Canon EOS M6 Mark II 4K is "pixel binned 3K" and Sony A6600 old sensor debacle "due to internal politics"

[plucas]

When I think about a future camera to purchase, I like to look at what creators and filmmakers use more than what they recommend or exalt. I have heard every high praise for the XT-3; camera of the year 2018 from multiple folk. And yet I hear that sales are slow, camera stores struggle to move them, and while plenty of creators use it I'm sure, none that I follow on YouTube appear to - not regularly, if they own one - even though they've reviewed it positively. One guy even said he was looking to switch from his Sonys because the color and image takes a lot of work to get right and tried the XT-3 but wasn't thrilled with the image and settled on an EOS R.

So what's the story? Is it that good?

[tokyojerry]

10 hours ago, MaverickTRD said:

I’d hold off on canon apsc as their sensors are technically smaller than Sony and Fuji apsc so the size difference between it and what you have isn’t really that huge. Especially once the canon crops in (if it does in 4K) 

i imagine even a speed booster on ur current body would generate better imagery  

Thanks for that feedback MaverickTRD.  Yeah, I am leaning in that direction for the short-term.  With the advent of EM5-III coming soon, and rumored to have at least the equivalent sensor of the current EM1-II, a new processor, not to mention the wide availability of lenses not only from Olympus, but Panasonic, and 3rd parties,  I reckon I should stay put with what I have for the interim.  If I make any move it might be on the E-M5-III once we know more.    Oh, and good point on Canon's version of APS-C sensor size (1.6 vs.1.5) I never even gave that any thought.  

[Oliver Daniel]

I regret selling my A6500 as it was just such a useful "take anywhere" camera with awesome AF. Slog2 was instrumental in getting my holiday shots exposed well with a smooth picture. This line definitely has a marketplace, BUT.... 

I wouldn't say the A6600 is even worth looking at seen as the A6500 can be had for £600-£700 new. 4k60p, better ergonomics, better rolling shutter would have been worth it! This incremental update thing by Sony is getting ridiculous. They used to be very aggressive. Saving the best for the A7S III perhaps? 

As for Canon, you can't possibly defend them now. They are dead to me for video. 

[gethin]

What's this sigma camera is going to be like I wonder? I'm a bit over the big boys.  I'm not loving the Z6.  (Actually I wonder if anyone does. It's a fiddly pain in the bum). 

I'd be curious @Andrew Reid how you'd find the z-cams.  I'm loving the image I'm seeing from them (if only the E2 wasn't 3x the cost of the BMPCC4K), and their super35 bodies didn't have EF mount. 

[darcyperkins]

9 hours ago, Mako Sports said:

yeah but comparing an Alexa Mini to to cheap a mirrorless camera is silly. 

Yeah but I'm not comparing them. I'm comparing the complaints. If company X sells a $20,000+ camera described as "4K" when it's upscaled and nobody complains, then company Y sells a $900 camera described as "4K" when it's actually upscaled and everyone complains, that's telling of a double standard.

Yes, I realise other manufacturers offer full-readout 4K off APS-C sensors for similar $900-ish prices, but people find something to complain about those cameras too anyway.

We haven't even tested the camera yet.

[Adam Kuźniar]

21 minutes ago, darcyperkins said:

Yeah but I'm not comparing them. I'm comparing the complaints. If company X sells a $20,000+ camera described as "4K" when it's upscaled and nobody complains, then company Y sells a $900 camera described as "4K" when it's actually upscaled and everyone complains, that's telling of a double standard.

 

I guess it's different when the camera specifically says "this is upresed 4k" instead of selling it as "this is native 4k" when it isn't. 

[thebrothersthre3]

I don't completely hate Sony yet. They are addressing important stuff getting rid of record limits, stopping the overheating, innovating auto focus even in low end cameras. Really too bad they don't want to incorporate their newer sensors though. 

[Matias Mayolo]

I was expecting this post!!! Thanks Andrew! EOSHD is the only website to acknowledge that the two cameras have nothing new, but they are a rebadged mashup of the previous APS-C cameras, they just added a flip screen, HLG, autofocus and processor from the A6400 and only the batteries from the A73 series. Otherwise, pure shit. All of the other websites praising the new battery, the AF speed, come on, it's the same camera.
I changed from Sony to Fuji because I needed to shot lots of 1080 50p (I live in a PAL country) and I was tired of the constant decreasing quality of the 1080p on Sony APS-C cameras, it's a REAL shit, It's canon-like shit, it has no detail, lots of moire and aliasing, and not even gonna talk about slow-mo which is even worse. The 1080p quality started to decrease from the A6300, which is worse than the A6000. As you can check out here, I had both and it's true.

14 hours ago, plucas said:

When I think about a future camera to purchase, I like to look at what creators and filmmakers use more than what they recommend or exalt. I have heard every high praise for the XT-3; camera of the year 2018 from multiple folk. And yet I hear that sales are slow, camera stores struggle to move them, and while plenty of creators use it I'm sure, none that I follow on YouTube appear to - not regularly, if they own one - even though they've reviewed it positively. One guy even said he was looking to switch from his Sonys because the color and image takes a lot of work to get right and tried the XT-3 but wasn't thrilled with the image and settled on an EOS R.

So what's the story? Is it that good?

I bought the X-T30, because I was a bit short of money..
And I'm more than happy, the colors are awesome, you can get a nice baked in color if you want or a really flat image with lots of information without having to use F-log, you have way less rolling shutter, you have plenty of options for dynamic range, it has a beautifully detailed 1080p image, and from that an almost unchanged 1080p 100-120fps. You could just shoot everything in 100fps that you wouldn't notice the difference, but you have no audio   ?‍♂️ . You can shoot with an HDMI monitor and you DON'T loose you LCD scree image, none of the Sony can do that. The only thing I miss from Sony is the AF on video... that is something that Fuji is bit behind, you got less options, it's not as reliable, for tracking a face it's fine, other things, not as much as Sony.

You can check out video resolution in here, it's a great tool to know the resolving power of cameras in different resolutions. It's for sharpness only, you can't check other features like iso, dynamic range, etc. But it's good enough and quite reliable.

https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=sony_a6300&attr29_1=fujifilm_xt30&attr72_0=1080&attr72_1=1080&normalization=full&widget=636&x=-0.04440091689095804&y=0.2513405105351813

[thebrothersthre3]

3 minutes ago, Matias Mayolo said:

I was expecting this post!!! Thanks Andrew! EOSHD is the only website to acknowledge that the two cameras have nothing new, but they are a rebadged mashup of the previous APS-C cameras, they just added a flip screen, HLG, autofocus and processor from the A6400 and only the batteries from the A73 series. Otherwise, pure shit. All of the other websites praising the new battery, the AF speed, come on, it's the same camera.
I changed from Sony to Fuji because I needed to shot lots of 1080 50p (I live in a PAL country) and I was tired of the constant decreasing quality of the 1080p on Sony APS-C cameras, it's a REAL shit, It's canon-like shit, it has no detail, lots of moire and aliasing, and not even gonna talk about slow-mo which is even worse. The 1080p quality started to decrease from the A6300, which is worse than the A6000. As you can check out here, I had both and it's true.

 

I agree, I also have both the XT3 and XT30. I am not a fan of Sony's move and of course its a money decision. Sony can afford to gimp their cameras because they are so popular at this point in comparison to Fuji. 

That said Sony did make a lot of good improvements. Their new line of APSC cameras are definitely ready to do almost anything you need. Though the lack of a good 1080 60p is really crippling. I know they could remedy this without changing the sensor. The XT2 had pretty much the same sensor yet the 1080p was great. 

[amanieux]

the only great thing about a6600 you don't even mention is continuous eye AF in video, do you know another camera that can do that ? a f1. 4 closeup with the $289 sigma 30mm will open up the possibility of interview with nearest eye in focus and the rest of the face blurred  - a very intimate image with cinematic intensity https://images.app.goo.gl/3A5aCA1CFmzxRsyXA

 

[Avenger 2.0]

4 minutes ago, amanieux said:

the only great thing about a6600 you don't even mention is continuous eye AF in video, do you know another camera that can do that ? a f1. 4 closeup with the $289 sigma 30mm will open up the possibility of interview with nearest eye in focus and the rest of the face blurred a very intimate image with cinematic intensity

How about an entire wedding video with only one eye in focus and everything else blurred ?

[amanieux]

11 minutes ago, Avenger 2.0 said:

How about an entire wedding video with only one eye in focus and everything else blurred ?

just saying you could do it with a $1700 combo (CeyeAF with sigma 30mm f1.4) but you cannot do it with any other camera and wether you like it or not it gives intensity : 

 

[heart0less]

It may seem impressive on paper, but still - I, myself, wouldn't trust any kind of AF during interview shooting.

Especially with a close-up like this.

Too many things could go wrong and most of the times you don't have any chance to reshoot.

[amanieux]

when comparing a6600 to xt30 of course xt30 is cheaper and better in some aspects but what about the 10 min max recoding time in 4k vs unlimited recording ? you should not nitpick your arguments but rather give an honest pros and cons list and let us decide what compromise we want to make for our specific needs as unfortunately no camera has it all (though a73 is the closest to a good hybrid camera all rounder)

[frontfocus]

2 hours ago, amanieux said:

the only great thing about a6600 you don't even mention is continuous eye AF in video, do you know another camera that can do that ?

Funny. Actually it was Fujifilm that introduced eye AF to video a year ago with the X-T3. So yes, other cameras can do that

1 hour ago, amanieux said:

when comparing a6600 to xt30 of course xt30 is cheaper and better in some aspects but what about the 10 min max recoding time in 4k vs unlimited recording ? you should not nitpick your arguments but rather give an honest pros and cons list 

I don't think this post was about a pros and cons list. 
It was about two things:
1. Sony not introducing new hardware like a new, higher performing sensor 
2. Sony not doing anything new with it's codecs. XAVC-S has been out like what? 6 years? Back that it was state of the art. But at the moment, Sony is lagging behind by quite a bit. 

Those things need to be pointed out. It's like a kick in the a**. Otherwise Sony might become like Canon and only introduce marginal updates, maybe even removing features. 

[Thomas Hill]

6 hours ago, amanieux said:

when comparing a6600 to xt30 of course xt30 is cheaper and better in some aspects but what about the 10 min max recoding time in 4k vs unlimited recording ? you should not nitpick your arguments but rather give an honest pros and cons list and let us decide what compromise we want to make for our specific needs as unfortunately no camera has it all (though a73 is the closest to a good hybrid camera all rounder)

If you're going to make any comparisons, it should be A6600 vs X-T3, APS-C flagship vs APS-C flagship.

[michaldurovic]

Waaaaaait, what? Who did the calculation, that if you read 2x2 you get 2.8K video? It would be if you had a 24MP sensor, because 2x2 is 4 so you divide 24MP by 4 and get 6MP, which is 3K sized video..... BUT..... we are talking about 32MP sensor, so 32MP divided by 4 is 8MP as a 4K video resolution! I bet there is some sort of certification they have to go through in order to say they record 4K, else we would have 4K 10 years ago from upscaled FullHD. The "4K is achieved by processing" is probably from the fact they use 2x2 binning. I had to make an account to discuss this, so please, comment on it, because the calculation does not make sense to me.

[Andrew Reid]

Further Canon madness with regards EOS RP, M6 II and 90D:

- Aperture Priority mode 4K shooting is disabled

- Video mode is either Full Auto / Full Manual. It does not follow the mode dial selection

- Cannot shoot 4K by hitting record button in a stills mode - and 1080p is recorded in P Auto no matter what stills mode you are in

- No ALL-I codec option

- No AF or IS with 120fps

- 120fps is cropped, using 84% of sensor

- Bitrate for 4K is just 120Mbit

There is a movie-cropping feature on the 90D, so it will be interesting to see if 4K in the cropped mode is a 1:1 crop with no binning. Either way it's lose-lose. Crop in one, poor resolution and moire in the other.

It isn't clear whether the EOS M6 II has the cropped-sensor mode in 4K or whether this is a 90D feature only.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/learn/education/topics/article/2019/august/video-with-the-eos-90d/video-with-the-eos-90d/!ut/p/z1/jZFbT8JAEIV_DY9ltuz25tvS0otWsWCB7otpy1IaeyGl0sCvd1GiMWpx3mbynZlzMsBgBayKD3kWt3ldxYXoI6Y-3weu7nom8pHlGyiYTseWbZseoQSW7wD6oygC9h99D8D61y8gmkBUei_BMYPbq9fsT5bJ4jbrFdypVwCHXADd0yeugUb-1Hc0RDWToNkTlZ1Q-bFhMSaIqoZl4pF9znABeiKKVFlRJx_foFWCdeG-4Rve8Gb42ojxtm13-5sBGqCu64ZZXWcFH6Z1OUC_Sbb1voXVdxIi8QftK4djehYKKJ7ZPp075FGF5SHnHYRV3ZTCyfxse5fma4g0BWN5LSuSwnUuETXFUhwniiQbKVFkvsYbOQEXwa4Mw0opDC_3JJYc8Wn8IL0BI0U2tA!!/dz/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/?urile=wcm%3Apath%3A%2Fcanon_newweb_content%2Fdigital_learning%2Feducation%2Band%2Binspiration%2Farticles%2F2019%2Faugust%2Fvideo-with-the-eos-90d%2Fvideo-with-the-eos-90d

[frontfocus]

11 hours ago, michaldurovic said:

Waaaaaait, what? Who did the calculation, that if you read 2x2 you get 2.8K video? It would be if you had a 24MP sensor, because 2x2 is 4 so you divide 24MP by 4 and get 6MP, which is 3K sized video..... BUT..... we are talking about 32MP sensor, so 32MP divided by 4 is 8MP as a 4K video resolution! I bet there is some sort of certification they have to go through in order to say they record 4K, else we would have 4K 10 years ago from upscaled FullHD. The "4K is achieved by processing" is probably from the fact they use 2x2 binning. I had to make an account to discuss this, so please, comment on it, because the calculation does not make sense to me.

No. 32MP with a 3:2 aspect ratio. At 16:9 you get 6960x3915=27MP. And this with a pixel binning results in 27/4=6.8MP which is not really 4K. 

[Dirk]

There is a more compelling reason why Sony do not want / cannot fit their small bodied alpha 6 cameras with the IMX571 26 megapixel sensor.  The Fuji X-T30 with its 26 megapixel sensor has a huge over-heating problem  - that is why certain video modes are limited to 10 minutes.  I haven't tried out the Fuji myself but I watched a comparison video of the X-T30 and a6400 earlier this week and the Fuji temperature kept on climbing over the 100F mark within minutes to the extent where the reviewer said that as much as the Fuji has a number of superior features, he could never buy the Fuji because of the serious overheating issue.  This is serious for Fuji and if you think about the fact that the a6400 can now record non-stop video in excess of 30 minutes without the overheating issues experienced in earlier models, it does look as though Sony's decision makes sense doesn't it?