Poll: What Do You Think About the EOS Canon 6D Mark II?

[rfdesigner]

I suspect that lifting the 80D AF and putting it into the 6D MK II is a typical cost cutting measure. Canon saved money on firmware development, the hardware, of course, stocking of spare parts, and tools to calibrate and adjust AF which are in maintenance shops around the world. The savings are probably pretty substantial when you look at the volume of sales. Its just the typical Canon formula that has pushed them to the top of the heap, produce a good but not best product for a low price and high profit, provide good customer service, and money seems to flow in by the boat load. If Sony ever got serious about producing cameras and lenses, they might take over quickly, but their designs are difficult to make and repair, and their prices far too high.

Sony still has the attitude that buyers will pay more because "Its a Sony" It has not helped them as much as lower prices has helped Canon. Even so, In the US and many parts of the world, the weaker Yen helps keep prices low ans sales are rising.

BTW, Sony is investing in another Growth Industry - Vinyl Records!

Absolutely, reusing an existing chip means no additional NRE, no additional logistics, additional volume efficiencies etc. etc.

just like the car companies that share engines, chassis, software, electronics etc, between multiple models or even brands.

Really good brands build a great kit of parts then build a range of products from the same kit.

 

[JPCanonUser]

AF spread is a big issue for me. I'm a bit tired on focus and compose and hearing the number of AF points I was really set to buy this to replace my 5D classic.

But right now I have decided not to buy it. But I will wait for the reviews and then try it in a shop before making the final decision.

I will probably end up with a Sony A7 III.

This is exactly what I am really really frustrated about. Try doing a portrait shot and apply the rule of thirds, as a simple compositional approach. The eyes of the subject will be outside the AF points of Canon (and probably Nikon) cameras. You have to focus and recompose. Do this with a f1,4 lens and open aperture and you have such a narrow depth of field that during the time you compose, your distance camera-subject will change slightly and the eyes will be slightly out of focus. And also the moment is probably gone.

I hate this. I simply hate this. This is why i voted that I will probably leave Canon to go for Sony, although I have shot with Canon gear for over 30 years. And although I don´t like the ergonomics of a7 and a9 cameras, just too small. But that´s it.

The AF spread was also my biggest disappointment.

However in your example, if you are comparing to an a7/a9, you should remember the 6D2 has DPAF which gives you similar coverage to the Sony, but is much faster and from my experience, more reliable. Although I do not generally use such wide apertures for a portrait, DPAF would work well in that situation.

 

[ecka]

I suspect that lifting the 80D AF and putting it into the 6D MK II is a typical cost cutting measure. Canon saved money on firmware development, the hardware, of course, stocking of spare parts, and tools to calibrate and adjust AF which are in maintenance shops around the world. The savings are probably pretty substantial when you look at the volume of sales. Its just the typical Canon formula that has pushed them to the top of the heap, produce a good but not best product for a low price and high profit, provide good customer service, and money seems to flow in by the boat load. If Sony ever got serious about producing cameras and lenses, they might take over quickly, but their designs are difficult to make and repair, and their prices far too high.

Sony still has the attitude that buyers will pay more because "Its a Sony" It has not helped them as much as lower prices has helped Canon. Even so, In the US and many parts of the world, the weaker Yen helps keep prices low ans sales are rising.

BTW, Sony is investing in another Growth Industry - Vinyl Records!

Absolutely, reusing an existing chip means no additional NRE, no additional logistics, additional volume efficiencies etc. etc.

just like the car companies that share engines, chassis, software, electronics etc, between multiple models or even brands.

Really good brands build a great kit of parts then build a range of products from the same kit.

Exactly. Any idea why Canon is spending so much money to "invent" inferior stuff?
They could simply produce one uncompromised semi-pro FF DSLR series (5D) and cut their prices each time a newer model is released (or gradually), like:
2005 - 5D - $3500
2008 - 5DII - $3500, 5D - $2200
2011 - 5DIII - $3500, 5DII - $2200, 5D - $1500
2014 - 5DsR - $3500, 5DIII - $2500, 5DII - $1500, 5D - $1000 or discontinued
2016 - 5DIV - $3500, 5DsR - $2700, 5DIII - $1800, 5DII - $1000 or discontinued, 5D - discontinued
2018 - 5DX - $3500, 5DIV - $2700, 5DsR - $2000, 5DIII - $1000 or discontinued, 5DII - discontinued
Canon could have been selling 5DII for $1000 in 2016 no problem. And 5DIV could have a flip-out touch-screen and a proper 4K (maybe even in 5DsR) if they didn't waste time and effort on 6D2. Now, who wants to buy a "new" 5DIII for $2300 in 2017 after the 6D2 ($2000) been announced? Nobody?

 

[Deleted member 379512]

I suspect that lifting the 80D AF and putting it into the 6D MK II is a typical cost cutting measure. Canon saved money on firmware development, the hardware, of course, stocking of spare parts, and tools to calibrate and adjust AF which are in maintenance shops around the world. The savings are probably pretty substantial when you look at the volume of sales. Its just the typical Canon formula that has pushed them to the top of the heap, produce a good but not best product for a low price and high profit, provide good customer service, and money seems to flow in by the boat load. If Sony ever got serious about producing cameras and lenses, they might take over quickly, but their designs are difficult to make and repair, and their prices far too high.

Sony still has the attitude that buyers will pay more because "Its a Sony" It has not helped them as much as lower prices has helped Canon. Even so, In the US and many parts of the world, the weaker Yen helps keep prices low ans sales are rising.

BTW, Sony is investing in another Growth Industry - Vinyl Records!

Absolutely, reusing an existing chip means no additional NRE, no additional logistics, additional volume efficiencies etc. etc.

just like the car companies that share engines, chassis, software, electronics etc, between multiple models or even brands.

Really good brands build a great kit of parts then build a range of products from the same kit.

Exactly. Any idea why Canon is spending so much money to "invent" inferior stuff?
They could simply produce one uncompromised semi-pro FF DSLR series (5D) and cut their prices each time a newer model is released (or gradually), like:
2005 - 5D - $3500
2008 - 5DII - $3500, 5D - $2200
2011 - 5DIII - $3500, 5DII - $2200, 5D - $1500
2014 - 5DsR - $3500, 5DIII - $2500, 5DII - $1500, 5D - $1000 or discontinued
2016 - 5DIV - $3500, 5DsR - $2700, 5DIII - $1800, 5DII - $1000 or discontinued, 5D - discontinued
2018 - 5DX - $3500, 5DIV - $2700, 5DsR - $2000, 5DIII - $1000 or discontinued, 5DII - discontinued
Canon could have been selling 5DII for $1000 in 2016 no problem. And 5DIV could have a flip-out touch-screen and a proper 4K (maybe even in 5DsR) if they didn't waste time and effort on 6D2. Now, who wants to buy a "new" 5DIII for $2300 in 2017 after the 6D2 ($2000) been announced? Nobody?

I'm assuming they use the manufacturing time/space/capacity to produce the newer models, which will help pay off the new research investment and/or would be more cost effective to produce. They'll sell the current stock they already have, but that likely won't last that long

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Exactly. Any idea why Canon is spending so much money to "invent" inferior stuff?
They could simply produce one uncompromised semi-pro FF DSLR series (5D) and cut their prices each time a newer model is released (or gradually), like:
2005 - 5D - $3500
2008 - 5DII - $3500, 5D - $2200
2011 - 5DIII - $3500, 5DII - $2200, 5D - $1500
2014 - 5DsR - $3500, 5DIII - $2500, 5DII - $1500, 5D - $1000 or discontinued
2016 - 5DIV - $3500, 5DsR - $2700, 5DIII - $1800, 5DII - $1000 or discontinued, 5D - discontinued
2018 - 5DX - $3500, 5DIV - $2700, 5DsR - $2000, 5DIII - $1000 or discontinued, 5DII - discontinued
Canon could have been selling 5DII for $1000 in 2016 no problem. And 5DIV could have a flip-out touch-screen and a proper 4K (maybe even in 5DsR) if they didn't waste time and effort on 6D2. Now, who wants to buy a "new" 5DIII for $2300 in 2017 after the 6D2 ($2000) been announced? Nobody?

Inferior?

Not everyone cares about 4K or 1/8000 sec shutters, dual card slots, or high end features of a 5 Series camera. Many find it too heavy.

A 6 series camera can take professional level photos just fine, and most camera buyers look at the price tag and buy what they can afford as long as it does what they want.

This is how economics works in the West, multiple models with different features for varied prices. Look at something as simple as bread. From 79 cents in our local store to about $5 a loaf. Nothing basically different about it, it could be all exactly the same. A competitor would then put such a company out of business. Some people value the added features and will pay for them. Automobiles, the same, TV sets, the same. The same milk from the same cow sold in a generic container for half the price of a branded package. The list is almost infinite.

 

[ecka]

Exactly. Any idea why Canon is spending so much money to "invent" inferior stuff?
They could simply produce one uncompromised semi-pro FF DSLR series (5D) and cut their prices each time a newer model is released (or gradually), like:
2005 - 5D - $3500
2008 - 5DII - $3500, 5D - $2200
2011 - 5DIII - $3500, 5DII - $2200, 5D - $1500
2014 - 5DsR - $3500, 5DIII - $2500, 5DII - $1500, 5D - $1000 or discontinued
2016 - 5DIV - $3500, 5DsR - $2700, 5DIII - $1800, 5DII - $1000 or discontinued, 5D - discontinued
2018 - 5DX - $3500, 5DIV - $2700, 5DsR - $2000, 5DIII - $1000 or discontinued, 5DII - discontinued
Canon could have been selling 5DII for $1000 in 2016 no problem. And 5DIV could have a flip-out touch-screen and a proper 4K (maybe even in 5DsR) if they didn't waste time and effort on 6D2. Now, who wants to buy a "new" 5DIII for $2300 in 2017 after the 6D2 ($2000) been announced? Nobody?

Inferior?

Yes

Not everyone cares about 4K or 1/8000 sec shutters, dual card slots, or high end features of a 5 Series camera. Many find it too heavy.

Which exactly why it makes sense to keep selling older model cameras at lower prices, instead of producing new expensive inferior ones.

A 6 series camera can take professional level photos just fine, and most camera buyers look at the price tag and buy what they can afford as long as it does what they want.

I know, I own one. But I had the 5D2 before 6D and they both seem very similar in many ways (some things better, some things worse) ... IMHO, while releasing 6D, Canon missed the opportunity to produce a smaller 5D2.5 model (in between 5D2 and 5D3), making a shorter release cycle. Unfortunately, now we get an inferior 6D2 to play with for the next 5 years and keep watching Canon's self-competing madness for ... forever?
6D2 is a nice camera. But is it $2000 nice or is it $1500 nice? - Not that nice for 2019-2022 for sure.

This is how economics works in the West, multiple models with different features for varied prices. Look at something as simple as bread. From 79 cents in our local store to about $5 a loaf. Nothing basically different about it, it could be all exactly the same. A competitor would then put such a company out of business. Some people value the added features and will pay for them. Automobiles, the same, TV sets, the same. The same milk from the same cow sold in a generic container for half the price of a branded package. The list is almost infinite.

That's not economics. That's a lot of wasted energy and fooled customers.

 

[jd7]

The AF spread was also my biggest disappointment.

However in your example, if you are comparing to an a7/a9, you should remember the 6D2 has DPAF which gives you similar coverage to the Sony, but is much faster and from my experience, more reliable. Although I do not generally use such wide apertures for a portrait, DPAF would work well in that situation.

This is a significant point, isn't it?

If you want to shoot through the OVF using a PDAF system, the AF coverage is less than you might like ... but all full-frame cameras seem to suffer that to at least some degree, as a result of technical difficulties putting PDAF AF points too far from the centre. In the end the 6DII doesn't seem to be really that much worse than other full-frame cameras in that regard, does it?

If you want to compare against a camera like the a7 or a9, you can switch the Canon LiveView so you use CDAF and can focus on areas toward the periphery ... and in that mode you get the benefits of DPAF, which seems to be very good. A difference at that point is on the Canon you'd have to be using the rear LCD, while on the a7/a9 you could be using the EVF - which I guess will be more important to some people than others.

Am I missing something?

 

[CADW]

I think canon got it right not putting 4K in the 6D, It would just have put up the price of it even more, I cant remember ever using video on my 6D which i suspect 90% of the other users who own a 6D would say the same, i love my current 6D and wish i could justify spending money on the 6Dmk2, maybe when the price eventually drops.

 

[heimdall999]

Well, the best comment I heard about 6d Mark II
############################
CANON SHOULD DESERVE OUR MONEY !
############################
Even the AF Spread problem is enough for -not to buy- 6D mark II.
The sells of 6DM2 will be a disaster I suppose, and Canon will learn a lesson
Otherwise, I will sell all my Canon gear (which is a lot!), and jump to another boat !
We are not stupid people Canon ! Please respect us during the design process of your gear...

 

[Talys]

Not everyone cares about 4K or 1/8000 sec shutters, dual card slots, or high end features of a 5 Series camera. Many find it too heavy.

Which exactly why it makes sense to keep selling older model cameras at lower prices, instead of producing new expensive inferior ones.

I disagree with this. I care WAY more about a lot of the features that are not top-line, that have to do with modernization of technology, ergonomics improvements, and creature comforts than I do about 4k or 1/8000 shutters (neither of which I would use, even once). Like, wifi liveview RAW/JPEG splitting, Bluetooth shutter, articulating screen.

Features like these aren't on older models, and will never be, which is why I'd much rather use an 80D than use a 6D, or 5D3 -- or even 5D4, especially considering the price difference. Since weather sealing is only marginally important to me (most of my shooting is in ideal weather or in studio), I find the articulating lens is almost a "must have" feature. I would trade it for 4k or 1/8000 any day, because it makes it easy, for example, to put a camera at the top of an articulating arm tripod, point it down, and snap a photo of an object laying flat on the ground. Or, mount the camera on an arm and take a photo of a diorama from an of angle, such as just beneath a spotlight.

Product differentiation is a good thing. If I can buy a $2000 camera that gives me everything I want, why would I want to buy a $3,300 camera? Even if getting rid of the $2000 camera could drop the next model up down to $3,000, that would still be a lot more to pay, for $1000 of extra features that I either don't care about, or don't care enough about to pay $1,000 more. But for those people who want those features, good on them, please do by the $3,300, or $7,500 camera.

Same thing for lens: I like the 3-4 tiered system, where you have entry level, enthusiast, and then 1-3 levels of pro lenses (like the variants of 70-200L). I like that, if I am buying glass that will always be in a studio, I won't care about IS or wide aperture and don't have to pay for them, and can instead purchase a lens at a lower cost that will give me the same IQ for my purposes. And if it's for farting around taking weekend photos of birds and raccoons, I'm perfectly happy with a mid-range enthusiast lens.

I think that the number of options/segments should decrease as you get to the highest end camera, because there are a small number of buyers for those (1DX). As you drop down to FF, there needs to be at least a couple of price point, feature and weight options, because 5D4 is not appealing to everyone. When you get to APSC, and sub-$1,500, and especially sub $500, Canon can support a lot of options, because there are tons of buyers out there.

 

[Talys]

Well, the best comment I heard about 6d Mark II
############################
CANON SHOULD DESERVE OUR MONEY !
############################
Even the AF Spread problem is enough for -not to buy- 6D mark II.
The sells of 6DM2 will be a disaster I suppose, and Canon will learn a lesson
Otherwise, I will sell all my Canon gear (which is a lot!), and jump to another boat !
We are not stupid people Canon ! Please respect us during the design process of your gear...

I absolutely agree that Canon should deserve our money: nobody should buy something that they're not happy with. I certainly wouldn't.

I doubt that's really in question. I think what is, is that some people seem absolutely baffled that there are those who don't see that the 6D2 is a good buy... and others who seem absolutely baffled that anyone would settle for a camera that doesn't have most of the big top-line features from 5D4, but at $2,000.

