I sold my 6D and 80D a few weeks ago and got the 6DMII that arrived this morning, got some quick stills and videos and did some edits. From what I see in my initial edits, the DR is just fine for what I will use my 6DMII for. My priorities were Full frame, DPAF, at least 1080p 60fps (bummed about no ALL-I, but oh well), 4K would have been nice, but not something critical for my needs. I think part of the problem is the expectation that 6DMII is Pro-Level, unfortunately it still is budget - Semi-Pro, at least that is my opinion of the 6DMII. I am stoked that I don't have to carry 2 bodies anymore - Yay!
How you feel about it still? When I upgrade it's gonna be between this or the 5DIII. I'm leaning towards the 6dII because I want to shoot more night stuff and I like the idea of the screen which flips like the T3i I use currently.
There is good and bad I guess. My Sigma 85mm f1.4 ART hunts a lot on my 6DMII, interestingly the AF on my Sigma 24 ART, 50ART and 135ART are fast, accurate and rock solid on the 6DMII. Not sure if the problem is my 6DMII or the Sigma 85mm ART! second, I tried the cinestyle picture profile on the 6DMII (maybe someone can suggest a solution) it looked like crap! a lot of noise! I switched to the stock Neutral profile and that was great! Low light performance on 6DMII is better than the 6D or the 80D from what I have seen. just like the 80D with Touch to focus, if you use live view even for still, the AF point coverage would not matter at all. I heard a lot of folks complain that the AF points did not cover the grid (for rule of 3rds) for composition, I just use live view, and in live view I can throw my focus any damn place i wish and my Sigma ART's nail focus every single time (exception is the 85mm ART). So For me the AF is exactly what I wanted. As for the DR issues on the 6DMII, I was bothered with it a little when I read about it, but now after several weeks of shooting I can say that for my taste and needs, the DR is more that sufficient.
People who complain about the AF point spread on the 6DII do so because it is the first non-crop body they have ever used. The spread is no narrower than the 5D, 5DII, or the 6D. Even though the 5DIII has more AF points, the spread is not very much larger than the far left/right/top/bottom AF points of the 6DII. As someone who uses both crop bodies (mainly a 7DII) and FF bodies (mainly a 5DIII), it can get frustrating when one runs out of room to select an AF point on the FF body after just being able to use one that wide on the crop body!
I guess im asking the wrong place but does anyone know of a way to log back into an instagram account?? I was stupid forgot the password. I love any assistance you can give me.
@Huxley Mitchell i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site through google and im in the hacking process atm. Seems to take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
I am really starting to enjoy your videos. You hit it on the head, and I agree completely. I have an 80D, and I am about to upgrade to the 6D2. Mostly for reasons that don't involve the sensor size. Mostly I want to use weather sealed lenses to their fullest, I LOVE my 80D, and the 6D2 is essentially a full frame 80D. I have watched dozens of reviews, and read hundreds of tech comparisons. You are the only one who did what you just did, and you made my mind to buy the 6D2 as my main, and keep my 80D for a backup. Because you are right, the 6D2 images you demonstrated were just as good at their respective ISO as anything my 80D could produce, maybe better in some cases. My shooting style typically requires long exposures (10-30 sec), ND filters, and large (f/16-22) stops, and I tend to favor ISO 800-1600. Seems like the 6D2 will do nicely.
After upgrading my 5D 1 to 6D 2, I was unhappy with the contrastiness of it, and how you'd get dropped shadows and blown out skies in the same image constantly, however, I had the habit of trying to keep ISO at 100 from using the 5D, and recently found that it's much less noisy at 1000 ISO than the 5D is at 500, and cranking up the ISO and shooting faster speeds with highlight protect mode knocks that contrast WAY back, but also you get a much wider recoverable range in the highlights and shadows, so much that three shot HDR seems pretty unnecessary anymore.
I think there are photographers that chase the numbers and buy gear and test their cameras and defend their purchase by bashing other cameras like this one . I do not own a full frame I'm happy what i have and my exposer is very very close ( mirror less). Very easy to do . People said same thing with the 6d and I saw amazing portraits with that camera because the photographer went out and got the shot and knows how Everybody needs to calm down bashing each other to defend the choice they made Need to get out and shoot more than staying home researching on camera they already own but still. Watching reviews on them lol makes me laugh and questions thier purchase then very happy to put down another camera they never touch to make themselves feel better It's getting old guys !!
Sadly had someone give me a hard time today because I have a d3500 with good glass and I took much better photos than they did and they had a d750 with yongnuo laughable glass
Of course, for photos, it's fine. I have a 6DII and the real problem with dynamic range is in the videos, even bringing the contrast and sharpness all the way down. Also, a black mist filter may help a bit.
I'm surprised, that in this comment section everyone is talking about dynamic range, but no one even remotely mentions graduated ND Filters. I've never seen a landscape photographer NOT using filters... that's why DR shouldn't matter... but hey, I'm just a newbie
I got lessons from a friend of mine who is a full-time pro when I was starting out, and after a while, I mentioned to him that I wanted to upgrade my body (I had a t3i). He asked me a very poignant question: "do you think you are maxing out the capabilities of your camera now?" I had to be honest and say no. Now, a few years later, I can safely say - yes I am, so I got the 6d II. Suffering through terrible low-light performance, slow AF, slow everything, and having to get creative made me a way better photographer than if someone just handed me a 5d mk III day one or something. I think there are loads of ways to get around having 2 less stops of dynamic range depending on the photo you're taking. It's easier when you're used to less dynamic range and suddenly have more room to work with (as is my case).
When doing generalised daylight shooting with my 6Dmk1 I've personally been finding that 320ISO is producing better looking photos as usually the camera under exposures by keeping to 100, so any improvement of DR at higher iso is welcome.
It sounds to me that everyone was expecting to get a 5D mk IV for two grand and hence the hissi fits. People it's a 1600 euro camera! Canon it's not going to give you 4000 worth of gear for that price. They learnt their lesson with the mark ii.
People like to pick one stat and harp on it. That's why they usually crap on the 6D2. You want to know a highly acclaimed camera that has worse dynamic range than 80D or 6D2? Try the Fuji X100F at L ISO 100, it has about 7 or 8 stops of dynamic range, but when you put it at ISO 200 or 400, then it has a lot. If you use 80D at ISO 200 or 6D2 at ISO 200-800, they out perform the X100F slightly, then the 6D2 takes the lead from 1600 and up. The only cameras that seem to have unlimited DR is Nikon D750 and D7000 series, even at ISO 100 you can boost the shadows up 4 stops or more. But Nikon has the world's crappiest Live View AF, especially for video and vlogging where Canon always takes lead. But dynamic range isn't everything, I'm still taking awesome photos on my Eos 30D and Tamron 17-50/2.8 and they have a very E6 film look, and the ISO noise looks more organic compared to the rainbow puke of newer cameras.
It's down to $999 at B&H and you have to ask is it worth a slight dynamic range difference at 100 ISO compared to cameras that are selling for 3X as much? I guess it depends on how often you are actually shooting at 100 ISO. Normally, if I am shooting at 100 ISO it's in a situation where I have a ton of lighting control-like in a studio or some other situation where I am using lights. If that's the case, it isn't all that crucial unless you suck at lighting. For me, it's more crucial to be able to shoot in extremely low light with the least amount of noise, where I can't light, such as in a church during a wedding.
I bought the 6D Mark II and simply started shooting with it. I got pictures that reflect my effort and skill. Same thing happens when I shoot with my 6D Mark I (now my back-up and hobby camera). Its cool to have all the bells and whistles that come with the new version, but really it's just another camera body that works and I'm happy about that. 4K video? I could care less about more resolution. It takes longer to load, I need to buy more hard drives, and I never felt I missed out on content watching 1080 or even 720p. Select your lenses wisely and enjoy the art and craft of photography. Then you might start to notice an increase in IQ.
Thank you, this is exactly what I've been looking for. Extremely helpful in my decision between the 6Dii vs 5Diii. I even canceled my 6Dii preorder and decided to reevaluate because of all this dynamic range talk.
If you've got Canon glass, the 6D Mkii shouldn't disappoint you. Honestly, even with my landscapes I don't push the dynamic range that much on my D800. Unless if you rely on that dynamic range, chances where you have to push things to the limit are rare. However, greater dynamic range never hurts.
I have Canon L's and Sigma Art lenses, so I should be good. I reevaluated with a pros/cons list and found a new 5Diii for the same price as the 6Dii, so I'm going with that. The dual card slots and proven quality set me over the edge. All of this thinking really pushed me to look into Nikon but switching is expensive and a pain in the ass, so we'll see what Canon can/can't do down the line.
I considered it, but I'm already deep into Canon and have been for years, the switch isn't necessary at this point and would be a huge pain in the ass.
It really doesn't--there's no law that says image quality must monotonically improve with decreasing ISO. It could be that ISO 400 on the 6dmii is it's "magic" number. Time will tell, though.
Glad you mentioned that, it has been on my mind ever since I heard about it. I know that when I have to recover shadows in a picture it is because I didn't do my part right to begin with.
Thanks for putting things in perspective. I've been waiting for someone to say this. For wildlife photography, I'm so rarely shooting at ISO 100 it's unreal, and when I do, I invariably use a strobe, negating any DR issues. Good work, Fro!
