6d2 is here.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18416211
Yep. I shoot birds. I'm not the best at it, but I do love it and I do know how to expose them properly and get it right in camera. However, it's the light or lack thereof in my part of the world, especially in the fall and winter that is a problem. My 1D4 is still a great camera and I love it, but there are better options today for those low light/high iso situations that I run into. So after years of buying used, I had planned to get me a brand new 6DII. I know my 300/4 does really well with both 1.4x and 2x extenders on a full frame and then maybe next year I was going to pair it up with the Tamron 150-600mm G2 as that lens does so well on full frame cameras. I was keeping my fingers crossed about the AF system in the 6DII, hoping Canon would have listened to its users. And they did. Unfortunately I took for granted that the sensor tech in the 6DII would be the latest. After all, the sensor is what made the original so wonderful. Looking at the scores and the images and the lack of wiggle room, I can't bring myself to buy this camera. Dynamic range is actually a bit worse than on the 6D. I still cannot believe Canon did this.

I have been looking at Nikon and Sony and am becoming more depressed. It will take significantly more money than I have to switch. I don't know what to do now.

I decided to stop fighting it.... I'm saving up for a 1DX Mark 2. It will take me a few years, but I'll get by with my 1D IV until then. I know some birders are very happy with their 5D Mark IV's.... I still think shutter speed rules when it comes to birds in flight. As I've mentioned elsewhere, unless something changes, the 1DX Mark III will be announced before I have the cash in hand. I am trying to sell a pretty expensive guitar so who knows?

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18417541
Wow, 6 APS-C models.

Life would be so much easier if they trimmed it down to
- APS-C: 1 entry level, 1 high end level (7D)
- FF: 1 entry level (6D), 1 high end level (5D4)
And make the 1DX an APS-H again.

Hear, hear!!!!!

Anyone know if they fixed the moire and aliasing issues that the original 6d suffered from?????

The filters would not be user replaceable....

Just the inventer and engineer in me, and that is what I do, both for a career and on the side. It won't be the first time somebody dissed my ideas only to see them come to fruition years later.

The 5D4 would be logical for my purposes, given my current gear list. Would make a good combo with the 7D2, and have a very similar user interface, minimal learning curve. And it is a great all around FF camera like the 7D2 is a great all around APS-C camera.

But, I would both be playing Canon's game, and would require one or more additional lenses on the wide side to approach the wide FOV I can get with my APS-C bodies. This is why I am almost certain to rent a Sony A7II with a Metabones adapter and just see how it works in actual practice, see how I like the Sony RAW files. Its good to look outside of the box from time to time. Also exercise my CPS membership and evaluate a 5D4. Both are basically the same cost, about $3K.

Nearly picked up a 6D last year, struck me as a 40D with a good FF sensor. But then I heard the rumors about a 6D2 on the way, so I held off. Still holding off.

russbecker wrote in post #18419478
The 5D4 would be logical for my purposes, given my current gear list. Would make a good combo with the 7D2, and have a very similar user interface, minimal learning curve. And it is a great all around FF camera like the 7D2 is a great all around APS-C camera.

But, I would both be playing Canon's game, and would require one or more additional lenses on the wide side to approach the wide FOV I can get with my APS-C bodies. This is why I am almost certain to rent a Sony A7II with a Metabones adapter and just see how it works in actual practice, see how I like the Sony RAW files. Its good to look outside of the box from time to time. Also exercise my CPS membership and evaluate a 5D4. Both are basically the same cost, about $3K.

Nearly picked up a 6D last year, struck me as a 40D with a good FF sensor. But then I heard the rumors about a 6D2 on the way, so I held off. Still holding off.

it's so cheap nowadays that you should just buy one and use for a little while. With the metabones, you can try what Eye AF is all about, just a small taste with the A7ii. The A6300, A6500, A7rii, A9 are in different leagues when it comes to eye tracking.....

body cost me 1K, second hand MBiv 250-350? Learning the sony system takes time, it's way different than canon. Once you learn it, it's real nice. Also, best if used with Capture one. Many sony users swear by C1, since the software was built to handle sony files. The switch from LR to C1 was tough as hell, but I'm glad I switched. Much cleaner and better organized software. It's also much faster. Learning it was a royal PITA

Oops, sorry, meant the A7R2 (not up on the various Sony model numbers). 42MP FF format sensor. Need to find out if this makes enough difference in landscapes/portraits to justify acquiring one (same applies to a 5D4). I can instead acquire some new glass, such as a 100-400 II (ideal airshow lens IMO), which is more likely to have a positive impact. That and a 400mm DO II, but that is further out on horizon.

I viewed the 6D2 as a relatively low-cost FF experiment, but not with those sensor specs. Not in 2017. I am sure it will take 'nice pictures' but my 40D does that -- in its parameter space. Nearly all DSLRs sold in the last 15 years take nice pictures -- in their parameter spaces. Its a question of the boundaries of the parameter space.

Just back from Botswana, so is the 6D2 sensor still pants? or did real images emerge showing it's better?

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18419960
Just back from Botswana, so is the 6D2 sensor still pants? or did real images emerge showing it's better?

No hidden DR was released with the firmware of the officially released camera. Slightly worse DR than the original 6D at ISO 100 has been confirmed.

That has not stopped people reading from Canon PR scripts from saying, "greater dynamic range", though.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18419960
Just back from Botswana, so is the 6D2 sensor still pants? or did real images emerge showing it's better?

You probably aren't up for reading the last few hundred posts you've missed, someone had this link that showed some interesting stuff, I think anyway. Plot the DR for the 6d and 6d Mark II and 5D Mark III and you they aren't much different, and about the same as DR increases. I suspect, maybe, (I suggested here a few pages back) that the difference between the two 6D's at ISO 100 may just be due to small measurement variations in whatever test they'd conduct to do this. Seems like the 6D II has a 6D sensor that just had a few more megapixels added to it. (if you want to see why people are upset, as if we didn't know this, stick a Nikon or Sony camera in that plot, quite a bit better)

http://www.photonstoph​otos.net/Charts/PDR.ht​m

CheshireCat wrote in post #18416612
Nope. Shutter mechanisms are different. However, the 1/4000 limitation might well be a software one.

It is easier to achieve 1/8000 with APS-C frame size than with FF frame size. In the case of the 6D/6DII shutter, its lower lifetime expectancy is most likely reflective of the fact that lower cost components with lower ultimate durability went into the manufacture of its shutter vs. those in the 5Dn and in the 1Dn shutters, which themselves are stratified by Canon for lifetime cycle count.

Faster shutters translate into the need for lighter weight shutter curtains, etc. which makes for inherently lower durability. So the durability has to be engineered back into the mechanism, perhaps with more-durable more-expensive lightweight metals.

For the above reasons, it is easy to understand that the 6D/6DII limitations in both max shutter speed AND in its max X-sync speed are NOT necessarily Canon Marketing stratification alone, with software crippling the camera's performance, but may well be engineered in by selection of cost saving components. You cannot put in as much cost into a $2000 camera as you can put into a $4000 camera!

CheshireCat wrote in post #18416627
I finally realized why the 6D2 is selling like crazy and kits are back-ordered !

Turns out that Canon engineers did not work to improve sensor technology for a very good reason.
R&D was secretly focused on time-portal technology. It required 3 years of hard work, but now Canon has a working time-portal that allows going back in time up to 10 years !
Thanks to this groundbreaking technology, Canon is selling the 6D2 in 2007. And it is selling like crazy thanks to its superior dynamic range and bleeding edge 1080p video.
Sorry to all of you who live in 2017: you will have to wait for your 6D2 kit.

To paraphrase what you said...

The 6D presented the very high IQ -- nearly as good as the 5DIV -- three years early to the world, before Canon was otherwise ready to deliver high ISO low noise high IQ in its 5Dn and 1Dn lines! Although the 6DII itself is 'no slouch' in IQ, many folks are disappointed that the entry-level FF $2000 6DII does not again spring forward well passed the $3500 5DIV in IQ

John Sheehy wrote in post #18419980
That has not stopped people reading from Canon PR scripts from saying, "greater dynamic range", though.

Folks readily accept the claims of 'Whiter whites' in detergents, and never wonder about how you could continuously increase whiteness without maxing out! Such claims are not in the context of
'whiter than the 2015 version of our detergent' but simply accept it as 'marketing hype' of 'whiter than dingy white'
Somehow they do not understand the application of the same 'greater (whatever)' when applied to camera IQ, and the interpretation of "greater dynamic range" HAS TO BE 'better than the 6D' and they get upset when it is not that comparative quality, but represents 'marketing hype' of 'better IQ than what you get from inferior products'

Wilt wrote in post #18420503
Folks readily accept the claims of 'Whiter whites' in detergents, and never wonder about how you could continuously increase whiteness without maxing out! Such claims are not in the context of
'whiter than the 2015 version of our detergent' but simply accept it as 'marketing hype' of 'whiter than dingy white'
Somehow they do not understand the application of the same 'greater (whatever)' when applied to camera IQ, and the interpretation of "greater dynamic range" HAS TO BE 'better than the 6D' and they get upset when it is not that comparative quality, but represents 'marketing hype' of 'better IQ than what you get from inferior products'

you're assuming white clothing is actually white

Charlie wrote in post #18420508
you're assuming white clothing is actually white

Well, it is white enough to be clipped off the right side of the histogram when improperly exposed when attempting ETTR