Canon R6 Mark II...

[hjoseph7]

Is there any reason not to get the Canon R6 mark II ? It seems that Canon has refined and improved almost everything on the previous R6 mark I. The specs on this camera blows everything Canon ever built out of the water and it's only an enthusiast camera ! For a little under $2000 and 760 shots per battery charge is there any reason not to upgrade from a wimpy DSLR ? 

[Ken Katz]

It actually costs $2,499 at B&H today and I think you will need a lens or 2 or 3.  Canon in it’s infinite wisdom has locked out third party AF lenses (Sigma and Tamron) from the R mount so it’s those bargain Canon RF “L” lenses to the rescue. 
 

it seems like a really nice camera system but it’s not cheap and there is lot’s of competition

[Robin Smith]

Too expensive, results will be similar to a 6DII. Will you need fancy AF? Have to use an adapter to shoot your EF lenses. I agree with Ken. Canon are getting $$$. I am sure it is a good camera (is there a bad one?)

[steve_dunn2]

I suspect the target market for this is not so much people looking to upgrade from a 6D but people looking to upgrade from something older and/or lower in the product line.  For instance, I'm a hobbyist shooting with a 7D, and if a new body was in the cards for me (which it isn't at this time), I think Canon has pretty much nailed it with the 6D II.  Not that the 6D wasn't good, but I think they're closer to the bullseye with their second shot.  If I already had a 6D, then I definitely wouldn't be upgrading; there's nowhere near enough there to make it worth the cost.

It's on my Christmas gift list, alongside other things nobody will ever give me like a new car, but hey, a boy can dream, right?  And if 2023 is a good year for me financially, then I'm probably trading up to a 6D II late next year (and two of my lenses are full-frame so they'll work just fine).

[paddler4]

Quote

results will be similar to a 6DII. Will you need fancy AF?

The AF is in my mind the biggest issue, since I don't shoot video. If you do work that involves tracking, the R6 II will be orders of magnitude better than the 6D II. If you are shooting landscape or real estate, that fabulous AF will do you no good whatever. 

I shoot with a 5D IV, and AF is the primary reason I might consider the R6 II. I shoot a lot of candids of kids, and I think the R6 would at least double my keeper rate. for the other stuff I do, it wouldn't matter, and I'd even lose a little resolution (24 vs 30 MP).

For me, the lack of 3rd party lenses is a big negative. I have excellent EF lenses that I can use with an adapter, but for anything new, I'd be stuck buying RF lenses, which are for the most part very pricey. I'm hoping that this is a temporary policy on Canon's part.

[Robin Smith]

My assumption is that Canon will fill in the range of RF lenses with lower priced non-L lenses, as they have started to do. The issue I see is that they are so behind the Sony E Mount, it will take them many years to do so, and, of course they have to license the mount to third party makers. Canon have been canny in the past in order to come out on top, but whether this policy will work out in the long run this time will be interesting to see. It was interesting that Sony licensed their mount early on, which I always found strange given that they had bought Minolta/Kyocera, so had plenty of optical know-how, but I assume it is working out for them.

Edited November 19, 2022 by Robin Smith

[ilkka_nissila]

On 11/20/2022 at 12:03 AM, Robin Smith said:

It was interesting that Sony licensed their mount early on, which I always found strange given that they had bought Minolta/Kyocera, so had plenty of optical know-how, but I assume it is working out for them.

Sony is above all an electronics company and they probably find they make the most money from selling camera bodies, with lenses important but not quite so critical. Nikon and Canon are optical companies above anything else and they want to sell their own lenses rather than cameras to mount third-party lenses on. That said, Nikon seem to be more permissive about third-party products than Canon in that they haven't banned Viltrox from making autofocus lenses for Z system, and Tamron and Nikon collaborate by making (mostly) Tamron-designed (AF) lenses available for Z mount under both Nikon and Tamron brand names, with Nikon providing some specs.

Edited November 22, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

[dmanthree]

On 11/8/2022 at 7:52 PM, hjoseph7 said:

Is there any reason not to get the Canon R6 mark II ? It seems that Canon has refined and improved almost everything on the previous R6 mark I. The specs on this camera blows everything Canon ever built out of the water and it's only an enthusiast camera ! For a little under $2000 and 760 shots per battery charge is there any reason not to upgrade from a wimpy DSLR ? 

Cost is always relative, so it's up to you. From a technical standpoint, it's a yes over a DSLR. EF lenses will work really well, bur RF lenses will work better; faster AF, closing the aperture on shutdown for starters. So if you can swing it, go for it. You absolutely will not regret it.

[Mark Keefer]

On 11/8/2022 at 4:52 PM, hjoseph7 said:

Is there any reason not to get the Canon R6 mark II ? It seems that Canon has refined and improved almost everything on the previous R6 mark I. The specs on this camera blows everything Canon ever built out of the water and it's only an enthusiast camera ! For a little under $2000 and 760 shots per battery charge is there any reason not to upgrade from a wimpy DSLR ? 

If you got the money and a really nice prosumer camera is what you want, go for it. Canon makes a nice camera. Look at other options and decide if this is the camera for you or can you find more bang for your buck on something else. Would a 5D MK IV or a Sony A7R3 give you more pro features for the money. In the end, they all take nice photos. It is just a choice. Personally I like more resolution. I like making adjustments with buttons on the camera and not in a menu. I like a PC port to trigger external flash or strobes. But you many no care about this stuff. The R6 is an awesome camera.  I shot a wedding with a 6D and a 7D, and got gorgeous shots... I am sure the R6 MK 2 will do you well. 

Edited November 26, 2022 by Mark Keefer

[mikemorrellNL]

+1 for the responses for far.

For me, the decision whether to upgrade from my 2nd hand Canon 6D depends mainly on:

- the types of amateur photography I mainly do (and where and how I publish photos)

- the degree to which the 6D limits my abilities

- the degree to which any upgrade within my budget would give me more or better opportunities

At some stage, I'll probably upgrade to a used 5D mk IV. But TBH for the types of photography I do (and web publishing), the 6D (2013) still does it's job.

 

 

- the degree to which camera system X limits your abilit  do that

- the degree to which camera system Y would more camera system X(or better) opportunities to do that

[hjoseph7]

5 hours ago, mikemorrellNL said:

+1 for the responses for far.

For me, the decision whether to upgrade from my 2nd hand Canon 6D depends mainly on:

- the types of amateur photography I mainly do (and where and how I publish photos)

- the degree to which the 6D limits my abilities

- the degree to which any upgrade within my budget would give me more or better opportunities

At some stage, I'll probably upgrade to a used 5D mk IV. But TBH for the types of photography I do (and web publishing), the 6D (2013) still does it's job.

 

 

- the degree to which camera system X limits your abilit  do that

- the degree to which camera system Y would more camera system X(or better) opportunities to do that

I understand where you are comming from. For someone just starting out in photography these new cameras with all their gadgets might seem like a sweet-deal, but for somebody already invested in the older systems, it can get quite expensive. Unless you have deep pockets, you gotta wonder if its really worth it ? Is my photography going to improve at all with these new cameras?  The answer is probably "YES" and "NO"  !! You may get more 'keepers' with these new cameras, but the old cameras were pretty good themselves if you took the time to learn how to use them. 

The Canon 6D is a great camera in most circumstances, but the Dynamic Range is its achilles-heel(IMHO).  I should know I own one !! The 5D Mark IV is much better in that regard, but its a BIG heavy camera(compared to the 6D) and way more expensive.  Also, the Canon 6D is not quite up there when it comes to the reliability you get from a Professional cameras. They is a reason why they are cheaper. 

As the technology improves year by year, model by model you gotta ask yourself if you are not falling hopelessly behind ?  Some of these new cameras are more like portable computers than cameras. They do everything but tie your shoe-laces on your way to work in the morning.  Is that really neccessary just to take a good picture ?

 

Edited November 26, 2022 by hjoseph7