I don't think that the other sites were claiming the 6DmII has terrible dynamic range, but rather the DR is not up to par with it's competitors in the $2,000 price range. I think a more interesting video would be to compare the 6DmII image quality (ie; DR range and ISO performance) to the Nikon D750 and Sony A7ii, two FF cameras that are both hundreds of dollars cheaper than the 6DmII.
But remember when the D750 was launched it was about $2300 if memory serves, yes everyone is going on about the price but look at the prices when the other cameras were launched, then the price seems fare give it 6 months to a year and it will drop in price they always do.
Agreed. But I do feel that when the D750 was announced, it beat all it's competitors in that price range. I don't feel that way with the 6DmII, and I think a lot of reviewers feel that way, too. I bet if it was priced in line with the current D750 and Sony A7ii, it would be getting much better reviews.
Thanks for the video Jared. I think dynamic range it's not a deal breaker in this case. Maybe 1 slot of memory is (Never got a problem for like ten years with any memory ). And personally i don't care if this have not 4k. I want a camera for making stills. This light, small, with GPS, weather sealed, tilltable touchscreen DSLR its a smart way to compite with CSC's. And for who's are complaining, today the 6D MII costs 1.9 USD with 24-105mm. I think its a very far price for what offers. It's very competitive. You can say a lot of bad things of Canon, and i agree in very angles. But they make very, very reliable cameras who you know they will perform for many years flawlessly. That makes the difference, entry level FF with a lot of lenses and accessories.
The 9 stop dynamic range @ 100 ISO isn't the terrible thing of the 6D Mk II for me at least . The single slot for memory card is a most definitely is .
Thanks for sharing the files. Again, as for the xt-2 files you shared that's really nice to put my hands on them. It brings me directly to the process stage without having to buy or rent the camera first! I compared the 6400 ISO file with those of my old 5dii and even the fuji x-t10, and honestly I did not find any particular differences. Why this that? Some would say because the tech is outdated, others because these are not the same shots (lighting conditions, etc...). Where does this lead? I guess, and I borrow words from people wiser than I am, that in the end it is mainly a question of how much do you like the experience with the camera in your hands, and what upgrades do you need when considering a new purchase. Interested to go for Fuji I tried the x-t10 (and put my hands on the x-t20) and I realised I preferred the reliability of my old canon body as well as its ergonomics. Interested to go for that mirrorless EVF, I found I still prefer my old optical viewfinder, and prefer to wait for the former tech to be mature. When it will be, I tell myself I'll have a set of good and affordable glasses ready, because canon and nikon won't miss the train of full frame mirrorless. As to replace my old 5dii, the better AF and the flippy screen seriously makes the 6dii attractive. And it is da.n cheaper than the 5d iv. As for the DR, it depends on the way you like your shots. I prefer contrast and kind of like a hint of haze. So that's not a big deal. What i am demanding is high IQ and nobody can argue that you can't find a good combination of a canon full frame body with glasses (either from canon, tamron or sigma by the way). As for landscape, I am not a pro but if I need high DR, HDR works just fine (sometime even hand held, as for panoramas). Hope this will not fires up anyone. See ya (at Jared Polin sauce :) !!
GND filters also help with high dynamic range landscape scenes. But I guess that is too much trouble to actually get it right *before* the light strikes the sensor.
I was all set to buy this camera, but the knowledge that Canon could have brought a better camera to market but purposefully did not was a slap in the face. As such, I'm now selling my EF glass and have switched to Nikon FX.
I'll admit that its not "THAT BAD" as some others are complaining, but what make me sad is that canon could easily make it better( with not much a cost increase) but they decided not to.
Well, most of these test pages measure the Dynamic range from the Base lowest ISO. even the almighty DR king (Nikon D810) is only really that strong at its lowest base iso(50).. and is even/on par with the Sony A7rII & Canon 5DmIV at around ISO 200-400.. after that the D810 even falls behind these 2 competitors in DR. This is actually only important for Landscape shooters who only wants to use Lowest ISO possible. And even then i would rather shoot several exposures anyway. It actually doesnt matter so much how many stops you can pull the shadows or highlights up, whats more important to me is, that these pulled up areas looking clean. The older canon sensors had some Horrible color banding in the shadow areas. that changed with the newest Canon sensor generation. They became much cleaner now. and i hope thats also the case with the 6Dii.
"They became much cleaner now. and i hope thats also the case with the 6Dii" 6DII is using older technology (off sensor A/D converter), 80D and 5Dmk4 use on sensor ADC tech (like Sony sensors)
I think the problem with the 6D II it's the pricing. If it was priced on par with the 80D, you could choose between two nearly identical cameras, the 6D II for better low light and the 80D for better DR and more spread of the AF. But at this cost, I want more of everything. If you use and 80D with a Sigma 18-35 F1.8 you have amazing low light and bokeh with a zoom, with better DR at a much cheaper price. Problem solved.
I have an Sl2, and now I bought the 6DMKII. I just hope the RAW files get better, not worse. I live in Brazil, so here even a Sl2 can be used for professional work, since most photographers won't have anything better, and if you have you will find it hard to recover your money. I am keeping both cameras, though. I like this because it's one of the only reviews that is not dedicated to bash the 6DMII, although it should be compared to the 6DMKI, since it's more expensive. But I will take into the account the better dynamic range in higher ISOs. I almost bought a 6D, but the used one I was buying was always front focusing, even at +20 in lens correction. Something was terribly misaligned, normally the 6D do a decent job, but I got entranced by the "new" model and a Mark II in the front of the name. At least this new model didn't have a that punishing price difference.
Thanks! Now I can compare these files to your raw files from other cameras to get unbiased results. This may not be a dream camera, but perhaps people are just TRYING to find fault with it? Man I hate when people do that.
Thanks for the great take on "DR Gate!" Perspective! While some people are online hating on Canon, I'm in the mountains taking fabulous pictures with my 80D and fine glass. I guess that makes some people angry.
Kevin Johnson I’m with you on that one. I just came back from Poland and I took awesome pictures with a 60D. Not once did I think “Oh crap! I don’t have enough DR for this” for a 6+ year-old camera it works like a charm and I’ve done 36x24” prints out of it so I think this is just marketing.
this is not really a challenging scene. if using a square box, one side open, there will be less light in the shaddow compared to another where there is only one or two sides up. there is a different ammount of light left in every shadow. also as a Stills u want to use 100 iso.
The 6D Mark II doesn't have terrible dynamic range at all. Once you learn the settings to use, the camera does fine. (The settings will differ from cameras like the 5D Mark IV when trying to achieve the same result.) Most of the people complaining are the ones who rely too much on software like Photoshop or Lightroom to enhance their photos. Any dynamic range issues are only found when pushing the limits on photo software. Too many people have missed what this camera is supposed to be. It's meant to be a full frame 80D with better low light performance.
I own the 6D MII. It's a great camera. A lot faster than the 6D and the touch screen is a game changer. I do notice more grain in my pics than 6D if I shoot in auto or AV. The grain is easily removed in LR. I suggest keeping LENR off. I shoot lots of nightscapes and cityscapes, ISO starting around 200. The camera by default makes shooting a lot easier with the touch/tilt screen. The 4k timelapse feature is great too and can easily edit in Premiere. I wouldn't recommend this camera for anyone shooting people in low light without a flash or event photographers. Landscapes/cityscapes are forgiving but skin isn't. I got this camera because it speeds up the process of taking photos and gives me advantages that I had with my 70D & 80D but with a full frame.
Personally, I'd take the 6DMII. Once you go touch screen, you cannot go back. The touch screen and being able to move the screen around in different angles is pretty awesome. I loved doing video with it on my 70D. Doing 4k videos in camera is a cool feature too. Lots of time saving with that feature too. Both cameras are pretty close in specs, i'm all about saving time and being more efficient and the features on the 6DMII do that till the next new camera comes up that will be a good upgrade.
Hmmm... well but then there's this: petapixel.com/2017/08/14/canon-6d-vs-6d-ii-heres-high-iso-noise-comparison/ I don't know if I should believe it or not, sounds like another a9-esque conspiracy theory.
The DIGIC 7 might give you some quality NR. Try it out! It is a Digic SEVEN after all... no other DSLR has it, only a Canon mirrorless camera. That's a damn good processor which may be able to do some things better, like perhaps NR.
No one is forcing you to upgrade to 6D MKII, If you really care about the DR that much then stick with what you have rather than whining, You don't want to buy a $2k camera because it's DR can't compare to your dinosaur DSLR? Then don't buy it, you can't have everything. They are a company that needs profit and as much as I hate their marketing strategy it makes sense, even if you don't buy it others will and when they earn millions, they won't need your thousands. I'm not a pro-tographer but pretty much DR is very subjective, just properly expose your shots or bracket it or whatever technical terms you all use this days, do it. Take time in composing your shots pretty simple. Lighting is really your responsibility. I'm not a canon fanboy but all this whining is really pointless, Do you care more about the specs or the techniques? do you rely so much on the specs because you don't have a decent post-processing skills? Go out and shoot.
Thank you Jared for your post. This kind of information should be presented openly to suppress all the stupid moaning some people like to present without even touching the camera and others follows them.
It seems to me that both Canon and Nikon are pushing out cameras which only have small, timid improvements over the previous models, while Fuji and Sony are making huge leaps with cameras like the a9 or the gfx 50s. I expect a full frame to do much better than an aps-c. It is embarassing, that the question arises at all because you pay much more for a full frame camera.
Except sony also pushed out a firmware release to most of it's mirrorless cameras that makes them unusable for night sky/ astrophotography because they now have processing done to the raw files (yeah, raw! WTF?) that removes the fainter stars.
Which firmware release are you talking about, because mines up to date and i have no issue with astrophotography, you sure you're not talking about in camera noise reduction?
He's right. Anything that the camera deems to possibly be noise is averaged out at longer exposure times. This is a recent change on Sony cameras and it is very bad for astro. And no, the most recent update hasn't fixed it. It is a problem.
Well, the problem is not low DR only, but the fact that touching 6dii RAWs makes no difference comparing to my 550d except for higher ISOs. Obviously, it's not how full frame camera should perform.
I think the problem is not that the 6DII's DR is bad objectively, but comparatively. Meaning compared to the cameras you can get for the same money, such as the aged Nikon D750, it seems like it's pulling behind. Objectively, this is not a bad camera. You won't be just desperately limited by this camera at all. But $2K is a pretty substantial chunk of change and I think people just want their money's worth.
Canon releases a camera that is competitive in base ISO DR and now everyone shooting Canons forget they never had that before. All of a sudden Canon shooters are missing something they never had? To make it worse... its only useful low ISO settings? Man... I don't get out of bed lower than 400 ISO. The bottom-line, yeah Canon probably could have done a better job, but this one issue is not as important as most people are making it out to be.
It's an amazing camera. Reviewers just like to whine in their headlines to attract viewers. Yeah so if your exposure is off by 3 stops and you try to bring back the details then there's a bit more noise. But again, if you're presented with this kind of situation then the problem is not with the camera but the shooter. The camera offers plenty of dynamic range with all the benefits of a full frame camera for the price of a really good crop sensor camera. This is why since your comment was posted, this camera eventually became super popular. Buying mine in a few days after having it tested out and for a camera that only costs today 1200$ it's perfect.
I think there are tow types of Camera: Type 1. ISO Invariant ones, like the D810, 5D IV, 80D, A7RII, and Type 2. ISO Variant, like the D700, 5D III, 6DII, D5,... this is not good ore bad, this is only affecting the way you taking pictures and some times you ending up with a better result with one of the two types, depending on your subject. You have only access to the extreme DR from “Type 1”at base ISO vs. you can only make use of your high ISO performance from “Type 2” in low light conditions. I think it makes sense that, there are sports Camera like the D5 are “Type 2” and others like the D810 more for landscape/portrait are "Type1" Camera.
The problem is that if you are using Canon or Nikon, the wide angle lens selection is limited for cropped sensor cameras. So you're basically telling landscape photographers, who would be a target market for this camera as they don't need the advanced af and low light performance, that they need to buy the 5Dmk4 if they want to do serious landscape work on Canon.
I downloaded the files and checked the ones done at ISO100. I'm disappointed to see so much grain in the image. It looks more like ISO400-800 to me. I currently use a 5D MkII and that is so smooth and crisp at ISO100. They just don't compare. I'm looking for a good DSLR with a fully articulating screen and I was looking at the 6D MkII as a possible upgrade. After checking the files I'm not so sure now. Maybe I'll get a 5D MkIII and get an eyepiece instead.
you have to take the crop factor when you compare the true iso numbers. when you take this into account the 80D will destroy the larger sensor. Smaller Sensor ISO * Crop Factor * Crop Factor = Full Frame ISO
Been playing with my 6DMII, for those interested, unlike my old 70/80D where movie mode did not work when Wi-Fi is enabled (you could not start movie recording via Wifi) In 6DMII, you can now start/stop and remote control your video recording via Wi-Fi from your smart phone, won't be needing my CamRanger no more! there is still a Lag, but nothing worse that my CamRanger.
I am amazed that you are still on RUclips. Last I saw your vids were in 2011. You still look the same. You even moved from your mom or grandmas house. Good to see you again.
Real world photos? Thank you. I do realize the 6D Mark ii doesn’t compare well against the Sony A7iii but that isn’t all bad. The 6D prices have plunged to $1200 + some small change. I even realize the 6D wont appeal to the pros but a step up a rebel crop sensor. It may work. Jared you have proven some since photos can come out of the 6D Mark ii. Now can we get a full screen Gear Vault app designed for the iPad and or iMac?
The bottom line here is that the 6dii does not offer everything that the competitors do at the same or lower price. Whether it be the DR at ISO 100 not allowing you to recover as much clean detail in the shadows as you'd expect, the lack of dual card slots for backing up important shoots, the lack of any kind of 4k video. You can say you don't need this all you want, but the fact of the matter is with other manufacturers you get all or most of this. How much is the Canon name worth to you to pay for this camera? Because for $2000 today, you really should expect to be be getting more for your money.
It's not so horrible! I played around with the raw files. Dynamic range isn't par with other cameras that's a fact but it isn't TOO bad. You really need to use the noise reduction though in LR 😅 and really balance it. It came out pretty good. I'm testing it with my 5d3 later.
Phil Jones65 I guess I did an awesome job in Lightroom! I mean I do agree the DR was "okay" but not at all great. I managed to make it workable in Lightroom but I'm sure it'll varies to other people.
just got my 6dmk2. so far im happy... nothing beats a full frame shutter clunk. :) id get this over a sony any day :) oh and ive been to sony(have a rx100mk5) tried them a7 series, lumx gh3 and 4, fujis as well as im a nikon born photographer :) real world plus a touch of a good form factor for me
rajdeep pal ahahah ... this Don't worry we'll see soon the next gen. nikon d 850 with great dynamic range 8k time craps, super specs and at least at 5000 dollars of price tag. Too bad it will be full of issues and recalls starting after the first month of selling😂😂😂
Dynamic range is not overrated in today's camera. It is very useful, especially for wedding photographers. It saves so much time in many situations. I switched from Canon to Nikon, just because of the better sensor performance!
agree. i cant believe some of the comments on here. most comments here are terrible. if you want good shit, you will pay the big shit. people want the consumer price and want the flagship. aint happening people! cough up if you want top shelf with all the options or shut the hell up and go shoot something. peace
I am surprised Canon has not responded to all of this. They put out a newer sensor, supposedly for this. I get why people feel this camera is not for them. Personally, I find my t6i sufficient for my needs, but the 77D would be nice for the better focus system and the 80D would be nice for bad weather ( don't think 77D is weather proof.) But I am not a pro. If I was a pro, I would maybe care about this DR issue, and look at Nikon/Sony. Or maybe I would own the 5D Mark IV if I was a pro.
Well... The lower ISOs are what matters for me. Dynamic range is one thing, but at higher ISOs your colors just aren't as good. So while the 6D II may have the edge at the higher ISOs, which it should as a camera with a 35mm sensor, having better dynamic range at the base ISO where you get the best possible image quality is also important. For example, if you take landscapes, which 35mm sensors are better for than APS-C sensors as you get the most out of your wide angle lenses, you won't care too much about the higher ISOs. Why go to ISO 6400 and beyond when you can just pop the camera on a tripod and get better image quality? And the dynamic range then simply gives you more freedom when it comes to editing. The difference between these two cameras seems to be so small though it pretty much doesn't matter. Is the 6D II sensor bad? Maybe the 80D sensors greateness just can't be scaled up to 35mm, who knows? :) Not that any of this matters to me (or you, Jared), Nikon has way better dynamic range than Canon anyway ;D
If you would show me two images, one taken with the 80D and one with the 6D II, I probably wouldn't even be able to spot a difference (obviously you would have to adjust the images because of the crop factor but you get my point).
There is no "major difference" between new cameras any more. Problem for 6Dmk2 is that direct price and sensor size competition cameras are better, and all of them are 2/3 years old. How is 6Dmk2 going to compare to new Sony/Nikon cameras in that price range if it's already lagging behind.
"Maybe the 80D sensors greateness just can't be scaled up to 35mm, who knows? " Actually it can. see the 1DXmii and 5Dmark4. they have very similar results in low ISO DR and are even slightly better. seems like they went all in for High ISO performence with the 6dii
Well, that's not a new at all and it's exactly what the 6D did, only difference is that at the time the 100ISO DR of the 6D was just a bit behind the competition (excluding the D800 that however isn't great at high ISO) and better than almost everybody alse at high ISO, but now it's 2017 and we have cameras that are great both at Low and High ISO (D750, A7RII, 5D Mark IV, 1DxII just to name a few) plus some sensor that is basically almost isoless (see XT2). Come on, the 6DII at ISO 100 has less DR than my Nikon D90 from 2008 at 200 ISO!
I currently have a 7d mark ii. I do a lot of indoor sports photography where lighting is not the greatest. With my 7d mk ii I typically run ISO 2000 1/1250 sec F2.8. Could I expect ISO 4000 with similar noise results? My strategy has been to shoot dim to keep ISO's low and then bump up the exposure and the shadows in Lightroom. In the case of the 6d mark ii, should I shoot higher ISO's utilizing the dynamic range being more comparable to other camera bodies, then maybe reduce the highlights? That way I can harvest the information in the shadows without bumping up in lightroom. I am on the fence with regards to buying the 6d mark ii or saving for 5d mark IV.
