« The Most Amazing Technology of Our Era | Main | I'm Going to Shut Up »

Friday, 30 June 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The Canon 6D Mark II looks like a terrific package, Mike. And a pretty darn good value. If I didn't already have the 5DIV I'd be very tempted to go this route, as I do not need any video functionality. Plus the 6DII has an articulating touch LCD screen, something that's become nearly an essential feature for me.

Am I talking myself into swapping-down?

I get that Canon have been immensely successful with their strategy of relentless lukewarm incrementalism, but I can't help thinking they'd be a lot smarter to add something more compelling to this new offering than a few more megapixels and a little more speed. Like, say, really good 4K video, or really excellent in-camera HDR. Given the encroachment of increasingly brilliant mirrorless cameras, Canon may wake up some day soon to find their loyal customers have abandoned them for Sony/Fuji. Or, you know. Retired to Florida or died of old age.

And people call the EM-1 Mk II overpriced? Yes, the 6D is a FF camera, but only 6.5 FPS, an embarrassingly small RAW buffer, and no 4K for $2000? I just don't see it...

Glad to see the venerable 6D getting some much-deserved attention. It's an excellent value for getting into fine photography, and full-frame at that. Regardless of how you feel about SLR vs. mirrorless, there's no getting around the fact that Sony, Fuji and M43 don't come close to offering the array of lenses available for Canon and Nikon – new, refurb, gray and used. To augment my X System, I recently picked up a new 6D for $1400, along with the oldies-but-still-goodies 24-85mm and 100-300mm for $85 each off eBay.

As an orginal 6d owner I pre-ordered the 6d ii within hours of it being released (thank you B&H email updates).

No 4k video, no big deal rarely use it. Small buffer, no worries I don't shoot sports that much anymore. Updated sensor and processor, great! Better weather sealing, excellent!! Upcoming solar eclipse and an articulating touch screen, got to have it!!!

Post-eclipse I'll be parting with the original 6d and can be reached at jimdot175athotmaildotcom to work out a fair deal.

It's not "weatherproof." Per Canon, it's "Dust- & Water-resistant". That's far from weather-proof, as evidenced by how much dust can get into a Nikon D810:

I loved my Samsung note 3, but when I was ready for a new phone I picked the 7 plus due to one app, Mark II viewfinder. As a large format shooter this is exactly what I was looking for.

I wish Sony would put an articulating touch LCD screen on the next batch of A7 cameras. Articulating because the camera is pretty vertical hostile if you ate shooting waist level which I prefer for portraits' Touch screen because that is a really to select the focus point. fortunately the Sony ios and android apps provide that functionality but a little flip out screen in the vertical mode would be nice.
This isn't enough to make me go back to Canon although if I hadn't dumped my Canon gear already it might tempt me to stay.

With five years gone by since the 6D came on the scene, this refresh for owners of the original is logical and timely.

I have to respectfully disagree with ya on this, Mike. I'm with Richard on this one. I'm sure the camera is "competent" but I what I see compared to the competition is an mild incremental upgrade at best that doesn't match the other market offerings in this price class, to wit:

1. No Canon C-LOG, no high bitrate codec, no 4K HDMI output, no full pixel readout. C'mon, Canon, it's 2017! Even a Fuji X-T20 at half the price shoots 4K video.

2. No headphone jack for monitoring microphone input. What good is having a mic input if you can't monitor audio levels with a headphone input? Thia is just stupid.

3. One SD card slot that card slot doesn't even support UHS Class II. WTF?

4. 45 AF points. Contrast this with the 325 AF points on the Fuji X-T20.

5. 21 file RAW buffer. Compare this to the Nikon D500 with a 200 frame compressed RAW buffer.

Lastly...it still has a mirror.

In short, the "classic" Canon incremental upgrade; stripping out features and performance that people want and their competitors offer at lower prices. True to historical Canon fashion.

C'mon, Canon, get with the program. Geez.


