Where is the Canon EOS 6D Mark II?

[ahsanford]

Disclaimer: I read the first few pages, then was away for awhile and haven't caught back up, so forgive me if this has been covered...

I've been thinking about cannibalization of the 5DIV if the 6DII goes upmarket. It's true that some would choose the 6DII instead of the 5DIV because it will meet their needs and cost less. Some of those might even be pros. That would be cannibalization.

But.

Most pros don't just operate with one camera body.

• Would a more upmarket 6DII that still costs less than a 5DIV be attractive as a worthy backup/second to a pro who primarily shoots a 5DIV?
• Would an emerging pro who would otherwise (reluctantly) buy a single 5DIV instead choose two 6DII's?

Both of these scenarios seem likely to occur at some level. The question Canon has to answer is, will they occur enough to truly offset cannibalization of the 5DIV? We'll know Canon's guess when we see what's announced...

Thoughts on these "second body" wonderings? Anyone here considering an upmarket 6DII as a second body to their 5DIII/IV?

I've been harping on single or 'their next best' camera purchasers with my '6D2 cannibalizing 5D4' talk, but yes, it could affect pros with numerous bodies as well:

• I often see pros working events/weddings with a 1D or 5D primary body and a 6D secondary body. If the 6D1 is 'pro' enough for them, surely a 6D2 with a lot more tech will be as well. (It's not like they are doubling the price or taking something away from the 6D1. so I expect this trend to continue.)
  
  
• In the two body scenario I just listed above, if your primary cam is dialed in for stills, your b-cam might be doing the lion's share of the impromptu video work. Unless you need 4k or a specific higher-end video option (in which case even a 5D4 might not cut it :), one might imagine the 6D2's tilty-flippy might win out over the 5D4's fixed screen for that need.
  
  
  
• Just look at the value proposition I shared on page 1 of this thread -- compare and contrast:
  
  5D4: 30 MP / 7 fps / 61 AF points / dual cards / many f/8 points for T/C use / stellar build quality / fixed LCD --> $3499 initial asking (might come down some)
  
  6D2: 24-28 MP / 6 fps / 45 AF points / dual cards / many f/8 points for T/C use (presumed) / good build quality / tilty-flippy LCD --> $2k?
  
  Yes, unless you need the pro build or great tracking AF, yes, I absoutely could see some pros go 2x in on a 6D2 rather than one 5D4. (The math's not quite 2:1 of course, but the value proposition argument above is fair.)

That said, some people buy more rugged / full-featured gear and that's that, and the 5D line much more comprehensively ticks those boxes. I'm not for a moment going to say that the 5D4 sales will tank for a $2k 6D2 offered with these rumored specs. But to every Canon customer, the 6D2 would be a very solid alternative to the 5D4 and I think many types of photographers -- pros with multiple bodies included -- will avail themselves of that option.

- A

 

[ExodistPhotography]

• ..........
  
  

  • Just look at the value proposition I shared on page 1 of this thread -- compare and contrast:
    
    5D4: 30 MP / 7 fps / 61 AF points / dual cards / many f/8 points for T/C use / stellar build quality / fixed LCD --> $3499 initial asking (might come down some)
    
    6D2: 24-28 MP / 6 fps / 45 AF points / dual cards / many f/8 points for T/C use (presumed) / good build quality / tilty-flippy LCD --> $2k?
    
    Yes, unless you need the pro build or great tracking AF, yes, I absoutely could see some pros go 2x in on a 6D2 rather than one 5D4. (The math's not quite 2:1 of course, but the value proposition argument above is fair.)

  
  That said, some people buy more rugged / full-featured gear and that's that, and the 5D line much more comprehensively ticks those boxes. I'm not for a moment going to say that the 5D4 sales will tank for a $2k 6D2 offered with these rumored specs. But to every Canon customer, the 6D2 would be a very solid alternative to the 5D4 and I think many types of photographers -- pros with multiple bodies included -- will avail themselves of that option.
  
  - A

  
  Very true.
  