Jared Polin if you are not too busy and you see this can you do a sharey-mcsharison and share your insight? Love what you do for the RUclips community.
I do have a Tamron SP 70-200mm DC VC f/2.8 that I was using that yesterday with my new 6D Mark II that was shooting a little dark. The rest of my pictures came out great though.
Thanks for this review of the 6D Mark 2. Everyone else in the industry has done a good job trashing this new DSLR from having worst dynamic range than its predecessor, no 4K video, and only one card slot. But after seeing your review and the sample shots I believe this to be a pleasant upgrade from the original 6D, and certainly an older 5D Mark 2. The flip/tilt touch screen, dual pixel AF, and 45 all cross type AF points, and improved low light performance is worth it, especially for landscape photographers. Well done Jared! Thank you.
Jared your videos are always stellar in quality and content, but to have a good idea on dynamic range, you should always compare to something else, on top of your head you can't judge how a camera is good or bad on a technical aspect (it just how our brain work), comparaison is always key, the "less than average" DR of the 6DII(at ISO100) is it a deal breaker for 99% of photographers ? of course no, it is still a very good camera for canon users, for the others who could jump on the Canon ship the only somewhat "novelty" there is the flip out screen(first one on a fullframe camera), and apparently the very good high ISO performance compared to a crop body ......DSLR are always a solid investment, they are still the most reliable cameras ......
Jared, good points. Everyone knows that this camera is quite good but real problem is how expensive it is for what it is. Nikon d750 has better dynamic range, better hi ISO, better iq and af at the same price... it looks even worse if you check Fuji, for a lot less $ you will buy better camera in most aspects (hi ISO is only point where canon have advantage?) and there is no excuse for poor dr and video (it's not super fast camera and canon have technology). This is simply cost cut/safe camera placement vs 5dm4. Is it matters for a buyer? Maybe not, he simply spend ~400$ more then he should but sites about camera comparison must make "big deal" for this type of situation.
People just want to complain about what technology is not in their camera because their pathography sucks… But they are realizing that’s not how to make a timer fee better…
You have a solid point Jared but let's be brutally honest here......can you really justify £2000 for a camera with pretty much a 5 year old sensor? A camera like this benefits me as I'm an events photographer used to shooting in low light but I'm sorry......Canon doesn't deserve my money or anyone elses. This is shameful and an embarrassment, Canon should be called out at every opportunity for this. Had the 6D Mark II come out at a substantially lower price.........we wouldn't be having this conversation....
Hi sir. I’m a canon 6D ii user. My back dial doesn’t work properly now. I want to repair it but I also want to upgrade to canon eos r6 as well. I posted on Facebook to sell and it’s really hard to sell it. What should I do?
Of course you can do this and this (plays with knobs in Lightroom). The argument was how much noise you get back when recovering shadows, Not merely having Lightroom brighten your picture. Besides, new cameras at higher prices should be better than their predecessors, not worse. If canon never sponsored you to make this video you probably would be arguing the other way.
i unfortunately don't really find this video very helpful. helpful would have been providing like for like comparisons of image quality at various isos with current gen 5div and 1dxii, along with the 6di it replaces and perhaps the 5d3 that is fairly price comparable. the specs of this camera are pretty underwhelming and to hear that image quality gains over the 6d are so moderate makes it even less attractive. iso 100 is the only iso that is relevant a great deal of the time for a great many people who control light.
You sir, at the wrong place actually, the video is just discussing about the dynamic range of the camera in which a bunch of people called it to be worst than 80d, he delivers exactly that, It's not a comparison video, it's just to show you what you can mess with the RAW file produced.
it is my understanding that they didn't call it worse than 80d: they measured it to be such. demonstrably less dynamic range can be achieved at base iso i.e. at optimum sensor performance. As someone who uses a 1dxii, a 5diii and a 6di, and would like to replace the latter with a nice new one with a tilty screen and better iq, i believe my disappointment in the camera, and this article's failure to in any way judge its iq against a 80d, 6d or any other camera, is legitimate, sir.
I browsed a ton of Flickr 6D pages - I'm talking several thousand - and bookmarked several hundred great portrait pics taken with my favorite Canon 135/2 and 24-105 lenses. I've browsed another ton of 6d2 pages and haven't found ONE portrait that comes within 100,000 miles of the quality I can get with the 6D (or 5D3/4). Maybe it's not dynamic range, but the pics just aren't anywhere in the same ballpark. The 6D portraits are wonderful; the 6D2 portraits are not - they look like Kodacolor snapshots. Don't tell me I'm wrong - please show me. From what I've seen, 6D portraits have wonderful gradation in the skin, whereas the 6d2 doesn't. Skin in the 6D2 pics looks plasticky, with rare exceptions, and those aren't up to 6D standards.
I have a question. If I were to choose this vs the 5D M4 which would be better for both business/ production along with vlogs. With higher focus on the 5d m4 it seems like the Flippy screen isn't technically needed, or am I wrong?
Love your reviews! Just found your channel yesterday. Downloaded you raw photos, and I don't know if you did realized that, but I think you indirectly revealed your address lol.
I have the original 6D & an 80D and I know the 80D produces way more noise than the 6D so I'm confident the 6D MKII will be absolutely fine. Very rarely used 100 iso on the 6D either as 200 as so good. Jarod is spot-on here, I'm more interested in how it performs in real-world conditions, not minute differences measured under conditions I'll never shoot in.
It doesn't matter until you find out you get better body, of course with better dynamic range with less price. Canon fanboy or canon basher are not important, its about what you pay doesn't help you get what you want, thus the rave
I think the frustrating thing is that the current 6d ii is years behind something like the d610 or d750 when it comes to IQ and DR, don't take this personally Jared, but some of us just don't push contrast to 100, I don't think I'm the only one to desire lower native iso, sure high iso performance is nice but is seriously the last thing I check in a camera, since I rarely bump it up to 200, maybe 400 for 1% of my total shots. And when comapred to the 5dIV, well... that's embarassing
I went to the camera store after work today to buy myself a flash and the clerk told me that the 6D mark II are all sold out, so if the camera is so bad why does it sell so well!!!
ben196145 Because people are fanboys... Oh and I am a Canon shooter who loves his 70D and Sigma Art glass...then shot with the same glass on the D500, wouldn't touch the 6D II with a 10 foot stick.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Best. Voiceover. Ever.
Todd Wolfe knows what's up! 🤣🤣🤣
9 stops vs. 11 stops (at first) ;)
Todd Wolfe Really? I could barely tell, it was sooooo subtle 😏.....
I think all the videos should be dubbed so it has a Gozilla vibe.
I sold my 6D and 80D a few weeks ago and got the 6DMII that arrived this morning, got some quick stills and videos and did some edits. From what I see in my initial edits, the DR is just fine for what I will use my 6DMII for. My priorities were Full frame, DPAF, at least 1080p 60fps (bummed about no ALL-I, but oh well), 4K would have been nice, but not something critical for my needs. I think part of the problem is the expectation that 6DMII is Pro-Level, unfortunately it still is budget - Semi-Pro, at least that is my opinion of the 6DMII. I am stoked that I don't have to carry 2 bodies anymore - Yay!
How you feel about it still? When I upgrade it's gonna be between this or the 5DIII. I'm leaning towards the 6dII because I want to shoot more night stuff and I like the idea of the screen which flips like the T3i I use currently.
There is good and bad I guess. My Sigma 85mm f1.4 ART hunts a lot on my 6DMII, interestingly the AF on my Sigma 24 ART, 50ART and 135ART are fast, accurate and rock solid on the 6DMII. Not sure if the problem is my 6DMII or the Sigma 85mm ART! second, I tried the cinestyle picture profile on the 6DMII (maybe someone can suggest a solution) it looked like crap! a lot of noise! I switched to the stock Neutral profile and that was great! Low light performance on 6DMII is better than the 6D or the 80D from what I have seen. just like the 80D with Touch to focus, if you use live view even for still, the AF point coverage would not matter at all. I heard a lot of folks complain that the AF points did not cover the grid (for rule of 3rds) for composition, I just use live view, and in live view I can throw my focus any damn place i wish and my Sigma ART's nail focus every single time (exception is the 85mm ART). So For me the AF is exactly what I wanted. As for the DR issues on the 6DMII, I was bothered with it a little when I read about it, but now after several weeks of shooting I can say that for my taste and needs, the DR is more that sufficient.
People who complain about the AF point spread on the 6DII do so because it is the first non-crop body they have ever used.
The spread is no narrower than the 5D, 5DII, or the 6D. Even though the 5DIII has more AF points, the spread is not very much larger than the far left/right/top/bottom AF points of the 6DII. As someone who uses both crop bodies (mainly a 7DII) and FF bodies (mainly a 5DIII), it can get frustrating when one runs out of room to select an AF point on the FF body after just being able to use one that wide on the crop body!
You have 4k but its motion jpeg
I enjoy those little audio cut ins. Do that more.
he should get dan to do them
Not to burst your Fro fandom. But, fuck no. Its awkward & it's not even funny.
The voice over parts made me laugh more than I did watching an entire HBO comedy hour long special did.