I'm tempted by this camera. Right now I shoot with a well worn 5D Mk3, and based on stats the 6D2 isn't much different from the 5D, however, what grabs me is the tilt screen and dual pixel autofocus. I want a tilt screen so I can shoot street photos from waste level and to help me get low for pics of my kids and pets. With dual pixel autofocus this camera won't be crippled in live view mode like my old 5D Mk3. I imagine the 6D2 opening up new ways of shooting that don't involve me making the jump to another system (If it weren't for all my lovely Canon full-frame glass I'd have switched to a different manufacturer and format years ago).

In the end, my decision to buy a 6D2 will probably come down to the sensor. If the new sensor further opens my night aerial and night street photography possibilities I'll go for it.

Specs don't impress me, but they hardly ever do at this point. Unless the MK II somehow handles a LOT better than the original, I can't see any compelling reason to do this upgrade, unless I decided that I need a second body. Then it would be the obvious way to go.

Sounds nice. Does the Dynamic Range at least match the competition?
No ISO 25. Really want ISO 3 like Tech Pan. Would be nice to shoot longer exposures without having to use Neutral Density filters.
No machanical mirror lock.
Even at that it will be a nice, lightweight package that will produce images better than most of us will need.

More of the same but more expensive. Too expensive actually and not innovative enough.

Not interested in this camera.

I bought the Canon 30D when it came out, followed by the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS, 24-70 2.8, 10-22, Sigma 50 1.4 and 150 2.8 macro, I have 6 580EX II flashes.

Then upgraded to a like new (but used) 50D plus grip ($300).

I waited and waited for the right Canon FF body for me.

The day after the Canon 6DII was announced I bought a Fuji XT2 and 2 lenses.

I will now sell-off my Canon gear

I agree with Stephen Scharf: "In short, the "classic" Canon incremental upgrade; stripping out features and performance that people want and their competitors offer at lower prices. True to historical Canon fashion.
C'mon, Canon, get with the program. Geez."

It was this approach from Canon that finally had me give up and change brands after 24 years of using Canon cameras. Too little, too late. The days of brand loyalty are fading fast. The argument of large lens selection really matters little for the average user if the company of choice offers the 2-3 lenses most people would use. I'm sure this is nice body, but so are all the other current bodies from all the other brands.

While Canon USA made no mention of weatherproofing for the Mk.1, I did find a European brochure that described it as being of the same standard as the EOS-1n. A film camera from the 1990s! Presumably, therefore not as good as the EOS-1V (Canon's last professional film camera). Are the 5/6D series meant to be equal to the EOS-1D in this regard?

the 6D Mark II lacks 4K video, probably to avoid cannibalizing Canon's higher models.

In other words, Sony will cannibalize it, especially when its A7iii models begin arriving.

Or Panasonic will cannibalize it, with multiple high-quality 4K shooters already available.

This does not seem like a sustainable strategy today.

Canon is sort of the default brand for people who don't want to put in the effort to learn about other options, and who can't afford a Leica. So I am sure it will sell well.

[That's a bit harsh! I know a lot of excellent, dedicated photo people who use Canon. --Mike]

"That's a bit harsh! I know a lot of excellent, dedicated photo people who use Canon. --Mike"

That you know so many people who uses Canon is sort of consistent with the observation that it's the default brand, isn't it? :)

A company becomes the default brand by once upon a time being very relevant to what people wanted or needed to buy. But it's a lot easier to stay there through inertia. There are some who make the observation that "all modern cameras are very good," so if that's true then Canon is able to stay the default brand by being good enough so that no one has a compelling reason to venture out into the wilds of new players like Sony.

Why do people take this camera brand stuff so seriously? They are all just big corporations who want to make a profit.

The critical commenters sound like a bunch of Corvette enthusiasts complaining about Camry's.

Having a mild case of GAS affords me the opportunity to use a bunch of different cameras - the 6D is the one I never sell, and also the one I grab if it's imperative the shoot go smoothly. Comfortable to use, batteries go forever, gorgeous files, a competent all-arounder.

