Canon R6 Mark II vs Sigma fp L
The Canon EOS R6 Mark II and the Sigma fp L are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in November 2022 and March 2021. Both the R6 Mark II and the fp L are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a full frame sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 24 megapixels, whereas the Sigma provides 60.2 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Canon EOS R6 Mark II and the Sigma fp L? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon R6 Mark II and the Sigma fp L is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Sigma fp L is considerably smaller (42 percent) than the Canon R6 Mark II. Moreover, the fp L is substantially lighter (36 percent) than the R6 Mark II. In this context, it is worth noting that both cameras are splash and dust-proof and can, hence, be used in inclement weather conditions or harsh environments.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. Hence, you might want to study and compare the specifications of available lenses in order to get the full picture of the size and weight of the two camera systems.
Concerning battery life, the R6 Mark II gets 450 shots out of its Canon LP-E6NH battery, while the fp L can take 240 images on a single charge of its Sigma BP-51 power pack. The battery packs of both cameras can be charged via USB, which can be very convenient when travelling.
The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.
Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Canon R6 Mark II | 138 mm | 98 mm | 88 mm | 670 g | 450 | Y | Nov 2022 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
2. | Sigma fp L | 113 mm | 70 mm | 45 mm | 427 g | 240 | Y | Mar 2021 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
3. | Canon 6D | 145 mm | 111 mm | 71 mm | 770 g | 1090 | Y | Sep 2012 | US$ 2 099 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon R | 139 mm | 98 mm | 84 mm | 660 g | 370 | Y | Sep 2018 | US$ 2 299 | ebay.com | |
5. | Canon R3 | 150 mm | 143 mm | 87 mm | 1015 g | 760 | Y | Sep 2021 | US$ 5 999 | amazon.com | |
6. | Canon R5 | 138 mm | 98 mm | 88 mm | 738 g | 320 | Y | Jul 2020 | US$ 3 899 | amazon.com | |
7. | Canon R5 C | 142 mm | 101 mm | 111 mm | 770 g | 320 | Y | Jan 2022 | US$ 4 499 | amazon.com | |
8. | Canon R6 | 138 mm | 98 mm | 88 mm | 680 g | 360 | Y | Jul 2020 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
9. | Fujifilm X-H2S | 136 mm | 93 mm | 85 mm | 660 g | 580 | Y | May 2022 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
10. | Leica M11 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 640 g | 700 | Y | Jan 2022 | US$ 8 999 | amazon.com | |
11. | Nikon D780 | 144 mm | 116 mm | 76 mm | 840 g | 2260 | Y | Jan 2020 | US$ 2 299 | amazon.com | |
12. | OM System OM-1 | 135 mm | 92 mm | 73 mm | 599 g | 520 | Y | Feb 2022 | US$ 2 199 | ebay.com | |
13. | Sigma fp | 113 mm | 70 mm | 45 mm | 422 g | 280 | Y | Jul 2019 | US$ 1 899 | amazon.com | |
14. | Sony A7 IV | 131 mm | 96 mm | 80 mm | 659 g | 580 | Y | Oct 2021 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
15. | Sony A7R | 127 mm | 94 mm | 48 mm | 465 g | 340 | Y | Oct 2013 | US$ 2 299 | ebay.com | |
16. | Sony A7S | 127 mm | 94 mm | 48 mm | 489 g | 380 | Y | Apr 2014 | US$ 2 499 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony A99 | 147 mm | 111 mm | 78 mm | 812 g | 500 | Y | Sep 2012 | US$ 2 799 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The retail prices at the time of the camera’s release place the model in the market relative to other models in the producer’s line-up and the competition. The two cameras under review were launched at the same price and fall into the same market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.
Sensor comparison
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Both cameras under consideration feature a full frame sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the fp L is 1 percent bigger. They nevertheless have the same format factor of 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
With 60.2MP, the fp L offers a higher resolution than the R6 Mark II (24MP), but the fp L has smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.79μm versus 5.98μm for the R6 Mark II). It is noteworthy in this context that the R6 Mark II is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 7 months) than the fp L, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units.
The resolution advantage of the Sigma fp L implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the fp L for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 47.6 x 31.6 inches or 120.9 x 80.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 38.1 x 25.3 inches or 96.7 x 64.3 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 31.7 x 21.1 inches or 80.6 x 53.6 cm. The corresponding values for the Canon R6 Mark II are 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm for good quality, 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm for very good quality, and 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 cm for excellent quality prints.
