I returned the R6ii and kept the R6. No difference at all in image quality. Af was the same Except for no recording limit on video R6 is just as good. Get a used R6 and buy good glass.
I agree, the R6 image quality is superb and image quality isn’t about more megapixels. There’s a lot more to the equation. Besides, I’ve never noted anyone complaining about the image quality of the flagship 1Dx iii, also 20.1 megapixels
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons agreed alot of work but just one thing you forgot the rf f11 lenses work better on the newer camera. because focus box is much bigger. its the only reason I upgraded.
Yooo I never expected to see FINAL FANTASY X figures used in camera review videos! Everyone just uses Funco Pops lol. Mad respect as a still hobbyst photographer and an FF fan!
Very nice, concise review! I got the R6 Mark II back in December and boy do I love it. I've shot for 18 years as a pro with some of the best cameras available (including 1D series cams) and this is the best camera I've ever owned. I use all adapated EF glass including the Sigma Art 50 1.4, 14-24 and Canon 70-200 2.8 III and nothing I've used before has come close to this setup for sharpness, clarity, noise, and autofocus.
I just picked up a hardly used R6 after giving up waiting for the R8 to come in on back order. Your video has made me feel really good about getting the R6 and glad I didn't splurge on the mark ii as you've shown that 90% of the upgrades are not important to me and the ones that are like higher Res and 40 f/s I have in the R7 which I already have.
Thank you for the great comparison! I'm a stills only shooter, so I didn't care about the improvements in video in the mark II. Due to a cashback offer, I got the original R6 for 1850€ adapter included, which is a great price for a photographer's camera, I guess. I'm not willing to spend 1000€ more for those minor improvements.
I've been considering the R6 since the R6 mkII was introduced but was unsure if the new one was worth the extra money. After this comparison and reading the comments, I can feel good about going with the R6 especially now that the price has dropped. Thank you for helping me decide!
I'm a few months late to this particular dance, but I wanted to chime in and say your comparisons, and the overall quality of your presentation, are masterfully done! I've been happily in the DSLR camp for years, but I've decided to add a mirrorless to my kit. I've been saving up, and I think that in the fairly near future I'll be picking up the R6 Mark II. (Note: I really shoot no video at all; only stills.) Other than an old Tokina 19-36mm and my Sigma 150-600 C, all of my glass is either EF or EF-S. I've done my research and discovered that I could use, for example my 100-400 II, plus a 1.4x converter, on an R-series camera using the the EF > RF converter. Really looking forward to this!
Hi Mathieu. I no longer shoot Canon, having moved to Fujifilm cameras & lenses. Your reviews are always comprehensive, detailed & quite informative. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with your viewing audience. Best wishes!😊🙏
Very much like the r6. Simpler in some ways. Faster switching between video and photo modes using the dial. However: the overheating on the r6 is a REAL issue and disqualifies the camera from being used in longer format environments. GREAT camera the r6 though. Loved mine and actually Miss it :-) only a good thing.
I'm so glad I came upon your channel. Your reviews are rich with such great relevant facts and details, yet still easy to understand. I learn so much from watching. I would appreciate some advice if you don't mind offering it. I've been taking photos for about 2 months now with a Sony A700 camera paired with 3 lenses: a Sigma APO DG70-200mm 1:28 II EX, a Sigma DG 120-400mm 1:45.-5.6 APO HSM, and a Sigma 28-80mm 1:35-5.6 macro lens. All of this was given to me by a friend when I mentioned I wanted to get into photography. I am shooting mostly high school American football during bright daylight, heavy clouds, drizzly rain, and stadium lighting which varies from newer lighting which is very bright to older lighting bright enough for players to play but most action shots come out blurry. I also shoot ice hockey indoors with varied lighting from bright to poor for photography and most photos coming out blurry. Sometimes I have to shoot through the protective plexiglass surrounding the rink, another times I can be on the bench and shoot without any plexiglass in the way. During outdoor bright days, I'm very happy with the quality of my photos, but when the light is low or when shooting indoors too many photos are blurry or take a too much editing time to get them useful or, with the high ISO of 4000 that I sometimes have to use, become too grainy to be usable. The photos are posted on-line and viewed on mobile phones (so image quality doesn't have to be that great), but they are also viewed on webpages as large as the pc screen, and also printed in full-color 5"x7", 8"x10" or much larger formats for advertising posters. I love the feel of the Sony A700 in my hand: The camera is on the larger size and it has a nice large finger grip so with the large lenses I use, it's easy to carry the camera with one hand and grip is comfortable even after a few hours of use. I was going to upgrade to one of the new Sony's but when I actually held any of them I didn't like how they felt. The camera was too small for my hand, and the finger grip wasn't as big as the A700. I tried a few other cameras such as Nikon and Fuji but had the same issue. When I tried the Canon, I immediately loved the form fit in my hand - because I shoot action sports without a tripod or monopod and have to move around a lot on the field on in the rink for usually 90 or more minutes, having a firm, secure and comfortable grip ends up very high on my priority list. I plan on shooting sports for at least the next 4 or 5 years and I don't mind investing in good quality gear that will last a long time. I also don't mind used gear but am hesitant because the warranties are very short and I'd hate to get stuck with faulty equipment. I love the Sigma 70-200mm and 120-400mm that I have with the internal focusing telephoto lenses, because the zoom ring is close to the camera and very easy to rotate so I can quickly adjust it with just my thumb to follow the action. The 28-80mm I have is horrible because it takes a thumb and finger to rotate and a lot of pressure to move it. My current camera does not take video, so while that would be nice and I'm sure I'll use it for these sports once I have it, it's not an overwhelming driver. I read some issues with overheating and would want to avoid that. On one hand I hate to switch from Sony to another brand because I have these lenses. On the other hand they cost me nothing and I could sell them to offset the cost of new gear. My priority is a comfortable to hold camera paired with lenses that are great for sports in both good and poor lighting, in cold and hot environments and occasional rain drizzle, gear that will be tolerant of occasional rough outdoor handling, for taking photos that will be used both on-line and occasionally printed, sometimes heavily cropped and enlarged. Ideally, I'd like two very fast lenses: one for football that is 50-300(or more)mm and the other for hockey which is ~35-200mm. If this in not possible with two lenses I can also use three lenses (or I can do a two camera set-up and keep the Sony and use it for close range photos where lighting isn't as much an issue) and use the new camera for the majority of the telephoto long-range and low light photos. I have a budget of $2-$2.5k US for the camera body and $2k for all the lens (however I could buy one lens now and other lenses later after I've saved some more.) Any suggestions for a Canon camera model (or other brand I suppose) and lens based on the information I've provided? Your insights would be really appreciated.
If you're in the USA, Canon Refurbished on the R6 hit $1,299 in June 2023, which is almost half of the R6 Mark II for something that is virtually brand new. At that price point, you'll have to think long and hard whether the mark II is worth the extra cost.
I think I made the right choice. Maybe R6 has better focus after firmware update? if Canon releases new firmware for AF, it will probably be a worthwhile update “hahhaha”. The old R6 is too good, in Vietnam the body price is about 1650 usd, the R6ii costs about 2250 usd. the trade-off around ~700 usd is probably not worth it. I followed and liked, thank you so much for the video. Good video!!!
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons I thought the c-raw vs un-compressed was the first visual i've seen in the difference...I was shooting in C-Raw but i'm thinking i'm going back to full raw :)
Right now in the UK the R6 Mk2 is £2779... you can still get the original R6 for £1399. Ive tried a Mark 2 and loved it (coming from an R) but not sure i can justify paying double the price for it.
Thank you, this was very helpful as always! Both seem really good, but I don't like the way the pre-capture images have to be extracted in camera or special software. On my Fuji X-T5 they are all saved separately so I don't have to mess about doing that. I also thought about the R7 as that seems to get good reports now but it has the same thing for the pre captured shots. Your very valuable video has helped me decide to save my money and stick with what I have. Thank you!!
I got my nearly new R6 + the 24-105 kit lens for $1450. Using it with a dummy battery and Ninja V shooting 4K with zero issues. Will NOT upgrade but buy more lenses.
The rf 85mm f2 is a really slow lens to be testing autofocus on both cameras. The lens bottlenecks both of them. Try using an rf 70-200 2.8 that is lightening fast to spot the real differences.
Thank you for a very nice review! I´m a concert photographer and i´m using a canon R now. But I am considering buying an R6 mark 1 or an R6 mark 2. Which camera would you recommend for concert photography?
I found the R6 II to be better in low light when it comes to autofocus, so there is an advantage there. Not huge, but I noticed it. Overall, the R6 II is a better package, even if doesn't make a substantial difference. If you have the budget, go for the mark II model.
