February 18, 2018, 03:28:37 PM

Author Topic: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful  (Read 25775 times)

josephandrews222

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 154
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2018, 08:36:18 PM »
from the original post:

"Size and weight?
Is this really why we want mirrorless cameras?"

Uhhhh...yes?!

(for starters, and it's complicated)
5DMkIII; 40D; M10, M2 & M; S95 + a dozen or so lenses & a half-dozen flashes

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2018, 08:36:18 PM »

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 5-1500mm f/1.0L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 13990
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2018, 09:02:11 PM »
I have zero interest in a camera that requires a adapter.  For consumers, who only get a kit lens, a new lens mount won't matter.

scyrene

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1931
    • My Flickr feed
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2018, 09:13:37 PM »
If I think I have to add a teleconverter to a 500mm lens, then I’ll buy a 600mm lens.

I know this is beside the point of the thread, but...

Each to their own, but that only works if money is no object. The 500L II is £8k while the 600L II is £10.5k. That's a hell of a difference for 100mm, when the 1.4x TC gives you 200mm extra for £300.

I would much rather see a native EF mount mirrorless camera, of course.
Current equipment: 5Ds, 5D mark III, 50D, 24-105L, MP-E, 100L macro, 500L IS II; 1.4xIII + 2x III extenders; 600EX-RT.
Former equipment includes: 300D; EOS-M, EF-M 18-55, Samyang 14mm f/2.8, EF 35 f/2 IS, 70-200L f/4 non-IS and f/2.8L IS II, 85L II, Sigma 180 macro, 200L 2.8, 400L 5.6

Canon Rumors

  • Administrator
  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • *****
  • Posts: 6311
    • Canon Rumors
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #18 on: January 22, 2018, 09:25:10 PM »
from the original post:

"Size and weight?
Is this really why we want mirrorless cameras?"

Uhhhh...yes?!

(for starters, and it's complicated)

The point I was making is mirrorless doesn't mean it's automatically lighter and a smaller body can be too small and make ergonomics terrible. There's a reason the 1d is the size that it is and why people use battery grips in large numbers on both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras.
canonrumors.com

J.R.

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1748
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #19 on: January 22, 2018, 09:37:11 PM »
The real question here is whether a camera without the mirror will lead to better photographs? In my specific case, I don't think so but I'd like to have more information on this.
I took a hiatus from CR for a year and a half. The discussions haven't changed much. Excellent information is still being shared while people bitching about Canon cameras are still bitching and haven't moved on to Sony

rrcphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2162
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #20 on: January 22, 2018, 10:32:21 PM »
from the original post:

"Size and weight?
Is this really why we want mirrorless cameras?"

Uhhhh...yes?!

(for starters, and it's complicated)

is it?

would you choose a SL2 against a 7D Mark II if they had the same specs? if so why or why not?



Aaron D

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 25
    • web site
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #21 on: January 22, 2018, 10:42:30 PM »
That EF mount is just a passing fad.  I'll buy Canon again when they bring back the FD mount.  OH WAIT... photography is just a passing fad.  Nothing but paintings on MY walls.  Oils, of course none of that acrylic rubbish--passing fad.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #21 on: January 22, 2018, 10:42:30 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 22186
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #22 on: January 22, 2018, 10:52:42 PM »
Each to their own, but that only works if money is no object. The 500L II is £8k while the 600L II is £10.5k. That's a hell of a difference for 100mm, when the 1.4x TC gives you 200mm extra for £300.

Sure, but the TC also costs you a stop of light, and spending an extra £2,5k does not.  ;)
EOS 1D X, EOS M6, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Orangutan

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1981
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #23 on: January 22, 2018, 11:03:27 PM »
from the original post:

"Size and weight?
Is this really why we want mirrorless cameras?"

Uhhhh...yes?!

(for starters, and it's complicated)

The point I was making is mirrorless doesn't mean it's automatically lighter and a smaller body can be too small and make ergonomics terrible. There's a reason the 1d is the size that it is and why people use battery grips in large numbers on both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras.

And as I've prattled about, removing the mirror also gives the option to use a multi-sensor design, either RGB; or. alternately, two standard Bayer arrays, but one with an ND filter in front to give single-shot HDR.  You could also use a slightly larger sensor to capture a square covering both portrait and landscape orientations simultaneously. (edit: not ND filter, but partial mirror to one of them)

Reducing size is definitely not the only reason to go mirrorless.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2018, 11:20:08 PM by Orangutan »

In-The-Dark

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 43
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #24 on: January 22, 2018, 11:49:19 PM »
- native EF lens mount - great EF lens lineup already.
- weight & size - lighter weight is welcome. as for size, Canon doesn't need to go on a diet.
- good AF


mirrorless eliminates the need for AFMA (am i correct?)

