Is 6D2 the only new camera with low DR?

landscaper1 said:

If you seriously think the vast majority of basic FF consumers care all that much about dynamic range, then you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Click to expand...

toomanycanons said:

So...does anyone here still recommend buying a 6D today? Assuming I got a screamin' deal on a used one.

Click to expand...

toomanycanons said:

landscaper1 said:

If you seriously think the vast majority of basic FF consumers care all that much about dynamic range, then you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

--
Landscaper

Click to expand...

Wha wha what? How in the world did you come up with that theory? Probably heavily depends on your definition of "basic".

Click to expand...

Yake said:

tijno said:

Yake said:

clark321 said:

tijno said:

According to the website from Canon it should be better.

Yake said:

For photographers seeking to make use of better dynamic range, lower noise and creative depth-of-field options, the new full frame 26.2 Megapixel CMOS sensor will encourage creativity, ensuring details are captured right across the image, from the brightest of highlights to the darkest of shadows. Low light shooting has been further improved thanks to the EOS 6D Mark II using similar sensor technology as found on the award-winning EOS 5D Mark IV and EOS-1D X Mark II DSLRs. A high maximum ISO of 40,000 (expandable to ISO 102,400) ensures that photographers can keep shooting long after the sun has gone down and with in-camera diffraction correction plus the Auto Lighting Optimizer also on board, the EOS 6D Mark II is ready for high-quality images the moment it’s switched on.

Click to expand...

I still can't believe that they did this intentionally, maybe there will be a fix for this low DR issue?

Click to expand...

Canon not only used a downgrade sensor intentionally but they also had a little fun with the AF system as well.

The idea of chucking an APC system in a FF camera must have have given them a little snort.

Click to expand...

I have been using the original 6D's AF system for years and the 6D2's AF is definitely an improvement over that of the original 6D. The AF system is fine for a broad range of photography. I need about 3 good AF points, not 45. The 6D2 is the economy model in Canon's FF camera line. You can't expect the latest and best of everything in the economy model.

Click to expand...

I'm also using the 6D mk1 for years and I'm happy and know the limitations. I was exited when the mk2 was announced. I agree with the number of AF point, 45 is nice but if the kept the 11 AF point but made it faster, all cross-type and one f/8 AF it would have been fine.

I wonder how the meeting went at Canon when they discussed the mk2.. did they really say.. well.. its fine that the DR range is less than the original??

The 6D is a 'low budget' Full Frame... so coming from an APC you (at least me) want to go forward with the IQ, also when upgrading (that's why they call it an upgrade) from the mk1 I want at least equal or better IQ, not less in every setting. All the other features are nice to have but in the end the IQ (beside the story/composition etc..) is what counts.. for me.

It's not that I'll switch to a other brand or go to the 5DIV (out of my budget), so I'll keep shooting with the mk1 and spent my money on glass.

Click to expand...

If you look at the chart on photonstophotos.net, the DR of the 6D2 almost exactly matches the DR of the 5D3. The 6D2 DR is slightly worse than the DR of the original 6D at low ISO, and slightly better at high ISO.

What this means to me is that the DR is a known quantity and is fine for my work. It is basically the same as that of two cameras that I've been very happy with for years (5D3 and 6D). I think Canon simply decided that the DR is not lacking, and they would save some costs by leaving it as is — that is, at a level that has proven itself in tons of professional work, photo contests, etc.

Review sites harp on small differences and blow them out of proportion. And some commenters react as if it is the end of Canon. But ultimately we are talking about small differences.

Click to expand...

tijno said:

Yake said:

tijno said:

Yake said:

clark321 said:

tijno said:

According to the website from Canon it should be better.

tijno said:

For photographers seeking to make use of better dynamic range, lower noise and creative depth-of-field options, the new full frame 26.2 Megapixel CMOS sensor will encourage creativity, ensuring details are captured right across the image, from the brightest of highlights to the darkest of shadows. Low light shooting has been further improved thanks to the EOS 6D Mark II using similar sensor technology as found on the award-winning EOS 5D Mark IV and EOS-1D X Mark II DSLRs. A high maximum ISO of 40,000 (expandable to ISO 102,400) ensures that photographers can keep shooting long after the sun has gone down and with in-camera diffraction correction plus the Auto Lighting Optimizer also on board, the EOS 6D Mark II is ready for high-quality images the moment it’s switched on.

Click to expand...

I still can't believe that they did this intentionally, maybe there will be a fix for this low DR issue?

Click to expand...

Canon not only used a downgrade sensor intentionally but they also had a little fun with the AF system as well.

The idea of chucking an APC system in a FF camera must have have given them a little snort.

Click to expand...