Neither: Get Panasonic S5ii and stop wasting your money 🙂... and may the better Photo/ video Camera win At least do a comparison between the two please, as You are very thorough
Hi Matthieu, I need your advise. I have Canon 550D and I’m not professional but I would like to upgrade my camera. I was thinking a lot about 90D but since it’s not full frame +the weight …. I changed my mind, the future is with mirrorless cameras so I decided to go either with R6 Mark II or R 6 and I don’t have a big budget, I won’t use video much. And since I’m still learning about photography what should I get? And what type of lens do you recommend for pet photography? Thank you 😊🙏🏻
You can find very good prices for the R6 these days, even second-hand, so I would definitely go with that one. It also means you can save money for a second lens. I'm not an expert with pet photography, but I would imagine a nice telephoto zoom lens would be very helpful outdoor. Which one to get depends on your budget: there is the RF 70-200mm F2.8 (the most expensive) or the RF 70-200mm F4 (very compact). On a budget, I used the RF 85mm F2 a lot. Not the fastest AF motor for action, but otherwise a pretty good lens, very sharp and with a nice bokeh. Not as long as 200mm so you will need to get closer to the pet, but I'm sure it can work very well.
was looking into either of these for super lowlight video recording at FHD / 1080p 60fps (if i can get 120fps even better but not needed) biggest thing is ISO for video recording specifically, and was wondering if the MKII was a big enough bump to be worth the extra cost
Hello Mathieu. I need to ask you a question about whether it is worth swapping the Canon R6 for the R6 Mark II. I have video focus problems with the R6 with dark skins, the focus goes back and forth without stopping and is not stable, with light skins everything works great. I had an interview recently and the result was horrendous because of the bad focus of the R6 I with dark skins, no matter the focus setting. Has the R6 Mark II improved in this regard and is it stable? Would it be worth the change? My next step would be to get over Sony if I can't get it fixed. Thanks!
It's hard to give you an answer without testing this myself, because what you described is very specific. Did you try the AF settings available in video mode on the R6 mk1? One changes the speed, the other the sensitivity.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons Yes, I have reduced the two configurations almost to the minimum and the problem is still dark skins, since in light skins it does not happen and everything works perfectly. Is Sony a better option or maybe the R6 Mk2?
I already have an Eos r which I use for my photography work. I mostly use sigma lenses and I am a big fan of flash photography. So, I am happy with the image quality the camera produces. But, I also want to get into video work. Hence, I want to upgrade. I am not sure which camera to buy. I live in Australia and price of the r6 is significantly less than that of the mark ii. The markii is going for almost 4000 aud while r6 plus adaptor is 3,102 aud. Also r 5 is 4,500 and it’s offers great photography and video experience. I am so confused about which camera to get for video. Please help me.
I had the EOS R for about a year. I had the 5D IV before that and I loved the image quality from the 5D IV better. I too use Sigma Art lenses (50 1.4 and 14-24 2.8) and I sold all my gear and go the R6 Mark II because in December it was on sale for the same price as the original R6 ($3099 canadian). WOW. I love it! The R6 Mark II is the best camera I've ever owned (and I've owned a lot of Canon cameras over 18 years as a pro photog). The image quality is way better than the EOS R (and better than the 5D IV) and even though you lose 6 MP, you can output Adobe Camera Raw to the same 30 MP size and the sharpness on the R6 II is just as good (if not better because the AF is so good). The AF is remarkable! Way better than the EOS R or 5D IV, even with adapted EF lenses you get PERFECT AF results adapted on the R6 II. And video is also INCREDIBLE. I shoot mainly 4K 60 and the R6 II has the best 4K 60 on the market right now. That's a huge difference you have in price down in AUS between the R6 and the Mark II. For me it was a no brainer to get the Mark II at the same price as the original. Even if it was a few hundred dollars more I'd still get the Mark II as it's better in most ways and more future proof. The R5 here was over $5100 so it was a $2000 premium over the R6 II and other than resolution there was no real benefit. Also I did comprehensive tests upscaling the R6 II files to 45 MP and they are just as sharp and detailed as the R5 files (you can also use the Adobe Camera Raw "Enhance" feature to get even better results). Normally I'd say get the R6 II for sure. But with that price difference it would be really a tough call.
You look younger every day. Can’t comment on the video because I do not have or intend to move to Canon. I’m sure it is to your usual high standard. Greetings from sunny Aberaeron.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons I had a beard from Jan 22 to August 22. One of my lady friends told me to shave it off because it added 30 years to my age. I’m 65 as it is So off came the beard before my daughter’s wedding.
Hello, I been looking to buy r6, r6 mark ii or r5 used I can get r6 for 2100 euros, r6 mark ii for 3100 and r5 used for 3300 euros. Which camera would you suggest getting? I have a budjet of around 4000-4500 for the camera and the lens. Should I be getting high end rf lens with r6 or spend on better camera with ef is usm lens.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons I planned on doing portraits, product photography, landscapes, photos and video and possibly some wildlife but thats not the mainfocus.
When I buy the R6 mk II body, I am planning to get the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4~6.3 IS USM as my initial RF lens. While it's not as fast as I'd prefer, especially when shooting indoor sports, I love the range and the very affordable price. From my research on this lens, I'm expecting to be quite happy with it.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons If you get a chance can you post the page number from the manual of the R6mk2 that highlights this feature please. I looked for it but only found wireless options, thanks.
