Review: Canon EOS R6 by DPReview

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
1,052
2,306
Great points you have there, I guess that is why it was difficult deciding which one to go with. I however decided to go with the R5 despite the price increase because I want a more durable body and the higher megapixel count. I also want the 8K, so that I can create still grabs from hard to catch situations.


Yep.. If Canon had chosen t go with a higher megapixel sensor in the R6 I'd be there, but 20MP isn't going to do it for me.
 

mccasi

EOS M50
Oct 24, 2019
38
55
AF performance is the most important thing for me. Like are these new cameras up to the level of a DSLR yet or do they still struggle. There wasn't even talk of the EVF speed and latency, does it get you close enough to a OVF now that it is worth trying to track an animal and you are no longer a 3rd of a second behind.
Man, the Pinnacle of DSLR AF is the 1Dx3.. and that doesn’t do half as low light, half as accurate for face and half the image cycle... plus micro adjustments as the image sensor and pdaf are often misaligned... DSLR AF sucks hard compared to z6, eos R, a7iii, maybe barely outperforms a Panasonic s1...
for lag, watch Tony northrups videos, if you chase birds in flight A9 was meh, 120hz should help a ton, but at High battery life cost, ... then again no bird eye af in the DSLR desert
 

AEWest

EOS RP
Jan 30, 2020
243
297
Or perhaps with the news about Olympus going under they need to capture more Canon fans attention.

Self-preservation is a powerful thing. ;)
I think that if they are concerned about impact of Olympus demise on their site usage, they have serious problems.
 

Keith_Reeder

I really don't mind offending trolls.
Feb 8, 2014
957
469
60
Blyth, NE England
DPReview has given many Canon products very good reviews. Those who nitpick their reviews and damn the entire review for justified mentioning of less than great features or performance aren’t really paying attention to the entire review.
They have also told blatant lies, and provided "opinions" that bear no semblance to the reality of what they're pontificating about, often based on presumptions about how in their view a thing should work, rather than on how the manual says they do work.

Misunderstood victims they are not.
 

Go Wild

EOS RP
Dec 8, 2014
288
344
Video quality from pre-production EOS R5 - Stunning!!
Vídeo quality from production EOS R6 - Stunning!!
Still Image quality from EOS R6 - Stunning!!

What´s NOT TO LIKE from these 2 beast!!! Keep going haters!! :D Can´t wait to put my hands on both!! Looking sooo forward to test 4k120fps from R5 and stills from both of the cameras!! Looking promising!
 

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,158
767
It was somewhere, but I don't remember where exactly. Basically the IBIS will work with IS in EF lenses, but it won't be 'coordinated', so not as good as with RF lenses with IS.
Yeah, but at least they should clarify what that roughly means, extra +1 stop? etc.
The RF 28-70mm f/2L and RF 85mm f/1.2L are claimed to be 8-stops even without any IS in the lens (the lenses do have a gyro sensor, which will communicate with the camera's gyro sensor, therefore making the IBIS even more effective)
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,769
8,518
Well, it was said that they preferred to use the LiveView on the 1DX III due to superior AF and that AF on the R6 matches or exceeds what they valued about it in the 1DX III right?
No, not really right. I watched it before your post and further twice afterwards to check. He said the liveview of the 1DXIII was better than with the mirror and the R6 has features of the LV like eye detection they valued etc. He didn't say that the AF matched or exceeded that of the 1DXIII. He ended with that the AF is knocking on the door of the Sony gold standard. If it is knocking on the door of the A9, then that would be really impressive. If it's the A7RIV or AIII, then it isn't impressive. The AF section of the review was too sketchy to draw real conclusions.
 

Lenscracker

Old Prospector from 1944
CR Pro
Jun 28, 2013
55
78
Bucksnort, Ohio
I think one clarification is missing from Canon: how well does the IBIS work with EF lenses? (or fully manual lenses, but let's not go into that, they want to sell Canon lenses primarily)

Will they provide the same data for their EF lenses?

