Review: Canon EOS 6D Mark II by DPReview

[scyrene]

so I sold most of my Canon gear; lost some $ on bodies, but maintained or made $ on the lenses.
I still keep a little bit of it for specific uses but in 2012 I switched to Nikon and eventually added Pentax, Fuji and Olympus gear.

No, *really*? This is definitely new information and not at all you repeating what you've said ad nauseam in more other threads than I can remember :

Well then, take your Dramamine and find a comfortable spot to sit it out.
Maybe you might notice it was for the benefit of CanonGuy who hasn't been here long enough to dig into old threads.

Yeah, but CanonGuy was borderline trolling (as nobody has called the 6D2 "amazing" as he said), so replying to him is counterproductive.

 

[ShootForThrills]

Re: won't upgrade to it

I'm a 70D user with a moderate investment in canon (sigma 18-35, EF 50/1.4, canon EF-S 55-250, EF-S 60 macro, 430 iii flash...)

I closely followed the rumors of the 6dii because I thought that it was going to be my first FF camera... but now that it's out I'm having second thoughts... is the image quality of a FF system worth the added bulk and price? is mirrorless the future?

the competition is fierce... the fuji x-t2 for instance seems to be slightly cheaper and much more portable... and with 4k...
I'm also considering the eos m5 or waiting for the next iteration... the eos m7?

Canon definitely didn't give us aps-c shooters a real reason to upgrade.

I'd love the ff M series if that comes out but I too was waiting to potentially upgrade my 70D to a 6D II. Now I'm wondering if it would be better to grab a 5D III, even if it's older its still a workhorse.

Anybody else considering this jump or have feedback?

 

[Mikehit]

First time poster here.

I've been following the reviews and forum posts for some time and I finally feel compelled enough to chip in.

I have a 70D with Sigma 18-35 1.8 and 50-150 f2.8 OS and have been itching to sell the 70D body + 18-55 STM kit lens to fund an 80D body for the low ISO DR improvements, wider spread AF coverage, -3EV sensitivity amongst other small benefits like mechanical shutter, larger buffer, 100% VF coverage etc.

When people said the 6D ii was like a full frame 80D I was really excited to consider going FF because this would make a great two body combo that are almost ergonomically identical.

But since discovering more specs it seems like the 6D ii is more a FF rebel just in the larger 80D body. I was almost coming round to 1/4000 max shutter speed which is limiting for fast glass in bright sun, and I've been used to single SD slot and okay with that (though not pleased). But then when the sensor tests show it's the old tech and that the DR at ISO 400 and below is no better than 70D (and way behind 80D and 5D IV), I'm thinking what is the point? I already have the 18-35 1.8 which is like a 28-55 2.8 FF or thereabouts, and on an 80D this would be better than a 6D ii with 24-70 2.8 in low ISO DR, AF coverage, 1/8000 max shutter, 7fps and 1/250 max sync speed as well as being equivalent in ISO performance, DoF control etc, and most importantly at a tiny fraction of the cost of 6D ii + 24-70!

I'm hoping Sigma release a 50-85 ish f2 lens to compliment the 24-35 f2 in a two lens combo that beats the 28-55 2.8 equivalent that you can get on crop sensors with the 18-35 by a full stop.

I was really hoping that the 6D ii would at least update sensor tech so that it genuinely does seem like a FF 80D but whilst it's old sensor tech, no headphone jack, slow max shutter and sync speed and I have the 18-35, I start to look to the 5D IV but then I ask why couldn't canon just keep the 6D ii truly equivelant to the 80D as they match so perfectly together in every other way!

Someone else seduced by all the blather.
If you look at images on threads and social media, you will not see an improvement with the 6d2 or, really, any other camera.
If you crop a lot you will start to see an improvement with the 6D2.
If you print above A2 the larger sensor will benefit you, despite that the spec sheets tell there are situations where the FF sensor beats APS-C despite talk about dynamic range.

But all this ignores the glass which is the biggest factor. Given a choice between the 6D2 and a 'consumer level' lens or the 80D and a 70-200 f4LIS, the 80D wins. Every. Single. Time.