Canon still uses OUTDATED decades old front-lit CMOS sensors . Sony A7sIII is superior but still has problems like lack of pixel shift. By now industry should have been moving to new sensor technology such as SPAD or x1000 more sensitive graphene sensors.
Hello mathieu amazing video. I will have to pick between the 2 next week. If the price difference is about 400-600€ would you still recommend the r6 over the mk ii for a pure photographer? I dont care about video at all. Thanks in advance formany reply from anyone 😊
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons mostly landscape, preffered low light (cities at night f.e.), but also portrait. No sports at all, mostly non-fast-moving objects but a good AF is nice to have too.
Hi Mathieu, this is the first time i see ur videos and its hit every point for reviewing a camera. Really appreciate your work, i may ask if should i go with r8 or r6? I do like smaller form factor of r8 and the capability to use cable to transfer picture to ipad instantly and also newer cheaper and probly better AF(in the future update). But the r6 eventhough more expensive (approx. 20% more) with the better build , sd card slot, batteries and most importantly IBIS. This make it hard to decide. So i wanna ask your opinion about what should i get?
The R8 should have better AF (especially in low light, if the performance is really like the R6 II), and perhaps less problems with overheating when recording 4K 25p. Otherwise, the R6 has a better body and all the extra features you mentioned. Also, keep in mind the R6 price is closer to the R8 if bought second-hand. You may or may not like that option, but it's something to consider. Personally, I know I would go with the R6, because video recording would not be a priority for me (unless I wanted to buy the camera to make my UA-cam videos for example).
As usual a fantastic and in depth review like no other. How about the R6 Mark ll vs Sony A7lV. I'm looking for the best BIF camera and lens combo. I have a Fuji X-T5 and 100-400 but I'm struggling with the AF. Again thanks for all your time and hard work.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons I'm an idiot. I did see it. I like the better FPS on Canon but think I will still go with Sony for the flexibilty. However most BIF photograhers I see do use Canon.
I returned the R6ii and kept the R6. No difference at all in image quality. Af was the same Except for no recording limit on video R6 is just as good. Get a used R6 and buy good glass.
hows it perform with lowlight video recording? is the mark II worth the bump in price for that?
I agree, the R6 image quality is superb and image quality isn’t about more megapixels. There’s a lot more to the equation. Besides, I’ve never noted anyone complaining about the image quality of the flagship 1Dx iii, also 20.1 megapixels
R6 is an awesome camera. I agree. If you can get a good deal on the original, do it. Use the extra money on glass.
If you’re a hybrid shooter you’ll want the mark ii.
There is a massive amount of work in this video. You deserve a lot more subscribers! Thank you for the review, it's great as usual!
Thank you, much appreciated!
You truly have the best videos when it comes to comparing gear . ❤
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons agreed alot of work but just one thing you forgot the rf f11 lenses work better on the newer camera. because focus box is much bigger. its the only reason I upgraded.
You deserve 1 Canon R6 MII for free from Canon
FINALLY! A PHOTOGRAPHY review of the these cameras! I'm tired of seeing all the video stuff
Yooo I never expected to see FINAL FANTASY X figures used in camera review videos!
Everyone just uses Funco Pops lol. Mad respect as a still hobbyst photographer and an FF fan!
Very nice, concise review!
I got the R6 Mark II back in December and boy do I love it. I've shot for 18 years as a pro with some of the best cameras available (including 1D series cams) and this is the best camera I've ever owned. I use all adapated EF glass including the Sigma Art 50 1.4, 14-24 and Canon 70-200 2.8 III and nothing I've used before has come close to this setup for sharpness, clarity, noise, and autofocus.
Thank you for sharing your experience with the camera. Glad you're liking it!
I just picked up a hardly used R6 after giving up waiting for the R8 to come in on back order. Your video has made me feel really good about getting the R6 and glad I didn't splurge on the mark ii as you've shown that 90% of the upgrades are not important to me and the ones that are like higher Res and 40 f/s I have in the R7 which I already have.
Congrats on your R6. Let me know how you find it!
Thanks a lot for making such a detailed video. It was really hard to find one that exhaustive.
Thanks for commenting. Glad it was helpful!
I've had the r6ll for a month now and its much better than my old sony a7iii in every way.3rd party lenses are on the way for the canon R series.
The most detailed video I've ever seen (examining two cameras). thank you.
Thank you for the nice comment!
Wow! A thorough and thorough review! I certainly subscribed to the channel. Thanks!
Awesome, thank you!