I think we should just all respect that people come from different perspectives, and that Canon is targeting a certain segment of the DSLR market with the 6D2. If the features you're looking for, whether it's dual SD or 4K or whatever aren't there, the camera isn't for you. Yeah, it's disappointing that Canon made those cuts to hit a price point, but let's be honest: if they're making a $2,000 camera, it's not going to have 98% of the features of a $3,300 camera that sells really well, right?

As to Canon "learning a lesson" with the 6D2 being a train wreck -- since it's already the best selling camera over $500 on Amazon.com, I think you can rule that out. The aging 6D and 5D4 are the two best-selling FF cameras on the market, of any brand, and 6D2 is almost certainly going to sell better than the 6D has been selling in the last couple of years. After all, if you compare it only with 6D, it's superior in practically every way that matters, and will sell at about the price that 6D sold at until recently.

If that makes you so mad that you'd sell all your gear and restart with Pentax or Sony or Nikon or whatever, you might as well get it over with But IMO, you should just buy what makes you happy that's at the price you want, should that exist. If another company's manufacturing philosophy and their product matches your needs better, you should 100% go there. Just keep in mind that their mind is also on the bottom line, and they will also make decisions to optimize their profits, which may, if not now, perhaps in the future will segment their products in a way that is undesirable to you as well.

 

[captainkanji]

I'm gonna buy it. It has the three most important features. It has a full frame sensor, my 135 f/2 fits on it, and I can afford it.

 

[hbr]

The AF spread was also my biggest disappointment.

However in your example, if you are comparing to an a7/a9, you should remember the 6D2 has DPAF which gives you similar coverage to the Sony, but is much faster and from my experience, more reliable. Although I do not generally use such wide apertures for a portrait, DPAF would work well in that situation.

This is a significant point, isn't it?

If you want to shoot through the OVF using a PDAF system, the AF coverage is less than you might like ... but all full-frame cameras seem to suffer that to at least some degree, as a result of technical difficulties putting PDAF AF points too far from the centre. In the end the 6DII doesn't seem to be really that much worse than other full-frame cameras in that regard, does it?

If you want to compare against a camera like the a7 or a9, you can switch the Canon LiveView so you use CDAF and can focus on areas toward the periphery ... and in that mode you get the benefits of DPAF, which seems to be very good. A difference at that point is on the Canon you'd have to be using the rear LCD, while on the a7/a9 you could be using the EVF - which I guess will be more important to some people than others.

Am I missing something?

This is an excellent point. I may have been the first one to complain about the point spread out of ignorance. I wrongly assumed that since my 7D2 allowed me to choose an AF point much closer to the edge than my 6D1 did that the 6D2 would be the same as the 7D2.

I guess that if I want to take the kind of photos that need closer to the edge focusing, I will have to use a tripod or a monopod.

Brian

 

[hbr]

Exactly. Any idea why Canon is spending so much money to "invent" inferior stuff?
They could simply produce one uncompromised semi-pro FF DSLR series (5D) and cut their prices each time a newer model is released (or gradually), like:
2005 - 5D - $3500
2008 - 5DII - $3500, 5D - $2200
2011 - 5DIII - $3500, 5DII - $2200, 5D - $1500
2014 - 5DsR - $3500, 5DIII - $2500, 5DII - $1500, 5D - $1000 or discontinued
2016 - 5DIV - $3500, 5DsR - $2700, 5DIII - $1800, 5DII - $1000 or discontinued, 5D - discontinued
2018 - 5DX - $3500, 5DIV - $2700, 5DsR - $2000, 5DIII - $1000 or discontinued, 5DII - discontinued
Canon could have been selling 5DII for $1000 in 2016 no problem. And 5DIV could have a flip-out touch-screen and a proper 4K (maybe even in 5DsR) if they didn't waste time and effort on 6D2. Now, who wants to buy a "new" 5DIII for $2300 in 2017 after the 6D2 ($2000) been announced? Nobody?

Inferior?

Yes

Not everyone cares about 4K or 1/8000 sec shutters, dual card slots, or high end features of a 5 Series camera. Many find it too heavy.

Which exactly why it makes sense to keep selling older model cameras at lower prices, instead of producing new expensive inferior ones.