 

[EduPortas]

Re: won't upgrade to it

I'm a 70D user with a moderate investment in canon (sigma 18-35, EF 50/1.4, canon EF-S 55-250, EF-S 60 macro, 430 iii flash...)

I closely followed the rumors of the 6dii because I thought that it was going to be my first FF camera... but now that it's out I'm having second thoughts... is the image quality of a FF system worth the added bulk and price? is mirrorless the future?

the competition is fierce... the fuji x-t2 for instance seems to be slightly cheaper and much more portable... and with 4k...
I'm also considering the eos m5 or waiting for the next iteration... the eos m7?

Canon definitely didn't give us aps-c shooters a real reason to upgrade.

I agree that the competition is fierce and there's little incentive to start your FF adventure with a 6D mark II.

However, your mentioned that you already have at least one Canon lens and that makes a difference.

There's a certain incomparable "feel" with Canon's FF cameras that is not replicable even

with Canon's top APS-C product. You'll be hooked once you try it.

And yes, I've owned or own the following cameras: SL1, Rebel T4, 7D Mark II and 6D.

I've also owned Nikon APS-C and FF.

Ergonomically, Canon wins hands down. For me, that was the most important factor when deciding on the system

to invest in. The gear must "feel right" and Canon does that better than anyone else.

 

[hbr]

Looks like a very nice camera. If I was in the market for a backup/alternative to my 5D3 this would be the ticket, especially with the screen for ground level macro. I don't need the latest greatest, I don't use half of the 5D3's feature set. I also don't shoot with a spec sheet or need bragging rights, I just need time with a body and lens combinations to know their abilities and limitations.

Has anyone used this camera long enough to know those factors? Everything we hear at this point is from either a very short duration of use and or griping about specs. Neither is a good way to judge a camera body.

Don't own a 5DIII but I do own the original 6D and a 7DII. What feature sets are you interested in? I have taken over 800 shots with my 6DII and would have taken more but it has been raining every day here. I have found the 6DII to be a significant upgrade from my original 6D in almost every way. Off the top of my head, i think the 5DIII has more focus points and possibly a little faster AF. I considered buying a refurbished 5DIII instead of the 6DII but I am glad I didn't.

After using the 6DII for close to a couple of weeks, I just don't see why everyone is poo-pooing it. Makes me wonder how many of them have actually used it instead of spouting out garbage from spec sheets. If you are on the fence about buying one try it for yourself.

Brian

 

[Otara]

I think it was a pretty fair score. Good camera, but not award worthy.

I view this as mostly Canon saying that the 6d was too close a competitor to the 5D3, and they didnt want similar with the 6D2 vs the 5DIV. Fair enough, but as a result I choose neither at this stage.

 

[pwp]

Re: won't upgrade to it

I'd love the ff M series if that comes out but I too was waiting to potentially upgrade my 70D to a 6D II. Now I'm wondering if it would be better to grab a 5D III, even if it's older its still a workhorse.
Anybody else considering this jump or have feedback?

I get asked a lot from clients and friends about planned camera purchases. Having direct, daily use experience with 5DIII (& 5DIV) I've been suggesting a low-mileage 5DIII as a preferred alternative to the 6DII in most cases. If size and lightweight (for travel) are high priorities, then the 6DII will be sure to satisfy. Yesterday I spent a day with a 6DII and could find little to fault with it.

If weight is no issue, why not consider a used 1DX? 1-Series bodies are just insanely robust. My 1DX looks like it's been in a fight with a tiger but still functions perfectly with a shutter count up over 600k (it had a new shutter at 450k). Buy a 1DX for similar money with around 100k on it and you'll be unlikely to ever wear it out with typical non-professional usage.

-pw

 

[woodman411]

My issue with the dp-review of the 6d2 is that they didn't really try to get great pictures from it, rather, it seemed like they zeroed in on the weaknesses (low-iso DR and ovf tracking), and built the review around that. In fact, the first preview article of the 6d2 was them complaining about the sensor. Other statements in their review also shows they just didn't try, like this:

​

"We've also had some issues with outright focus accuracy when using the viewfinder, so for formal portraits or perhaps paid event coverage, it's best to switch into live view just to be safe."

