Canon Community Canon Community
 


Reply
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 3,722
Registered: ‎06-25-2014

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???


KlausEnrique wrote:

Bob, you are right in that Tom's photo does not require superior dynamic range. It just needed for Tom to not make a mistake. But you know what, we all make mistakes at some point.

On your second point, however, unfortunately, you are incorrect. Low light performance refers to shooting, well, in low light. I am not sure if Tom was shooting in low light, but he probably wasn't. One does not normally shoot birds in flight in the middle of the night. How well does a camera perform in low light generally refers to: can the camera find focus in the dark? How noisy is the camera at high ISO?(which in this case, the 6D Mark II is pretty good). So, no, we are not talking about low light, we are talking about dynamic range, which affects not only photos shot in low light, but in all circumstances. Now, for all practical purposes, Tom was recovering information from the shadows (because he mistakenly underexposed his image). But even in normal conditions one may want to bring out the detail in the shadows, specially if you do not want to have your highlights all blown out! And some times you are hit with banding because of Canon's poor dynamic range.

The photo below was shot in the middle of the day. It is a 16 minute exposure. The highlights on the red channel are already blown out, but the blue and green channels have not even left the sensor's floor, so there is banding in the shadows. Even entry level cameras from Sony, Nikon and Pentax would not have that issue. This was shot with a 5DS which is not a cheap camera and has even better dynamic range than the original 6D and obviously way ahead of the 6D Mark II (although not as good as the 5D Mark IV). I already own the Pentax 645Z, which is even more expensive than the 5DS, but I still want to have a 35mm body with decent dynamic range (by 2017 standards). The 5D Mark IV doesn't cut it, but given that Canon already has advanced on dynamic range technology, even if it still remains the industry's laggard, to not include the meagre best that they can offer in this regard in ALL their models, is a huge disappointment.

 

Central_Park_Infrared_10.JPG


Um ... Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but

 

A)  That looks like an IR photo. The reason the blue and the green are pegged at zero is that you're filtering them out, right?

 

B)  What you see in the lower half isn't banding. It's the reflections of the trees in the background.

Bob
Boston, Massachusetts USA
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 23
Registered: ‎10-24-2017

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???


Waddizzle wrote:

The 5Ds has better dynamic range than the 6D2 and the 5D4?  What on Earth are you talking about?  

 

The 5Ds has a base ISO range of 100-6400, while the 6D2 has a base ISO range of 100-40000.  While 5Ds has twice the resolution of the 6D2, the 6D2 blows the socks off of the 5Ds when it comes to low noise.  The 5D4 has a base ISO range of 100 to 32000.


@Waddizzle - Why don't you read what I actually wrote before you hit the "post" button?

 

I never said the 5DS has better dynamic range than the 5D Mark IV. Seriously, reread my post and then quote where I say that.

 

In fact, I said the opposite! Jeez!

 

Second, yes, the 5DS does have better dynamic range than the 6D2 at all ISOs (that the 5DS delivers). Why exactly are you mentioning ISO ranges?  Are you telling me that you think dynamic range is the same as ISO range??? If that is the case, then I would also recommend that you familiarize yourself with the different concepts before you start ranting again... The ISO range of a camera does not have anything to do with the dynamic range of a camera as the graph below shows... I.E. The 5DS has a shorter ISO range than the 6D2, and yet it also has better dynamic range over the 6D2 (you are welcome!)

 

Dynamic Range.JPG

Occasional Contributor
Posts: 23
Registered: ‎10-24-2017

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???


RobertTheFat wrote:

KlausEnrique wrote:

Bob, you are right in that Tom's photo does not require superior dynamic range. It just needed for Tom to not make a mistake. But you know what, we all make mistakes at some point.

On your second point, however, unfortunately, you are incorrect. Low light performance refers to shooting, well, in low light. I am not sure if Tom was shooting in low light, but he probably wasn't. One does not normally shoot birds in flight in the middle of the night. How well does a camera perform in low light generally refers to: can the camera find focus in the dark? How noisy is the camera at high ISO?(which in this case, the 6D Mark II is pretty good). So, no, we are not talking about low light, we are talking about dynamic range, which affects not only photos shot in low light, but in all circumstances. Now, for all practical purposes, Tom was recovering information from the shadows (because he mistakenly underexposed his image). But even in normal conditions one may want to bring out the detail in the shadows, specially if you do not want to have your highlights all blown out! And some times you are hit with banding because of Canon's poor dynamic range.

