Canon EOS 6D Mk2 Owner's Thread

Diamonddec said:
The DR comparison with the 5d4 at 10 mins, 12 secs of that video is huge in the detail!
Click to expand...

But he doesn't say what ISO he's comparing at. If it's no better than the old 6D then the 5D4 will have a 1.5 EV advantage at base over it.

If it's no better than the old one sensor wise the other improvements are still worth having. The camera world has become obsessed with DR. I'm sure that some people would buy a camera based purely on it and if the manufacturer put the shutter button and controls on the bottom they'd think that was a price worth paying if it had 16 EV dynamic range over ISO50-3200.
 
Jamie perks said:
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 time will tell.
Click to expand...

It'll be a lot better than the IQ from the 50d. A lot (and I love my 50d still!).
 
Jamie perks said:
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 consistent that people are disappointed but is it worse for example than my old 50d which in good light is usable for me.
Confused but annoyingly stuck with canon
Click to expand...

It's not 'worse' than your 50d. Far from it. Where are you getting this from? As above, it's a lot better than the 50d sensor by some considerable margin (I'm not even sure why you're comparing them?).

Oh, and there would be a decent amount of detail and not that much noise using appropriate processing. It's not an old 350d [emoji23]
 
Last edited:
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 of IQ.
I see the DR graphs etc but I'm not techy enough to really imagine the difference.
Some great points made on here though.
I basically want a 6d but with auto focus video for the odd bit of family stuff. 6d2 seems to tick my boxes, just don't want to buy a lemon.
Do all reviewers hate canon cameras ?
 
Jamie perks said:
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 of IQ.
I see the DR graphs etc but I'm not techy enough to really imagine the difference.
Some great points made on here though.
I basically want a 6d but with auto focus video for the odd bit of family stuff. 6d2 seems to tick my boxes, just don't want to buy a lemon.
Do all reviewers hate canon cameras ?
Click to expand...

No, it is directly comparable to the 5d4 as it's far more similar sensor wise than a Canon crop camera (the 6d sensor is after all better than the 5d3's sensor so the 6d2 is naturally comparable to the 5d4, and actually the real world differences aren't that different).
 
Phil V said:
372 posts in the 'owners' thread, and still no owners :tumbleweed:
Click to expand...

The creation of this thread was definitely premature [emoji23]
 
Phil V said:
I think it ought to be renamed, then we can have an owners thread when there's cameras in hands.
Click to expand...

A good idea. Otherwise new people to the thread have to wade through all this before they hear from an actual user!
 
I was just after some help on technical issues from experienced folk before I buy a 6d2. This was the only place for that at present.
 
Jamie perks said:
I was just after some help on technical issues from experienced folk before I buy a 6d2. This was the only place for that at present.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with that and it wasn't aimed at you, it's aimed at all of us posters here, lol! [emoji23]
 
Jamie perks said:
I was just after some help on technical issues from experienced folk before I buy a 6d2. This was the only place for that at present.
Click to expand...

odd jim said:
Nothing wrong with that and it wasn't aimed at you, it's aimed at all of us posters here, lol! [emoji23]
Click to expand...

What Jim said.

The thread isn't useless (almost...) but it doesn't really deserve its title. :)
 
Jamie perks said:
.
Do all reviewers hate canon cameras ?
Click to expand...

Canon have built up a reputation for playing it safe with their new products, upgrading them just enough (but no more) to make them financially viable. As an example the big issue with the 6d2 when it was first announced was the lack of 4k video. This wouldn't worry me but the first revewers stated this as a major reason not to by it. The lack of dual card slots was another. Now it appears that the sensor performance is a bit of a let-down as well. For me that IS a deal-breaker.

Another example of Canon's attitude was the Mk 2 version of the 24-105 zoom lens. I know I was looking forward to improved optical performance over the Mk 1. But it is no better. In other respects it is but after the ?10/12 year life-span off the Mk 1 there was surely room for improvement optically.

People look at the technological advances that other manufacturers make and wonder why Canon seem so reluctant to go there too.
 
i remember the mk1 6d wasnt well received on release, loads of negativity about it, but its turned out to be a great camera. be interesting to see what happens with the mk2. still debating if its the route i should take or not
 
niko said:
i remember the mk1 6d wasnt well received on release, loads of negativity about it, but its turned out to be a great camera. be interesting to see what happens with the mk2. still debating if its the route i should take or not
Click to expand...

I don't remember it being received poorly, quite the opposite. It outperformed any Canon sensor that went before it especially in low light, and was considered the first of its kind (as an affordable entry level FF without compromising quality and with arguably Canon's best sensor!).
 
odd jim said:
I don't remember it being received poorly, quite the opposite. It outperformed any Canon sensor that went before it especially in low light, and was considered the first of its kind (as an affordable entry level FF without compromising quality and with arguably Canon's best sensor!).
Click to expand...
that took a while, before people started realizing what it was capable of, 1st responses were lack lustre. apart from the low light af on centre point that is.
 
niko said:
that took a while, before people started realizing what it was capable of, 1st responses were lack lustre. apart from the low light af on centre point that is.
Click to expand...
I remember the poor responses initially,then like you say it found favour,yes it made me think at the time.
 