So did they even bother to micro adjust? Doesn't seem like it, which also brings into question how accurate their af assessment was. With proper micro-adjustment, af is very accurate for me, both with the 80d and 5d4 (ai-servo is not that accurate with 3rd party lenses, but that's not really Canon's fault). They criticize ovf tracking, again not a Canon strength, most if not all Canon sport shooters I know select one point focus and ai-servo - how accurate was this method? Did they even try? It is not that hard to move the camera with one focus point and ai-servo, it really isn't, with the advantage that you get to select exactly what's in focus and not rely on the camera to hopefully select the right focus points.

Speaking of ovf af, which lenses did they use for ai-servo? We know lenses make a huge difference in ai-servo performance, especially within the large Canon ecosystem. It's almost comical they're using old and cheap 50 1.8 and 28 2.8 primes (yes I know they used a few L lenses), while using nothing but expensive G-master lenses for their Sony a9 review. That's fair. (of course they needed to do that, that's the only way to take advantage of the a9's 20fps).

No mention of AWB-W. No mention of anti-flicker. If they did mention it, I must have missed it among the overwhelming negativity. Before posting that you disagree that they didn't try much, please, take a look at their 6d2 gallery. Take at look at the effort they put in composition, settings, lighting, and post-processing. It is almost non-existent. I could have taken better pictures with an iPhone. That's not a knock on the 6d2. You could take terrible pictures with an a9. Point is, in dpreview's eyes, the 6d2 was doa, and for me at least, it clearly shows in their half-hearted review.

 

[dcm]

I think it was a pretty fair score. Good camera, but not award worthy.

I view this as mostly Canon saying that the 6d was too close a competitor to the 5D3, and they didnt want similar with the 6D2 vs the 5DIV. Fair enough, but as a result I choose neither at this stage.

If they had named it the 8D or 9D would people better accept the feature separation?

 

[Tangent]

I think all the cards are on the table now. For me hanging on to the 6D for now seems most reasonable since the IQ is basically the same as the mkII, a bit better at low ISO's. Disappointing, but there it is.

Get a good deal on 6D mkII later for the non-sensor features, play into Canon's segmentation scheme and get a 5D mkIV, sit out a generation? I'll be looking at the Sony's Alpha A7 III as well, so I won't make a decision until then. I guess I'm past the emotion of acute disappointment now. Just being pragmatic going forward.

The seven stages of 6D MkII grieving:

SHOCK & DENIAL - The DR can't be that bad! It's just the beta body!
PAIN & GUILT - Well, pain anyway - that Canon would mess up in the one area I needed most.
ANGER & BARGAINING - Maybe Canon will release a firmware upgrade ?!!?
"DEPRESSION", REFLECTION, LONELINESS - How could Canon not care about me, their customer, mfft!
THE UPWARD TURN - Well, my 6D still works, I can still use that for now.
RECONSTRUCTION & WORKING THROUGH - I'll look at the alternatives and work out a plan.
ACCEPTANCE & HOPE - How long til the 6D mkIII? That Alpha A7III is coming out this fall... Hmmm...

 

[[email protected]]

This would be a good first time FF DSLR. If you are on a 6D, I feel the next meaningful upgrade would be the 5D Mk IV. 6D to 6 MkII is not really a value for money in any way, not for long term. Mediocre AF and DR, with a single SD card slot is too little for an upgrade from a 6D. I am disappointed with the 6D MkII AF spread out, its too crammed for a FF system. Canon needs to improve the DR with its sensors to stay competitive.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

Not sure what to make of DPReviews AF results. I don't generally pay much attention to DPReview Canon AF test results as I don't think their methods really optimize Canon's AF system. I don't see it as a case of bias, they are just trying to use a standard methodology that seems to hobble Canon's AF accuracy.

In my experience, Canon cameras work best if you use them the way they were designed to function. Sounds like a funny thing to say but I see cameras with some peculiar setups.