Dima 135

  • Canonflex
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #25 on: January 23, 2018, 12:57:15 AM »
Just make a normal sensor there, at least as in 5d4. Canon inclined to fulfill desires ? No !
 Maybe canon, like some other manufacturers, try so hard, and making each new camera so good as far as possible today , that it seems, even touches the upstream segment cameras ? NO !

Therefore, the only thing that I want from canon is that the sensor be better than in 6d2.

Jack Douglas

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4892
  • http://www.gohaidagwaii.ca/blog/eagle-photography-
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #26 on: January 23, 2018, 12:58:20 AM »

PS: "professional" camera does not equal "use of big tele lenses" or "shooting outdoors in sub-zero blizzard conditions".
+1. I see no need for every top tiered camera to be either big or weather-sealed.


Wedding/Event photogs, studio work, fashion, portraiture, etc. etc. generally dont need 400mm lenses or wheather sealing (at least most of the time).

Well... as to weddings, I’ve not been to a single wedding where the photog didn’t have to shoot in either some rain or snow.  Of course that’s not representative of all weddings, but if I we’re doing weddings I would very much like to have a sealed body.

I read CR for the humour.

Why would anyone not want weather sealing when it could be the difference between a functional and non-functional camera in a critical situation.  I suppose it needs dual cards in case of memory failure but not sealing in case of weather. 

Jack
1DX2   11-24 F4   24-70 F4   70-200 F2.8 II   300 F2.8 II   1.4X III   2X III   400 DO F4 II 

http://yourshot.nationalgeographic.com/profile/647784/

-pekr-

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 82
    • 2zone studio
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #27 on: January 23, 2018, 01:30:23 AM »

PS: "professional" camera does not equal "use of big tele lenses" or "shooting outdoors in sub-zero blizzard conditions". Wedding/Event photogs, studio work, fashion, portraiture, etc. etc. generally dont need 400mm lenses or wheather sealing (at least most of the time).

We are probably not professionals, but we do weddings. And what we use is the 70-200/2.8 II IS, and next month we get 5DIV along with 24-70/2.8 II. And then we've already got Sigma ART 35/1.4. All pretty heavy lens imo, which I would not like to have attached to my cell phone size/proportion camera :-)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #27 on: January 23, 2018, 01:30:23 AM »

Mikehit

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2321
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #28 on: January 23, 2018, 02:49:15 AM »

mirrorless eliminates the need for AFMA (am i correct?)

Apparently when the Olympus E-M1 came out and incorporated phase detect AF to supplement the contrast detect, they started having AFMA issues.

Talys

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 874
  • Canon 6DII
Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #29 on: January 23, 2018, 02:49:25 AM »
First, I 100% agree with everything that CR guy said.

I won't buy a Canon mirrorless FF, at least not any time soon, that isn't EF, ergonomically comfortable for the stuff I like to shoot, and has a superb EVF.  I cannot imagine any set of features they could pack into a FF MILC that would compensate for a shortfall in any of those categories.


PS: "professional" camera does not equal "use of big tele lenses" or "shooting outdoors in sub-zero blizzard conditions".
+1. I see no need for every top tiered camera to be either big or weather-sealed.

-1 for me.  Every top tiered camera needs to be weather-sealed. 

It's not that everyone who uses a top tiered camera will always need weather-sealing, and it's not that every high end camera needs to be weather-sealed.  But if it's not in your top tiered camera, what are you going to do, stick it in your second tiered camera?  That just sounds kind of crazy.  More likely, you get the Sony thing... where none of your top tiered cameras have competitive weather sealing, and that's a terrible thing.

Even me... almost exclusively fair weather or indoor photographer... If I'm going to spend $4000+ on a camera, it's going to have decent weather sealing.

Wedding/Event photogs, studio work, fashion, portraiture, etc. etc. generally dont need 400mm lenses or wheather sealing (at least most of the time).

I agree that there are lots of professional photography doesn't require a 400mm lens.  No argument there. 

But a 70-200/2.8 is an ultra-popular lens for all those things you're talking about, and that's not a light lens in any system.  It's almost the same size and weight as Canon's 100-400LII.  Also, it's not like 16-35 and 24-70/2.8's are small lenses.

And if we're talking big aperture super telephotos, one might argue that these are likely to be used on monopods/tripods, and the ergonomics equation is a little different.  But I don't think current generation mirrorless in these use cases will be a hot seller anyways, because EVF just blows through batteries too quickly when you have to keep the EVF running for hours.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2018, 02:53:40 AM by Talys »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless Needs To Have To Be Successful
« Reply #29 on: January 23, 2018, 02:49:25 AM »