A much maligned camera

[rpcrowe]

I personally think that Canon fell over their own feet when they came out with the 6D Mark ii. However, I have had my copy for about a month now and certainly don't consider it a bad camera. In fact, I am really beginning to like it.

Let's get a few things out of the way...

The original Canon suggested retail price of about $2K USD is way higher than the camera should sell for. I got mine for about $1.3K USD (after rebate) along with a Canon OEM battery grip which I have found that I really like - Another neat thing about the battery grip is the ability to use a hand strap (as was pointed out by Donald). I used a hand strap on my 7D connected to a RRS L plate, two extra (third party) batteries + charger along with the Canon Pixma Pro 100 printer and 50 sheets of 11 x 13 inch Canon paper was included. Canon also threw in a year of accident insurance.

There is no 4K Video. Well, I don't often shoot video with my DSLR. However, with the articulating LCD and great live view AF, I might just start using the 6D2 for my dog videos for which I don't need 4K. I am also looking forward to playing with the 4K time lapse feature (see this YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2FKlfUyAQ8).

The elephant in the room is the dynamic range which is lower than the previous 6D as well as many other cameras. This is a factor I must live with, although at somewhat higher ISO levels, the difference is not as great as it is when shooting at ISO 100. In fact, I am pretty happy with the general characteristics of this camera at say between ISO 320 and ISO 3,200.

There is only one memory card slot. I no longer shoot professionally and even though my 7D2 has two slots, I normally shoot with just the CF Card. However, I wish that the one slot in my 6D2 was a CF, not SD. I like CF cards better and I own a good selection of top brand CF cards.

There are some things that I really like about the 6D2! Surprisingly, the articulating touch screen LCD leads the features I like (I really never thought that I would like that!). The dual CMOS sensor allowing good live view AF also helps. Additionally, I like either using the touch screen for focusing or for focus and shooting and for menu selection. It does a very nice job with pulling focus in video and it is great for focus bracketing. It is also is nice for night focusing (I use a stylus) of cityscapes...

I like the AF - which is better than my full-frame 5d2 but, not quite up to my 7D2 (because the focus points are bunched towards the center). The 6D2 allows me to use my 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS ii lens and still retain AF with a 1.4x sensor as does the 7D2 but, not the 5D2. The AF is fast and accurate on the 6D2...

I like the excellent battery life (especially with the grip attached) and can also use the batteries from my 7D2 interchangeably.

I like the 7 shot AEB bracketing.

The camera and battery grip fit my hand quite well.

The learning curve between the 6D2 and my other Canon DSLR cameras is not that great at all and, of course I can use all my Canon EF lenses with the 6D2.

I really like the ISO 1,600 results... That gives 6D2 makes a really nice low light capability with the Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS lens.

There are other interesting features but, I am still in a quandry whether I would recommend this camera, especially for a one camera owner. I do like it better than my 5D2 and it was a bit less expensive than a used 5D3. I like shooting with a full frame camera for dog photography since I don't have enough room for full body shots of larger dogs in the area that I shoot (using my favorite dog lens, the 70-200mm f/4L IS). Additionally, a full frame camera with my 70-200mm f/4L IS lens combined with my 7D2 and 100-400 Mk2 is a great combination for shooting people outside.

[Tronhard]

I have shot Canon digital for about 16 years, so I think I could be considered a loyal user. Still, I am slightly perplexed by the combination of features that do or do not appear in this model. Canon have so many models out at the moment that placing one more model upgrade must present some challenges in terms of differentiation. I am glad you are enjoying your 6DII - the main thing is that it has to work for you. I am very impressed by the deal you got - the price reduction and additional stuff are very impressive. Sadly we don't often get deals like that outside of the US...

[DanK]

Despite the inclusion of a few bells and whistles that the more expensive cameras didn't have, I always thought of the 6D I/II as a way to get FF without paying the tab for the 5D III/IV. It seemed to me to be sensible for a limited share of the market to offer a relatively stripped down FF, and it is a way to give people wanting that a FF camera while not cannibalizing the market for the more expensive models. The big bonus was the superior low-light performance of the sensor, compared with the 5D III. The part of this that I don't understand is that the new generation brought with it an improved sensor for the 5D series but a step backwards for the 6D. Given both Canon's lagging Nikon in his aspect of sensor performance and the fact that the sensor was one of the main draws for the 6D, I don't understand this move.

[Tronhard]

Well... as far as the Canon 5DIV is concerned the sensor has taken a major step forward. I agree that the D850 is fighting it out with the Sony Alpha 7III as top of the bunch. but Canon are making strides. When I look at any brand I do so in terms of the system it offers: i.e. a combination of bodies and lenses, and how they are relevant to what I am trying to produce and it was in that context that, back in 2001, I chose to go with Canon - because of their lenses. 17 years and $45k gear later I'm not going to find it easy or cost-effective to switch brands, and frankly I think they are ALL GOOD cameras, and perfectly capable of producing good images.

In terms of market share both Canon and Nikon are losing ground against other technologies, particularly in terms of compact cameras that are vulnerable to the ever-improving cell phones. Still, despite what some say, I cannot see big sensors and long lenses being superseded in the foreseeable future.

[rpcrowe]

Some folks "think" that something magical will happen to their imagery if they switch from a crop to a full frame sensor camera. IT WON'T... If you were shooting mediocre to bad imagery with a crop camera you will have more expensive and larger mediocre to bad images with a full frame camera. If you have been getting very good to excellent imagery with a crop sensor, you may (and I say "MAY") see an improvement when shooting with a full framer. The amount of improvement is dependent upon what you are shooting and what your equipment is. (as an example, I can do a better job shooting sports with a 7D or 7D2 than with a 5D2).

However, there is one aspect that I will bet that you enjoy more... That is switching from a Canon menu-driven entry level camera such as one of the Rebels to a dual dial Canon (be it full frame or crop).

A corollary to the expectation that a full framer will always improve your imagery over a crop body is the idea that the entry level Canon Rebel Cameras are easier to use than the dual dial models. I found that was not so for me...

I started with a 10D and now use a 6D2 and a 5D2 (with multiple bodies in the interim). However, I do have an ancient and venerable Canon D60 (not the 60D) which I converted to full time Infra Red and will probably keep forever...

Canon D60 with 12-24mm f/4 Tokina ATX Mark-One at 20mm using ISO 100, 1/180 second at f/11 Tripod mounted

[Tronhard]

Richard that is a GORGEOUS shot!!!!

I agree about the better controls of the higher-end Canons. One can get much more control over the interface with the extra functionality afforded in the XXD and XD bodies. I also agree that "upgrading" a camera: be it by sensor size or model number will not, in itself, make one a better photographer.

[DanK]

Some folks "think" that something magical will happen to their imagery if they switch from a crop to a full frame sensor camera. IT WON'T...

Amen. It depends on what people are shooting, but for many people, a 7D II is a superior camera.

[Manfred M]

The folks over at fstoppers are not too impressed either...

https://fstoppers.com/critiques/cano...ra-2017-209420

I'm someone who doesn't generally suggest a camera is good or bad, but rather look at it as on delivering value versus the price that one pays.

[Tronhard]

Having done some checking to make sure this is ok... This image was posted on the web some time ago, but I have used it in some of my presentations to make the point that while gear can give us more potential capability, it doesn't make use better photographers.

(Added on!) Well, that was a bit of a disappointment. I went to post an image and when I clicked on the Upload photo button nothing has happened! I have gone to the advanced option, tried logging out of CiC, exited my browser and even rebooted, and it still didn't work for me. To cap it all I inadvertently clicked on the quick post button.

[Dave Humphries]

(Added on!) Well, that was a bit of a disappointment. I went to post an image and when I clicked on the Upload photo button nothing has happened! I have gone to the advanced option, tried logging out of CiC, exited my browser and even rebooted, and it still didn't work for me. To cap it all I inadvertently clicked on the quick post button.

Trev,

Please see this

Sorry,
Dave

[rpcrowe]

Richard that is a GORGEOUS shot!!!!

I agree about the better controls of the higher-end Canons. One can get much more control over the interface with the extra functionality afforded in the XXD and XD bodies. I also agree that "upgrading" a camera: be it by sensor size or model number will not, in itself, make one a better photographer.

Thanks for the compliment. It kind of proves that you don't need the latest and greatest camera to get some rather nice images. The D60 was the second Canon DSLR camera, following the D30. A problem with the D60 which was echoed in the 10D is the inability to fit EFS lenses. The D30, D60 and 10D cameras were crop sensor models which only fitted the EFS Canon lenses of the time. However, my trusty 12-24mm Tokina TX came to the rescue because it is a lens designed for a crop sensor but has an EF mount. In fact, I use the 12-24mm Tokina lens on my full frame cameras and don't get any substantial vignetting until I am shooting below 17-18mm.

