Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Canon 6D mark II
Hello, are there people here who have experience with the Canon 6D mark II regarding aviation photography? I am looking to upgrade to a full-frame camera because of better sharpness and noise than my crop sensor dslr (100D/SL1). I have read that the new 6DII has some limitations regarding dynamic range. Has anybody experienced this as a problem? Any other thoughts about this camera or maybe even better full-frame cameras? Thanks and greets Stefan
Re: Canon 6D mark II
As you've said, the new 6D supposedly has worse high-ISO and DR performance than the original. The focus mechanism is also a bit of a faux pas because it's basically the 80D's system in a FF body - in other words, it doesn't have anywhere near decent frame coverage as the system was designed more for 1.6x crop bodies.
I'd go with an original 6D, unless speed is absolutely critical. It's a solid performer and, while the AF system is a bit outdated, that centre point is always super accurate! It's also going to drop in price since the release of the MkII.
Karl
I'd go with an original 6D, unless speed is absolutely critical. It's a solid performer and, while the AF system is a bit outdated, that centre point is always super accurate! It's also going to drop in price since the release of the MkII.
Karl
Re: Canon 6D mark II
JakTrax wrote:I'd go with an original 6D, unless speed is absolutely critical. It's a solid performer and, while the AF system is a bit outdated, that centre point is always super accurate! It's also going to drop in price since the release of the MkII.
I just bought a used 6D Mark 1 a few months ago. Quite happy with it so far - it's better than my 5D2.
I'd personally save the money and go with the Mark 1.
Re: Canon 6D mark II
I have the original 6D since April 2013 and will not touch a 6D2. Any upgrade I make will be for a 5D4.
The 6D2 has its limitations and to me is a big disappointment given how long this was rumored for and the hype on things that could happen. The original 6D was supposed to be the entry level professional body yet Canon seemed to lose touch with that idea in giving it the flip out screen and making it into a ff crop like body. Some people really like that feature, I personally don't like it and find it something that can easily break. The body is not good for video with no 4K capability. It also still only offers a single SD card slot (something that everybody hated on the 6D).
It does have more megapixel so you can get some finer details on shots at lower ISO, but that is really about it.
The 6D2 has its limitations and to me is a big disappointment given how long this was rumored for and the hype on things that could happen. The original 6D was supposed to be the entry level professional body yet Canon seemed to lose touch with that idea in giving it the flip out screen and making it into a ff crop like body. Some people really like that feature, I personally don't like it and find it something that can easily break. The body is not good for video with no 4K capability. It also still only offers a single SD card slot (something that everybody hated on the 6D).
It does have more megapixel so you can get some finer details on shots at lower ISO, but that is really about it.
-
- Miguel1982
- Posts: 214
- Joined:
Re: Canon 6D mark II
Hi Stefan,
Another one with the original 6D here. I got it beginning of 2014 and exactly as Len said, I would only consider a 5D4 if / when I change it. Or a complete change to Sony, but that's another topic.
Other than the autofocus with more points and blah blah blah, I don't see any improvement in the 6D2 vs the 6D. And if you are primarily shooting airliners, most likely you will only use the center focusing point, so effectively the 6D2 has zero improvements over the original 6D. And as Karl mentioned, the center point on the 6D is amazingly accurate.
And with regards to image quality, no APS-C in the Canon lineup comes closer. Not by a long shot.
Cheers,
Miguel
Another one with the original 6D here. I got it beginning of 2014 and exactly as Len said, I would only consider a 5D4 if / when I change it. Or a complete change to Sony, but that's another topic.
Other than the autofocus with more points and blah blah blah, I don't see any improvement in the 6D2 vs the 6D. And if you are primarily shooting airliners, most likely you will only use the center focusing point, so effectively the 6D2 has zero improvements over the original 6D. And as Karl mentioned, the center point on the 6D is amazingly accurate.
And with regards to image quality, no APS-C in the Canon lineup comes closer. Not by a long shot.
