Canon squares up to price range’s top dog with the EOS R6 Mark II

24 megapixels, 40 frames per second and video recording in 4K 60p with no crop? The specifications of Canon’s new full-frame EOS R6 Mark II camera sound good, especially at the starting price of 2,629 francs. Among its competitors is the Sony Alpha 7 IV – the top dog in this crucial price segment. Just like the Sony, the new Canon aims to be all-singing and all-dancing – equally suitable for photographers and videographers. Basically, a mini R3. And given the R6 MK II has barely any weaknesses, the endeavour has been successful. In certain respects, it falls just short of the A7 IV, but in others, it pips the competition to the post.

Design and specs: the FSI sensor is here to stay

I adore the shape of the recent Canons, and the body of the R6 MK II is no exception. It’s a more snug fit for my hands than cameras of other manufacturers, as it’s rounder and has indentations in exactly the right places. The R6 MK II may be less compact and a few grammes heavier than its biggest competitor, the Sony A7 IV, but that doesn’t bother me. That being said, if you have small hands or if every cubic centimetre of volume in your travel luggage counts, it could be a drawback.

One definite downside is Canon’s stubbornness when it comes to ports: there’s still only an extremely fragile micro-HDMI instead of a full-size one. Why, Canon? Why?

On the inside of the R6 MK II, however, a lot has changed. The CMOS sensor with a resolution of 24 megapixels is new, although it’s still front-side illuminated («FSI»). For a while now, competitor Sony has been using back-side illuminated (BSI) sensors that purport to have a higher dynamic range. You’ll find these sorts of sensors in the recent Nikons too. The flagships Sony A1 and Nikon Z9 even make use of stacked sensors, which have faster readout rates for images. This reduces rolling shutter and provides even better autofocus. Canon has also made its debut use of a stacked sensor, building one into the large R3. However, the technology still appears to be too expensive for the cheaper R6 line.

The electronic shutter has doubled the continuous shooting speed from 20 to an insane 40 frames per second (FPS). There’s still a 12-FPS mechanical shutter inside. Another area of improvement is video. The R6 MK II now records up to 4K at 60 FPS with no crop whatsoever – oversampled and without a limit on clip length. This makes filming less complicated, as does the outstanding battery life. During my tests, the battery was still going after an entire day involving over 1,000 shots and numerous videos. With that, we’re finally back at the level of single-lens reflex cameras that didn’t need to power an electronic viewfinder.

Here are the most important specifications compared with those of its predecessor and the Sony A7 IV:

Usability, display and viewfinder: all A-OK

The EOS R6 Mark II is used like any other Canon, with a logically structured menu navigation. The only thing that’s lacking is the 4-way switch on the thumb wheel I’m familiar with through Sony. The thumb joystick navigation is less appealing to me. That said, it’s an acquired taste. Just like the quick menu, which, instead of letting me jump directly from left to right, makes me scroll through every single option.

I like the new position of the on/off switch. It’s now on the right, where I can easily reach it with my index finger. However, I can imagine that die-hard Canon fans are starting to get annoyed at having to recalibrate their thinking around every new camera. In the place the switch used to be, there’s now a dedicated switch for swapping between photo and video mode. It’s something I find really useful. What I’m less taken with is the record button in the top. It’s set in a deep recess and has no noticeable resistance. Consequently, I’m often unsure whether I’ve actually pressed it. The other buttons, on the other hand, have a good feel to them.

The camera has the same electronic viewfinder as its predecessor. With 3.68 million pixels and a magnification of 0.76, it’s nothing special, but not bad either. You can set the frame rate to 60 or 120 hertz. At 60, you save battery, while at 120, the image appears more fluid. Canon has once again installed a fold-out, rotatable touch screen on the back of the camera. This is the most flexible and therefore my favourite solution. The screen has a good resolution of 1.62 million dots and is nice and bright.

Autofocus: very good, but not perfect in videos

The R6 MK II’s enormously high continuous shooting speed and solid video features are only useful if the autofocus can keep up. It does manage this in photo mode. There aren’t many duds, even with continuous snapping and fast objects like cars. The autofocus also homes in on the correct eye accurately in portraits. The accuracy is excellent and for an FSI sensor, the speed is good too. The thing is, it’s not on a par with stacked sensors like that of the R3. A feature I find handy is the automatic selection, which allows the Canon to independently determine whether the subject is a person, an animal or a vehicle.

Things aren’t quite perfect in the video department. Admittedly, the R6 MK II is very accurate in this respect once it’s recognised a face. However, it does sporadically lose sight of people it’s tracking before the shot is taken, focusing instead on the background or something else. Though the mistake is quickly corrected, by then – unlike with photos – the damage has already been done. Unfortunately, I don’t have the camera’s biggest rival, the Sony A7 IV, at hand for a direct comparison. Instead, it’s up to my A1 – a player from a higher price range – to hold the fort. For a virtually error-free autofocus system, it’s still my go-to. In this test recording, neither camera loses track of me. Although, the Canon seems a little more sluggish. I set the sensitivity mid-way for both.

During my tests, tracking manually selected objects leaves a lot to be desired. The autofocus often seems overwhelmed, especially in backlight, and the camera sometimes arbitrarily shifts the focus back to my eye or somewhere else entirely. In less demanding light conditions, things improve. This considered, I still think the autofocus on the R6 MK II is really good. But not flawless.

Image quality: medium resolution, great colours

As I mentioned before, Canon steadfastly refuses to switch to BSI sensors. The question is: does this mean the manufacturer will lose out to its competition? No. The R6 MK II shows how much Canon can get out of its FSI sensor technology. Its 24 megapixels do lag a bit behind the 33 of the Sony A7 IV. Whether that makes a difference depends on what you’re using it for. If you’re a sports, journalistic, or wedding photographer shooting thousands of images per day, the smaller datasets are probably more of a blessing than a curse.

In these situations, you’ll be glad of the R6 MK II’s good noise performance. Mind you, I could write that about any full-frame camera these days. What makes the Canon stand out from the crowd is its colours. This is ultimately down to taste, but to me, skin tones simply look better than in photos taken by other cameras. With my Sony, for example, I often have to take a firm hand to the individual colour channels, removing any tinge from neutral colours while ensuring the skin looks natural. No big deal, but it eats up time. Time that the Canon saves me. It’s only in terms of dynamic range that I get the impression the photos taken by rival cameras have more to them. However, I don’t have any metric to quantify this.

Video: no compromise with high frame rates

4K oversampled with a full-frame sensor, no crop, no maximum clip length – and all of that from 24 to 60 FPS. That’s fantastic for a camera in the R6 MK II’s price range. It sounds banal that the video quality remains constant when, for example, changing from 25 to 50 FPS. The processors on other cameras, however, can’t handle oversampling at high frame rates. Compromises such as a crop factor or switching to the inferior line-skipping method become necessary. This is also the case with the Sony A7 IV, which switches to the APS-C crop at over 30 FPS. That’s not what happens with the R6 MK II, with the choice of frame rate becoming a purely creative decision. On account of oversampling, the sharpness of the Canon is generally outstanding, outperforming my Sony A1 in 4K formats. Only the scaled 8K on the A1 is able to go a step further.

Canon has a good grasp of temperatures. I left the camera to film at room temperature in 60 FPS. It was only after running for 44 minutes that it overheated. Not only that, but the rolling shutter is well under control too. Of course, the sensor can’t be read out as fast as expensive stacked sensors can. But for a regular sensor, the R6 MK II is remarkably fast – and better than the Sony A7 IV, the Panasonic S5 or the Nikon Z6 II.

As for the R6 MK II’s video, there were only three flies in the ointment. The first, as described above, is the less-than-perfect autofocus. The second, as was the case with photos, is the dynamic range. In backlit scenes, overexposed or underexposed areas tend to be easier to save on other cameras. YouTuber Gerald Undone speculates that this is due to both an internal image processing system that’s more prone to loss and the colour profile. R6 Mark II is only equipped with the C-Log 3, and not the more even C-Log 2. This seems to me to be an artificially created argument for more expensive cameras. Still, at least I can use the log profile – even at 1080p in 180 FPS. I really like the colours with C-Log 3 and a regular DaVinci Resolve colour transformation.

The third drawback is the wobble effect that has afflicted Canon’s R cameras for years. When the image stabiliser is activated and the camera is moving slightly, the background looks like rubber while the foreground stays stable. The phenomenon is especially prevalent with wide-angle lenses – and is a real bugbear for vloggers. Canon has tried to get a handle on the problem by using firmware updates, which has half worked. In the R6 MK II, the effect is nowhere near as pronounced as in previous R series. However, it hasn’t gone completely.

Verdict: a front-runner from the outset

The Canon EOS R6 Mark II is a strong answer to the Sony Alpha 7 IV: a remarkably well-rounded full-frame hybrid camera. Sometimes it’s Canon coming out on top in the comparison of test categories, sometimes it’s Sony.

In my opinion, the R6 MK II is perfect for photojournalism as well as wedding and sports photography. It has an absurdly high continuous shooting speed, very good noise performance and by far the best battery life in its segment. The autofocus also performs very well when it comes to still images. Additionally, the camera feels great in your hands and is weatherproof. Its 24 megapixels are a good compromise between resolution and file size. For applications like landscape photography, the Sony A7 IV offers a bit more resolution and dynamic range for a similar price.

As for video, oversampling allows the new Canon to score points for very good image quality. Across all frame rates, no less. While every other full-frame camera in this price segment is subject to cropping in 4K at over 30 FPS, the R6 MK II even uses the full sensor at 60 FPS. It also has a better handle on the rolling shutter than the competition. However, the autofocus isn’t always completely reliable and the dynamic range isn’t as wide as that of Sony or Panasonic. And why Canon was still building in micro HDMI slots as of 2022, I’ll never understand.

These niggles are first-world complaints. Overall, the Canon EOS R6 Mark II is a very good camera with a reasonable price. Sure, this isn’t worth a change of system. However, if you’ve already invested in the Canon system and are looking for a new all-rounder body, you can go for it without hesitation. And if you’re new to the world of mirrorless cameras and on a mid-sized budget, the R6 MK II is one of the first cameras I’d recommend – but only if you prefer Canon lenses. Lenses produced by other manufacturers are still not supported by Canon’s R System.