A 6 series camera can take professional level photos just fine, and most camera buyers look at the price tag and buy what they can afford as long as it does what they want.

I know, I own one. But I had the 5D2 before 6D and they both seem very similar in many ways (some things better, some things worse) ... IMHO, while releasing 6D, Canon missed the opportunity to produce a smaller 5D2.5 model (in between 5D2 and 5D3), making a shorter release cycle. Unfortunately, now we get an inferior 6D2 to play with for the next 5 years and keep watching Canon's self-competing madness for ... forever?
6D2 is a nice camera. But is it $2000 nice or is it $1500 nice? - Not that nice for 2019-2022 for sure.

This is how economics works in the West, multiple models with different features for varied prices. Look at something as simple as bread. From 79 cents in our local store to about $5 a loaf. Nothing basically different about it, it could be all exactly the same. A competitor would then put such a company out of business. Some people value the added features and will pay for them. Automobiles, the same, TV sets, the same. The same milk from the same cow sold in a generic container for half the price of a branded package. The list is almost infinite.

That's not economics. That's a lot of wasted energy and fooled customers.

I think the flaw in your argument is that Canon sold a tremendous amount of 6D1 cameras and I suspect the same for the 6D2. If you are a business and you can produce a product that sells very well, you would be stupid not to manufacture it.

Whether Canon is fooling their customers, etc. that is for the customers to decide with their wallets.

Brian

 

[heimdall999]

Well, the best comment I heard about 6d Mark II
############################
CANON SHOULD DESERVE OUR MONEY !
############################
Even the AF Spread problem is enough for -not to buy- 6D mark II.
The sells of 6DM2 will be a disaster I suppose, and Canon will learn a lesson
Otherwise, I will sell all my Canon gear (which is a lot!), and jump to another boat !
We are not stupid people Canon ! Please respect us during the design process of your gear...

I absolutely agree that Canon should deserve our money: nobody should buy something that they're not happy with. I certainly wouldn't.

I doubt that's really in question. I think what is, is that some people seem absolutely baffled that there are those who don't see that the 6D2 is a good buy... and others who seem absolutely baffled that anyone would settle for a camera that doesn't have most of the big top-line features from 5D4, but at $2,000.

I think we should just all respect that people come from different perspectives, and that Canon is targeting a certain segment of the DSLR market with the 6D2. If the features you're looking for, whether it's dual SD or 4K or whatever aren't there, the camera isn't for you. Yeah, it's disappointing that Canon made those cuts to hit a price point, but let's be honest: if they're making a $2,000 camera, it's not going to have 98% of the features of a $3,300 camera that sells really well, right?

As to Canon "learning a lesson" with the 6D2 being a train wreck -- since it's already the best selling camera over $500 on Amazon.com, I think you can rule that out. The aging 6D and 5D4 are the two best-selling FF cameras on the market, of any brand, and 6D2 is almost certainly going to sell better than the 6D has been selling in the last couple of years. After all, if you compare it only with 6D, it's superior in practically every way that matters, and will sell at about the price that 6D sold at until recently.

If that makes you so mad that you'd sell all your gear and restart with Pentax or Sony or Nikon or whatever, you might as well get it over with But IMO, you should just buy what makes you happy that's at the price you want, should that exist. If another company's manufacturing philosophy and their product matches your needs better, you should 100% go there. Just keep in mind that their mind is also on the bottom line, and they will also make decisions to optimize their profits, which may, if not now, perhaps in the future will segment their products in a way that is undesirable to you as well.

In economical or capitalistic sense, you are right...
But "PHOTOGRAPHY" is something else...
CANON -as a brand- means lot more to me. You may find it "unrealistic romantism" but, my father had a CANON taking pictures of us as a family. That camera was a relic of my childhood. Something more brighter than any technical object other.
This is why I buy CANONs...simply
6DM2 would be my way to FF, and I have every right to expect a reasonable product, after all those years...
As I shoot stills, 4K means nothing to me...
But the "AF SPREAD" problem is a big complication, without an excuse...
So, just for fun, I will try to start a new topic like this:
POLL: DID THE PRODUCT MANAGER OF 6DM2 LOOK FROM THE VIEWFINDER BEFORE ANNOUNCING IT? WHAT DO YO THINK ? YES OR NO ?

