R6ii mechanic or electronic shutter bif

[Peace_VN]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

 

[Ephemeris]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

 

[Alastair Norcross]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

 

[JustUs7]

Rolling shutter effect from panning an R6II at 40 fps using e-shutter. Note that absent the vertical lines, you would not see any subject distortion. But the fence posts are, in reality, straight up and down.





Below is a tight crop of a pitched baseball (little league, so not a crazy hard throw) using 40 fps in e-shutter. At full size, it’s very difficult to tell the baseball is slightly oval. The bat itself doesn’t appear bent at all mid swing.



BTW - I like having the fake shutter sound on in e-shutter. It’s shocking how fast frames add up. If it were truly silent, I’d be less likely to let off the shutter button. I don’t want to cull that much.

At ISO 1600 on up, there’s not even 1/3rd a stop difference in dynamic range between mechanical and e-shutter. So there’s that too.

 

[Ephemeris]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

--
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 

[JustUs7]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

--
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 

[Ephemeris]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

Loading…

www.photonstophotos.net

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

--
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 

[Peace_VN]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Canon EOS R6 Mark II,Canon EOS R6 Mark II(ES)

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

 

[Ephemeris]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Canon EOS R6 Mark II,Canon EOS R6 Mark II(ES)

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

Hold on. So... It means.... Es has better performance? And higher iso?? Or opposite

 

[JustUs7]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Canon EOS R6 Mark II,Canon EOS R6 Mark II(ES)

Right So the flatter the line, the more ISO invariant the sensor. For the R6II, using mechanical shutter, around ISO 400 and greater, it doesn’t matter so much if you increase ISO at capture or lift shadows in post Until you use e-shutter. Then it is better it increase ISO at capture because too much lifting in post will be worse.

Overlay the R6II in e-shutter with the RP on all those charts and you’ll find it performs remarkably similar.

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

 

[Alastair Norcross]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

That's still just theory, and again, doesn't help someone who doesn't have any of those cameras. That was my point. The OP didn't indicate that they had any of the other cameras to compare. Far more useful is the many reports and reviews from actual users reporting whether the rolling shutter bothered them at all, and if so, under what circumstances.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

And I said it was useful, if you know what you're looking for.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

That's concrete information. And useful, if the OP wants to take lots of shots of fan/compressor blades. Even the e-shutter on the R3 won't be good for that. But then, mechanical shutter probably won't be good either (the e-shutter on the R3 is almost as fast-reading as a mechanical shutter). For all those shots that aren't of fan/compressor blades (for many people, myself included, that's 100% of our shots), this particular problem won't arise.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

 

[Ephemeris]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Canon EOS R6 Mark II,Canon EOS R6 Mark II(ES)

Right So the flatter the line, the more ISO invariant the sensor. For the R6II, using mechanical shutter, around ISO 400 and greater, it doesn’t matter so much if you increase ISO at capture or lift shadows in post Until you use e-shutter. Then it is better it increase ISO at capture because too much lifting in post will be worse.

That's it, exactly. You got it.

Overlay the R6II in e-shutter with the RP on all those charts and you’ll find it performs remarkably similar.

Ah, interesting. I do wonder why the difference but it's something I look at when choosing e shutter (aside the drip in bit depth). So I have some knowledge in how to use it

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

--
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 

[Ephemeris]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Canon EOS R6 Mark II,Canon EOS R6 Mark II(ES)

Right So the flatter the line, the more ISO invariant the sensor. For the R6II, using mechanical shutter, around ISO 400 and greater, it doesn’t matter so much if you increase ISO at capture or lift shadows in post Until you use e-shutter. Then it is better it increase ISO at capture because too much lifting in post will be worse.

Overlay the R6II in e-shutter with the RP on all those charts and you’ll find it performs remarkably similar.

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

 

[JustUs7]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Canon EOS R6 Mark II,Canon EOS R6 Mark II(ES)

Right So the flatter the line, the more ISO invariant the sensor. For the R6II, using mechanical shutter, around ISO 400 and greater, it doesn’t matter so much if you increase ISO at capture or lift shadows in post Until you use e-shutter. Then it is better it increase ISO at capture because too much lifting in post will be worse.

Overlay the R6II in e-shutter with the RP on all those charts and you’ll find it performs remarkably similar.

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

The R5 changes between MS low speed, MS high speed, and ES.

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Cha...anon EOS R5(APS-C),Canon EOS R5(ES),Canon EOS

I believe the R5 drops to 13 bit raw in MS high speed where as the R6II stays at 14 bit. Both drop to 12 bit in ES. I think the R3 is always 14 bit.

 

[Ephemeris]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

But the R6II is pretty much ISO invariant with mechanical shutter or EFCS after ISO 400. Whereas it’s closer to the RP when it comes to ISO invariance in electronic shutter. If I’m reading the charts at photonstophotos.net correctly.

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Canon EOS R6 Mark II,Canon EOS R6 Mark II(ES)

Right So the flatter the line, the more ISO invariant the sensor. For the R6II, using mechanical shutter, around ISO 400 and greater, it doesn’t matter so much if you increase ISO at capture or lift shadows in post Until you use e-shutter. Then it is better it increase ISO at capture because too much lifting in post will be worse.

Overlay the R6II in e-shutter with the RP on all those charts and you’ll find it performs remarkably similar.

Point being, in e-shutter, raise your ISO if you must because lifting shadows in post won’t work as well as it does with mechanical. Only really applicable in specific scenarios though.

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

The R5 changes between MS low speed, MS high speed, and ES.

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Cha...anon EOS R5(APS-C),Canon EOS R5(ES),Canon EOS

I believe the R5 drops to 13 bit raw in MS high speed where as the R6II stays at 14 bit. Both drop to 12 bit in ES. I think the R3 is always 14 bit.

