6d2 is here.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18416215
What ISO levels do you usually shoot at for birding? If the lighting is bad, but you also have to juggle shutter speeds to stop motion, I would think you are at higher ISOs correct? If that is the case, the 6D2 will work just fine for you, its higher ISO levels are very close to the 5D4 in that regard. I wouldn't dismiss the 6D2 just yet if you find yourself at ISO 640 or higher. It also seems that the 6D2 has a reduced impact AA filter, based on some of the details that I have seen in various files at higher ISO, meaning NR can be more aggressive while maintaining details, and thus more usable than even before.

To give you an idea, I rarely go back to my 5D4 raw files. I shoot both raw and JPG, but with the proper in-camera settings, and the in-camera NR, the JPG files are actually very good to work with. I haven't been able to do that with prior bodies, other than the 7D2.

This is ISO 8000 processed JPG on the 7D2, the 6D2 will better this result.

My default ISO setting for birds is 800. It's only in Summertime that I can go lower to ISO 400. I also shoot a lot at ISO 1600. Depends on the quality of light and the location on how much noise that will give me but in fairly good conditions ISO 1600 will be very clean. I don't shoot at ISO 3200 unless it's an emergency.

I did notice how the 6DII files are pretty similar to those of the 5D4 at higher ISOs. What concerns me is the wiggle room. In winter I mainly walk the park and it gets dark there and I may have no choice but to underexpose. What I was wondering is this. The 6DII scores for DR are bad at base ISO but are actually better than quite a number of cameras at higher ISO speeds. Now I have only seen people pulling shadows and reducing highlights on files at base ISO and the 6DII does not do so well there, to say the least. However, as the 6DII is relatively better at higher ISO speeds in terms of DR, I was wondering how pulling shadows on files of ISO 800 or ISO 1600 would do. Or does the bad DR at base ISO also influence wiggle room in files with higher ISO speeds?

And thanks, Cary, for responding as I really do need help here.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18416242
does the bad DR at base ISO also influence wiggle room in files with higher ISO speeds?

no.

noise patterns at high ISO, and AA filter as TS mentioned, might even make the 6DII better than some other cameras that you might not initially think would be outperformed by it.

saying DR at base is bad is just not true. It is not what is expected from a modern FF DSLR camera. But is much better than many past options.

get out your popcorn folks:

Canon EOS 6D Mark II w/24-70mm f/4L IS Kits Delayed

By Canon Rumors | July 31, 2017 | Canon DSLR News

The brand new Canon EOS 6D Mark II has begun shipping along with the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II kit. However, it appears the EOS 6D Mark II w/24-70mm f/4L IS has been delayed. The kit was scheduled to begin shipping on August 4, 2017, however it has been pushed back indefinitely.

From Canon: (Google Translated)

Thank you very much for your patronage of Canon products.

Digital SLR camera that we are planning to release on August 4 EOS 6D Mark II · EF 24-70 F4L IS USM Lens Kit We are currently receiving very many orders that exceed the plan and deliver goods It is expected that you will receive your time.

We sincerely apologize for any inconveniences caused by our dealers and orders.

We will improve this situation as soon as possible and we will continue to devote ourselves to relevant departments so that we can deliver the products promptly to our customers, so we appreciate your understanding.

Canon claims demand has exceeded expectations and that is the reason for the delay.

Read more: http://www.canonrumors​.com/#ixzz4oVsHyPbJ

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18416245

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18416242
does the bad DR at base ISO also influence wiggle room in files with higher ISO speeds?

no.

noise patterns at high ISO, and AA filter as TS mentioned, might even make the 6DII better than some other cameras that you might not initially think would be outperformed by it.

Thanks! That's good to know and might actually change things for me.

Yes of course. I meant "bad in comparison to its competitors".

^^^ That basically means that people prefer the 24-70/4 to the 24-105/4 v2.
If you want to buy the 6D2 with 24-105/4 kit, then it is available.

In other words, there's plenty of 6D2 and 24-105/4 v2 lenses available. Wonder why ?

CheshireCat wrote in post #18416259
^^^ That basically means that people prefer the 24-70/4 to the 24-105/4 v2.
If you want to buy the 6D2 with 24-105/4 kit, then it is available.

In other words, there's plenty of 6D2 and 24-105/4 v2 lenses available. Wonder why ?

seems like canon has always shiped body only and 24-105 kits first.

that means they package them first.

that means they package 24-70 kits second.

further, there is no way the 24-70 f/4 is more popular than the24-105II. No way.

i doubt any real conclusion can be drawn from the CR post, but I would definitely say that the 24-70 being preferred is at the bottom of any potential reality.

for all we know they forgot to print the boxes for the 24-70 kit. But it's still fun to speculate that the constraint is with supplies of the camera.

I almost never shoot below 400 ISO with my 6D, but I am certainly not a pro. The better AF, faster frame rate and "flippy" screen would be enough to influence me. It's not a bad camera, just not a 5D IV for $2000.

Ascenta wrote in post #18415297
Dean Cain does a mean camera review!

I love his reviews.

Dlee13 wrote in post #18415935
The thing with that is Jared tends to go on real world results, not test charts (which I personally think is much better). Even as a Nikon user he dismisses DXO results and only focuses on real world performance. I've had my M5 for roughly 6 months now and I would have trusted my 6D at ISO 800 over my M5, although I don't greatly underexpose my images.

In my opinion, there's no better testing method than real world ! Who shoots resolution graphs all day ?! I owned the original 6D and loved it ! All this dynamic range nonsense never bothered me and I always had enough head room to pull up shadows without destroying the image. It's called "exposing properly" See below example where I exposed for the sky, then pulled up shadow and also pulled back on the highlights...THE 6D2 WILL BE A FANTASTIC CAMERA:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/K39p​eq

DR charts are not resolution charts, sigh. DR can be calculated from the raw data, not from your subjective views on how a shadow can be pulled up. Other than slight copy variations, the DR is very measurable. That is the only way. Your pulling up shadows and thinking they are good enough is subjective, much like how high of an ISO you can go before you are uncomfortable.

Also, DR cannot be combated simply by "exposing properly"... One is not the cure for the other.

Patbil10 wrote in post #18416318
In my opinion, there's no better testing method than real world ! Who shoots resolution graphs all day ?! I owned the original 6D and loved it ! All this dynamic range nonsense never bothered me and I always had enough head room to pull up shadows without destroying the image. It's called "exposing properly" See below example where I exposed for the sky, then pulled up shadow and also pulled back on the highlights...THE 6D2 WILL BE A FANTASTIC CAMERA:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/K39p​eq untitled-4700 by Patrick Bilodeau, on Flickr

If what you say is true why don't you just use a 5D classic, save yourself some money.

Patbil10 wrote in post #18416318
.....THE 6D2 WILL BE A FANTASTIC CAMERA:...

I don't think anyone is saying that the 6DII won't be a good camera but compared to it's competition, it will be quite behind the times. As the other poster mentioned, the 5D in it's day was a fantastic camera. As new cameras came out the 5D didn't get worse but peoples expectations changed as other cameras performed better. I see the 6DII the same way. It's a fine camera but just seems old.

Stregone wrote in post #18416352
If what you say is true why don't you just use a 5D classic, save yourself some money.

Better AF, DPAF, higher MP, etc....dynamic range was never a consideration. Like I said, it never was an issue. Can Canon cameras recover from 5 stops of under exposure....no but then again, who the hell does that ?! LOL

Patbil10 wrote in post #18416366
dynamic range was never a consideration. Like I said, it never was an issue.

FOR YOU, does not change the fact that is an an issue FOR MANY

Scoobert wrote in post #18416368
FOR YOU, does not change the fact that is an an issue FOR MANY

Agreed ! I just don't understand why. I know all the landscape photogs are the biggest complainers about DR....the photo I posted above is the closest I ever came to a landscape yet I was able to pull out allot of great details in the shadows with an original 6D....

Perhaps I'm alone but if I still had the 6D awaiting the 6D2, all the negative hype about DR would not bother me...