The photo below was shot in the middle of the day. It is a 16 minute exposure. The highlights on the red channel are already blown out, but the blue and green channels have not even left the sensor's floor, so there is banding in the shadows. Even entry level cameras from Sony, Nikon and Pentax would not have that issue. This was shot with a 5DS which is not a cheap camera and has even better dynamic range than the original 6D and obviously way ahead of the 6D Mark II (although not as good as the 5D Mark IV). I already own the Pentax 645Z, which is even more expensive than the 5DS, but I still want to have a 35mm body with decent dynamic range (by 2017 standards). The 5D Mark IV doesn't cut it, but given that Canon already has advanced on dynamic range technology, even if it still remains the industry's laggard, to not include the meagre best that they can offer in this regard in ALL their models, is a huge disappointment.

 

Central_Park_Infrared_10.JPG


Um ... Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but

 

A)  That looks like an IR photo. The reason the blue and the green are pegged at zero is that you're filtering them out, right?

 

B)  What you see in the lower half isn't banding. It's the reflections of the trees in the background.


Hi Bob,

 

A) yes, that is an IR photo, and yes, you are kind of right. In IR photography you filter out visible light. That means the red, green and blue pixels in the Bayer filer of your camera don't receive any visible light, but the red pixels are more sensitive to infrared light than the green and blue ones, hence they blow out before the greens and the blues leave the sensor floor. Anyhow, I just brought up Infrared as one example where Canon's mediocre dynamic range shows up pretty fast. But I could have equally posted an HDR sunset photograph that would show the same. In fact, why don't you just Google "canon banding issue" and then go to images you can see thousands and thousands of photographs showing the banding that I am referring to. To be honest, it is a little surprising to be on a Canon forum and yet people don't seem to have ever heard of this. Every single Canon camera will show this if you don't throw enough light at the sensor to push the sensitivity pass its floor, as you can attest by the photo that you posted. The banding and the poor dynamic range are closely intertwined. Canon does a bad job at reading the data that the sensor is capturing and it keeps it in analog form longer than other brand sensors. I am sure there is an article somewhere where you can read all about this...

 

B) no, I was not referring to the reflections of the trees. Here is a crop of the image that shows it better. Hopefully you will see it. In this case the banding is very strong in a vertical fashion. And that is just an artifact that Canon cameras have. In the case of the image you posted, the banding is mostly horizontal. If you post a crop of the area without doing any noise reduction I can point it out for you.

 

_K8A2345.JPG

Honored Contributor
Posts: 5,426
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???


KlausEnrique wrote:

 

Second, yes, the 5DS does have better dynamic range than the 6D2 at all ISOs (that the 5DS delivers)


Okay.  I see, you’re just comparing dynamic range across the ISO range the 5DS delivers, which is apples to oranges.

So, the 5Ds is better at going from 0 to 30 mph, but only has a top speed of 35 mph, while the others have top speeds over 60 mph.  Again, that’s apples to oranges.

But, if the 5D4 has better dynamic range than the 5Ds, across the ISOs the 5Ds delivers, then what good is a 5Ds?  I’m just trying to make sense out of your facts and claims, which seem cherry picked to me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't rent software. I use Photoshop CS6, ACR 9.8 and Lightroom 6.8 ."
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 23
Registered: ‎10-24-2017

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???


Waddizzle wrote:

KlausEnrique wrote:

 

Second, yes, the 5DS does have better dynamic range than the 6D2 at all ISOs (that the 5DS delivers)


Okay.  I see, you’re just comparing dynamic range across the ISO range the 5DS delivers, which is apples to oranges.

So, the 5Ds is better at going from 0 to 30 mph, but only has a top speed of 35 mph, while the others have top speeds over 60 mph.  Again, that’s apples to oranges.

But, if the 5D4 has better dynamic range than the 5Ds, across the ISOs the 5Ds delivers, then what good is a 5Ds?  I’m just trying to make sense out of your facts and claims, which seem cherry picked to me.


LOL...

 

OK, honestly, I don't care if you agree with me or not... If you are a happy human being then I am good...

 

Yes, you are right, I am comparing dynamic range across the ISO range of the 5DS. But that is so that I can compare apples to apples. The 5DS maxes out at 12,800. And until that point it has better dynamic range than the 6DII. And after that you cannot compare them because then that would be comparing apples to oranges.

 

It sounds like to you, a camera with ISO 20,000,000 would be a dream come true. In your analogy, that would be like a car that can do 1,000 mph, but your analogy is completely wrong. A better analogy is that ISO 50 is Formula One, and ISO 12,000 is little kids racing in tricicles, and that is as far as the 5DS goes. And the 6DII goes even further and you can play races with tinny little plastic cars... If that is what interests you, then good for you. Personally, I don't see the point, but that does not mean that I am right. Is it a good thing that the 6DII has a wider ISO range? Yes, it undoubtedly is, but that does not make its poor dynamic range at the more important end of the ISO range any better.

 

And on to your last point, yes the 5DIV has better dynamic range. But dynamic range is not the only important thing in a camera, right? I mean, I still have a Canon system, and Canon does have the worst dynamic range ever! I think the 5DIV is a better all-around camera, but I make very large prints of my work, so the 50 MPs are more important to me than the superior dynamic range of the 5DIV. However, I do need a third body with good dynamic range and since Canon is not going to provide it, I am going to get a Pentax K-1, which does not have a very good focusing system and the Pentax lenses are not as great as Canon's, but it will have to do... Because life is not perfect. Happy shooting!

Honored Contributor
Posts: 5,426
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???

Like I said, I am just trying to understand what you are talking about, not argue.  Your rants are condescending and offensive.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't rent software. I use Photoshop CS6, ACR 9.8 and Lightroom 6.8 ."
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 3,722
Registered: ‎06-25-2014

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???


KlausEnrique wrote:

RobertTheFat wrote:

KlausEnrique wrote:

Bob, you are right in that Tom's photo does not require superior dynamic range. It just needed for Tom to not make a mistake. But you know what, we all make mistakes at some point.

On your second point, however, unfortunately, you are incorrect. Low light performance refers to shooting, well, in low light. I am not sure if Tom was shooting in low light, but he probably wasn't. One does not normally shoot birds in flight in the middle of the night. How well does a camera perform in low light generally refers to: can the camera find focus in the dark? How noisy is the camera at high ISO?(which in this case, the 6D Mark II is pretty good). So, no, we are not talking about low light, we are talking about dynamic range, which affects not only photos shot in low light, but in all circumstances. Now, for all practical purposes, Tom was recovering information from the shadows (because he mistakenly underexposed his image). But even in normal conditions one may want to bring out the detail in the shadows, specially if you do not want to have your highlights all blown out! And some times you are hit with banding because of Canon's poor dynamic range.

The photo below was shot in the middle of the day. It is a 16 minute exposure. The highlights on the red channel are already blown out, but the blue and green channels have not even left the sensor's floor, so there is banding in the shadows. Even entry level cameras from Sony, Nikon and Pentax would not have that issue. This was shot with a 5DS which is not a cheap camera and has even better dynamic range than the original 6D and obviously way ahead of the 6D Mark II (although not as good as the 5D Mark IV). I already own the Pentax 645Z, which is even more expensive than the 5DS, but I still want to have a 35mm body with decent dynamic range (by 2017 standards). The 5D Mark IV doesn't cut it, but given that Canon already has advanced on dynamic range technology, even if it still remains the industry's laggard, to not include the meagre best that they can offer in this regard in ALL their models, is a huge disappointment.

 

Central_Park_Infrared_10.JPG


Um ... Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but

 

A)  That looks like an IR photo. The reason the blue and the green are pegged at zero is that you're filtering them out, right?

 

B)  What you see in the lower half isn't banding. It's the reflections of the trees in the background.


