What do you think of the Canon R6 mark ii?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

B

bleirer

Bill, Cleveland OH.
Supporting Member
Marketplace
I know there are only a few Canon shooters here. But this looks like a good'n to me. Not BSI or stacked but other improvements, including 40 frames per second and precapure raw for a half second with raw burst. Looks like you can review and choose the frames you want to keep in camera or in post.

The R5 mark ii couldn't be too far behind.



www.dpreview.com

Canon EOS R6 Mark II in-depth review

The EOS R6 II arrives in one of the most competitive parts of the market, facing off against some very capable competition. We think it rises to the challenge.
www.dpreview.com www.dpreview.com
 
Last edited:
The auto mode for subject detection seems interesting, including the addition of trains and planes and horses and zebras, though not sure why those specifically, maybe just because they can.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Lately Canon has released three (R6 Mark 2, R7, R10) cameras without stacked BSI sensors but with excellent features otherwise in the entry level and enthusiast price range ($1000-$2500). It appears that they intend to own this space and will attract point-and-shoot users who plan to move up as opposed to moving down to the new smart phones with enhanced cameras. In doing so they did NOT abandon the APS-C market.

Nikon appears to be moving towards the serious professional and well-healed enthusiast market pairing the Z-9 with an expanding line of primes that are either PF or have a built in TC.

It is not clear to me yet where Sony is going.

Tom
 
Member's gallery
Blerier - I removed the post I had since there is no need to have 2 posts with same topic. I did not see yours before posting mine.
Thanks for posting this, will be following.
 
Member's gallery
Tom Reynolds said:
Lately Canon has released three (R6 Mark 2, R7, R10) cameras without stacked BSI sensors but with excellent features otherwise in the entry level and enthusiast price range ($1000-$2500). It appears that they intend to own this space and will attract point-and-shoot users who plan to move up as opposed to moving down to the new smart phones with enhanced cameras. In doing so they did NOT abandon the APS-C market.

Nikon appears to be moving towards the serious professional and well-healed enthusiast market pairing the Z-9 with an expanding line of primes that are either PF or have a built in TC.

It is not clear to me yet where Sony is going.

Tom
Click to expand...

Sony is focusing on video. Just recently they introduced the FX30 entry level camera, the Venice 2, which is the flagship and a revolutionary PTZ camera.
 
jeffnles1 said:
Blerier - I removed the post I had since there is no need to have 2 posts with same topic. I did not see yours before posting mine.
Thanks for posting this, will be following.
Click to expand...

What do you think of the camera?
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
What do you think of the camera?
Click to expand...
I've been in a meeting most of the day and haven't really looked into it a whole lot. It seems very interesting. I would have preferred 33-35mp sensor but 24 is Ok too. Being wildlife and nature centric in my photography, sometimes (frequently) cropping is necessary but within reason, 24 should be fine. Low light should be OK. I like the 12fps in mechanical. "Up to 40fps" in electronic I will have to read more to see the caveats from Canon around that number. Also, I would need to see if there are any videos or examples of rolling shutter (or lack thereof) with faster moving subjects (is it egregious or is it manageable).

Overall, it seems like a well thought out camera but I haven't dug into it past just reading the specs. I've not been a Canon shooter but I have a couple friends shooting R5 and the new R7. The 100-500 lens is really great only potential issue is F7.1. The background separation seems good for that level of Fstop opening. It sure is a light weight and handy lens. Canon is in the running for my next camera purchase. I currently shoot D500 but that camera is getting a bit long in the tooth. Time to move and Nikon really doesn't currently have anything that interests me (cost vs. benefit analysis).
 
They say the 40 frames electronic shutter is 12 bit raw, just as the r5 at 20 frames raw Electronic. Probably the difference is the r5 has to process 45 megapixels.
 
