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

ct1co2 wrote in post #19133188
Out of curiosity, what cable are you waiting on? Am I correct seeing that a USB-C to USB-C cable for a Mac will be sufficient for effective transfer of images? I'm also curious what others are doing for file transfers. Using a cable or just a reader?

The cable came and works. I have now downloaded all the raw files to my Mac. It wasn't super fast but fast enough.

The cable I have is a USB-C to USB-A cable, type 3.1, gen. 2 (which transfers data up to 10Gb/s).
And of course male to male.
I paid € 16,99.

EDIT: I used Mac's uploader this time but I have just downloaded the latest EOS Utility and will try that next time. Maybe that will be faster.
DPP can read the raw files but it's the only one. The Finder, Lightroom, Bridge, nope. So I converted the files to DNG's.

EDIT2: This cable has been confirmed to work: https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …es&sts=ma&Top+N​av-Search=

I don't remember the last time I connected a camera to a computer for file transfer. For years, Apple and others had built-in SD card readers. The touch bars have forsaken them because they're “cumbersome” So I bought this USB-C reader. So far so good.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19133194
The cable came and works. I have now downloaded all the raw files to my Mac. It wasn't super fast but fast enough.

The cable I have is a USB-C to USB-A cable, type 3.1, gen. 2 (which transfers data up to 10Gb/s).
And of course male to male.
I paid € 16,99.

EDIT: I used Mac's uploader this time but I have just downloaded the latest EOS Utility and will try that next time. Maybe that will be faster.
DPP can read the raw files but it's the only one. The Finder, Lightroom, Bridge, nope. So I converted the files to DNG's.

EDIT2: This cable has been confirmed to work: https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …es&sts=ma&Top+N​av-Search=

Lightroom Classic 9.4 does read the raw files.

gossamer88 wrote in post #19133203
I don't remember the last time I connected a camera to a computer for file transfer. For years, Apple and others had built-in SD card readers. The touch bars have forsaken them because they're “cumbersome” So I bought this USB-C reader. So far so good.

I'm running on a 2018 MacBook Pro, so yup, no SD reader, just the 4 thunderbolt ports. I do have the adapter for USB-A which I have been using for file transfer from my 7D2 and M50, and another 1 to connect my backup drive. The cable for the M50 is blazing fast transferring CRAW's whereas the one for the 7D2 is sloooow.

I pulled the trigger on an R6 today that should be here next week, so trying to sort through if a reader or cable will be best so I appreciate all the input from everyone.

LJ3Jim wrote in post #19133205
Lightroom Classic 9.4 does read the raw files.

Unfortunately I still use Lightroom 5.7.

Okay, it's official: I am in love with both the R6 and the 800/11 lens. That lens is really amazing. And very sharp too! But then, my old lenses are twice as sharp on the R6 it seems! Amazing.

The R6 files are very nice to work with. I was out today and light was not good. It didn't rain but it was dark and damp. And I just take this camera where it needs to go to get the exposure right. I can honestly say that I have never shot at ISO 4000. Today I did just that. And the files are so nice! Yes, there's some noise, but it cleans up really nice and easy.

If the R6 and the 800/11 can perform like this, in difficult light, then I can't wait to see what the combo can do in good conditions!

Having an 800mm lens is making a huge difference! I bought it for two specific locations: the countryside where I stroll the fields. And for a lake nearby where a large group of Cormorants reside (as well as other water fowl. Herons too and of course the inevitable gulls). They all sit on poles (and fight over them) in an abandoned and closed-off small harbour and I can't get close to them. My 300/4L and 400/5.6L just aren't long enough for anything good. I can use extenders but that won't do either. Well, the 800/11 proved its usefullness here. My goodness, how did I ever live without it! I never owned or used one of the big whites and I'm sure they're better, maybe even much better, but I am very happy with this lens.

Just a few snaps from the lake. And as you can see, if there is enough distance between your subject and the background the f/11 becomes meaningless.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

On my way home I met this kitten. S/he was really beautiful. I used my 300/4L. Razor sharp!

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

You have great perseverance and are being rewarded for keeping at it. Nice pictures!

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19133227
Okay, it's official: I am in love with both the R6 and the 800/11 lens. That lens is really amazing. And very sharp too! But then, my old lenses are twice as sharp on the R6 it seems! Amazing.

The R6 files are very nice to work with. I was out today and light was not good. It didn't rain but it was dark and damp. And I just take this camera where it needs to go to get the exposure right. I can honestly say that I have never shot at ISO 4000. Today I did just that. And the files are so nice! Yes, there's some noise, but it cleans up really nice and easy.

If the R6 and the 800/11 can perform like this, in difficult light, then I can't wait to see what the combo can do in good conditions!

Having an 800mm lens is making a huge difference! I bought it for two specific locations: the countryside where I stroll the fields. And for a lake nearby where a large group of Cormorants reside (as well as other water fowl. Herons too and of course the inevitable gulls). They all sit on poles (and fight over them) in an abandoned and closed-off small harbour and I can't get close to them. My 300/4L and 400/5.6L just aren't long enough for anything good. I can use extenders but that won't do either. Well, the 800/11 proved its usefullness here. My goodness, how did I ever live without it! I never owned or used one of the big whites and I'm sure they're better, maybe even much better, but I am very happy with this lens.

Just a few snaps from the lake.

Hosted photo: posted by Levina de Ruijter in
./showthread.php?p=191​33227&i=i96394474
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

You thought there wouldn't be any gulls, did ya?

Hosted photo: posted by Levina de Ruijter in
./showthread.php?p=191​33227&i=i252996293
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Dang these look great

1500 cheaper is a real incentive. Im guessing that the crop you showed me would make a nice 16s24 print

My thinking cap is officially on

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19133229
On my way home I met this kitten. S/he was really beautiful. I used my 300/4L. Razor sharp!

Hosted photo: posted by Levina de Ruijter in
./showthread.php?p=191​33229&i=i209274596
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

By the way, I am still struggling with BIF, but am improving. Taken with the 800/11 and so sharp that I didn't apply sharpening in post. I just cropped it some, used a bit of noise reduction on the background and the underside of the bird and resized.

Hosted photo: posted by Levina de Ruijter in
./showthread.php?p=191​33229&i=i74801781
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

4000 ISO looks pretty darn good. Looks very clean. Im assuming you were in pretty low light for this to jump to 4000 ISO

Love your results

I was a bit worried about F/11

Now im not after seeing this....6400 is very usable on the 1Dx2....The R6 looks excellent

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19133232
You have great perseverance and are being rewarded for keeping at it. Nice pictures!

Thanks, Cary. And yes, there's no stopping me now.

Seriously though, I haven't enjoyed photographing birds this much in a long time. The fun went sort of out of it. Well, it's back. I am truly blown away with the camera, the 800/11 and the state of the files. New files though and they require different processing than the ones I'm used to with the 1D4. The R6 files are very nice and need extremely little in post. Even at ISO 4000 they need very little noise reduction. It's all too easy to go too far with that, I have to be careful with that.

I wish it were Spring. It's going to be a long winter!

Come on Levina let’s see some 6400 and 12800 ISO.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19133229
On my way home I met this kitten. S/he was really beautiful. I used my 300/4L. Razor sharp!

Hosted photo: posted by Levina de Ruijter in
./showthread.php?p=191​33229&i=i209274596
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

By the way, I am still struggling with BIF, but am improving. Taken with the 800/11 and so sharp that I didn't apply sharpening in post. I just cropped it some, used a bit of noise reduction on the background and the underside of the bird and resized.

Hosted photo: posted by Levina de Ruijter in
./showthread.php?p=191​33229&i=i74801781
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

You might want to experiment shooting in TV mode with the F/11 lens. I notice the gull is at 1250 for the shutter. You might be able to be at 1/640-800 and that would result in lower ISO at capture. I love the 300/F/4 image with the cat. That tells me the 500F/4's are going to do very well.

try auto ISO, TV mode and control that shutter yourself- the camera should drop that ISO with a Fixed F/111 lens- FYI

Man I love what you have shown

umphotography wrote in post #19133252
Dang these look great

1500 cheaper is a real incentive. Im guessing that the crop you showed me would make a nice 16s24 print

My thinking cap is officially on

Thanks, Mike.

I've seen your thread about the R5 vs the R6. It's a hard choice. I'm very happy with the R6. Of course I never had a camera with a high res sensor. The 1D4 is just 16mpx. So going to 20mpx for me feels like progress (yes, John, I know, the 1D4 has a 1.3 crop whereas the R6 is full frame! ).

umphotography wrote in post #19133253
4000 ISO looks pretty darn good. Looks very clean. Im assuming you were in pretty low light for this to jump to 4000 ISO

Love your results

I was a bit worried about F/11

Now im not after seeing this....6400 is very usable on the 1Dx2....The R6 looks excellent

I find that f/11 is very doable. And as I said, it's sharp!

Light was low, yes. I didn't want too slow a shutterspeed as I was waiting for BIF or some other bird action and with f/11 it was the ISO that had to adapt. I did of course use noise reduction, but very little indeed. This is the exact reason why I wanted to upgrade. My 1D4 had too much noise at ISO 1600 already. Not in good light, but then again, good light is not where you need the high ISO speeds to begin with.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19133263
Thanks, Mike.

I've seen your thread about the R5 vs the R6. It's a hard choice. I'm very happy with the R6. Of course I never had a camera with a high res sensor. The 1D4 is just 16mpx. So going to 20mpx for me feels like progress (yes, John, I know, the 1D4 has a 1.3 crop whereas the R6 is full frame! ).

I find that f/11 is very doable. And as I said, it's sharp!

Light was low, yes. I didn't want too slow a shutterspeed as I was waiting for BIF or some other bird action and with f/11 it was the ISO that had to adapt. I did of course use noise reduction, but very little indeed. This is the exact reason why I wanted to upgrade. My 1D4 had too much noise at ISO 1600 already. Not in good light, but then again, good light is not where you need the high ISO speeds to begin with.

I have been shooting all my BIF's and wildlife in TV for the last 5 yrs. I can roll the shutter controls very quickly. I find that with good panning I can be at 1/640-1/800 for 80-90% of the shots. It rare for me to need to be at 1/1250.....1/1000 will freeze almost all motion for birds