The Canon EOS R6 has shown up for certification

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,435
2,297
I have the 5DIV, and I am not ready to pull thr trigger on a mirrorless yet, but if I did, I would gladly put up with the touch bar to get the Canon R sensor.

Truth be told, I've gone back and forth on that one. But if I recall correctly, I was responding to a comment about a hypothetical R-II with no touchbar and IBIS.

Rs just might get super-cheap too.
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
267
364
We'll see. I bet if you compare an R6 image and a R5 image downscaled to the same resolution, you won't notice the difference.

If you think otherwise, feel free to provide us with a comparison that shows how a lower resolution sensor outperforms a higher resolution one from the same generation when compared at the same magnification.

Edit: To avoid confusion, here is what I'm talking about:


The differences between these sensors are pretty marginal, despite wildy different resolutions.

You are referring to photography comparisons not video. The A7S and GH5S both went with lower resolutions to improve low light video performance. The Cinema series has 8.8MP sensors and 15 stops of DR, so yes, smaller sensors with larger photosites for better low light performance is not just a myth; actual camera manufacturers prove it each time they release a video oriented body; they all get smaller resolution sensors.

Sony A7S

GH5S - smaller sensor to improve low light video performance

Two sensors with the same physical size with all else being equal and the lower resolution sensor will outperform the higher resolution sensor in low light scenarios. By dropping down to 20MP for the R6 Canon was probably able to reuse an existing sensor (1DXII or III) and was able to achieve great low light performance for a lower cost. Less data to read from a smaller sensor means cheaper processor required and equal or better low light performance than a higher resolution sensor (i.e. R5). Yes side by side the low light performance of the R5 vs the R6 may be indistinguishable; but I think that would actually be perfect, getting the low light performance or better than the R5 at the R6's price.

Want even more proof? The C500 Mark II is Canon's full frame Cinema camera and retails for $16K...guess what the sensor resolution is: you guessed it 20MP.


Everything about the R6 to me points to a video and low light beast at a very economical price point. The places where Canon cut corners so far do not affect the video performance at all. Of course if we start talking about crop factors, missing codecs, missing DPAF at certain frame rates, etc. then we know the new Canon isn't so new.
 
Last edited:

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,726
2,135
Hamburg, Germany
You are referring to photography comparisons not video.
Yes. But even for video, since Canon can do 8K 30p full sensor RAW on the R5, downsampling that should give us the same situation as with stills. It should deliver very similar quality to what a lower resolution sensor would, but with the potential for more accurate color detail and better noise reduction.

I'm not denying that Canon must have a good reason for going with the 20 MP sensor here or that it probably helps with cost or that a R5 will be overkill for many. I'm just saying that the negative attitude some still have towards high pixel counts is poorly justified with arguments about low light. Now, take rolling shutter or file size or FPS and you have a good point. Processing as well in theory, although there could also be a significant overlap in parts here to save costs.
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
267
364
Yes. But even for video, since Canon can do 8K 30p full sensor RAW on the R5, downsampling that should give us the same situation as with stills. It should deliver very similar quality to what a lower resolution sensor would, but with the potential for more accurate color detail and better noise reduction.

I'm not denying that Canon must have a good reason for going with the 20 MP sensor here or that it probably helps with cost or that a R5 will be overkill for many. I'm just saying that the negative attitude some still have towards high pixel counts is poorly justified with arguments about low light. Now, take rolling shutter or file size or FPS and you have a good point. Processing as well in theory, although there could also be a significant overlap in parts here to save costs.

The thing is, you are taking my statements out of context. I have never said its low light performance will be better than the R5; in fact I never compared it's low light performance to any other camera. All I've ever said is that at 20MP this camera will be a lowlight beast. That to me simply means minimal noise in lowlight situations where traditionally cameras at its price point would suffer.

Will it outperform xyz camera in low light tests? Personally I couldn't care less, if it meets or exceeds my own personal expectations for lowlight performance that's all that matters. All I've ever said is that with a 20MP sensor it is off to a great start in the low light department.
 

dslrdummy

EOS RP
Aug 28, 2012
376
145
I have the 5DIV, and I am not ready to pull thr trigger on a mirrorless yet, but if I did, I would gladly put up with the touch bar to get the Canon R sensor.
The touch bar can be disabled or, as I do, assigned a function (iso) but locked so that it isn't activated accidentally. One of those adjustments that you get used to while enjoying the benefits of mirrorless. But then I also shoot with a Leica M so working a bit more slowly doesn't worry me in most situations.
 

