...

were you manually focusing?

Auto focus and we know how fast the AF of the X100 is.

btw the light blooming looks downright horrid.

I know. But I haven't done any post yet.

 

[Loswr]

But given that they included both the transmissive LCD and swappable screens on the similarly-priced 7DII, to not include both on the 6DII (and the more expensive 5DIV) does seem like 'nerfing' on Canon's part. Or if you prefer, product differentiation – as it now stands, only the top-of-the-line APS-C and FF bodies have both capabilities.

On this feature, it's more modernization than nerfing / segmentation / differentiation to me. One might argue, just as you said, the added AF points create clutter in the VF than a transmissive screen would manage.

I just see the 6D2 catching up to the 5D line with this decision. Yes, it's a takeaway to folks who handhold their 6D1 with Zeiss glass, but to the other (guessing) 98% of the 6D1 masses, this should (correctly) be seen as an upgrade.

Not to beat a dead horse, but my point is that given that the 7DII has both, for the 6DII Canon could have added the transmissive LCD and kept the interchangeable focus screens. But they didn't. Definitely agree that for almost everyone the switch is beneficial, but my point is that the two features aren't mutually exclusive in that price-class, and while the transmissive LCD is 'better' than the swappable screens, having both features would be even better.

 

[CanonCams]

quite alot better...
it is still 63 zone as before but new RGB metering sensor sees colours.
old metering system treated everything in the viewfinder as mid level grey (18% grey) colour.
hence your snow would come out underexposed and your blacks over exposed. new RGB metering system delivers more accurate scene metering and white balance.

http://www.canon-asia.com/cplus/en/metering-system/

How much better is the "7560 pixel RGB + IR metering sensor" versus the old 63 zone metering? Will this camera have iTR servo AF?

Ok, so the 6D has 63 Dual Layer but the 6D MK II will have 63 Dual Layer w/ RGB + IR? (If I read that correctly)

 

[Redline]

I mean it is still considered an entry-level full frame body no? And seems like a decent spec for astrophotographers especially that tilt screen which I wish my old 6D MKI had. Another slow but strong body...the added AF point is a big bonus. Of course we'll never hear the end of people that want all the specs from the 5D or expect to do everything like a $4,000 camera

 

[bereninga]

But given that they included both the transmissive LCD and swappable screens on the similarly-priced 7DII, to not include both on the 6DII (and the more expensive 5DIV) does seem like 'nerfing' on Canon's part. Or if you prefer, product differentiation – as it now stands, only the top-of-the-line APS-C and FF bodies have both capabilities.

On this feature, it's more modernization than nerfing / segmentation / differentiation to me. One might argue, just as you said, the added AF points create clutter in the VF than a transmissive screen would manage.

I just see the 6D2 catching up to the 5D line with this decision. Yes, it's a takeaway to folks who handhold their 6D1 with Zeiss glass, but to the other (guessing) 98% of the 6D1 masses, this should (correctly) be seen as an upgrade.

Not to beat a dead horse, but my point is that given that the 7DII has both, for the 6DII Canon could have added the transmissive LCD and kept the interchangeable focus screens. But they didn't. Definitely agree that for almost everyone the switch is beneficial, but my point is that the two features aren't mutually exclusive in that price-class, and while the transmissive LCD is 'better' than the swappable screens, having both features would be even better.

Although I've never changed my focusing screen, this is a bummer for folks who use manual focusing lenses. Seems like one of the appeals for the 6D vs the 5D series.

 

[LonelyBoy]

It's a question of cost. The latch mechanism is cheap enough, but the screen itself has to be aligned within a few microns. That's tough to do in a high-volume camera.

Yet Canon somehow found a way to pull off this engineering phenomenon in the 6D1. :

I'm not upset or ranting about it not being present in the 6D2 -- though others surely will -- but your argument would imply this is a straight takeaway from an existing brand for cost reasons. Possible, but unlikely.

I still think Canon has jazzed up the viewfinder somehow as a result of this decision, perhaps making it more 5D-like. This can't just be a takeaway.

- A

It would be poor even as a differentiator, since taking it out can't possibly even "protect" the 5D4. I'd assume either that you're right that they jazzed up the VF (more likely) or determined the added construction cost wasn't justified by the added sale price/ utility in the field. Remember, it's a whole fiddly extra set of moving parts to engineer and assemble, not just "sure, toss it in".

I know it's a very big deal to some people, but I wonder how many the number is, remembering that the people on this site and the other photo nerd sites are very much the exceptions.

 

[Talys]

LPE6 Batteries. Huzzah, there was much rejoicing.

 

[daphins]

But given that they included both the transmissive LCD and swappable screens on the similarly-priced 7DII, to not include both on the 6DII (and the more expensive 5DIV) does seem like 'nerfing' on Canon's part. Or if you prefer, product differentiation – as it now stands, only the top-of-the-line APS-C and FF bodies have both capabilities.

