I for some reason got side tracked and forgot to post the link to the files. The description has now been updated and has the link to the CR3 RAW files.
Just FYI I tried underexposing by 4 stops and the files are incredible! The best I've seen so far from what I've tested. About 1/3 stop better than the A7IV.
@@77dris that's surprising result. I've read in forums about a7iv owners claiming their high iso results is same as R6. I don't believe them but I can't prove them wrong as I don't have a7iv to test🤔
The images look great, and the capabilities of this camera are fantastic for the price point. I have been playing with my R6 Mkii for the past few days. I sent some footage to my editor and he said that the image quality was fantastic (previously I filmed using my EOS R).
JUST an FYI: The R6 Mark II is cleanest at full ISO stops. 6400 will be cleaner than 4000 as an example. Unsure if other Canon mirrorless are like this or not but this is a thing on the R6 II. The ISO noise on this cam is incredible.
I lost my RP in a river over the summer, and have been saving up for something new ever since then. When this got announced I chucked a pre-order on it instantly. This camera is nuts, it’s capabilities are insane. Absolutely happy with it.
@@TigaWould one result of a comparision could be for which type of photographer each camera is suited best. And a comparision in terms of ISO, dynamic range and AF performance is at least not irrelevant.
I just got the R6 II yesterday and I'm BLOWN away by the files coming out of this thing. I've shot as a pro for 18 years with Canon and I've also tested Sonys (like the A7IV) and these files have the lowest noise of any camera I tested. I shot pics in my living room with no lights except for a monitor in another room: ISO 12,800 F1.4 1/4s handheld and it looked like daylight and there was VERY little noise at all... no need for noise reduction. Reminded me of ISO 1600 on some of my other bodies. And the fact I can handhold a 50mm lens (Sigma Art) at 1/4s and get tack sharp images shows just how good the in body IBIS is, even with third party lenses. And I get full 12 FPS/40 FPS using this adapted EF lens. Wow.
Thanks Fro for these files to look at. I had to share some images with the R6 mark I and a 400mm f/2.8 taken last week at a football game at 1/1000, f/2.8 with ISO 12800 and processed with Skittles (tweaked of course) with some other local sports people and they couldn't believe the lack of noise in the images. Sure, I shot them jpeg and let the camera handle the high ISO noise reduction but they looked good. Keep on sharing your knowledge with others
Thanks for the info. As an old film shooter, I find it amazing that we are talking 8000+ ISO is acceptable!!! I am shooting a Z6ii and finding these high ISO's more than acceptable.
I've been shooting the RP for years, and got my R6 Mark II earlier this week. This camera is incredible. I shot my first rave this last weekend, and even pushing upwards near 10000 ISO in some instances, the photos look great, and the noise is anything but terrible.
Same thing. I have used RP for 3 years even for commercial work and it works totally fine. Got my R6 mark II last week and what I can say is that Autofocus is insane comparing to RP. Though I hold on to my RP because it is so small and cute and comes in handy.
I just upgraded as well from the R to the R6 mk2 and also can't believe the difference. I'm going to get a chance to really push it this Sunday when I shoot a Santa Run in Downtown.
@@johndyke8735 It is a huge difference! I made my first shoot in low light with heavy snow and I can not believe how great AF worked and not to mention high ISO was not a problem at all.
@@johndyke8735 I am having a dilema, whether to buy the R, or go with the R6 mark II...Exactly what you have, both models. Did you tried the r6mii out by now, did you compare it to the R? What would you advice, should I go with the R, is it good enough, or is the R6 m ii worth the extra money? Were you impressed by your shift from the R to the R6 m ii or you could have done without it? Disappointments/downsides? High ISO? Did you compare them? Mmmmany questions, I appologize, but I think you understand 😄😄😄 Thanks in advance
@Marvel Churuk I've been extremely happy with my R6mk2 and haven't missed my R one tiny bit. Firstly, the eye detection and speed of the AF is unbelievable in comparison. The ISO is also pretty wild; anything above 6400 in the R was not usable, imo but with the R6m2, I've shot at 8000 ISO, and it looked like the 1600 ISO in the R! Thirdly, the IBIS is a game changer, as I do a lot of shooting in dark conditions and was able to get shots at ½" exposure HAND-HELD without much effort. Simply put, if you can afford it, then get it. You won't regret it.
4000 ISO is actually fairly high, and not at all uncommon in an indoor situation. I think that this is as "real world" as it gets in terms of pushing the limits, because low light situations are the most challenging. If they weren't then Jared wouldn't have written an entire guide to dealing with it. But the images look great at that ISO! Is the 24 MP worth upgrading? That's a tough question because if you're not cropping and you're shooting portraits then 20MP will get the job done. Anyhoo, good job Jared and Canon!
Coming from my 5D Mkiii, I rarely ever go to 3200, and NEVER above it unless I'm shooting black and white. Being able to go to 4000 without automatically tossing the photo is going to be a game changer for me. Oh, and having eye AF so I can actually use my 50mm 1.2 without wanting to rage quit every time I review photos lol.
@@Kee_Diddy you will still need to hold your breath. After getting the R6 i noticed just how much i move back and forth like a leaf in the storm. The camera itself however is doing a really good job, you will be very happy
@@Kee_Diddy I had the 5D IV and thought that IQ was darn near perfect! I shot at ISO 12800 without a second thought and could push and pull files with no issues! My big issue was like you... the AF was so unreliable on large apertures (like my sigma 85 1.4) I also wanted to rage quit. I got the R which improved the AF a lot, but the IQ was not as good as the 5D IV (more noise, shadow banding). Now with the R6 II... WOW! The IQ is better than the 5D IV which I thought was impossible. I can shoot in almost pitch black at F1.4 and ISO 12800 on a 50mm lens at 1/4s handheld and not only are the images SUPER clean, they are tack sharp! The AF is incredible and so is the IBIS, even on my Sigma Art which is adapted and third party! Coming from a 5D III you should be doubly impressed! I'd say ISO12800 on the R6 II will look like ISO 3200 on your camera now.
@@Kee_Diddy I'm coming from a 5d3 as well. While we all wished it was more than 24 MP preferably a 28 or 30, I can still appreciate the 500 or so pixel difference between the 5d3 and the r62. Iaf is definitely a game changer for me because I'm a portrait guy. And the good iso handling is going to be awesome for my landscapes. I gave those files a good tossing around and between that and Lightroom upgrades on how it handles highlights and shadows, it looks very very good. I'm suspect that the R6 will still have overall sharper files, but hey, the R6 will now be one of the best backup bodies you can possibly get on the market. It was even another sale yesterday for a 2100 brand new at adorama. Some used market camera purchasers are going to be very happy in the next 6 months. Better the feedback is from the r62, the more R6S will enter the used channel.
Thank you so much for sharing the raw files!! I am considering to buy the R6mkii as a second camera for concert photography. I have the R5 and definitely the R6 is more than enough for my objectives.
Great video Jared! Grain is one thing, but even more important than grain is a colour shift at high iso above 1600. I'm a R6 Mk I user and from my experience I noticed that above iso 1600 colour is falling apart really quick.
I guess the million dollar question is: Does the R6 Mark II handles noise better than its predecessor since it has a bigger sensor and the fact that it has 4 more megapixels? Also, did they finally get fix of the warm yellow-ish hue every one was complaining about on the Mark 1?
Hey Jared I don't want to sound mean to you I just want to critique your work, for me it's hard to understand how your photo are edited , they look over processing really sharp really saturated, I will tell you this from the bottom of my heart because I like you and I think you're amazing person you need to work more in your photography. Is no bueno my friend
Thank you for the RAW files Jared. I own the R6 and am debating on whether or not to swap it for the R6ii. This will help in making that decision (as I really currently enjoy my R6). More research :)
@@charismaticrell4206 I want a bcam though. I am keeping my R6 as the bcam and looking for a second camera body. I am now torn between the R6 MK II or buying a second hand R5. I am seeing prices for the R5 that I never thought I’d see
Jared, I got the R6m2 second day it came out. Watched your user guide for the R6 and it helped a lot! Focus modes are different in the mark 2 though. Any suggestions?
Thanks for this video, Jared. Question on the shot with the woman squatting with the windows in the background where you exhibited the highlight recovery - can I ask what metering mode you used for that?
Many of us will live until 2050-2060 or even more. I wonder how much the tech can evolve until everything becomes ultra-suficient, what can we expect in 2060. Canon X1, 400mp, 120fps?
Hi Jared, could you simulate a simple fast game that happen at night indoor with a dim light. Safe enough light for running away. Example: Marbles on Teaspoon Race game. How is the result with R6 II?
It's obvious from the slider positions in the LR basic panel that Jared uses an import preset to increase contrast, reduce highlights, and open the shadows right off the bat. It is likely that others will see very different images when they import the RAW files using their own importation profiles. Jared should have clarified that his "unedited" files already have a significant amount of editing built in. All that said, the files look great. If I didn't have an R5, I'd buy an R6 II without hesitation.
@@stepheneckert4006 that's exactly my point. Jared's RAW file won't look the same to most others because his version has some editing baked in when he imported it into Lightroom, based on his preferences. He should have shown truly unedited RAW files, absent any importation presets. Else, Jared should have mentioned his importation settings. The R6 Mark II files should still look outstanding.
Hi JARED... I am confused between R5 and R62 , but yes 1200$ is a big difference for me but i do a lot gems photography so confused if it will be able to give nice results after lot of crops..I currently use EOSR and 90mm Tamron macro for gems...I will also use the new cam for lot of pre wed shoots and also for weddings... so i need one good cam , which R62 def is but little less MP are causing a doubt to me as i currently use R and crop lot of image for gem photos... please suggest if R62 will be good enough or I should wait a bit more and buy R5
Danger of falling down a rabbit hole but does the histogram in camera on a mirrorless closely represent the raw image? or mainly reflects the Jpeg render on the back of the camera? I shoot raw but I know the camera creates a jpeg render when previewing images on the back of the camera. it also shows the jpeg render when I open in finder on my Mac which I find annoying. Thanks :)
How are you able to open CR3 files from the R6II? I recently got this camera and today tried to open some raw files in LR but it shows "preview unavailable" :(
If i goona print a photo from the R6 mark II? In like 240 or 300 dip, like 30 or 40 inches or more? I can't decide iff I shall go for the R5 or the R6 mark 2
Shooting indoors, sports with a 135mm prime at 1.8 ? you would get 4000 iso with a 1.8 lens but however no one shoots sports with a 135mm prime. It's always 70-200 f2.8 at the least which would never give you 4000 ISO. The lights in the sports place must have been LED and plentiful even to get down to an acceptable 4000 iso range. I'm a big fan of you jared, but I feel you let canon use you to push that 135mm lens on this one. which is super expensive(for one focal range)... even for the outdoor shot shooting sports your definitely not using a prime 135mm lens to shoot any sports. That lens is $2,099 for one focal range and in this video it was shown photographing sports which is kind of insane.
not to be rude to you or to the work you're putting out, which generally is outstanding, but i'm curious about one thing. What's the point of reviewing the files of today's cameras? More so, when you don't even push them because one better "get slapped in the face before raising 5 stops" (xD)? I mean, nowadays we expect them to be way more than fine, dont we? So why making a video about you saying they're more than fine? I feel like it would be the same as you making a video that went kinda like "Does the camera take a photo when you press the shutter?", of course it does
Advice for 'normalizing' LR photos: Put sharpness to 25**. EVERYTHING else should be baseline. Do not add sliders +/-, nothing. The only other test you should do is bring up shadows ONLY to see how many stops of flexibility there is. THATS IT. Review away. PS- if you're viewing on a retina screen (mac laptopn, imac) , the images WILL look sharper / more contrasty than on any other screen. Enjoy **- LR starting setting default sharpness to 40, up from 25 a while back. TURN THIS BACK DOWN. It adversely affects clean skies. If your images are not sharp at the old default 25, then that is because the image file is not sharp. Newer mac retina screens will hide the effects it creates, but its still there.
That's LR applying what it assumes is the Camera Standard since it won't read the Canon CR3 info. For images where it really matters, I'll use Canon DPP to bake the camera info in, and then import those raw files into LR with no profile needed. Makes a difference.
I for some reason got side tracked and forgot to post the link to the files. The description has now been updated and has the link to the CR3 RAW files.
One job….
Must have been one of those damn money trucks🤔
Love that you supply raw files! That's always super helpful to those looking to buy.
@@marccav7910 🤣
Take Adderall u need it
As a photographer, I really hope I don't make a mistake and be off 5 stops while Jared is around. I do not want to be slapped. :D
Especially using a mirrorless camera with an EVF…………
Just FYI I tried underexposing by 4 stops and the files are incredible! The best I've seen so far from what I've tested. About 1/3 stop better than the A7IV.
@@77dris that's surprising result. I've read in forums about a7iv owners claiming their high iso results is same as R6. I don't believe them but I can't prove them wrong as I don't have a7iv to test🤔
Jared just want to say thank you for the Raw files. That's the only way to test the image quality of a camera.
The images look great, and the capabilities of this camera are fantastic for the price point. I have been playing with my R6 Mkii for the past few days. I sent some footage to my editor and he said that the image quality was fantastic (previously I filmed using my EOS R).
Do you have the 15-35mm? Are there still wobbles?
@@mcgojosh following your question
@@mcgojosh No, I don't have the 15-35 (I use an adapted EF 16-35). I have not noticed any of the rolling shutter issues...maybe because of how I film?
@@mcgojosh yes.
@@kifley19 that stinks. If that was fixed, I would totally be buying one. Now I’m not so sure.
I bought the R6 Mark II and I'm happy with it after one use.
JUST an FYI: The R6 Mark II is cleanest at full ISO stops. 6400 will be cleaner than 4000 as an example. Unsure if other Canon mirrorless are like this or not but this is a thing on the R6 II. The ISO noise on this cam is incredible.
I lost my RP in a river over the summer, and have been saving up for something new ever since then. When this got announced I chucked a pre-order on it instantly. This camera is nuts, it’s capabilities are insane. Absolutely happy with it.
So fish we have to use ur RP for ever 😭😥😭 I wish I was that fish 😰 sorry mate
I´ve got R6 Mark II at home, and it´s awsome
Thank you so much for the RAW files. I always enjoyed playing with your raw files.
Thanks for sharing the files. A comparision with Sony Alpha 7 IV would be great. Interested in how those two cameras compare to each other
@@TigaWould one result of a comparision could be for which type of photographer each camera is suited best. And a comparision in terms of ISO, dynamic range and AF performance is at least not irrelevant.
Loving this as an upgrade over my R. Files are so great right out of camera that I’ve not had nearly as much work to do in post.
They are terribly sharp photos 😁 nicely done and the R6 ii is a contender for the ultimate all rounder
Agreed.
I just got the R6 II yesterday and I'm BLOWN away by the files coming out of this thing. I've shot as a pro for 18 years with Canon and I've also tested Sonys (like the A7IV) and these files have the lowest noise of any camera I tested. I shot pics in my living room with no lights except for a monitor in another room: ISO 12,800 F1.4 1/4s handheld and it looked like daylight and there was VERY little noise at all... no need for noise reduction. Reminded me of ISO 1600 on some of my other bodies.
And the fact I can handhold a 50mm lens (Sigma Art) at 1/4s and get tack sharp images shows just how good the in body IBIS is, even with third party lenses. And I get full 12 FPS/40 FPS using this adapted EF lens. Wow.
The images look good
Thanks Fro for these files to look at. I had to share some images with the R6 mark I and a 400mm f/2.8 taken last week at a football game at 1/1000, f/2.8 with ISO 12800 and processed with Skittles (tweaked of course) with some other local sports people and they couldn't believe the lack of noise in the images. Sure, I shot them jpeg and let the camera handle the high ISO noise reduction but they looked good. Keep on sharing your knowledge with others
Be careful. You may get a slap from Jared for not shooting RAW :)
Ken Rockwell nods in approval
Thanks for the info. As an old film shooter, I find it amazing that we are talking 8000+ ISO is acceptable!!! I am shooting a Z6ii and finding these high ISO's more than acceptable.
Yup. Auto iso is the norm now.
I've been shooting the RP for years, and got my R6 Mark II earlier this week. This camera is incredible. I shot my first rave this last weekend, and even pushing upwards near 10000 ISO in some instances, the photos look great, and the noise is anything but terrible.
Same thing. I have used RP for 3 years even for commercial work and it works totally fine. Got my R6 mark II last week and what I can say is that Autofocus is insane comparing to RP. Though I hold on to my RP because it is so small and cute and comes in handy.
I just upgraded as well from the R to the R6 mk2 and also can't believe the difference. I'm going to get a chance to really push it this Sunday when I shoot a Santa Run in Downtown.
@@johndyke8735 It is a huge difference! I made my first shoot in low light with heavy snow and I can not believe how great AF worked and not to mention high ISO was not a problem at all.
@@johndyke8735 I am having a dilema, whether to buy the R, or go with the R6 mark II...Exactly what you have, both models. Did you tried the r6mii out by now, did you compare it to the R? What would you advice, should I go with the R, is it good enough, or is the R6 m ii worth the extra money? Were you impressed by your shift from the R to the R6 m ii or you could have done without it? Disappointments/downsides? High ISO? Did you compare them? Mmmmany questions, I appologize, but I think you understand 😄😄😄 Thanks in advance
@Marvel Churuk I've been extremely happy with my R6mk2 and haven't missed my R one tiny bit. Firstly, the eye detection and speed of the AF is unbelievable in comparison. The ISO is also pretty wild; anything above 6400 in the R was not usable, imo but with the R6m2, I've shot at 8000 ISO, and it looked like the 1600 ISO in the R! Thirdly, the IBIS is a game changer, as I do a lot of shooting in dark conditions and was able to get shots at ½" exposure HAND-HELD without much effort. Simply put, if you can afford it, then get it. You won't regret it.
I wanna upgrade to the Mk ii soooo bad. I'm shooting sports...... with the RP :D
4000 ISO is actually fairly high, and not at all uncommon in an indoor situation. I think that this is as "real world" as it gets in terms of pushing the limits, because low light situations are the most challenging. If they weren't then Jared wouldn't have written an entire guide to dealing with it. But the images look great at that ISO! Is the 24 MP worth upgrading? That's a tough question because if you're not cropping and you're shooting portraits then 20MP will get the job done. Anyhoo, good job Jared and Canon!
Coming from my 5D Mkiii, I rarely ever go to 3200, and NEVER above it unless I'm shooting black and white. Being able to go to 4000 without automatically tossing the photo is going to be a game changer for me. Oh, and having eye AF so I can actually use my 50mm 1.2 without wanting to rage quit every time I review photos lol.
@@Kee_Diddy you will still need to hold your breath. After getting the R6 i noticed just how much i move back and forth like a leaf in the storm.
The camera itself however is doing a really good job, you will be very happy
@@Kee_Diddy I had the 5D IV and thought that IQ was darn near perfect! I shot at ISO 12800 without a second thought and could push and pull files with no issues! My big issue was like you... the AF was so unreliable on large apertures (like my sigma 85 1.4) I also wanted to rage quit. I got the R which improved the AF a lot, but the IQ was not as good as the 5D IV (more noise, shadow banding).
Now with the R6 II... WOW! The IQ is better than the 5D IV which I thought was impossible. I can shoot in almost pitch black at F1.4 and ISO 12800 on a 50mm lens at 1/4s handheld and not only are the images SUPER clean, they are tack sharp! The AF is incredible and so is the IBIS, even on my Sigma Art which is adapted and third party!
Coming from a 5D III you should be doubly impressed! I'd say ISO12800 on the R6 II will look like ISO 3200 on your camera now.
@@77dris That is so exciting to hear!! Thank you! I pick my R6II up on Saturday :D
@@Kee_Diddy I'm coming from a 5d3 as well. While we all wished it was more than 24 MP preferably a 28 or 30, I can still appreciate the 500 or so pixel difference between the 5d3 and the r62. Iaf is definitely a game changer for me because I'm a portrait guy. And the good iso handling is going to be awesome for my landscapes.
I gave those files a good tossing around and between that and Lightroom upgrades on how it handles highlights and shadows, it looks very very good.
I'm suspect that the R6 will still have overall sharper files, but hey, the R6 will now be one of the best backup bodies you can possibly get on the market. It was even another sale yesterday for a 2100 brand new at adorama.
Some used market camera purchasers are going to be very happy in the next 6 months. Better the feedback is from the r62, the more R6S will enter the used channel.
I had the chance to photograph the fursuit dance competition at MFF and the R6MKII handles 6400 iso like a champ
Hi Jared, can you make 1 video comparing R6 M II vs R7?
Thank you so much for sharing the raw files!! I am considering to buy the R6mkii as a second camera for concert photography. I have the R5 and definitely the R6 is more than enough for my objectives.
Great video Jared! Grain is one thing, but even more important than grain is a colour shift at high iso above 1600. I'm a R6 Mk I user and from my experience I noticed that above iso 1600 colour is falling apart really quick.
I guess the million dollar question is: Does the R6 Mark II handles noise better than its predecessor since it has a bigger sensor and the fact that it has 4 more megapixels? Also, did they finally get fix of the warm yellow-ish hue every one was complaining about on the Mark 1?
I simply use these tools and share my findings from the real world. I doubt there’s a perceivable difference .
Beyond ISO 8000 means overcast day in Norway in autumn/winter/early spring.
Hey Jared I don't want to sound mean to you I just want to critique your work, for me it's hard to understand how your photo are edited , they look over processing really sharp really saturated, I will tell you this from the bottom of my heart because I like you and I think you're amazing person you need to work more in your photography. Is no bueno my friend
I'm using an adapter and my 70-200 vii... NOISY AS HELL at ISO 2500... metering to zero. Is it my lens????
Thank you for the RAW files Jared. I own the R6 and am debating on whether or not to swap it for the R6ii. This will help in making that decision (as I really currently enjoy my R6). More research :)
Do it! The improved video specs make this upgrade a no-brainer 🎉🎉
Don’t do it’s not in your budget because the R6 mark2 isn’t that much better than the r6 mark 1
@@charismaticrell4206 I want a bcam though. I am keeping my R6 as the bcam and looking for a second camera body. I am now torn between the R6 MK II or buying a second hand R5. I am seeing prices for the R5 that I never thought I’d see
@@cjm8160 If you need the mega pixels to crop then I would go for the R5 however the R6 mark 2 is more sharper and has better low light
I saw the thumbnail and i was expecting think to be a manny ortiz viceo
What's the answer?!
I say it in the video. They look great
Jared, I got the R6m2 second day it came out. Watched your user guide for the R6 and it helped a lot! Focus modes are different in the mark 2 though. Any suggestions?
I have the m6II. I use ART (another raw therapee) in Linux to deal with CR3 Raw photos.
Great content. Which noise reduction settings are you using in camera?
Yey ❤
Congrats Fro, HEard you got engaged.
when are we getting the User's Guide for the R6 Mk II ?
Fro knows fro-toe!!
Can we get a User guide video?
I am getting mine tomorrow R6 II
Me too. Selling my old R6
@@pianofinger Cheers then :)
@@grom5756 cheers to you as well!!!
Thanks for this video, Jared. Question on the shot with the woman squatting with the windows in the background where you exhibited the highlight recovery - can I ask what metering mode you used for that?
When there be a full review and comparison video? ✌️🙂
The electronic shutter is always noisier than a mechanical shutter why ?
Many of us will live until 2050-2060 or even more.
I wonder how much the tech can evolve until everything becomes ultra-suficient, what can we expect in 2060. Canon X1, 400mp, 120fps?
Is it just me that likes the original files much more than the edited ones??!!
Watching while I am struggling to get at least a used canon 6D.
Raw r6 mark 2 file not not in my pc
There is no link for the raw files (?)
I meant to post and of course got side tracked bit.ly/3P2I0mV
@@froknowsphoto Thank you :) YOu are the best :)
Hi Jared, could you simulate a simple fast game that happen at night indoor with a dim light. Safe enough light for running away. Example: Marbles on Teaspoon Race game. How is the result with R6 II?
You gonna have a fro pack 4 anytime soon? I love all of the fro packs. I like having them on my phone for sure.
FroPack 4 will be out early next year
It's obvious from the slider positions in the LR basic panel that Jared uses an import preset to increase contrast, reduce highlights, and open the shadows right off the bat. It is likely that others will see very different images when they import the RAW files using their own importation profiles. Jared should have clarified that his "unedited" files already have a significant amount of editing built in.
All that said, the files look great. If I didn't have an R5, I'd buy an R6 II without hesitation.
You can download the raw file unedited and see if its right for you. Everybody’s style is different
@@stepheneckert4006 that's exactly my point. Jared's RAW file won't look the same to most others because his version has some editing baked in when he imported it into Lightroom, based on his preferences. He should have shown truly unedited RAW files, absent any importation presets. Else, Jared should have mentioned his importation settings. The R6 Mark II files should still look outstanding.
Should I upgrade from a M50 to the R6 or the R6 mark ii? Is it worth the extra couple hundred bucks?
Hi JARED... I am confused between R5 and R62 , but yes 1200$ is a big difference for me but i do a lot gems photography so confused if it will be able to give nice results after lot of crops..I currently use EOSR and 90mm Tamron macro for gems...I will also use the new cam for lot of pre wed shoots and also for weddings... so i need one good cam , which R62 def is but little less MP are causing a doubt to me as i currently use R and crop lot of image for gem photos... please suggest if R62 will be good enough or I should wait a bit more and buy R5
İ have same problem, im confused… which one did u get and r u happy with your new cam. İ need advice too, thank you
@@orcungokcek1724 I bought second hand R5 and happy with that... more MP really help in photography
could you please compare this camera to the a7 iv? i am not sure between the two
Me too. I think at the end of the day it comes down to which lenses you need and can afford…
Danger of falling down a rabbit hole but does the histogram in camera on a mirrorless closely represent the raw image? or mainly reflects the Jpeg render on the back of the camera? I shoot raw but I know the camera creates a jpeg render when previewing images on the back of the camera. it also shows the jpeg render when I open in finder on my Mac which I find annoying.