Hi Bob,

 

A) yes, that is an IR photo, and yes, you are kind of right. In IR photography you filter out visible light. That means the red, green and blue pixels in the Bayer filer of your camera don't receive any visible light, but the red pixels are more sensitive to infrared light than the green and blue ones, hence they blow out before the greens and the blues leave the sensor floor. Anyhow, I just brought up Infrared as one example where Canon's mediocre dynamic range shows up pretty fast. But I could have equally posted an HDR sunset photograph that would show the same. In fact, why don't you just Google "canon banding issue" and then go to images you can see thousands and thousands of photographs showing the banding that I am referring to. To be honest, it is a little surprising to be on a Canon forum and yet people don't seem to have ever heard of this. Every single Canon camera will show this if you don't throw enough light at the sensor to push the sensitivity pass its floor, as you can attest by the photo that you posted. The banding and the poor dynamic range are closely intertwined. Canon does a bad job at reading the data that the sensor is capturing and it keeps it in analog form longer than other brand sensors. I am sure there is an article somewhere where you can read all about this...

 

B) no, I was not referring to the reflections of the trees. Here is a crop of the image that shows it better. Hopefully you will see it. In this case the banding is very strong in a vertical fashion. And that is just an artifact that Canon cameras have. In the case of the image you posted, the banding is mostly horizontal. If you post a crop of the area without doing any noise reduction I can point it out for you.

 

_K8A2345.JPG


A)  Yes, if you filter out the green and blue channels, the red will blow out first. I sort of thought that was what I had already said, but I guess I didn't make myself clear.

 

B)  I surmise that that crop is from the lower left of the frame, but it's pretty hard to tell. In any case, I still think you're interpreting reflections as banding.

 

C)  I've searched this thread for the image you think I posted, but couldn't find it. Senility must be overtaking me more rapidly than I had imagined.

 

D)  I apologize for the cluelessness of the participants in this forum. Frankly, I had no idea. I guess it's a good thing you came along to enlighten us.

Bob
Boston, Massachusetts USA
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 18
Registered: ‎07-04-2014

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???

This has been a very interesting discussion to say the least. BTW, I did upgrade to the 6D MKII and love it so let me make a few observations:

 

 

1. I use to shoot film all the time and still do but just for fun. Dynamic range with film? You have to be kidding. You could do magic in the darkroom but you could not bring back the highlights or shadows, etc.

 

2. With film we loved grain!!  I still love shooting Kodak Tri X with it nice luminance grain. Same for color.

 

3. I stuck with Canon as all my many lens and other cameras are Canon and being retired I didn’t want to spend the bucks for the 5D M4. Nor did I want to sell everything and go Sony, Fuji or Nikcn.

 

4. I tend to shoot a lot of 3, 5 or 7 (HDR) exposures to get better dynamic range. Not all the time mind you.

 

5. Could Canon have done a better job with the 6D MK2? Yes. For example the focus points. It looks like they just took the focus points from the 8D and dropped them in the 6D MK2 so they looked and are clumped together. They should have expanded them. 

 

6. They could have put two card slots in the camera not just one.

 

7. 4K? For me...I don’t care. I have high end video cameras including my iPhone 7 to do that.

 

8. So many people want all th features of the 5D MK4 in the 6D MK2!! Canon needs to make some separations between the cameras.

 

9. So far nobody has said anything about noise, etc. in my large prints.

 

10. The even better thing, we have options. If you have. 6D MK1 stay with it. Buy a Canon 5d MK3 or go Sony, etc.

 

11. Go shoot film and get a whole new perspective.

 

Again, this has been a great “pixel peeping” discussion and I have enjoyed it.

 

Now, go out and shoot!!

 

James

Respected Contributor
Posts: 1,813
Registered: ‎02-26-2015

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???


RobertTheFat wrote:

 

_K8A2345.JPG


A)  Yes, if you filter out the green and blue channels, the red will blow out first. I sort of thought that was what I had already said, but I guess I didn't make myself clear.

 

B)  I surmise that that crop is from the lower left of the frame, but it's pretty hard to tell. In any case, I still think you're interpreting reflections as banding.

 

C)  I've searched this thread for the image you think I posted, but couldn't find it. Senility must be overtaking me more rapidly than I had imagined.

