Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: M6 ii

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    New Hampshire, USA

    M6 ii

    The thought for this thread really comes out of my assessment of the M6 II. Like many others, I jumped into the "M" ecosystem when Canon started offering some extreme sales on bundles. I remember picking up the M, a lens, and a flash for $400. I have been intrigued by system since. I certainly like the idea of a small travel camera, but I never really found a niche for the M system, especially after I bought the G7X II, which is even smaller and is truly "pocketable." Continuing to give the system a try, I went from the M to the M3. This past fall I was considering ditching the ecosystem as a niche for the M never really developed for me. But, I decided to give the system another try after looking and being intrigued by the specs of the M6 II and watching some reviews.

    One of the items that caught my attention was a variation of this graph, which plots the dynamic range of my previous or current camera bodies:

    Name:  chart (2).jpg
Views: 45
Size:  95.5 KB
    Basically, the modern APS-C sensor has more or about the same dynamic range as my old 5DIII from ISO 100 to ISO ~800 and is consistently much better than my original 7D. In fact, my G7X II has more DR than the 5DIII at ISO 125 and is fairly consistent to my original 7D.

    Then, for the M6 II, I was also curious about the eye-AF, FPS, the uber high pixel density, it being slightly larger in size and just a general inexpensive way for me to start assessing "mirrorless" while also giving the "M" ecosystem another chance.

    All that said, I am impressed with the M6II. It is a very nice little camera. Unfortunately, I now consider it let down by the current set of EF-m lenses as the camera can do much more than those lenses permit.

    But, focusing on the uber-high pixel density, when you are reach limited, this is a great way to put pixels on target. But, in contrast to the DR figure above, I am also well aware that others have assess the "true" advantage of aps-c to be much less than advertised. So, the types of questions I have been wondering: What is the real equivalent advantage of the APS-C crop in terms of reach? Am I better off in terms of adding a 1.4x TC to my 5DIV to get similar reach? What is the bokeh difference between APS-C at 500 mm and my 5DIV plus 1.4x TC at 700 mm (similar pixels on target)?

    But, first, I thought I would start with some recent pictures, taken with the M6 II, "H" drive mode, at 500 mm so similar resolving power to my 5DIV plus 1.4x TC that I have been using. All f/4, 1/1000th of a sec and all edited (I am even using Topaz sharpening, etc). But, to best view detail, click through to Flickr, and double click on the image to zoom in.

    ISO 1000 (2928 x 3660 or ~10.7 MP)
    IMG_3589-SAI by kayaker72, on Flickr

    ISO 5000 (3239 x 4049 or ~13.1 MP)
    IMG_3705-SAI by kayaker72, on Flickr

    ISO 1000 (3768 x 3014 or ~11.3 MP)
    IMG_3765-SAI by kayaker72, on Flickr

    ISO 640 (5139 x 3426 or ~17.6 MP)
    IMG_3834-SAI by kayaker72, on Flickr

    Last edited by Kayaker72; 07-17-2020 at 08:43 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts