6d2 is here.

I use a d750 all the time and imo the noise produced at higher ISO (even 400) is much more noticeable than my 6D.

The colors are better too. But yes, that's about it. Still really disappointed in Canon. Guy has a good point about no pop up flash. If they want it to be a entry level camera, that is a good selling point.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18415398
Guy has a good point about no pop up flash. If they want it to be a entry level camera, that is a good selling point.

Canon didn't want to cannibalize the entry-level-camera-with-popup-flash product line.
Keep in mind that the real market segment of this camera is not entry-level photographers but amateur helpless suckers.

Scoobert wrote in post #18409717
I think in part he is correct in that Canon can not keep up with Sony. Their best sensor in the 5Div is even behind the Sony and it still has 3 to 4 years before a refresh. So they were not about to let the 6dii have that same sensor and challenge or even outperform the 5Div.

gjl711 wrote in post #18409735
Canon has done that before with the original 6D. It outperformed the 5DIII in IQ and they used other features to differentiate the bodies. The difference was not very big but it was measurable. They could have easily done the same here. The 5DIV has a lot of other features that would separate the two bodies.

I have made this point before, but it bears repeating, because Canon's positioning of the 6DII relative to the 5DIV seems to be in line with what I predicted would happen.

• When the 6D was launched, Canon probably did so with the idea that the camera was 'crippled' in sufficient ways (max shutter speed; X-sync speed; lack of joystick; lack of PC cord port; etc) that folks would have demand for the 'more professional' 5Dn bodies...their error was that low noise at high ISO performance was just so stunning that nobody really cared about the crippling...the 6D sold while the 5DII and then the 5DIII did not sell. So the higher profit margins, expected with 5Dn sales vaporized, leaving Canon with lots of lower profit 6D units being sold
  
• I speculated that Canon learned via the School of Hard Knocks not to repeat the error with a 6DII that outperformed the 5DIV, but to firmly stratify IQ in addtion to the feature crippling vs. the 5DIV. That would drive users (particularly pros) up to the 5DIV; if hobbyists were driven in that direction too, that would be all the better for Canon profits...and the 6DII remains firmly entrenched as the 'affordable entry level FF' and not the profit eroder.
  

Wilt wrote in post #18415417
I have made this point before, but it bears repeating, because Canon's positioning of the 6DII relative to the 5DIV seems to be in line with what I predicted would happen.

• When the 6D was launched, Canon probably did so with the idea that the camera was 'crippled' in sufficient ways (max shutter speed; X-sync speed; lack of joystick; lack of PC cord port; etc) that folks would have demand for the 'more professional' 5Dn bodies...their error was that low noise at high ISO performance was just so stunning that nobody really cared about the crippling...the 6D sold while the 5DII and then the 5DIII did not sell. So the higher profit margins, expected with 5Dn sales vaporized, leaving Canon with lots of lower profit 6D units being sold
  
• I speculated that Canon learned via the School of Hard Knocks not to repeat the error with a 6DII that outperformed the 5DIV, but to firmly stratify IQ in addtion to the feature crippling vs. the 5DIV. That would drive users (particularly pros) up to the 5DIV; if hobbyists were driven in that direction too, that would be all the better for Canon profits...and the 6DII remains firmly entrenched as the 'affordable entry level FF' and not the profit eroder.
  

That would only work in an arena where you are the only player. In today's market with many competitors offering better equipment at lower prices, why would anyone choose Canon. Maybe the pros would move to the 5DIV but the amateurs? Way better equipment elsewhere.

Whatever Canon is doing in terms of advertising/PR, it is working. And maybe that is part of the reason for their conservative approach.

This summer, I have traveled a lot. Been in Eastern Washington, NYC, Boston, Princeton, New Haven, all over Italy, Switzerland and for the last few days, Chicago.

I have seen more Canons that I can shake a stick at. Most are crop/lower end models but regardless, Canons outnumber any other type of camera (not counting cell phones here) by an order of magnitude.

Its name recognition in their favor..
Ask most consumers (with no photography knowledge )who they think is the best ..the anser is almost always canon then nikon.
Now , what the "best " means they usually dont know , or they think purely in IQ. as in "i want my pictures to look like professional"

gjl711 wrote in post #18415434
That would only work in an arena where you are the only player. In today's market with many competitors offering better equipment at lower prices, why would anyone choose Canon. Maybe the pros would move to the 5DIV but the amateurs? Way better equipment elsewhere.

Frankly, we here are a minority. I'll bet most potential 6D Mark II owners don't frequent on line websites and wouldn't understand half the stuff written on them if they occasionally do. They purchase by brand, and most people only know two brands, Canon and Nikon, With more Canon cameras around there is more visibility. Most occasional photographers with cash who will buy the 6D2 probably have no clue what dynamic range is, or even care, but they will buy it because of the "magic" of full frame which they've leaned about from reading consumer reviews and marketing material. I suspect this will be a very popular camera and will give many users the impression they own a "professional" camera which will give them "professional" results. Honestly, going on other sites and seeing the images that people post, most people can't tell the difference between excellent and mediocre images and don't know how to get the best from their equipment anyway..

mwsilver wrote in post #18415464
Frankly, we here are a minority....Honestly, going on other sites and seeing the images that people post, most people can't tell the difference between excellent and mediocre images and don't know how to get the best from their equipment anyway..

^...many folks don't even notice that their posted shot on POTN is underexposed by -1.5EV resulting in grey whites!

