Canon 6D Mark II lacks 4K video - What were they thinking?!

[anonim]

34 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Don't make me laugh! They'd rather it didn't exist.

Of course, that indeed was intention, to make laugh - imperial giant is counting of near underground/dirty guerilla movement to make more followers and profits... but wait, isn't it sounding somehow familiar in wider arena (So, maybe sooner or later topic here will be - "It isn't a joke, 6D MK2 4kRaw")

[Mattias Burling]

49 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

All I am asking for is an editable 4K codec on their 2017 DSLRs costing $2000+!

It might just be me but it sounds like alot to ask for imo.

Its like asking Apple to include a tripod with the iPhone or that the C200 should include an external flash just because it can capture jpeg frames.

Its a DSLR not a video camera.

And Im not a video camera shooter per say. My XT2 is my only personal video camera and Im greatfull for its 4K. But I would have liked it at HD. And I would consider without any video at all.

(Im debating switching it for an Xpro-2. Or sell it all together and just use my SD Quattro which has no video at all and get a video camera for video.)

 

[mercer]

3 hours ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

Panasonic get's praised because they offer different codecs for different shooters. Why is that so hard to understand? 

C'mon Fredrik, I am pretty sure I have read numerous times that the video quality will be much better, with the GH5, when the 400mbps firmware update is released. And the excitement for it is palpable. But those same people knock Canon for using too high of a bitrate? Why is this so hard to understand? It has been repeated dozens and dozens of times since the 5D4 has been released and then Panasonic was praised for offering the 400mbps codec by the same people.

[SullyCortez]

Andrew I could not freaking agree more! This is a ridiculous situation. Coming from film, then super early video (Betamax, HI8, MiniDV) and then the 5dMKII it literally seems like canon hasn't moved since 2009.  The 6D MK II was really there last chance in my opinion to make one hell of a camera for the full frame entry level market.... and what do they do? Pull the same stupid shit they've done the last 7 years... this is why I left Canon a long time ago and am happy straddling the sony/panasonic playing field. what Canon doesn't understand is nobody wants to buy 4 c200's when you can buy 1 c200 and like 3 5dmkV's or 4 6dmkIIs that have 4K 60p, 10bit 422 and get amazing quality while having multiple cameras that dont break the bank.. but of course no, Canon once again cripple their users and I just cant stand it. Ive said goodbye to my canon bodies and haven't look back. If color science and 'dual pixel af' are the ONLY things canon is offering that is worthwhile.... then no thanks I'll be happy right where i'm at with Sony and Panasonic and now the upcoming EVA1

[Jorge M]

Real World. More and more people are doing more with their cameras. Some of us want to size down. What's in my bag. Drone, 5d3, g7x II, lenses...(dedicated video camera?) Travelling with so much is cumbersome. I'm not getting a whole other body just for video.  I only shoot canon and don't plan on switching because I like the lenses I have and have taken years to build up my collection. But I've thought about leaving for awhile now due to the lack of innovation and poor, poor DR in their sensors and crap video frame rates. My canon g7x mark I shoots 60fps at 1080. Its a few years old. This canon 6d mark II does the same and costs 4 times more. All my cinematic slo-motion clips on my travel videos use the g7x mark I because my canon 5d3 only does 30fps. SMH.  :o    All shot on canon except for the drone shots.  Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/cha...

[KrisAK]

1 hour ago, wolf33d said:

The worst in all this, is that they will announce in a couple of months a FF mirorless, it won't be any better for video, and that will be even more a shame. 

Sad. 

I wouldn't expect 4K in that, either.

But for god's sake implement electronic (fully silent) shutter, the lack of which is the only reason I didn't purchase an M5.   

[Fredrik Lyhne]

26 minutes ago, mercer said:

C'mon Fredrik, I am pretty sure I have read numerous times that the video quality will be much better, with the GH5, when the 400mbps firmware update is released. And the excitement for it is palpable. But those same people knock Canon for using too high of a bitrate? Why is this so hard to understand? It has been repeated dozens and dozens of times since the 5D4 has been released and then Panasonic was praised for offering the 400mbps codec by the same people.

I was under the impression that they use different codecs and you didn't have to transcode the Panasonic files? Could be wrong though...

Anyways, I don't think anyone uploading to youtube want or need 400mbs, so it's great that Panasonic offers a lower bit rate as well and they should be applauded for offering both. 

[OliKMIA]

2 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Its a DSLR not a video camera.

Yeah but even on the Photo side the 6Dmk2 is very disappointing.

2 hours ago, SullyCortez said:

literally seems like canon hasn't moved since 2009. 

They move in 2008 with the 5mk2 creating the DSLR video thing by mistake. Now they do everything they can to cripple their DSLR. For me the final hit was the 5Dmk4. I don't know why people still expect anything from Canon. They never fail to disappoint release after release. I already stopped buying EF lenses, I got a GH5 for video and I'm really considering switching to Sony with the next A7R and A7S camera. Especially now that Sigma and Rokinon are jumping in the FE boat.

[SlanderShot]

Canon really don't care video on their DSLR, they know Magic Lantern is here for unlock their products.

[Andrew Reid]

3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

It might just be me but it sounds like alot to ask for imo.

Its like asking Apple to include a tripod with the iPhone or that the C200 should include an external flash just because it can capture jpeg frames.

Its a DSLR not a video camera.

Come on, it's an old old arguement that there should be such a big divide between cameras for stills and cameras for video! We both know they do both so well. Otherwise, we'd all be satisfied with our small 1/2.3 inch handycams and gopros.

The only DSLR that is not a video camera is the Nikon DF. They took the video off purely for marketing reasons.

Also Canon have competition, they don't exist in a bubble. If they aren't competing with Sony for customers, then what are they even in the consumer electronics business for? To whither and die?

Quote

And Im not a video camera shooter per say.

You were... And a very good one. Hope you go back to that some day!

Get into the spirit of things again

Quote

My XT2 is my only personal video camera and Im greatfull for its 4K. But I would have liked it at HD. And I would consider without any video at all.

(Im debating switching it for an Xpro-2. Or sell it all together and just use my SD Quattro which has no video at all and get a video camera for video.)

I just picked up a Leica T from watching your YouTube channel.

Photography is a big thing for me.

But so is video.

And I really love the DSLR price tag, the unassuming small body compared to a RED or C300. I hate - HATE - being a single operator of a cinema camera for my street cinematography - always feel like I am about to be robbed or told off for not having a permit. In a closed set for a music video then a big camera is fine... still a heavy pain in the ass for handheld though... And I hate rigs.

There was a reason when the DSLR revolution started why filmmakers and DPs started using them for personal projects and other stuff... Because it was FUN!!

15 minutes ago, SlanderShot said:

Canon really don't care video on their DSLR, they know Magic Lantern is here for unlock their products.

Sadly, this is bullshit nonsense.

Canon do not endorse or want ML in any way on their cameras and whatever effect ML is having on sales, Canon can't even detect as they have no way of knowing or researching the impact. It could be quite sizeable in my opinion but in no way does Canon care. They see it as an illegal hacking project, end of story.

The reason 4K is not on the 6D II is presumably they did some market research and their idiot customers told them 1080p is what we want, it's easy to use.

Which is why you should NEVER ask the public what they want.

BREXIT anyone?

[Elias]

Dear Canon,

I once had a Canon 60D and then upgraded to the Canon 6D soon afterwards, looking for the full-frame look. I was happy with the resulting images of my 6D, but I had been spoiled by the incredible usefulness of having a swivel screen on the back. Many "Pro" users argue that a Pro camera does not need one, but to me that's as dumb of a statement as saying that digital would never be as good as analog back in the day. A swivel screen is just super useful and improves your work and also contributes to the enjoyment of using the camera.