  With Canon rumored to make the body smaller and also add the VA Flip screen. Wonder if it may actually become a poly body like the 80D to further seperate it from the 5D line. I highly doubt it, but who knows.

 

[Sharlin]

With Canon rumored to make the body smaller and also add the VA Flip screen. Wonder if it may actually become a poly body like the 80D to further seperate it from the 5D line. I highly doubt it, but who knows.

It seems like a reasonable thing to do, the 6D shell is already half metal, half plastic. For most people the only difference between a mag alloy and polycarbonate body is the mental image. OTOH if they do move the 6D2 upmarket then maybe not after all.

 

[Sharlin]

When there are many AF points, they become quite close to each other, lacking physical space for "cross type" in all of them.

Yeah, that's the geometry argument I alluded to. In the sensor photo it can be seen quite clearly why the leftmost and righmost columns of the peripheral groups only have horizontal-sensitive coverage. But see the 7D2 sensor layout which is a bit different:

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

When there are many AF points, they become quite close to each other, lacking physical space for "cross type" in all of them.

Yeah, that's the geometry argument I alluded to. In the sensor photo it can be seen quite clearly why the leftmost and righmost columns of the peripheral groups only have horizontal-sensitive coverage. But see the 7D2 sensor layout which is a bit different:

I particularly prefer 45 AF points, all of them cross type, rather than a hundred common (non cross type) points.

 

[rfdesigner]

Disclaimer: I read the first few pages, then was away for awhile and haven't caught back up, so forgive me if this has been covered...

I've been thinking about cannibalization of the 5DIV if the 6DII goes upmarket. It's true that some would choose the 6DII instead of the 5DIV because it will meet their needs and cost less. Some of those might even be pros. That would be cannibalization.

But.

Most pros don't just operate with one camera body.

• Would a more upmarket 6DII that still costs less than a 5DIV be attractive as a worthy backup/second to a pro who primarily shoots a 5DIV?
• Would an emerging pro who would otherwise (reluctantly) buy a single 5DIV instead choose two 6DII's?

Both of these scenarios seem likely to occur at some level. The question Canon has to answer is, will they occur enough to truly offset cannibalization of the 5DIV? We'll know Canon's guess when we see what's announced...

Thoughts on these "second body" wonderings? Anyone here considering an upmarket 6DII as a second body to their 5DIII/IV?

In Europe the 6D only qualifies towards CPS silver membership, for anything more you need 2x 5D or 1D

I think my kit would might qualify in the states where it seems to be done on points and two of my lenses count, but here I get nothing.

I wonder if that keeps their 5D/1D market up here or if it means photogs hang onto 5DIIs rather than upgrading to 6Ds?

https://cps.canon-europe.com/

 

[slclick]

Disclaimer: I read the first few pages, then was away for awhile and haven't caught back up, so forgive me if this has been covered...

I've been thinking about cannibalization of the 5DIV if the 6DII goes upmarket. It's true that some would choose the 6DII instead of the 5DIV because it will meet their needs and cost less. Some of those might even be pros. That would be cannibalization.

But.

Most pros don't just operate with one camera body.

• Would a more upmarket 6DII that still costs less than a 5DIV be attractive as a worthy backup/second to a pro who primarily shoots a 5DIV?
• Would an emerging pro who would otherwise (reluctantly) buy a single 5DIV instead choose two 6DII's?

Both of these scenarios seem likely to occur at some level. The question Canon has to answer is, will they occur enough to truly offset cannibalization of the 5DIV? We'll know Canon's guess when we see what's announced...

Thoughts on these "second body" wonderings? Anyone here considering an upmarket 6DII as a second body to their 5DIII/IV?

In Europe the 6D only qualifies towards CPS silver membership, for anything more you need 2x 5D or 1D

I think my kit would might qualify in the states where it seems to be done on points and two of my lenses count, but here I get nothing.

I wonder if that keeps their 5D/1D market up here or if it means photogs hang onto 5DIIs rather than upgrading to 6Ds?

https://cps.canon-europe.com/

I do not think I would make a purchase based upon CPS status. YMMV

 

[hubie]

I think these specs look around right. If they go most lower than 45 point then it will have a hard time selling against the 5D3. There was a lot of talk about which camera you should buy then the 6D came out, it or the 5D2. The camera they listed makes it an easy choice.
If these specs are true they might get me to upgrade 6 months after it comes out and I didn't think I would.

Nonsense in my eyes. Cameras are about image quality in the first place, and the 5d mk iii already falls behind the 6D in most of the times... even a 19 point AF like in the 70D would be more than enough to take photos of everything you want.

 

[IglooEater]

I think these specs look around right. If they go most lower than 45 point then it will have a hard time selling against the 5D3. There was a lot of talk about which camera you should buy then the 6D came out, it or the 5D2. The camera they listed makes it an easy choice.
If these specs are true they might get me to upgrade 6 months after it comes out and I didn't think I would.

Nonsense in my eyes. Cameras are about image quality in the first place, and the 5d mk iii already falls behind the 6D in most of the times... even a 19 point AF like in the 70D would be more than enough to take photos of everything you want.

By that logic the 1DX had nothing over the 6D. I don't think you mean that. More AF points do make certain tasks much easier, especially sports and wildlife, where keeping an AF point on target while tracking is paramount.

Cameras are all about actually creating the image you want. IQ is only a part of that.

Of course, the 19 point 70D is not rubbish, but there's no question the 7D II's AF system will have the clear edge in certain applications. I think folks are hoping for more than 19 to make the new 6D an more versatile all-rounder.

 

[hubie]

I surmise you are right about Canon taking their time with 5DSR II and 7D III. However, I have both the 5D IV and the 5DSR, and I find myself now reaching for the 5D IV a lot more than the 5DSR. Yes, I would like to have 20 more MP for my image, but that new on-chip ADC sensor in the 5D IV is really an improvement over the older sensor technology of the 5DSR. I think 5DS/5DSR sales will begin to dry up until they make improvements to bring that sensor up to date. If Canon thinks otherwise, it will probably be awhile until we have an update for the 5DSR and 7D II.

Depends on which 5DS user you are talking about above.

If you are referring to the rabid enthusiasts who were screaming for on-chip ADC and sensor scores all these years, perhaps. They seemingly want all the best tech in one product at one point in time, like when the A7R II dropped -- that rig seemingly had everything for them. There are unreasonable folks who want that D810/A7R II cosmic stardust sensor that is simultaneously great for detail and great in high ISO; they want the best tech across the board and the 5DS is (I suppose) lacking at present vs. what the 1DX2/5D4 rigs have recently been given.

But if you are referring to the people the 5DS was actually designed for -- detail obsessives prepared to work in a studio or on a tripod to get the most out of the camera -- they likely won't belly ache about not having DPAF or the latest sensor tech and just keep happily snapping away. A studio / product / landscape photographer isn't going to give up 20 MP for +1 stop of base ISO DR the 5D4 offers.

- A

50 MP to me seems like having a choice. Without having shot at such high MPs, I imagine reducing the MP count by 2/5 down to 30 MP would also reduce noise effects and giving you a better noise performance a the cost of a loss in resolution...

I think these specs look around right. If they go most lower than 45 point then it will have a hard time selling against the 5D3. There was a lot of talk about which camera you should buy then the 6D came out, it or the 5D2. The camera they listed makes it an easy choice.
If these specs are true they might get me to upgrade 6 months after it comes out and I didn't think I would.

Nonsense in my eyes. Cameras are about image quality in the first place, and the 5d mk iii already falls behind the 6D in most of the times... even a 19 point AF like in the 70D would be more than enough to take photos of everything you want.

By that logic the 1DX had nothing over the 6D. I don't think you mean that. More AF points do make certain tasks much easier, especially sports and wildlife, where keeping an AF point on target while tracking is paramount.

Cameras are all about actually creating the image you want. IQ is only a part of that.