There are also some RF lenses that do not have IS installed in them. The 28-70 F/2.0 is one of them. I am considering a purchase but I want to know how much the IBIS alone will help to steady it.
 

cornieleous

5D4 + R5
Jul 13, 2020
208
736
They could build the case that Canon has really launched two R6 bodies -- it's just that one comes with 45 MP/8K upgrade inside for a $1400 upcharge, and that the upcharge/functionality isn't truly needed.

- A

I don't agree that these cameras are different only in resolution for $1400 or that they are both an R6 with only one major feature difference (resolution). I would agree the $1400 might be slightly much for all that you do get, but it is not just resolution on the list.

Just talking resolution, when it is needed, 45 vs. 20 MP allows over a third of the frame to be cropped in either dimension and have the same quality, or it can be down sampled uncropped to eliminate noise. It also allows for larger prints, and I did see my large print quality improve when I went from 20-30MP as it obviously should. I could never go back to my 6D @ 20 MP for many types of shooting I do (timelapse, astro photography, severe weather, landscape) without a significant loss in quality and post processing options. For some people, 20MP might be fine as it was for me for many years, but I push right to the edge of even the 5D4 capabilities currently at 30MP, and that extra 1/4 of cropping I can do is used all the time. 45MP will be even better.

If you consider all the difference between these cameras, the $1400 starts to make more sense and they appear very similarly priced and spec'd to the mirrorless updated equivalents of the 5D4 and 6D:
  1. 8K (debatable how many of us will actually use it)
  2. 4K DCI vs UHD (essential if that is your project format)
  3. +25 MP (significant for many types of photo and video work, and if you need it, you need it.)
  4. Better weather sealing
  5. Better LPF
  6. Higher resolution viewfinder
  7. Larger rear screen (slightly) with higher resolution
  8. Faster Wifi and newer bluetooth.
  9. For 4K video the R5 is full frame vs. a slight crop on the R6 (not a big deal).
  10. Top screen (RF control ring might make this less needed but still nice to have)
  11. Several more video modes such as shutter and aperture priority
  12. More resolutions and codecs
  13. 3 pin remote shutter release port vs 2.5mm
  14. Nearly all metal vs part plastic body
  15. Dual pixel raw (it isn't that amazing in the past, but some new features and DSP are promising)
  16. R5 ships earlier :D
For myself, its a bit much and obviously marketing separation, but when considering my needs the 1400 seems worth it in the end and it is hard to regard these as simply two R6 with one having more resolution. I shoot in bad weather, I push resolution, and the better EVF and screen will be welcome for someone used to non articulating DSLR (5D4 and 6D).
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,825
972
UK
www.flickr.com
I'm with you. My now pensionable 5D3 is highly likely to finally be retired for the R5. We're just not traveling anytime soon :rolleyes: , so I may save my money and get one next year when the price comes down a bit.

I certainly have the funds to get it right now, but I'd overwhelmingly just be shooting the family and flowers in the yard, you know?

I don't normally advocate for early adoption but two points to consider: you may have more budget now for gear if you're unable to travel; and if you get it sooner rather than later, you'll be comfortable with all its features, foibles, and limitations by the time you go somewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert63

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
AF performance is the most important thing for me. Like are these new cameras up to the level of a DSLR yet or do they still struggle. There wasn't even talk of the EVF speed and latency, does it get you close enough to a OVF now that it is worth trying to track an animal and you are no longer a 3rd of a second behind.


Umm, Chris went into the 120Hz EVF and latency figures were quoted if I recall.

- A
 
  • Haha
Reactions: YuengLinger

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
What do you mean when you say 'functionality isn't truly needed"?


I'm saying they could argue that the R5 upcharge isn't worth paying, and that the R6 is probably the best camera for most of us.

No one's invalidating anyone's needs -- if you need 45 MP or the top end video, get the R5 of course.

Perhaps making my prior assertion another way: when you used to jump from 6-series to the 5-series, 5-series to 1-series, etc. you roundly got better stuff across the board -- better build, exclusive features, etc. One notch faster sync, that second card slot, on-chip ADC, full VF coverage, a few extra MP, a few extra FPS, etc. you get the idea.

