Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Canon 6D Mark II Sensor Measurement Completed

astrophotography dslr
  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
61 replies to this topic

#26 MCovington

MCovington

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3255
  • Joined: 13 May 2014
  • Loc: Michael Covington - Athens, Georgia

Posted 17 July 2017 - 02:09 PM

I'm surprised that people are doubting Bill Claff's analysis.

 

That guy knows what he is doing.

 

What is surprising is that Canon has the off-die ADC technology in the 80D and 1D MII and apparently the 5D MIV.

 

I guess they consider the 6D MII to be entry-level full frame and don't want a $2,000 camera to compete with the big boy 1D MII at $6,000 and the 5D MIV at $3,500.

 

Jerry

Jerry, where can I learn more about the sensor chip architecture?


 

#27 Ron359

Ron359

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 757
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008
  • Loc: -105 +39

Posted 17 July 2017 - 03:37 PM

Canon seems to take an entirely different approach to the market, and they haven't seemed as willing to invest in sensor technology and pushing the envelope with ultra low noise sensors like the rest of the industry. It just isn't in their M.O. Never has been. 

That is a hilariously inaccurate statement.  Which was the first major camera company to adopt CMOS sensors, bring out DSLR camera models dedicated to astro-imaging, could do long exposures without a hack and didn't have a modified star eating firmware of its raw files built in?  


 

#28 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 17 July 2017 - 03:42 PM

 

Canon seems to take an entirely different approach to the market, and they haven't seemed as willing to invest in sensor technology and pushing the envelope with ultra low noise sensors like the rest of the industry. It just isn't in their M.O. Never has been. 

That is a hilariously inaccurate statement.  Which was the first major camera company to adopt CMOS sensors, bring out DSLR camera models dedicated to astro-imaging, could do long exposures without a hack and didn't have a modified star eating firmware of its raw files built in?  

 

Your comment just as hilariously misses the point and context, entirely. 


Edited by Jon Rista, 17 July 2017 - 03:44 PM.

 

#29 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 17 July 2017 - 03:43 PM

I'm surprised that people are doubting Bill Claff's analysis.

 

That guy knows what he is doing.

 

What is surprising is that Canon has the off-die ADC technology in the 80D and 1D MII and apparently the 5D MIV.

 

I guess they consider the 6D MII to be entry-level full frame and don't want a $2,000 camera to compete with the big boy 1D MII at $6,000 and the 5D MIV at $3,500.

 

Jerry

You sure about the off-die ADC with the 80D? I thought they had moved to on-die CP-ADC for that camera..


 

#30 Ron359

Ron359

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 757
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008
  • Loc: -105 +39

Posted 17 July 2017 - 03:45 PM

 

 

Canon seems to take an entirely different approach to the market, and they haven't seemed as willing to invest in sensor technology and pushing the envelope with ultra low noise sensors like the rest of the industry. It just isn't in their M.O. Never has been. 

That is a hilariously inaccurate statement.  Which was the first major camera company to adopt CMOS sensors, bring out DSLR camera models dedicated to astro-imaging, could do long exposures without a hack and didn't have a modified star eating firmware of its raw files built in?  

 

Your comment just as hilariously misses the point and context, entirely. 

 

You're just trolling again....


 

#31 MCovington

MCovington

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3255
  • Joined: 13 May 2014
  • Loc: Michael Covington - Athens, Georgia

Posted 17 July 2017 - 03:50 PM

The way I see it, for a long time Canon was ahead of the rest of the pack on suitability for astronomy.  The latest generation of low-noise sensors, however, came from Sony (there is one in the Nikon D5300) and Canon lagged behind.  With the 80D, Canon is catching up, but apparently not all new Canons are benefiting from this latest move.

Canon's biggest selling point is consistency.  All Canons work very much alike, except for documented differences and gradual improvements.  Nikon goes several different directions at once and you have to educate yourself about what any particular Nikon model is like.

Related to this is that the EOS system was designed from scratch and introduced as a film camera line in 1987, with digital cameras already foreseen.  Nikon is still maintaining some interoperability with lenses and accessories all the way back to 1958.  My mid-1970s Micro-Nikkor fits on my D5300, though it does not autoexpose or even meter.


Edited by MCovington, 17 July 2017 - 03:53 PM.

 

#32 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 17 July 2017 - 04:08 PM

 

 

 

Canon seems to take an entirely different approach to the market, and they haven't seemed as willing to invest in sensor technology and pushing the envelope with ultra low noise sensors like the rest of the industry. It just isn't in their M.O. Never has been.

That is a hilariously inaccurate statement.  Which was the first major camera company to adopt CMOS sensors, bring out DSLR camera models dedicated to astro-imaging, could do long exposures without a hack and didn't have a modified star eating firmware of its raw files built in?

