Sadly, the 6dm2 and 5div to be obsolete shortly

[SecureGSM]

I am just couple of meter away from the screen. My HTPC connected to 75" Sony TV.

I am likely correct, but am viewing images on 75" screen side by side and what I am able to notice is not necessarily evident to some (many) other photogs.

How far away from that do you have to sit?!

 

[scyrene]

I am just couple of meter away from the screen. My HTPC connected to 75" Sony TV.

I am likely correct, but am viewing images on 75" screen side by side and what I am able to notice is not necessarily evident to some (many) other photogs.

How far away from that do you have to sit?!

Fair enough

 

[dak723]

OMG no, dude, I WANT a 5div or a 6d2 BUT not something built for today. Sony/Nikon, and others are presently running over Canon with creativity and innovation. Heck, even cell phones, 4k right? CAnon is not listening or doing a damn thing for thier 'clients' that shoot canon and have succumbed to the L lens crackpipe. CAnon is my first choice, and i am furious over the crap they produced these past few years. 5d4 is a good camera, but it wont last more than a year innovation wise when Sony comes and trounces all over it. Nikon is doing it now. Believe me, i am pro Canon........but they appear to have given up or lack any ability. Sorry for my low post count and I dont brag about the equipment i have (and its no powershot, LOL) at the bottom of this email, nor will i ever. Helllllllllllllo thieves!

LOL! Sounds like you have been bashed in the head with that crackpipe.

Cell phone 4k ;D are you really going to make that argument...

What innovation are we actually talking about here because I need a camera that works and most of all the sony release cameras have a huge flaw that they overheat, super uncomfortable to use, the IQ isn't really miles better in the real world and the fact the colour is not a touch on canon cameras. Nikon cameras are plagued with mechanical issues, neither Nikon or sony can come close to CPS either.

You have been smoking the marketing crack pretty deep.

After shooting a wedding for 12 hours I'm tired, the canon cameras are amazingly ergonomic and I'm still sore. I don't have particularly big hands pretty average and I can't grip the sony cameras comfortably in any way shape or form and the lenses are so front heavy that it really puts a strain on your right wrist from offsetting the camera body. I would dread shooting an hour with one let alone 12. If the thing had the best IQ and shoot 120fps at 200mp... but if I'm not comfortable I won't get good images.

Nikon are being brave in the market because they are in serious trouble they don't really have much else to do than go full throttle which means in the short term its great but they have played all their best cards and have put a question mark on a lot of the other cameras in their own line up releasing the 850. Also what will people expect in 3-5 years time a 100mp camera shooting 20fps its not sustainable. You have to be realistic.

The A9 is on paper an incredible camera but again its not getting the incredible feedback the specs suggest and thats the whole point! It doesn't matter what the specs are on paper, if you have to prove you have the bigger crackpipe by buying one then please do us all a favour and swap system.

Im not interested in hype and marketing, I evaluate what I can see and if you can't do that for yourself and make a decent image with your imaginary canon gear then theres a bigger problem than an few extra stops of DR.

Tom, you have summed up very well the differences between some of the camera brands, but arguing with a troll is a waste of time. What Trolls like Deadwrong don't realize is that making declarations and proclamations (such as "the 6dm2 and 5div to be obsolete shortly" only make them seem stupid to anyone reading the thread. Certainly any educated camera buyer can tell that the strategies of the various brands is quite different - that Canon takes the conservative approach and won't add bells and whistles to cameras if those "innovations" aren't 100% reliable. Canon makes easy to use, reliable, comfortable cameras with and all-around excellent IQ and arguably the best color. They also place a major focus on producing high quality lenses. If that is not what a camera buyer wants - if they want "creativity and innovation" above all else - then Sony or Nikon is likely their best bet. The fact that they don't switch to the brand that best suits their needs only shows that they are either:

a) a troll or constant complainer.
b) dumb.

All forum members who want to show the rest of us just how dumb you are, please continue posting how Sony and Nikon are way better than Canon and how you wish Canon cameras were just like Nikon or Sony's latest offerings - without actually trying or buying those brands.

 

[Talys]

Very nice shots, Talys. well done, my friend. I am also liking your new signature in the bottom right corner. looks good there.

Thank you!

By the way, since you were mentioning > ISO 3200 on 5D3, I snapped this guy in my back yard at ISO 5000. You can definitely see a little graininess creep in, but it's far from unpleasant. I couldn't have dreamed of shooting at ISO 5000 before I purchased the 6D2 -- it would be a hot mess on an 80D.

Full Res: http://talys.icxi.com/isotest/bunny_FW.jpg

 

[Talys]

Tom, you have summed up very well the differences between some of the camera brands, but arguing with a troll is a waste of time. What Trolls like Deadwrong don't realize is that making declarations and proclamations (such as "the 6dm2 and 5div to be obsolete shortly" only make them seem stupid to anyone reading the thread. Certainly any educated camera buyer can tell that the strategies of the various brands is quite different - that Canon takes the conservative approach and won't add bells and whistles to cameras if those "innovations" aren't 100% reliable. Canon makes easy to use, reliable, comfortable cameras with and all-around excellent IQ and arguably the best color. They also place a major focus on producing high quality lenses. If that is not what a camera buyer wants - if they want "creativity and innovation" above all else - then Sony or Nikon is likely their best bet. The fact that they don't switch to the brand that best suits their needs only shows that they are either:

a) a troll or constant complainer.
b) dumb.

All forum members who want to show the rest of us just how dumb you are, please continue posting how Sony and Nikon are way better than Canon and how you wish Canon cameras were just like Nikon or Sony's latest offerings - without actually trying or buying those brands.

Meh. I'm convinced that there is a group of people who don't plan to buy any high end camera of any brand. In the world of virtual camera purchases, the one that has the most checkmarks down the list wins, especially if you have no intention of taking pictures with it.

Incidentally, the couple of camera shops that I frequent have said that they've had about the same number of D850 pre-orders as 6DII's, which makes them very happy, considering the D850's price. Also, one said that first run of D850 is now sold out in Canada -- though it's totally possible he was just trying to drum up sales for his own initial allocation.

If it's true (and I have low confidence that it is), that would be terrible planning by Nikon, since local stores here were getting in as many as 10 6DII's between bodies and kits -- and moving them.

 

[Don Haines]

OMG no, dude, I WANT a 5div or a 6d2 BUT not something built for today.

By "not something built for today", do you mean built for tomorrow? What you need is a Delorean, a flux capacitor, and 1.21Gigawatts of power..... Then you can go into the future and bring one back.... Of course we know how that isn't going to happen, so you must mean built for yesterday... I am sure that if you look around you can find a 5D.... or a 20D.... or if you want to escape Canon for some true innovation, a Kodak DC-20....

 

[Talys]

OMG no, dude, I WANT a 5div or a 6d2 BUT not something built for today.

By "not something built for today", do you mean built for tomorrow? What you need is a Delorean, a flux capacitor, and 1.21Gigawatts of power..... Then you can go into the future and bring one back.... Of course we know how that isn't going to happen, so you must mean built for yesterday... I am sure that if you look around you can find a 5D.... or a 20D.... or if you want to escape Canon for some true innovation, a Kodak DC-20....

The first digital camera I owned was a Kodak DC-50

It had a serial port! and like, 750x500 resolution! and a PCMCIA card slot!! LOL. Amazingly, that was only 20 years ago. I recall it was pretty pricey; we had it on a tripod and used it to make ID badges.

 

[Don Haines]

OMG no, dude, I WANT a 5div or a 6d2 BUT not something built for today.

By "not something built for today", do you mean built for tomorrow? What you need is a Delorean, a flux capacitor, and 1.21Gigawatts of power..... Then you can go into the future and bring one back.... Of course we know how that isn't going to happen, so you must mean built for yesterday... I am sure that if you look around you can find a 5D.... or a 20D.... or if you want to escape Canon for some true innovation, a Kodak DC-20....

The first digital camera I owned was a Kodak DC-50

It had a serial port! and like, 750x500 resolution! and a PCMCIA card slot!! LOL. Amazingly, that was only 20 years ago. I recall it was pretty pricey; we had it on a tripod and used it to make ID badges.

It was 768x512.... we had one at work!

 

[Loswr]

OMG no, dude, I WANT a 5div or a 6d2 BUT not something built for today.

By "not something built for today", do you mean built for tomorrow? What you need is a Delorean, a flux capacitor, and 1.21Gigawatts of power..... Then you can go into the future and bring one back.... Of course we know how that isn't going to happen, so you must mean built for yesterday... I am sure that if you look around you can find a 5D.... or a 20D.... or if you want to escape Canon for some true innovation, a Kodak DC-20....

The first digital camera I owned was a Kodak DC-50

It had a serial port! and like, 750x500 resolution! and a PCMCIA card slot!! LOL. Amazingly, that was only 20 years ago. I recall it was pretty pricey; we had it on a tripod and used it to make ID badges.

It was 768x512.... we had one at work!

No 4K? Useless!

 

[Talys]

It was 768x512.... we had one at work!

LOL yeah, there you go That's more resolution than the VGA screens that some people ran back then!

No 4K? Useless!

But there is an optical viewfinder. Who needs pentaprism when you have parallax?

 

[Don Haines]

It was 768x512.... we had one at work!

LOL yeah, there you go That's more resolution than the VGA screens that some people ran back then!

No 4K? Useless!

But there is an optical viewfinder. Who needs pentaprism when you have parallax?

And here's a hi-res image from where I was working back then.... not even half a megapixel, no 14 stops of DR, amazing that it could take a picture....

 

[Adelino]

And I think that raises on interesting question: why was the 6D2 sensor designed like it was? I presume the technicians had a specific objective in mind and wanted to resolve specific issue(s) so it would be interesting to know what that was and whether they had achieved it.
For example, the D5 has been widely acknowledged to take a hit on DR but with benefits elsewhere in the picture-making chain. What was the logic behind the 6D2. If it was simply 'because it is cheaper', then it does add to your comment.

Another possible reason - to save sales of 5d mark IV. I believe that this is the main reason, since a much cheaper camera (80D) has more advanced sensor.

Your example kills your premise. They should have designed a better sensor to keep 80D from stealing 6D2 sales. It makes no sense as far as I can tell. Look how Canon shares technology across th Rebel line they don't seem to market segment like they appear to do with the FF lineup.

 

[Talys]

And I think that raises on interesting question: why was the 6D2 sensor designed like it was? I presume the technicians had a specific objective in mind and wanted to resolve specific issue(s) so it would be interesting to know what that was and whether they had achieved it.
For example, the D5 has been widely acknowledged to take a hit on DR but with benefits elsewhere in the picture-making chain. What was the logic behind the 6D2. If it was simply 'because it is cheaper', then it does add to your comment.

Another possible reason - to save sales of 5d mark IV. I believe that this is the main reason, since a much cheaper camera (80D) has more advanced sensor.

Your example kills your premise. They should have designed a better sensor to keep 80D from stealing 6D2 sales. It makes no sense as far as I can tell. Look how Canon shares technology across th Rebel line they don't seem to market segment like they appear to do with the FF lineup.

Actually, the example just says that the jester hasn't used a 6D2 and 80D, at least not beyond shooting a price tag in a camera store. I challenge one person who owns or has significantly used both to actually state that the 80D has a "more advanced sensor" -- from the perspective of, you know, images that are output by the camera.

It isn't even close. The 6DII outputs gorgeous photographs, and is superior in a broad number of scenarios -- the obvious exception is that 6DII is full frame; the 80D will get a lot more megapixels out of the center of the lens and arguably better ISO 100 performance if you just want that center crop area. But like, Duh.

Now, I'll happily agree that it's **possible** that 26 megapixels, DR, shutter speed, or 4k may be artificially limited to segment the market and protect 5DIV sales.

 

[malarcky]

And I think that raises on interesting question: why was the 6D2 sensor designed like it was? I presume the technicians had a specific objective in mind and wanted to resolve specific issue(s) so it would be interesting to know what that was and whether they had achieved it.
For example, the D5 has been widely acknowledged to take a hit on DR but with benefits elsewhere in the picture-making chain. What was the logic behind the 6D2. If it was simply 'because it is cheaper', then it does add to your comment.

Another possible reason - to save sales of 5d mark IV. I believe that this is the main reason, since a much cheaper camera (80D) has more advanced sensor.