But with the R5 and R6, as much as the sensor res + what video you can capture with it is a very big deal, the R6 in no uncertain terms got hooked up with the good stuff here. The nerf gun stayed home for this mid-tier camera. R6 gets almost everything the R5 gets other than the sensor itself and the video it can pull down.

So when the 'lower' of the two cameras takes on (candidly) a Sony or Nikon price-tiering argument in which you can get ALL the good stuff except resolution, it's a lot easier to attack the pricier camera's value proposition. I expect DPR (Chris, especially on stills) to raise that question.

Or the corollary: Canon would have sold more R5 bdoies if they artfully nerfed the R6, and it would have p----- us off like it always does. Thankfully, they didn't do that. :)

- A
 
  • Like
Reactions: cornieleous

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
1,052
2,306
I don't agree that these cameras are different only in resolution for $1400 or that they are both an R6 with only one major feature difference (resolution). I would agree the $1400 might be slightly much for all that you do get, but it is not just resolution on the list.

Just talking resolution, when it is needed, 45 vs. 20 MP allows over a third of the frame to be cropped in either dimension and have the same quality, or it can be down sampled uncropped to eliminate noise. It also allows for larger prints, and I did see my large print quality improve when I went from 20-30MP as it obviously should. I could never go back to my 6D @ 20 MP for many types of shooting I do (timelapse, astro photography, severe weather, landscape) without a significant loss in quality and post processing options. For some people, 20MP might be fine as it was for me for many years, but I push right to the edge of even the 5D4 capabilities currently at 30MP, and that extra 1/4 of cropping I can do is used all the time. 45MP will be even better.

If you consider all the difference between these cameras, the $1400 starts to make more sense and they appear very similarly priced and spec'd to the mirrorless updated equivalents of the 5D4 and 6D:
  1. 8K (debatable how many of us will actually use it)
  2. 4K DCI vs UHD (essential if that is your project format)
  3. +25 MP (significant for many types of photo and video work, and if you need it, you need it.)
  4. Better weather sealing
  5. Better LPF
  6. Higher resolution viewfinder
  7. Larger rear screen (slightly) with higher resolution
  8. Faster Wifi and newer bluetooth.
  9. For 4K video the R5 is full frame vs. a slight crop on the R6 (not a big deal).
  10. Top screen (RF control ring might make this less needed but still nice to have)
  11. Several more video modes such as shutter and aperture priority
  12. More resolutions and codecs
  13. 3 pin remote shutter release port vs 2.5mm
  14. Nearly all metal vs part plastic body
  15. Dual pixel raw (it isn't that amazing in the past, but some new features and DSP are promising)
  16. R5 ships earlier :D
For myself, its a bit much and obviously marketing separation, but when considering my needs the 1400 seems worth it in the end and it is hard to regard these as simply two R6 with one having more resolution. I shoot in bad weather, I push resolution, and the better EVF and screen will be welcome for someone used to non articulating DSLR (5D4 and 6D).


Perfect post - one more thing - it only costs about the same as the 5D4 did when it was introduced. It's a bargain.
 

davidhfe

EOS RP
Sep 9, 2015
305
456
The video looked really nice. I’m super curious what mode(s) they used. If that’s the binned 4K footage for instance than the whole heat thing is a non-issue until you get to HFR.

Answering my own question: On twitter Jordan mentioned that it's the "standard, non-supersampled 4K" mode. I'm impressed. Renders the "overheats at 30p" argument much less relevant.

Edit: He says he used both modes depending on shot. Can't wait for the full review(s). Both these cameras look quite wonderful.

 
Last edited:

TMHKR

EOS 700D
Sep 1, 2018
70
91
31
It was somewhere, but I don't remember where exactly. Basically the IBIS will work with IS in EF lenses, but it won't be 'coordinated', so not as good as with RF lenses with IS.
Rudy Winston from Canon USA said it in an interview. With RF lenses, the IBIS will probably be a bit more responsive, since the RF mount has higher data speed.
He also said that the stabilization function in general can be either "on" or "off" - you can't for example have lens IS on and IBIS off. Both of them are either on, or off.
 
<-- start Taboola -->