6D MKII a disappointment???

[skyking]

I did order the 6D MKII from B&H - arrives Monday. This is an upgrade from my 6D. I am a little concerned about the recent tests showing, at lower ISO's, poorer dynamic range. Apparently the 6D MKII showed very good dynamic range at higher ISO's. Apparently the 80D had better dynamic range at lower ISO"s then the 6D MKII. I'll know a lot better when I get the camera but is that is the truth its a little disappointing for what I'm paying for this camera.

Any comments??

James

[derekmccoy]

I'm in the same boat, I have nice EF glass collection and the move to Fuji will not be without some expense. However, Fuji is listening to their customers, they aren't playing marketing games and are actually delivering time after time.
Canon is resting their efforts on users like us who are invested in glass, but the 6D2 is not lacking because they lack the technology. They've done it on purpose, and I see it as an insult to those of us who were expecting at the very least performance somewhere between the 80D and the 5D4. As it turns out, it's below both.

[skyking]

I'll know better once I get the camera, which is today. That will be the real test - using it. Thanks for your insight!

[TTMartin]

---

@skyking wrote:

Rick Salmon? That is a very good point. I guess I would think the same for those photographers who are Ambassadors for Sony, Fuji, etc. I indicated above that I don't want to switch to Sony or Fuji due to all the EF and EFS lens I have. I would have loved to splurge for the 5DMK4 but it is out of my price range. My daughter has an older 60D and may get my 6D. I have a T4i that I use as a back up and for any wild life (gets great tele-photo shots with EF lens).

James

---

I would not recommend buying the 6D over the 6D Mk II. The 6D Mk II addresses two of the biggest short comings of the 6D the biggest being the 6D's dismal 4.5 fps frame rate, and the second being the 6D's inability to AF with an f/8 maximum aperture. 

It is best to compare the 6D Mk II with the 5D Mk III. The 6D Mk II has more megapixels, a higher frames per second, has WiFi, Blutooth, Touch screen, Tilt swivel display, Built-in Intravalmeter, and Built-in GPS all of which slot it above the 5D Mk III. The 5D Mk III has 1/8000 maximum shutter speed vs 1/4000 for the 6D Mk II, flash sync speed of 1/200 vs 1/180 for the 6D Mk II, and 61 AF points vs 45 for the 6D Mk II, however the 6D Mk II can AF at f/8 on 27 of those 45 AF points the 5D Mk III was limited to f/8 on the center AF point only. None of those differences would make me chose a 5D Mk III over the 6D Mk II. 

In my opinion characterizing the 6D Mk II as kneecapped is ridiculous. Should someone upgrade from a 6D to a 6D Mk II, probably not, but, that is usually the case as it is typically best to wait for two updates to a model line before upgrading. Should someone upgrade from the 5D Mk III to the 6D Mk II, probably not, though I'm sure some will due to the feature differences. Should someone choose a 6D Mk II over a 5D Mk III at this point in my opinion yes.

[skyking]

TTMartin - I'm upgrading for many of the reasons you wrote about plus my daughter (who I got into photography a few years ago) will possibly benefit by getting my 6D. If not I may keep it as another back up camera. The features you mentioned are exactly why I'm upgrading. To me, your comments during this discussion have been extreamly beneficial and I greatly appreciate your insight. I remember when the 5D MK4 came out there was actually some negative reviews.

Thanks again for your insight.

James

[TTMartin]

---

@skyking wrote:

TTMartin - I'm upgrading for many of the reasons you wrote about plus my daughter (who I got into photography a few years ago) will possibly benefit by getting my 6D. If not I may keep it as another back up camera. The features you mentioned are exactly why I'm upgrading. To me, your comments during this discussion have been extreamly beneficial and I greatly appreciate your insight. I remember when the 5D MK4 came out there was actually some negative reviews.

Thanks again for your insight.

James

---

Thank you for the compliment.

I decided to give my 6D to my daughter after I upgraded to the 7D Mk II. I found I just wasn't using the 6D, and rather having it sit on a shelf, it brought a lot of joy to my daughter and she uses it regularly. 

[ElizabethH]

Thanks, everyone for your responses here - this is really helpful!!

[skyking]

I did receive my Camera (Thanks to B&H) but have not studied images yet. I've been learning the newer focus system which I really like - it's way better than the 6D. I also love the flip out screen. So far, the few images I have messed with look great. i did a couple at 12,500 ISO and yes there is some noise there but less than what the 6D did. I'm still messing with the other features. I do like the new menu system. The only issue I have experienced so far is not with the camera but software. On1 Raw has not updated for this camera yet nor has Affinity Photo. All Adobe products have been updated to no issues with Photoshop or Lightroom.

James

[KlausEnrique]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

While I appreciate Tom's post on how to extend the dynamic range, the photo above is a big "Canon disappointment": you can clearly see the banding in the background, which is the telltale of Canon's inferior dynamic range. That has nothing to do with not "baking" the true raw file. That is just bad sensor design and bad sensor read technolog (Canon's weak spots). If this image had been captured with a Nikon D810 or a Pentax K-1. the image would not show such artifacts... I am a Canon user and you could almost say I am a Canon fan, but if Canon doesn't improve their dynamic range capabilities (the 5D Mark IV is still not good enough), then more people will jump ship. But to deliberately not include the best technology that Canon has (i.e. the dynamic range of the 5D Mark IV) even if inferior, is borderline outrageous...

---

[Waddizzle]

ISO 12800

Friday Night Lights.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@KlausEnrique wrote:

---

@TTMartin wrote:

While I appreciate Tom's post on how to extend the dynamic range, the photo above is a big "Canon disappointment": you can clearly see the banding in the background, which is the telltale of Canon's inferior dynamic range. That has nothing to do with not "baking" the true raw file. That is just bad sensor design and bad sensor read technolog (Canon's weak spots). If this image had been captured with a Nikon D810 or a Pentax K-1. the image would not show such artifacts... I am a Canon user and you could almost say I am a Canon fan, but if Canon doesn't improve their dynamic range capabilities (the 5D Mark IV is still not good enough), then more people will jump ship. But to deliberately not include the best technology that Canon has (i.e. the dynamic range of the 5D Mark IV) even if inferior, is borderline outrageous...

---

 

---

Are you sure about that, Klaus? I'm under the impression that banding is always parallel to the x or y axis of the sensor. The "bands" in Tom's photo aren't; in fact they aren't even all parallel to each other. Given the loss of detail in a 5-stop underexposure, it's next to impossible to determine what the bands really are; but I guess I'd have taken them for some sort of OOF vegetation, like reeds or small trees. Am I missing something obvious?