Jump to content

Why did Canon remove so many EOS R features on the more expensive EOS R6?


Andrew Reid
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thanks, Andrew—

My own experience with canon has been also tainted. I became interested in digital photography in 2017, and opted for the 6D Mark ll— with neophytes knowledge of video. At that time, seemed to be the best all purpose entry level full frame option— at flash Black Friday sale impulse-buy price. At that time, the Sony A7 III hadn’t been released yet— and the A7R II was over my budget. That marked my entry into the Canon universe. After leaning into the video side, I soon realized that someday a budget filmmaker oriented Canon mirrorless— hybrid body— would make the most sense for me. But since 2017, the waiting never ends. The R line is either too expensive, or kneecapped— Canon hasn’t marketed an affordable body, or lens selection that an aspiring artist/filmmaker could grow into a professional environment with. So here I am, with a couple of great Sigma EF prime lenses— plotting my next move. One thing I know for sure is that Canon’s marketing approach has me seriously looking elsewhere, (like the Sigma Lp)— before investing in the troubled R system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

The dilemma is, there are not many full frame 4K cameras with both great AF and great color.

The Sigma Fp is great for the price though and really a company I can support.

Engineering led

Not bullshit led

The Sony A9 used is worth a look, funnily enough I find it has the most mojo of the Sony cameras and the 4K image is incredibly detailed, and great AF. I prefer it to A7 III even though the latter is cheaper and has S-LOG.

Panasonic also worth a look, but AF is still a bit of a handicap.

Looking at G9 improvements though with firmware 2.4 that'll soon be a thing of the past?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The dilemma is, there are not many full frame 4K cameras with both great AF and great color.

The Sigma Fp is great for the price though and really a company I can support.

Engineering led

Not bullshit led

The Sony A9 used is worth a look, funnily enough I find it has the most mojo of the Sony cameras and the 4K image is incredibly detailed, and great AF. I prefer it to A7 III even though the latter is cheaper and has S-LOG.

Panasonic also worth a look, but AF is still a bit of a handicap.

Looking at G9 improvements though with firmware 2.4 that'll soon be a thing of the past?

Price aside, what about Sony A1?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Not tried one. I am sure it is very good but I don't need 8K or have the will to spend $6000 on features I don't use.

I’m in the market for one of these, I would totally prefer canon R5’s ergonomics and lenses, but I need an out of the box reliable camera…

If I’m not mistaken you tried Sony A7sIII, what’s your take on Sony’s IBIS and AF?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

The IBIS isn't as locked off as the R5 or Fuji systems, doesn't act like a tripod, but it looks a bit more natural for handheld shooting. It has more free movement going on.

The AF is superb.

The image seems to lack a bit of mojo for me, the files look thin, S-LOG 3 is as difficult to get the best out of as ever.

It really is a case of pick your poison with these cameras. Do you risk reliability problems with the R5, or go for Sony's more digital look to the files (even in 10bit)?

Personally if you're really good at grading and tweaking the Sony color profiles in-camera, I'd go with the Sony.

It is a real pity Panasonic do not yet have superb AF in video mode as otherwise I could recommend the S1H which has the best image of the lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members
8 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The IBIS isn't as locked off as the R5 or Fuji systems, doesn't act like a tripod, but it looks a bit more natural for handheld shooting. It has more free movement going on.

Did you try the Catalyst Browse post stabilisation on any of the a7Siii footage ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Canon came out with the R6 and R5, I sold my 5DIV and bought... a Fujifim XT-4.

The XT-4 has better specs overall (for what I need), and much more fun to use than any Canon camera.

Any camera is as good as a paperweight, if you aren't excited about having it with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 6/15/2021 at 11:51 AM, Andrew Reid said:

DSCF0171.jpg

What happened to the top LCD?!

So Andrew's article showed up on my feed and the title really confused me. Going backwards? felt the R6 was amazing so clearly we had different opinions. But I figured I would read the full article. Now I understand why Andrew felt the way he did. 

I may be stating the obvious here but reading other people's comments, I didn't see anyone really stating the following. In summary the R6 is really more a still photographer's camera. Not a camera that should be used for video even though it has the option. Kinda like saying I have a Subaru Outback for my daily and once in a while I might go off-road because it's capable, but is nothing like a Landrover.  I am and have always been more of a traditional photographer, not a videographer. From my perspective and use scenarios, the R6 has been nothing but Amazing...Canon still at their finest. When you are taking photos, you won't be switching back an forth from video to photo so the top LCD screen is not necessary. The dial is all you need and actually works better. I for one usually have mine on manual the whole time and once in a while I may need to switch to Av or Tv but M is what I use 99% of the time. When I had my R, same thing. but switching on the R required me looking at the screen and hitting a few buttons while with the R6, I can click the dial and with memory, know what it's on depending on how many clicks. There are many other features Andrew complained about but again, from a photographer's perspective, the R6 is all I need.

My friend who is a Videographer, he and I bought the R at the same time. He went to the R5 afterwards, while I went to the R6. The thing here is I can borrow his camera to do things I need to do but doesn't work the other way around. My friend used to rent the C300MK3 for all his video needs but he was hoping the R5 would do most of what he needed and so far it has. Unfortunately, he recently got his hands on the C70 and nearly wet his pants so he will likely sell his three R5's that he currently has for maybe two C70's once he can get them. maybe still keep one R5 as a backup or when I come by because he needs my expertise.  

So long rant (not so) short, R5 is better anyway for an all-rounder camera but in the end, these camera's are still designed to be a still photo camera first and video camera 2nd. I think if you want the best of both worlds, the Sony seems to have a slight edge but I continue to stick with canon for their amazing lens. One day, i'll probably get into video too but for now, I continue to do only still photos...The new R3 sounds like a beast of a camera that will further fit my needs too.. I don't need it but boy does it sound fun to own. My original R.... that's now turned into a glorified webcam. LOL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

As a long time Panasonic m43 user I actually just upgraded to the Canon R6 and absolutely love it. For me it came down to 100% EF lens support.

The 20 MP completely makes sense t one for the same reason why 12 MP makes sense for the Sony A7S.  It helps sensitivity. The R6 has about a 1 stop advantage over the R5 and even photographers are very happy with the 20 MP stills. The sensitivity gain matters more then the tiny bit of extra detail.  Detail that is debatable how many lenses really take advantage of.

Yes The R6 has some head scratching limitations but I think the amount of hatred is a bit overly dramatic. Its a solid stills and video camera with really good IBIS and really good DPAF. I also have a P4k and while its nice that I'm not limited in what tools and options I have on the P4k the addition of super clean low light, super reelable DPAF and very good IBIS make it a more enjoyable camera to use in many situations.

Every camera out there has flaws. The latest Sony A7S finally has 10bit but its stills suck.  If we are going to complain about 20 MP on the R6 its funny the Sony fans are willing to look the other way for 12 MP stills on the A7S. Most of the other Sony cameras still don't have 10bit.  Talk about outdated thinking.

I didn't realize 4k 60p line skips.  Is that 100% confirmed?   If you look at this review and look at the studio tool the 4k 60p seems to have the same detail as the UHD in the drop down. https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r6-review/8 Are you sure you didn't do something wrong? I rarely use 4k 60p even on the P4k.  I'm not as obsessed with slow motion as others are I guess.  I also don't really have an issue with the rolling shutter on the R6. Maybe its not as good as other options out there but I rarely run into a rolling shutter issue because I don't whip my camera around. 4k 60p APS-C crop eliminates a lot of those concerns.  Yes it sucks to have a crop but my other camera choice was the Panasonic S5 which can only shoot 4k 60p with a APS-C crop. So technically the R6 having a FF 4k 60p mode is a bonus over the S5 even if it is compromised. I really see no decent affordable option out there for FF 4k 60p 10bit that doesn't have some kind of compromise or much higher cost.

I also find it odd to criticize the RF lens options when I think many EF users will happily use their trusted EF lenses on the camera. EF glass works great on the R6 and there are a ton of EF owners out there.

I am not even close to a Canon fan boy. I have used Panasonic since before the GH1. I owned a Canon XL1 many years ago but that was my last Canon camera.  I used to laugh at what passed for quality from their DSLRs. The HD made me want to vomit I hated it that much. The R6 is the first Canon camera I feel finally gets 4k video right.  Now that it has c.log3 its pretty solid and has a bit better DR. Every camera out there has disadvantages so its silly to only trash one camera. The S5 is an amazing camera but the L mount lenses are insanely over priced and Panasonic only focused on the high end market for glass. Nothing can really be adapted to the L mount either with any hope of video AF. Even adapted stills AF is hit or miss. Thats even assuming one finds value in the contrast detect AF of the S5. Much better than it used to be but still not perfect enough to trust it. Plus I'm just not sure of the future of the L mount and Panasonic. Feels like risky investment at this point and I just cannot afford the L mount lenses I really want.

Sony does make nice cameras but the lack of 10bit is a deal breaker for me and I will not compromise on that. No matter what other features Sony does better its not enough to make up for that. I don't want to have to buy a $4,000 camera body just to get a Sony with 10bit. Thats essentially R5 price territory which arguably does a lot of things better than the Sony A7S. Those with hybrid needs that shoot professional stills and video will never consider a A7S so basically 10bit is a dead end with Sony for those users.

I was about 30 seconds away from getting a Panasonic S5 instead. In the end it was the AF and bleak lens options that killed it for me. I just didn't have $8,000 to invest in a new set of f2.8 zooms and a new body. With the R6 I get 100% perfect performance from my $1,000 Tamron 70-200 f2.8 lens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Line skipping wouldn't even be possible on the R6. In order to line sip a camera has to use multiples of pixels in an even amount. 2x or 3x for example.  A 2x crop would be 2736 wide only. Even less when you factor in the 94% crop video uses of the FF sensor. Thats like 2572 wide for 4k video. I realize some cameras like the M6 Mk2 do this as well but there is a massive detail difference between what the M6 Mk2 does and what the R6 is doing in 4k 60p mode. Not even close to the same detail between the two.

I think the article needs to retract that part about the line skipping because its simply not true at all. I have seen plenty of videos online where the details was super sharp shooting 4k 60p. Just went outside and shot 23.98 and 59.94 4k on my R6 and the detail was identical on both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure your camera was not a dud?  I'm getting absolutely insane levels of detail out of the camera. Like too sharp compared to the 1:1 sensor on my GH4 and P4k cameras.  Much more detailed than my M6 Mk2 and not even close. The R6 I have is razor sharp.

I did notice in FCPX that when pausing the video the decoding will display the video softer until I add something like a filter that impact all the pixels.  Then it suddenly snaps into full detail.  During playback its that sharp as well.  I think there may be something interesting going on with my M1 MBA and its hardware decoding of Canon 10bit material. Are you sure you are not seeing some weird issue caused by Premiere trying to handle the material.

Not sure I would fault a camera for a NLE not doing well t handle the material.  The 10bit h265 files are insanely fast performing on my M1 MBA.  Super fast and snappy.  Plays back great and renders super fast. I couldn't ask for a better combination really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been shooting a lot with the R6 this summer including a run&gun event last week. The IQ I'm getting from the CLog3 10-bit 4:2:2 files is quite possibly the best 4K IQ I've gotten on any camera. The image is so clean, so detailed, with those great Canon skin tones.  To avoid the poor RS I often shoot in 4K60p crop mode. I don't notice any line skipping either, really sharp detailed IQ on my 5K iMac Pro monitor.

I must agree that for the price, the R6 outclasses all the competition in terms of IQ.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One other thing I would like to add.  Coming from Panasonic cameras I did find it odd that the M6 mk2 and R6 did not have a shutter or aperture priority mode for video. With that said in my years using a GH1, GH2, GH3 and GH4 I have never used those modes and almost 100% of the time used fully manual. I have at times considered using the other modes but in the end just did not.

So I'm not entirely sure how many are actually negatively impacted by this. When it comes to video under no circumstances should the shutter speed be allowed to adjust on its own like some crappy smartphone camera. Nothing screams amateur more than video with different shutter speeds depending on the lighting.

Aperture adjusting has a lot more practical use but given how much optically a lens can change based on aperture alone it really is not the best option.  Since the ISO is so clean on the R6 using ISO to automatically adjust smoothly is likely the best option if one absolutely cannot manage to adjust exposure manually. I'm frankly surprised any professional would have an issue with this and cannot recall the last person that actually used an automatically adjusting aperture besides a soccer mom. Those soccer moms do still have the full auto mode which they are more likely to use anyway since they don't care about shutter speed or ISO either. Plus if one absolutely wanted to in full auto mode they could set the shutter range to 60 for both the low and high. That could lock in the shutter to not change at all which would effectively give the same effect of only auto adjusting the aperture.

I guess I'm just not entirely sure why this is considered such a negative and worthy of a rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Django said:

I've been shooting a lot with the R6 this summer including a run&gun event last week. The IQ I'm getting from the CLog3 10-bit 4:2:2 files is quite possibly the best 4K IQ I've gotten on any camera. The image is so clean, so detailed, with those great Canon skin tones.  To avoid the poor RS I often shoot in 4K60p crop mode. I don't notice any line skipping either, really sharp detailed IQ on my 5K iMac Pro monitor.

I must agree that for the price, the R6 outclasses all the competition in terms of IQ.

 

Have you found the DR on the R6 to be ok? One of the things mentioned in a couple of reviews was that it was quite limited compared to the competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheBoogieKnight said:

Have you found the DR on the R6 to be ok? One of the things mentioned in a couple of reviews was that it was quite limited compared to the competition.

SOOC DR isn't great however what tests have shown is that the latitude when underexposing is really good especially considering the pleasing nature of the fine grain noise. Hence I've been able to recover loads of info in Davinci and actually have very nice DR in some otherwise complex scenes. Clog3 makes this even better imo. I'm basically very happy with the DR on R6, you just need to adapt how you shoot and recover in post if necessary.

3 hours ago, ntblowz said:

I wonder how much will the Tilta Fan help with R6 overheating?

Interesting, I hadn't noticed the Titla fan finally came out (I thought it was vapourware but I'm guessing the pandemic delayed its release). I will wait on some real-world reviews but will definitely be purchasing it if it is proven effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, TheBoogieKnight said:

Have you found the DR on the R6 to be ok? One of the things mentioned in a couple of reviews was that it was quite limited compared to the competition.

The topic of DR is kind of interesting.  A lot of cameras live around the 12 stop range.  m43 cameras like the GH5, GH5S and the Pocket 4k are all around 12-13 stops.

On the Pocket 4k due to how the ISO works by shifting the stops over and under many do not shoot at ISO 1000 which has the most stops over middle gray due to the amount of visible noise. so they get 13 stops but most of that is in the shadows.

Recording format can limit the DR as well and 8bit video just cannot capture the same DR as raw can which is why Sony has always been a tad misleading about DR. First of all you don't get 14+ stops of DR out of a Sony camera by shooting rec709 video profiles.  You have to use log to get extra DR and even then you have to use the flatter log profiles which do not work as well with 8bit video recording. So while the raw stills may have higher DR on Sony cameras the video has likely never had a ton of extra DR. You really have to shoot Slog3 to get even close to the sensors capable DR amount and that doesn't always look the best in 8bit. It has the most risk of falling apart and the most risk of excessive noise which users will hate more than clipped clouds in the sky. We as humans are used to seeing lights and clouds clipped in video.  We are used t seeing a window blown out. We are used to thinking of noise and heavy noise reduction as cheap quality.

Just looking at how much is protected in the highs does not give us the full picture of how much log has gained on each camera. Some cameras like the Pocket 4k still have 13 stops of DR but use very little of that in the highs if shot at ISO 100 or ISO 1250 using the Dual Native ISO. It all really comes down to acceptable noise in the shadows. So far I like what I see with the R6 in the highs and shadows with C.log3.  Its no Alexa but then again neither is BMD or Sony. No camera really is which is why people love the Alexa so much. DR is a flawed form of measurement and nobody has ever tried to pretend a Sony DSLR DR is the same as what Alexa measures.

Could the R6 be better?  I'm sure it could. I think every DSLR could be better.  No camera right now matches what Alexa can do with DR. I think what the R6 does have is a good amount for professionals to make use of. We need to stop thinking of 12 stops as 6 stops likes its in some way inferior or unusable. We get way too hung up of a single stop of DR difference when its really kind of splitting hairs.  Especially from those viewing the final product. I would like 13 or 14 of course but not enough to think the camera isn't worth it.

I also know many Pocket 4k users consider their measly 13 stops cameras to look much better than cameras claiming 14+ stops. Proving that DR is a flawed spec more used as a marketing term than anything of real value.  Kind of like what the lux rating used to be on video cameras. Its a nice to have but not a must have. Thats my opinion of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...