• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

EOS 6D II and 200D (Rebel SL2) announced


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#21 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,526 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 04 July 2017 - 11:55 PM

Another question to ask: where are the lenses that were supposed to be announced alongside these cameras? :)

#22 Claus

Claus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 47 posts

Posted 13 August 2017 - 11:49 AM

Sorry, but the 6D Mark II is a real joke.



#23 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 13 August 2017 - 01:11 PM

It looks like a pretty nice camera to me. Just not one for those who feel a camera needs 14 stops of DR at ISO 100 in its RAW.



#24 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,688 posts

Posted 13 August 2017 - 01:41 PM

  To be fair it looks like the sensor in the 5DMKIV is getting much closer to the performance of the Sony sensors used by Nikon and of course Sony, but from the info out there (not much yet) the 6DMKII hasn't really upped the game like it's more expensive sibling,which is nonetheless a pity!

 

  Both Nikon and Canon are deliberately leaving out features etc. so as not to undermine their own range of cameras and price structure........not in my opinion a wise policy when you have ML snapping at the heels of this older technology!



#25 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 13 August 2017 - 02:12 PM

The 6D mk II has about the same DR at base ISO as the 6D and the Nikon D5. 



#26 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,688 posts

Posted 13 August 2017 - 04:06 PM

The 6D mk II has about the same DR at base ISO as the 6D and the Nikon D5. 

  Unfortunately that is not much of a reference....... there are many who have IQ issues with the D5, a LPF which give softer results than the D500 with 12.3 Ev dynamic range.. 1.7 stops less than the sharper D500...in my view Nikon let things slip a little..counting on low noise and speed as it's stock in trade!

 

   I wouldn't mind some of the D5's lower noise though..

 

   Just read DP's review...hmm well !



#27 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 13 August 2017 - 05:13 PM

I do not care about weak LPF's... And there are many who use the D5 as a professional tool. The drooling over such high DR values is done by tools ;)



#28 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,227 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 13 August 2017 - 08:37 PM

Not to defend Canon, but since camera news now have a huge coverage, and the least issue is exaggerated, remember D200 banding ? now they are making a story of rolling shutter, then there's the dynamic range, in film days negatives had larger exposure latitude ( ok ok it's not dynamic range but something a little close to it)  than slide film, yet many preferred slide film, dynamic range isn't the only thing to consider



#29 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 13 August 2017 - 08:59 PM

Negative colour film also had a bigger DR than colour slide film. Back then we also liked contrasty images.



#30 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,227 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 14 August 2017 - 07:41 AM

On Dpreview a quite simplistic approach 80D vs 6D MKII 

https://www.dpreview...hould-i-upgrade



#31 Reinier

Reinier

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 227 posts
  • LocationThe village of Monster in Westland

Posted 23 August 2017 - 10:45 PM

Hi All,

How are you all doing?

We were, or at least I was, anticipating the arrival of the new 6D II.

Has some of you already bought one or are you considering it?

I read on Dpreview the IQ is not much better, but I surely like some of the new features, like the screen. What are you thoughts?

Kind regards,
Reinier

#32 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 24 August 2017 - 10:41 AM

The IQ of my 6D is great. Not sure how it could or should be better in the mk II. Somehow, people on dpreview seem to think that "IQ" means high DR numbers at base ISO hidden in the depths of RAW. Oh well.



#33 miro

miro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • LocationI am here

Posted 24 August 2017 - 11:02 AM

Hello reiner. As Far as I remember your type of photography - this article may be interesting for you.

 

https://www.dpreview...i-dynamic-range

 

@Brightcolours - Since first day of photography the DR has been an issuee. Just to name few of them -  developing of film, doging and burning in dark room.



#34 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,719 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 24 August 2017 - 11:21 AM

No matter how big the DR - reality still has bigger ranges to deal with. And for stills there's always the possibility to do HDR.

 

But I am happy for each improvement, because HDR-series is not always a solution. And the occasssions to need this technique become lesser with higher DR-range. Never understood why somebody thinks DR per se is a bad thing or not worth to pay attention for. Either it's sombody who never faces challenging light situations or is happy with black silhouettes or has to appear happy because the system he chose just doesn't offer much DR.



#35 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 24 August 2017 - 12:55 PM

Hello reiner. As Far as I remember your type of photography - this article may be interesting for you.

 

https://www.dpreview...i-dynamic-range

 

@Brightcolours - Since first day of photography the DR has been an issuee. Just to name few of them -  developing of film, doging and burning in dark room.

Dodging and burning was used to limit the DR mostly. To increase contrast. 



#36 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,227 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 24 August 2017 - 01:41 PM

Hi All,

How are you all doing?

We were, or at least I was, anticipating the arrival of the new 6D II.

Has some of you already bought one or are you considering it?

I read on Dpreview the IQ is not much better, but I surely like some of the new features, like the screen. What are you thoughts?

Kind regards,
Reinier

Unless you already have the full format lenses, 6d offers very little if any over 80D, besides 80D plus its lenses are much less bulky, and you save some $$$, if I were to choose I would go without hesitating to 80D. besides Canon APS-C lenses ofering is very decent : you have the almighty Canon 17-55f2.8 (for me it's the best standard zoom lens Canon has made) 15-85 is another gem, the new 18-135 nano USM is nothing short f a good lens do you are well covered



#37 miro

miro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • LocationI am here

Posted 24 August 2017 - 09:38 PM

Dodging and burning was used to limit the DR mostly. To increase contrast. 

Yes the workflow is as follow

high DR scene -> High DR negative -> /dark room processing= DR compression/ -> Low DR foto paper /6...7stops/

 

Yes result is reduced DR and increased contrast on fotopaper.

 

Many photographers still use this technique. That is why we need high DR negative.

 

My experience - 90% of the time I have good lighting. The DR of my smartphone is good enough.



#38 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 25 August 2017 - 06:57 AM

Yes the workflow is as follow

high DR scene -> High DR negative -> /dark room processing= DR compression/ -> Low DR foto paper /6...7stops/

 

Yes result is reduced DR and increased contrast on fotopaper.

 

Many photographers still use this technique. That is why we need high DR negative.

 

My experience - 90% of the time I have good lighting. The DR of my smartphone is good enough.

Funny. So the DR was too high, and with burning and dodging they brought it down to get a more contrasty, low DR image.

Luckily, the standard tonal curves of cameras do that for us already.



#39 miro

miro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • LocationI am here

Posted 25 August 2017 - 08:59 AM

Funny. So the DR was too high, and with burning and dodging they brought it down to get a more contrasty, low DR image.

Luckily, the standard tonal curves of cameras do that for us already.

Unfortunately the tonal curves does not do that. It is local adjustment.It is time consuming process even that software like photoshop and lightroom make it much easier.  I'm afraid that you are talking to something different.

Here is the wiki link

https://en.wikipedia...ing_and_burning



#40 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 25 August 2017 - 10:24 AM

Unfortunately the tonal curves does not do that. It is local adjustment.It is time consuming process even that software like photoshop and lightroom make it much easier.  I'm afraid that you are talking to something different.

Here is the wiki link

https://en.wikipedia...ing_and_burning

Yes, tonal curves do that. How do you suppose a 12 to 14 stops of DR in the RAW end up showing the 7-8 stops standard output? The tonal curve. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de