Really unhappy with EOS R6. Curious to know if others have similar Wi-Fi, IBIS, color issues.

[johninbigd]

I previously had a 60D, a 6D, then an R. I recently upgraded to the R6 and have mostly been unhappy with the expenditure. I do love the improved eye AF. That makes shooting a breeze! I also love the AF joystick and and the return of the old style control wheel. So nice! But.....the problems.

In order of mild to worst:

1. Horrible wifi connectivity problems

2. IBIS doesn't seem to work with any of my lenses (Tamron and Sigma, through an adapter)

3. Colors are horrible and photos lack contrast, creating a flat smeared sort of look that is really unpleasant

I process my photos in Lightroom Classic and have the most recent version available. I had zero problems with the 60D, 6D and R. Photos from any of those bodies look fantastic, especially the R. Colors are vibrant, skin tones are gorgeous, and there is plenty of contrast. I've done two shoots with the R6 and I absolutely hate the results. So much so that I'm already considering selling it. It's too late to return it, unfortunately. 

Have any of you run into these issues, particularly with the color and contrast?

[shawnphoto]

I got Photolab 4. It does a fantastic job with skin tones. Interestingly, I discovered the color rendering section and I get even better skin tones by rendering my image as if it were a Canon 1000D body. I get nice Kodak-looking skin tones. In Lightroom, the skin tones are more saturated and lean heavily to green/yellow. It's very frustrating. My workflow is going to have to be initial edits in DxO, then export to PS for portrait-specific editing that DxO mysteriously lacks entirely, like useful pleasing vignettes, dodging and burning, etc. 

The problem I have at the moment is that I get an error when I try to export to Photoshop. I'm going to have to open a ticket with DxO, I guess. I also need to figure out photo library management. I'm used to doing it all in Lr. 

Lightroom is just bad in so many ways. I feel your pain though with the workflow issues. There's no perfect one app solution right now, but you might try Capture One. I used to use that awhile back and they give you some powerful tools for controlling skin tones. I would say it is kind of geared towards portrait shooters. I should give it a shot again...

[johninbigd]

---

@shawnphoto wrote:

I got Photolab 4. It does a fantastic job with skin tones. Interestingly, I discovered the color rendering section and I get even better skin tones by rendering my image as if it were a Canon 1000D body. I get nice Kodak-looking skin tones. In Lightroom, the skin tones are more saturated and lean heavily to green/yellow. It's very frustrating. My workflow is going to have to be initial edits in DxO, then export to PS for portrait-specific editing that DxO mysteriously lacks entirely, like useful pleasing vignettes, dodging and burning, etc. 

The problem I have at the moment is that I get an error when I try to export to Photoshop. I'm going to have to open a ticket with DxO, I guess. I also need to figure out photo library management. I'm used to doing it all in Lr. 

Lightroom is just bad in so many ways. I feel your pain though with the workflow issues. There's no perfect one app solution right now, but you might try Capture One. I used to use that awhile back and they give you some powerful tools for controlling skin tones. I would say it is kind of geared towards portrait shooters. I should give it a shot again...

---

If I remember right, I tried Capture One a year or so ago and it was unbelievably slow. But I might not be remembering that correctly. I'd like to settle on one simple workflow again. For the last several years, it's been pretty straightforward: transfer images to computer, load library in Lr, do basic light and lens adjustments then edit in Ps for skin smoothing/blending and blemish removal and other such things, then save to go back to Lr for final color tweaks and any vignettes, etc. Export JPEG. Easy peasy. 

I need to take a look at Canon DPP. It's not something I've ever looked at before and I'm not even sure what it does. But if I can use that as the entry point so I at least get good camera support, maybe that would help.

[jrhoffman75]

---

@johninbigd wrote:

---

@shawnphoto wrote:

I got Photolab 4. It does a fantastic job with skin tones. Interestingly, I discovered the color rendering section and I get even better skin tones by rendering my image as if it were a Canon 1000D body. I get nice Kodak-looking skin tones. In Lightroom, the skin tones are more saturated and lean heavily to green/yellow. It's very frustrating. My workflow is going to have to be initial edits in DxO, then export to PS for portrait-specific editing that DxO mysteriously lacks entirely, like useful pleasing vignettes, dodging and burning, etc. 