I've picked one up and messed around with it so now the thread is getting there.
 
Gaz J said:
But he doesn't say what ISO he's comparing at. If it's no better than the old 6D then the 5D4 will have a 1.5 EV advantage at base over it.

If it's no better than the old one sensor wise the other improvements are still worth having. The camera world has become obsessed with DR. I'm sure that some people would buy a camera based purely on it and if the manufacturer put the shutter button and controls on the bottom they'd think that was a price worth paying if it had 16 EV dynamic range over ISO50-3200.
Click to expand...

If you have access to the forums at luminous Landscape there's an interesting if rather abrasive thread over there about the 6DII.

My own view is that anyone who thinks that DR doesn't matter and any camera is good enough these days probably thinks anyone who thinks it does matter needs to learn how to expose properly :D
 
niko said:
i remember the mk1 6d wasnt well received on release, loads of negativity about it, but its turned out to be a great camera. be interesting to see what happens with the mk2. still debating if its the route i should take or not
Click to expand...
I don't remember that. Lots have changed over the last 4 years. Canon have lost the plot it seems.

A d750 blows this camera out of the water.
 
woof woof said:
If you have access to the forums at luminous Landscape there's an interesting if rather abrasive thread over there about the 6DII.

My own view is that anyone who thinks that DR doesn't matter and any camera is good enough these days probably thinks anyone who thinks it does matter needs to learn how to expose properly :D
Click to expand...

But we have become obsessed with it. It's just part of a camera. For some it's the holy grail, for others, like me, it's not. I don't care that a Sony sensor has 0.5 EV more that my camera at base ISO. I never use my camera at base ISO so it's immaterial. My camera may have 0.5 EV advantage at the ISOs that I do use. Mine is good enough to give me the results I'm happy with. In fact, as will be the case with most people, my camera is way better than me.

Whenever a new camera is rumoured or announced its almost guaranteed that in the first page on here someone will mention DR. The D850 thread as an example. Although most of the page is taken up with whinging about Nikons reliability and recalls DR comes up pretty soon.
 
Last edited:
My D750 has luckily not been recalled. I was looking at the Canon 6D MK2 with interest as my Sis in law has a lot of Canon gear and we were considering a business venture so sharing lenses could have been of help. The review at Tech Rader has the AF system (not live view as the Canon is clearly better) as better in the D750 and the D750 is the clear winner is high ISO and noise control. This is of course a little dissapointing as thought that this would be a step forward from the D750.

Its clearly a step up from the 6D and crop camers, but I still feel a little dissapointed with these inital reviews. I guess I should be putting this is a 6D Mk2 discussion thread, and not owners thread!
 
jonneymendoza said:
You got a leser camera that cost more. Less Dr slower. Less features.lesser af.
Click to expand...

Have I?

That's you're opinion and you're opinion counts for FA when it comes to spending my money. You seem to delight in rubbishing other people's choices because they don't fit with your ideal of what makes a good camera.
 
Gaz J said:
Have I?

That's you're opinion and you're opinion counts for FA when it comes to spending my money. You seem to delight in rubbishing other people's choices because they don't fit with your ideal of what makes a good camera.
Click to expand...
You have no clue. They are facts not opinions on d750 performance and specs. It's not fairy dust.


Better iq
Better af
.

Factual. Not my fault you like a lesser camera but don't talk as if the 6d/6d2 is a much better camera. Based on what. Fairy dust?
 
Last edited:
Gaz J said:
But we have become obsessed with it. It's just part of a camera. For some it's the holy grail, for others, like me, it's not. I don't care that a Sony sensor has 0.5 EV more that my camera at base ISO. I never use my camera at base ISO so it's immaterial. My camera may have 0.5 EV advantage at the ISOs that I do use. Mine is good enough to give me the results I'm happy with. In fact, as will be the case with most people, my camera is way better than me.

Whenever a new camera is rumoured or announced its almost guaranteed that in the first page on here someone will mention DR. The D850 thread as an example. Although most of the page is taken up with whinging about Nikons reliability and recalls DR comes up pretty soon.
Click to expand...

I don't think people are obsessed with it (DR) per se and I'd agree that 0.5 is probably not worth getting bent out of shape over but maybe some people would like more for practical reasons... such as not having to risk crushing the shadows / blowing the highlights quite so much and not having it all fall apart quite so much when doing something relatively normal such as boosting the shadows a bit. I think the reason it's been discussed so much in relation t the 6DII is that in the opinion of some this camera is years behind the best.

I think it's also worth remembering that other people have different wants and needs than you or I. For example you never use your camera at base ISO, I use mine at every setting from 100 to 25,600 but I'm not particularly demanding when it comes to image quality and I don't claim to need perfect gallery quality 2m wide prints but people out there have different expectations and for some the 6DII may be a disappointing camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top