Skux

EOS 90D
Feb 21, 2020
128
165
I'd love an R5, but I’m certain my wallet says R6.

I'm in the same boat haha. I want one camera that I can use for gigs (dual card slots), street (compact), filming shows (4k with good battery life) and the occasional wildlife outing (high fps). The R5 would be overkill for my needs and wallet, but the R6 could be just right.

I just hope it has 4k with DPAF with EF and EF-S lenses. No recording limit would be a bonus but I can live without it.
 

Mr Majestyk

EOS RP
Feb 20, 2016
419
276
Australia
I hope this camera will replace my GH5 it has so much potential...yet so many features could be crippled behind those great numbers. I only care about the video features so from my viewpoint:

The good (so far)
-Dual Card Slots
-20MP Sensor
-4K 60FPS
-Battery compatible with 5D4
-IBIS

The wish list
-Unlimited video recording
-XLR module
-False Color
-Waveforms
-Clog2 and Clog3
-Raw output over HDMI

The ways they could cripple it
-Record video to only a single card at a time
-Video recording limit
-Severe crop in 4k
-No DPAF in higher frame rates
-No audio at 60FPS

My Estimated Price
$2499.00USD

For me this one camera will determine if I give up on Canon video and get the EVA1 A camera and S1H B camera or I go all in on the Canon family and get the C300II A Camera and R6 as a Gimbal/B Camera.

Way too dear in this segment, same mistake Canon made with the EOS R. It will be up against the A7IV at similar time with talk of that coming around September and set to offer 4K60p as well. It won't have the crippling your worrying about either, although I doubt Canon would cripple the R6 in those ways.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: scyrene

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,376
1,246
I'd probably jump on that.

As it sits right now, if the R5 is too expensive--I'll just get an RP. Yes, it's missing a lot but it's dirt cheap, and no touchbar.
That’s exactly how Canon slicing and dicing their customer base within a single product category :
Both grate cameras. One is a fully featured product sold at premium and a second product, still great but missing some of the top shelf features of the premium product but affordable at the same time.
 

Proscribo

EOS RP
Jan 21, 2015
266
148
You are referring to photography comparisons not video. The A7S and GH5S both went with lower resolutions to improve low light video performance. The Cinema series has 8.8MP sensors and 15 stops of DR, so yes, smaller sensors with larger photosites for better low light performance is not just a myth; actual camera manufacturers prove it each time they release a video oriented body; they all get smaller resolution sensors.
Or could it be... you know... that lower resolution is (was) perfectly enough for video as 4K is just over 8MP. This gives lower rolling shutter, eases off the load on the processor, and I figure makes manufacturing the sensor somewhat cheaper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bahrd

rwvaughn

Live in the moment.
Mar 22, 2016
47
24
Southern Indiana, USA
Still wondering how the camera will look. Probably, will replace my actual R if the DR is the same (or at least a little bit better, please) and the AF system works even better, too. The R still doing a good job for me, also 30 mpx helps to do some crops, but double SD is very necessary for weddings, even at cost of those 10 extra mpx.



Totally agree hahahaha

Where have you seen that it dual SD? I personally wouldn't expect them to be the same format.
 

Otara

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2012
419
245
So, Bluetooth 5 is 48MBps versus 24MBps for 4.2. It’s also 300meters versus 100m For range. The big issue is it is not backwards compatible with earlier versions of Bluetooth. Id love an R5, but I’m certain my wallet says R6.

I’ve really only used WiFi, does anyone use a lot of Bluetooth in cameras?

It can be great, but its implementation varies a bit between cameras, even within Canon.
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
267
364
Or could it be... you know... that lower resolution is (was) perfectly enough for video as 4K is just over 8MP. This gives lower rolling shutter, eases off the load on the processor, and I figure makes manufacturing the sensor somewhat cheaper.
I take it you did not read the articles in the links where they state the sensors were made with lower resolution to improve low light performance. You are missing the bigger discussion here which is that it is well documented that camera makers pick lower resolution sensors for their video oriented bodies when targeting low light improvements.