Is it worth upgrading R6 mk1 to mk2 for wildlife/birding/BIF?

steeldrake wrote:

I struggle to decide if i should spend a reasonably big amount of money to upgrade my R6 to mk2, I know the differences in specs but one thing really bothers me and if any of you have experience (or even can share example raws) on this, i would be happy:

I do lot of wildlife and BIF (birds in flight) with R6 and RF100-500, sometimes with RF1.4 extender. Still depending on subject and situation i often need to crop quite alot. Now 24 is not much more that 20

It is very marginal. On the real pictures you will not notice any relevant difference. You can try it by yourself: download any RAW file from R6II (from a DPR sample gallery for instance, crop it down to 20Mpix and print both the original and crop on A3. You will see literally no difference in resolution or sharpness.

but i read a lot of info and experiences that the IQ and details are much better in mk2.

Comparing the DPR studio test scene tells that this rumor is not true.

Perhaps due to different AA filter or something similar.

So will you get a much better highly cropped image from Mk2?

No.

I sometimes use Topaz gigapixel and it creates often anomalies in e.g. bird feathers. I also wonder if a more detailed original picture would generate less artefacts...

Well, this is the issue with Topaz and its way too much overcooked output. But since the actual resolution of both cameras is hair tight, also the outcome from Topaz will be the same. Try Adobe Super Res, it gives much more natural output, especially but not only color wise.

And finally if you have the experience, is the AF and animal/bird tracking really noticeable better in mk2?

The AF on R6 is already very good and reliable itself. R6II brings something on the top but it is rather a fine tuning improvement than a generation leap. Many videos available on this topic on YT.

Thanks for any help in the difficult question ;).

As other said, if you want a real step forwards, the R7 might be the answer. It has significantly better reach due to 1.6x crop, on the top it has notable higher resolution and the same improved AF as R6II.

The R7's logical downside is MUCH worse per pixel noise than the R6 which spoils its resolution advantage from let us say ISO6400 up.

So if you shoot wild life under a good light situation, then R7 would be a benefit. If you often use ISO6400 and higher, it will not bring anything in terms of better detail resolution.