Canon EOS R6 Review: not the hybrid king, but a great photographers' camera

Dynamic Range is defined as the range from clipping down to a certain SNR cutoff (noisiness level). As such any noise reduction would extend the point until you reach that cutoff and be seen as an increase in dynamic range.

It's up to everyone to decide whether the loss of detail in the deep shadows has any real impact for them.

Oh no it has noise reduction so i'll have to spend less time noise reducing my files in topaz or lightroom on computer waaah :((

niko, i have reason to believe you have no clue what you are talking about.

There is a manufacturer that released a 12mp camera in 2020. Crazy, right?

@Crypt Keeper
Do you really count the price on resolution? Interesting POV. So the new Sony A7S will set you back far more for 12 MP, only. While I agree they could price it $500 less, it's usually reasonable that the Canonbodies are a bit higher... if you want MP for money get a smartphone. 40MP+ for 300$... what a bargain.

You all know perfectly well the A7S line of cameras is a camera for videographers. An specialized camera if you will. This one is a good hybrid but too expensive for what it is at €2630.96. With the same money or less you can get a Nikon Z6 (at least same or equivalent low noise sensor, more megapixels, a high quality video camera with the high quality 24-70 f4 S kit lens plus an adapter.

And the Z6 has the same AF, 20fps ibis and 4k60p? If you don't need this specs then the Z6 is fine but don't say they are the same camera

Mark3794, I didn't say they were the same camera. But the Z6 has many of the features of this new camera and image quality is at least equal or better. But If you think the Canon R6 body should cost €1000 more than the Z6 , then good for you. I don't feel or think the same way. As you said I may not need some features you value.

So you are comparing the price of a new camera with an older camera price. Wow. Did the Z6 cost 1500 dollars when launched? And it got not really much love at that time... what a pointless comparison.

@crypt keeper
What people like you very often don't understand is, apart from specs, that the cameras are different. I used Canon for a decade now, so nikon is a no go for me because the lens focused on the other direction, the aperture too. I would say the same thing if I had started with nikon. Nikon had the better sensors but I stayed with Canon because I started with Canon back in the filmdays. I can operate my Eos 1 or 5D Series in total darkness, so, whatever it will take... I would buy the R5 over a lousy Z6/Z7. I'm willing to pay a *bit *more for this :)

@Crypt Keeper. The last time I checked, the Nikon Z6 didn’t have the following; dual sd card, 100% af coverage, animal af, 1053 af pts., af down to -6.5 EV, 20 fps electronic, +240 raw burst buffer, 300k shutter rating, battery grip with gps option, 8 stop ibis, dual pixel II for video, 4K60, fully articulating screen......

....Question is for the Nikon Z6s and A7iiii, can it match the R6 specs above when the price drops below $2000 when Z6s and A7iiiicomes out, hmmmm.....

@vscd "What people like you very often don't understand is.." Not sure about what you mean...but I don't care either.
Fact: Only 20 Mp in 2020,
Fact: Most professional photographers who print big or want to have more Mp just in case will not buy it (at that price)
Fact: Not everybody uses all specs.
Fact: Many enthusiasts (or at least those who don't print money) are not paying that price when image quality is not superior to a camera body like Z6 costing €1000 less
Conclusion: Not suitable for many pro photographers and too expensive for most hobbyist considering the competition.

@JRFlorendo: Are you in Photography to make good photos or to brag about specs on your camera you may not even need?
The R6 on paper is only slightly better than the Z6, but you pay a substantial premium (+€1000) for that. I am just saying that for a body only and with only 20mp it is too expensive.
But hey, why are you people so defensive? If you can happily afford it then why even bother to show me "the light".
Thing is, when people start defending an argument, it is generally because there is some unpleasant truth they face. You don't need to convince me (you won't), but you need to convince yourself. :)

@crypt keeper
That you won't get what professionals use is clearly visible. You have no glue what the r6 is capable of. You only see Megapixels. Get yourself a smartphone.

mr.izo, i don’t t think you understand what you are commenting on...