Of course, the 19 point 70D is not rubbish, but there's no question the 7D II's AF system will have the clear edge in certain applications. I think folks are hoping for more than 19 to make the new 6D an more versatile all-rounder.

I get that, but I doubt that a 6D mk II which might be less expensive than a 5D mk III will sell less against a 5D mk III just because of the AF... The 5D mk III focus system is quite capable, but I can think of only very rare occasions where this might give you an image that you can't get with a 6D mk II, probably. We are not talking about fps here, just about AF capabilities. And if you take the rest in, the 6D would just be an overall better performer with a much more advanced processor making that AF to be on a same level, except coverage probably.

Take in other factors like lenses, they are much more prone to give you bad results than a body with a modern AF system where there are "just" 50% of the cross-type points available.
If you are dependant on getting that image, you will take the 5D mk IV or 1DX mk II anyway, and not an aged 5D mk III (except you might shoot one for a bargin).

 

[ExodistPhotography]

50 MP to me seems like having a choice. Without having shot at such high MPs, I imagine reducing the MP count by 2/5 down to 30 MP would also reduce noise effects and giving you a better noise performance a the cost of a loss in resolution...

Those who use those cameras (5DS & 5DSR) normally have the ISO locked in on 100 or perhaps in extreme cases 400. High ISO, who cares. These are not sports or wildlife cameras. Whats important to those shooters is extreme detail.

I get that, but I doubt that a 6D mk II which might be less expensive than a 5D mk III will sell less against a 5D mk III just because of the AF... The 5D mk III focus system is quite capable, but I can think of only very rare occasions where this might give you an image that you can't get with a 6D mk II, probably. We are not talking about fps here, just about AF capabilities. And if you take the rest in, the 6D would just be an overall better performer with a much more advanced processor making that AF to be on a same level, except coverage probably.

Take in other factors like lenses, they are much more prone to give you bad results than a body with a modern AF system where there are "just" 50% of the cross-type points available.
If you are dependant on getting that image, you will take the 5D mk IV or 1DX mk II anyway, and not an aged 5D mk III (except you might shoot one for a bargin).

I am not sure why everyone keeps on about the 5DII and 5DIII. Those are older models and the 5DII is not even sold by Canon anymore. The 5DIII is on its way out the door as well. Before the 6DII us released they will stop production of the 5DIII (if not sooner) as the 6DII will fill that lower end gap. At the same note, before the 6DII is released. Canon will stop production of the 6D. That way they can reduce their stock of the existing cameras instead of cutting a huge loss.

So soon there will only be a 5DS(R), 5DIV and 6DII.. 4 cameras that fit the needs and budgets. But honestly I feel they may even drop the 5DS and just keep the 5DSR around. Its been a much bigger seller then the 5DS anyway.

The 19pt AF is OLD tech from original 7D. It was good and worked great in the 70D. But its not a fit for the much larger full frame sensor. The current 6D does have 11pt. But its outdated also. They will most likely put something in much like the 80Ds AF points, but upscaled for full frame.

As far as pricing. Forget the price of the 6D now. When it originally came out it was $2099 Body Only..
The new 6DII will very likely be within $100USD of that price, give or take.

 

[ahsanford]

Those who use those cameras (5DS & 5DSR) normally have the ISO locked in on 100 or perhaps in extreme cases 400. High ISO, who cares. These are not sports or wildlife cameras. Whats important to those shooters is extreme detail.

Respectfully disagree. That's what we all thought when the camera was announced: "If they still haven't gone to on-chip ADC or illuminating the sensor, jamming 50 MP into the sensor will drive spectacular noise levels. Therefore, it will be a studio or tripod camera used only at very low ISO." (Goodness knows I said all that myself when it was announced.)

Turns out that's not the case at all. Most reviewers describe the 5DS as a very fair noise competitor to the 5D3 once you downsample to the 5D3's 22 MP. That's not a cheat or a magic trick -- think of it as the camera needing to downshift to manage a steeper hill climb.

In other words, the 5DS / 5DS is both...

• ...a high detail rig from base ISO to some middle ISO level (800-1600 depending on how picky you are), and
• ...a 5D3 at high ISO levels

In other words, downsampling (loosely) prevents high ISO performance from falling off a cliff.

Once you consider the 5DS / 5DS R in that light, it's a far more capable camera than we thought it would be when it was first announced.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Nonsense in my eyes. Cameras are about image quality in the first place, and the 5d mk iii already falls behind the 6D in most of the times... even a 19 point AF like in the 70D would be more than enough to take photos of everything you want.

By that logic the 1DX had nothing over the 6D. I don't think you mean that. More AF points do make certain tasks much easier, especially sports and wildlife, where keeping an AF point on target while tracking is paramount.

Cameras are all about actually creating the image you want. IQ is only a part of that.

+1 to IE. AF critically matters, and not remotely just for sports. Good luck shooting an f/1.4 prime wide open off-center (say rule of thirds) on a 6D in real-time without a tripod, focusing screen or trial and error. A 5D3 will nail that all day.

Hubie, respectfully, feel free to enjoy the gamechanging sensor improvements the 6D offers over the 5D3 :, I'll in turn take the 5D3 over the 6D for more reasons than I can count.

- A

 

[hubie]

Nonsense in my eyes. Cameras are about image quality in the first place, and the 5d mk iii already falls behind the 6D in most of the times... even a 19 point AF like in the 70D would be more than enough to take photos of everything you want.

By that logic the 1DX had nothing over the 6D. I don't think you mean that. More AF points do make certain tasks much easier, especially sports and wildlife, where keeping an AF point on target while tracking is paramount.

Cameras are all about actually creating the image you want. IQ is only a part of that.

+1 to IE. AF critically matters, and not remotely just for sports. Good luck shooting an f/1.4 prime wide open off-center (say rule of thirds) on a 6D in real-time without a tripod, focusing screen or trial and error. A 5D3 will nail that all day.

Hubie, respectfully, feel free to enjoy the gamechanging sensor improvements the 6D offers over the 5D3 :, I'll in turn take the 5D3 over the 6D for more reasons than I can count.

- A

Respectfully, I am talking about a 6D mk II with the assumption of it having a much more modern AF system than the mk I version , just may be not with over 60 AF points like a 5D mk III

Btw, doesnt a 5D mk IV qualify you for the CPS? A 6D would definitely not.

 

[privatebydesign]

Those who use those cameras (5DS & 5DSR) normally have the ISO locked in on 100 or perhaps in extreme cases 400. High ISO, who cares. These are not sports or wildlife cameras. Whats important to those shooters is extreme detail.

Respectfully disagree. That's what we all thought when the camera was announced: "If they still haven't gone to on-chip ADC or illuminating the sensor, jamming 50 MP into the sensor will drive spectacular noise levels. Therefore, it will be a studio or tripod camera used only at very low ISO." (Goodness knows I said all that myself when it was announced.)

Turns out that's not the case at all. Most reviewers describe the 5DS as a very fair noise competitor to the 5D3 once you downsample to the 5D3's 22 MP. That's not a cheat or a magic trick -- think of it as the camera needing to downshift to manage a steeper hill climb.

In other words, the 5DS / 5DS is both...

• ...a high detail rig from base ISO to some middle ISO level (800-1600 depending on how picky you are), and
• ...a 5D3 at high ISO levels

In other words, downsampling (loosely) prevents high ISO performance from falling off a cliff.

Once you consider the 5DS / 5DS R in that light, it's a far more capable camera than we thought it would be when it was first announced.

- A

That presupposes that:-
1/ You sometimes need high resolution and know beforehand when those occasions will be.
2/ You are happy to put up with the much larger file sizes and unnecessary processing for every single image you take.

I'd like a 5DSR but probably won't get one until the MkII, there are too many interesting features I'd like that the current model doesn't have over and above the improvements that on chip ADC will give the base iso, things like better AF, full touch screen, WiFi, etc. that a MkII will have and I, personally, would use.

