Upgrade to m6 ii or RP for family memories in low light

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,364
346
Davidson, NC
I use the 24-105 L as a walkaround on a M6 II. It is def NOT too big. And the range? Quite nice actually.
We all differ in preferences and usage. I really like the 24-105mm (non-L) on my 6D2, and use it the most of any lens. On an M it is more like a normal to small telephoto, so if that is your preferred range, great. I travel now with the G5X II, which is 24-120 equivalent, and find I am more limited on the wide end than on the long end. When I get home, I'm always stitching together panoramas for both interiors and landscape vistas. I have handled an M50 just briefly and it had an M lens on, so I don't really know what it would be like with an EF zoom, but would expect it to be rather front-heavy. I realize you can adapt your hold to fit. After all, I do handheld shots with my 100-400mm on the 6D2.

I tried stitching together six shots of the Pantheon dome, and still didn't get it all.

IMG_0387-Pano.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dantana and SteveC

SteveC

M6 mk II
Sep 3, 2019
551
382
+1 for the Pantheon dome...it's not one of the Seven Wonders of the World (only one of which survives today), but honestly, it probably should be. A technological marvel for its age (2nd century CE), over 1800 years old today.
 

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
509
6
41
Orlando
www.allophotography.com
Ok so I upgraded to the m6 ii
Ef 17-55 2.8 and 32mm 1.4.
I felt confident until I saw shots from Christmas. They are not as sharp and detailed as I was hoping with better glass vs the kit zoom. I am wondering if I should bite the bullet and get the RP while still on sale or even the R if that is the best camera when upgrading from the M50. It just does not feel that great in terms of IQ indoors even with a speedlite. The RP with 24-105 seemed significantly more detailed in every shot. Is that a Full Frame sensor thing or something I am doing wrong?
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,364
346
Davidson, NC
I get sharp pictures with my G series cameras with 1” sensors and tiny lenses, so I would expect M series cameras to do even better. Can you tell if you have focus issues and/or motion blur? Christmas pictures can involve active kids and slow shutter speed from low light and situations where autofocus could be tricky.
 

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
509
6
41
Orlando
www.allophotography.com
I get sharp pictures with my G series cameras with 1” sensors and tiny lenses, so I would expect M series cameras to do even better. Can you tell if you have focus issues and/or motion blur? Christmas pictures can involve active kids and slow shutter speed from low light and situations where autofocus could be tricky.
They are relatively in focus but seems that that the detail is either lost in noise reduction in post or just not there. I will post an example in the am
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
741
499
Ok so I upgraded to the m6 ii
Ef 17-55 2.8 and 32mm 1.4.
I felt confident until I saw shots from Christmas. They are not as sharp and detailed as I was hoping with better glass vs the kit zoom. I am wondering if I should bite the bullet and get the RP while still on sale or even the R if that is the best camera when upgrading from the M50. It just does not feel that great in terms of IQ indoors even with a speedlite. The RP with 24-105 seemed significantly more detailed in every shot. Is that a Full Frame sensor thing or something I am doing wrong?
For fairly static scenes the RP picture look better at the same ISO, but as soon as something moves the AF and FPS on the M6II are superior. For this xmas I rented the RF24-70 and RF50, so I have native RF glass to try on the RP. The combination of M6II+22mm+EL100 and RP+RF50+V860IIC worked out well yesterday.
Compared to the RF50 everything is soft and boring :) But the main thing that impacted the image quality is Canon locking auto ISO to 400 and 1600 when using flash. Things improve a lot when manually moving it to 800 or 400.
If you don't use eye AF + servo or need high FPS, the RP seems better for indoors. I also miss the 'dial func' button on the RP, it makes changing things like FPS so much faster, especially outside with gloves on.
 

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
94
126
Yes, I think seeing a photo or two will help determine why your photos are softer than you would like. There are so many variables that go into getting a sharp photo.

Regarding the cameras, all other things being equal (approx focal length, aperture, shutter, ISO), a full frame camera will give better low light results. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I rented an M6 II and RP specifically to compare low-light IQ, and the RP gave better results. I bought an RP and use it primarily with an RF 35mm F1.8 and EF 85mm F1.8 and the results both indoors and outdoors are spectacular. I do not use flash at all. My Christmas photos which included my running 3-year old were taken in very low light by the Christmas tree.