Member's gallery
i've only glanced at the r6ii so far, but it looks like it's a nice, but incremental upgrade. doesn't seem like it's going to sway many folks to upgrade from the r6, but it seems like it's mostly to stay super current to pull people away from adopting other brands. ie, r6ii vs a7iv or whatever
 
Member's gallery
Tom Reynolds said:
Jeff,

The R7 will work better for you. 500mm is not nearly as good as 800mm (due to the crop factor) and the R7 has a higher mp sensor.

Tom
Click to expand...
I agree it is probably closer to my D500 than the R6ii would be. A couple reservations with the R7 are limited buffer in silent shutter mode and rolling shutter in electronic.

I'm just not sure how big of a deal that really is. For example how much of the commenting on the buffer size is folklore or internet complaining and how much is it a matter of concern in real world. Is Compressed "C-RAW really a negative or is it internet photographer snobbery "real photographers only shoot in full RAW"?. How big of a deal is rolling shutter in real world wildlife and nature photography? For my landscapes, macros and wildflowers, it is probably a "nothingburger". For mu deer well maybe, I honestly have not been able to find a real world review from someone who shoots like I do. They may be out there but I haven't done an exhaustive search.

I don't do a lot of BIF shooting but I do some. I do like to capture deer mid jump as they are running through fields, dragonflies on the wing, butterflies landing on flowers. Most of my BIF photos are waterfowl lifting off or sandhill cranes dancing in the corn stubble. Not sure how much rolling shutter on electronic would come to play with these subjects. They are moving fast but not fast like a diving falcon or a warbler flying over a field.

Good news is the D500 is working well now so no need to rush a decision.

Back to the topic of the thread, the R6ii looks interesting and like it will be a great camera for someone who's photography will fit the parameters of what it is designed to do.



Jeff
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
In my analysis versus the OM-1 I did not think either "rolling shutter" or "limited buffer" as important. I liked the APS-C 32mp sensor size better than the 20mp sensor size of the OM-1 and I liked that the Canon 100-500 F/7.1 was a pro lens and the Olympus 100-400 F/6.3 was not. I liked that both have an 800mm full frame equivalent reach.

I liked that the OM-1 was considerably more compact and more than 1/2 pound lighter. (The OM-1/100-400 is less than 4.5#, the R7/100-500 a bit over 5# and the D-500/500pf a bit over 5.5# on my scale) I also liked that the sensor was a modern stacked BSI sensor.

I thought that BOTH would be a significant upgrade to my D-500/300pf/500pf rig.

Now, 4 months later I see that Nikon is continuing to move away from DX cameras and lenses and seems to prioritize primes over replacing the 200-500 zoom. For Nikon to produce what I need they need a D-500 replacement and a newer zoom. Neither have happened yet.

That 4 months has been critical to learning the new system in advance to my bird photography trips that start in November and stretch to May. What have I learned?

When shooting a cropped camera with a lens that has a high f-stop the effective f-stop (f-stop x crop factor) goes through the roof. (11.3 on the R7/100-500, 12.6 on the OM-1/100-400 compared to 8.4 on the D-500/500pf). I now really need to pay attention to proper exposure and actively change the exposure compensation in the field. I also need to use one of the new software offerings to suppress noise and to only sharpen the subject. On the plus size the WYSIWYG EVF makes paying attention to proper exposure a piece of cake. (I did not find the difference between the OM-1 and the R-7's EVF resolution a big deal.)

I found that the Olympus 100-400 F/6.3 is a fine lens. The enhancements that go into an Olympus PRO lens are not important to me because I don't shoot manual focus. I did pick up an 300f4 but the zoom is my goto lens.

What would I recommend to a Nikon D-500 wildlife shooter? Either pick one.

Regards,
Tom
 
I might have gone with the r6ii when I was debating R5 vs R6. The 20 mp was just too low for me, though 24 is not much more. Most full frame shooters are not going to go back to crop or m43 in my view. The advantages in noise and subject isolation and other reasons. So that leaves a niche for a lower megapixel moderately priced full frame. They already have the R3 as the high priced spread.
 
Member's gallery
Tom Reynolds said:
In my analysis versus the OM-1 I did not think either "rolling shutter" or "limited buffer" as important. I liked the APS-C 32mp sensor size better than the 20mp sensor size of the OM-1 and I liked that the Canon 100-500 F/7.1 was a pro lens and the Olympus 100-400 F/6.3 was not. I liked that both have an 800mm full frame equivalent reach.

I liked that the OM-1 was considerably more compact and more than 1/2 pound lighter. (The OM-1/100-400 is less than 4.5#, the R7/100-500 a bit over 5# and the D-500/500pf a bit over 5.5# on my scale) I also liked that the sensor was a modern stacked BSI sensor.

I thought that BOTH would be a significant upgrade to my D-500/300pf/500pf rig.

Now, 4 months later I see that Nikon is continuing to move away from DX cameras and lenses and seems to prioritize primes over replacing the 200-500 zoom. For Nikon to produce what I need they need a D-500 replacement and a newer zoom. Neither have happened yet.

That 4 months has been critical to learning the new system in advance to my bird photography trips that start in November and stretch to May. What have I learned?

When shooting a cropped camera with a lens that has a high f-stop the effective f-stop (f-stop x crop factor) goes through the roof. (11.3 on the R7/100-500, 12.6 on the OM-1/100-400 compared to 8.4 on the D-500/500pf). I now really need to pay attention to proper exposure and actively change the exposure compensation in the field. I also need to use one of the new software offerings to suppress noise and to only sharpen the subject. On the plus size the WYSIWYG EVF makes paying attention to proper exposure a piece of cake. (I did not find the difference between the OM-1 and the R-7's EVF resolution a big deal.)

I found that the Olympus 100-400 F/6.3 is a fine lens. The enhancements that go into an Olympus PRO lens are not important to me because I don't shoot manual focus. I did pick up an 300f4 but the zoom is my goto lens.

What would I recommend to a Nikon D-500 wildlife shooter? Either pick one.

Regards,
Tom
Click to expand...
Thanks for your perspective. Much appreciated
 
Member's gallery
I bet this is similar to what Nikon does with their Z 6III, as said above the R6II being an incremental upgrade. In this megapixel range, a body needs a stacked sensor to get me interested, though.
 
Member's gallery
The R6 Mark II looks like a fantastic camera to me. I personally think 24MP is enough, but also an interesting choice given how excited people were about the 30+ MP of the Sony A7iv over the previous 24MP sensor. If I didn’t previously sell all my Canon gear, I would be buying this camera. The one area I would like to know more on is how it handles noise and dynamic range. My negatives are more with the Canon lens lineup over the camera bodies. When comparing to the competition, I like that the R6MkII has a many of the speed advantages of a stacked sensor. The A7iv has more MP but is slower. I don’t want to compare to the Z6ii because it’s the old model and should be refreshed soon.
 
Member's gallery
More in depth reviews will have to confirm but I am quite impressed by the read speed Canon squeezed out of a non-bsi, non-stacked sensor. It might be "old tech" but they managed read times that are significantly faster than any non-stacked sony sensor. The rolling shutter performance seems at least on par and possibly better than the R5 which was the reference so far for non-stacked sensors.
TBH that's why I have not grabbed a Sony A7iv and will not grab an A7Rv as second body - their read speeds are amongst the worst right now and you'll get rolling shutter on about any pan shot or BIF shot. Hopefully the A9iii isn't too far off, likely with the AF engine of the A7Rv...
 
Member's gallery
I have the same problem with buying something like the R6 as I did with the Nikon D5 and D6 20MP cameras. With a 45MP camera a APS-C cropping still provides a very usable image in terms of its resolution at around 20MP. With a 20MP camera a APS-C crop turns it into a 9MP camera. I can get the same image size with a 500mm lens on a 45MP camera as I would with a 600mm lens on a 20MP camera.

For wedding and sports and portrait photographers this is not a concern. With wildlife and macro shooters it means having longer and heavier and more expensive lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top