 

Your comment just as hilariously misses the point and context, entirely.

 

You're just trolling again....

 


No, trying to give people realistic expectations for the 6D II. If anyone is expecting the RTM to hit the streets with another stop or two dynamic range above what Bill Claff has measured, they need to realize that it just isn't going to happen. I'm not trying to get a rise out of people. The simple fact of the matter is, we've been here, more than once, with Canon DSLRs. People deny the validity of the preliminary evaluations with pre-RTM models, then spend months trying to figure out how to twist the facts so that the RTM results, which are just the same as pre-RTM results, seem better than they really are. The reality of the situation is, Bill Claff knows what he is doing, he's been doing this for years, his preliminary results never vary much from the results with final release models of the cameras, and this is not unusual for Canon. They just don't seem all that concerned about competing head to head with the alternatives when it comes to noise performance, especially at the lower end of the ISO range. Doesn't matter if Canon makes dedicated astro cameras...even those don't compare to the offerings from the competition (the D810a wipes the floor with anything Canon has ever created.) Doesn't matter how good their SDK is either. We are talking about fundamental sensor performance here.

 

Realistic expectations: There isn't going to be any meaningful improvement to the sensor noise with the final RTM model of the 6D II. Anyone who has high hopes that there will be, should come to terms with the history here...the chances are extremely, extremely slim that there will be any difference between Claff's current measurements and those of a final release model. 


 

#33 DuncanM

DuncanM

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1753
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Arizona Sky Village or the rain forest

Posted 17 July 2017 - 04:29 PM

The 6DII is not looking too good:

 

http://www.photonsto...D750,Nikon D810


 

#34 bnickeson

bnickeson

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 194
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2016

Posted 17 July 2017 - 04:49 PM

The latest generation of low-noise sensors, however, came from Sony (there is one in the Nikon D5300) and Canon lagged behind.  With the 80D, Canon is catching up, but apparently not all new Canons are benefiting from this latest move.
 

Ignoring the whole astro-imaging aspect of it, this is what baffles me the most about Canon's decision on this camera.  They clearly have the architecture and ability to create a higher performing sensor since it was installed in the 5DIV and, especially, in the 80D.  Why they would put a sensor with high dynamic range into an APS-C sensor primarily marketed to amateurs and hobbyists and not a newer full-frame camera that many pros would use is beyond any logic I can think of.  Canon's brand has already been taking a pretty big hit lately among knowledgeable photographers due to their sensors falling so far behind.  A brand new camera with sensor with virtually no improvement over the five-year-old one just seems like a giant middle finger when they clearly have the ability to improve.


Edited by bnickeson, 17 July 2017 - 04:52 PM.

 

#35 MCovington

MCovington

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3255
  • Joined: 13 May 2014
  • Loc: Michael Covington - Athens, Georgia

Posted 17 July 2017 - 10:24 PM

Maybe something to do with fabrication -- they do not yet have the new process up and running in the full-frame size?  But in that case they shouldn't have introduced the new camera until its sensor could be as good as their latest mid-range camera.


 

#36 Jerry Lodriguss

Jerry Lodriguss

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 6034
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Voorhees, NJ

Posted 17 July 2017 - 11:40 PM

 

I'm surprised that people are doubting Bill Claff's analysis.

 

That guy knows what he is doing.

 

What is surprising is that Canon has the off-die ADC technology in the 80D and 1D MII and apparently the 5D MIV.

 

I guess they consider the 6D MII to be entry-level full frame and don't want a $2,000 camera to compete with the big boy 1D MII at $6,000 and the 5D MIV at $3,500.

 

Jerry

You sure about the off-die ADC with the 80D? I thought they had moved to on-die CP-ADC for that camera..

 

Yes, you're right, I said it backwards... on-die for the 80D is correct.

 

Jery


 

#37 Jerry Lodriguss

Jerry Lodriguss

    Vendor

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 6034
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Voorhees, NJ

Posted 17 July 2017 - 11:41 PM

 

I'm surprised that people are doubting Bill Claff's analysis.

 

That guy knows what he is doing.

 

What is surprising is that Canon has the off-die ADC technology in the 80D and 1D MII and apparently the 5D MIV.

 

I guess they consider the 6D MII to be entry-level full frame and don't want a $2,000 camera to compete with the big boy 1D MII at $6,000 and the 5D MIV at $3,500.

 

Jerry

Jerry, where can I learn more about the sensor chip architecture?

 

There's no one place that I know of, I pick it up here and there in threads on different forums.

 

Maybe Jon knows someplace it's all in one place...

 

Jerry


 

#38 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 17 July 2017 - 11:42 PM

 

 

I'm surprised that people are doubting Bill Claff's analysis.