Sorry, not sure why the r6 mark ii wasn't included in the graphs I intended it to be.

And yes I think you are right, I had forgotten that.

The r6ii in es seems to flatten at a much higher ISO (3200)

R3 has some delta which suggests the ES isn't as noise efficient as MS is suppose. So some impact to using it.

Loading…

www.photonstophotos.net

Thanks for the feedback

 

[John Sheehy]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

The subject matter doesn't jump around from shutter shock at long focal lengths, so it should be easier for the AF to stay on the subject, and less time is spent where the sensor can't see the subject due to physical curtains.

1. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

It is in the range of distant "second best" to the current stacked-sensor cameras like the R3 and some Nikon and Sony bodies, but faster than the R7 by a good margin, and much faster than the rolling live-view e-shutters of a decade ago.

Thank u all

 

[John Sheehy]

Hold on. So... It means.... Es has better performance? And higher iso?? Or opposite

Opposite. This is exactly what I often warn about this metric. Normalizing at base ISO is an arbitrary choice on Bill's part. Normalizing for base ISO implies that there is something good about a lot of improvement at high ISOs, when in fact, a great improvement only says how bad base ISO is.

 

[Ephemeris]

Dear all

I managed to borrow r6ii from canon for testing.

I m new to mirrorless and i couldn't not find the answer online.

1. Would the af perform better with electric shutter??

2. How acceptable is the rolling shutter with r6ii?

Thank u all

Horshack, a forum member has some detailed measurements that may help you.

His results can be found here:

https://horshack-dpreview.github.io/RollingShutter/

Those detailed measurements are useful, if you know what you're looking for. For most people, those numbers won't mean anything, unless you can connect them with real life shooting situations.

I don't agree at all. One can take the numbers and compare, say to R5, or to R3. Then decide whether the r5 / r6Ii comparable numbers are okay or if one needs/must go with the R3. Doesn't matter the actual numbers use it as a a comparator tool.

That's still just theory, and again, doesn't help someone who doesn't have any of those cameras.

Don't agree at all. It isn't a theory, it's factual measured data that compares well with other data. Thus it's multi point validated data. No theories here.

One doesn't need to own something to compare it.

Take the fastest slowest, and look where it fits in the pattern.

That was my point. The OP didn't indicate that they had any of the other cameras to compare.

The chart has the data to compare, I don't need to own any of them to make the comparisons.

Far more useful is the many reports and reviews from actual users reporting whether the rolling shutter bothered them at all, and if so, under what circumstances.

Think what you want but my post that you have tried to trample all over, bully and become genuinely unpleasant over I have a firm and strong belief it's useful.

The information was passed and presented with good intent, faith and the aid to helping people.

Seriously dude

One can then also ask questions if more information is needed. I would be happy to answer and was happy to post what I feel is a very useful link.

And I said it was useful, if you know what you're looking for.

And I don't agree. It's my post.

I can say some of my work the R5 is far to slow in e-shutter and we almost always use ECFS.

The R3 was an improvement but fan / compressor blades were still a problem.

That's concrete information. And useful, if the OP wants to take lots of shots of fan/compressor blades. Even the e-shutter on the R3 won't be good for that. But then, mechanical shutter probably won't be good either (the e-shutter on the R3 is almost as fast-reading as a mechanical shutter). For all those shots that aren't of fan/compressor blades (for many people, myself included, that's 100% of our shots), this particular problem won't arise.

Well your wrong again, I successfully take these images in ECFS regularly. I have significant experience of this with the r5 and some experience via a loan R3.

The R5 suffers also with panning shots for say car race events , horse racing. Switch to ECFS and the problems disappear.

Another thing to look at is the impact to the image qualities when choosing e-shutter over ECFS.

I think the r6ii has about 0.25ev of shadow advantage at ISO 1600 so it's pretty close

Most R6II users, including me, very rarely see any rolling shutter distortion with e-shutter. That, of course, depends on what you are shooting. The advantages of e-shutter (faster shooting rate, smoother view, etc.) are big enough that it's worth using to see whether you get any distortion that you don't like. I have shot fast-moving soccer and lacrosse with my R6II, and plenty of runners, and never seen any distortion in many thousands of shots. I don't know whether the AF performs better with e-shutter. I've found the AF on the R6II to be simply superb in any shutter mode. It's probably the best currently available AF in a Canon camera (including the R3), and maybe in any camera. I expect the soon to be announced (probably) R5II will be even better, but it's hard to see how.

--
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 

[John Sheehy]

This is what I was looking at (shadow improvement)

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R6%20Mark%20II,Canon%20EOS%20R6%20Mark%20II(ES)

Right So the flatter the line, the more ISO invariant the sensor.

Potentially. Many cameras have post-gain read noise that is riddled with spatial correlation. With suh cameras, a flat line or relatively flat line does not necessarily mean true ISO invariance. For the R6-II (and R7, and R6, and R8), the spatial correlation is weak, so you can probably trust a flat line, but for the R5 or the RP, there is "visible" post-gain read noise due to its spatial correlation, which evades the standard deviation measurements, and doesn't show in the charts.

Comparing sensors based solely on standard deviations is only accurate when the spatial character of the noise is the same.

 

[John Sheehy]

I believe the R5 drops to 13 bit raw in MS high speed where as the R6II stays at 14 bit. Both drop to 12 bit in ES. I think the R3 is always 14 bit.

Imagine how fast the R3 might be at 12-bit bursts or even 10-bit video, but of course, you need to process the pixels coming off the sensor fast, too, so that is where the bottleneck would lie. There's no reason why the R3 (or any other R body, for that matter) couldn't do ultra-high speed in crop modes, especially wide formats that don't have to read as many rows of pixels.