Pointless comment, the Samyang RF line is nice, get the Sammy 14 f2.8, the Canon RF 35 f1.8, the Sammy 85 f1.4 (which are very good) and a 24-105 zoom and live happy, next year you'll have plenty of new cheaper lenses from Canon. It took years to Sigma to develop lenses for Sony. Years.

@larkhon:
F7.1 is poor if you're looking to shoot at all in low light or create subject separation. If you're spending $2,500 on an R6, why would you settle for such a lens? An A7III + Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 is a cheaper combo that is much more versatile.

@SF: It doesn't matter how long it took other mounts to come online, as people are choosing between the options that are available now for purchase. It also seems weird to purchase a handful of random primes and an F7.1 24-105mm when for the same price you could snag a Tamron 17-28 F28, 28-75mm F2.8, and 35mm of your choice.

Which inexpensive lenses are Canon releasing next year? Will there be any value F2.8 zooms like the Tamron trio? When are they releasing a cheap nifty fifty?

A9 is 3500$

sound of shutter can mimicked in the menu

@Nexuser, What about dynamic range, ISO performance and stabilisation?

A9ii is a specialised camera for sports whilst R6 is a general camera. They are not in the same league. For apples to apples comparison you can compare it against A7iii.

Anyways none of the cameras I mentioned above are bad.

@Larkon, Sony did “beat” or came close to a $6500 camera with a $4500 camera, and didn’t ask for $6500! I must be missing something here

Rolling shutter on the Z5 is grievous, actually :/

If the Z6 had an SD slot, it’d be the automatic winner, though.

Because the hardware is already built in. EVF is basically a live video feed.

If you don’t record videos then I agree R6 won’t affect you. Buy the tool that fits your needs (not my needs).

A camera can just be a camera. But when it's marketed/sold as a stills and video camera, it's reasonable to assess it on that basis.

That said, the conclusion should make clear that it primarily got its gold award for its stills capabilities, not its video.

At the moment, that would require deleting all the existing comments, which isn't fair on anyone who's made a useful contribution.

While a better long-term solution is on the to-do list, we mark the point where the new comments start.

@ Richards: Are you sure it's still on the TO-DO list? I already saw that marker in several reviews.

Best solution will be to separate the final review from the preview. Two different articles, two different user comment sets. Simple as that.

@Kandid: Many poeple here are not English native speakers.
But I guess you speak and write 5 languages without any mistake?

By adapting DSLR lenses, you lose most mirrorless benefits. If that's okay to you...

Where?

If they didn't see the loss of detail they would not have mentioned it.

We provided an example so that readers can decide whether it makes a difference that matters to them.

I think that's sound advice for most claims of weather sealing: err on the side of caution, because 'harsh conditions' are rarely covered by the warranty when things go wrong.

If you're a photographer (and/or very occasional videographer), R5 and R6 are perfect cameras !
All R5-owner experiences related in many web forums are very positive !
Video concerns will probably be totally or partially fixed in a few weeks or months via firmware update. So ...

Since you asked... far from perfect. Canon R6 is expensive, huge, heavy, limited lens line-up, limited mega-pixels, limited frames-per-second, no APS-c compatibility (for cheap back-up camera or wildlife for example).

s_connor, what do you base your conviction on? do you own an r5 so you can tell? just wondering...

S_connor succeded to put in the same sentence so many silly and wrong things. Wow, Respect man. 💪🏻

The small central AF region on the 1D X III (and all DSLRs) comes from them using a separate, dedicated AF sensor that sits beneath the main reflex mirror. The mirror is only partially silvered in the center, and some light passes through, onto a second mirror and down to the AF sensor.

The R6 is a mirrorless camera, so doesn't/couldn't use a dedicated AF sensor: all AF information is measured from the main imaging sensor. Even in 'fully mechanical' mode, it's dropping then lifting a mechanical set of shutter blades to start the exposure and releasing a second set to stop it again: AF is conducted when both shutters are open (before the mechanical shutter drops into place).

So it can always use the full sensor region for AF: much wider than the 1D X III's viewfinder AF system, and the same as its live-view AF system. So far as I can tell, the R6's AF is the same as the 1D X III's live view AF (which is very good).

