R6 observations & test shots (PICS)

I appreciate you doing these samples as I know what to expect from your output and thus gives me some appreciation/context of the color response of the R6.

Any chance I can request you do some work with the EF 24mm f/1.4L and EF 135mm f/2L (at your leisure of course)? Curiosity on IBIS response, color response and I also know what to expect from both from your time with them in the past on the 6D, which I'm a fan of it's color response.

Thanks again

BTW, I'm holding unto the R (original) for now, but the R6 is tracking on my radar. In no rush here as the R itself is quite capable.

How do you find the crop-ability of the r6?  I currently have the r5 and a7riv. I've decided to not move off sony yet. I do have EF glass/RF glass from when I had the R/5mdark iv etc. I was thinking I'd replace my r5 with a r6 (kinda like getting a9 on cannon). My only concern on cropping is fo bif, anything else I have the a7riv.

Love your pictures. What firmware version did the camera ship with?

zonoskar wrote:

Love your pictures. What firmware version did the camera ship with?

He has already mentioned, 1.1.0

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64315372

BloodyCommie wrote:

Great shots! How much post-processing did you apply to these JPEGs?

Very little. In most instances I simply resized them before posting. Two images had the lowest amount of NR possible applied. None were cropped. No sharpening was added. No vignetting removal was required. Both lenses had lens correction enabled on the camera. Note that there's also a full-sized image that I posted (the view overlooking the ocean from above a seaside town)to show the amount of detail captured. Be aware that the use of a Circular Polarizer can have an effect on colors - usually by warming them. But they can also add contrast. I tried to make a note on each image where an CPL filter was used. I only just now realize (after reading your post) that I did not need to correct images taken with the CPL filters on lenses. The Auto WB seems to have done a good job there.
.
The first image with the yellow flower looks to have been processed due to the color and lighting.... but that's how it looks straight out of the camera. I just compared the shot I took with the one I posted and they were indistinguishable aside from the resizing. The shots of a pair of ducks on water (see first set in the original post) had a hint of saturation enhancement applied to the water color (but not the birds themselves).

RLight wrote:

I appreciate you doing these samples as I know what to expect from your output and thus gives me some appreciation/context of the color response of the R6.

It only just dawned on me that the Auto WB on the R6 handled the shots quite well where a CPL filter was used.  On my other cameras (Mirrorless, DSLRs, Compacts) the use of a CPL filter tends to warm colors up and can affect greenery and skies in a negative way.  They also tend to enhance contrast.  In the case of this cameras the images required no special color adjustments.

Any chance I can request you do some work with the EF 24mm f/1.4L and EF 135mm f/2L (at your leisure of course)? Curiosity on IBIS response, color response and I also know what to expect from both from your time with them in the past on the 6D, which I'm a fan of it's color response.

Will do.  I may take a short trip with both of those lenses shortly. I am just about to get some shut-eye but will take one of these lenses with me for a walk tomorrow when I get up.  Will report in with samples.  I really enjoyed shooting with the EOS 6D.  It was very reliable and the image quality was always appealing.  The R6 is the camera I bought to replace it.  I really do feel that it's the mirrorless equivalent to the 6D but with quite a lot more capability, features and potential under the hood.

Thanks again

BTW, I'm holding unto the R (original) for now, but the R6 is tracking on my radar. In no rush here as the R itself is quite capable.

I was all set to buy myself a standard EOS R when the R6 was announced.  If it hadn't surfaced, I would have bought an R to run alongside with the EOS Ra that I use.

RHutch wrote:

Interesting to see that you also have a Canon 5Diii. I bought mine new in 2012 & very tempted with the R6. I was a little surprised Canon came out with a 20MP sensor rather than a 24MP sensor.

Hi Randy! Same here. It's actually a little hard for me to get my head around. By nature alone I expected at LEAST a 24MP sensor for the R6. Still, comparing the image sizes from the R6 to the M6 (which has a 24MP sensor), the images are only slightly smaller. And 20MP was once touted by Canon as being "ideal for wildlife". I just overlapped two images from the weekend (see image below) to see how much physical difference there was between the 20MP and 24MP sensor and it's not so bad. Canon are using the same sensor (with a different AA filter) in their relatively new 1DS III pro-camera so it's certainly no slouch.
.

This is starting to mess with my head too...

.
The other weird thing is trying to appreciate that the M6 has a physically much smaller sensor (APS-C) compared to the physically larger Full Frame sensor on the R6. It's not until you view each sensor side-by-side (above) that you can appreciate the differences. Canon said the sensor pixels on the R6 are large (larger than the R5) - so I expect the R6 to have very good low-light performance. We know that the AF performance at -6.5EV is already pushing ahead of the pack.
.

Comparison between sensor sizes and their differences.

I suppose the IQ is close and maybe better than the Mark III, due to a much more modern sensor. What are your early thoughts on the IQ between the R6 & Mark iii?

I feel I need more time shooting with similar subjects in similar lighting to be able to answer that question accurately. I barely used the EF 100-400mmL II lens on the R6 yesterday but spent a lot of time on location with it on the 5D III and especially the 6D.
.
I think the IQ is very similar although the WB seems much better on the R6 if you're a JPEG shooter like me. This is going to be a tricky question for me in some ways because when using the 5D III (which was my work camera), clients often insisted on RAW files which I then had to process and edit to my own limitations - whereas on the 6D (which was my leisure camera), I took mostly JPEG images. This resulted in similar results to the R6 for me.
.
But the 6D images required a bit more editing to tweak the shots I took with it - yet the R6 images didn't need much work at all (if any). The 6D shots often seemed slightly coarser than the 5D III shots. In addition, I feel that the R6 shots are slightly smoother and more refined than the 6D shots. I think this might be because the 6D has more noise at the mid-ISO settings compared to the R6. The R6 was taking shots at ISO 5000 with noise that was barely noticeable to me until I checked the EXIF data. For shots taken just after sunset I was shooting at 400mm with ISO 2500 and the noise was barely noticeable (and very easily corrected if needed). If I reduced the images, any noise all but vanished. It's peculiar.
.
They are similar to the 5D III images - or at least they are to me. Color saturation is similar but the WB feels more accurate. Image dimensions are close. Handling is quite different. A lot of photographers preferred the 5D III over the 5D IV (especially with RAW files) but I'd say the shots from the EOS 5D III are very similar to the R6. The shot of the bikers (above) isn't a good example from the R6 because I had three seconds to raise the camera and my settings on the camera needed to be altered before I could catch the shot.. but I took it anyway. Hence it's slightly overexposed because I was messing around with the exposure metering and shutter speeds earlier and wasn't prepared to be shooting things out of my window (whilst not drawing too much attention to myself from the other bikers). Overall, I like the images from the R6 and I prefer the mirrorless handling over DSLRs any day.

.
The two shots below were taken with different cameras and different exposures and with/without filters.  But the amount of detail captured is similar, the lens was the same, and the subjects match.  A real test of the R6 would be to shoot the same type of subject under the same type of lighting and compare any relevant details in comparison.  I was shooting mostly architecture and portraits with the 5D III.
.

R6 + EF 100-400mmL II lens - handheld + JPEG - taken at Sunset with NO CPL filter. 
This image has only barely been edited.

6D + EF 100-400mmL II lens - handheld + JPEG - taken at near midday (CPL filter used)
The CPL was essential avoid having the sunlight overexpose the bright bird/post.  Colors were also warmed and enhanced.  This image has also been edited to benefit shadow recovery and reduce anti-aliasing.  Color saturation has also been adjusted selectively and it's possible some sharpening and noise-reduction was applied (I don't remember).

Marco Nero wrote:

R6 + EF 100-400mmL II lens - handheld + JPEG - taken at Sunset with NO CPL filter. This image has only barely been edited.

Yeah, this is the one that I was admiring from your OP. It really demonstrates the potential of the R6. Not to mention your photographic abilities .

Thanks for sharing with us!

R2

ps. You better get some sleep tonight!

You know, cats are always right and accurate. Man, your can finds your R6 beeing very suspicious! Maybe just jealous you spend too much time with it?

Marco Nero wrote:

CANON EOS R6 - waiting for the battery to charge

.
This isn't a "review".
I'll get around to doing one of those later after some other tests. I'm simply passing on my first impressions on the R6 camera. To sum it up: I like it. .
.
Using the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM lens (via the control-ring lens adapter for RF to EF lenses), I literally forgot I wasn't using a full-frame DSLR. The speed and responsiveness were great and there was no lag in operation while shooting. Quite a surprising experience. With the RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens, the camera caught every single shot of every single subject trained it on. To speed things up, I'll post my observations in bullet-form below...
.
.
Observations from today:
* R6 was used with two lenses initially.
* Battery took over 1.5 hours to charge & was mostly depleted when unboxed.
* After 20 minutes setting preferences, camera was slightly warm.
* Heat was not observed during two days of shooting stills.
* Camera turns on instantly. There's no delay in startup.
* Camera is very responsive.
* Images were fairly well exposed.
* Joystick will appeal to DSLR users.
* Touch screen is VERY responsive.
* After taking 387 images, there was 76% power left in the battery.
* R6 is thicker than the EOS R but very comfortable to hold.
* Feels solid & well constructed.
* Eye/Face tracking ignored backlit birds.
* Eye/Face tracking ignored my black cat in the dark on black fabric.
* Eye/Face tracking absolutely superb with humans.
* Eye/Face tracking worked well with all three my cats.
* VERY reliable Autofocus. 100% success rate with over 1000 images.
* Control Dial feels firm and solid. Turns easily (faster than the R imo).
* Nice colors in JPEG.
* Low noise with high ISO.
* EVF is good.
* LCD with Live View was great.
* I suspect that IBIS draws plenty of battery power.
* A second battery is a good idea (I took all my shots with just one).
* 12fps burst rate applied to both lenses I used today.
* IBIS works beautifully.
* No signs of wear on the R6 body paint so far.
* IBIS performed at around 8 stops with the RF 85mm f/1.2L lens.
* LCD playback applies some anti-aliasing that is exaggerated where high contrast occurs on an image. The images don't exhibit this when downloaded.
* I was aiming at a tree while holding the R6 over my head - my hands shook and I could see this on the LCD screen. As I half-depressed the shutter, the IBIS kicked in and the scene immediately stabilized. Impressive to watch (similar to lens stabilization).
.
.
Things I didn't like:
* Screen could have been slightly larger but is still excellent.
* Rear viewfinder sticks out almost half an inch from the body.
* Canon didn't ship the BG-R10 Battery Grips with the cameras & lenses.
* Spare LP-E6NH batteries are way too expensive for what they are.
.
.
For these sample images that I took today:
* Mechanical Shutter was used.
* I selected "Fine Detail" for my User Defined Setting.
* All images shot in JPEG (I don't shoot RAW).
* All images were handheld (no tripod or monopod needed)
* Images have been lightly edited in Lightroom 4.
* One full sized JPEG is included below. All others are reduced to 2500p wide.
.
.
Afterthoughts:
I really like the R6 camera. I've opted to replace the R6 branded Canon EOS strap (that comes with the camera) with a slightly wider EOS DSLR strap with no camera model name stitched into it. A branded strap often causes people to engage you over the model you are using... but several people still approached me to see what I was shooting with and wanted to ask a lot of questions. Two of them knew of the R6/R5 and were keen to take a closer look. The camera is small enough to balance perfectly on the EF 100-400mmL II lens, even without the battery grip attached.
.
Is it worth the additional cost over the R/RP? Not quite sure of that but it's worth the price if you want a definitive camera that covers most bases. If you need to upgrade or buy a new imaging instrument like the R6, then this is like a blend between the 5D/6D DSLR cameras. It handles a lot like a 6D with a vastly improved AF system. I think it's a significant camera model and the images it produces are excellent. I imagine it would be hard to go back to a "regular" camera with less features after using the R6.
.
* (I have more than 10 images to share, but will post a few more in a separate reply below).

Very nice review. Thx

Got my R6 on Thursday, played around a bit on Friday and had a photoshoot with it on Saturday (sadly I cannot show any of the pics).

My main camera is the 1DX and the R6 was used for part of the shoot to test it out.

Here a my findings:

Focusing in the dark during preparation with the EF 70-200 2.8 II was not working all the time. Over half the time to camera focus point lit up but no focusing took place. Will have to try to figure out what caused it at a later date.

For the photoshoot in good light and with an external Canon flash the camera worked flawless.  I shot with the RF 24-70 f2.8 and the EF 70-200 f2.8

100% focus success in good light with both lenses.

Canon 600 RT flash on ETTL gave me perfect results (off camera).

Love the EVF

Canon colours are great as usual especially skin tones

Pulling the screen out is a very flimsy experience. When you pull it out on the right bottom part the screen slightly pulls upward and touches the top right part of its surroundings.

Took 485 shots (EVF on) and reviewed 100 using the back screenl - still had about 50% battery charge left.

During testing on Friday connected R6 to my iPhone and iPad to review pics on the card in the camera via bluetooth (that drained the battery a good bit). Worked good.

Like it was said by the original poster - the strap is too thin for me and got in the way during camera operation quite a bit.

I have very small hands and it was not perfect to reach the focusing toggle button. For normal hands it will be perfect.

Had trouble the get the extra control ring on the lens to work until I figured out I had to hold my finger on the shutter button to get it to respond

Didn't use the video function - no overheating shooting stills

Button layout is very intuitive for me. Love the rating button.

Downloaded the files into the updated LR and was ok with the initial results. DPP is way better though.

Freddy wrote:

Very nice review. Thx

Got my R6 on Thursday, played around a bit on Friday and had a photoshoot with it on Saturday (sadly I cannot show any of the pics).

Same here. There was an embargo on when I picked up my camera and I was aked not to post any images until the following day. Presumably, they let me pick it up when I did due to the distance and effort (and COVID-risks) involved.  I held off using it until the following day when the embargo ended.  I will admit that the R6 worked very well on the EF-100-400mmL II lens and felt just as responsive as any DSLR.  For this reason alone, I feel comfortable in saying that the R6 (and presumably the R5) have brought Canon up to to speed and that these new R models are as practical as any DSLR.
.