If I read the chart supplied in Manfred's article correctly, the 6D2 has approximately the same dynamic range as the 5D2 with which suits me just fine. But, the AF and ISO capability is better than the 5D2. I wanted an upgrade for my 5D2 but, didn't want to spend the cash on a used 5D3 and, the 5D4 was totally out of the question.

I am not trying to defend my purchase of the 6D2, just trying to explain it.

I think however that Canon did not get their ducks in line when designing the 6D2. If they had just alleviated at least one problem of the trio of major problems (focus area, dynamic range or the lack of 4K video) reviewers might have looked at the good points of this camera (and there are quite a few) instead of bemoaning that trio of problems.

Like I mentioned before, I have fallen in love with the articulating touch screen LCD...

However, I seem to remember that the Canon 50D did not get sterling reviews when introduced but, came to be a well respected camera.

[Cogito]

Richard I'm pleased that you are enjoying the 6D. So, only one card slot. No 4K video. Hmmm. The image you posted - very nice - but could have been taken with ANY EXISTING DIGITAL CAMERA with a 24-36mm lens equilalent lens. All cameras have pros and cons. In my opinion, it comes down to what you are used to. I like Minolta/ Sony! Probably won't buy a Canon.....

[Tronhard]

The more one has invested (emotionally, intellectually and financially) in a brand the harder it is to switch. I started off with Canon and have too much invested to sell it all off and go to another brand. I COULD use adaptors and switch to say a Sony Alpha but I am used to the interface and my hands automatically find the controls of Canon DSLRs. I did make an exception for the Nikon Df, but that is a very unique camera...

Richard I'm pleased that you are enjoying the 6D. So, only one card slot. No 4K video. Hmmm. The image you posted - very nice - but could have been taken with ANY EXISTING DIGITAL CAMERA with a 24-36mm lens equilalent lens. All cameras have pros and cons. In my opinion, it comes down to what you are used to. I like Minolta/ Sony! Probably won't buy a Canon.....

[xpatUSA]

Originally Posted by Cogito So, only one card slot. No 4K video. Hmmm. The image you posted - very nice - but could have been taken with ANY EXISTING DIGITAL CAMERA with a 24-36mm lens [equivalent] lens.

The more one has invested (emotionally, intellectually and financially) in a brand, the harder it is to switch. I started off with Canon and have too much invested to sell it all off and go to another brand. I COULD use adaptors and switch to say a Sony Alpha but I am used to the interface and my hands automatically find the controls of Canon DSLRs. I did make an exception for the Nikon Df, but that is a very unique camera...

Yep, +1 to that, Trev! As a shooter of some seriously-maligned cameras, you have my sympathy.

Not sure where he-who-thinks' rather demeaning comment comes from.

[Tronhard]

I am about a technical as the next person, and maybe more than many. However, I firmly believe that for the vast majority of photographers, the fixation on which sensor is better than another is a bit of a red herring and often a good reason to blame for bad technique. If you look at the capability of cameras today compared to what they were capable of 10 years ago, let alone in the film days, you can see what amazing strides the technology.

For me the idea of performance of a camera is very tied up on what I want it to produce. I don't feel a need to pixel-peep except on occasions when I have a specific purpose. Most people will look at a photo under glass (which can get dirty or have distortions and reflections), in a book - depends on the quality of the printer or on a screen - now becoming far more common, or perhaps a massive hoarding. Each of these output media has its issues, so the search for the holy grail of sensors is, to me, far less important than using what I have with skill: really getting to know the interface so I can get the shot "in the can" to begin with and using good glass to do so. Camera bodies come and go with monotonous regularity, glass has a much longer life-span.

Having finally (I hope) got the link thing sorted, I repeat that skill is the biggest thing to invest in. As the photo below indicates, a bear with a good camera is still a bear...
https://1drv.ms/i/s!ApMt_iuZ3cpdmRCqZzZWjUsHr3HY

The following image hopefully make my point. The first one was taken with a Canon 60D using the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (NOT an L lens). I like it because it is sharp and had pleases my eye. The second one is taken on a 400D/Rebel Xti (vintage 2006) and using a 28-300L (vintage 2004). It is a good image to me because of the subject matter: the statue to Terry Fox a cancer sufferer who died running across Canada and its position not quite at the start of the Trans Canada Highway that was his goal. I still have and use these cameras and lenses, and they still give me the results that work for my own purposes. Surely that is the most criteria of all...

https://1drv.ms/f/s!ApMt_iuZ3cpdmRRWBvRYhJm7SVhw