-= Canon EOS R6 Mark II owners unite! Post photos and discuss.

digital paradise wrote in post #19455033
I'm no Einstein but I have to wonder how would a fan work an enclosed space? Fans cool you down by the evaporation of sweat. Not sure how a fan can change the ambient heat unless air is drawn in. Also a fans use energy which would increase heat? Maybe Canon has a new design/patent?

Yeah, weird eh? Unless it's blowing from the sensor/processor inside the body outward toward a heatsink somewhere on the outside of the body maybe? Then the heatsink can dissipate the heat to the outside?

drisley wrote in post #19455034
He did!

Right. He only showed the front of the R6. He was recording the R6II before that.

digital paradise wrote in post #19455033
I'm no Einstein but I have to wonder how would a fan work an enclosed space? Fans cool you down by the evaporation of sweat. Not sure how a fan can change the ambient heat unless air is drawn in. Also a fans use energy which would increase heat? Maybe Canon has a new design/patent?

Maybe Roger Cicala will do a tear down one day.

Had another thought. When we used to have a house I had a mechanics Stethoscope. I sure wish I know what I did with it. When we sold the house and bought a condo we did the mass purge and I gave a lor away a lot of to tools to my friends kids.

When the R came out and occasionally when new ML owners, especially using EF lenses people would comment about the IS running all of the time. I used the Stethoscope to test out R and even shutting the IS off via the switch on the lens the IS continued to operate. It didn't stabilize but continued run. The new IS design uses some of type of magnetic system instead of springs so it has to keep running. We also read about saying there is a chunk in the body when powered off which is the IBIS assembly. I did post about my test a few years ago.

New design, thinner walls, etc and perhaps it is just louder on the R6II.

digital paradise wrote in post #19455058
Had another thought. When we used to have a house I had a mechanics Stethoscope. I sure wish I know what I did with it. When we sold the house and bought a condo we did the mass purge and I gave a lor away a lot of to tools to my friends kids.

When the R came out and occasionally when new ML owners, especially using EF lenses people would comment about the IS running all of the time. I used the Stethoscope to test out R and even shutting the IS off via the switch on the lens the IS continued to operate. It didn't stabilize but continued run. The new IS design uses some of type of magnetic system instead of springs so it has to keep running. We also read about saying there is a chunk in the body when powered off which is the IBIS assembly. I did post about my test a few years ago.

New design, thinner walls, etc and perhaps it is just louder on the R6II.

Perhaps!
We need a teardown ASAP. I volunteer you to do it! :P

drisley wrote in post #19455081
Perhaps!
We need a teardown ASAP. I volunteer you to do it! :P

I excel at tearing things down. Putting then back to together is different story.

digital paradise wrote in post #19455085
I excel at tearing things down. Putting then back to together is different story.

All we need is the teardown. We don't need it put back together.
LOL

I'm still shocked at how much detail the R6 II and Sigma 50 Art can produce, even at F1.4 the construction site picture shows fine rivets way up at the top.

drisley wrote in post #19455357
I'm still shocked at how much detail the R6 II and Sigma 50 Art can produce, even at F1.4 the construction site picture shows fine rivets way up at the top.

Hosted photo: posted by drisley in
./showthread.php?p=194​55357&i=i205332463
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by drisley in
./showthread.php?p=194​55357&i=i222340837
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

High ISO Danialson High Iso

drisley wrote in post #19455004
I just did a comparison with my 5D IV - my previous low light beast - and the R6 II is SLIGHTLY better but very close. I would shoot my 5D IV at ISO 12,800 and never give it a second thought.
When I pull shadows up, the R6 II has slightly less noise and also a fair bit less colour shifting and purple green blotches.

Btw, if you shoot high ISOs, DEFINITELY check out DXO PureRaw2. I've used all the NR plugins over 18 years (as I shoot usually ISO 1600++ for 90% of my shooting) and they were all mediocre at best. PureRaw2 is a game changer for me! Not only does it scrub out the noise of the raw files, it enhances the sharpness slightly. No mushiness, it's just incredible!! You run it on raw files (and can batch) it outputs DNG/Raws that you then use normally (LR/PS etc). It's basically a one click solution and man, it's just soooo good. I have some old stage photos from my 1D Mark III files taken at ISO 3200 that it scrubbed out the noise and improved detail and made them look like new images.

No R6 II support yet, though.

If you want me to send test raws to you I can.

So It sounds like the 5D4 is pretty darn close.....less auto Eye focus features ??
I love the 5D4. Its a great camera

umphotography wrote in post #19455376
So It sounds like the 5D4 is pretty darn close.....less auto Eye focus features ??
I love the 5D4. Its a great camera

Yeah, it's VERY close for IQ and dynamic range recovery imho. Unless I just had a great copy but when I pull out my old 5DIV raw images, some shot at ISO12800 or even underexposed to the point of being black, the images are insanely clean, with tiny, fine grain. The EOS R was terrible in these same conditions but the R6 II seems to be very close. I wish I had my 5D IV so I could do direct comparisons. That camera was so very underrated for image quality. The AF for me though could be very unreliable to say the least otherwise I probably would have just bought that again.

Sigmas on the 5D IV would be about 50% hit rate (my 85 1.4 was probably less than that). I know on the R it was heaps better and the 50 on the R6 II so far is just stellar. That hit rate (and perhaps some say a very weak AA filter) can give sharper images despite the lower resolution. I do know that the UV/IR filter glass on the R6 was much, much thinner than on the EOS R (unsure if that affects sharpness at all but I would say less glass is better).

umphotography wrote in post #19455374
High ISO Danialson High Iso

Here is an ISO 12800 at F1.4 for you to try
https://we.tl/t-jolISTvjTd

Too lazy to make grill cheese except on the plate I'm going to eat on.
ISO 1250 F1.4

new love in Prague - R6 MK II + RF 14-35

Really nice! Glad you are liking it!
One of the underrated aspects of this camera is the battery life. I have had the camera for a week and taken a hundred shots here and there, PLUS I walked around shooting for about 90 minutes in -20 and the battery is still 60%.