 

That guy knows what he is doing.

 

What is surprising is that Canon has the off-die ADC technology in the 80D and 1D MII and apparently the 5D MIV.

 

I guess they consider the 6D MII to be entry-level full frame and don't want a $2,000 camera to compete with the big boy 1D MII at $6,000 and the 5D MIV at $3,500.

 

Jerry

You sure about the off-die ADC with the 80D? I thought they had moved to on-die CP-ADC for that camera..

 

Yes, you're right, I said it backwards... on-die for the 80D is correct.

 

Jery

 

Ah, ok. I was really starting to wonder how Canon made the 80D as clean as it is if they had stuck to off-die ADC units! :p I honestly don't know what they did with the 5D IV, but a coworker just picked one up recently, and it's probably the cleanest FF Canon DSLR I've ever seen. They definitely improved something with it. If I had to pick a camera for AP these days, it would probably be the 5D IV. Compared to my 5D III, the IV seems devoid of banding. It's got a nice clean grain, and lower ISO settings seem like they would be quite usable for AP (so more DR). 


 

#39 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 17 July 2017 - 11:47 PM

 

 

I'm surprised that people are doubting Bill Claff's analysis.

 

That guy knows what he is doing.

 

What is surprising is that Canon has the off-die ADC technology in the 80D and 1D MII and apparently the 5D MIV.

 

I guess they consider the 6D MII to be entry-level full frame and don't want a $2,000 camera to compete with the big boy 1D MII at $6,000 and the 5D MIV at $3,500.

 

Jerry

Jerry, where can I learn more about the sensor chip architecture?

 

There's no one place that I know of, I pick it up here and there in threads on different forums.

 

Maybe Jon knows someplace it's all in one place...

 

Jerry

 

It is generally the same for me. I just pick up the details in my travels. I read a lot of news about sensor tech, though. One of the better places I know of for sensor news is Image Sensors World:

 

http://image-sensors...d.blogspot.com/

 

Pretty much, one way or another, the news about sensors ends up here. The big dogs tend to hang out there as well, Eric Fossum, Albert Theuwissen, Vladimir Koifman, etc. Those guys are basically the fathers of CMOS sensors, you wanna know something about that technology, they are the ones to ask. 


Edited by Jon Rista, 17 July 2017 - 11:48 PM.

 

#40 Spica010

Spica010

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 26
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2014

Posted 20 July 2017 - 12:29 AM

Hello,

 

it seems the cat is out of the bag ...bawling.gif bawling.gif bawling.gif https://www.dpreview...i-dynamic-range (full-production unit)

Very disappointing...

I am still hoping for some sort of reaction on Canon's part (statement, maybe firmware change or whatever) because although they are more on the conservative side this is downright hurtful for business.


 

#41 Jim Waters

Jim Waters

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 547
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ USA

Posted 20 July 2017 - 12:44 AM

Saw this too.  I ordered a 5DMkIV from B&H earlier today.  Not looking back...


 

#42 Jim Waters

Jim Waters

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 547
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ USA

Posted 20 July 2017 - 01:28 AM

I would switch but I have too much invested in Canon ‘L’ glass.  I get sick just thinking about switching.

 

I take pleasure in knowing that in an alternate reality my 'doubles' are using Pentax K-1, Nikon D810A and Sony 7R II… smile.gif


 

#43 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 20 July 2017 - 11:53 AM

Hello,

 

it seems the cat is out of the bag ...bawling.gif bawling.gif bawling.gif https://www.dpreview...i-dynamic-range (full-production unit)

Very disappointing...

I am still hoping for some sort of reaction on Canon's part (statement, maybe firmware change or whatever) because although they are more on the conservative side this is downright hurtful for business.

I rest my case. meditation.gif Been there, done that, toooo many times. gramps.gif At least I'm never disappointed about it anymore. ;P On the contrary, I was quite pleased to see the 5D IV performance was quite good. 

 

BTW, Canon ain't gonna fix that with a firmware update. That's a hardware architecture thing. They would have to redesign the camera to improve the DR.


Edited by Jon Rista, 20 July 2017 - 11:54 AM.

 

#44 Ron359

Ron359

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 757
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008
  • Loc: -105 +39

Posted 20 July 2017 - 02:21 PM

Really terrible.  huh?

 

Screen Shot 2017-07-20 at 1.08.19 PM.jpg

 

"...Similarly, at higher ISO settings, amplification overcomes the electronic noise, so you see the camera begin to out-perform the 80D and then close the gap with the D750, just as Bill's chart suggests."