Your example kills your premise. They should have designed a better sensor to keep 80D from stealing 6D2 sales. It makes no sense as far as I can tell. Look how Canon shares technology across th Rebel line they don't seem to market segment like they appear to do with the FF lineup.

Actually, the example just says that the jester hasn't used a 6D2 and 80D, at least not beyond shooting a price tag in a camera store. I challenge one person who owns or has significantly used both to actually state that the 80D has a "more advanced sensor" -- from the perspective of, you know, images that are output by the camera.

It isn't even close. The 6DII outputs gorgeous photographs, and is superior in a broad number of scenarios -- the obvious exception is that 6DII is full frame; the 80D will get a lot more megapixels out of the center of the lens and arguably better ISO 100 performance if you just want that center crop area. But like, Duh.

Now, I'll happily agree that it's **possible** that 26 megapixels, DR, shutter speed, or 4k may be artificially limited to segment the market and protect 5DIV sales.

The constant complaint that the sensor on the 6D Mk II is somehow crippled or less advanced is just a rehearsed complaint that people use to make it look like the 6D Mk II is a bad camera. None of it is true, it's just hype that's designed to give the camera an overall bad rap. I'm not buying into it one bit. I honestly believe that people are just complaining about this camera to try and hurt Canon's reputation. There is just a strange aura about this camera where a lot of people aren't even interested in buying it, or looking into it's merits at all, but going out of their way to make negative comments about it. That's just the way it seems to me.

If you look at the comments that constantly berate this camera, it's always from people who seem to want to sell you on another brand, or want to just present a one liner on how bad it is without any kind of rationale whatsoever. I'm not talking about here, just all over the youtube circuit of commentary. There are certain themes that people seem to use when describing why it's not a good choice. The main thing about jumping to another brand is the most curious, and prevalent one it seems.

 

[jester73]

I am interested in upgrade my camera to FF, and 6d2 specification looks fine. But I think it is overpriced taking into account it real characteristics. For me it should cost at least 1200 USD less then 5d4 and since price for 5d4 is 2750 so 6d2 should cost 1500 USD. I am not using recommended prices since there no official Canon in Ukraine so I have to buy it via internet. Time will show if my assumption is correct. On e-bay already is 6d2 for 1770 USD.

Regarding questions was sensor of 6d2 was crippled or not: for me the only objective evidence is presence of on chip ADC. Until such information will be not available all opinions (including mine) are miserable.

 

[tomscott]

I am interested in upgrade my camera to FF, and 6d2 specification looks fine. But I think it is overpriced taking into account it real characteristics. For me it should cost at least 1200 USD less then 5d4 and since price for 5d4 is 2750 so 6d2 should cost 1500 USD. I am not using recommended prices since there no official Canon in Ukraine so I have to buy it via internet. Time will show if my assumption is correct. On e-bay already is 6d2 for 1770 USD.

Regarding questions was sensor of 6d2 was crippled or not: for me the only objective evidence is presence of on chip ADC. Until such information will be not available all opinions (including mine) are miserable.

Completely agree.

I bought mine a week after it was launched for £1500... The price it should have been at launch. If you look hard enough you will find retailers selling at less than this already. At this price it is a relative bargain compared to the 5DMKIV yes its better but not twice the price better.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

OMG no, dude, I WANT a 5div or a 6d2 BUT not something built for today. Sony/Nikon, and others are presently running over Canon with creativity and innovation. Heck, even cell phones, 4k right? CAnon is not listening or doing a damn thing for thier 'clients' that shoot canon and have succumbed to the L lens crackpipe. CAnon is my first choice, and i am furious over the crap they produced these past few years. 5d4 is a good camera, but it wont last more than a year innovation wise when Sony comes and trounces all over it. Nikon is doing it now. Believe me, i am pro Canon........but they appear to have given up or lack any ability. Sorry for my low post count and I dont brag about the equipment i have (and its no powershot, LOL) at the bottom of this email, nor will i ever. Helllllllllllllo thieves!

LOL! Sounds like you have been bashed in the head with that crackpipe.

Cell phone 4k ;D are you really going to make that argument...

What innovation are we actually talking about here because I need a camera that works and most of all the sony release cameras have a huge flaw that they overheat, super uncomfortable to use, the IQ isn't really miles better in the real world and the fact the colour is not a touch on canon cameras. Nikon cameras are plagued with mechanical issues, neither Nikon or sony can come close to CPS either.

You have been smoking the marketing crack pretty deep.

After shooting a wedding for 12 hours I'm tired, the canon cameras are amazingly ergonomic and I'm still sore. I don't have particularly big hands pretty average and I can't grip the sony cameras comfortably in any way shape or form and the lenses are so front heavy that it really puts a strain on your right wrist from offsetting the camera body. I would dread shooting an hour with one let alone 12. If the thing had the best IQ and shoot 120fps at 200mp... but if I'm not comfortable I won't get good images.

Nikon are being brave in the market because they are in serious trouble they don't really have much else to do than go full throttle which means in the short term its great but they have played all their best cards and have put a question mark on a lot of the other cameras in their own line up releasing the 850. Also what will people expect in 3-5 years time a 100mp camera shooting 20fps its not sustainable. You have to be realistic.

The A9 is on paper an incredible camera but again its not getting the incredible feedback the specs suggest and thats the whole point! It doesn't matter what the specs are on paper, if you have to prove you have the bigger crackpipe by buying one then please do us all a favour and swap system.

Im not interested in hype and marketing, I evaluate what I can see and if you can't do that for yourself and make a decent image with your imaginary canon gear then theres a bigger problem than an few extra stops of DR.

Tom, you have summed up very well the differences between some of the camera brands, but arguing with a troll is a waste of time. What Trolls like Deadwrong don't realize is that making declarations and proclamations (such as "the 6dm2 and 5div to be obsolete shortly" only make them seem stupid to anyone reading the thread. Certainly any educated camera buyer can tell that the strategies of the various brands is quite different - that Canon takes the conservative approach and won't add bells and whistles to cameras if those "innovations" aren't 100% reliable. Canon makes easy to use, reliable, comfortable cameras with and all-around excellent IQ and arguably the best color. They also place a major focus on producing high quality lenses. If that is not what a camera buyer wants - if they want "creativity and innovation" above all else - then Sony or Nikon is likely their best bet. The fact that they don't switch to the brand that best suits their needs only shows that they are either:

a) a troll or constant complainer.
b) dumb.

All forum members who want to show the rest of us just how dumb you are, please continue posting how Sony and Nikon are way better than Canon and how you wish Canon cameras were just like Nikon or Sony's latest offerings - without actually trying or buying those brands.

This is a really good summary and I find that in practice there is not much difference between the major brands. They all do the job reasonably well and it is often a matter of personal taste that influences our decision. For me my Canon feels slightly more comfortable in my hand than the equivalent Nikon or Sony product, but if for some reason I switched to one of the other brands I don't think it would cause me any major problems.
Sometimes I am frustrated that Canon lags behind in terms of innovation but on the other hand Canon cameras and lenses are built to last and my equipment has always worked perfectly, even in very harsh environments.

 

[Loswr]

Sometimes I am frustrated that Canon lags behind in terms of innovation...

I'd be interested to hear how Canon is 'lagging behind in innovation'. Now, if what you mean is, "Canon is lagging behind in the products/features that I personally want," it's fine to say so. But the blanket statement that they're 'lagging behind on innovation' is, objectively, simple bullshit.

 

[Don Haines]

Sometimes I am frustrated that Canon lags behind in terms of innovation...

I'd be interested to hear how Canon is 'lagging behind in innovation'. Now, if what you mean is, "Canon is lagging behind in the products/features that I personally want," it's fine to say so. But the blanket statement that they're 'lagging behind on innovation' is, objectively, simple bullshit.

I'll give you a good example... flicker detection....

It came out on the 7D2, and has been on every body since.....

Forum users blasted it as a useless feature, yet it took me keeper rate shooting in the anechoic chamber from about 20% to about 90%.....

Forum wisdom is often wrong because you can not take one persons needs and apply them to the whole world.... for some, they had no need of that feature and dismissed it as useless, yet to others, it was fantastic.

Definitely innovation, a solid feature, but ignored by many because that example of innovation is not to a sensor..... there is a lot more to a camera than a sensor.....

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Wow...is this troll bait thread still rolling??? For real????