Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canon EOS R6

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    An interesting thread, thanks for the updates.
    EOS 7D mk II, Sigma 150-660C, Canon 17-85 EF-S, Tamron 10-24 and a wife who shares my obsession.

    Comment


      #17
      Personal reviews are far are more useful to me rather than from people with maybe a commercial interest involved.

      Many thanks.

      Dave
      Dave , France 79

      Comment


        #18
        Went out and did some landscapes. I have seen the comment made that the R5 is the camera for landscapes due to the high pixel count. I do wonder why! Unless you Pixel peek, extreme crop or print at some enormous size, 20mp is more than enough. The image quality of the R6 is excellent, the noise level is very low, colour rendition is first class. I have dropped 10mp compared to my 5D 4s and I am very satisfied. I had sort of hoped that the continual pixel war had come to and end but clearly it still rages on. I don't see the need for 45mp. I looked at the R5 and dismissed it as having nothing to offer over the R6.. I wanted a good stills camera that could do the occasional short burst of video. The R6 fits that description.
        Alan

        2 EOS 5D Mk IVs, EOS R6, EOS 3, Canon 20mm f2.8, Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art, Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art, Canon 85mm f1.8, Tamron 24-70 f2.8, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS Sport and Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro. Canon RF 24-105mm STM

        http://www.springfield-photography.com/

        Comment


          #19
          The R5 vs R6 discussion is similar to the one when the Nikon Z6 and Z7 first appeared. The Z6, which I still own and my wife is eying for a trial, has half the pixel count of the Z7 but is a way better all round camera. I’m not sure why that should be the case but maybe it’s not having to move as many pixels or those pixels being bigger and hence iq is better.
          EOS 7D mk II, Sigma 150-660C, Canon 17-85 EF-S, Tamron 10-24 and a wife who shares my obsession.

          Comment


            #20
            Those poor professional photographers have been managing with around 20-22mp for years and paying 5,000 plus for the privilege. Picture quality is not about pixel count alone but is a combination of factors. The argument will continue, no doubt, but I will continue to buy the spec that suits the way I work and that will not be based on pixel count. Some of my best competition pictures were shot on a 10D with just 6mp. When I got my 5D with a massive 12mp sensor, I thought it was Xmas and New year rolled into one. I have been able to afford high pixel count cameras but they have never impressed me.
            Alan

            2 EOS 5D Mk IVs, EOS R6, EOS 3, Canon 20mm f2.8, Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art, Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art, Canon 85mm f1.8, Tamron 24-70 f2.8, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS Sport and Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro. Canon RF 24-105mm STM

            http://www.springfield-photography.com/

            Comment


              #21
              Fact of the matter is numbers sell - the bigger the number the more marketing departments get excited and lots of megapixels appear to count far more than big ISO numbers... For years I managed quite happily with the 10Mp on my 40D - TBH I'd still be quite happy with my 80D if it only 10MP but the much better ISO performance of it's modern sensor/processor combo...

              I one got a a picture in the magazine with my D30 - and that has a measly 3.2Mp. It still works even now.
              Nigel

              You may know me from Another Place....

              The new ElSid Photogallery...

              Equipment: Far too much to list - including lots of Nikon...

              Comment


                #22
                As many regulars will know, I do much of my photography in my studio, so today I took the plunge and did a shoot almost entirely with the R6. It was a complex shoot involving several different lighting techniques and a lot of different camera setups. In total I took 779 pictures so I really gave the beast a damned good thrashing.. So what do I think after my marathon shoot?
                1- Image Quality - No problems here at all. The images were sharp, Dynamic range was good and noise levels were excellent, even when I pushed beyond the ISO 12,800 point.
                2. Handling - This was a more mixed bag. I like the control layout and find the three wheels very easy to operate. The vari-angle screen allowed me to take several shots that would have been much more difficult with the 5D 4s.
                However there are some bad points, The EVF is awful in the studio as everything looked weird colours, . This is because the cameras white balance is set for my studio flash but the only light while setting the shots is tungsten modelling lights, The model looked like Tango man in the EVF. Image preview has to be turned off as the camera is operating in full manual mode and has no communication with the flash. TTL flash wouldn't overcome this as creative studio photography involves making value judgments of the setting for lights and the camera.
                It is far too easy to accidentally move the focus point.
                Finally the hot shoe is lower than on the DSLRs which means that in portrait mode my nose is pressed against the radio trigger which rather uncomfortable.
                3. Overall - I enjoyed using the camera and the results (examples of which I will be uploading to the site), were very good. The positives far outweigh the negatives.
                Will I be rushing out to sell my 5D4s, not a chance.
                Am I pleased with my R6, yes, very pleased
                Am I off to buy loads of RF lenses. No. For the present I get the quality I want from the EF fit lenses I already own and the handling of the R6 with these lenses attached via an adapter is absolutely fine.

                The R6 is a fine camera and it is inevitable that mirrorless cameras with eventually replace DSLRs. I don't, personally, see this as an amazing advance in photography but more a way for manufacturers marketing departments to convince us that the new cameras solve problems we didn't know we had (BTW the computer industry has bee successfully doing that for years). My photography will not be improved by changes in technology. It never has been in the past and this latest change in the technology will be no different. All of the pictures I took today could have been taken with a DSLR. Not one required IBIS or lens IS. In fact until I bought my Sigma 70-200 18 months ago, I had never used IS. and given the amazing ISO performance of modern cameras I am far from convinced that many photographers really need it. Still the marketing gurus tell us we do and they must be right as without all this hype the camera industry would slowly slip into oblivion, superseded by the smartphone.
                With that thought I bow to the inevitable and wish you all 'happy snapping'. and if you want a really good mirrorless camera, I can thoroughly recommend the R6.
                Last edited by SpringfieldPhoto; 15-07-2021, 15:24.
                Alan

                2 EOS 5D Mk IVs, EOS R6, EOS 3, Canon 20mm f2.8, Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art, Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art, Canon 85mm f1.8, Tamron 24-70 f2.8, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS Sport and Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro. Canon RF 24-105mm STM

                http://www.springfield-photography.com/

                Comment


                  #23
                  A few pictures
                  Attached Files
                  Alan

                  2 EOS 5D Mk IVs, EOS R6, EOS 3, Canon 20mm f2.8, Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art, Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art, Canon 85mm f1.8, Tamron 24-70 f2.8, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS Sport and Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro. Canon RF 24-105mm STM

                  http://www.springfield-photography.com/

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X