 

 

 

 


 

#45 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 20 July 2017 - 03:22 PM

Two EV is nothing. Try four, five, six. Compare to the 5D IV. The 5D IV kicks the crap out of the 6D II. Consider that an astrophotography stretch is a lot more than even a 6EV landscape stretch. So, 2EV...yeah. Let's be realistic here.


Edited by Jon Rista, 20 July 2017 - 03:27 PM.

 

#46 MCovington

MCovington

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3255
  • Joined: 13 May 2014
  • Loc: Michael Covington - Athens, Georgia

Posted 20 July 2017 - 03:36 PM

It's not that the 6D II is bad, it's that so many others have made a big step forward (including Canon's 80D), and this one's left out.  It performs like the state of the art 5 years ago.


 

#47 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 20 July 2017 - 03:38 PM

It's not that the 6D II is bad, it's that so many others have made a big step forward (including Canon's 80D), and this one's left out.  It performs like the state of the art 5 years ago.


Older than that, since the D800 hit in 2012, and that was the state of the art back then.
 

#48 sharkmelley

sharkmelley

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1349
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2013

Posted 20 July 2017 - 03:45 PM

​Despite the rumours that Canon would be using the latest sensor technology (similar to the 7D MkII but full frame) it's now abundantly clear that Canon decided to use old technology instead.  What a shame :(

 

Mark


 

#49 Ron359

Ron359

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 757
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008
  • Loc: -105 +39

Posted 20 July 2017 - 03:49 PM

Two EV is nothing. Try four, five, six. Compare to the 5D IV. The 5D IV kicks the crap out of the 6D II. Consider that an astrophotography stretch is a lot more than even a 6EV landscape stretch. So, 2EV...yeah. Let's be realistic here.

Testing and experience have shown for years that for astro-imaging, Canon DSLRs work best at ISOs 800-1600.  The DPr comparisons shows nothing has changed, although it may actually be slightly better at 3200 than other models -including the 80D, as noted in the reviews.   Its just a shame that no one at Canon Corp. HQ in Tokyo listens to you.   Sad!   I'll be glad to give you a hundred bucks for your 5DIv and 600mm L lens since you're be dumping all that Canon crap on the classifieds.  

 

Here's the comparison at 5ev. Which you could do if really interested instead of just ranting.   Some less noise at low ISO in Nikon models, but also where is the gray separation (dynamic range) of 4 levels of the gray bar chart?  If you can't differentiate anything in the shadows or of nebula in space what good is it to take an image at that ISO???  Noise can be removed or reduced by various means.  Dark gray differentiation cannot be added back in unless you're 'photoshopping' your images.  

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • Screen Shot 2017-07-20 at 3.01.20 PM.png

Edited by Ron359, 20 July 2017 - 04:13 PM.

 

#50 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18116
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 20 July 2017 - 04:21 PM

 

Two EV is nothing. Try four, five, six. Compare to the 5D IV. The 5D IV kicks the crap out of the 6D II. Consider that an astrophotography stretch is a lot more than even a 6EV landscape stretch. So, 2EV...yeah. Let's be realistic here.

Testing and experience have shown for years that for astro-imaging, Canon DSLRs work best at ISOs 800-1600.  The DPr comparisons shows nothing has changed, although it may actually be slightly better at 3200 than other models -including the 80D, as noted in the reviews.   Its just a shame that no one at Canon Corp. HQ in Tokyo listens to you.   Sad!   I'll be glad to give you a hundred bucks for your 5DIv and 600mm L lens since you're be dumping all that Canon crap on the classifieds.

 


Well, there it is. That everlasting, undying, unwavering Canon loyalty, even when the facts have smacked you upside the head. I don't think I'll ever understand it... shrug.gif

 

Sure, Canon DSLRs do work best at 800-1600...and thats BECAUSE they have historically had such crappy low ISO performance! Let's not be naive here. :p I used 800 & 1600 on my 5D III, because had to. However it definitely limited my dynamic range. With a 5D IV, I'd be very happy using ISO 400, even 200 on the objects I needed more dynamic range for (i.e. Orion Nebula, Lagoon Nebula, Globs, many galaxies). With a D810, I'd be happy using ISO 100!

 

I'd definitely not be comfortable sitting at ISO3200 on a 6D II. 

 

Of all the shadow pushers out there, of all the people who need more dynamic range, astrophotographers are the top, by a long shot. The kind of shadow pushing people do for landscapes pales in comparison to most astrophotography stretches. 

 

If you are happy with ISO 800, then have at it. Personally, as an astrophotographer, I wouldn't touch the 6D II with a 50' pole. Not a chance, not when the 5D IV is several STOPS better, basically devoid of banding, and has measured dynamic range over 12 stops (which is well into the range of good CCD cameras...the best Sony ICX sensors have 12.5-12.8 stops). 


 


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: astrophotography, dslr



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics