Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canon EOS R6

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

  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    Well the inevitable Mk II version of the R6 has been released and I have looked at the list of new features and specifications and I have to say they don't prompt me to go out and buy one. Very few of the new features really benefit a stills photographer. The emphasis is on video features and a ridiculous increase in burst speed. The price increase of 10% over the the Mk1 is not justified by the new features. With no support of third party lenses, excessively expensive lenses and accessories, the RF system is looking less and less attractive. I am sure that many people will be dazzled by headlines like 40 frames per second but realistically, such features are of limited use to the vast majority of photographers.
    I have virtually stopped using the R6. I have it up for sale and I will be moving to Sony as there are many more choices in both camera bodies and lenses within their system. Canon need to learn that they aren't the only game in town.

    Leave a comment:


  • ColytonJohn
    replied
    Interesting finale to this just as I'm considering replacing my now very old 7D (that is the spare to my 5D3) with something mirrorless and likely a R6 and demote my 5D3.
    Were I to I would also have no desire (or budget) to buy R lenses and intend(ed) to continue using my collection of EF L glass as they cover the ranges and photography styles with the quality I need.
    Most likely, then, is that I'll buy a 5D4 and sit on the mirrorless fence a bit longer.

    Cheers,
    John

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    Well to round off this review, the R6 is now on the market as I am not going to move forward with the RF system. I intend to replace the R6 with a Sony camera. The reason is entirely down to the lack of choice of lenses. There are currently 259 lenses from 8 manufactures available for the E mount.
    The R6 is very good camera but the RF system doesn't offer me a route forward that works for me. The lenses are overpriced. There are no 3rd party alternatives. As I do a range of different styles of photography, I have varying requirements. While I am prepared to spend a lot of money on prime lenses for use in the studio, I don't take some other styles of photography as seriously and would look for cheaper alternatives. These are not available. It's all about choice. The RF system is very clever, but I don't need or want many of its tricks. My 5D4s are more than adequate. mirrorless is clearly the future, and for me, Canon offers no technical advantages over the opposition so why stay with Canon when there is more choice from other manufacturers. The 5D4s will soldier on for the short to medium term as I transition to Sony.

    Leave a comment:


  • ST-EOS
    replied
    Alan thanks for taking the time to write all of your thoughts about the R6 and your findings on the tasks you use it for.

    A very honest and informative write up, I had an R6 for a weekend via the Canon try before you buy scheme (I can't remember the marketing name) two days didn't give me sufficient time to try out the camera in anger, though one feature that impressed me was the in camera focus stacking.

    Thanks again Alan, I'll stick with my 5D4-1V

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    Further update. I use the R6 for all types of photography and have got used to the weird view you get in manual mode in the studio. it takes excellent pictures and 20mp is more than enough for my style of photography. I have no intention of getting any RF lenses as they offer me nothing over the EF fit lenses I already have. The performance of RF lenses in many recent reviews has not convinced me that they are worth the very high prices. They are often not the best on test and are usually the most expensive. I don't need 8 stops of image stabilization, in fact I never turn on any image stabilization as it offers me nothing. i can see that some photographic styles would benefit so I understand why it is there. I don't shoot video and the ISO performance of the camera is so good that my low light shots are easily catered for. I would have considered the R7 as a second mirrorless body but the lack of a battery grip for it, is a show stopper for me as I have been using them for years and hate not having one on the camera. I seldom fit 2 batteries but the duplicate controls make the camera so much more flexible and easy to use.

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    I have now taken just over 10,000 images with the R6. The focus problem is very very occasional and only occurs with very low contrast subjects that lack much detail. The flash problem was due the brides wedding dress, I think, and has not happened since.
    One final point, I have seen criticism of the battery life. I really haven't found this to be a problem and have actually manged over 1000 shots on a single battery. To clarify I use the viewfinder but have the camera back on the back in black and white info screen mode. This effectively is like using a DSLR but I switch to the screen if I need that facility.
    The more I use the camera the more I like it the face/eye recognition is very near perfect, the tracking is similarly excellent. Add to this the first class image quality, great dynamic range and excellent ISO performance and the camera is very near perfect. I still find the EVF annoying on occasions but I have learned to live with it. I can most definitely recommend this camera.
    Last edited by SpringfieldPhoto; 01-12-2021, 19:35.

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    Final thought:
    Having borrowed an R5 for 2 days.
    R6 - 9 out of 10 - I still hate the EVF
    R5 - 8 out of ten - Too expensive with more pixels that are necessary and the EVF is still horrible
    5D MkIV - 10 out of 10 - That was my score when I got the first one and I still say that overall it is a nicer camera to use and provides excellent results.

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    A further update. I have taken around 7,000 images with the R6 now in various situations. My conclusions are:
    1. Image quality - Excellent. I have absolutely no problem with image quality. 20mp is quite enough for most purposes and the dynamic range and low light performance is very good.
    2. Auto focus - Very good but there are some circumstances where it can fail. Once you are ware of these it is easy to avoid the problem.
    3. Handling - The camera is well laid out and controls are very easy to use. The menus follow the usual Canon format and are easy to follow.
    4. Build Quality - The camera is very well made and has the usual Canon feel but considering the price, there is too much plastic unlike the Nikon.
    5. EVF - OK in general use but extremely annoying in the studio. Overall, I dislike EVFs, still prefer an optical viewfinder. The so called 'advantages' don't impress me.
    6. Overall - The R6 is a very good camera, and well worth buying. My views on the EVF are personal and related to the range of photography that I do.
    Last edited by SpringfieldPhoto; 15-08-2021, 22:50.

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    A few pictures
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    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 all the colours looked weird. This is because the camera's white balance is set for my studio flash (5,600 K) 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 will 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; 24-07-2021, 19:01.

    Leave a comment:


  • El Sid
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • AndyMulhearn
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • SpringfieldPhoto
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • davcoll
    replied
    Personal reviews are far are more useful to me rather than from people with maybe a commercial interest involved.

    Many thanks.

    Dave

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X