I have been using the original 6D's AF system for years and the 6D2's AF is definitely an improvement over that of the original 6D. The AF system is fine for a broad range of photography. I need about 3 good AF points, not 45. The 6D2 is the economy model in Canon's FF camera line. You can't expect the latest and best of everything in the economy model.

Click to expand...

I'm also using the 6D mk1 for years and I'm happy and know the limitations. I was exited when the mk2 was announced. I agree with the number of AF point, 45 is nice but if the kept the 11 AF point but made it faster, all cross-type and one f/8 AF it would have been fine.

I wonder how the meeting went at Canon when they discussed the mk2.. did they really say.. well.. its fine that the DR range is less than the original??

The 6D is a 'low budget' Full Frame... so coming from an APC you (at least me) want to go forward with the IQ, also when upgrading (that's why they call it an upgrade) from the mk1 I want at least equal or better IQ, not less in every setting. All the other features are nice to have but in the end the IQ (beside the story/composition etc..) is what counts.. for me.

It's not that I'll switch to a other brand or go to the 5DIV (out of my budget), so I'll keep shooting with the mk1 and spent my money on glass.

Click to expand...

If you look at the chart on photonstophotos.net, the DR of the 6D2 almost exactly matches the DR of the 5D3. The 6D2 DR is slightly worse than the DR of the original 6D at low ISO, and slightly better at high ISO.

What this means to me is that the DR is a known quantity and is fine for my work. It is basically the same as that of two cameras that I've been very happy with for years (5D3 and 6D). I think Canon simply decided that the DR is not lacking, and they would save some costs by leaving it as is — that is, at a level that has proven itself in tons of professional work, photo contests, etc.

Review sites harp on small differences and blow them out of proportion. And some commenters react as if it is the end of Canon. But ultimately we are talking about small differences.

Click to expand...

I stumbled across this (dutch) review and although they acknowledge that the DR is not better than the mk1, they are more positive. On this site there is a link to an youtube video about the DR and some examples.. so.. there is some hope

Click to expand...

fishy wishy said:

toomanycanons said:

landscaper1 said:

If you seriously think the vast majority of basic FF consumers care all that much about dynamic range, then you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

landscaper1 said:

fishy wishy said:

toomanycanons said:

landscaper1 said:

If you seriously think the vast majority of basic FF consumers care all that much about dynamic range, then you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

No, the real Reality Check is the fact that there a far more consumers of entry level FF cameras than there are members in DPR or any other photo forum. To most of them, "dynamic range" probably conjures up visions of some new-fangled kitchen appliance.

Click to expand...

I think the problem for the 6D2 is that most people making a $2,000 purchase where there are several options to choose from will search out reviews on the internet before making a decision. The reviews they are going to find on the 6D2 will not be glowing or complimentary and will sow seeds of doubt in a potential buyer's head. Not all people will seek out reviews but many, many will and this could develop to be a major problem for Canon over the 4-5 year lifespan of the 6D2.

Click to expand...

zluo8 said:

Other than old model such as 7D2, 5Ds.

Click to expand...

landscaper1 said:

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

No, the real Reality Check is the fact that there a far more consumers of entry level FF cameras than there are members in DPR or any other photo forum. To most of them, "dynamic range" probably conjures up visions of some new-fangled kitchen appliance.

Click to expand...

I think the problem for the 6D2 is that most people making a $2,000 purchase where there are several options to choose from will search out reviews on the internet before making a decision. The reviews they are going to find on the 6D2 will not be glowing or complimentary and will sow seeds of doubt in a potential buyer's head. Not all people will seek out reviews but many, many will and this could develop to be a major problem for Canon over the 4-5 year lifespan of the 6D2.

Click to expand...

You could be right. But remember that, as far as I'm aware, none of those reviews have described the 6Dii as "a bad camera" or "a problematic camera." Rather, they pretty much say that the 6Dii "could've been better." That's not exactly a damning indictment to the average amateur. You could truthfully say the same thing about the entry level Chevy, Toyota, Nissan, etc.

On the other hand, if those amateurs have it mind to buy more than one lens, then they may eventually discover that not only does Canon have a generally superior line of lenses, but that they're generally less costly than Sony's and Nikon's.

If I were Canon, I'd bet on Canon's reputation and the fact of its superior DSLR market share.

Click to expand...

maiaibing said:

zluo8 said:

No, I do mean 5Ds because it is the current model. And it does not use 65nm fab, same as 7D2. And 5D3 is no longer current. So I think it is really hard (or a huge waste) for Canon to do off chip ADC on 65nm fab.

Click to expand...

But you wrote the 5DS/R has low DR - it does not.

Click to expand...