On this feature, it's more modernization than nerfing / segmentation / differentiation to me. One might argue, just as you said, the added AF points create clutter in the VF than a transmissive screen would manage.

I just see the 6D2 catching up to the 5D line with this decision. Yes, it's a takeaway to folks who handhold their 6D1 with Zeiss glass, but to the other (guessing) 98% of the 6D1 masses, this should (correctly) be seen as an upgrade.

Not to beat a dead horse, but my point is that given that the 7DII has both, for the 6DII Canon could have added the transmissive LCD and kept the interchangeable focus screens. But they didn't. Definitely agree that for almost everyone the switch is beneficial, but my point is that the two features aren't mutually exclusive in that price-class, and while the transmissive LCD is 'better' than the swappable screens, having both features would be even better.

Although I've never changed my focusing screen, this is a bummer for folks who use manual focusing lenses. Seems like one of the appeals for the 6D vs the 5D series.

Im trying to follow what all of this means? (60D shooter, behind on current tech but getting mkii for FF)

1. What's a transmiissive screen do?
2. Why do people want swappable screens?
3. How does his affect manual of users?
4. Will it have touch-point AF?

 

[tr573]

Im trying to follow what all of this means? (60D shooter, behind on current tech but getting mkii for FF)

1. What's a transmiissive screen do?
2. Why do people want swappable screens?
3. How does his affect manual of users?
4. Will it have touch-point AF?

1: Let's them overlay a ton of (user selectable) info on top of the scene in the viewfinder, instead of the (relatively) limited amount of info that can be fitted into the small lcd bar below the scene. AF Points included, rather than being etched into the focus screen permanently
2: Stock focus screens, in order to brighten the view with slow (f/4, f/5.6, etc) lenses, cannot accurately display the DOF for fast (f/2, f/1.4, f/1.2) lenses. So they are harder to manually focus
3: More difficult to manually focus fast lenses
4: Yes, in Live View

 

[rrcphoto]

Mirrorless is too slow and fuzzy for that. It's fine for static work, but not when your subject is moving around.

Mirrorless is too slow? Straight out of camera (Fuji X100) and the subject was moving around...

were you manually focusing?

Auto focus and we know how fast the AF of the X100 is.

that wasn't his point. they were talking about manual focus.

 

[PHOTOPROROCKIES]

Mirrorless is too slow and fuzzy for that. It's fine for static work, but not when your subject is moving around.

Mirrorless is too slow? Straight out of camera (Fuji X100) and the subject was moving around...

were you manually focusing?

Auto focus and we know how fast the AF of the X100 is.

that wasn't his point. they were talking about manual focus.

I can manually focus my X-PRO2 fast and efficiently with my 23mm f2 attached. It's definitely not a slow camera in any respect.

 

[rfdesigner]

It's a question of cost. The latch mechanism is cheap enough, but the screen itself has to be aligned within a few microns. That's tough to do in a high-volume camera.

Yet Canon somehow found a way to pull off this engineering phenomenon in the 6D1. :

I'm not upset or ranting about it not being present in the 6D2 -- though others surely will -- but your argument would imply this is a straight takeaway from an existing brand for cost reasons. Possible, but unlikely.

I still think Canon has jazzed up the viewfinder somehow as a result of this decision, perhaps making it more 5D-like. This can't just be a takeaway.

- A

It would be poor even as a differentiator, since taking it out can't possibly even "protect" the 5D4. I'd assume either that you're right that they jazzed up the VF (more likely) or determined the added construction cost wasn't justified by the added sale price/ utility in the field. Remember, it's a whole fiddly extra set of moving parts to engineer and assemble, not just "sure, toss it in".

I know it's a very big deal to some people, but I wonder how many the number is, remembering that the people on this site and the other photo nerd sites are very much the exceptions.

I'm guessing the logic is that they are used for manual focus.. so with a million focus points they're not needed.

Alas I have an EG-S screen to help me judge DoF, not for manual focus.

If they can produce a focus screen that doesn't over dim slow glass but also show true DoF for fast glass then everyone's happy.

 

[daphins]

Im trying to follow what all of this means? (60D shooter, behind on current tech but getting mkii for FF)

1. What's a transmiissive screen do?
2. Why do people want swappable screens?
3. How does his affect manual of users?
4. Will it have touch-point AF?

1: Let's them overlay a ton of (user selectable) info on top of the scene in the viewfinder, instead of the (relatively) limited amount of info that can be fitted into the small lcd bar below the scene. AF Points included, rather than being etched into the focus screen permanently
2: Stock focus screens, in order to brighten the view with slow (f/4, f/5.6, etc) lenses, cannot accurately display the DOF for fast (f/2, f/1.4, f/1.2) lenses. So they are harder to manually focus
3: More difficult to manually focus fast lenses
4: Yes, in Live View

Thanks a ton! Greatly appreciate the download. Even more excited now