The R6 Mark II has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.
The Canon EOS R6 Mark II has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 102400, which can be extended to ISO 100-204800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Sigma fp L are ISO 100 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 6-102400.
In terms of underlying technology, the R6 Mark II is build around a CMOS sensor, while the fp L uses a BSI-CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.
For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Canon R6 Mark II | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4k/60p | 25.4 | 14.6 | 3154 | 96 | |
2. | Sigma fp L | Full Frame | 60.2 | 9520 | 6328 | 4K/30p | 25.3 | 14.4 | 3001 | 96 | |
3. | Canon 6D | Full Frame | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 1080/30p | 23.8 | 12.1 | 2340 | 82 | |
4. | Canon R | Full Frame | 30.1 | 6720 | 4480 | 4K/30p | 24.5 | 13.5 | 2742 | 89 | |
5. | Canon R3 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 6K/60p | 25.0 | 14.7 | 4086 | 96 | |
6. | Canon R5 | Full Frame | 44.8 | 8192 | 5464 | 8K/30p | 25.3 | 14.6 | 3042 | 95 | |
7. | Canon R5 C | Full Frame | 44.8 | 8192 | 5464 | 8k/60p | 25.4 | 14.5 | 3082 | 96 | |
8. | Canon R6 | Full Frame | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 4k/60p | 24.2 | 14.3 | 3394 | 90 | |
9. | Fujifilm X-H2S | APS-C | 26.0 | 6240 | 4160 | 6.2k/30p | 24.3 | 13.9 | 2224 | 86 | |
10. | Leica M11 | Full Frame | 60.3 | 9528 | 6328 | none | 26.3 | 14.8 | 3376 | 100 | |
11. | Nikon D780 | Full Frame | 24.3 | 6048 | 4024 | 4K/30p | 25.3 | 14.3 | 2877 | 95 | |
12. | OM System OM-1 | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/60p | 23.4 | 13.4 | 1553 | 77 | |
13. | Sigma fp | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/30p | 25.2 | 14.2 | 2829 | 94 | |
14. | Sony A7 IV | Full Frame | 32.7 | 7008 | 4672 | 4K/60p | 25.4 | 14.7 | 3379 | 97 | |
15. | Sony A7R | Full Frame | 36.2 | 7360 | 4912 | 1080/60p | 25.6 | 14.1 | 2746 | 95 | |
16. | Sony A7S | Full Frame | 12.0 | 4240 | 2832 | 1080/60p | 23.9 | 13.2 | 3702 | 87 | |
17. | Sony A99 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 25.0 | 14.0 | 1555 | 89 | |
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age. |
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the R6 Mark II provides a higher frame rate than the fp L. It can shoot video footage at 4k/60p, while the Sigma is limited to 4K/30p.
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the R6 Mark II has an electronic viewfinder (3690k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the fp L relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the fp L can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the EVF-11. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Canon R6 Mark II, the Sigma fp L, and comparable cameras.
Camera Model |
Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots) |
Control Panel (yes/no) |
LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots) |
LCD Attach- ment |
Touch Screen (yes/no) |
Max Shutter Speed * |
Max Shutter Flaps * |
Built-in Flash (yes/no) |
Built-in Image Stab |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Canon R6 Mark II | 3690 | n | 3.0 / 1620 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | Y | |
2. | Sigma fp L | optional | n | 3.2 / 2100 | fixed | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | n | |
3. | Canon 6D | optical | Y | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
4. | Canon R | 3690 | Y | 3.2 / 2100 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 8.0/s | n | n | |
5. | Canon R3 | 5760 | Y | 3.2 / 4150 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | Y | |
6. | Canon R5 | 5760 | Y | 3.2 / 2100 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | Y | |
7. | Canon R5 C | 5760 | Y | 3.2 / 2100 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | n | |
8. | Canon R6 | 3690 | n | 3.0 / 1620 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | Y | |
9. | Fujifilm X-H2S | 5760 | Y | 3.0 / 1620 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 15.0/s | n | Y | |
10. | Leica M11 | optical | n | 3.0 / 2333 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
11. | Nikon D780 | optical | Y | 3.2 / 2359 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | n | |
12. | OM System OM-1 | 5760 | n | 3.0 / 1640 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
13. | Sigma fp | optional | n | 3.2 / 2100 | fixed | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | n | |
14. | Sony A7 IV | 3686 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
15. | Sony A7R | 2400 | n | 3.0 / 1230 | tilting | n | 1/8000s | 4.0/s | n | n | |
16. | Sony A7S | 2400 | n | 3.0 / 921 | tilting | n | 1/8000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
17. | Sony A99 | 2359 | Y | 3.0 / 1229 | full-flex | n | 1/8000s | 6.0/s | n | Y | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One feature that differentiates the R6 Mark II and the fp L is in-body image stabilization (IBIS). The R6 Mark II reduces the risk of handshake-induced blur with all attached lenses, while the fp L offers no blur reduction with lenses that themselves do not provide optical image stabilization.
The R6 Mark II has an articulated LCD that can be turned to be front-facing. This characteristic will be appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in snapping selfies. In contrast, the fp L does not have a selfie-screen.The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, both cameras under consideration feature an electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).
The Canon R6 Mark II and the Sigma fp L both have an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the R6 Mark II and the fp L write their files to SDXC cards. The R6 Mark II features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the fp L only has one slot. Both cameras support UHS-II cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s.
Connectivity comparison
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS R6 Mark II and Sigma fp L and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
Camera Model |
Hotshoe Port |
Internal Mic / Speaker |
Microphone Port |
Headphone Port |
HDMI Port |
USB Port |
WiFi Support |
NFC Support |
Bluetooth Support |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Canon R6 Mark II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
2. | Sigma fp L | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.2 | Y | - | - | |
3. | Canon 6D | Y | mono / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
4. | Canon R | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | mini | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
5. | Canon R3 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
6. | Canon R5 | Y | mono / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
7. | Canon R5 C | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
8. | Canon R6 | Y | mono / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
9. | Fujifilm X-H2S | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.0 | Y | - | Y | |
10. | Leica M11 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
11. | Nikon D780 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | mini | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
12. | OM System OM-1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.0 | Y | - | Y | |
13. | Sigma fp | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 3.1 | - | - | - | |
14. | Sony A7 IV | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
15. | Sony A7R | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
16. | Sony A7S | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
17. | Sony A99 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - |
Both the R6 Mark II and the fp L are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The R6 Mark II replaced the earlier Canon R6, while the fp L does not have a direct predecessor. Further information on the features and operation of the R6 Mark II and fp L can be found, respectively, in the Canon R6 Mark II Manual (free pdf) or the online Sigma fp L Manual.
Review summary
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Canon R6 Mark II and the Sigma fp L? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Arguments in favor of the Canon EOS R6 Mark II:
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (4k/60p versus 4K/30p).
- Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
- Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
- More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (12 vs 10 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (450 versus 240) on a single battery charge.
- Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
- Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
- Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
- More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 1 year and 7 months after the fp L).
Reasons to prefer the Sigma fp L:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (60.2 vs 24MP), which boosts linear resolution by 59%.
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (2100k vs 1620k dots).
- More compact: Is smaller (113x70mm vs 138x98mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 243g or 36 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in March 2021).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the R6 Mark II is the clear winner of the match-up (11 : 6 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision. A professional wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.
How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Canon R6 Mark II and the Sigma fp L place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the R6 Mark II and the fp L in practical situations. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.