For my uses I can see a two body solution to replace my aging 1DS MkIII's, a 1DX MkII and a 5DS/R MkII. I'll probably get the 1DX MkII first as I don't see that being upgraded to a MkIII until the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. However i do see a 5DS/R MkII (which I believe will be joined to make a single non AA filter equipped body) coming a good time before that.

 

[Don Haines]

Nonsense in my eyes. Cameras are about image quality in the first place, and the 5d mk iii already falls behind the 6D in most of the times... even a 19 point AF like in the 70D would be more than enough to take photos of everything you want.

By that logic the 1DX had nothing over the 6D. I don't think you mean that. More AF points do make certain tasks much easier, especially sports and wildlife, where keeping an AF point on target while tracking is paramount.

Cameras are all about actually creating the image you want. IQ is only a part of that.

+1 to IE. AF critically matters, and not remotely just for sports. Good luck shooting an f/1.4 prime wide open off-center (say rule of thirds) on a 6D in real-time without a tripod, focusing screen or trial and error. A 5D3 will nail that all day.

Hubie, respectfully, feel free to enjoy the gamechanging sensor improvements the 6D offers over the 5D3 :, I'll in turn take the 5D3 over the 6D for more reasons than I can count.

- A

Respectfully, I am talking about a 6D mk II with the assumption of it having a much more modern AF system than the mk I version , just may be not with over 60 AF points like a 5D mk III

Btw, doesnt a 5D mk IV qualify you for the CPS? A 6D would definitely not.

You don't pictures with a sensor or an AF module, you take them with a camera system. There are many technological factors and ergonomic factors that make up the camera systems performance. Looking at a single component in isolation is a fool's quest. As has been said many times before in this forum, nobody cares how many megapixels or stops of DR are in a blurry picture, and that for modern cameras your lens choice is more important than the choice of body

 

[ahsanford]

That presupposes that:-
1/ You sometimes need high resolution and know beforehand when those occasions will be.
2/ You are happy to put up with the much larger file sizes and unnecessary processing for every single image you take.

Oh, goodness, I did not state the 5DS R is not free of downsides! I'm just rebutting the point that it goes to hell north of low ISO. It does not.

You are spot on with both points, and the 5DS / 5DS R is not for everyone. I'm naturally in the 5D4 (or 5D5) trajectory as a guy who wants a great all-arounder and does want a great balance of resolution and high ISO performance. That said, I'm passing on the 5D4 and will buy glass this cycle.

- A

 

[Zv]

Wouldn't it be interesting if they kept the megapixel count around 20? It's good enough for the flagship so not so far fetched an idea! Maybe it could be a low light wonder?

Personally I'd be cool with that. They could just stick the sensor from the 1DX2 in there, add a Digic 7 and call it a day. Well, I guess if that was the case we would've seen the finished product by now!

 

[AlanF]

Please correct me if I am wrong as I am relying on reading measurements on sites and not direct experience. it seems that there is very little to choose between the 5DIV and 1DXII in terms of noise and dynamic range and so the lower pixel sensor's prime role is to allow more fps? In which case, the putting the 1DXII sensor in a low fps 6DII would be worse than putting the 5DIV sensor into it?

 

[ExodistPhotography]

.....

Turns out that's not the case at all. Most reviewers describe the 5DS as a very fair noise competitor to the 5D3 once you downsample to the 5D3's 22 MP. That's not a cheat or a magic trick -- think of it as the camera needing to downshift to manage a steeper hill climb.

.....
- A

Absolutely true. You do not even have to really downsample per se. Just printing the both the same size (say A3+ 19x13 inches) will end up with similar results since the pixel resolution tend to just overpower the noise. (I hope I am saying that correctly). Just like if you take a really high ISO image say from a 80D at ISO6400 and post it to FB at 1000px.. Everyone is not going to see that there was noise in the image. I did not mean to imply you could not use the 5DSR in anyway you wanted. I just tend to come from a portrait studio mindset

Cheers, Joe