In light of recent articles I’ve written, I’ve come to accept Canon’s probable upcoming full frame mirrorless is going to be more than my wife will ever go for ($4K for just the body, not even optics), but I still want to go back to full frame. At the same time, I want something that maintains traditional Canon colors, and does video as it’s really awkward to reach for another camera, be it your smartphone, or my G1X III, and shoot video with it, when you could double use the DSLR already in your hand. Thus although the 5D III is relatively inexpensive on a good sale, it’s video AF isn’t so good. It is, however, my favorite DSLR to date for a variety of reasons, mainly it’s color combined with good AF capability and of course, price.

Recently the 6D II has really come to light with some serious fire sales Canon’s been doing. Their friends and family sale was particularly good with a new, 6D II and free extra battery grip $1316 before tax; sadly I missed the sale (which was available through employee purchase program portals that participate with Canon direct). I could slap on a EF 50mm f/1.4 for a little over $200, and the EF 70-300 IS II USM just went refurb status also for around $336 on the friends and family sale. That’s a lot of bang for the buck.

Anyhow, it got me really looking hard at the 6D II, a camera that just isn’t winning any awards from most reviews I’ve read and clearly isn’t selling well due to the recent deep, deep discounts falling from it’s $1999 MSRP.

The 6D II has a couple things going for it:

Traditional Canon colors, which in my opinion, actually are better then the 5D III which was my running favorite as it maintains the same punch, but, seems to render things truer to life, while maintaining the punch. That’s in contrast to the 5D IV which just does not (and costs twice as much).

Price; it’s hard to beat $1316 with a battery grip thrown in, OEM at that, or the $1189 refurb, which I don’t know we’ll ever see it that cheap again, but we might based off that friends and family $1316 with grip thrown in.

DIGIC7 driving it’s DPAF; it’s live view performance is going to be good without me even trying it (I plan to spend some time with one the next opportunity I get at a camera store soon) as my M5 and G1X III (also DIGIC7) are very good (and have facial recognition).

Has the new auto white balance preferences, that is ambient priority and white priority, that’s big.

Fully articulating screen.

It has a few things not going for it:

Poor AF coverage (concentrated in the center making it inappropriate for portrait shooting without focus and recompose)

No AF joystick

No 4K

Poor sensor performance (DR in particular).

This is nothing new here...

But, I started thinking between using the live view and the fully articulating screen when doing portraiture, that’d give me my extra AF coverage, fast AF selection without a joystick, and while avoiding the issues of AFMA for my portrait shooting. Shooting in live view is mirrorless. This would cure my issues with portrait shooting, which I love, but, I also love shooting from the viewfinder which live view is not. I can live without 4K; the goal of 4K is to convert 4K into high def 1080P anyways... Good 1080P, which the sample footage from the 6D II I’ve seen, largely mitigates that problem. It doesn’t matter how you get the quality 1080P, as long as it’s quality. Downsampled 4K to 1080P is a means to an end, a very very nice one albeit.

Then I had a hard look at the A7 III; it’s hard to ignore a modern full frame offering with 4K for under $2K, even one that doesn’t have the colors I want.

So it got me thinking though, Canon’s really flopped on the 6D II as the fire sales are indicating; it was $1189 body only late last year refurb, and $1316 with the battery grip this year new. Canon’s clearly moving it with price point since the spec sheet (or lack of) isn’t.

Then it hit me... You know what would solve the A7 III “problem”? Ripping the mirror out of the 6D II, replacing the OVF with an EVF and throwing in a DIGIC8 processor and permitting some kind of even watered down 4K ala M50.

This would solve a couple problems...

1. 1.AF coverage would suddenly jump to 80%x80% (or more, say the new 88%x100%) in the EVF vs the tiny AF coverage of the 6D II’s phase sensor
   

2. 2.Touch and drag AF implementation for fast and easy AF selection, without the joystick.
   

3. 3.No AFMA
   

4. 4.Eye AF support
   

5. 5.It wouldn’t compete with the 5D IV as it’s AF won’t be as good for low light since it’s DPAF, no dedicated phase detect and is lower megapixel count, lower sensor performance and lesser build, buttons, etc.
   

6. 6.It would compete with the A7 III in stills on the other hand picking up most of the benefits of mirrorless while producing better 1080P, even though it doesn’t doesn’t do as good of 4K thus also not eating into Canon’s precious cinema lineup at the $2K pricepoint.
   

7. 7.Canon could sell it MSRP, $1999, and produce it more cheaply then the existing 6D II as it would have no mirror and AF sensor.
   

8. 8.It’d be cheaper then the A7 III with a metabones adapter alternative or expensive Sony native glass, which those metabones adapters are not cheap either. It also has better color science, better video AF with Canon optics (then adapted obviously), better stills AF as it’s native with Canon optics then the A7 III too. DPAF is a big deal as it’s still better then the A7 III’s video AF. And, it has touch and drag AF which Canon’s is also top notch, with that fully articulating, fully touch functional screen. Oh, and no AF pixel stripping with fast or wide lenses.
   

9. 9.The 6D II is the lightest FF DSLR; ripping out the mirror and AF sensor means it goes lighter still (not by much)
   

I’d buy it in a heartbeat. And Canon has everything they need to do it, right now.

I can live with the sensor performance of the 6D II, and lack of 4K if the 1080P is good.

This ticks a lot of boxes the A7 III does, and a couple even the A7 III doesn’t, except the 4K video and sensor performance. Likewise, it doesn’t compete with Canon’s cinema offerings, or 5D IV offering, or even the 6D II itself, which can remain deeply discounted as a DSLR alternative.

Add in some of the new features of the M50, that is an extra 1/2 stop of IS on supported lenses, new ALO options, eye-AF, poor 4K (but at least some 4K) which are all DIGIC8 driven. This could be a real winner. It would do what the 6D original did, be a less expensive alternative to the 5D, that has some advantages the 5D III didn’t. What a thought.

Maybe Canon’s testing it right now. I’d bet if they weren’t before, they are now in the wake of the A7 III...