WINNING!!!
I guess im asking the wrong place but does anyone know of a way to log back into an instagram account??
I was stupid forgot the password. I love any assistance you can give me.
@Nikolas Alfredo instablaster ;)
@Huxley Mitchell i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site through google and im in the hacking process atm.
Seems to take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@Huxley Mitchell it worked and I finally got access to my account again. I am so happy!
Thanks so much you saved my ass !
I am really starting to enjoy your videos. You hit it on the head, and I agree completely. I have an 80D, and I am about to upgrade to the 6D2. Mostly for reasons that don't involve the sensor size. Mostly I want to use weather sealed lenses to their fullest, I LOVE my 80D, and the 6D2 is essentially a full frame 80D. I have watched dozens of reviews, and read hundreds of tech comparisons. You are the only one who did what you just did, and you made my mind to buy the 6D2 as my main, and keep my 80D for a backup. Because you are right, the 6D2 images you demonstrated were just as good at their respective ISO as anything my 80D could produce, maybe better in some cases. My shooting style typically requires long exposures (10-30 sec), ND filters, and large (f/16-22) stops, and I tend to favor ISO 800-1600. Seems like the 6D2 will do nicely.
Hi, I'm in the similar situation, currently using an old 80D, thinking of getting a new-old-stock 6D Mk2 and using both, any regrets? Cheers.
After upgrading my 5D 1 to 6D 2, I was unhappy with the contrastiness of it, and how you'd get dropped shadows and blown out skies in the same image constantly, however, I had the habit of trying to keep ISO at 100 from using the 5D, and recently found that it's much less noisy at 1000 ISO than the 5D is at 500, and cranking up the ISO and shooting faster speeds with highlight protect mode knocks that contrast WAY back, but also you get a much wider recoverable range in the highlights and shadows, so much that three shot HDR seems pretty unnecessary anymore.
The DR nagging is exactly the same syndrome people are suffering from when 4K started to be a thing...
DR has improved a lot in recent years thing is this is a relatively new camera so people kinda expect good DR to be present
I think there are photographers that chase the numbers and buy gear and test their cameras and defend their purchase by bashing other cameras like this one . I do not own a full frame I'm happy what i have and my exposer is very very close ( mirror less). Very easy to do . People said same thing with the 6d and I saw amazing portraits with that camera because the photographer went out and got the shot and knows how
Everybody needs to calm down bashing each other to defend the choice they made
Need to get out and shoot more than staying home researching on camera they already own but still. Watching reviews on them lol makes me laugh and questions thier purchase then very happy to put down another camera they never touch to make themselves feel better It's getting old guys !!
Sadly had someone give me a hard time today because I have a d3500 with good glass and I took much better photos than they did and they had a d750 with yongnuo laughable glass
Of course, for photos, it's fine. I have a 6DII and the real problem with dynamic range is in the videos, even bringing the contrast and sharpness all the way down. Also, a black mist filter may help a bit.
I'm surprised, that in this comment section everyone is talking about dynamic range, but no one even remotely mentions graduated ND Filters. I've never seen a landscape photographer NOT using filters... that's why DR shouldn't matter... but hey, I'm just a newbie
I think you're right😉
I got lessons from a friend of mine who is a full-time pro when I was starting out, and after a while, I mentioned to him that I wanted to upgrade my body (I had a t3i). He asked me a very poignant question: "do you think you are maxing out the capabilities of your camera now?" I had to be honest and say no. Now, a few years later, I can safely say - yes I am, so I got the 6d II. Suffering through terrible low-light performance, slow AF, slow everything, and having to get creative made me a way better photographer than if someone just handed me a 5d mk III day one or something. I think there are loads of ways to get around having 2 less stops of dynamic range depending on the photo you're taking. It's easier when you're used to less dynamic range and suddenly have more room to work with (as is my case).
@@karikaru you should be an example for all photographers.
Graduated filters while doing landscapes are a dang nuisance..dust & water droplets are a nightmare.
When doing generalised daylight shooting with my 6Dmk1 I've personally been finding that 320ISO is producing better looking photos as usually the camera under exposures by keeping to 100, so any improvement of DR at higher iso is welcome.
It sounds to me that everyone was expecting to get a 5D mk IV for two grand and hence the hissi fits. People it's a 1600 euro camera! Canon it's not going to give you 4000 worth of gear for that price. They learnt their lesson with the mark ii.
People like to pick one stat and harp on it. That's why they usually crap on the 6D2. You want to know a highly acclaimed camera that has worse dynamic range than 80D or 6D2? Try the Fuji X100F at L ISO 100, it has about 7 or 8 stops of dynamic range, but when you put it at ISO 200 or 400, then it has a lot. If you use 80D at ISO 200 or 6D2 at ISO 200-800, they out perform the X100F slightly, then the 6D2 takes the lead from 1600 and up. The only cameras that seem to have unlimited DR is Nikon D750 and D7000 series, even at ISO 100 you can boost the shadows up 4 stops or more. But Nikon has the world's crappiest Live View AF, especially for video and vlogging where Canon always takes lead. But dynamic range isn't everything, I'm still taking awesome photos on my Eos 30D and Tamron 17-50/2.8 and they have a very E6 film look, and the ISO noise looks more organic compared to the rainbow puke of newer cameras.
Too many people focusing on this DR hype ~ images look clean enough to me.
Looking forward to the real real world review.
Cheers for this, Jared!
With so many alternates avail, two grand is a big number to drop on a camera that's not setting the world alight.
No I didn't - my mistake I thought it was the equipment.
True
2K is still cheap
"cheap"
It's down to $999 at B&H and you have to ask is it worth a slight dynamic range difference at 100 ISO compared to cameras that are selling for 3X as much? I guess it depends on how often you are actually shooting at 100 ISO. Normally, if I am shooting at 100 ISO it's in a situation where I have a ton of lighting control-like in a studio or some other situation where I am using lights. If that's the case, it isn't all that crucial unless you suck at lighting. For me, it's more crucial to be able to shoot in extremely low light with the least amount of noise, where I can't light, such as in a church during a wedding.
I bought the 6D Mark II and simply started shooting with it. I got pictures that reflect my effort and skill. Same thing happens when I shoot with my 6D Mark I (now my back-up and hobby camera). Its cool to have all the bells and whistles that come with the new version, but really it's just another camera body that works and I'm happy about that. 4K video? I could care less about more resolution. It takes longer to load, I need to buy more hard drives, and I never felt I missed out on content watching 1080 or even 720p. Select your lenses wisely and enjoy the art and craft of photography. Then you might start to notice an increase in IQ.
Thank you, this is exactly what I've been looking for. Extremely helpful in my decision between the 6Dii vs 5Diii. I even canceled my 6Dii preorder and decided to reevaluate because of all this dynamic range talk.
I almost did the same thing, but I'm glad I didn't. So far, I don't have any complaints.
If you've got Canon glass, the 6D Mkii shouldn't disappoint you. Honestly, even with my landscapes I don't push the dynamic range that much on my D800. Unless if you rely on that dynamic range, chances where you have to push things to the limit are rare. However, greater dynamic range never hurts.
Just hold off for the D850. Even the 5d4 sucks.
I have Canon L's and Sigma Art lenses, so I should be good. I reevaluated with a pros/cons list and found a new 5Diii for the same price as the 6Dii, so I'm going with that. The dual card slots and proven quality set me over the edge. All of this thinking really pushed me to look into Nikon but switching is expensive and a pain in the ass, so we'll see what Canon can/can't do down the line.
I considered it, but I'm already deep into Canon and have been for years, the switch isn't necessary at this point and would be a huge pain in the ass.
For any serious landscape photographer, that 100iso DR does matter tho.
It really doesn't--there's no law that says image quality must monotonically improve with decreasing ISO. It could be that ISO 400 on the 6dmii is it's "magic" number. Time will tell, though.
Zhen Chen Proper exposure negates most dynamic range issues.
Glad you mentioned that, it has been on my mind ever since I heard about it. I know that when I have to recover shadows in a picture it is because I didn't do my part right to begin with.
Yes but for $2,000 is 'most' good enough, especially if the competition can resolve the issue better.
yes, they do. A72 is better, d750 is better, d610 is better, APSC A6500 is better, canon 80d is better, A6300 is better,
Thanks for putting things in perspective. I've been waiting for someone to say this. For wildlife photography, I'm so rarely shooting at ISO 100 it's unreal, and when I do, I invariably use a strobe, negating any DR issues. Good work, Fro!
I don't think that the other sites were claiming the 6DmII has terrible dynamic range, but rather the DR is not up to par with it's competitors in the $2,000 price range. I think a more interesting video would be to compare the 6DmII image quality (ie; DR range and ISO performance) to the Nikon D750 and Sony A7ii, two FF cameras that are both hundreds of dollars cheaper than the 6DmII.
But remember when the D750 was launched it was about $2300 if memory serves, yes everyone is going on about the price but look at the prices when the other cameras were launched, then the price seems fare give it 6 months to a year and it will drop in price they always do.
Agreed. But I do feel that when the D750 was announced, it beat all it's competitors in that price range. I don't feel that way with the 6DmII, and I think a lot of reviewers feel that way, too. I bet if it was priced in line with the current D750 and Sony A7ii, it would be getting much better reviews.
Thanks for the video Jared. I think dynamic range it's not a deal breaker in this case. Maybe 1 slot of memory is (Never got a problem for like ten years with any memory ). And personally i don't care if this have not 4k. I want a camera for making stills. This light, small, with GPS, weather sealed, tilltable touchscreen DSLR its a smart way to compite with CSC's. And for who's are complaining, today the 6D MII costs 1.9 USD with 24-105mm. I think its a very far price for what offers. It's very competitive. You can say a lot of bad things of Canon, and i agree in very angles. But they make very, very reliable cameras who you know they will perform for many years flawlessly. That makes the difference, entry level FF with a lot of lenses and accessories.
Your honesty is commendable. Something sadly very rare these days. Keep up the great work. Thank you.
One of your finer reviews! Everyone is just looking at spec sheets these days. Thank you.
The 9 stop dynamic range @ 100 ISO isn't the terrible thing of the 6D Mk II for me at least .
The single slot for memory card is a most definitely is .
Thanks for sharing the files. Again, as for the xt-2 files you shared that's really nice to put my hands on them. It brings me directly to the process stage without having to buy or rent the camera first!
I compared the 6400 ISO file with those of my old 5dii and even the fuji x-t10, and honestly I did not find any particular differences. Why this that? Some would say because the tech is outdated, others because these are not the same shots (lighting conditions, etc...). Where does this lead? I guess, and I borrow words from people wiser than I am, that in the end it is mainly a question of how much do you like the experience with the camera in your hands, and what upgrades do you need when considering a new purchase. Interested to go for Fuji I tried the x-t10 (and put my hands on the x-t20) and I realised I preferred the reliability of my old canon body as well as its ergonomics. Interested to go for that mirrorless EVF, I found I still prefer my old optical viewfinder, and prefer to wait for the former tech to be mature. When it will be, I tell myself I'll have a set of good and affordable glasses ready, because canon and nikon won't miss the train of full frame mirrorless. As to replace my old 5dii, the better AF and the flippy screen seriously makes the 6dii attractive. And it is da.n cheaper than the 5d iv. As for the DR, it depends on the way you like your shots. I prefer contrast and kind of like a hint of haze. So that's not a big deal. What i am demanding is high IQ and nobody can argue that you can't find a good combination of a canon full frame body with glasses (either from canon, tamron or sigma by the way). As for landscape, I am not a pro but if I need high DR, HDR works just fine (sometime even hand held, as for panoramas). Hope this will not fires up anyone. See ya (at Jared Polin sauce :) !!
GND filters also help with high dynamic range landscape scenes. But I guess that is too much trouble to actually get it right *before* the light strikes the sensor.
I was all set to buy this camera, but the knowledge that Canon could have brought a better camera to market but purposefully did not was a slap in the face. As such, I'm now selling my EF glass and have switched to Nikon FX.
I'll admit that its not "THAT BAD" as some others are complaining, but what make me sad is that canon could easily make it better( with not much a cost increase) but they decided not to.
Well, most of these test pages measure the Dynamic range from the Base lowest ISO. even the almighty DR king (Nikon D810) is only really that strong at its lowest base iso(50).. and is even/on par with the Sony A7rII & Canon 5DmIV at around ISO 200-400.. after that the D810 even falls behind these 2 competitors in DR. This is actually only important for Landscape shooters who only wants to use Lowest ISO possible. And even then i would rather shoot several exposures anyway. It actually doesnt matter so much how many stops you can pull the shadows or highlights up, whats more important
to me is, that these pulled up areas looking clean. The older canon sensors had some Horrible color banding in the shadow areas. that changed with the newest Canon sensor generation. They became much cleaner now. and i hope thats also the case with the 6Dii.
"They became much cleaner now. and i hope thats also the case with the 6Dii" 6DII is using older technology (off sensor A/D converter), 80D and 5Dmk4 use on sensor ADC tech (like Sony sensors)
I think the problem with the 6D II it's the pricing. If it was priced on par with the 80D, you could choose between two nearly identical cameras, the 6D II for better low light and the 80D for better DR and more spread of the AF. But at this cost, I want more of everything. If you use and 80D with a Sigma 18-35 F1.8 you have amazing low light and bokeh with a zoom, with better DR at a much cheaper price. Problem solved.
Bomber I've been debating just this lol, whether an 80D with that sigma would get me the same finished product a 6d mk2 with similar glass would
It would get you the same finished product wit more dynamic range at half the price.
Better comparison in Canon APS-C line up is 77D. No headphone jack, max shutter speed 1/4000, max flash sync speed 1/200, IPB video...
I have an Sl2, and now I bought the 6DMKII. I just hope the RAW files get better, not worse. I live in Brazil, so here even a Sl2 can be used for professional work, since most photographers won't have anything better, and if you have you will find it hard to recover your money. I am keeping both cameras, though. I like this because it's one of the only reviews that is not dedicated to bash the 6DMII, although it should be compared to the 6DMKI, since it's more expensive. But I will take into the account the better dynamic range in higher ISOs. I almost bought a 6D, but the used one I was buying was always front focusing, even at +20 in lens correction. Something was terribly misaligned, normally the 6D do a decent job, but I got entranced by the "new" model and a Mark II in the front of the name. At least this new model didn't have a that punishing price difference.
Thanks! Now I can compare these files to your raw files from other cameras to get unbiased results. This may not be a dream camera, but perhaps people are just TRYING to find fault with it? Man I hate when people do that.
the deal-breaker for me is not the dynamic range but the focus points crammed in the middle of the frame.
I'm so old school i just use one af point in the middle and recompose
@@edeagleton6447 enjoy it, it is an amazing camera with tons of great lens options.
Thanks for the great take on "DR Gate!" Perspective! While some people are online hating on Canon, I'm in the mountains taking fabulous pictures with my 80D and fine glass. I guess that makes some people angry.
Kevin Johnson I’m with you on that one. I just came back from Poland and I took awesome pictures with a 60D. Not once did I think “Oh crap! I don’t have enough DR for this” for a 6+ year-old camera it works like a charm and I’ve done 36x24” prints out of it so I think this is just marketing.
this is not really a challenging scene. if using a square box, one side open, there will be less light in the shaddow compared to another where there is only one or two sides up. there is a different ammount of light left in every shadow. also as a Stills u want to use 100 iso.
The 6D Mark II doesn't have terrible dynamic range at all. Once you learn the settings to use, the camera does fine. (The settings will differ from cameras like the 5D Mark IV when trying to achieve the same result.) Most of the people complaining are the ones who rely too much on software like Photoshop or Lightroom to enhance their photos. Any dynamic range issues are only found when pushing the limits on photo software.
Too many people have missed what this camera is supposed to be. It's meant to be a full frame 80D with better low light performance.
I own the 6D MII. It's a great camera. A lot faster than the 6D and the touch screen is a game changer. I do notice more grain in my pics than 6D if I shoot in auto or AV. The grain is easily removed in LR. I suggest keeping LENR off. I shoot lots of nightscapes and cityscapes, ISO starting around 200. The camera by default makes shooting a lot easier with the touch/tilt screen. The 4k timelapse feature is great too and can easily edit in Premiere. I wouldn't recommend this camera for anyone shooting people in low light without a flash or event photographers. Landscapes/cityscapes are forgiving but skin isn't. I got this camera because it speeds up the process of taking photos and gives me advantages that I had with my 70D & 80D but with a full frame.
I'm trying to decide between 6D2 and D750 for video.
Personally, I'd take the 6DMII. Once you go touch screen, you cannot go back. The touch screen and being able to move the screen around in different angles is pretty awesome. I loved doing video with it on my 70D. Doing 4k videos in camera is a cool feature too. Lots of time saving with that feature too. Both cameras are pretty close in specs, i'm all about saving time and being more efficient and the features on the 6DMII do that till the next new camera comes up that will be a good upgrade.
Hmmm... well but then there's this: petapixel.com/2017/08/14/canon-6d-vs-6d-ii-heres-high-iso-noise-comparison/
I don't know if I should believe it or not, sounds like another a9-esque conspiracy theory.
The DIGIC 7 might give you some quality NR. Try it out! It is a Digic SEVEN after all... no other DSLR has it, only a Canon mirrorless camera. That's a damn good processor which may be able to do some things better, like perhaps NR.
No one is forcing you to upgrade to 6D MKII, If you really care about the DR that much then stick with what you have rather than whining, You don't want to buy a $2k camera because it's DR can't compare to your dinosaur DSLR? Then don't buy it, you can't have everything. They are a company that needs profit and as much as I hate their marketing strategy it makes sense, even if you don't buy it others will and when they earn millions, they won't need your thousands. I'm not a pro-tographer but pretty much DR is very subjective, just properly expose your shots or bracket it or whatever technical terms you all use this days, do it. Take time in composing your shots pretty simple. Lighting is really your responsibility.
I'm not a canon fanboy but all this whining is really pointless, Do you care more about the specs or the techniques? do you rely so much on the specs because you don't have a decent post-processing skills? Go out and shoot.
Thank you Jared for your post. This kind of information should be presented openly to suppress all the stupid moaning some people like to present without even touching the camera and others follows them.
It seems to me that both Canon and Nikon are pushing out cameras which only have small, timid improvements over the previous models, while Fuji and Sony are making huge leaps with cameras like the a9 or the gfx 50s.
I expect a full frame to do much better than an aps-c. It is embarassing, that the question arises at all because you pay much more for a full frame camera.
Except sony also pushed out a firmware release to most of it's mirrorless cameras that makes them unusable for night sky/ astrophotography because they now have processing done to the raw files (yeah, raw! WTF?) that removes the fainter stars.
Which firmware release are you talking about, because mines up to date and i have no issue with astrophotography, you sure you're not talking about in camera noise reduction?
He's right. Anything that the camera deems to possibly be noise is averaged out at longer exposure times. This is a recent change on Sony cameras and it is very bad for astro. And no, the most recent update hasn't fixed it. It is a problem.
Almost all manufacturers fiddle around with black level before producing a raw file, but your point still stands.
Well, the problem is not low DR only, but the fact that touching 6dii RAWs makes no difference comparing to my 550d except for higher ISOs. Obviously, it's not how full frame camera should perform.
I think the problem is not that the 6DII's DR is bad objectively, but comparatively. Meaning compared to the cameras you can get for the same money, such as the aged Nikon D750, it seems like it's pulling behind. Objectively, this is not a bad camera. You won't be just desperately limited by this camera at all. But $2K is a pretty substantial chunk of change and I think people just want their money's worth.
Canon releases a camera that is competitive in base ISO DR and now everyone shooting Canons forget they never had that before. All of a sudden Canon shooters are missing something they never had? To make it worse... its only useful low ISO settings? Man... I don't get out of bed lower than 400 ISO.
The bottom-line, yeah Canon probably could have done a better job, but this one issue is not as important as most people are making it out to be.
For the $ 2k price, being "good enough" or "not that bad" is simply inexcusable for a 2017 tech.
It's an amazing camera. Reviewers just like to whine in their headlines to attract viewers. Yeah so if your exposure is off by 3 stops and you try to bring back the details then there's a bit more noise. But again, if you're presented with this kind of situation then the problem is not with the camera but the shooter. The camera offers plenty of dynamic range with all the benefits of a full frame camera for the price of a really good crop sensor camera. This is why since your comment was posted, this camera eventually became super popular. Buying mine in a few days after having it tested out and for a camera that only costs today 1200$ it's perfect.
But for a landscape photographer or long exposure this is bad at ISO 100 -300 that dynamic images is not good and to me that is not acceptable
I think there are tow types of Camera: Type 1. ISO Invariant ones, like the D810, 5D IV, 80D, A7RII, and
Type 2. ISO Variant, like the D700, 5D III, 6DII, D5,...
this is not good ore bad, this is only affecting the way you taking pictures
and some times you ending up with a better result with one of the two types,
depending on your subject.
You have only access to the extreme DR from “Type 1”at base ISO vs. you can only make use of your high ISO performance from “Type 2” in low light conditions.
I think it makes sense that, there are sports Camera like the D5 are “Type 2” and others
like the D810 more for landscape/portrait are "Type1" Camera.
looks like it's WAY better than my 60d. I'm looking to upgrade to the 6d2
The problem is that if you are using Canon or Nikon, the wide angle lens selection is limited for cropped sensor cameras. So you're basically telling landscape photographers, who would be a target market for this camera as they don't need the advanced af and low light performance, that they need to buy the 5Dmk4 if they want to do serious landscape work on Canon.
OMG. Thank you for posting this, even if it's 7 years too late. Dynamic range at base iso is the biggest scam in the digital camera world.
I downloaded the files and checked the ones done at ISO100. I'm disappointed to see so much grain in the image. It looks more like ISO400-800 to me. I currently use a 5D MkII and that is so smooth and crisp at ISO100. They just don't compare. I'm looking for a good DSLR with a fully articulating screen and I was looking at the 6D MkII as a possible upgrade. After checking the files I'm not so sure now. Maybe I'll get a 5D MkIII and get an eyepiece instead.
Good god, did Jared get this shirt at baby gap? 🤣🤣🤣 as always, I appreciate the great info and content. Thank you!
You didn't say your slogan "Jared Polin Fro Knows Photos" in the end with enough dynamic range this time :-)
you have to take the crop factor when you compare the true iso numbers. when you take this into account the 80D will destroy the larger sensor. Smaller Sensor ISO * Crop Factor * Crop Factor = Full Frame ISO
I wish Canon would respond to this issue, because it's weird this new sensor is worse than the 80D
Been playing with my 6DMII, for those interested, unlike my old 70/80D where movie mode did not work when Wi-Fi is enabled (you could not start movie recording via Wifi) In 6DMII, you can now start/stop and remote control your video recording via Wi-Fi from your smart phone, won't be needing my CamRanger no more! there is still a Lag, but nothing worse that my CamRanger.
I am amazed that you are still on RUclips. Last I saw your vids were in 2011. You still look the same. You even moved from your mom or grandmas house. Good to see you again.
Real world photos? Thank you. I do realize the 6D Mark ii doesn’t compare well against the Sony A7iii but that isn’t all bad. The 6D prices have plunged to $1200 + some small change. I even realize the 6D wont appeal to the pros but a step up a rebel crop sensor. It may work. Jared you have proven some since photos can come out of the 6D Mark ii.
Now can we get a full screen Gear Vault app designed for the iPad and or iMac?
You always give the best reviews, thank you... I'm from South Africa🇿🇦 by the way
The bottom line here is that the 6dii does not offer everything that the competitors do at the same or lower price. Whether it be the DR at ISO 100 not allowing you to recover as much clean detail in the shadows as you'd expect, the lack of dual card slots for backing up important shoots, the lack of any kind of 4k video. You can say you don't need this all you want, but the fact of the matter is with other manufacturers you get all or most of this. How much is the Canon name worth to you to pay for this camera? Because for $2000 today, you really should expect to be be getting more for your money.
would you be able to recommend some of the other cameras at this price point? im trying to decide on what i should get
but does it smell better than the 80D?
It's not so horrible! I played around with the raw files. Dynamic range isn't par with other cameras that's a fact but it isn't TOO bad. You really need to use the noise reduction though in LR 😅 and really balance it. It came out pretty good. I'm testing it with my 5d3 later.
Phil Jones65 I guess I did an awesome job in Lightroom! I mean I do agree the DR was "okay" but not at all great. I managed to make it workable in Lightroom but I'm sure it'll varies to other people.
Or maybe DXOMARK is wrong?
just got my 6dmk2. so far im happy... nothing beats a full frame shutter clunk. :)
id get this over a sony any day :) oh and ive been to sony(have a rx100mk5) tried them a7 series, lumx gh3 and 4, fujis as well as im a nikon born photographer :) real world plus a touch of a good form factor for me
Nikon d5 has the same problem and no one talked about them 😀😀😀😀
rajdeep pal
ahahah ... this
Don't worry we'll see soon the next gen. nikon d 850 with great dynamic range 8k time craps, super specs and at least at 5000 dollars of price tag. Too bad it will be full of issues and recalls starting after the first month of selling😂😂😂
Alessio D'Agosto exactly
Dynamic range is not overrated in today's camera. It is very useful, especially for wedding photographers. It saves so much time in many situations. I switched from Canon to Nikon, just because of the better sensor performance!
agree. i cant believe some of the comments on here. most comments here are terrible. if you want good shit, you will pay the big shit. people want the consumer price and want the flagship. aint happening people! cough up if you want top shelf with all the options or shut the hell up and go shoot something. peace
I am surprised Canon has not responded to all of this. They put out a newer sensor, supposedly for this. I get why people feel this camera is not for them. Personally, I find my t6i sufficient for my needs, but the 77D would be nice for the better focus system and the 80D would be nice for bad weather ( don't think 77D is weather proof.) But I am not a pro. If I was a pro, I would maybe care about this DR issue, and look at Nikon/Sony. Or maybe I would own the 5D Mark IV if I was a pro.
Well... The lower ISOs are what matters for me. Dynamic range is one thing, but at higher ISOs your colors just aren't as good.
So while the 6D II may have the edge at the higher ISOs, which it should as a camera with a 35mm sensor, having better dynamic range at the base ISO where you get the best possible image quality is also important.
For example, if you take landscapes, which 35mm sensors are better for than APS-C sensors as you get the most out of your wide angle lenses, you won't care too much about the higher ISOs. Why go to ISO 6400 and beyond when you can just pop the camera on a tripod and get better image quality? And the dynamic range then simply gives you more freedom when it comes to editing.
The difference between these two cameras seems to be so small though it pretty much doesn't matter. Is the 6D II sensor bad? Maybe the 80D sensors greateness just can't be scaled up to 35mm, who knows? :)
Not that any of this matters to me (or you, Jared), Nikon has way better dynamic range than Canon anyway ;D
I still don't think you will see a major difference right?
If you would show me two images, one taken with the 80D and one with the 6D II, I probably wouldn't even be able to spot a difference (obviously you would have to adjust the images because of the crop factor but you get my point).
There is no "major difference" between new cameras any more. Problem for 6Dmk2 is that direct price and sensor size competition cameras are better, and all of them are 2/3 years old. How is 6Dmk2 going to compare to new Sony/Nikon cameras in that price range if it's already lagging behind.
"Maybe the 80D sensors greateness just can't be scaled up to 35mm, who knows? "
Actually it can. see the 1DXmii and 5Dmark4. they have very similar results in low ISO DR and are even slightly better.
seems like they went all in for High ISO performence with the 6dii
Well, that's not a new at all and it's exactly what the 6D did, only difference is that at the time the 100ISO DR of the 6D was just a bit behind the competition (excluding the D800 that however isn't great at high ISO) and better than almost everybody alse at high ISO, but now it's 2017 and we have cameras that are great both at Low and High ISO (D750, A7RII, 5D Mark IV, 1DxII just to name a few) plus some sensor that is basically almost isoless (see XT2).
Come on, the 6DII at ISO 100 has less DR than my Nikon D90 from 2008 at 200 ISO!
I currently have a 7d mark ii. I do a lot of indoor sports photography where lighting is not the greatest. With my 7d mk ii I typically run ISO 2000 1/1250 sec F2.8. Could I expect ISO 4000 with similar noise results? My strategy has been to shoot dim to keep ISO's low and then bump up the exposure and the shadows in Lightroom. In the case of the 6d mark ii, should I shoot higher ISO's utilizing the dynamic range being more comparable to other camera bodies, then maybe reduce the highlights? That way I can harvest the information in the shadows without bumping up in lightroom. I am on the fence with regards to buying the 6d mark ii or saving for 5d mark IV.
Jared Polin if you are not too busy and you see this can you do a sharey-mcsharison and share your insight? Love what you do for the RUclips community.
I do have a Tamron SP 70-200mm DC VC f/2.8 that I was using that yesterday with my new 6D Mark II that was shooting a little dark. The rest of my pictures came out great though.
How do you like Tamron 70-200 VC?
Thanks for this review of the 6D Mark 2. Everyone else in the industry has done a good job trashing this new DSLR from having worst dynamic range than its predecessor, no 4K video, and only one card slot. But after seeing your review and the sample shots I believe this to be a pleasant upgrade from the original 6D, and certainly an older 5D Mark 2. The flip/tilt touch screen, dual pixel AF, and 45 all cross type AF points, and improved low light performance is worth it, especially for landscape photographers. Well done Jared! Thank you.
Jared your videos are always stellar in quality and content, but to have a good idea on dynamic range, you should always compare to something else, on top of your head you can't judge how a camera is good or bad on a technical aspect (it just how our brain work), comparaison is always key, the "less than average" DR of the 6DII(at ISO100) is it a deal breaker for 99% of photographers ? of course no, it is still a very good camera for canon users, for the others who could jump on the Canon ship the only somewhat "novelty" there is the flip out screen(first one on a fullframe camera), and apparently the very good high ISO performance compared to a crop body ......DSLR are always a solid investment, they are still the most reliable cameras ......
Hey Fro! Are you aware that you gave away the address of the Frofactory with that outside picture?
Jared, good points. Everyone knows that this camera is quite good but real problem is how expensive it is for what it is. Nikon d750 has better dynamic range, better hi ISO, better iq and af at the same price... it looks even worse if you check Fuji, for a lot less $ you will buy better camera in most aspects (hi ISO is only point where canon have advantage?) and there is no excuse for poor dr and video (it's not super fast camera and canon have technology). This is simply cost cut/safe camera placement vs 5dm4. Is it matters for a buyer? Maybe not, he simply spend ~400$ more then he should but sites about camera comparison must make "big deal" for this type of situation.
People just want to complain about what technology is not in their camera because their pathography sucks… But they are realizing that’s not how to make a timer fee better…
You have a solid point Jared but let's be brutally honest here......can you really justify £2000 for a camera with pretty much a 5 year old sensor? A camera like this benefits me as I'm an events photographer used to shooting in low light but I'm sorry......Canon doesn't deserve my money or anyone elses.
This is shameful and an embarrassment, Canon should be called out at every opportunity for this. Had the 6D Mark II come out at a substantially lower price.........we wouldn't be having this conversation....
Hi sir. I’m a canon 6D ii user. My back dial doesn’t work properly now. I want to repair it but I also want to upgrade to canon eos r6 as well. I posted on Facebook to sell and it’s really hard to sell it. What should I do?
So what lens goes well and affordable with this camera? Preferably (ultra) wide angle, please
Of course you can do this and this (plays with knobs in Lightroom). The argument was how much noise you get back when recovering shadows, Not merely having Lightroom brighten your picture. Besides, new cameras at higher prices should be better than their predecessors, not worse. If canon never sponsored you to make this video you probably would be arguing the other way.
Would have been good if you took another camera known for its DR to compare.
i unfortunately don't really find this video very helpful. helpful would have been providing like for like comparisons of image quality at various isos with current gen 5div and 1dxii, along with the 6di it replaces and perhaps the 5d3 that is fairly price comparable. the specs of this camera are pretty underwhelming and to hear that image quality gains over the 6d are so moderate makes it even less attractive. iso 100 is the only iso that is relevant a great deal of the time for a great many people who control light.
You sir, at the wrong place actually, the video is just discussing about the dynamic range of the camera in which a bunch of people called it to be worst than 80d, he delivers exactly that,
It's not a comparison video, it's just to show you what you can mess with the RAW file produced.
it is my understanding that they didn't call it worse than 80d: they measured it to be such. demonstrably less dynamic range can be achieved at base iso i.e. at optimum sensor performance. As someone who uses a 1dxii, a 5diii and a 6di, and would like to replace the latter with a nice new one with a tilty screen and better iq, i believe my disappointment in the camera, and this article's failure to in any way judge its iq against a 80d, 6d or any other camera, is legitimate, sir.
Any chance your Gear Vault will be released in landscape like on an iPad or on a desktop?
Jared, approximately when will the real world review of this camera come out?
If I want get better image quality,, and want to take Weddings photograph, which should I buy. 6D or 6D mark 2 . ????
I browsed a ton of Flickr 6D pages - I'm talking several thousand - and bookmarked several hundred great portrait pics taken with my favorite Canon 135/2 and 24-105 lenses. I've browsed another ton of 6d2 pages and haven't found ONE portrait that comes within 100,000 miles of the quality I can get with the 6D (or 5D3/4). Maybe it's not dynamic range, but the pics just aren't anywhere in the same ballpark. The 6D portraits are wonderful; the 6D2 portraits are not - they look like Kodacolor snapshots. Don't tell me I'm wrong - please show me. From what I've seen, 6D portraits have wonderful gradation in the skin, whereas the 6d2 doesn't. Skin in the 6D2 pics looks plasticky, with rare exceptions, and those aren't up to 6D standards.
Those "I Shoot Raw" t-shirts are so cool. I need one in my life!
Haha he's outta control- awesome video, I learned a lot, thank you!
Wow. What would your comment be if compared to the canon 5d mark IV? "why are you comparing this to a 11month old camera?"
I love the voice over corrections! Caught me off guard but enjoyed it anyways way better than just oops text
Why didn't you redo the video Jared? :D
Im hoping Canon will release 6D Mark III with ALL-I video option this time next year
Hello i have canon 6d camera should I have to upgrade to 6d mark ii Or 5d mark iv
When you turned up the shadows in the backyard picture I was expecting Moonbeam to appear ....... because she was hiding in the shadows hahaha
The best way to hear Jared Polin Fro Knows Photo is using 0.5 speed!
I have a question. If I were to choose this vs the 5D M4 which would be better for both business/ production along with vlogs. With higher focus on the 5d m4 it seems like the Flippy screen isn't technically needed, or am I wrong?
Love your reviews! Just found your channel yesterday. Downloaded you raw photos, and I don't know if you did realized that, but I think you indirectly revealed your address lol.
I have the original 6D & an 80D and I know the 80D produces way more noise than the 6D so I'm confident the 6D MKII will be absolutely fine. Very rarely used 100 iso on the 6D either as 200 as so good. Jarod is spot-on here, I'm more interested in how it performs in real-world conditions, not minute differences measured under conditions I'll never shoot in.
It doesn't matter until you find out you get better body, of course with better dynamic range with less price. Canon fanboy or canon basher are not important, its about what you pay doesn't help you get what you want, thus the rave
Smooth voice edits, can't even tell!
I think the frustrating thing is that the current 6d ii is years behind something like the d610 or d750 when it comes to IQ and DR, don't take this personally Jared, but some of us just don't push contrast to 100, I don't think I'm the only one to desire lower native iso, sure high iso performance is nice but is seriously the last thing I check in a camera, since I rarely bump it up to 200, maybe 400 for 1% of my total shots.
And when comapred to the 5dIV, well... that's embarassing
thanks. First video that I would consider a balanced, non emotion driven review.
"non emotion driven review" The whole video is a rant, you can't get more emotional.
I went to the camera store after work today to buy myself a flash and the clerk told me that the 6D mark II are all sold out, so if the camera is so bad why does it sell so well!!!
ben196145 Because people are fanboys...
Oh and I am a Canon shooter who loves his 70D and Sigma Art glass...then shot with the same glass on the D500, wouldn't touch the 6D II with a 10 foot stick.
Their inventory consisted of one (1) 6DMKII :].
As of last Thursday they had 12 all sold this week-end, that's what the clerk told me is he honest or not don't know!!!!
ben196145 - Stupid Consumers!!!
How many will be returned...?