 

[Deepboy]

I'm gonna buy it. It has the three most important features. It has a full frame sensor, my 135 f/2 fits on it, and I can afford it.

Q U O T E

The most intelligent comment i read in the last 3 days (included mine!)

 

[Loswr]

...the AF Spread problem...

Let's see...the 6DII has cross-type AF points with the same horizontal spread as the cross-type points on my 1D X, Canon's penultimate flagship camera costing over 3-times the price of the 6DII. Oh, and those lateral cross-type points on the 1D X need f/4...with an f/5.6 lens, such as when I put a 1.4x TC on my 600/4, the 1D X cross type points are restricted to the center three columns. If I put a 2x TC behind the 600/4, a 6DII would maintain 27 AF points with the full lateral spread of the AF array. My 1D X with an f/8 lens? One selectable point, smack in the middle.

If you'd prefer to compare to the 6D, the 6DII has the same horizontal spread, and adds a much wider vertical spread at the lateral edges, meaning unlike its predecessor, the 6DII has AF points very close the rule-of-thirds intersections.

So...what's the 'problem' here??

 

[Khalai]

...the AF Spread problem...

Let's see...the 6DII has cross-type AF points with the same horizontal spread as the cross-type points on my 1D X, Canon's penultimate flagship camera costing over 3-times the price of the 6DII. Oh, and those lateral cross-type points on the 1D X need f/4...with an f/5.6 lens, such as when I put a 1.4x TC on my 600/4, the 1D X cross type points are restricted to the center three columns. If I put a 2x TC behind the 600/4, a 6DII would maintain 27 AF points with the full lateral spread of the AF array. My 1D X with an f/8 lens? One selectable point, smack in the middle.

If you'd prefer to compare to the 6D, the 6DII has the same horizontal spread, and adds a much wider vertical spread at the lateral edges, meaning unlike its predecessor, the 6DII has AF points very close the rule-of-thirds intersections.

So...what's the 'problem' here??

As I stated earlier, that AF spread is pure hysteria. If you compare all FF DSLR across all brands (not to speak only X-types or f/8 types), they are basically all cramped in the middle. Limitation of TTL PDAF. If you want 80% VF coverage, you'd basically need another FF AF sensor array under the imaging one. That'd been bulky, expensive and mostly useless anyway.

If the X-type points spread is actually indeed like the 1DX, that's quite good. Expecting better AF system of 6000 $ flagships in 2000 $ prosumer body is frankly naïve and a way to disappointment...

 

[hbr]

Thanks neuro,

This is the second time you have explained something that I was having trouble understanding.

Brian

 

[nightscape123]

...the AF Spread problem...

Let's see...the 6DII has cross-type AF points with the same horizontal spread as the cross-type points on my 1D X, Canon's penultimate flagship camera costing over 3-times the price of the 6DII. Oh, and those lateral cross-type points on the 1D X need f/4...with an f/5.6 lens, such as when I put a 1.4x TC on my 600/4, the 1D X cross type points are restricted to the center three columns. If I put a 2x TC behind the 600/4, a 6DII would maintain 27 AF points with the full lateral spread of the AF array. My 1D X with an f/8 lens? One selectable point, smack in the middle.

If you'd prefer to compare to the 6D, the 6DII has the same horizontal spread, and adds a much wider vertical spread at the lateral edges, meaning unlike its predecessor, the 6DII has AF points very close the rule-of-thirds intersections.

So...what's the 'problem' here??

I agree with the idea of your post but I did want to point out that only the 100-400 ii and the 200-400 maintain 27 focus points at f/8. All other lenses, such as the 600 f/4 with 2x only get the center point. Though to be honest if you can afford the 600 f/4 you are probably buying multiple 5d iv's or a 1dx2 and a 5div, not a 6DII.

The whole AF thing is moot with DPAF being fast and covering 80% of the sensor though. If you are shooting something too fast for DPAF then you are probably keeping it closer to the center of the frame anyway.