I later upgraded to a Canon 5D Mark III (looking for Magic Lantern), and again, although the image quality was excellent, I did not enjoy the camera as much as my old Canon 60D with its swivel screen.

So eventually Panasonic came out with the GH4, offering good image quality, a swivel screen (yeah!), and really good 4K video, and I made the switch thanks to a very nice Metabones adapter for my Canon glass.

However, I have to admit I missed the Canon color science. Video-wide the GH4 is excellent, but photo-wise it does not compare to the Canon full-frames (at least IMHO).

So, I was one of the very excited people when I read the rumors that a new Canon 6D Mark II could come out *with* a swivel screen. Yeah baby! I was so happy. But I had already been spoiled by the GH4 4K video quality, so now I'm at a crossroads. I honestly can't believe that in mid-2017 Canon will offer a high-price full-frame camera that does *not* have 4K video capabilities. It seems nowadays even the cheap lower-end pocket cameras have 4K video built-in, why can't Canon? And why digital video stabilization instead of optical/sensor-based??? I expect a lot more nowadays from a $2,000-dollar camera. Come on Canon, wake up! In your quest to protect your higher end cameras what you're really accomplishing is for people like me to look elsewhere. I was totally ready to shell out my hard-saved money to get the 6D Mark II (and honestly speaking, I might still do, but I know I won't be as happy, as I enjoy video as much as photos), but now I'm truly considering the alternatives from your competitors.

 

[mercer]

Actually I wouldn't be surprised if their Rebel line gets 4K before their mid line does. 

[Andrew Reid]

44 minutes ago, Elias said:

So, I was one of the very excited people when I read the rumors that a new Canon 6D Mark II could come out *with* a swivel screen. Yeah baby! I was so happy. But I had already been spoiled by the GH4 4K video quality, so now I'm at a crossroads. I honestly can't believe that in mid-2017 Canon will offer a high-price full-frame camera that does *not* have 4K video capabilities. It seems nowadays even the cheap lower-end pocket cameras have 4K video built-in, why can't Canon? And why digital video stabilization instead of optical/sensor-based??? I expect a lot more nowadays from a $2,000-dollar camera. Come on Canon, wake up! In your quest to protect your higher end cameras what you're really accomplishing is for people like me to look elsewhere. I was totally ready to shell out my hard-saved money to get the 6D Mark II (and honestly speaking, I might still do, but I know I won't be as happy, as I enjoy video as much as photos), but now I'm truly considering the alternatives from your competitors

I totally agree with you.

If you end up not getting the 6D II due to lack of video quality and 4K and it throwing rainbow-tantrums in 1080p moire mode, the Sony A99 II is your best best as it has a similar form factor, DSLR style controls, very fast AF, amazing 42MP stills, yet packs in all the video features you can wish for and that all important swivel screen.

Articulated screen has been one of the most essential ergonomic features of cameras, and to think there are still bodies out there without one, most of them top-end and costing between $3000-$7000, like the 1D C, Leica SL, 5D Mk IV to name but a few, is crazy.

Stills photographer or video guy... it doesn't matter, we both need to see the damned live-view image on a tripod, without doing our backs in!!

I have bought and enjoyed however, many cameras without the feature, 1D C and Leica SL for instance, but both of them would be even better with an articulated screen.

There are certain features that pro photographers have looked down their noses at and branded 'consumer', touch screen is one of them, video can be another. Fuji take video buttons off entirely, in case of X-T2, at the same time as flogging it as their best filmmaking camera yet and making X-mount cinema lenses for it!! Nikon take video modes away, on the DF for instance, to appeal to the 'purity' of photography. Even though Leica have video on the M, haha. And nobody minds!

I think there's some seriously faulty thinking going on out there, not just at the camera companies, but in the minds of the customer as well.

If an articulated screen can be built to a high standard and doesn't hurt weather sealing, there's zero reason for not having one, not even size-related reasons, just look at the RX1 II.

Best thing Nikon ever did was put one on the D750.... They saw the light!! Miraculous!

It has taken Canon 5 years to catch up... Over a hinge.

[Mattias Burling]

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Come on, it's an old old arguement that there should be such a big divide between cameras for stills and cameras for video! We both know they do both so well. Otherwise, we'd all be satisfied with our small 1/2.3 inch handycams and gopros.

The only DSLR that is not a video camera is the Nikon DF. They took the video off purely for marketing reasons.

Also Canon have competition, they don't exist in a bubble. If they aren't competing with Sony for customers, then what are they even in the consumer electronics business for? To whither and die?

I know its an old argument but its true. Hard core stills shooters are happy when they don't get excessive video features.
Rational, no. Smart, maybe not. But they are the important target audience with the cash. They are the buyers of a 6D. 
So what they say goes

Its just that "DSLR". Just the very word doesn't say "video" to me any more. If they have it its great. The D750 is nice and so is the 5Dmkiii.
But its just bonus imo.
And when a used C100 is what, sub $2K and a BMPCC is a case of beers or something.. why not get a proper video camera.
Like I said, I get it, its nice to have both. "Nice" not "Need" for me personally. 
 

Quote

 

You were... And a very good one. Hope you go back to that some day!

Get into the spirit of things again

 

I will shoot a lot of video this summer for work so I will probably have enough of it.
Maybe this fall
 

Quote

 

I just picked up a Leica T from watching your YouTube channel.

 

The T is pure love.
Ive seen a cheap one in Sweden again and was offered a TL from a camera store that they would sell me without profit just for karma...
But the XT2 and my fall into the Sigma Foveon rabbit hole... I need to hold off for a wile. I will get it again... some day

Quote

 

And I really love the DSLR price tag, the unassuming small body compared to a RED or C300. I hate - HATE - being a single operator of a cinema camera for my street cinematography - always feel like I am about to be robbed or told off for not having a permit. In a closed set for a music video then a big camera is fine... still a heavy pain in the ass for handheld though... And I hate rigs.

There was a reason when the DSLR revolution started why filmmakers and DPs started using them for personal projects and other stuff... Because it was FUN!!

 

I feel you. I don't mind using stuff out in public (Robbery isn't that common around my parts) but the weight of some cameras...
They are shooting a workplace reality show where I work for TV broadcast, think American Chopper or something like that.

The crew consists of a director with a monitor that also does audio for syncs. A producer that does this and that. A camera man with a Sony F5 and an Easy Rig for handheld (its mostly handheld). They also have a drone.

At first I thought, "thats a nice setup". Easy to lug around, nice image, stable camera, all you need. 
And then I was asked if I wanted to play with it for a while.... the weight sucked absolute mega balls. Never knew how heavy that thing is.
A rigged F5 or a Red One MX = Tomato, tomato

2 hours ago, OliKMIA said:

Yeah but even on the Photo side the 6Dmk2 is very disappointing.

Not imo.

BTW, didn't a lot of video people ridicule Canon when they put in an articulating screen that didn't interfere with the mic- and headphone jack?
You know that thing that pissed you of every time you used your GH3 or G7 or what have you.
That was a huuuuge feature that actually makes a difference when shooting video.

My point being. Sure many buy Canons because its a known brand that they feel secure with.
But there is also a lot of bashing of Canon in here just because its Canon.
People can almost pee their pants in anger over a feature and then praise Panasonic if they do the same thing.

[Andrew Reid]

2 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

And when a used C100 is what, sub $2K and a BMPCC is a case of beers or something.. why not get a proper video camera.
Like I said, I get it, its nice to have both. "Nice" not "Need" for me personally. 

Well, the C100 doesn't do it for me, the image is sub-par compared to a lot of stuff and creatively speaking it isn't exactly a Noctilux on an A7S.

The BMPCC doesn't work in low light, or after 20 minutes...

Getting a proper video camera doesn't appeal either, but everyone is entitled to do what's right for their needs.

