I got the 6d ii 3 years ago because it just had the niche features I was looking for. It got dumped on by early reviews for its specs and honestly, I think we can justifiably be a bit ticked that canon didn't include 4k and the sensor actually has slightly worse dynamic range than the original 6d. However, being what it is - it's extremely well built. The image quality and performance is good, and it just fills this role of a light rugged DSLR that can go anywhere and do anything - not the best mind you - but still capable of making incredible images and video in the hands of a competent photog. Older EF L glass is actually affordable on the used market and render gorgeous images which is the true value of going for these antiquated dslr bodies.
I've been using a Canon 200D MII for quite a while ( perfecting my craft ), and now I'm ready to move on to bigger and better. I love Canon for many reasons, and I knew I wanted to move to a full frame camera, so I think the 6D MII is the one for me. Thanks for the informative upload.
I ve been using the 250D for almost two years, I want to go for full frame too, but I ll probably keep the 250D because of the crop factor that helps when using telephoto lenses
That's exactly what I did, but only because it made sense to me. I had a bunch of full frame lenses and was using an APS-C camera so I felt like it was a logical upgrade but i honestly wouldn't say the 6d Mark II is a much better camera than the 80d
I bought mine years ago. Yes, there are several cameras that can do more. It all comes down to how you use your camera. Love my 6D MK II. I use it a lot for sailing photography. The weather seal is awesome. I added the battery grip for ergonomics and extra battery, and I don't see myself replacing it for another 5-7 years. Again, there are techniques to bump up the MP data. Landscape, portraits (right lens of course), but once again it always comes down to glass for me. Great video!
I agree with everything you said. It really is a great camera, but it does depend on whether or not you know how to use it. Because a professional camera in a beginner's hands probably won't produce professional looking images. So, it's not always about the gear. However, with that said it still has some awesome features that really round it out in my opinion and I probably won't replace it for a while. Thank you for the comment!
I had the original 6D and the 6D2. If I could have the sensor from 6D in the house of the 6D2, I would never have sold it. Today I use the R6(1) and it is a completely different ballgame. I do miss the ergonomics of the 6D2 though
I'm not very familiar with Sony cameras. I've never used one before, but I can say that the Canon 6D Mark II is a solid camera. It's video is more than acceptable, the low light isn't amazing, but you can get by with it, and for detail photos it's sort of a lower megapixel camera so it might not be great for that sort of thing. However, with all that said I still recommend the 6D Mark II. I don't think it has one thing it's great at. It's more of a jack of all trades sort of camera, but that's the one thing I'd say this camera does pretty well. The fact that it's pretty average in most situations is a huge pro to me. Hope that helps!
Just bough one used for 1000$, added a 24-70 usm1 and a 16-24 usm2 both 2.8 ( next is the 70-200 to complete the trinity set ) Excited to have some hardcores here ! What’s in your gearbox ?
That's awesome bro! I obviously have the 6DM2, which is a great camera, the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, and the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. The only issue I have is with the 24-70 because the quality isn't what I hoped it would be.
thank you very much for your video. I wanted to ask you a question, you who come from using an aps-c, do you think that the image quality improved when going to full frame, or did it end up being the same? I have a 77d sigma 17 50 2.8 and I'm looking to improve image quality, less noise, more sharpness, I hope you can help me, thanks!
Upgrading your camera to a more expensive professional camera will improve those qualities you're talking about but overall it won't make a huge difference. You may notice better image quality at higher iso but actual image quality, normally that depends on the lens you choose. To be honest with you I think most of the problems you mentioned could be solved with a higher quality lens. However I don't know how nice the Sigma lens is that you're currently using. With that all said personally I think jumping up to full frame is worth the investment because you're dealing with higher quality products altogether. Hope that helps!
I have my eyes on the Canon r6, however I am considering a Second hand good 5d mark 4. Thanks to this video I'm Co sidering a 6d mark ii. However where I live, the 6d mark ii is almost the same price of the r6 kit, so e countries also have that close price range. Which begs the question, why is the 6d mark ii very close in price to the Canon eos r6. OK we know the r6 is a mirroless 6d, r7 mirrorless 7d, R5 mirroless 5d, and r3 mirrorless 1dx, still why are the mirrored body still expensive and close to mirrorless bodies?!?
I'm glad my video was able to help you out a bit, but honestly a tough question. My only guess as to why the old DSLRs are close to their mirrorless counterparts would be because the lens options for DSLRs is much cheaper and you have a wider variety therefore if you do buy a DSLR, even though the price is very close to a mirrorless, the total price of your camera setup including lenses would still be cheaper. But again that's just a wild assumption. I really have no idea why they're very close in price.
The Canon 6D Mark II is my main camera! What's your favorite camera and why?📷
It's mine too!!
@@skyaqua776 awesome!
...also for drummers, that flip out screen is a must for dialing in that all important overhead shot. Thank you for this helpful video!
No problem! Happy to help!
I got the 6d ii 3 years ago because it just had the niche features I was looking for. It got dumped on by early reviews for its specs and honestly, I think we can justifiably be a bit ticked that canon didn't include 4k and the sensor actually has slightly worse dynamic range than the original 6d. However, being what it is - it's extremely well built. The image quality and performance is good, and it just fills this role of a light rugged DSLR that can go anywhere and do anything - not the best mind you - but still capable of making incredible images and video in the hands of a competent photog. Older EF L glass is actually affordable on the used market and render gorgeous images which is the true value of going for these antiquated dslr bodies.
I've been using a Canon 200D MII for quite a while ( perfecting my craft ), and now I'm ready to move on to bigger and better. I love Canon for many reasons, and I knew I wanted to move to a full frame camera, so I think the 6D MII is the one for me. Thanks for the informative upload.
You're welcome! Happy I could help!
I am still using canon 200D and want to get a 6D mark 2 too. did you get it? ))))
I ve been using the 250D for almost two years, I want to go for full frame too, but I ll probably keep the 250D because of the crop factor that helps when using telephoto lenses
@@NarekManukyan I’ve got a 200D and considering upgrading to 6Dii, did you get the 6Dii?
I recently picked one up with a shutter count less than 8000 for $700! I can’t seem to put this thing down. Huge upgrade from my rebel SL1.
That's a great deal! And I upgraded from my SL2 to the 6D Mark II so I completely know how you feel. Love this camera!
Great information
Thanks for the feedback!
Is it advisable to upgrade from 80D to 6D mark ii?
That's exactly what I did, but only because it made sense to me. I had a bunch of full frame lenses and was using an APS-C camera so I felt like it was a logical upgrade but i honestly wouldn't say the 6d Mark II is a much better camera than the 80d
I bought mine years ago. Yes, there are several cameras that can do more. It all comes down to how you use your camera. Love my 6D MK II. I use it a lot for sailing photography. The weather seal is awesome. I added the battery grip for ergonomics and extra battery, and I don't see myself replacing it for another 5-7 years. Again, there are techniques to bump up the MP data. Landscape, portraits (right lens of course), but once again it always comes down to glass for me. Great video!
I agree with everything you said. It really is a great camera, but it does depend on whether or not you know how to use it. Because a professional camera in a beginner's hands probably won't produce professional looking images. So, it's not always about the gear. However, with that said it still has some awesome features that really round it out in my opinion and I probably won't replace it for a while. Thank you for the comment!
How do you bump up the MP data?
Is this good for concert photography or any other photography in general?
I wouldn't say it's the best for concert photography because the max iso isn't that high. You might be better off with one of the 5D cameras instead
I had the original 6D and the 6D2. If I could have the sensor from 6D in the house of the 6D2, I would never have sold it. Today I use the R6(1) and it is a completely different ballgame. I do miss the ergonomics of the 6D2 though
Yeah I agree if they combined a few aspects of the 6D with the 6DM2 that would've been an awesome camera!
I use the Fuji XS10. Sure no full frame and the AF is, well Fuji. Still love it. The 6d sounds very tempting as well.