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

No, the real Reality Check is the fact that there a far more consumers of entry level FF cameras than there are members in DPR or any other photo forum. To most of them, "dynamic range" probably conjures up visions of some new-fangled kitchen appliance.

Click to expand...

I think the problem for the 6D2 is that most people making a $2,000 purchase where there are several options to choose from will search out reviews on the internet before making a decision. The reviews they are going to find on the 6D2 will not be glowing or complimentary and will sow seeds of doubt in a potential buyer's head. Not all people will seek out reviews but many, many will and this could develop to be a major problem for Canon over the 4-5 year lifespan of the 6D2.

Click to expand...

You could be right. But remember that, as far as I'm aware, none of those reviews have described the 6Dii as "a bad camera" or "a problematic camera." Rather, they pretty much say that the 6Dii "could've been better." That's not exactly a damning indictment to the average amateur. You could truthfully say the same thing about the entry level Chevy, Toyota, Nissan, etc.

On the other hand, if those amateurs have it mind to buy more than one lens, then they may eventually discover that not only does Canon have a generally superior line of lenses, but that they're generally less costly than Sony's and Nikon's.

If I were Canon, I'd bet on Canon's reputation and the fact of its superior DSLR market share.

Click to expand...

The word I see, or hear, in 6D2 reviews is "disappointing" among other negative terms. If a person takes the time to read, or watch, all of a review they will get a bad vibe. Then add that they will read/watch reviews of other brand that will be more positive and I can see a perpetual, increasingly nagging problem for Canon. If it does get too bad then we will see the 6D3 sooner rather than later.

Click to expand...

Yake said:

confused circle said:

Yake said:

confused circle said:

What I don't get are the defenses. They aren't things any consumer should be saying in defense of a thing, a thing they exchanged their money for. Like, you already have the lenses, so you're stuck. Essentially defending opportunistic design and manufacture. Or, there are plenty of cheap lenses, meaning the system is viewed from a race to the bottom price cutting perspective. The features are set by marketing to meet minimum expectations, meaning the cameras are meant to barely deserve your attention & not meant to engender better than that. Canon cuts costs to remain profitable, meaning the bottom line of a company means more to that consumer than the usability in their own hands.

The people aren't even defending their purchase, they're defending decisions that diluted the utility of their purchase. It gets astoundingly sycophantic. All manufacturers operate under constraints with demand schedules that shape their ability to profit. That never makes marginal offerings a great thing. The fervor behind statements that amount to no more than, "its pretty livable when you lower your expectations" is hilariously self defeating.

It isn't even close to a bad camera, but I have been completely put off by the posts demanding that we all deal with it, or that were destined to own or because Canon is too smart for us. Like that's a victory for these posters.

The 6D2 is just a body where the sensor didn't receive the improvements the other new bodies have gotten. Coupled with the other changes being older Canon developments that really only appears as an update because the 6D was also behind the curve. The vari angle touchscreen isn't new for 2017, dpaf isn't new for 2017, the dr isn't new for 2017, the af isn't new for 2017, the video resolution and codec isn't new for 2017, the price point for a ff dslr isn't new for 2017, there's really nothing new about the camera. That isn't a terrible thing, but the vitriol spewed in defense of this milquetoast release certainly is.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

confused circle said:

Yake said:

confused circle said:

Yake said:

confused circle said:

What I don't get are the defenses. They aren't things any consumer should be saying in defense of a thing, a thing they exchanged their money for. Like, you already have the lenses, so you're stuck. Essentially defending opportunistic design and manufacture. Or, there are plenty of cheap lenses, meaning the system is viewed from a race to the bottom price cutting perspective. The features are set by marketing to meet minimum expectations, meaning the cameras are meant to barely deserve your attention & not meant to engender better than that. Canon cuts costs to remain profitable, meaning the bottom line of a company means more to that consumer than the usability in their own hands.

The people aren't even defending their purchase, they're defending decisions that diluted the utility of their purchase. It gets astoundingly sycophantic. All manufacturers operate under constraints with demand schedules that shape their ability to profit. That never makes marginal offerings a great thing. The fervor behind statements that amount to no more than, "its pretty livable when you lower your expectations" is hilariously self defeating.

It isn't even close to a bad camera, but I have been completely put off by the posts demanding that we all deal with it, or that were destined to own or because Canon is too smart for us. Like that's a victory for these posters.

The 6D2 is just a body where the sensor didn't receive the improvements the other new bodies have gotten. Coupled with the other changes being older Canon developments that really only appears as an update because the 6D was also behind the curve. The vari angle touchscreen isn't new for 2017, dpaf isn't new for 2017, the dr isn't new for 2017, the af isn't new for 2017, the video resolution and codec isn't new for 2017, the price point for a ff dslr isn't new for 2017, there's really nothing new about the camera. That isn't a terrible thing, but the vitriol spewed in defense of this milquetoast release certainly is.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

landscaper1 said:

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

No, the real Reality Check is the fact that there a far more consumers of entry level FF cameras than there are members in DPR or any other photo forum. To most of them, "dynamic range" probably conjures up visions of some new-fangled kitchen appliance.

