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

[TTMartin]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

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.

---

You know how much I love my EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II, but, if you are going to continue to do a lot of stadium lit football photography I recommend you consider getting the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8. The extra two stops is significant when shooting under stadium lights. I have the older non-OS non-Sport version and it is fine, by all reports the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS Sport is even better. Plan on using a monopod with it as regardless of the version it is a heavy beast. 

[Waddizzle]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

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.

---

You know how much I love my EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II, but, if you are going to continue to do a lot of stadium lit football photography I recommend you consider getting the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8. The extra two stops is significant when shooting under stadium lights. I have the older non-OS non-Sport version and it is fine, by all reports the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS Sport is even better. Plan on using a monopod with it as regardless of the version it is a heavy beast. 

---

Oh, I do use a monopod, for sure.

I do not know how much more I will be shooting in years to come.  I’m just shooting my nephew, who happens to score a TD every game.  The 6D bodies do quite well under the conditions with the 100-400, though.  The shots are ISO 12800 are really good, IMHO  No doubt, if I used an f/2.8 lens I would probably bet even better photos.

Sample shot at ISO 12800.

[ScottyP]

I'm with you on the low light performance of the 6d. I was hoping to grab a 6d2 to correct the AF deficiencies of the original.  I am a bit disappointed that the point spread seems to come from the crop sensor 80d and thus doesn't cover the full frame. Any input from an actual user?

[Waddizzle]

---

@ScottyP wrote:

I'm with you on the low light performance of the 6d. I was hoping to grab a 6d2 to correct the AF deficiencies of the original.  I am a bit disappointed that the point spread seems to come from the crop sensor 80d and thus doesn't cover the full frame. Any input from an actual user?

---

When looking through the 80D viewfinder, you seem to get more apparent coverage, but that is due to cropping of the image.  I really do not see the difference as big issue.  I am not disappointed.  I think you’re looking at it from the wrong perspective.

This AF point coverage difference when using the same AF system on APS-C and FF is not new.  Some Canon 1D and 1Ds bodies used the same AF system, and the APS-H bodes would appear to have better coverage than their FF counterparts, when you looked through the viewfinder.  

In fact, the AF coverage of the image circle coming off of the lens was actually identical in both types of camera bodies.  The APS-H bodies were simply presenting a cropped view of the image, which made it seem as if they had better coverage of the image.  I suppose this could be interpreted as “wider” coverage, but in fact it is not.  Coverage is identical.

I think the 6D2 tracks VERY well in AI Servo Mode.  In fact, I like the tight spacing of the AF points.  The overall viewfinder coverage in the 6D2 is pretty close to that of the 6D, 45 AF points vs. 11 AF points.  I think the 6D2 fills in the apparent “gaps” between the 6D AF points, although no gaps actually existed in the 6D.  

The AF system has more resolution, which makes AI Servo mode work VERY well.  Now, I can see what the camera if focusing on in AI Servo mode.  I was amazed when I first saw the system in the 80D.  The fact that there are 27 AF points that can track at f/8 means I can use an extender and see which AF points are active and tracking, instead of having all AF points disabled except for the center AF point.

[KlausEnrique]

It is not funny. It is a real Canon deficeincy and the infrared example was not because "I had to" but because it was the latest example I encoutered of Canon's dynamic range being subpar.

Like I said, I don't really care if any of you is convinced that this is an issue, but people who look at forums should be aware that it exists. Attached is a straight 30 sec exposure (ISO 100 with a 5DII) of a pretty dark nightclub. Again, the highlights are all blown out, and the shadows all show heavy banding.

You will have to excuse me if I don't reply any more to your "I don't think this is an issue" type comments.

PS Ansel Adams shot film, which has more dynamic range than the best that Canon can offer, i.e. the 5DIV. Just FYI...

---

TTMartin wrote:

---

RobertTheFat wrote:

---

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.



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. 

---

[TTMartin]

---

@KlausEnrique wrote:

PS Ansel Adams shot film, which has more dynamic range than the best that Canon can offer, i.e. the 5DIV. Just FYI...

---

No Ansel Adams' 'film' did not have more dynamic range than even the Canon 5D Mk III.



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

Time for you to go back to Dynamic Range Review (DPR) your BS isn't needed here.

[KlausEnrique]

@TTMartin, "BS" is what you have in your brain. Film has around 13 real stops of dynamic range. The 6DII has 9. You can say that my comments are not needed here, but you are just spreading misinformation.

---

TTMartin wrote:

---

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

Time for you to go back to Dynamic Range Review (DPR) your BS isn't needed here.

---

[ebiggs1]

"PS Ansel Adams shot film, which has more dynamic range than the best that Canon can offer, i.e. the 5DIV. Just FYI..."

Actually, FYI, film has better resolution, mostly, but it has less DR.  Of course it depends on the sensor and/or the film you are comparing but generally speaking digital will have better DR.

BTW, recent DSLR sensors are approaching better resolution, too.

I agree Canon sensors lag behind especially Sony sensors in overall performance.

[KlausEnrique]

Kodak VISION3 has 13 stops of dynamic range. That is film. Look it up...

[ebiggs1]

Klaus have another cup of coffee and read more slowly...

"Of course it depends on the sensor and/or the film you are comparing but generally speaking digital will have better DR."

Hey, man, I am on your side about Canon sensors.  I, too, think they are falling short to what Sony and Nikon are offering in their newest models. It has always been a leap frog thing.  One company comes out with a better, whatever, and the next model from the other company gets better.  However, I don't see that in the last updated models from Canon.  It seems to me they skipped a mode upgradel !

Now do I think Canon cameras are better overall, darn toot'in, I do.  There is more to a camera than just the sensor.