I'm watching too many reviews I think. Most are slating the 6d2 by comparing it to 5d4. But surely it was never going to be comparable. It is after all a replacement for the 6d not a 5d5.
As an entry level FF camera it should really in my opinion be compared to canons top APS-C camera in terms...
I had a 5d3 on long term loan for a while and liked it but it had to go back so I'm now using my old 50d. I want to go back to full frame. So my choice is 5d3 again or 6d2. I regularly raise shadows in landscapes on my 50d and is perfectly usable for me. So time will tell how bad 6d2 is I guess
I agree, I was on the cusp of buying a used 6d or 5d3 but thought the 6d2 would be a good option but i may be back to square 1. I suppose I'm in a better place than someone already with 6d wanting more capabilities
Am I right in that in thinking then if you take a slightly under exposed shot at 100 ISO with the 6d2 and then wanted to boost the shadows of the raw file there would be little detail and a lot of noise?
Is this the crux of poor dynamic range the reviews are referring to? So far it seems...
Bit disappointing, in terms of dynamic range but how would the new sensor stack up against my old 50d for example?
I had a 5d mkiii for a while on loan, I loved this so would like to get a full frame body. Where would the 6d mk ii sit between these two models? Purely on dynamic range, I guess...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.