Thank you for the great comparison! I'm a stills only shooter, so I didn't care about the improvements in video in the mark II. Due to a cashback offer, I got the original R6 for 1850€ adapter included, which is a great price for a photographer's camera, I guess. I'm not willing to spend 1000€ more for those minor improvements.
Good price, you made the right choice!
I've been considering the R6 since the R6 mkII was introduced but was unsure if the new one was worth the extra money. After this comparison and reading the comments, I can feel good about going with the R6 especially now that the price has dropped. Thank you for helping me decide!
You made the right choice, there is not much more of a difference to pay the extra money
I'm a few months late to this particular dance, but I wanted to chime in and say your comparisons, and the overall quality of your presentation, are masterfully done!
I've been happily in the DSLR camp for years, but I've decided to add a mirrorless to my kit. I've been saving up, and I think that in the fairly near future I'll be picking up the R6 Mark II. (Note: I really shoot no video at all; only stills.) Other than an old Tokina 19-36mm and my Sigma 150-600 C, all of my glass is either EF or EF-S. I've done my research and discovered that I could use, for example my 100-400 II, plus a 1.4x converter, on an R-series camera using the the EF > RF converter. Really looking forward to this!
Thank you! Glad you’re liking the R6 II!
Hi Mathieu. I no longer shoot Canon, having moved to Fujifilm cameras & lenses. Your reviews are always comprehensive, detailed & quite informative. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with your viewing audience. Best wishes!😊🙏
Thank you for the kind comment! Which Fuji camera/lenses do you have?
Went with the R6 and spent the remaining balance on some L series EF glass.
Very much like the r6. Simpler in some ways. Faster switching between video and photo modes using the dial. However: the overheating on the r6 is a REAL issue and disqualifies the camera from being used in longer format environments. GREAT camera the r6 though. Loved mine and actually Miss it :-) only a good thing.
I'm so glad I came upon your channel. Your reviews are rich with such great relevant facts and details, yet still easy to understand. I learn so much from watching. I would appreciate some advice if you don't mind offering it.
I've been taking photos for about 2 months now with a Sony A700 camera paired with 3 lenses: a Sigma APO DG70-200mm 1:28 II EX, a Sigma DG 120-400mm 1:45.-5.6 APO HSM, and a Sigma 28-80mm 1:35-5.6 macro lens. All of this was given to me by a friend when I mentioned I wanted to get into photography.
I am shooting mostly high school American football during bright daylight, heavy clouds, drizzly rain, and stadium lighting which varies from newer lighting which is very bright to older lighting bright enough for players to play but most action shots come out blurry.
I also shoot ice hockey indoors with varied lighting from bright to poor for photography and most photos coming out blurry. Sometimes I have to shoot through the protective plexiglass surrounding the rink, another times I can be on the bench and shoot without any plexiglass in the way.
During outdoor bright days, I'm very happy with the quality of my photos, but when the light is low or when shooting indoors too many photos are blurry or take a too much editing time to get them useful or, with the high ISO of 4000 that I sometimes have to use, become too grainy to be usable. The photos are posted on-line and viewed on mobile phones (so image quality doesn't have to be that great), but they are also viewed on webpages as large as the pc screen, and also printed in full-color 5"x7", 8"x10" or much larger formats for advertising posters.
I love the feel of the Sony A700 in my hand: The camera is on the larger size and it has a nice large finger grip so with the large lenses I use, it's easy to carry the camera with one hand and grip is comfortable even after a few hours of use.
I was going to upgrade to one of the new Sony's but when I actually held any of them I didn't like how they felt. The camera was too small for my hand, and the finger grip wasn't as big as the A700. I tried a few other cameras such as Nikon and Fuji but had the same issue. When I tried the Canon, I immediately loved the form fit in my hand - because I shoot action sports without a tripod or monopod and have to move around a lot on the field on in the rink for usually 90 or more minutes, having a firm, secure and comfortable grip ends up very high on my priority list.
I plan on shooting sports for at least the next 4 or 5 years and I don't mind investing in good quality gear that will last a long time. I also don't mind used gear but am hesitant because the warranties are very short and I'd hate to get stuck with faulty equipment. I love the Sigma 70-200mm and 120-400mm that I have with the internal focusing telephoto lenses, because the zoom ring is close to the camera and very easy to rotate so I can quickly adjust it with just my thumb to follow the action. The 28-80mm I have is horrible because it takes a thumb and finger to rotate and a lot of pressure to move it.
My current camera does not take video, so while that would be nice and I'm sure I'll use it for these sports once I have it, it's not an overwhelming driver. I read some issues with overheating and would want to avoid that.
On one hand I hate to switch from Sony to another brand because I have these lenses. On the other hand they cost me nothing and I could sell them to offset the cost of new gear.