On a 1920x1040 monitor -- or even on a 4K monitor -- folks NEVER see the advantage of a 5DS vs. a 30D, and seeing an 1EV to 2EV noise advantage of a A7RII vs. the 5DIV is not apparent to the average non-enthusiast...the resolution of the monitors (2K to 4k) and the POOR (vs. the sensor) DYNAMIC RANGE of the monitor both result in making the technical advantages of one model/brand vs. another virtually INVISIBLE!
While HDR displays are touted to produce a peak brightness of 1000 nits or more, the Dell 27-inch S2718D Ultrathin monitor shown at 'Jaw-droppingly gorgeous HDR explodes onto PC monitors at CES 2017...After years of tedious technical groundwork, the gorgeous future of PC displays finally—finally—materi​alized at CES 2017' only has 400 nits.
On a Toshiba plasma display there was 7+ stops of brightness range and fall into what is called 'standard dynamic range' of 7-9 stops, and 12 stops was achieved only the absolute best of monitors published in a paper High Dynamic Range Video in 2016.

I went to a party over the weekend, celebrating the retirement of someone, and I had the ONLY dSLR. No, even more dramatically, I had the only CAMERA...everyone else was busy snapping with their smartphones. Do you think anyone cared about their DR? Do you think anyone cared about the pixel count decimation whenever 'zoom' was used? Do you think that anyone cared that they could not control WB? Do you think anyone CARED...other than about getting a shot which could be posted on Facebook (with its even more decimated performace)?!

Wilt wrote in post #18415484
^...many folks don't even notice that their posted shot on POTN is underexposed by -1.5EV resulting in grey whites!

On a 1920x1040 monitor -- or even on a 4K monitor -- folks NEVER see the advantage of a 5DS vs. a 30D, and seeing an noise advantage of a A7RII vs. the 5DIV is not apparent to the average non-enthusiast...the resolution of the monitors (2K to 4k) and the POOR DYNAMIC RANGE of the monitor both result in making the technical advantages of one model/brand vs. another virtually INVISIBLE!

I went to a party over the weekend, celebrating the retirement of someone, and I had the ONLY dSLR. No, even more dramatically, I had the only CAMERA...everyone else was busy snapping with their smartphones. Do you think anyone cared about their DR? Do you think anyone cared about the pixel count decimation whenever 'zoom' was used? Do you think that anyone cared that they could not control WB? Do you think anyone CARED...other than about getting a shot which could be posted on Facebook (with its even more decimated performace)?!

Absolutely. And that's why the 6D Mark II will probably be a success. People will buy it because they'll think their pictures will look like a professional took them. Never mind understanding exposure or composition. I see so many newbies with Canon or Nikon DSLR's who shoot 100% jpeg in full auto and are happy campers. As I said, we here are a small minority and our experiences and opinions probably don't represent the majority of people buying enthusiast and even some pro level DSLR and mirrorless cameras. I'm amazed by the number of full frame camera owners I've run into both online and in the real world who are fairly clueless about their camera's capabilities and who often shoot in full auto.

mwsilver wrote in post #18415507
Absolutely. And that's why the 6D Mark II will probably be a success. People will buy it because they'll think their pictures will look like a professional took them. Never mind understanding exposure or composition. I see so many newbies with Canon or Nikon DSLR's who shoot 100% jpeg in full auto and are happy campers. As I said, we here are a small minority and our experiences and opinions probably don't represent the majority of people buying enthusiast and even some pro level DSLR and mirrorless cameras. I'm amazed by the number of full frame camera owners I've run into both online and in the real world who are fairly clueless about their camera's capabilities and who often shoot in full auto.

Can you imagine the amount of people using the 6d with their pop-up flash firing away?!...while in P. haha

I think you are not giving enough credit to other photographers out there. Maybe someone picking up a Rebel SLR kit on sale at some big box store might not care all that much but someone plopping down 2k on a camera that is not going to be in most stores is going to do a bit of investigation before buying.

gjl711 wrote in post #18415512
I think you are not giving enough credit to other photographers out there. Maybe someone picking up a Rebel SLR kit on sale at some big box store might not care all that much but someone plopping down 2k on a camera that is not going to be in most stores is going to do a bit of investigation before buying.

Most, yes, all...no way. There are a lot of people who have the money irrelevant to their knowledge of the equipment. And that goes for more than just cameras.

gjl711 wrote in post #18415512
I think you are not giving enough credit to other photographers out there. Maybe someone picking up a Rebel SLR kit on sale at some big box store might not care all that much but someone plopping down 2k on a camera that is not going to be in most stores is going to do a bit of investigation before buying.

But just using my own anecdotal experience, not many people are buying dSLRs...I know that ONE other person (besides me) at that party this weekend even OWNS a dSLR...and he snapped away on his smartphone.

gjl711 wrote in post #18415512
I think you are not giving enough credit to other photographers out there. Maybe someone picking up a Rebel SLR kit on sale at some big box store might not care all that much but someone plopping down 2k on a camera that is not going to be in most stores is going to do a bit of investigation before buying.

Frankly. I think you're giving the average camera owner way too much credit. I know several well healed people who buy only the "best", and who own expensive full frame cameras but have no idea or even an great interest in learning how to use them properly. They expect, and actually assume, an expensive pro or semi pro camera will do the work for them and when it doesn't they trade it in for even newer or more expensive bodies.

Wilt wrote in post #18415526
But just using my own anecdotal experience, not many people are buying dSLRs...I know that ONE other person (besides me) at that party this weekend even OWNS a dSLR...and he snapped away on his smartphone.

And the sales data backs that up. I think most who wanted a slr, bought one and see no reason to upgrade. The more serious photogs keep using their cameras and the less serious fall back to their phones.