Canon EOS 6D Mark II firmware 1.0.4 update fixes 'rare' operational bugs

I said it's still a capable camera, but to say it is a disappointment in terms of pricing, year of release and technology is perfectly fair.

I said it's a good camera and that can take great photos, but there are many disappointing things about it.

I don't know why you're getting upset over this. The 6D II is a disappointment and didn't compare well with its peers at the time, and now in a world with the A7 III it looks even more like a poor value.

Richard it doesn't matter. You don't have to use it. Spec wise and build wise and sensor wise it is measurably well bellow the competition, at that price. It's just a fact. It may work great, it may take amazing photos, that's wasn't the point

@ecka84
I would not call it a "downgrade"... the new one has some nice advantages. But if you get along with the old one - its ok. ...it's still a capable cam.

What's worse in this cam?

Really? The most important thing in a camera (the sensor) being worse doesn't bother you at all? The AF system borrowed from a much lower class Rebel camera, which wasn't intended for FF, not a problem? Worse feature set than in the much older and twice cheaper 80D crop ... OMG! :)

It’s really interesting that a few tests and testimonies from utubers and popular reviewers and this camera is forever dammed. There are a small number of more flattering views out there and of course the DXO orthodoxy on how you measure camera sensors is not a helpful measure when you try to asses the camera as a system rather than a just component.
Is it really such a bad camera? Well it is selling and those who buy it and use it must be convinced it’s worth it.
I personally believe it to be a good camera in its self. It delivers what I need and it’s currently the cheapest FF on the market. If you can’t take a good commercial image with it, having a so called better camera won’t save you.

There's nothing interesting about working with noisy 6D2 RAW files. However, it might be a fine camera for those who don't post process their images, people new to photography or snap-shooters. But then, if you don't care, why buy such camera in the first place? Sony FF is the cheapest.
All that "camera doesn't matter" thing is coming from the film era, which is long gone. Cameras didn't matter back then. Film did! Things change, but the logic stays the same. Sensors matter now (more than fancy bells and whistles).
Try using F1.2/F1.4 lenses on your 6D2 on a bright day and see what happens. Yes, you will need an ND filter, because that thing can't go faster than 1/4000sec, which is only fine for F1.8/F2. Perhaps it got better video quality? - No ... it's worse than before (than the old 6D). Want to monitor the sound via headphones? - Tough luck, can't do, no socket. But the 80D can do all of that for half the price since two yeas ago. Go figure!

@ecka84
I think you are mistaken. The Sensor is equal to the old 6D (which is nothing good for a new cam, but anyway). The 80D is no match for the fullframe 6D and never was. Go out and check for yourself:

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-6D-Mark-II-versus-Canon-EOS-80D-versus-Canon-EOS-6D___1170_1076_836

6D2 [11.9] vs 80D [13.2] vs 6D [12.1] Higher = better.
How is that equal? What are you looking at there? The overall score? Well, you shouldn't. It is meaningless. I can push my 6D files around 3 stops when needed. While I can't push 6D2 files even 2 stops. That's far from equal. For me it is like "can't do" vs "can do". And I really don't trust DXO lab tests. There's too much BS nonsense and errors. The higher 6D2 ISO score seems to be BS as well, because in real world side by side RAW samples 6D looks considerably better than 6D2. Less noise, less color degradation, better contrast. Maybe 6D2 JPEGs are better, but I don't care about JPEGs at all. 6D2 sensor is like going back a decade to 5D2 level. Which was a fantastic camera of its time and I enjoyed using it, but now I can have it for less than $500 (if I'd want) and it comes with many features that the "new" 6D2 doesn't have: 1/8000sec, CF slot, the "nipple" joystick, MagicLantern "support", less compressed video, etc.

You don't understand the numbers there. You should check the graphs between the sensors (dynamic Range and Noise). Quoting the number of ISO 100 DR alone is not giving you any important information.

The ISO of the 6D is way better than the APS-C 80D. Also the tonal range...

I understand the numbers, I just don't think they are all that relevant and not in DxOMark's suggested order. I don't care much about the graphs. I can see the actual results in real world images and I trust my own eyes more than someone's mathematical model of priorities. Specially when there are so many errors made.
The DR number is (kind of) relative to the actual image processing flexibility. That's why it matters. But the ISO graphs are mostly useless. I don't care how the noise looks like. I care about what's left after I remove it. Believe it or not, but even the 5DsR produces cleaner images than 6D2 (at non-astronomical ISOs), unlike DXO tells you.

@ecka84, it's not about graphs. Its more about facts. You have plenty side by side samples on the net and you can see there that old 6D have less noise than 6D2.

@DuxX
I know. Why are you telling me that?

Ecka84 - I don’t Agree with your formulation on who he canon6D mk Ii is for. I use one professionally for weddings. I also do not recognise your issue of noises raw file size either. If well exposed they hold up really well. Not sure where your direct experience comes from in processing 6D raw files, but why not share it, it likely makes you sound more reasoned rather than scathing and angry.
I do agree that in bright light a fast lens needs to be stopped down or you need an ND, I get that on my 5D mk iv too albeit admittedly less often.
Not sure why you mention film, I certainly didn’t. However I get your implication that you think i am resistant to progress or stuck in my ways.
However you can’t know that and in the event you are quiet wrong.
I agree the early A7 with kit lens is cheaper than the 6D mkii but with a canon adaptor for my L series lenses it ain’t .

Well, that tells a lot about your professionalism. :) What if your memory card fails? You have no backup slot in 6D2. Some people are using iPhones professionally. So what?
If you don't like what I'm saying, it doesn't mean that I'm angry or scathing. You are just reading the text and the only voice you can hear (including the one in your head) is your own. Why don't you just pick a tone you like best? Problem solved :). And please stop trying to read between the lines and making up context. I'm not your enemy.
Actually, the earliest A7 is younger (and cheaper) than 6D. I mean, 6D predates A7 series. And 6D2 doesn't cost $2000 anymore, just because it was too overpriced at launch (for what it is). Its price wouldn't melt so fast if it was selling like hot cakes.
I'm not into kit lenses or zooms in general. I'd rather use it with a cheap 50F1.8 instead and then add some decent primes later. But if (when) I switch to Sony, I will definitely adapt some reasonably priced non-OEM lenses.

@Photoman
:D :D .... in Canon case something like that ;)

You're right because 99.99% of people aren't dumb enough to buy it.

seethroughme
Hahahahahaha............sigh.........

Funny. I just got myself a new 6D II (I was aware of all the press as I was making my choices). Coming from my trusty Rebel T1i for the last 10 years I was looking to go into full frame ... after evaluating all my choices the 6DII was the natural choice especially with the on-going summer sales.

I had the opposite reaction to the Sony mirrorless cameras actually - when I started this I was looking to get away from Canon and start over but after picking one up I realized I can't stand electronic viewfinders. However most of all I couldn't stand how the A7/A9 felt like just big a** Cyber Shot point and shoots. That fake 'click' and the lame white telephotos ... ugh ... couple that with Sony UI/UX from 2004 Cybershot cameras sealed the deal.

P.S. I must be blind or Canon has some better back LCD screens because every picture looked super noisy reviewing on the back LCD of those big cybershots

@PDD... the even more important question would be, where's the new Canon MICL camera???? :/