 

D)  I apologize for the cluelessness of the participants in this forum. Frankly, I had no idea. I guess it's a good thing you came along to enlighten us.


I think it's funny that he has to resort to a IR filtered image where visible light isn't allowed to get to the sensor to show the inadequacy of Canon sensors. 

 

For years the story was claimed that you could only push Canon images by two stops and that was so inferior to Sony sensors that could be pushed 4 stops. But, 4 stops was not only adequate it was what you needed. Now that Canon images can be pushed 4 stops with no issues, suddenly 4 stops is inadequate. While you might be able to push a Sony sensor 1 or 2 more stops than a Canon sensor, I'm sorry I'm not buying that there is a need for it.

Zone system.PNG

A reminder that Ansel Adams Zone System is based 9 stops of dynamic range with Zone 0 being pure black, and Zone X being pure white. 

Honored Contributor
Posts: 5,426
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: 6D MKII a disappointment???

[ Edited ]

Skyking,

 

1) I used to shoot film a lot in the 1980s, as I traveled a lot and saw a lot sights.  Then along came disposables, and the law of diminishing returns kicked in.  I was really just a casual shooter.

 

3).I like and love my Canon gear.  It has been easy to learn to use, and I get great results.

 

4). I like to shoot HDR shots, too.  Frequently, my exposure sets are not centered around 0 Ev, either.

 

5). I do not mind the AF points being cluster together.  The spacing in the viewfinder is similar to higher end cameras, which have more coverage because of more AF points.  I think the clustering helps the AF tracking in AI Servo immensely.

 

6). If they had included two card slots, then why would anyone buy a 5D Mark IV?  Yes, it would have been a nice feature.  But, carrying a spare card is a minor inconvenience.  With the larger 40B RAW files, one needs a 64GB card.

 

7). Seeing how 4K is not currently a US broadcast standard, i do not see the point of it in a DSLR.  If people want to get that serious about video, then they should invest in a serious video camera, instead of body primarily designed to shoot stills.

 

8). The biggest separation is the two card slots between a 5D3 and a 6D2.  I have not used a 5D4, so I cannot directly compare the two.  Personally, I think the 6D series is for people who want a 5D, but are on a budget.  Likewise, I think the 5D series is for people who want a 1D, but are constrained by a budget.

 

9). I posted the shot of “Friday Night Lights”, which if memory serves, was shot at ISO 12800.  At best it was ISO 10000.  I was using AUTO ISO, and it was bouncing between those two settings.  I shot with -1 Ev compensation, too.   Otherwise, all of my shots would have been ISO 25600.  I was using 1/500 shutter for most of the night, a f/5.6 aperture, with the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM.

 

10). I have a 6D.  I recently chose between a 6D2, 5D3, and 5D4.  The 5D4 had features that were not crucial for me, so I picked the 6D2 over the 5D3, mainly because of the 27 f/8 focus points.

11). I have been shooting with the 6D2, and loving the increased resolution and focusing power.  

 

I think I will keep the 6D2.  I can now retire either my 7D Mark II or my 1D Mark IV.  Depending upon the scenario, I would carry one or the other with the 6D, usuallly the 1D4.  

 

I love them both, but neither of them can shoot Friday Night Lights like the 6D bodies can.  I seem to do a lot of shooting under poor lighting conditions, which is what I liked most about the 6D.  I cannot go past ISO 3200 with either the 7D2 or the 1D4, while the 6D bodies are still quite good at ISO 128000.

 

In AI Servo mode, the 6D viewfinder left much to be desired, which is what I liked most about the 7D2 and 1D4.  Now, the 6D2 has its’ own “ring of fire” mode, and it tracks VERY well.  Both the 7D2 and 6D2 can track equally well so far.  I will know for sure the next time I go to an RC Aircraft show..

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't rent software. I use Photoshop CS6, ACR 9.8 and Lightroom 6.8 ."
powered by Lithium

LIKE US on Facebook FOLLOW US on Twitter WATCH US on YouTube CONNECT WITH US on Linkedin WATCH US on Vimeo FOLLOW US on Instagram SHOP CANON at the Canon Online Store
© Canon U.S.A., Inc.   |    Terms of Use   |    Privacy Statement