I think for existing Canon shooters such as myself, I'd rather have AF feedback from other Canon shooters. I use a fairly blunt force-limited points-cranking the AF points around with the joystick approach myself and it works fine for me. However, between that and the AF-on BBF deathgrip my thumb joints can be a bit sore after a long day of shooting so I'm open to trying something new if it works as well.

With no joystick on the 6D's I guess that's not going to be an option regardless. Be curious to hear what a few Canon oriented reviewers like TDP think about the AF. That rocker pad looks a bit sketchy.

AF tuning is also an area where you can see a big improvement through a firmware upgrade post launch.

That being said, the results were quite a bit worse than I expected.

I managed to work my way through the sensor issues but there's no real way around ineffective AF for my intended use. Given how positive the buzz has always been about the original 6D, I guess I was just expecting too much. A greymarket/refurb/used 5D3 is looking pretty good right now but I was looking forward to having a light-weight full frame travel camera with a touch tilty-flippy, GPS and WiFi. None of that would make up for OOF images though.

 

[Luds34]

Re: won't upgrade to it

I'm a 70D user with a moderate investment in canon (sigma 18-35, EF 50/1.4, canon EF-S 55-250, EF-S 60 macro, 430 iii flash...)

I closely followed the rumors of the 6dii because I thought that it was going to be my first FF camera... but now that it's out I'm having second thoughts... is the image quality of a FF system worth the added bulk and price? is mirrorless the future?

the competition is fierce... the fuji x-t2 for instance seems to be slightly cheaper and much more portable... and with 4k...
I'm also considering the eos m5 or waiting for the next iteration... the eos m7?

Canon definitely didn't give us aps-c shooters a real reason to upgrade.

I was a 70D shooter at one point. And I added/upgraded to the original 6D. My thoughts going into the upgrade were that moving to the full frame camera would be "underwhelming", however I'd never look back. And that is what a happened. 70D collected dust and I shot the 6D almost exclusively.

Now, a couple things... the 6D2 is better than the 6D so you have a potential greater bump than I experienced. And second (and much more importantly) it depends what you shoot. I shoot people/portrait more, landscapes, low light, etc. The 6D was just the better tool. And frankly I like wide angle primes and the in the Canon lineup this works out much better for full frame (EF) vs crop (EF-S).

Again, depends what you shoot, but if low light, wide angle, or narrow DOF/crazy bokeh are on your list, there is always a reason to upgrade to full frame, even last generation equipment.

 

[daphins]

First time poster here.

I've been following the reviews and forum posts for some time and I finally feel compelled enough to chip in.

I have a 70D with Sigma 18-35 1.8 and 50-150 f2.8 OS and have been itching to sell the 70D body + 18-55 STM kit lens to fund an 80D body for the low ISO DR improvements, wider spread AF coverage, -3EV sensitivity amongst other small benefits like mechanical shutter, larger buffer, 100% VF coverage etc.

When people said the 6D ii was like a full frame 80D I was really excited to consider going FF because this would make a great two body combo that are almost ergonomically identical.

But since discovering more specs it seems like the 6D ii is more a FF rebel just in the larger 80D body. I was almost coming round to 1/4000 max shutter speed which is limiting for fast glass in bright sun, and I've been used to single SD slot and okay with that (though not pleased). But then when the sensor tests show it's the old tech and that the DR at ISO 400 and below is no better than 70D (and way behind 80D and 5D IV), I'm thinking what is the point? I already have the 18-35 1.8 which is like a 28-55 2.8 FF or thereabouts, and on an 80D this would be better than a 6D ii with 24-70 2.8 in low ISO DR, AF coverage, 1/8000 max shutter, 7fps and 1/250 max sync speed as well as being equivalent in ISO performance, DoF control etc, and most importantly at a tiny fraction of the cost of 6D ii + 24-70!

I'm hoping Sigma release a 50-85 ish f2 lens to compliment the 24-35 f2 in a two lens combo that beats the 28-55 2.8 equivalent that you can get on crop sensors with the 18-35 by a full stop.

I was really hoping that the 6D ii would at least update sensor tech so that it genuinely does seem like a FF 80D but whilst it's old sensor tech, no headphone jack, slow max shutter and sync speed and I have the 18-35, I start to look to the 5D IV but then I ask why couldn't canon just keep the 6D ii truly equivelant to the 80D as they match so perfectly together in every other way!

