6D Mark II very informal DR Test

I tried to do some very informal DR tests with my new 6D II. The first photo was done at ISO 100 and intentionally underexposed 3 stops. I was also testing the IS capability of my new lens so it was shot at a shutter speed of 1/15. (Which should only affect sharpness, not DR) I also processed the photo in LightRoom and DPP.

The 2nd set of photos was shot at ISO 12800 to see what high ISO output is like. It looks like I actually underexposed them by 1/2 a stop or so, but I wanted to see what the noise level at this ISO was without pushing. I didn't see any of the magenta cast like I had read about.
Overall, I am pleased with the results. Is it as good as my 1DXII (or a 5DIV)? Of course not. But I do believe it is every bit as good as my 5DIII I used to own. I have also read elsewhere that when processed with DPP that there is less shadow noise when increasing exposure, than with LightRoom. From my initial tests I have to agree with that.


ISO 100 pushed 3 stops in Lightroom

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/22ji​q89

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Js7N​Zr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Js7A​XF

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/22ji​H4J

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Js7s​8B

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/23oU​isk

Yes, the 6D2 DR is very nearly identical to the 5D3 as is about any other statistical analysis of the 6D2 for ISO, noise handling, etc.

http://www.photonstoph​otos.net …rk%20III,Canon%​20EOS%206D

This is why many of the review sites and various others raised an uproar when Canon released a new camera 5 years later, seemingly using some variant of the 5D3 sensor and not the new sensor tech in the Rebels and other bodies.

tim1970 wrote in post #18539021
I tried to do some very informal DR tests with my new 6D II. .....
Overall, I am pleased with the results. Is it as good as my 1DXII (or a 5DIV)? Of course not. But I do believe it is every bit as good as my 5DIII I used to own. .....

Not really a glowing conclusion comparing it to a 6 year old camera.

gjl711 wrote in post #18539074
Not really a glowing conclusion comparing it to a 6 year old camera.

True, but with the other improvements made over the camera it replaced (6D), I believe it is a very capable camera. While it was overpriced at launch, and is still overpriced in my opinion, it is a great value for $1200, which is what I paid for it through the Canon refurbished program.

You can say that I am biased in my opinion since I own a 6DII (I probably am), but I was well aware of the lack of DR improvement over the 6D when I bought it. I was also aware of the improvements (focus points,DPAF,Touch screen,tilt screen,fps) and for my uses the improvements far outweigh the non-improvements. If the 6DII would have had the same sensor as the 5DIV, or a sensor with similar DR, along with all of the other improvements it already has, then I believe Canon would have definitely cannibalized their sales of the 5DIV. As it stands now, the 6DII does have a good sensor (even if outdated) and along with many other improvements that makes it a great entry body for full frame (Or in my case a backup)

Getting back to my test above, I am really surprised at how much better DPP did processing the file over Lightroom.

I went from the 5Dc when it was new to a 5D3. I found the 5D3 was a great improvement in which I didn't have to ETTR for practically all my exposures. For some scenes, I do see that the exposure range isn't covering much of the range, and I might expose to the right to get more tonal range within the "cleaner" tonal ranges. For full ranges, I'm not hesitant to HDR bracket. The 6D/6DII are similar to what I'm used to. From what I'm seeing about the 5D4, it's only adding more leeway. During post, if you push shadows, there's not noise for most scenes with base ISOs. There's still scenes which have larger exposure ranges then what a single exposure can reveal: and they require exposure brackets. I'm used to the exposure range of my 5D3...but I know I'd like the extra leeway of the 5D4. At this point, it's not necessary, but a better specification.

Congrats, Tim, for understanding the box that Canon had to work within, so as not to cannibalize sales of 5DIV units. You appreciate the many new capabilities of the camera, although it is not a huge jump over the 6D in IQ. Yes, the camera has 'improved', just not in the ways that many wanted (meanwhile ignoring the Canon need to alter the cannibalization that the 6D had been exerting upon the 5DIII).

tim1970 wrote in post #18539091
If the 6DII would have had the same sensor as the 5DIV, or a sensor with similar DR, along with all of the other improvements it already has, then I believe Canon would have definitely cannibalized their sales of the 5DIV.

I wonder if, instead of worrying about losing sales to a different line of Canon camera, maybe Canon should be worried about losing sales to Nikon and Sony, and maybe should be offering more at a lower price to compete with other camera manufacturers.

I am wondering what increase in DR (if any) might be had using the new DXO Photo Lab to open RAW images and to post process the images.

I have been using a 5Dii and the 6Dii is a definite improvement overall.

I have fallen in love with the flip/touch screen which is something that I never expected to really like...