Click to expand...

I think the problem for the 6D2 is that most people making a $2,000 purchase where there are several options to choose from will search out reviews on the internet before making a decision. The reviews they are going to find on the 6D2 will not be glowing or complimentary and will sow seeds of doubt in a potential buyer's head. Not all people will seek out reviews but many, many will and this could develop to be a major problem for Canon over the 4-5 year lifespan of the 6D2.

Click to expand...

You could be right. But remember that, as far as I'm aware, none of those reviews have described the 6Dii as "a bad camera" or "a problematic camera." Rather, they pretty much say that the 6Dii "could've been better." That's not exactly a damning indictment to the average amateur. You could truthfully say the same thing about the entry level Chevy, Toyota, Nissan, etc.

On the other hand, if those amateurs have it mind to buy more than one lens, then they may eventually discover that not only does Canon have a generally superior line of lenses, but that they're generally less costly than Sony's and Nikon's.

If I were Canon, I'd bet on Canon's reputation and the fact of its superior DSLR market share.

Click to expand...

The word I see, or hear, in 6D2 reviews is "disappointing" among other negative terms. If a person takes the time to read, or watch, all of a review they will get a bad vibe. Then add that they will read/watch reviews of other brand that will be more positive and I can see a perpetual, increasingly nagging problem for Canon. If it does get too bad then we will see the 6D3 sooner rather than later.

Click to expand...

It would be wise to remember that it's very difficult for those of us with a much more evolved understanding of camera specification performance to put ourselves in the mindset of those who are "newbies," and that's the target market for the 6Dii.

Click to expand...

landscaper1 said:

Ed P said:

landscaper1 said:

Since when is stating an opinion of what the facts are considered "a defense?" As for your investment in the lenses, they're still perfectly capable of delivering the same results on the camera you already have. Where do you get off thinking anyone owes you something in the future in addition to what they sold to you in the past?

Oh, I get it; you must be part of "the entitled generation."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

MikeJ9116 said:

landscaper1 said:

No, the real Reality Check is the fact that there a far more consumers of entry level FF cameras than there are members in DPR or any other photo forum. To most of them, "dynamic range" probably conjures up visions of some new-fangled kitchen appliance.

Click to expand...

I think the problem for the 6D2 is that most people making a $2,000 purchase where there are several options to choose from will search out reviews on the internet before making a decision. The reviews they are going to find on the 6D2 will not be glowing or complimentary and will sow seeds of doubt in a potential buyer's head. Not all people will seek out reviews but many, many will and this could develop to be a major problem for Canon over the 4-5 year lifespan of the 6D2.

Click to expand...

You could be right. But remember that, as far as I'm aware, none of those reviews have described the 6Dii as "a bad camera" or "a problematic camera." Rather, they pretty much say that the 6Dii "could've been better." That's not exactly a damning indictment to the average amateur. You could truthfully say the same thing about the entry level Chevy, Toyota, Nissan, etc.

On the other hand, if those amateurs have it mind to buy more than one lens, then they may eventually discover that not only does Canon have a generally superior line of lenses, but that they're generally less costly than Sony's and Nikon's.

If I were Canon, I'd bet on Canon's reputation and the fact of its superior DSLR market share.

Click to expand...

The word I see, or hear, in 6D2 reviews is "disappointing" among other negative terms. If a person takes the time to read, or watch, all of a review they will get a bad vibe. Then add that they will read/watch reviews of other brand that will be more positive and I can see a perpetual, increasingly nagging problem for Canon. If it does get too bad then we will see the 6D3 sooner rather than later.

Click to expand...

It would be wise to remember that it's very difficult for those of us with a much more evolved understanding of camera specification performance to put ourselves in the mindset of those who are "newbies," and that's the target market for the 6Dii.

Click to expand...

If Canon thinks it can overcome lack of perform with marketing hype regarding a camera like the 6D2 then I believe it is making a grave mistake. One that could damage their reputation and its reputation sells more cameras than it can count. The rub is the quality of its products is how they built their reputation.

Click to expand...

Barple said:

landscaper1 said:

Ed P said:

landscaper1 said:

Since when is stating an opinion of what the facts are considered "a defense?" As for your investment in the lenses, they're still perfectly capable of delivering the same results on the camera you already have. Where do you get off thinking anyone owes you something in the future in addition to what they sold to you in the past?

Oh, I get it; you must be part of "the entitled generation."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...