Someone else seduced by all the blather.
If you look at images on threads and social media, you will not see an improvement with the 6d2 or, really, any other camera.
If you crop a lot you will start to see an improvement with the 6D2.
If you print above A2 the larger sensor will benefit you, despite that the spec sheets tell there are situations where the FF sensor beats APS-C despite talk about dynamic range.

But all this ignores the glass which is the biggest factor. Given a choice between the 6D2 and a 'consumer level' lens or the 80D and a 70-200 f4LIS, the 80D wins. Every. Single. Time.

Yeah, but a 6D mkii with a 70-200 f2.8L IS II will eat its king....

 

[greger]

I've read all the responses to this thread with interest. In spite of all the negative comments I think Canon will sell a ton of 6Diis. From what I've read it's an improvement on the 6D. I think the articulating screen will open the possibility of it appearing on the 7Diii and the two other full frame cameras. If they break they can be fixed. I'm a little more hopeful on the features of the 7Diii.

 

[ritholtz]

Very disappointing AF performance which is the case with even 80d.

I would take that with a big pinch of salt - DPR have a long history of not knowing how to use Canon AF. Rishi has been on here before saying they use the Canon AF in the same way they do the testing with Nikon AF and quite few have called him out on this.
I am not saying the 6D2 AF is fantastic, just that DPR history does not give me much confidence in what they write.

I think, DPR staff knows Canon AF stuff which needs user input for starting focus point when all focus points activated otherwise it picks focus point with nearest contrast/object. No option with Canon to pick face and track in view finder like Nikon 3D tracking which is a big feature for DPR staff. They even mentioned this 3d tracking in their recent Nikon d3400 vs sl2 article even with their 11 focus point system.

They reviewed lot of Canon cameras recently. Like 80d, all focus point servo tracking struggled to keep up with subject face. Unlike recent rebels and 80d, live view tracking also bad on 6d2. DPR is pretty big on live view tracking which also fits their mirror less and face tracking expectations). They praised recent rebels for their live view servo tracking. 6D2 live view servo tracking went back to M2.

 

[Talys]

Hidden gem that I wandered into, today. I used the Bluetooth Remote BR-E1 for the first time, and I was REALLY impressed (I don't have a 77D, so I've never had/used one before). Now this is saying something, since I use a remote trigger for pretty much every studio shoot where my cameras are on tripods, but I generally hate Bluetooth peripherals because they can be frustrating.

The form factor is awesome (much, much thinner and smaller than most remote triggers), it's very responsive and it just works. There is no sleep or re-connect lag; the instant you turn the camera back on, the remote is ready to go. And, the remote doesn't turn on/off, so you never have to worry about forgetting to turn it off. It's just a great accessory that improves quality of life, and it isn't very expensive (I bought it from Amazon US for less than $40 US dollars).


I am baffled by how people can say it's hard to set up. On the 6DII, you go to wireless, Bluetooth, and pick Remote, and choose Pair (and these are like, 3 options in a row). Then on the remote, you press and hold the W and T buttons for 3 seconds, and boom, it tells you you're paired. Done. There's a Bluetooth icon on the top display that shows that you're connected. How much easier can that be?

To shoot with the remote trigger have to set the drive mode to timer/remote, like the Infrared remote, which is a little annoying (why can't it just work in regular single or continuous mode?). But it's not terrible -- generally, if I'm using remote trigger, I'm going to use a remote trigger for the whole shoot anyways.

There's a separate AF and trigger button, which is an improvement to half/full-press shutter compatibility through the trigger port, especially since the AF button is recessed, and you can't really hit it by accident. There are W/T buttons if you're using a lens with the attachment that supports remote zoom. I'm told this is an awesome feature, but frankly, I don't care about video, so this it's lost on me.