It did take a while and a lot of experimenting to figure out the best way to set up the camera. On the RP, I almost always use Eye-Detect AF, servo, and continuous shooting. The eye detect on my rental M6 II was good, but it only tracked the eye when the subject's face was fairly large in the frame. My RP tracks the eye with the subject much smaller in the frame, which is helpful. There are also several parameters in the RP's Custom Functions menu that allow you to adjust how Eye-Detect operates and tracks.

Are you shooting RAW and processing in Canon DPP software? That will give the best results and allow a lot of fine tuning of sharpness and noise reduction. My latest set of cameras and DPP default the Sharpening Method to "Unsharp Mask". I've found that Unsharp Mask shows more noise in general than the "Sharpness" setting. I now set all photos to the Sharpness method "Sharpness" with a starting level of 5 and I like the results much better. (See screenshot below):

sharpness.jpg


I can't remember if the M6 II has Digital Lens Optimizer (I'm not referring to the aberration correction, distortion correction, etc., I'm referring to DLO for sharpness which the RP has). DLO works well outdoors, but I actually like the results with it off when I'm indoors.

My general test for indoor low-light shooting is how well I can see individual eyelashes when the photo is viewed at 100%. I'd have to know what you consider acceptably sharp. I'm sure seeing some example photos will be very helpful, along with exposure settings, and autofocus settings.
 

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
509
6
41
Orlando
www.allophotography.com
IMG_0466.jpg


This is my son on EFM 32mm F3.2 ISO 1000 1/160 EL 100 1/64 flash output manual. This is a good example of what I see with the APSC camera's indoors. Just a ton less detail so when you add some NR in post it is frustrating when I know what a FF sensor can bring. I was reviewing some pictures and I think the Eye AF which is what this was on in one shot is not always accurate. I found others where it was and there was more detail but for a almost $1000 body/evf I expect better as I own the M50 and this does not feel like as much of an upgrade as I was hoping. The second pic was F2 ISO 250 1/160 but he was more isolated so I wonder if the AF is getting confused when there are other people in the frame?
 

Attachments

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
576
Hamburg, Germany
View attachment 187925

This is my son on EFM 32mm F3.2 ISO 1000 1/160 EL 100 1/64 flash output manual. This is a good example of what I see with the APSC camera's indoors. Just a ton less detail so when you add some NR in post it is frustrating when I know what a FF sensor can bring.
A FF Sensor gives you a bit more than a stop of an advantage, but I doubt that would be a night and day difference in the picture you showed.

At that distance I think you could have opened the aperture a good deal further, and since he's sitting a lower shutter should be fine as well. But I'm most surprised at how little flash you used. Are you bouncing it? If so, why not go a bit higher and actually brighten up the room with it? It's just my personal preference of course, but I use my flash as the main light source on these dim family events, because otherwise the lighting often ends up looking rather dark and moody, even though the atmosphere is usually a good deal more cheerful.
 

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
94
126
This is my son on EFM 32mm F3.2 ISO 1000 1/160 EL 100 1/64 flash output manual. This is a good example of what I see with the APSC camera's indoors. Just a ton less detail so when you add some NR in post it is frustrating when I know what a FF sensor can bring. I was reviewing some pictures and I think the Eye AF which is what this was on in one shot is not always accurate. I found others where it was and there was more detail but for a almost $1000 body/evf I expect better as I own the M50 and this does not feel like as much of an upgrade as I was hoping. The second pic was F2 ISO 250 1/160 but he was more isolated so I wonder if the AF is getting confused when there are other people in the frame?
Both photos look pretty well focused to me. I don't think focus is your issue.

The second photo looks pretty good overall. I noticed the ISO on that photo is 250. The first photo is much noisier, and I see that it is set at ISO 1000. I think the higher ISO made a difference here, and that as joules said it could be a bit underexposed. Those two factors contributed to the noise on the first photo. I agree that a wider aperture and / or slower shutter speed with a lower ISO could have helped a lot with the noise on that one. It looks like the light source is a little brighter in photo two, considering the exposure settings are more than half a stop darker, yet the photo itself appears brighter.

