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

#51 Ron359

Ron359

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 702
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008
  • Loc: -105 +39

Posted 20 July 2017 - 04:49 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.

 


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. tongue2.gif 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). 

 

Why is your photography a hostage to an ISO number?  Who cares what the number is if the camera setting gives you the lowest noise and most dynamic range.  As I said, if you can't see or differentiate the detail in the shadow whats the point of using a number 100?You ain't seen any differentiation at 100 in those Nikon or Canon shots. If you can differentiate more dark grays shades and lower noise with a number like 1600, just turn the frakn' dial!  There's goin to be noise in any setting.  Plenty of tools to deal with it. And I'm an old guy that started with ASA film numbers and grain decades ago.  I still don't know or can remember what ISO stands for.  I shot with Nikons for 30+ yrs. But now its all photon voltages, binary numbers and proprietary black box algorithms.


Edited by Ron359, 20 July 2017 - 04:54 PM.

 

#52 Jon Rista

Jon Rista

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 17193
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 20 July 2017 - 05:35 PM

Why is your photography a hostage to an ISO number?  Who cares what the number is if the camera setting gives you the lowest noise and most dynamic range.  As I said, if you can't see or differentiate the detail in the shadow whats the point of using a number 100?You ain't seen any differentiation at 100 in those Nikon or Canon shots. If you can differentiate more dark grays shades and lower noise with a number like 1600, just turn the frakn' dial!  There's goin to be noise in any setting.  Plenty of tools to deal with it. And I'm an old guy that started with ASA film numbers and grain decades ago.  I still don't know or can remember what ISO stands for.  I shot with Nikons for 30+ yrs. But now its all photon voltages, binary numbers and proprietary black box algorithms.


Sure, the background sky details will be the same, I mean if you have 3e- read noise at ISO 100 and 2.8e- at ISO 1600, the difference isn't going to matter much. It's the stars that change. Fewer clipped stars. Stars in the true linear range of the sensor. More colorful. Better profiles (moffat rather than gaussian). Etc.

I've said my piece. I'm out.


 

#53 tonyt

tonyt

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1383
  • Joined: 01 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 20 July 2017 - 07:16 PM

I don't like processing so I'm looking for the least noisy camera to begin with, preferably with good DR. So far it looks like Nikon is still obviously better than Canon. To get equivalent performance to the FF D750 or APS-C D5600 you'd have to spend a lot more on a Canon. I'll still wait to see some actual astro pics from the 6D2 though.   


 

#54 MCovington

MCovington

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2926
  • Joined: 13 May 2014
  • Loc: Michael Covington - Athens, Georgia

Posted 20 July 2017 - 09:23 PM

The Nikon D5300 (and similar models) perform a tiny bit better than the Canon 80D and cost a lot less.


 

#55 17.5Dob

17.5Dob

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3035
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2013
  • Loc: Colorado,USA

Posted 20 July 2017 - 09:52 PM

The Nikon D5300 (and similar models) perform a tiny bit better than the Canon 80D and cost a lot less.

A "like new" used D5300 will run you ~$475.00, A new Canon 80D is $1,249.

You can get an "excellent" condition D5300 for $425. Pocket the ~ $825 savings, get it full spectrum modded for $275, and then spend the other $550 you saved vs the Canon 80D on something else. No brainer.

The D5300 is so clean there is no need for darks at all.

Canon lost their "edge" in AP years ago, even though they never really even had had it, to begin with !! That was all "fake news".


Edited by 17.5Dob, 20 July 2017 - 10:10 PM.

 

#56 Ron359

Ron359

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 702
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008
  • Loc: -105 +39

Posted 21 July 2017 - 12:40 AM

 

The Nikon D5300 (and similar models) perform a tiny bit better than the Canon 80D and cost a lot less.

A "like new" used D5300 will run you ~$475.00, A new Canon 80D is $1,249.

You can get an "excellent" condition D5300 for $425. Pocket the ~ $825 savings, get it full spectrum modded for $275, and then spend the other $550 you saved vs the Canon 80D on something else. No brainer.

The D5300 is so clean there is no need for darks at all.

Canon lost their "edge" in AP years ago, even though they never really even had had it, to begin with !! That was all "fake news".

 

How obvious you make fan-boy prejudice. You could at least compare apples to apples instead of used to new prices. 


 

#57 Jim Waters

Jim Waters

    Messenger

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 448
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 21 July 2017 - 01:05 AM

This thread is breaking down and isn't adding technical value to anything.  I am out of here...


 

#58 MCovington

MCovington

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2926
  • Joined: 13 May 2014
  • Loc: Michael Covington - Athens, Georgia

Posted 21 July 2017 - 11:16 AM

I am expecting the Canon 80D sensor to turn up in a much less expensive Canon, priced to compete with the Nikon D5300, any time now.  Maybe it has done so and we haven't had the test results yet.


 

#59 nofxrx

nofxrx

    Vendor (HyperCams & Mods)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 5357
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Melbourne, Florida

Posted 21 July 2017 - 07:25 PM

I thought the 80D sensor was in the 77D and M5/M6 already?

I love the 80D images so I expect canon to completely run this sensor into the ground by using it in the next 8 or so APS-C models like they did with the T2i-60D (yes I know they were not identical through all models but still we saw the 18Mp sensor for a loooooong time.

But this is a sensor worth keeping around imho.

 

Back OT, this 6DII DR thing is so annoying it baffles me why they did it. 

The images are still REALLY good and show even more detail and sharpness (less or lack of AS filter?) than even the 5DIV. But as far as DR is concerned canon did exactly what they wanted.....kept the ignorant buying their well-marketed 6DII and the people who know and care about sensor performance in the 5DIV ballpark. Guess they didn't want this one eating into the 5DIV sales.

For people like me that do not NEED FF, the 80D will be in my gear bag for the foreseeable future. Which is a shame as this release was supposed to be a good reason to consider the 6D line again. Guess ill have to wait another 5 years.... 


 

#60 MCovington

MCovington

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2926
  • Joined: 13 May 2014
  • Loc: Michael Covington - Athens, Georgia

Posted 21 July 2017 - 10:03 PM

I thought the 80D sensor was in the 77D and M5/M6 already?

It may well be, and I expect them to use it extensively, but I'd wait for tests of each model before being sure. 

 

(Looking up DxOmark tests, I see that the M5 and M6 are indeed similar to the 80D.  They haven't tested the 77D yet.)

 

The T7i/800D is another one to watch, probably similar, but I haven't seen a good test yet.

 

Here is a review that encourages optimism: http://www.the-digit...on-EOS-77D.aspx


Edited by MCovington, 21 July 2017 - 10:20 PM.

 

#61 StuartJPP

StuartJPP

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 231
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2015
  • Loc: Leeds, United Kingdom

Posted 22 July 2017 - 06:23 AM

 

The Nikon D5300 (and similar models) perform a tiny bit better than the Canon 80D and cost a lot less.


Canon lost their "edge" in AP years ago, even though they never really even had had it, to begin with !! That was all "fake news".

 

That is the most stupid comment I have read in a long time.

 

This thread is degenerating fast, astronomy used to be about enjoying the skies, not comparing the size of the gear.

 

Usually (but not always) the mouthiest people are the ones who never back up their "my stuff is better than your stuff" statements.


 

#62 moabyte

moabyte

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 377
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2015
  • Loc: UT

Posted 22 July 2017 - 01:28 PM

Locked, lest it deteriorate further...


 


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