With the EOS R and the 6D Mark II, Is Canon the Best Option for Vloggers?

However much Canon may be seen to have dropped the ball over the last couple of years, there’s still a strong argument that two of its most recent cameras — the brand new EOS R and last year’s 6D Mark II — are the best options for vloggers.

In this short video, Camera Conspiracies offers a compelling argument for why he regards Canon as the best suited to his workflow, citing the flippy screen and low weight of two of its full frame models. For him, Canon's competitors all have niggling little problems that make the EOS R and the increasingly affordable 6D Mark II much better options.

What’s fundamental to Camera Conspiracies is convenience, which for someone whose work is about speaking to the camera and uploading to YouTube, will always take precedence over quality. When you consider that the vast majority of his viewers are watching on devices where 4K is simply not possible and that his content doesn’t require incredibly high resolutions, this makes sense. For the countless vloggers out there, it's difficult to fault his logic: a flippy screen and good audio should be a priority, and if it doesn’t leave you with repetitive strain injury in your shoulder, even better.

As well as comparing it with alternative systems, Camera Conspiracies suggests that the EOS R will be a go-to choice for many once the price drops to something more realistic — say, $1799, especially when paired with one of Canon’s stabilized, affordable primes. Given that Canon is lining up two new bodies for 2019, a price drop might be a reasonable expectation.

Is he right? What is your best system for vlogging?

Log in or register to post comments


michaeljin's picture

Hard to beat DPAF and "pleasing" colors straight out of camera for vlogging and streaming. The less work you need to get to "good enough", the better it is for people in that world.

Eric Salas's picture

What vlogger doesn’t color grade?
C-Log exists because anyone spending this kind of money edits their footage.

michaeljin's picture

You'd be pretty surprised, actually. Lots of people use DSLR's or Mirrorless cameras for live streaming, which means that there's zero editing happening as the footage is saved directly online upon the completion of their stream. The number of vloggers and streamers that are doing any amount of serious editing (especially stuff like color grading) is VERY small compared to the whole community.

Eric Salas's picture

6DMark2... who owns that thing ? If so, why have they not traded it for a “Bop It” game by now since you can’t sell it to anyone with a good conscience.

Joshua Kolsky's picture

checks profile, sees that he shoots sony....that explains everything, you do you bro

Eric Salas's picture

Checks profile, sees zero photos but seeks to discredit someone’s opinion... carry on bro

Alex Dilem's picture

Do you even video, bro ? The 6Dmk2 has a better autofocus system than any Sony camera.

revo nevo's picture

But why would you than use fullframe camera ?
For vlogs you will be using 1080p on both anyway (almost forgot that 6D does not have 4k)
So why not Canon M50 than ? Light and easy to use with DPAF and small lens (that 11-22)

Canon EOS R and 6D will not make video any better for vlogs.

Tony Northrup's picture

A little background blur can really make some shots look much better, and full-frame gives you that. The 24mm f/1.4 can really create a dramatic effect and it requires zero extra production work. It's a bargain.

revo nevo's picture

but most of the time people want to see more than a talking head

David Pavlich's picture

And you know this how?

revo nevo's picture

What for you is vlog ?
For me and many other vlog video looks like something from
Casey Neistat. It's him and the city. Background is another character in his video.
Blur is nothing.
If you are at Machu Picchu would you vlog @f/1.4 ?
If you are vlogging from your home you could just put some black sheet behind you or clean your house.

6D and 24mm 1.4 is 1.4kg that you have to hold as far as you can with your arms (or your head will be 90% of your frame)

David Pavlich's picture

And many don't want the background to be a distraction. Both valid points, but you make it sound like Tony is the only vlogger that wishes to blur the background when he thinks it's needed.

As for me? I've never Vlogged and never will. I have no reason to.

michaeljin's picture

Casey Neistat is definitely not even close to your average vlogger. Your average vlogger is a person sitting at their desk in front of their computer screen talking to their camera with the rest of their room in the background.

It's really only the very few high end professional vloggers that are doing things like using lighting setups, backgrounds, location shots, etc. The vast majority of vlogging is just people recording a video diary into the ether.

revo nevo's picture

Sure he is not even close but why a person sitting at their desk needs a fullframe camera with f/1.4 lens ?
And even with that you are still getting crappy 1080p quality. (I have nothing agains 1080p but 1080p from canon 6D is a bit soft and overall not good)

You don't need that much money to make your filming spot nicer. With the money you have left from buying smaller camera you could buy some lights and make background nicer and more interesting than lazy blur.

There are a lot of travel vlogers and they want the background to be sharp and people that watch also want that

michaeljin's picture

"Sure he is not even close but why a person sitting at their desk needs a fullframe camera with f/1.4 lens ?"
For the same reason that a person who doesn't know what an aperture or shutter speed is buys a Leica to photograph their family or the same reason a person that doesn't know what EQ or Compression are buys a Heil PR-40 and a dedicated $1000+ channel strip to start a podcast. Because they can afford it and because they read people talking about how awesome the gear is on the internet so they assume that it'll produce better results.

"And even with that you are still getting crappy 1080p quality. (I have nothing agains 1080p but 1080p from canon 6D is a bit soft and overall not good)"
Most of these people aren't educated in video or video editing. They hit RECORD, say what they have to say, and throw it up online. Some of them might do some rudimentary timeline editing, but we're not talking about filmmakers here. If it looks better than a Logitech webcam, they're impressed. These aren't really people who worry about stuff like 8-bit vs. 10-bit, LOG profiles, or pixel binning.

"You don't need that much money to make your filming spot nicer. With the money you have left from buying smaller camera you could buy some lights and make background nicer and more interesting than lazy blur."
That requires time, effort, and ingenuity. It's easier to throw money at a problem than it is to actually be creative and try to solve issues within limitations. Besides, for a lot of people, they just love having a camera that can do "that iPhone Portrait Mode thing" for their video.

"There are a lot of travel vlogers and they want the background to be sharp and people that watch also want that"
Once again, most vloggers are people sitting at their computers. What you think is "a lot of travel vloggers" is a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the total number of people recording themselves talking for the internet. Also, even if you're a travel vlogger who knows what he's doing, you will probably want the option to switch between a shallow DoF for certain shots and a deep DoF for others.

One thing that you're also not taking into account is the quality of the glass available. Most camera manufacturers treat their APS-C systems as consumer systems so they release their higher end lenses for their full frame cameras while their APS-C lenses tend to be mediocre. For Canon shooters, I think the biggest benefit to going full frame is not in the bodies, but in the lenses that become available to you when you move up because in the end, it's the lens that is the biggest factor in image quality.

revo nevo's picture

So if you are lazy go fullframe with 1.4 lens ? :P

If people don't care about video quality why do you think they care about shallow DOF ?
If people are lazy why would they use that big and heavy camera combo ?
If they are at the desk they can move camera back and get shallow DOF with APS-C camera and some 50mm lens...

You don't make much sense.
Most casual people vlog with Sony RX100 or some Canon camera in that range.

Even the guy from camera conspiracies gave up on shallow DOF since his viewers did not like it

michaeljin's picture

Ultimately because people are lazy but they want to look good.

A shallow DoF is associated with quality (for better or worse) so people want to emulate that. Think about what the laziest way to impress your average person as a portrait photographer. Get yourself a Nikon D850 and a 105mm f/1.4 lens and shoot at f/1.4 and it doesn't matter how crappy everything else is because most average people will go "ooo" and "ahhh" over it because of the DoF.

As far as video quality, it doesn't really matter as much as it would for someone trying to make a film or serious production because these people are just cutting up timelines at best and uploading them to Youtube, Twitch, or whatever other platform where the video will be compressed to hell anyway.

Your problem is that you're assuming that people in general make logical decisions and spend their money wisely where they will get the most value. They don't. They read articles and blogs and buy whatever gear their favorite streamer or vlogger is using without critically thinking about whether any of it will actually matter for them.

It's no different from the numerous photographers that buy ridiculously expensive lenses and $3000+ cameras only to shoot photos of their feet hanging over cliffs for Instagram. It's stupid and nonsensical, but people do it all the time.

revo nevo's picture

Sure I understand that but I didn't really see that much people that vlog with fullframe and wide angle 1.4 lens even if they are Casey or no name guy at the desk
Maybe I'm on the wrong side of the internet
I see that many people are using Canon 80D, Sony RX100 or just their phone.

michaeljin's picture

Well, I'll admit that not many people are using f/1.4 as that's just too thin a DoF to really manage with video relying just on automatic face tracking. The people who are using shallow DoF are generally hovering between f/2.8 and f/4 depending on their lens and distance from the camera and I totally agree, it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to go out and buy an expensive, large, and heavy f/1.4 prime or f/2.8 zoom just for vlogging.

Investing in things like lighting, backdrops/set design, a good microphone and preamp, and ACOUSTIC TREATMENT gets you way further than paying the extra to jump from a crop sensor camera to a full frame or from a third party f/1.8 prime to an original manufacturer f/1.4 prime.

But people going to spend like the going to spend. LOL