Cheers,
Miguel
Re: Canon 6D mark II
len90 wrote:It does have more megapixel so you can get some finer details on shots at lower ISO
In theory, but often not in practice. Since a higher megapixel count will show up lens flaws more easily, you will often find that fine detail is actually lost on a per-pixel level. Less applicable to FF to be honest, but a valid point none-the-less.
Karl
Re: Canon 6D mark II
Thanks all for the replies and advice. Good to hear from the users themselves. I am a bit disappointed in the 6DII by reading your comments. For me the 6D won`t be an option because it`s not compatible with the 1.4 extender (losing autofocus). And somehow it feels not good to buy an older version of a camera even if the reviews are good. I am wondering if the 6DII is really worse than the 6D itself. At least the focus seems to be better, more pixels, more framerate and at least the same but probably slightly better noise results and sharpness (according the tests I did and read about). Perhaps upgrading to the newer version from a 6D sounds not worth it but it`s different maybe for a non fullframe owner. I am also looking into other options like the 5DIV or 5Dsr for example, although much more expensive.
Re: Canon 6D mark II
Hi Stefan,
be aware that you won't be able to use your wide-angle lense with a full-frame. Just to alert you, that some extra investment / upgrade would be necessary.
Otherwise it is true, that more megapixels doesn't automatically mean better quality.
Indeed a very valid point.
@Len: I am not a particular fan of the flip out feature, I have it on my cam and I rarely use it. Yet it is rock solid. My camera body once significantly fell down with the flip screen being out and nothing happened to that mechanism. So that isn't anything to worry about.
Cheers,
Julien
be aware that you won't be able to use your wide-angle lense with a full-frame. Just to alert you, that some extra investment / upgrade would be necessary.
Otherwise it is true, that more megapixels doesn't automatically mean better quality.
JakTrax wrote:len90 wrote:It does have more megapixel so you can get some finer details on shots at lower ISO
In theory, but often not in practice. Since a higher megapixel count will show up lens flaws more easily, you will often find that fine detail is actually lost on a per-pixel level. Less applicable to FF to be honest, but a valid point none-the-less.
Karl
Indeed a very valid point.
@Len: I am not a particular fan of the flip out feature, I have it on my cam and I rarely use it. Yet it is rock solid. My camera body once significantly fell down with the flip screen being out and nothing happened to that mechanism. So that isn't anything to worry about.
Cheers,
Julien
Last edited by 310815 on Mon Dec 04, 2017 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Canon 6D mark II
Stefan, the 6DII may be slightly faster than the original 6D, but bear in mind that 'faster' does not mean 'fast' - the 6DII is still a sluggish camera compared to its contemporaries. That AF system was basically designed for a 1.6x crop body, so to see it appear in a FF body reeks of a desire to get this camera onto the shelves as soon as possible.
The 6D was a game-changer; the 6DII seems like an afterthought, or a response to competing manufacturers producing increasingly better cameras.
The 6D was a game-changer; the 6DII seems like an afterthought, or a response to competing manufacturers producing increasingly better cameras.
Re: Canon 6D mark II
JakTrax wrote:Stefan, the 6DII may be slightly faster than the original 6D, but bear in mind that 'faster' does not mean 'fast' - the 6DII is still a sluggish camera compared to its contemporaries. That AF system was basically designed for a 1.6x crop body, so to see it appear in a FF body reeks of a desire to get this camera onto the shelves as soon as possible.
The 6D was a game-changer; the 6DII seems like an afterthought, or a response to competing manufacturers producing increasingly better cameras.
I kind of disagree with the autofocus system being a rush job to get the body out. The 6D2 came at least a year after most people speculated it would come out. Canon needed to do something to distinguish the body from 5D4 and it seems like that was one of the main features they went after.
As for the megapixel count and quality: On the comparison reviews I read and images that I saw it seemed like there was a benefit, albeit slight benefit and one that I would not waste the money for.
Re: Canon 6D mark II
It seems to me that they put the exact same AF system from the 80D into the 6DII, without taking into account the much larger sensor. Those 45 points more spread out across the frame wouldn't have realistically impacted sales of the 5DIV, which has 61 mostly cross-type points. More sloppiness from Canon in a world in which they're quickly being left behind.