My R6 on the EF 100-400mmL II lens.  I'll try using the Extenders at the end of the week to see if they can retain similar speeds to the higher model Canon DSLRs.

My main camera is the 1DX and the R6 was used for part of the shoot to test it out.

Here a my findings:

Focusing in the dark during preparation with the EF 70-200 2.8 II was not working all the time. Over half the time to camera focus point lit up but no focusing took place. Will have to try to figure out what caused it at a later date.

I discovered that when it face-tracking mode, the camera will seek out objects of interest nearby to focus on when it cannot detect a face.  Whenever the camera was left to decide on its own what to focus on, it invariably seemed to select the targets I was considering myself.  Perhaps this was coincidental... but it occurred numerous times.
.

Letting the camera select the subject to focus on

.

I was surprised to have the Eye-Tracking AF work with inanimate figures that were entirely backlit. This figurine that my wife collected was backlit and simply looked like a silhouette when I used the remotely triggered 600EX-RT flash on it. Really surprised at this. But I notice that the camera looks for eyes, and then it looks for a reflection on the eyeball. Not sure if anyone else has picked up on this yet. In the case of this image below, the Eye-Tracking locked onto the gem on the forehead of the figurine... which was essentially in silhouette before the flash went off. I could only make out the outline of the figure in the EVF.
.

For the photoshoot in good light and with an external Canon flash the camera worked flawless. I shot with the RF 24-70 f2.8 and the EF 70-200 f2.8

100% focus success in good light with both lenses.

Canon 600 RT flash on ETTL gave me perfect results (off camera).

I found the same. I used the camera with the Canon 600EX-RT flash on ETTL and the results were superb. I was using the Canon ST-E3-RT Remote trigger and it worked FLAWLESSLY for 70 shots in very low light. The Eye-Tracking worked just fine in the same environment.
.

Shot at night with the Canon 600EX-RT flash and the remote trigger in near darkness. The Eye-tracking was used. Out of 70 shots, only two or three were out of focus when the cat lunged forward to chase a laser pointer.

Love the EVF

Canon colours are great as usual especially skin tones

That's why I bought the R6... because my EOS Ra has a modified sensor that was always going to be problematic with skin tones. It seemed like a wasted of RF lenses not to be able to use them.

Pulling the screen out is a very flimsy experience. When you pull it out on the right bottom part the screen slightly pulls upward and touches the top right part of its surroundings.

Took 485 shots (EVF on) and reviewed 100 using the back screenl - still had about 50% battery charge left.

I took over 900 shots yesterday on and ran the battery down to around 36% before I decided to swap batteries and recharge the depleted one. You can see from the image below where my power was after 811 pictures were taken on the first battery.
.

60% of battery used over two days - having taken 811 pictures whist spending time changing settings many, many times and reviewing images repeatedly.

During testing on Friday connected R6 to my iPhone and iPad to review pics on the card in the camera via bluetooth (that drained the battery a good bit). Worked good.

I'm sure it's a useful feature for social events or when you capture something newsworthy that needs to be sent to a publisher or newspaper -- or guests or hosts of an event.

Like it was said by the original poster - the strap is too thin for me and got in the way during camera operation quite a bit.

I asked my Camera store if they could sell me a Canon strap with no model number on it. The EOS Ra came with a strap that just said "Canon" on it. But the EOS R6 comes with a strap that has "EOS R6" stitched in large letters on the strap - and the last thing I want to do is attract attention to the specific model of camera I am using. It could attract unwanted conversation with strangers during the COVID-19 pandemic or it might entice a theft. Ordinarily I don't have any issue with the logo or model number.  The R6 came with a bright red "artisan strap" as bonus but I offered to take an older DSLR strap in exchange that they had lying around.  It looks new but it's also wider than the standard R straps.  So far it's not slipping off my shoulders.

Button layout is very intuitive for me. Love the rating button.

The Button layout is good. I just wish Canon could settle down and stop moving things around every time a new model of camera comes along.

R2D2 wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

R6 + EF 100-400mmL II lens - handheld + JPEG - taken at Sunset with NO CPL filter. This image has only barely been edited.

Yeah, this is the one that I was admiring from your OP. It really demonstrates the potential of the R6...

It's pretty consistent too. I took multiple single shots of this bird and every image was matching with exposure levels and contrast etc.  The same applied to other images as well...  I could even return to the same spot (as long as the sunlight and atmospherics hadn't changed) and take more images and those would turn out almost exactly the same.  Which makes it hard to choose a keeper when selecting a final image.
.

Here's another one of the same bird but from a slightly different angle.

The flower I photographed on Day1 with the R6 at 4:00pm
(background is in shadow)

Same flower a day later with a different lens, a different CPL filter & different lighting as this was taken at a different time of day. (2:56pm)
(Background is illuminated).