I need stills and stealthy video in as simple and as small a package as possible, with as good an image for the price possible, with as many features packed in there is as ergonomically nice way as can be. And this isn't, and never will be, a proper video camera like the C100.

Maybe RED will reach the point of doing an extremely capable, highly portable hybrid camera with nice ergonomics in a few years, but it won't be cheap.

Quote

I will shoot a lot of video this summer for work so I will probably have enough of it.
Maybe this fall
 

Hope you can do it for fun again, in the same artistic and direct way one does photography...

I've always tried to do video as much like photography as possible.

I have no interest in the work-element of video, with a crew, endless complex rigs and multiple cameras... I want 100% complete control and final say as an artist, and cinematography with the simple workflow of a photography shoot gives me that.

Quote

The T is pure love.
Ive seen a cheap one in Sweden again and was offered a TL from a camera store that they would sell me without profit just for karma...

Glad to hear that. I found my T body with a heavily discounted Leica 23mm F2, which I can use with AF on my Leica SL in Super 35 mode as well...

Also I have the Canon EF adapter for the SL, which should work on the T as well. Same mount.

It was a guilty pleasure of a purchase, I don't really need either of them now the A99 II is here.

Quote

But the XT2 and my fall into the Sigma Foveon rabbit hole... I need to hold off for a wile. I will get it again... some day

I went down the Foveon rabbit hole as well... Amazing CCD-like analogue colour response, and a camera that encourages you to slow down and think about every shot, you can't run around too fast because of the slower AF and write speeds.

DP0 and DP3's lenses are also astounding.

Sigma Photo Pro not so much

But I still have a lot of fun in it (when I have the patience).

Quote

I feel you. I don't mind using stuff out in public (Robbery isn't that common around my parts) but the weight of some cameras...

It's the weight that makes me most miserable.

Kinefinity KineMINI was small but weighed a ton rigged up + V-lock.

Got in the way, didn't offer anything creatively a 5D Mark III with Magic Lantern couldn't do... In fact it was worse!

Still admire the company though and for the right people this is an amazing camera.

Quote

They are shooting a workplace reality show where I work for TV broadcast, think American Chopper or something like that.

The crew consists of a director with a monitor that also does audio for syncs. A producer that does this and that. A camera man with a Sony F5 and an Easy Rig for handheld (its mostly handheld). They also have a drone.

At first I thought, "thats a nice setup". Easy to lug around, nice image, stable camera, all you need. 
And then I was asked if I wanted to play with it for a while.... the weight sucked absolute mega balls. Never knew how heavy that thing is.
A rigged F5 or a Red One MX = Tomato, tomato

Not imo.

BTW, didn't a lot of video people ridicule Canon when they put in an articulating screen that didn't interfere with the mic- and headphone jack?
You know that thing that pissed you of every time you used your GH3 or G7 or what have you.
That was a huuuuge feature that actually makes a difference when shooting video.

Little things do definitely make a difference and it's why Canon still outsell Sony.

Sony keep doing stupid things like brightness changing 2 stops when you hit record on the A7R II.

[Writes list of 500 other things...]

Quote

My point being. Sure many buy Canons because its a known brand that they feel secure with.
But there is also a lot of bashing of Canon in here just because its Canon.
People can almost pee their pants in anger over a feature and then praise Panasonic if they do the same thing.

Well, Panasonic have the earned the goodwill of this community.

Canon haven't...

In fact, they have gone out of their way to piss people off.

Such is the price their brand pays, when they cripple features, threaten Magic Lantern with lawsuit and bare-face lie to their own customers, including me (oh hey Andrew, HDMI on 5D3 is not 1080p due to hardware limitation....2 years later, they add it in firmware...LIST. GOES. ON.)

[Matt Holland]

Somebody needs a diaper change. Buy a 4K video camera if it's that important. Expecting an entry level FF camera to meet all your video needs is a little crazy. 