There's also a slider that goes between instant trigger, 2 second timer, and movie. I'm not sure I'd ever use the 2 second timer, with a remote, but the really awesome thing is that you can't turn the slider off -- meaning, you can't accidentally drain the battery. If you wedge something against it and press the button down, it goes off by itself after a second or two, and stays off. The trigger doesn't support continuous shooting (which seems strange, because there is a timer-continuous mode), but I wouldn't use it anyways.

All in all, I am very happy with the BR-E1 plus the (much) wider field of view of the 60DII when shooting still subjects.

 

[dsut4392]

Re: won't upgrade to it

Canon definitely didn't give us aps-c shooters a real reason to upgrade.

I agree. My plans were to upgrade from 60D to the 6D II.

Now, I'll get the 80D (plus some lenses) instead. 3000,- € less for Canon.

Oliver

I upgraded from the 60D to the original 6D about 5 years ago and my only regret was giving up the tilt screen. The 6DII is a massive upgrade over the 60D in IQ and AF (both live view and viewfinder).
The 80D looks like a great camera in almost every respect for a fraction of the cost of a 6DII, but will never give you DOF equivalence with full frame. If you're after the 'full frame look', there is no substitute for sensor size.

 

[Talys]

Someone else seduced by all the blather.
If you look at images on threads and social media, you will not see an improvement with the 6d2 or, really, any other camera.
If you crop a lot you will start to see an improvement with the 6D2.
If you print above A2 the larger sensor will benefit you, despite that the spec sheets tell there are situations where the FF sensor beats APS-C despite talk about dynamic range.

But all this ignores the glass which is the biggest factor. Given a choice between the 6D2 and a 'consumer level' lens or the 80D and a 70-200 f4LIS, the 80D wins. Every. Single. Time.

I couldn't agree more, on the issue of the glass.

For people thinking that FF is an "upgrade", it's only an upgrade if you buy all the accompanying glass, which is an order of magnitude more expensive. If you cheap out on the glass, it's a waste of time. an 80D also gives you the ability to use cheap lenses that perform pretty well for the odd purposes that you don't use much. For example, the EFS10-18mm and the new macro-illuminated EFS 35mm are pretty decent lenses that just have no EF equivalent in those price ranges. You can buy those, and then spend all your money on a 24-70 or 70-200 depending on what you shoot.

But not only that, there's the weight factor. As you get to telephoto lengths of 200mm-600mm on APSC, to match the reach you need to buy much more expensive, heavy lenses to compete on reach.

I'm happy with my 6DII and with a FF camera, I really am. But it was a lot of planning and time spent with a borrowed 5DIV to know exactly what I was getting into, and what I would be giving up. For instance, selling my EFS17-55 2.8, and knowing that my 70-300 II (which is a good compromise on APSC as a light telephoto) and 70-200 II IS 2.8 are both going to be much less useful for telephoto -- but that the 70-200 2.8 will be much more useful for some other subjects I love to shoot, like hummingbirds.

And definitely it's not like: "I have a $2000 FF camera -- Now all my pictures will be better! ... They aren't better -- This camera must suck!"

 

[mahdi_mak2000]

Very disappointing AF performance which is the case with even 80d.

I would take that with a big pinch of salt - DPR have a long history of not knowing how to use Canon AF. Rishi has been on here before saying they use the Canon AF in the same way they do the testing with Nikon AF and quite few have called him out on this.
I am not saying the 6D2 AF is fantastic, just that DPR history does not give me much confidence in what they write.

I think, DPR staff knows Canon AF stuff which needs user input for starting focus point when all focus points activated otherwise it picks focus point with nearest contrast/object. No option with Canon to pick face and track in view finder like Nikon 3D tracking which is a big feature for DPR staff. They even mentioned this 3d tracking in their recent Nikon d3400 vs sl2 article even with their 11 focus point system.

They reviewed lot of Canon cameras recently. Like 80d, all focus point servo tracking struggled to keep up with subject face. Unlike recent rebels and 80d, live view tracking also bad on 6d2. DPR is pretty big on live view tracking which also fits their mirror less and face tracking expectations). They praised recent rebels for their live view servo tracking. 6D2 live view servo tracking went back to M2.

Not true.
I have 80d and 6dmkII. LV focus and tracking is improved in 6dmk2 compare to 80d.