Regarding camera choice though, I think a full-frame camera would have handled that shot a bit better even with the exact same exposure settings. On my RP, ISO 100 through 1600 produces results with minimal noise. That's the advantage, you get a bit more leeway in ISO. Before I went that route though, I'd see if you can lower the ISO in similar shots going forward, with wider aperture or slower shutter.
 

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
509
6
41
Orlando
www.allophotography.com
A FF Sensor gives you a bit more than a stop of an advantage, but I doubt that would be a night and day difference in the picture you showed.

At that distance I think you could have opened the aperture a good deal further, and since he's sitting a lower shutter should be fine as well. But I'm most surprised at how little flash you used. Are you bouncing it? If so, why not go a bit higher and actually brighten up the room with it? It's just my personal preference of course, but I use my flash as the main light source on these dim family events, because otherwise the lighting often ends up looking rather dark and moody, even though the atmosphere is usually a good deal more cheerful.
Yeah I agree but since I did not have much time to experiment with the camera and speedlite. It was just my initial settings and I realized I needed to make adjustments too late but I enjoyed the time vs click, click, click. Having owned the 1dx and 5d4. I just think my GAS took over and I should have jumped to the RP if the m50 was not cutting it or have been happy with it till more lenses surfaced on either systems. I love the 24-105 F4 and just wish it existed for the M mount in smaller size like the Sony 16-70 f4.
 

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
509
6
41
Orlando
www.allophotography.com
A FF Sensor gives you a bit more than a stop of an advantage, but I doubt that would be a night and day difference in the picture you showed.

At that distance I think you could have opened the aperture a good deal further, and since he's sitting a lower shutter should be fine as well. But I'm most surprised at how little flash you used. Are you bouncing it? If so, why not go a bit higher and actually brighten up the room with it? It's just my personal preference of course, but I use my flash as the main light source on these dim family events, because otherwise the lighting often ends up looking rather dark and moody, even though the atmosphere is usually a good deal more cheerful.
I went out again with the 17-55 2.8 lens and shot this at 2.8 1/80 40mm iso3200. Could not use speedlite as I did not want to startle him. Again the noise is fine just surprised at that lack of details. I have shots of the RP at ISO 10000 that have more details. I want to make sure before I lunge into the FF world again that I am not just missing technique vs an expectation that this camera will end up something it is not. I hope that makes sense.
 

Attachments

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
789
155
I went out again with the 17-55 2.8 lens and shot this at 2.8 1/80 40mm iso3200. Could not use speedlite as I did not want to startle him. Again the noise is fine just surprised at that lack of details. I have shots of the RP at ISO 10000 that have more details. I want to make sure before I lunge into the FF world again that I am not just missing technique vs an expectation that this camera will end up something it is not. I hope that makes sense.
ISO 3200 is not going to be great for details, but a couple of things you could check if you haven’t already.

Was the IS on or off on the lens? If on, did you give it time to settle after it activated before you too the shot?

What sharpness settings are you using for your processing?
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,364
346
Davidson, NC
I went out again with the 17-55 2.8 lens and shot this at 2.8 1/80 40mm iso3200. Could not use speedlite as I did not want to startle him. Again the noise is fine just surprised at that lack of details. I have shots of the RP at ISO 10000 that have more details. I want to make sure before I lunge into the FF world again that I am not just missing technique vs an expectation that this camera will end up something it is not. I hope that makes sense.
Every hair looks clear to me. What details are you missing?
 

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
509
6
41
Orlando
www.allophotography.com
ISO 3200 is not going to be great for details, but a couple of things you could check if you haven’t already.

Was the IS on or off on the lens? If on, did you give it time to settle after it activated before you too the shot?

What sharpness settings are you using for your processing?
The lens was on for a few shots prior. Yea it was on and settled. As for sharpness. It is 6 on unsharp mask in LR. I do realize that iso 3200 will not be as sharp but the pic still seems soft.
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
576
Hamburg, Germany
The lens was on for a few shots prior. Yea it was on and settled. As for sharpness. It is 6 on unsharp mask in LR. I do realize that iso 3200 will not be as sharp but the pic still seems soft.
LR isn't the greatest tool for sharpening and denoising. I use mostly smart sharpen from Photoshop, as it provides a simple to use deconvolution sharpening method and can surpress some noise. But there are many other tools people prefer over LR for noise, like Noise Ninja or Denoise Ai. Maybe you could see if some software improvements help you deal with these situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KKCFamilyman