The problem I have at the moment is that I get an error when I try to export to Photoshop. I'm going to have to open a ticket with DxO, I guess. I also need to figure out photo library management. I'm used to doing it all in Lr. 

Lightroom is just bad in so many ways. I feel your pain though with the workflow issues. There's no perfect one app solution right now, but you might try Capture One. I used to use that awhile back and they give you some powerful tools for controlling skin tones. I would say it is kind of geared towards portrait shooters. I should give it a shot again...

---

If I remember right, I tried Capture One a year or so ago and it was unbelievably slow. But I might not be remembering that correctly. I'd like to settle on one simple workflow again. For the last several years, it's been pretty straightforward: transfer images to computer, load library in Lr, do basic light and lens adjustments then edit in Ps for skin smoothing/blending and blemish removal and other such things, then save to go back to Lr for final color tweaks and any vignettes, etc. Export JPEG. Easy peasy. 

I need to take a look at Canon DPP. It's not something I've ever looked at before and I'm not even sure what it does. But if I can use that as the entry point so I at least get good camera support, maybe that would help.

---

DPP is Canon's free RAW file converter. It also can edit TIFF and JPEG files, but if they aren't derived from Canon RAW files there are reports of problems. 

DPP obviously produces  the most accurate RAW file output and will recognize any in-camera settings. DPP also has the most accurate lens profile corrections for Canon lenses. It is individual judgment whether or not the accurate results are pleasing to each user. DPP will be no different in that regard than DxO, Lr, Ps or Capture 1. 

DPP allows exporting a TIFF to other editors and has a dedicated tool for export to Photoshop. 

DPP has local editing tools, but they are rather limited compared to Lr and most like other. I only have experience with Lr. 

[shawnphoto]

DPP is definitely the best for accuracy. I have no idea how or why but it's basically a miracle worker with certain files, at least compared to Lightroom. 

The downfall is you need a supercomputer to run it. Which is why I still like to do all my local edits in Photoshop.

For me it is not quite a 1 app solution but a necessary step.

[johninbigd]

After playing with DxO Photolab, Capture One, and Canon DPP, I finally found something that actually works, but holy cats, it is going to be annoying and take up ridiculous amounts of hard drive space. If I open a raw file in Canon DPP and set the picture style to Faithful, enable Auto Lighting Optimizer set to Strong, then manually tweak the develop settings and then export that as a TIFF, I can import that into Lightroom and it will have fantastic skin tones like I'm used to with my EOS R. 

There must be a better way. I swear to god I'm almost ready to switch back to the R just so I don't have to deal with this crap. I'm frustrating.

[shawnphoto]

• Which settings? Many of the settings can be set in camera thus saving you time in DPP. I haven't used my R5 enough yet, only shot one wedding with it, but initial impressions are that it is much better than the R. However like you said, the R is easier to get a decent image, however with a little tweak here and there the R5 makes it easier to get an exceptional image. Just gotta learn the tool! And the R6 is definitely going to give you a high quality image, it's a little cleaner than the R too. Worst case you could just shoot jpeg and call it a day!

[johninbigd]

---

@shawnphoto wrote:

• Which settings? Many of the settings can be set in camera thus saving you time in DPP. I haven't used my R5 enough yet, only shot one wedding with it, but initial impressions are that it is much better than the R. However like you said, the R is easier to get a decent image, however with a little tweak here and there the R5 makes it easier to get an exceptional image. Just gotta learn the tool! And the R6 is definitely going to give you a high quality image, it's a little cleaner than the R too. Worst case you could just shoot jpeg and call it a day!

---

Yikes. Shooting JPEG is the last thing I'd want to try, but I might do it if I can't solve this problem. As I mentioned last night, I discovered that I can get the nice colors and skin tones I'm used to if I open the the raw files in DPP, set the picture style to Faithful, make a couple of other develop settings changes as necessary, then save it as a TIFF.  Setting the camera to Faithful just affects the JPEGs and I don't shoot JPEG.