Thanks :)
how is it possible for LR to have r6 mk2 compatibility and not yet for the a7rV... would be time.. I hate converting beforehand
My camera is still on backorder and still no time table!!!
How are you able to open CR3 files from the R6II? I recently got this camera and today tried to open some raw files in LR but it shows "preview unavailable" :(
Looking at the thumb nail, I thought Jared had a serious hair cut.
Nikon.... where's my sticky Z6iii
Great video bro but where is R6 mark II user guide? :(
Be patient, it’s coming…. 😅
@@cjm8160 I did most of the settings from R6 user guide 😁 but there are some new stuff I would like to hear out.
where is the downlink link of files?
bit.ly/3P2I0mV
Is it good for macro photography with rf 100mm
What Lightroom version you have? Mine can’t open .cr3 files
If i goona print a photo from the R6 mark II? In like 240 or 300 dip, like 30 or 40 inches or more? I can't decide iff I shall go for the R5 or the R6 mark 2
Doesn’t matter what camera you use. If it’s exposed well it’s going ti enlarge fine
(no surprise) (Not convincing ) but r6 II is not bad Sure
Shooting indoors, sports with a 135mm prime at 1.8 ? you would get 4000 iso with a 1.8 lens but however no one shoots sports with a 135mm prime. It's always 70-200 f2.8 at the least which would never give you 4000 ISO. The lights in the sports place must have been LED and plentiful even to get down to an acceptable 4000 iso range. I'm a big fan of you jared, but I feel you let canon use you to push that 135mm lens on this one. which is super expensive(for one focal range)... even for the outdoor shot shooting sports your definitely not using a prime 135mm lens to shoot any sports. That lens is $2,099 for one focal range and in this video it was shown photographing sports which is kind of insane.
The point was to test the limits of the technology which he did very well.
Why do you speaks sims in the intro of your videos
not to be rude to you or to the work you're putting out, which generally is outstanding, but i'm curious about one thing. What's the point of reviewing the files of today's cameras? More so, when you don't even push them because one better "get slapped in the face before raising 5 stops" (xD)?
I mean, nowadays we expect them to be way more than fine, dont we? So why making a video about you saying they're more than fine? I feel like it would be the same as you making a video that went kinda like "Does the camera take a photo when you press the shutter?", of course it does
1.2 is wayyyyyy to shallow for portraits!
#JaredLovesManny-FreshHairCut-Ortiz
Where are the files??
bit.ly/3P2I0mV here you go
@@froknowsphoto Thank you🙏 Keep up your awesome work, Jared:)
If Skittles wasn’t used I was going to smash my original R6…….
How does it comepare overall to the R3?
Very very well.
No girls in Raw files!! 😭 Thanks for nothing🤬
Advice for 'normalizing' LR photos: Put sharpness to 25**. EVERYTHING else should be baseline. Do not add sliders +/-, nothing. The only other test you should do is bring up shadows ONLY to see how many stops of flexibility there is. THATS IT. Review away.
PS- if you're viewing on a retina screen (mac laptopn, imac) , the images WILL look sharper / more contrasty than on any other screen.
Enjoy
**- LR starting setting default sharpness to 40, up from 25 a while back. TURN THIS BACK DOWN. It adversely affects clean skies. If your images are not sharp at the old default 25, then that is because the image file is not sharp. Newer mac retina screens will hide the effects it creates, but its still there.
That's LR applying what it assumes is the Camera Standard since it won't read the Canon CR3 info. For images where it really matters, I'll use Canon DPP to bake the camera info in, and then import those raw files into LR with no profile needed. Makes a difference.
Is there a way to make Lightroom open every film at *25 sharpness instead of that friggin high *40 ?
@@Makta972 Yup, you have to create and save a profile, and then apply that profile when importing images.
@@meechcreativellc ok make sense
@@Makta972 Yup! It’s pretty easy
Are there any girls in Raw files ? 😍😜
hi jared-thejman-thejmister