I love using the 6D Mark II. It's not the perfect camera by any means but it does what I need it to.
What do you think of the Timelapse mode on this camera?
I haven't used it much but the few times I have it seemed to work pretty well and was easy enough to use.
Question! What lens you recommend for this cámara. I got a budget of $500
This one or the Sony a6100? I do video, low light, detail photography
I'm not very familiar with Sony cameras. I've never used one before, but I can say that the Canon 6D Mark II is a solid camera. It's video is more than acceptable, the low light isn't amazing, but you can get by with it, and for detail photos it's sort of a lower megapixel camera so it might not be great for that sort of thing. However, with all that said I still recommend the 6D Mark II. I don't think it has one thing it's great at. It's more of a jack of all trades sort of camera, but that's the one thing I'd say this camera does pretty well. The fact that it's pretty average in most situations is a huge pro to me. Hope that helps!
great video! i just bought the 6d mark II
Thank you and it's such a great camera! You'll love it!
Just bough one used for 1000$, added a 24-70 usm1 and a 16-24 usm2 both 2.8 ( next is the 70-200 to complete the trinity set )
Excited to have some hardcores here ! What’s in your gearbox ?
That's awesome bro! I obviously have the 6DM2, which is a great camera, the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, and the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. The only issue I have is with the 24-70 because the quality isn't what I hoped it would be.
thank you very much for your video. I wanted to ask you a question, you who come from using an aps-c, do you think that the image quality improved when going to full frame, or did it end up being the same? I have a 77d sigma 17 50 2.8 and I'm looking to improve image quality, less noise, more sharpness, I hope you can help me, thanks!
Upgrading your camera to a more expensive professional camera will improve those qualities you're talking about but overall it won't make a huge difference. You may notice better image quality at higher iso but actual image quality, normally that depends on the lens you choose. To be honest with you I think most of the problems you mentioned could be solved with a higher quality lens. However I don't know how nice the Sigma lens is that you're currently using. With that all said personally I think jumping up to full frame is worth the investment because you're dealing with higher quality products altogether. Hope that helps!
@@JakeBorowski15 Excellent! thanks for answering
@@anderssonfajardot.5034 You're welcome! Happy to help!
I have my eyes on the Canon r6, however I am considering a Second hand good 5d mark 4. Thanks to this video I'm Co sidering a 6d mark ii. However where I live, the 6d mark ii is almost the same price of the r6 kit, so e countries also have that close price range. Which begs the question, why is the 6d mark ii very close in price to the Canon eos r6. OK we know the r6 is a mirroless 6d, r7 mirrorless 7d, R5 mirroless 5d, and r3 mirrorless 1dx, still why are the mirrored body still expensive and close to mirrorless bodies?!?
I'm glad my video was able to help you out a bit, but honestly a tough question. My only guess as to why the old DSLRs are close to their mirrorless counterparts would be because the lens options for DSLRs is much cheaper and you have a wider variety therefore if you do buy a DSLR, even though the price is very close to a mirrorless, the total price of your camera setup including lenses would still be cheaper. But again that's just a wild assumption. I really have no idea why they're very close in price.
I work in low light situations on video, mainly. Do you consider this a good camera for this purpose?
I wouldn't say the low light on this camera is amazing but if you have a fast enough lens it should definitely be fine for most situations
Are you Canadian?
Haha no I'm not😂 I live near Canada though
@@JakeBorowski15 Close haha 😂
@@DPoner yeah Michigan so not too far away
I use it as a b-cam to my 5D Mark IV. O shoot video
It's a pretty solid camera and so is the 5d mark II🔥
i have the canon 90d its great but if i had the cash id deffo get the 6d mk 2 only because of the roundness at the top !
Are you saying the roundness around the viewfinder area?
@@JakeBorowski15 no where the canon logo is where the flash is
@@AndrewThomasHelliwell yeah that's what I meant. But yeah it is a little more rounded there.
Beginning features the most mid location of all time.
Mid made dope by yours truly. Blowing minds since 1999 baby
HINDI INDIA BOLO