No, Canon simply is an overrated brand with old tech not able to compete with Sony/Nikon. It takes a moment for Canon fans to realize this, but it's time to open your eyes now. Old D610 for example is better than this new 6D2 innovation.

As a Sony user I've got to say the reception (and subsequent defence) of the Canon 6DMk2 seems earily familiar.

Im reminded of when the Sony a900 first appeared, an excellent, though workman like, camera that some people loved but really suffered from being off the pace features wise compared to its contemporary, the 5DMk2.

The camera was critised for lacking video, lacking live view, of being ok but thats all. Of course it was defended with people saying "if I wanted a video camera I would have bought one"....etc etc. I think you could take those old conversations, change half a dozen words and simply replay them.

More than anything I think we are seeing a change in the market. Not that long ago Canon could ignore the rest of the market as it (along with Nikon) was THE benchmark. Now all the innovation is (or appears to be) coming from the smaller players that used to struggle to keep up and I'm not certain Canon, with its struggle to keep its massive user base of legacy systems happy, is really well placed to respond.

Canon is the default brand for people who are just interested in taking pictures.

It's not the right brand for people who are more interested in cameras than taking pictures.

I can pick up any 5D from the 5D1 made in 2005 to this year's 5D4, put one of my excellent Canon L primes on it, and just take pictures. They will come out perfectly.

I don't even really need to read the instructions.

It's not rocket science. It may not be the right camera for you, but it might be the best camera ever for someone else with different wants or needs or interests than you.

If you think not having 4k or a mic input or IBIS is a deal-breaker, then this is clearly not the camera for you. Fine, move on. For a lot of people who don't give a hoot about video, the "missing" features don't make one iota of difference. For some, this camera is exactly what they need and does exactly what they want.

There are plenty of good cameras out there - something for nearly every taste and budget. This is just one of them. And, no, I have never owned or even coveted a Canon so I am not getting defensive about my own choices. I have a Fuji Xt-20 (& didn't even know that it has 4k video until reading the comments here - as I couldn't possibly care less about video) and a big fat Nikon DSLR. Both have their uses and strengths, just as every other model camera being made today.

I've owned a 6D for a few years now and it suits my minimalist approach. I'll probably get the new one once the price comes down. A small, simple camera with a big sensor that's compatible with a mountain of great glass. What's not to like? I'll also take a pickup or roadster over a hand built, quad-turbo, W16 powered wonder car every day of the week.

The 6D is the right balance for lots of people out there. A simple, no-frills, no-nonsense, generalist FF camera, that simply keeps on ticking good pics every time. My last DSLR, that I have fond memories of, especially coupled with the Zeiss 21 Distagon:)

It's like the FF Rebel, really.

I am buying one. It uses the same battery, lenses and accessories as my 7D2. Best, I won't have to read the entire manual, simplifies my life. There will be an A7M2 in great condition for sale soon.

"I have to respectfully disagree with ya on this, Mike"

I have to disagree with your disagreement. None of your points make any difference to me - I don't ever shoot video, so couldn't care less about 4K. Who really uses it anyway? Buffer size of 24 frames is easily enough for me, in fact I doubt I'll ever shoot more than 2 or 3 images at a time and then only in very rare circumstances.

As you can see, we have completely different desires/needs here. I want an optical viewfinder, so mirrorless is out. I also don't want to fiddle about with poorly organised menus, poor haptics and awful battery life.

I look forward to the great ergonmics of another Canon body, the superb choice of excellent lenses at highly competetive prices, the convenience of a touch-focus flexible screen, and enough battery life for week long treks into the wild.

"Canon is the default brand for people who are just interested in taking pictures."

I agree with this even more than I agree with my own unmodified statement.

Yes, people who just want to take pictures and don't care about the technology will find their way to Canon because it's the easy choice.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007