I'm sceptical about the extra 6mp being beneficial; we hit peak performance at 12-16mp in my opinion, and ever since we've been seeing less and less detail on a per-pixel level. The original 5D produced some of the silkiest images I've ever seen.
I rarely pay too much attention to online reviews as they tend to be controlled tests which never account for copy variation.
I'm sceptical about the extra 6mp being beneficial; we hit peak performance at 12-16mp in my opinion, and ever since we've been seeing less and less detail on a per-pixel level. The original 5D produced some of the silkiest images I've ever seen.
I rarely pay too much attention to online reviews as they tend to be controlled tests which never account for copy variation.
Re: Canon 6D mark II
Hi, I bought a 80D yesterday. Decided not to go for fullframe yet because I don`t want to loose the very nice reach my 100-400II has. I am also able to use my other lenses. Anyway thanks for the help and advice.
-
- Miguel1982
- Posts: 214
- Joined:
Re: Canon 6D mark II
The technology applied to the sensor of your new 80D is what everyone expected Canon to build the 6D2's sensor upon.... but then apparently they didn't. Have lots of fun with it!
Re: Canon 6D mark II
I will admit, I have been more than pleased with my 6D Mark II after picking it up from Adorama on a great Black Friday sale last Month. Although from reading this thread it would seem like perhaps I should return it 
I have found the AF to be accurate and fast enough for my uses, even using an old 100-400L and having come from a 7D. The touch-screen LCD and bluetooth connectivity has been awesome for night shooting on a tripod. For the cost, I couldn't really justify dropping over twice what I paid for the 6DII to get a 5DIV instead... and I have been quite pleased with my first foray into full-frame DSLR ownership.
There will certainly be issues or things that could have been better in any body/set-up. I remember countless members of this and another photography site I frequented who were dismayed that I was attempting to use a 7D+100-400 as the combination were absolutely no good. Yet it served me just fine for almost 7 years and 800+ photos on this site. It's all about finding what works for you I reckon
I have found the AF to be accurate and fast enough for my uses, even using an old 100-400L and having come from a 7D. The touch-screen LCD and bluetooth connectivity has been awesome for night shooting on a tripod. For the cost, I couldn't really justify dropping over twice what I paid for the 6DII to get a 5DIV instead... and I have been quite pleased with my first foray into full-frame DSLR ownership.
There will certainly be issues or things that could have been better in any body/set-up. I remember countless members of this and another photography site I frequented who were dismayed that I was attempting to use a 7D+100-400 as the combination were absolutely no good. Yet it served me just fine for almost 7 years and 800+ photos on this site. It's all about finding what works for you I reckon
Re: Canon 6D mark II
NPeterman, the vitriol aimed at the 6DII is mostly from those who've owned or extensively used the original - in your case, not having had the original, you're conducting an apples vs. oranges comparison, which is a bit unfair. No-one's said the 6DII is an incapable camera - what has been said is that, in many ways, it doesn't at all improve on the 6D (certainly in DR and high-ISO performance). Given the 5 years between the two iterations, this isn't convincing. Yes, the AF system might be accurate and fast, but without maximum frame coverage it's not great for some wildlife shooters, for example, who likely photograph things less predictable than aircraft.
If it works for you, great; but I suspect that the original 6D would work just as well for you. As someone who owns (and very much likes) the 6D, I see absolutely nothing that makes me want to upgrade. You and I are/were in totally different situations.
If it works for you, great; but I suspect that the original 6D would work just as well for you. As someone who owns (and very much likes) the 6D, I see absolutely nothing that makes me want to upgrade. You and I are/were in totally different situations.
Re: Canon 6D mark II
Miguel1982 wrote:The technology applied to the sensor of your new 80D is what everyone expected Canon to build the 6D2's sensor upon.... but then apparently they didn't. Have lots of fun with it!
Thank you Miguel! I'm looking forward to the shooting. It's really bad weather here (Amsterdam) last days so I must be a bit more patient. Hopefully some results later. Greets
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: tom3 and 17 guests