02-29-2020 02:29 AM - edited 02-29-2020 02:52 AM
I appreciate you taking a stab at this. There was a guy who posted this same issue about a year ago and he provided one of his photos.
Unfortunately, I have no picture to post with this issue as an example because I deleted all of the photos that have the bad effects in them. The issue that Ignacio and I are experiencing with the 6D Mark II is that the areas in an image that are out of focus look like a watercolor. In other words, those out of focus areas are beyond out of focus. Sometimes those areas just have a splash of color where you can’t even guess the image. Please understand we are not questioning WHY a particular area is out of focus. We both have a full understanding of depth of field. We are questioning why the out of focus area has been reduced to just a blotch of color, hence the “watercolor” appearance.
Like I said, your complaints and descriptions are totally meaningless without FACTS, samples, and supporting data. If you think no one understands your issue, then you would be correct. I wonder why.
It has been suggested to you to let Canon check your cameras. You have been requested for samples and EXIF data. You have done none of the above, choosing to continue to complain, instead. Your opinions are NOT facts. You have no supporting data or documentation to support your complaints, at all.
02-29-2020 02:51 AM
Exposure information is 1/15 of a second and aperture is 2.8. using a canon 600 ex rt.
But.. i dont think you are seeing what i mean. It doesnt matter if the image is bluried, or the subjets are moving, or is in focus or not, what im talking about is that this camera sometimes in the areas that are out of focus, that non-focus is very oddly rendered. Therefore i gave the example of the guys hair. no out of focus or moved hair looks like that.
Ive had this problems with photos at 1/100th of a second even in 2.8, even in 4.0, even in 5.6.
But this was never the case on other cameras while using the same lens / settings.
John, i will soon upload a RAW file showing this problem. Tomorrow i have a wedding and i will take the camera as my second body so i can prove what i mean.
Thanks again for taking the time to read
Ditto, to you, too. Your complaints have lacked merit, facts, and substance. Finally, after several posts you post actual facts. Your shutter is way to slow, IMHO. Your shutter speed determines the amount of ambient light, while the flash exposes the subjects. Judging from the environment, your photos could be suffering from the effects of light flicker.
As for your sample,it is not a keeper if you do not like it. You should have taken more than one shot. As for your sample shots of this wedding, post samples taken outdoors in the sunlight. I am not asking for wedding photos. I am asking you to demonstrate the issue in photos taken in sunlight without a flash or articficial lighting. If not, wait for a sunny day and take some sample photos. I could care less about your wedding photos.
Just the facts, please.
02-29-2020 04:42 AM
02-29-2020 07:49 AM - edited 02-29-2020 07:54 AM
Waddizzle, you are incorrect because I did reach out to Canon about this issue. They could not explain it and saw nothing wrong with the camera. Even more frustrating. In the meantime, since you are unable to offer any productive suggestions, instead of being insulting, please do not feel compelled to respond to us.
Ignacio, guaranteed with this guy, as soon as you post a picture all he is going to do is explain depth of field to you. That is all anyone has been able to do because they have never seen this problem before. It is a strange phenomenon.
No one has ever seen the problem, except for you. You cannot demonstrate it. You have no facts. I do not believe that you actually sent you camera to Canon to be checked, either. You ask for "productive suggestion". We ask for a demonstration of the problem. You have nothing, except to say that you deleted everything.
I wish you would post a photo and make fools out of all of us. But, you can't, can you? You still have your camera. You're still taking photos. What is the problem? "Where's the beef?" "Show me the money." Please, prove all of us wrong. You have had sufficient time to do so, and failed to produce anything of substance to support your claims. Demonstrate what the problem is. Your words and opinions are meaningless. "Just the facts, ma'am/"
02-29-2020 08:12 AM
I'm glad you posted the picture of the musician because it illustrates a lot of what I am talking about. Take a look at his left hand -- not the hand with the obvious motion blur. Do you see the fuzziness on his hand? I am getting that fuzziness wherever the lighting isn't strong -- even when the musician ISN'T MOVING. That is the issue, not the motion blur.
By the way, great color in that photo! It's a shame his hands came out looking that way as his right hand looks deformed with all of the blur. It could have really been a nice shot.
The left hand is motion blur, too.
Both hands are OOF because of motion blur.
02-29-2020 08:34 AM
I agree that left hand is motion blur. The fret lines on the guitar are sharp while the fingers touching them are not. The only variable between the two of them would be motion.
02-29-2020 08:36 AM
The picture below I took with my 6D. Had I taken that same shot using my 6D Mark II then the hands on the guy on the right would have been very fuzzy. Again, the issue I am having is that I get heavy "fuzziness" where there is less light.
What are your exposure settings? What lens and focal length are you using? Where is the AF point? Is this ambient lighting, or did you use a flash?
The above shot is ambient lighting. The exposure was 1/125, f/2.8, ISO 10,000 @200mm, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM.
02-29-2020 09:06 AM
02-29-2020 09:07 AM
Ignacio has a photo posted earlier in this chain. And, wrong again, I do not use the camera because I cannot trust it on shoots. I have two cameras.
i did not see any obvious "rainbow" effects, nor anything else out of the ordinary. The exposure settings were not close to what I might have used. I do not see anything else that jumps out as really bad in the group photo.
You have had over a year to post a sample photo to demonstrate the problem. IMHO, there is nothing wrong with the camera. I dare you to prove me wrong.