Expert reviews
This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Canon R6 Mark II | 5/5 | + + | 4.5/5 | 91/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Nov 2022 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
2. | Sigma fp L | 4/5 | .. | 4/5 | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2021 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
3. | Canon 6D | 5/5 | + + | .. | 83/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | US$ 2 099 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon R | 4/5 | o | 4/5 | 79/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Sep 2018 | US$ 2 299 | ebay.com | |
5. | Canon R3 | 5/5 | o | 4.5/5 | .. | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2021 | US$ 5 999 | amazon.com | |
6. | Canon R5 | 4.5/5 | + | 4/5 | 91/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2020 | US$ 3 899 | amazon.com | |
7. | Canon R5 C | .. | + + | .. | .. | .. | .. | Jan 2022 | US$ 4 499 | amazon.com | |
8. | Canon R6 | 5/5 | + + | 4/5 | 90/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jul 2020 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
9. | Fujifilm X-H2S | 5/5 | + | 5/5 | 90/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | May 2022 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
10. | Leica M11 | 4.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2022 | US$ 8 999 | amazon.com | |
11. | Nikon D780 | 5/5 | .. | 5/5 | 87/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2020 | US$ 2 299 | amazon.com | |
12. | OM System OM-1 | 5/5 | .. | .. | 87/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2022 | US$ 2 199 | ebay.com | |
13. | Sigma fp | 4/5 | .. | 4/5 | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2019 | US$ 1 899 | amazon.com | |
14. | Sony A7 IV | 5/5 | + + | 4.5/5 | 89/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Oct 2021 | US$ 2 499 | amazon.com | |
15. | Sony A7R | 5/5 | + + | .. | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Oct 2013 | US$ 2 299 | ebay.com | |
16. | Sony A7S | 4/5 | .. | .. | 86/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Apr 2014 | US$ 2 499 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony A99 | 5/5 | .. | .. | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | US$ 2 799 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just use the search menu below. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.
- Canon 1D Mark III vs Canon R6 Mark II
- Canon 1D vs Sigma fp L
- Canon 750D vs Canon R6 Mark II
- Canon M10 vs Canon R6 Mark II
- Canon R6 Mark II vs Nikon D5600
- Canon R6 Mark II vs Nikon P950
- Canon R6 Mark II vs Panasonic S5 II
- Canon SX70 vs Sigma fp L
- Fujifilm X100V vs Sigma fp L
- Leica SL3 vs Sigma fp L
- Olympus E-M5 III vs Sigma fp L
- Ricoh WG-6 vs Sigma fp L
Specifications: Canon R6 Mark II vs Sigma fp L
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
Camera Model | Canon R6 Mark II | Sigma fp L |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | Canon RF mount lenses | Leica L mount lenses |
Launch Date | November 2022 | March 2021 |
Launch Price | USD 2,499 | USD 2,499 |
Sensor Specs | Canon R6 Mark II | Sigma fp L |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | BSI-CMOS |
Sensor Format | Full Frame Sensor | Full Frame Sensor |
Sensor Size | 35.9 x 23.9 mm | 36.0 x 24.0 mm |
Sensor Area | 858.01 mm2 | 864 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 43.1 mm | 43.3 mm |
Crop Factor | 1.0x | 1.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 24 Megapixels | 60.2 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 6000 x 4000 pixels | 9520 x 6328 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 5.98 μm | 3.79 μm |
Pixel Density | 2.80 MP/cm2 | 6.97 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 4k/60p Video | 4K/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 102,400 ISO | 100 - 25,600 ISO |
ISO Boost | 100 - 204,800 ISO | 6 - 102,400 ISO |
Screen Specs | Canon R6 Mark II | Sigma fp L |
Viewfinder Type | Electronic viewfinder | Viewfinder optional |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.76x | |
Viewfinder Resolution | 3690k dots | |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.2inch |
LCD Resolution | 1620k dots | 2100k dots |
LCD Attachment | Swivel screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Canon R6 Mark II | Sigma fp L |
Focus System | On-Sensor Phase-detect | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/8000s | 1/8000s |
Continuous Shooting | 12 shutter flaps/s | 10 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | up to 1/8000s | up to 1/8000s |
Time-Lapse Photography | Intervalometer built-in | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | Lens stabilization only |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Dual card slots | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-II | UHS-II |
Connectivity Specs | Canon R6 Mark II | Sigma fp L |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 3.2 | USB 3.2 |
HDMI Port | micro HDMI | micro HDMI |
Microphone Port | External MIC port | External MIC port |
Headphone Socket | Headphone port | Headphone port |
Wifi Support | Wifi built-in | Wifi built-in |
Bluetooth Support | Bluetooth built-in | no Bluetooth |
Body Specs | Canon R6 Mark II | Sigma fp L |
Environmental Sealing | Weathersealed body | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Canon LP-E6NH | Sigma BP-51 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 450 shots per charge | 240 shots per charge |
In-Camera Charging | USB charging | USB charging |
Body Dimensions |
138 x 98 x 88 mm (5.4 x 3.9 x 3.5 in) |
113 x 70 x 45 mm (4.4 x 2.8 x 1.8 in) |
Camera Weight | 670 g (23.6 oz) | 427 g (15.1 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.