DSLR Vs Mirrorless - Was it worth the upgrade? Canon 6D Vs R6

A nice comparison between new and old. I have the R6 after upgrading from the 5Dmkiv, I was alittle worried about the loss of megapixels...but I don't really notice any difference. The R6 is so much more user friendly, faster and more responsive...makes my life easier. I was at Wedge pond last week...don't get the mist but got some lovely clouds, still waters and a beautiful sunrise...that place is very underrated as for mountain backdrops go...awesome comes to mind.
Take care from the UK.

Which one is better when mounted on a tripod and swung like a club to bash your way through larch season crowds in the Highwood Pass? 🤔

Thanks for this interesting video. I've owned a used 6D for a year or so. I shoot only stills: landscape, nature including macro, street and portrait. 
Having seen many high res images from Canon mirrorless cameras, my personal opinion is that the 6D has a superior sensor to any of the them. By this I mean that the rendering and colour processing is superior, so that often very little post processing is required. This is particularly noticeable when shooting portraits and certain landscape compositions.
I nearly always use the centre focus point on the 6D and then recompose. I understand from owners that the outer focus points on the R6 are better than those one the 6D.
I admit that it would be nice to have a tilt screen, and if I were shooting lots of sports and wildlife action then the R6 would be a much better choice than the 6D.

Great video 🔥 the 6d is a Astro beast. Alot of astro shooters still swear buy it today 👌. Subbed ☝️🤝

Funny enough, I have been shooting on a 6D and I love it. I bought an R6 Mk II and an EF-RF adapter today on a whim because of the holiday sales in the US, and I am super excited to try it out. I have a lot of super nice EF glass, but I mostly wanted the R6 for autofocus improvements (and they are stark*), the ability to take far more keeper shots when shooting continuous, and the low light performance. My 6D is awesome though, and I definitely plan to keep using it. I might just park my 50mm f/1.2L lens on it permanently. It is a fantastic portrait camera, and probably still one of the top 3 astrophotography cameras. It *really punched above it's weight class, and still does 10 years later.

My main reason for going with an R6II is because I am taking a train trip through most of California this month, and I really want to take advantage of the body IS while on the train, especially with some fast primes and an IS 70-300 too. My experience with my buddy's R6 with an EF IS lens was phenomenal, even in active situations. It really impressed me.

PASSADOS OITO ANOS,TALVES O QUE MUDA NÃO É A QUALIDADE DO EQUIPAMENTO,MAS SIM A DO FOTOGRAFO...

Not a whole lot of difference.

I can agree about usability being so important. I still use DSLRs, but recently went from an old 5D mk 2 to the 6D mk 2. On paper, both have similar dynamic range but the flip out touch screen of the 6D mk 2 is so lovely to use. Plus it has better live view and auto focus compared to the 5D. I know a mirrorless would probably be even more user friendly, but at a much higher cost so I'm happy to stay DSLR for now. I shoot mostly landscapes also.

Very nice review, but I have a question about the dynamic range of JPG files from the camera. Personally, I don't always shoot in raw mode and I'm curious if the greater dynamic range of the R6 sensor also translates into greater dynamic range in the camera's JPG files in the case of the R6 vs 6D body (I mean more detail in highlights and shadows in 8-bit JPG files).

You screwed up by not cropping the 6d .

I am curious. Why was the 6 d ii overlooked for the 6d. Versus the R6..? Is there no place in this comparison..?
How does it rate? I cannot seem to find anyone who compared the 3 together.
It’s as if it does not exist. As if to say if the R6 had not been introduced, then the 6d would be the all to end all and the 6d ii not worthy of a mention…

I managed to guess all the photos right, I had 6D and now I have R6 both are awesome cameras. thank you for this video, its very nice,

is the weight and size difference between an R6 w/RF lens compared to a 6D and EF lens that noticeable? i will be going to iceland in march and I dont want to carry me bigger backpack and want to attempt a smaller sling, minimalist loadout. I am considering renting an R6 and maybe a lens and adapter for one of my own lenses but if there really isnt that much of a difference i may just stick with my 6d and lenses and try to go the minimal route on loadout with them.

Which camera are you using to capture your video? i was there on Oct 1

Nice video. I take it the focus stack was done external software on both?

面白かったです😊
R6は高機能でエンジンも新しく使いやすいですが、かなり高価です
私の場合は星景写真や天体写真しか撮らないので、6Dで十分かなあ

The r6 has weird colors, I much prefer the 6d..I upgraded my r6 to the r6 mkii and the color rendition is almost as good as the 6d. The 6d really is a beast of a camera, if you don't need the advanced autofocus of the R bodies it's really a hard camera to beat.

I don't think the newer mirrorless bodies are designed to have "better" image quality. Image quality should, more or less, be the same logically. I think the only reason why one should consider switching or adding a mirrorless body is for practicality, mainly AF and speed. I never expected better image quality, but I like my R6 on top of my 6D ii which I love, because of it's Eye tracking and two cards slot.

if I only do landscape, I wouldn´t bother to upgrade. The 6D is more than enough

6d with dual sd card slot is a perfect camera.

6D has better colors. I'm not a Canon shooter but looking at a 6D or 5D II. I went mirrorless from a FF Nikon system and regretted changing. However, my Nikon D750 was incredible in all areas except colors. Blues and greens were awful and I spent a ton of time fixing them in post, which drove me away. Looking at 5D II and 6D, their colors are naturally more realistic than the Nikon. I'm also considering a D700 Nikon, but Canon colors are more punchy, despite the D700 having most other abilities better than the Canons. But output is what I'm after.

I hate to tell you but the 6d was the clear winner imo in all of the examples that you showed.

My 6D can be viewed/controlled by my phone and can compose in odd places etc. Maybe you didn't realise. Flippy screen is much more restrictive.

Excellent video. I sold my 5D Classic (which I bought new) years ago but want to get back into photography. A 6D seems a great and affordable way to do that, but mirrorless tech blows my mind and thank you for illustrating the benefits. Right now a R6 is four times the price of a 6D used (£1k vs 250). Hmm... 🤔

I'm a hobbyist using budget equipment but I have a similar experience. My Canon DSLR always gave me dependable shots, and I bought a mirrorless and goodness sakes I realized that batteries are temporary in this world. And I've loved the shots that I get with my mirrorless, once I remember to bring batteries, and if this mirrorless camera was the first camera I ever got, I would not see any problems with it.

But I go back to my DSLR pretty regularly and keep both of them with me. I like the optical viewfinder. I really really like it. I like not worrying about batteries. I also love the fact that EF Glass is so plentiful and so cheap.

I don't think I would ever shoot just on the DSLR, whereas I have gone on trips with just my mirrorless. The mirrorless is really great and I don't think there are any deal breaking flaws in it. I just think that both are good to have.

The 6d has always been under rated.

No difference in IQ for well litt landscapes I am sure. Not why one would prefer the R6 over the 6D . IBIS, out-of-this-world AF etc: That is why