Guys, the Canon R6 II is simply on another level. Everything works as it should, without driving you crazy with menus and glitches. Its image is warm, natural, full of life, not like some Sony cameras that produce cold colors, as if they shot inside a fridge. The Canon's autofocus locks onto the eye and never loses it, while the others are still trying to figure out what they're shooting. In video, the Canon records 4K without crop, clean and sharp, and it doesn't overheat after ten minutes. Meanwhile, the Sonys heat up as if they're baking a pie inside. And the menus? Don't even get me started... you need a diploma to change the white balance. With Canon, you go in, change it, and continue. The R6 II is a camera that works, that lets you create. The Sonys are cameras that make you struggle with buttons and settings until you forget why you wanted to shoot in the first place. If you want an image with soul and a machine that doesn't annoy you, Canon, my friend. If you want to search on YouTube how to change the ISO, get a Sony.

Canon R6 Mark II — A Shipwreck with an Expensive Ticket
Written by: A disappointed former Canon fan
I am an owner of the Canon R6 Mark II and in this article I will speak bluntly. Not with technical specs, numbers, and marketing promises, but with experience from real use. If you came for an enthusiastic hymn to Canon, warning: this article is not for you.

1. HDMI… small in size, huge disappointment
The small HDMI is a minus on its own. But the real disappointment starts when you use an external monitor: the camera’s LCD turns off. You lose the touch screen autofocus — one of the biggest advantages of the R6 Mark II. So? You lose your flexibility in the field.

2. “Clean” HDMI... only in theory
Canon advertises "clean HDMI," but it’s "clean" only when not recording. When you start recording, all the info overlays appear on the external signal and won’t go away no matter what. There’s no way to get a clean signal while recording. A serious blow for those of us who work professionally with external recording or live productions.

3. The high frame rate... a trap
A moment that left me speechless: While recording 4K at 50fps, I choose to try 100fps. I enter "High Frame Rate" mode and the camera switches to Full HD. I don’t mind temporarily. But when I turn it off and think I’m back to 4K — surprise! The camera remains at Full HD 50fps without any notification. You ruin footage without realizing it.

4. MOV then (5D Mark III), MP4 now — seriously?
As a former owner of the Canon 5D Mark III, I know what file quality means. The Mark III recorded in MOV. Quality, heavy files, professional. The R6 Mark II in MP4. Compressed, cheap-feeling. Unacceptable for a camera in this category.

5. The viewfinder is not for 2025
Feeling... blurry. A soft image. Our eyes are now used to high-resolution EVFs. Not here, though. It doesn’t inspire confidence for shooting, doesn’t help you be sure of the result.

6. The same old menu — 12 years behind
Canon shows it hasn’t made real progress. The R6 II’s menu is about 85% the same as the 5D Mark III. Meanwhile, Sony offers absolute customization: you tweak image, colors, black levels, knee, saturation — everything. Canon, nothing. No inspiration, no freedom.

7. Canon became the old Sony and Sony the old Canon
It’s reality. Canon follows a philosophy of locked features, while Sony has spread its wings. Professionals buy Canon only for the old EF lenses they own. But that’s no reason to stay behind. A friend of mine who wanted the R6 II tried mine for a week and told me: "You saved me. It’s a disappointment."

8. And a dose of irony to close...
With the same Canon EF lenses, the R6 II takes photos that... are unwatchable. In contrast, the Sony A7 III with a Metabones adapter, with the same lenses, delivers images that are poetry.

Final verdict

For me, the Canon R6 Mark II is not just a failed product. It’s a shipwreck that clearly shows Canon is betting on its name and not on substance. If you want quality, flexibility, and respect for the user: Sony all the way.

I bought the Canon EOS R6 II with high hopes that it would be the ultimate camera for my needs. In the end, I kept it for less than a month and sold it, as my experience with it was filled with disappointments.
The image quality is clearly good, with excellent performance in low light, but the overall package does not justify its price. The autofocus system is fast, but not as reliable as advertised, especially in more demanding conditions. I also found the menu and the overall operation of the camera quite complicated, resulting in me wasting time on settings instead of focusing on shooting.
One of the biggest problems for me was the weight and size, especially when combined with RF lenses. The camera is simply too bulky to be enjoyable to use for everyday or travel shots. Additionally, the battery performance was not up to my expectations, especially for a mirrorless camera in this category.
After being disappointed by the Canon R6 II, I decided to sell it and try the Fujifilm X-T5, thinking that perhaps I would find the balance there. However, I faced new disappointments there as well.
Ultimately, I ended up with the OM System OM-5, and I admit it was the most pleasant surprise. A camera that doesn't catch your eye at first glance, but offers portability, reliability, excellent stabilization, and image quality that competes with much more expensive options. The OM-5 combines everything I was looking for in a camera, without having to carry weight or pay extra for features I don't use.
The Canon EOS R6 II is a powerful camera for specific needs, but for me, it failed to find its place in my gear. If you are looking for something versatile, user-friendly, and reliable, look elsewhere; perhaps the OM-5 is what you need!

Owner of the camera for half a year.
Coming from the classic R and RP, the leap was quite big.
Absolutely no complaints about the construction, the camera is comfortable to hold and doesn't tire the hand.
The photos it takes, even with old EF lenses, are incredibly clear and the autofocus is truly amazing.
As for video, the camera shoots very clean 4K and it's important that it doesn't crop at 60fps.
The only negatives for me are the micro HDMI, which is garbage, and I wonder why companies still use it, and the camera's log profile, which is quite good and honest compared to older Canon models in its category. I think Canon should have a similar log to the C log 2, if not the same, which would be a bit more flexible than the C log 3. Overall, the camera is very reliable, I use it professionally and it hasn't disappointed me in any of my projects!
If you're a photographer, don't think twice, especially if you're already in the Canon system!
If you're a videographer and you're serious about it, go for the Canon Cine series or switch to another brand, although at this price point, you won't find much better elsewhere. However, if you're shooting content for YouTube or social media, or even for jobs that require a bit of video and you're not shooting a film, etc., the camera is perfect for those purposes!