@Maxim

If the AF is anything like the R5, its very good. You shouldn't notice a difference in in mechanical or e-shutter as far as AF goes. The only difference should be the mechanical shutter's physical blackout and the e-shutter's slight stutter.

My success rate on the R5 has been good, but don't expect miracles. The new system is excellent, but can still miss. Where I'm noticing the biggest gains is the number of perfectly focused images beat out the past DSLRs I used significantly. But yes... there will still be a number of misses here and there depending on the level of difficulty your subject poses.

miric

At least, his post is well written with some valid arguments.
Unlike the 90+% of others.
PS.
Take a look at any article about Sony, half of the posts are from Canikuji users.
Most of them have nothing reasonable to say. Belittling Sony has become a new trend here,

Regards

I know, but still, 20mp is just a dealbreaker for me. I'm at 30mp, I can't go backwards.

I appreciate your point! But if, IF, your 30MPs doesn’t include stabilization, you will not be able to take a picture where the R6 can with 8stops of stabilization plus the ability to focus down to -6.5EV. So it’s a picture with the R6 vs no picture! Just so you’ll know.

I already take more pics than I know what to do with, so...

So then go for the R5, why stop at 30mp?

Well you got the Hasselblad. But just remember having all those MEGA PIXELS will never make you a better photographer.
Otherwise all Hasselblad owners would be the only one's winning prizes.

@Jack...You’re shooting a Hasse! Oh, well to get better pictures all you have to do is get rid of it, and buy a Pentax 6x7! The best camera ever! And the rectangular images of the Pentax are much easier to print. Almost no cropping required to print the entire image. Crop as you shoot, filling up the frame. ;).

I never said I have a Hasselblad...?

My error, never mind.

20MP is fine for my kind of pictures, 30MP is perfect but if I have to choose I will go with IBIS and high iso performance against MP count. I think it will sell a lot.

@Abu: Both R6 and R are in the studio comparison tool now, so you can compare it yourself.
Looking at the comparison tool myself, I'd say that claim is correct.

I don’t buy it either, but for the opposite reason as you... the R6 is far closer to the R5 than the 6d was to the 5d series. Same AF system, same fps, joystick, same back wheel, etc etc. compared to the 6d, I think the price is justified. Do I hope the price goes down a bit soon so I can buy it? Of course I do! But that doesn’t mean it’s the wrong starting price.

Kind of, yes. The lenses can’t beat physics so they will be a certain size. The body is just about the perfect size for the lenses IMO

mattz10 "all I need is a *light* (less than 500 grams) travel camera with built-in GPS and FF performance."

Do you really need FF performance? As soon as you go for it you end up with heavier lenses or slow ones (like Canon's 24-70 F7.1) negating the lighter body. So you may as well have a smaller sensor and lighter lenses as the equivalence thing evens out when FF lenses start to get 3 stops slower if saving weight is the goal.

As to GPS, it seems all manufacturers have dropped it from mirrorless offerings. Canon has had it on a number of DSLR's previously. Possibly they think the power drain is too much for batteries already driving the EVF's but I wish they would give users the choice with an on off switch for GPS!

Dave Oddie: I don't think it's power drain that meant GPS no longer gets included, I think it's a combination of cost, how widely it's valued and the likelihood that photographers also have their GPS-enabled phone with them, most of the time.

My guess would be that not enough people's purchasing decisions are swayed by it, and enough people who do want it are willing to sync co-ordinates from their phone.

mattz10, if you want light weight and performance, the only solution is fuji aps c, reason why they are so successful

Why? What does the A9ii do that this camera doesn’t?

@ rubberdials - was that launch prices? Or current prices? It is though better equipped than all of those cameras and knocking on the door of the A9 while also having way more capable video.

@ rubberdials - yes the electronic shutter is slower, but it has a mechanical shutter that is faster. The A9/II have worse video codecs and have been crippled with no Log, which makes the video miles behind. This has better IBIS. Similarly large buffer. Faster dual slots compared to A9 OG. I wouldn’t say they are the same nor would I say they are non comparable.