My priority is a comfortable to hold camera paired with lenses that are great for sports in both good and poor lighting, in cold and hot environments and occasional rain drizzle, gear that will be tolerant of occasional rough outdoor handling, for taking photos that will be used both on-line and occasionally printed, sometimes heavily cropped and enlarged. Ideally, I'd like two very fast lenses: one for football that is 50-300(or more)mm and the other for hockey which is ~35-200mm. If this in not possible with two lenses I can also use three lenses (or I can do a two camera set-up and keep the Sony and use it for close range photos where lighting isn't as much an issue) and use the new camera for the majority of the telephoto long-range and low light photos.
I have a budget of $2-$2.5k US for the camera body and $2k for all the lens (however I could buy one lens now and other lenses later after I've saved some more.) Any suggestions for a Canon camera model (or other brand I suppose) and lens based on the information I've provided? Your insights would be really appreciated.
If you're in the USA, Canon Refurbished on the R6 hit $1,299 in June 2023, which is almost half of the R6 Mark II for something that is virtually brand new. At that price point, you'll have to think long and hard whether the mark II is worth the extra cost.
That's a very good price. Thanks for sharing.
The big labors day sale was 1799 for refurb :(
@@ericmanley4822it was $1099.99 on Black Friday weekend
Well done comparison! Chapeau!
Thank you!
Excellent comparison man. Very thorough and exhaustive.
Much appreciated!
Nice comparisson! Excellent production! Straight forward and clear information delivered. Thanks!
Thank you for the kind comment!
thank you, the explanation I was looking for, and your explanation is very detailed and very useful for many people
Glad it was helpful!
really nice review!
Díky!
Thank you very much for the donation!
Fantastic visual comparisons 💚
Thank you!
Thank you for the detailed comparison. I have R6, and was thinking to exchange it with R6 II. After seeing your video I believe I need not to.
Thank you for watching. Glad the video was of help!
i just got r6 markii for my first camera
I’m about to do the same thing!!! Which l lense did you buy?
Great comparison, thank you for your work.
I think I made the right choice. Maybe R6 has better focus after firmware update? if Canon releases new firmware for AF, it will probably be a worthwhile update “hahhaha”. The old R6 is too good, in Vietnam the body price is about 1650 usd, the R6ii costs about 2250 usd. the trade-off around ~700 usd is probably not worth it. I followed and liked, thank you so much for the video. Good video!!!
Thank you for the follow! A few previous firmwares have brought some improvements to the AF on the R6.
Great video. Thanks for your effort!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Wow…Awesome detailed work…very well done!!! 👍🏾
Thank you very much!
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons I thought the c-raw vs un-compressed was the first visual i've seen in the difference...I was shooting in C-Raw but i'm thinking i'm going back to full raw :)
Great and thorough comparison
Thank you!
Right now in the UK the R6 Mk2 is £2779... you can still get the original R6 for £1399. Ive tried a Mark 2 and loved it (coming from an R) but not sure i can justify paying double the price for it.
Thank you, this was very helpful as always! Both seem really good, but I don't like the way the pre-capture images have to be extracted in camera or special software. On my Fuji X-T5 they are all saved separately so I don't have to mess about doing that. I also thought about the R7 as that seems to get good reports now but it has the same thing for the pre captured shots. Your very valuable video has helped me decide to save my money and stick with what I have. Thank you!!
Glad the video was helpful!
I got my nearly new R6 + the 24-105 kit lens for $1450. Using it with a dummy battery and Ninja V shooting 4K with zero issues. Will NOT upgrade but buy more lenses.
What lense would you suggest for the R6 II if I’m shooting a wide range of things?
Thanks a lot for such a great review!
Great video! Very well done! Keep at it! 💯
Thank you!
Great video fam, getting the r6 ii soon!
Great choice, let me know how you like it when it arrives!
Love your way of explaining!
Thank you! 🙂
Great review !!! Thank you !
Glad you enjoyed it!
Amazing comparison, thanks
Nice job, Mathieu!
Thank you! Cheers!
Fantastic video!! Thank you so much!
Thanks for watching!
The rf 85mm f2 is a really slow lens to be testing autofocus on both cameras. The lens bottlenecks both of them. Try using an rf 70-200 2.8 that is lightening fast to spot the real differences.
Thanks for another great one!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Very nice and professional review! Good job 👍
Thank you!
Thanks Mathieu, always appreciate the comprehensive reviews and extensive testing! 😀
Thank you for watching!
Thank you for a very nice review! I´m a concert photographer and i´m using a canon R now. But I am considering buying an R6 mark 1 or an R6 mark 2. Which camera would you recommend for concert photography?
I found the R6 II to be better in low light when it comes to autofocus, so there is an advantage there. Not huge, but I noticed it. Overall, the R6 II is a better package, even if doesn't make a substantial difference. If you have the budget, go for the mark II model.
Neither: Get Panasonic S5ii and stop wasting your money 🙂... and may the better Photo/ video Camera win
At least do a comparison between the two please, as You are very thorough
Great video ❤
Thank you!!
Can the R6 shoot video in a raw format ? I can’t find this information anywhere
Not the R6, but the R6 II can (with external recorder).
Great Job 🙂
I think the lower MP of the R6 helps getting better images out of lower quality lenses.
Hi Matthieu, I need your advise. I have Canon 550D and I’m not professional but I would like to upgrade my camera. I was thinking a lot about 90D but since it’s not full frame +the weight …. I changed my mind, the future is with mirrorless cameras so I decided to go either with R6 Mark II or R 6 and I don’t have a big budget, I won’t use video much. And since I’m still learning about photography what should I get? And what type of lens do you recommend for pet photography? Thank you 😊🙏🏻
You can find very good prices for the R6 these days, even second-hand, so I would definitely go with that one. It also means you can save money for a second lens.
I'm not an expert with pet photography, but I would imagine a nice telephoto zoom lens would be very helpful outdoor. Which one to get depends on your budget: there is the RF 70-200mm F2.8 (the most expensive) or the RF 70-200mm F4 (very compact). On a budget, I used the RF 85mm F2 a lot. Not the fastest AF motor for action, but otherwise a pretty good lens, very sharp and with a nice bokeh. Not as long as 200mm so you will need to get closer to the pet, but I'm sure it can work very well.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons thank you so much 🙏🏻☺️
was looking into either of these for super lowlight video recording at FHD / 1080p 60fps (if i can get 120fps even better but not needed)
biggest thing is ISO for video recording specifically, and was wondering if the MKII was a big enough bump to be worth the extra cost
I find the two cameras very similar when it comes to ISO for video.
Hello Mathieu. I need to ask you a question about whether it is worth swapping the Canon R6 for the R6 Mark II. I have video focus problems with the R6 with dark skins, the focus goes back and forth without stopping and is not stable, with light skins everything works great. I had an interview recently and the result was horrendous because of the bad focus of the R6 I with dark skins, no matter the focus setting. Has the R6 Mark II improved in this regard and is it stable? Would it be worth the change? My next step would be to get over Sony if I can't get it fixed. Thanks!
It's hard to give you an answer without testing this myself, because what you described is very specific.
Did you try the AF settings available in video mode on the R6 mk1? One changes the speed, the other the sensitivity.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons Yes, I have reduced the two configurations almost to the minimum and the problem is still dark skins, since in light skins it does not happen and everything works perfectly. Is Sony a better option or maybe the R6 Mk2?
Thanks for putting this together. I'm wondering why the buffer in the MkII is smaller/slower.
Not sure to be honest, one reason can be the higher resolution but then it's not a huge difference either.
I already have an Eos r which I use for my photography work. I mostly use sigma lenses and I am a big fan of flash photography. So, I am happy with the image quality the camera produces. But, I also want to get into video work. Hence, I want to upgrade. I am not sure which camera to buy. I live in Australia and price of the r6 is significantly less than that of the mark ii. The markii is going for almost 4000 aud while r6 plus adaptor is 3,102 aud. Also r 5 is 4,500 and it’s offers great photography and video experience. I am so confused about which camera to get for video. Please help me.
I had the EOS R for about a year. I had the 5D IV before that and I loved the image quality from the 5D IV better. I too use Sigma Art lenses (50 1.4 and 14-24 2.8) and I sold all my gear and go the R6 Mark II because in December it was on sale for the same price as the original R6 ($3099 canadian). WOW. I love it!
The R6 Mark II is the best camera I've ever owned (and I've owned a lot of Canon cameras over 18 years as a pro photog). The image quality is way better than the EOS R (and better than the 5D IV) and even though you lose 6 MP, you can output Adobe Camera Raw to the same 30 MP size and the sharpness on the R6 II is just as good (if not better because the AF is so good).
The AF is remarkable! Way better than the EOS R or 5D IV, even with adapted EF lenses you get PERFECT AF results adapted on the R6 II. And video is also INCREDIBLE. I shoot mainly 4K 60 and the R6 II has the best 4K 60 on the market right now.
That's a huge difference you have in price down in AUS between the R6 and the Mark II. For me it was a no brainer to get the Mark II at the same price as the original. Even if it was a few hundred dollars more I'd still get the Mark II as it's better in most ways and more future proof.
The R5 here was over $5100 so it was a $2000 premium over the R6 II and other than resolution there was no real benefit. Also I did comprehensive tests upscaling the R6 II files to 45 MP and they are just as sharp and detailed as the R5 files (you can also use the Adobe Camera Raw "Enhance" feature to get even better results).
Normally I'd say get the R6 II for sure. But with that price difference it would be really a tough call.
Get the R6 II or wait for the Canon R5 II in 2024
You look younger every day. Can’t comment on the video because I do not have or intend to move to Canon. I’m sure it is to your usual high standard. Greetings from sunny Aberaeron.
Haha, thanks! It's because I shaved the beard!
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons
I had a beard from Jan 22 to August 22. One of my lady friends told me to shave it off because it added 30 years to my age. I’m 65 as it is So off came the beard before my daughter’s wedding.
I might let it grow again at some point, when I want to look wiser 🙃
Hello, I been looking to buy r6, r6 mark ii or r5 used I can get r6 for 2100 euros, r6 mark ii for 3100 and r5 used for 3300 euros. Which camera would you suggest getting? I have a budjet of around 4000-4500 for the camera and the lens. Should I be getting high end rf lens with r6 or spend on better camera with ef is usm lens.
It depends what you’re planning of shooting with it. Photos, video, both? Wildlife, weddings, portraits, ect. ?
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons I planned on doing portraits, product photography, landscapes, photos and video and possibly some wildlife but thats not the mainfocus.
When I buy the R6 mk II body, I am planning to get the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4~6.3 IS USM as my initial RF lens. While it's not as fast as I'd prefer, especially when shooting indoor sports, I love the range and the very affordable price. From my research on this lens, I'm expecting to be quite happy with it.
Thx a lot! 🙂
Will the wired connection with the Anker cable work with a Canon R5? Just curious. Thanks.
Hmm not sure but I don’t think so. I don’t recall the smartphone option in the USB setting of the R5, I think it’s something quite new.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons If you get a chance can you post the page number from the manual of the R6mk2 that highlights this feature please. I looked for it but only found wireless options, thanks.
Set-up Menu / page 5 / Choose USB Connection App
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons Thank you. This is definitely NOT a feature on the R5 unfortunately. Too bad, it would be very helpful. Thanks again.
Canon still uses OUTDATED decades old front-lit CMOS sensors . Sony A7sIII is superior but still has problems like lack of pixel shift. By now industry should have been moving to new sensor technology such as SPAD or x1000 more sensitive graphene sensors.
Hello mathieu amazing video. I will have to pick between the 2 next week. If the price difference is about 400-600€ would you still recommend the r6 over the mk ii for a pure photographer? I dont care about video at all. Thanks in advance formany reply from anyone 😊
What kind of photography? Sports, wildlife, portraits? Or just a bit of everything?
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons mostly landscape, preffered low light (cities at night f.e.), but also portrait. No sports at all, mostly non-fast-moving objects but a good AF is nice to have too.
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons oh ne happy new year to you and your family
Then yes, get the R6 mk1 and save some money for a good lens. Happy new year!
Which of these cameras gives the best dynamic range in the highlights?
In color and skin tone I like R6 more
Look at the dynamic range test in the video. They’re pretty close.
Hi Mathieu, this is the first time i see ur videos and its hit every point for reviewing a camera. Really appreciate your work, i may ask if should i go with r8 or r6? I do like smaller form factor of r8 and the capability to use cable to transfer picture to ipad instantly and also newer cheaper and probly better AF(in the future update). But the r6 eventhough more expensive (approx. 20% more) with the better build , sd card slot, batteries and most importantly IBIS. This make it hard to decide. So i wanna ask your opinion about what should i get?
The R8 should have better AF (especially in low light, if the performance is really like the R6 II), and perhaps less problems with overheating when recording 4K 25p. Otherwise, the R6 has a better body and all the extra features you mentioned. Also, keep in mind the R6 price is closer to the R8 if bought second-hand. You may or may not like that option, but it's something to consider.
Personally, I know I would go with the R6, because video recording would not be a priority for me (unless I wanted to buy the camera to make my UA-cam videos for example).
As usual a fantastic and in depth review like no other. How about the R6 Mark ll vs Sony A7lV. I'm looking for the best BIF camera and lens combo. I have a Fuji X-T5 and 100-400 but I'm struggling with the AF. Again thanks for all your time and hard work.
R6 II vs A7 IV was published just recently, you can watch it here:
ua-cam.com/video/vLrAn9xzwdE/v-deo.html
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons I'm an idiot. I did see it. I like the better FPS on Canon but think I will still go with Sony for the flexibilty. However most BIF photograhers I see do use Canon.
A bit off topic but will you be testing the new S5 II for bird photography?
I would like to, but not idea when. I'll try and do my best!
@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons Great! Hope you manage to get your hands on one soon. Your reviews are some of the best!
👏👏👏🙌🙌