The Canon R6 Thread

[photoflyer]

I have always benefited from others sharing their experiences with different gear. So I am creating a thread for the Canon R6. My hope is that those of you who get one will share your experiences and images so that those making a decision, perhaps years from now will benefit from your insights.

Mine arrived yesterday. It was killing me not to use it right away but I was committed to flying with a friend that evening. So today I really got a chance to take it for a spin.

First. I was not expecting to get one. And, I did not get it because it is mirrorless. I got it because the AF in it is dual pixel AF all the time and can focus a lens down to f 16. I have several L lenses that when the 2X teleconverter is on them go as small as f 11. I wanted to get more out of my glass and this camera is supposed to do that.

Based on today I think it does.

These images where shot with the EF 100-400 f 4.5-5.6 Mark II L and the 2X teleconverter at max zoom making it 800mm @ f 11 on the full frame R6. Also, I set the AF to tracking so once it locked on a subject it attempts to stick with it. ISO was set to Auto with minimum speed of 1/1000. At least one of the Osprey shots is at ISO 10000 and another at 20000. I was in a pontoon boat hand holding the camera. It was fairly calm during the shots of the Osprey but windy and choppy when I shot the Jet Ski and the boat. These were shot JPEG and HEIF converted to JPEG, not raw.

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

 

[Derrel]

I am seeing your photos on my phone but I did zoom in to the first two osprey shots and they look pretty darn good for such a high ISO level. It is amazing the image quality that the newest digital cameras are giving us.

I would say that this camera has extremely high image quality potential if that is what ISO 10000 looks like!

 

[Space Face]

Wow, looking great. For the very high iso, that is bloody impressive indeed.

 

[photoflyer]

I am seeing your photos on my phone but I did zoom in to the first two osprey shots and they look pretty darn good for such a high ISO level. It is amazing the image quality that the newest digital cameras are giving us.

These are cropped a bit and I'm sure if they were shot in raw I could have done a better job in post with any noise. So I think the camera did its job. And, if a viewer sees the noise, I failed in composing the subject. Of course this crowd, rightly so, wants to see the details.

 

[Derrel]

I was impressed by ISO 10,000... It is pretty clear that at ISO 20,000 there is more noise.I can remember when that level of noise was what we got at ISO 1600.

 

[zombiesniper]

Looks like this will serve you well.

Like Derrel I'm also quite impressed with an ISO 10000 image that looks that clean.
I look forward to seeing more from this body.

 

[photoflyer]

I look forward to seeing more from this body.

Let me know if there is something specific (low light, IBIS on non IS lens etc.) and I will see if I can take it and share it. Hopefully as others get theirs they will see this and share thoughts.

 

[photoflyer]

Just a throw away shot on the walk home, but I wanted to try night, medium ISO, IBIS on a non IS lens and dynamic range in a dark setting. ISO 6400, 85mm f 1.8 (no IS) 1/40th at f1.8. The darker is about what it really looked like (maybe even a bit darker). These were only very slightly cropped, otherwise JPG right from the camera.

 

[photoflyer]

Ok last images from me and then maybe someone else will share.

I will say the 20 megapixel sensor is fantastic. I can see why it is in the 1 DX Mark III.

This one is from the EF 100-400 f 4.5-5.6 L MII. Extreme crop.

These were from a walk downtown tonight using the EF 70-200 2.8 Mark II.

ISO 12800

ISO 1600 1/40th

 

[Winona]

Very impressive! I LOVE my Canon 100-400, but low light conditions are my downfall. I use it with a Canon 80D. I don’t like the outcome with higher ISO. I can’t think of what ISO starts to look bad- definitely 8000-12000. I would like to see some low light shots when you have time.

I need to look at this camera. I hike with my Fuji XT1 (mirror less) that my brother handed down to me because it is lightweight and doesn’t cause neck pain. But I only have a kit lens. The 80D is pretty heavy.

 

[Winona]

I should have said low light wildlife! Those last few pictures are low light and very good.

 

[photoflyer]

I should have said low light wildlife! Those last few pictures are low light and very good.

I took this last night. Even though it was dark and overcast as the sun was about to set and this was shot on at f 11 @ 25600 ISO it is still OK, not great but to me stunning if you could to see the conditions under which it was shot. Also, it was hand held at 800mm and 1/800th second from a boat.

 

[Winona]

Agree-not great, but good enough to record a moment in time. Really good for that high of ISO.

 

[Ulearndeals]

Very good information relate canon r6 read more infomation Ulearndeals

 

[Winona]

I am glad I remembered this thread. Photo flyer-I thought you had the R5, but now I see it was the R6. I feel limited with my 80D and planning a National park trip this June. I really want a nice camera set up this trip. The R7 is taking forever and we don’t even know what it will be yet, although maybe an announcement to come soon.

Anyway-I guess the biggest concern Is reach for wildlife and megapixels. I have never used FF and never feel I have enough reach as is. I see above you had some cropped photos that look good. Anyone have found this to be a problem? I do pet photography, wildlife, landscape. Hobby, but like pro results ( that’s eventually my goal-before I die I want to be really good at something LOL).

I have a canon 100-400 II with 1.4 extender. I can not get good shots from the 80D with the extender on. I was thinking about the f11 800mm, but see photoflyer gets good shots adding an extender to the 100-400. That’s something to think about.

I guess I’m rambling. Trying to decide whether to go for it or not but have heard very few complaints about R6. I am thinking R6, use my 100-400 w/ 1.4, maybe get f11 800-understand the downfalls. Buy a 70-200 f4 and adapter ( the older one cuz can’t afford new RF on top of everything else).

Anyone want to talk me out of it?