I honestly don't understand why this is such a struggle. I've been shooting for 12 years and never had a problem like this with my 60D, 6D, or EOS R. And my workflow has been generally unchanged during that time except for perhaps a bit more Ps as my skills improved. I'm starting to get the feeling that the R6 (and presumably the 1DX mk iii) just have bad skin tones SOOC. Maybe that's why you rarely hear of anyone using the 1DX mk iii as a portrait camera.

[shawnphoto]

---

@johninbigd wrote:

---

@shawnphoto wrote:

• Which settings? Many of the settings can be set in camera thus saving you time in DPP. I haven't used my R5 enough yet, only shot one wedding with it, but initial impressions are that it is much better than the R. However like you said, the R is easier to get a decent image, however with a little tweak here and there the R5 makes it easier to get an exceptional image. Just gotta learn the tool! And the R6 is definitely going to give you a high quality image, it's a little cleaner than the R too. Worst case you could just shoot jpeg and call it a day!

---

Yikes. Shooting JPEG is the last thing I'd want to try, but I might do it if I can't solve this problem. As I mentioned last night, I discovered that I can get the nice colors and skin tones I'm used to if I open the the raw files in DPP, set the picture style to Faithful, make a couple of other develop settings changes as necessary, then save it as a TIFF.  Setting the camera to Faithful just affects the JPEGs and I don't shoot JPEG.

I honestly don't understand why this is such a struggle. I've been shooting for 12 years and never had a problem like this with my 60D, 6D, or EOS R. And my workflow has been generally unchanged during that time except for perhaps a bit more Ps as my skills improved. I'm starting to get the feeling that the R6 (and presumably the 1DX mk iii) just have bad skin tones SOOC. Maybe that's why you rarely hear of anyone using the 1DX mk iii as a portrait camera.

---

Wrong. The settings you set in camera get applied to RAW files in DPP. All you do is complain, I'm done with this conversation.

[johninbigd]

What do you mean all I do is complain? I'm trying to explain what I've tried and what works and doesn't. I'm not sure why you're upset. I'm trying the things you suggest. In my experience, setting the picture style in camera does not affect the raw file at all. It has only affected the JPEG. I'm more than happy to test it again, but I just did that in a shoot last week. I sometimes set my picture style to monochrome so I can see the image in B&W and focus just on the light. That doesn't make the image a monochrome image. Until this problem started happening, I'd never used DPP, so I had no idea it applied those settings. I'm not sure how that helps as I still would need to open the image in DPP first then save it as a TIFF, then load the TIFF into Lr or whatever other editing tool I want to use. If that's what I have to do to solve this, I will. 

Not sure why you're mad at me. I've tried everything suggested in this thread so far.  I'm trying to find a feasible workflow that doesn't involve using three different apps. I'm frustrated and looking for a solution that isn't convoluted. Loading all my images into DPP and converting them to TIFFs and then loading them into Lr with further editing in Ps is convoluted. If it's the only way to make this work, I will do it, but you have to admit that's not the best workflow, nor is it going to great for disk space.

[johninbigd]

From Canon support:

"Picture Styles can also be applied to RAW files, either during or after exposure. For RAW files the Picture Style affects only how images are rendered on the camera’s LED display. The closer the Picture Style is to your intended rendering, the more accurate your image preview will be. For example, if you intend to convert RAW images to black and white, the Monochrome Picture Style will provide a preview of the image in black and white while retaining all original color information in the RAW file. (Monochrome JPEG or MOV images can not be reconverted back to color.) 

Any Picture Styles applied to RAW files can later be changed or modified. When applied during post-processing with the Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP) raw developer you can apply any Picture Style you like, whenever you like. The Picture Style you choose will not become a permanent part of the rendering until you export the RAW file as a JPEG or TIFF. "

So, like I said, the picture style does not change the raw file.