Canon EOS M6 II for Landscape photography!

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 7,209
Re: Laowa 9mm

Ed Rizk wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Ed Rizk wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Ed Rizk wrote:

This is how I got stuck with the giant FF beast. Maybe I should keep it for architecture and use an M for everything else.

Bingo. Otherwise you’d lose all of the benefits of T/S.

But with a wide enough lens and enough pixels, I could accomplish the same thing.

Looking at the performance of the M6ii, I see little reason for the big sensor, but the wide lenses are another matter.

Well for those of us who use it for F/L limited types of shooting (for myself that includes birding and macros), a lot of MP on a crop sensor makes a LOT of sense. What performance deficiencies are you referring to actually? Maybe we can find some work-arounds.

I don’t have any performance deficiencies with my R. It’s just too much of a beast to carry everything everywhere, unlike my old 60D system.

If you stitch the TSE 17 fully shifted both ways, you get an 11 mm FOV. I don’t do that, but I could have just as easily gone with an 11-24, mounted it level, and cropped for the same images, with a few less pixels. That wouldn’t save me any size or weight, though.

I don’t shift the 17 all the way, most of the time, so I could do a lot with the 14mm AOV of the Laowa on the M6II. But that vignette is very noticeable. The Sigma 8-16 has that mustache distortion. Maybe it’s easier to correct than it used to be.

I can easily live with a stop less in low light performance. If I could find a wide enough rectilinear lens for the M with good IQ, I’d think seriously about ditching FF altogether.

Obviously these are not Canon systems, but would the Sony 12-24mm f/4 on the A7 III or Fuji 8-16mm f/2.8 on the X-T30 get you a smaller and lighter architecture package?


The Sony is still a FF system, so I don’t know how much size and weight it would save.

It would save negative size and weight. The A7III with 12-24 would be bigger and heavier (and a lot more expensive) than the M6II with Sigma 8-16.

I have to find one to look at. Other lenses for it are similar in size to comparable Canon FF lenses, from comparisons here and at Best Buy.

Fuji definitely has a great set of lenses. Their 8-16 is supposed to be excellent.

XT30 with 8-16 would be a similar size to M6II with Sigma 8-16, but heavier, and a lot more expensive. The extra expense is all due to the lens. The Fuji is $2000. The Sigma is $450. You're mostly paying for the F2.8 of the Fuji, but you've said that a fast aperture isn't important to you for architecture. If you're going to be shooting at F5.6 (and up) anyway, why pay an exorbitant price for apertures you don't use?

That sensor, dual pixel AF, and the other lenses available for the M6ii are really impressive, though. And I am used to Canon. If I substitute the wider lens for the shift function, I would be cropping out half of the pixels, more if I change the aspect ratio.

The ultimate solution is probably two systems, and live with the AOV limitations when traveling. That 32 MP sensor is good enough for everything, though.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) +26 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow