You’ll see the option in the menu on the camera tab and page 1 you’ll see “digital tele-conv”” it’ll be grayed out unless you have your RAW images off you can only shoot in JPG with the tele converter. Thank you for watching I appreciate it.
Got a question. Can you make the focus bracketing and in-camera compositing feature on the R6 II work? I can’t. The Canon rep at Canon Professional Services can’t. Can you?
Yes I’ve used it successfully. When I use to complex of scene like say my chess board it struggles with around the edges of the pieces but yes I’ve had it work. You just turn on the two features set number of shots you want and takes the shots then also compiles a JPG stacked shot for you. Why haven’t you been able to get it to work?
Don’t know. What mode are you in? It took a long time for me to discover in the instructions that manual mode does not work. I was using a flower. I focused on the tip nearest me and got 10 pictures of the tip o the flower. Actually 11. I did see in a supplement to the manual that it works with most RF lenses. I know I am supposed to be between f/5.6 and f/11 per instructions. It doesn’t change the focus. The lens is in autofocus. I used a tripod after .I found that in the instructions. The Canon rep said I am doing everything I am supposed to do. What two functions are you referring to that you turn on?
@@PPNJ -Thanks very much. I’ll give that a try. I was surprised that you were in Manual mode. I found a place in the instructions that indicated you can’t use Manual. But obviously you can. Thanks again.
Pro-tip. You can speed up or slow down any youtube video by hitting the little gear icon on the video. There's a playback speed option. In fact, even for this video, I played it at 1.25x.
The R6 mark ii images (when shooting people/portraits) have an artificial clinically sharp look to them which I do not like. Both the R6 and R5 have this stunning cinematic quality in their photo's, I find that this quality and feel is missing in the R6 Mark ii images. I too thought that the clinically sharp, almost lifeless, empty and artificial look was caused by removing the low pass filter. But it seems it is caused by some artificial sharpening system? It is especially noticeable and disturbing while shooting people/portraits. I will definitely keep my original R6, as I feel it has the perfect look and balance while the R6 mark ii does not give me the look I want and feels a bit like a failed experiment with the (overly) artificial sharpness. The R7 seems to have this same problem.
It sounds like you are saying that you are used to the old slightly blurred looks of the R5 and R6 and are disturbed by the new sharpness of the R6 mark ii and R7.
If I am correct in my analysis, as time goes on, most buyers of mirrorless cameras are interested in video capabilities, not stills. Canon (champion cripple hamer) DOESN'T GET any of this. Now with the "total" reset of Panasonic from the "darkness of autofocus" to the field where the "Big Boys" are playing, it will have a very serious problem. They already know it as they have been steadily losing market share year after year, for the last 3-4 years...
I disagree with you. Who are all these video people and what are they filming? Auntie May's 70th birthday? I am on the move all the time and very rarely see anyone shooting video. When I do, they're more often than not shooting dedicated video/cinema cameras. I've seen a massive increase in people doing street photography. There are far more reasons people have photos taken than videos. When videos are shot, it's usually alongside photographers anyway.
@cooloox You can take "photos" with your mobile, or with a good DSLR, you don't need a mirrorless camera. Meanwhile, RUclips is "growing" with a plethora of "small" content creators' channels. All of them need video-centric mirrorless. Why do ALL COMPANIES present their new models, with EMPHASIS, on video features? Believe it or not, the 80/20 ratio (photo/video) for "hybrid" cameras HAS NOW CHANGED, video rules.
Sounds more like advertising video than a review. No downsides to Mark II? We all know there are. Worse mechanical shutter than the original, still can't save settings to card like my old cheap DSLRs could, same buffer like the original but with higher megapixels now it can take less shots, etc. As for AF im not sure which is better Mark I or Mark II end of the day. Its different menu settings for sure, but does it work any better? In theory it should due to faster readouts, but it has more pixels to slow it down...
I can tell you for sure the auto focus performs better. This is the first I’m hearing anything about the shutter. What are people noticing is worse about it? I thought I saw it was rated for higher usage the other day but that’s the only difference I’ve heard or read about. I haven’t personally noticed anything negative while using it. Sorry if you thought this sounding like an ad that wasn’t my intent. I appreciate you watching and your feed back man.
Really good video and help full
Thank you!
How to enable teleconverter ( zoom option for photography) ?
You’ll see the option in the menu on the camera tab and page 1 you’ll see “digital tele-conv”” it’ll be grayed out unless you have your RAW images off you can only shoot in JPG with the tele converter. Thank you for watching I appreciate it.
@@PPNJ which button we use zoom in and out ?
Got a question. Can you make the focus bracketing and in-camera compositing feature on the R6 II work? I can’t. The Canon rep at Canon Professional Services can’t. Can you?
Yes I’ve used it successfully. When I use to complex of scene like say my chess board it struggles with around the edges of the pieces but yes I’ve had it work. You just turn on the two features set number of shots you want and takes the shots then also compiles a JPG stacked shot for you. Why haven’t you been able to get it to work?
Don’t know. What mode are you in? It took a long time for me to discover in the instructions that manual mode does not work. I was using a flower. I focused on the tip nearest me and got 10 pictures of the tip o the flower. Actually 11. I did see in a supplement to the manual that it works with most RF lenses. I know I am supposed to be between f/5.6 and f/11 per instructions. It doesn’t change the focus. The lens is in autofocus. I used a tripod after .I found that in the instructions. The Canon rep said I am doing everything I am supposed to do. What two functions are you referring to that you turn on?
Hey man I haven’t forgotten you. I’ve been busy but I’m going to try and make a video about using it so you’ll be able to see how I’m using it.
ruclips.net/video/IoB0zCo6qko/видео.html
@@PPNJ -Thanks very much. I’ll give that a try. I was surprised that you were in Manual mode. I found a place in the instructions that indicated you can’t use Manual. But obviously you can. Thanks again.
Thank you for the video. Maybe you could slow down speed a bit - we are not in a hurry 😉
Ha I will try to slow it down! Appreciate you watching and the feedback really does help me so thank you.
Pro-tip. You can speed up or slow down any youtube video by hitting the little gear icon on the video. There's a playback speed option. In fact, even for this video, I played it at 1.25x.
Very informative!
Thank you.
The R6 mark ii images (when shooting people/portraits) have an artificial clinically sharp look to them which I do not like. Both the R6 and R5 have this stunning cinematic quality in their photo's, I find that this quality and feel is missing in the R6 Mark ii images. I too thought that the clinically sharp, almost lifeless, empty and artificial look was caused by removing the low pass filter. But it seems it is caused by some artificial sharpening system? It is especially noticeable and disturbing while shooting people/portraits. I will definitely keep my original R6, as I feel it has the perfect look and balance while the R6 mark ii does not give me the look I want and feels a bit like a failed experiment with the (overly) artificial sharpness. The R7 seems to have this same problem.
It sounds like you are saying that you are used to the old slightly blurred looks of the R5 and R6 and are disturbed by the new sharpness of the R6 mark ii and R7.
@@lbeetech The R5 and R6 are extremely sharp. The R6 mark ii is clinically sharp.
@@mariavanschie7946 Clinically?
@@lbeetech Yes, sterile, lifeless, overly sharp. Not good.
@@mariavanschie7946 Damn, that's cold...
If I am correct in my analysis, as time goes on, most buyers of mirrorless cameras are interested in video capabilities, not stills.
Canon (champion cripple hamer) DOESN'T GET any of this.
Now with the "total" reset of Panasonic from the "darkness of autofocus" to the field where the "Big Boys" are playing, it will have a very serious problem.
They already know it as they have been steadily losing market share year after year, for the last 3-4 years...
Not sure Canon lost any sales to anyone but Sony.
@Chris Z. Oh yes, so be it if you think so.
See you again when the financial analyzes of 2022 and the forecasts for 2023 are published....
I disagree with you. Who are all these video people and what are they filming? Auntie May's 70th birthday? I am on the move all the time and very rarely see anyone shooting video. When I do, they're more often than not shooting dedicated video/cinema cameras. I've seen a massive increase in people doing street photography. There are far more reasons people have photos taken than videos. When videos are shot, it's usually alongside photographers anyway.
@cooloox You can take "photos" with your mobile, or with a good DSLR, you don't need a mirrorless camera. Meanwhile, RUclips is "growing" with a plethora of "small" content creators' channels.
All of them need video-centric mirrorless.
Why do ALL COMPANIES present their new models, with EMPHASIS, on video features?
Believe it or not, the 80/20 ratio (photo/video) for "hybrid" cameras HAS NOW CHANGED, video rules.
I have the R6 and I have never shot any video.
Sounds more like advertising video than a review. No downsides to Mark II? We all know there are. Worse mechanical shutter than the original, still can't save settings to card like my old cheap DSLRs could, same buffer like the original but with higher megapixels now it can take less shots, etc. As for AF im not sure which is better Mark I or Mark II end of the day. Its different menu settings for sure, but does it work any better? In theory it should due to faster readouts, but it has more pixels to slow it down...
I can tell you for sure the auto focus performs better. This is the first I’m hearing anything about the shutter. What are people noticing is worse about it? I thought I saw it was rated for higher usage the other day but that’s the only difference I’ve heard or read about. I haven’t personally noticed anything negative while using it. Sorry if you thought this sounding like an ad that wasn’t my intent. I appreciate you watching and your feed back man.
Hi Andrew Tate 👋
Lol
Hahaha