[Andrew Reid]

7 minutes ago, Matt Holland said:

Somebody needs a diaper change. Buy a 4K video camera if it's that important. Expecting an entry level FF camera to meet all your video needs is a little crazy. 

Hello Matt, of 2008.

I hear time travel is popular these days, how else did we end up with Trump?

How's your DOF-adapter going?

Did you sell your DVX100 or did you bring it with you to 2017?

When you get back into your re-Tardis...

Give Dr Who an A7S, it will be a great pub-trick when you return to 2008.

Cheers - Andrew

[Mattias Burling]

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

DP0 and DP3's lenses are also astounding.

Sigma Photo Pro not so much

Lucky then that the DP1, DP1s, DP2, DP0/1/2/3 Quattro, SD/H Quattro and a few others all work in Lightroom

The 150MB native DNGs my SDQ spits out... yummy..

[PeterB]

I honestly would have been happy to buy a 6dmk ii if they had just included the same video features as the 5d mkiv (1.6x crop with the 24mp sensor, c-log update, Mjpeg 4k). paying $3500 for those features in a 5d mkiv is too steep a price. but $2000 for a 6d mkii shooting the same 4k as the 5d mkiv makes more sense (plus articulating screen), but they didn't include it (although I suspect it could easily be patched in with firmware update). The c200 is an amazing camera. but it's in a completely different price point (and size), and the c100 lacks 4k or a movable auto-focus point (and missing a touchscreen). Canons DPAF is the main draw of there cameras for me, otherwise what sony, panasonic, blackmagic are doing seems far ahead at the same price point. If I could afford a c200 I wouldn't decide not to buy it because the 6d mkii had 4k, the c200 would still have built in nds, RAW, Xlr, form factor, evf........ect. I don't understand canons thinking about not including 4k (even crippled 4k) in the 6d mkii

[Kisaha]

22 hours ago, PeterB said:

I honestly would have been happy to buy a 6dmk ii if they had just included the same video features as the 5d mkiv (1.6x crop with the 24mp sensor, c-log update, Mjpeg 4k). paying $3500 for those features in a 5d mkiv is too steep a price. but $2000 for a 6d mkii shooting the same 4k as the 5d mkiv makes more sense (plus articulating screen), but they didn't include it (although I suspect it could easily be patched in with firmware update). The c200 is an amazing camera. but it's in a completely different price point (and size), and the c100 lacks 4k or a movable auto-focus point (and missing a touchscreen). Canons DPAF is the main draw of there cameras for me, otherwise what sony, panasonic, blackmagic are doing seems far ahead at the same price point. If I could afford a c200 I wouldn't decide not to buy it because the 6d mkii had 4k, the c200 would still have built in nds, RAW, Xlr, form factor, evf........ect. I don't understand canons thinking about not including 4k (even crippled 4k) in the 6d mkii

You just don't "patch" 4K video, are you nuts?! It needs different hardware, thermal solutions, and a lot of different things. 4K isn't just a name, is a very demanding procedure with much more information and needs top of the line processors, chips, cooling solutions, input/output, etc.

Also, I don't understand how you go from the 6D to C200, and back and forth! You have to know what you really want, access the market, and then go buy whatever works for you. An entry level full frame camera, and a middling S35 cinema camera are very far apart. Check the XC series, great little cameras there, or the JVC LS300, if you do not want to pay much.

the 6D you are describing for 2000$ would have cut 2/3 of 5D sales instantly. The problem was the 5DmkIV. It is a "lesser" (to a degree) video camera, so everything below that have to have much worst specs than a 3500$ - middle tier, to be honest -  photo camera.

In my opinion these cameras aren't true hybrids (so, I don't care), are 80-90% photo cameras, and that is fine with me, and I look elsewhere. The only big hope for Canon is the M series, and they are very far behind completion there too (and with new cameras such the 6DmkII, I do not see a real great M camera any time soon.)

P.S I just bought another NX1, 28megapxls and 1.5X crop factor. It also has 4K, 120frames slow mo etc.