Mirrorless Camera & New Full Frame Coming Second Half 2012? [CR2]

[sphax]

Well everyone says here that this "entry-FF" should be more or less the same quality as the 5DmkII so you can't really compare : Apple just made a nice "four-times" multiplication on its screen resolution ... !

Anyway I think globally I just don't see the point of an entry FF who'd be about the same thing as a 5DmkII but re-designed, that's all.

And that's all Apple provided is a nice screen. Worthwhile to some? Sure. The added processing speed and battery are directly related to the screen requirements. Apple did NOT include Siri in the New Ipad, for example. So, other than the display and the stuff to run the display, there is (gasp) nothing new, yet people are lining up to buy it. (glad the smite thing is gone

But, I do believe you missed my iPad point. The prices range from $499 to $829. The only changes are internal memory and Wi-Fi or Wi-Fi + 4G.

Do you really think there is $330 in extra parts in there? (hell no)

Ah ok then for that that's for sure that Apple is screwing people when you buy versions with more memory. Everyone knows that. Just buy the basic 16Go + WiFi it's far enough (although not really with the new screen but anyway, photo forum !)

Repeat after me:

"The 5DmkII is 3.5 years old"


The list of things that I could see being different to the 5D3 are:
- autofocus - it will need to be a completely new design
- sensor is anyone's guess, from the 1DX sensor to the 5D3 sensor to something completely new.

The 5DmkII is 3.5 years old
The 5DmkII is 3.5 years old
The 5DmkII is 3.5 years old


new autofocus and sensor and most likely new body shape also or it would be not a really new design ... well, sorry but that sounds pretty expensive to me Anyway time will tell who's right ! I bought 5DmkII and I'm freakin' happy about it

[darryl]

So yes, I really believe Canon could offer a stills oriented "new 5D" for $1499 if they wanted to. If the firmware side was upgradeable to enable video stuff, people would buy it. Same for AF features available within a given module.

No offense but that's dumb.  If the product is capable of being able to do video with just a software change people will hack it and you will have video on that "still only" camera in less than a year.  Magic latern.  Go wiki it.

Also I think the current market trending is offer more in one product.  Not less.  The more one thing can do the bigger you're market becomes.  Less production cost and bigger market.  Win win.  The 5DII made a revolutionary killing because it offered not just stills but video.  People who don't care about stills bought it for the video.  People who don't care about video bought it for the stills.  You snagged 2 markets with just one product.

[grahamsz]

I suspect a cutdown mk3 would be cheaper to produce than keeping the mk2 around. If Canon can standardize on a new Digic and on the single 22MP sensor than that'll likely save them money in the long run versus keeping the other one around.

Still I do feel like the mk3 is maybe more of a 3D than it is a 5D. I suppose in my mind I think the 5 series is a little more cutting edge and the 1s and 3s are the more refined, polished and better built big brothers.

Another thought, how many bad pixels can a sensor have before Canon will trash it? I assume all dslr sensors have some number of black or hot pixels like an LCD might - canon most likely detect them and map them out. However I presume at some threshold, that becomes unacceptable in a pro level product. Perhaps if they dropped the resolution with some pixel binning, then could make an 11MP full frame rebel with the discarded 22MP sensors.

[danski0224]

No offense but that's dumb.  If the product is capable of being able to do video with just a software change people will hack it and you will have video on that "still only" camera in less than a year.  Magic latern.  Go wiki it.

Also I think the current market trending is offer more in one product.  Not less.  The more one thing can do the bigger you're market becomes.  Less production cost and bigger market.  Win win.  The 5DII made a revolutionary killing because it offered not just stills but video.  People who don't care about stills bought it for the video.  People who don't care about video bought it for the stills.  You snagged 2 markets with just one product.

No offense taken.

Sure, it can be hacked. I know a little (very little) about Magic Lantern, and I have no interest in it.

There are plenty of hacks or jailbreaks out there. Not everyone will take advantage of those things.

There is almost continual mention on this forum about stills and video. Some want one or the other and fewer want both.

I think that is a very logical point to provide a price break. Whether or not the logic carries through in real life, I have no idea.

I can say that if I got just the 5DIII sensor, better AF than the 5DII but not equal to the 5DIII, FPS equal to the 5DII, stick it in a 7D body so the buttons are the same and no video for ~$1500.00 USD, I'd be all over it.

[daniemare]

I like this rumor. Drop a full frame sensor in a 70D body (assuming the 70D will be the usual evolutionary upgrade from the 60D, i.e. Digic 5 etc) and I will buy it in an instant.  Do not really care whether its the 1Dx or 5DIII sensor.

Smaller body, built in flash, similar quality AF and weather sealing. Price $2,500 with usual kit lens. Thus $1,700 body only - heck do not even sell it body only, and get those Rebel users to upgrade.  I see only minor need to rework the sizing of the view finder (doesn't even need to be 100%) and AF point spread.

Who said full frame must be pro or semi pro lumps of metal with the submersive abilities of a submarine.  I use a Rebel, would love to gain the advantages of a full frame sensor, but as a pure amature and hobbyist, blazing frame rates, perfect AF tracking etc. isn't really necessary if it means I can save a bunch

I will not mind a price point engineered full framer.  Canon did that with the Rebel, why not shake up the full frame market.

I cannot afford/justify a 5DIII, nor do I like the idea of a brand spanking new 3.5 year old product. In any case the 5DII & 5DIII is too big and lack a pop up flash for my uses.

The "extra" functionality from Rebel to 60D or 7D is not enough to warrant an upgrade for me.  I know the 7D is fundamently different, but that is just it, I have no need for that which sets it apart.  Now a REBEL FULL FRAME - that will be something I can upgrade to.

[itsnotmeyouknow]

Well everyone says here that this "entry-FF" should be more or less the same quality as the 5DmkII so you can't really compare : Apple just made a nice "four-times" multiplication on its screen resolution ... !

Anyway I think globally I just don't see the point of an entry FF who'd be about the same thing as a 5DmkII but re-designed, that's all.

And that's all Apple provided is a nice screen. Worthwhile to some? Sure. The added processing speed and battery are directly related to the screen requirements. Apple did NOT include Siri in the New Ipad, for example. So, other than the display and the stuff to run the display, there is (gasp) nothing new, yet people are lining up to buy it. (glad the smite thing is gone

But, I do believe you missed my iPad point. The prices range from $499 to $829. The only changes are internal memory and Wi-Fi or Wi-Fi + 4G.

Do you really think there is $330 in extra parts in there? (hell no)

Do you really think they are making 6 different physical versions? (possible, but not likely)

Canon could do the same thing with a "re-vamped" "entry level" "5D" lineup.

They have the sensor. They have a current camera body. Different features enabled by processing can be disabled or locked out.

So yes, I really believe Canon could offer a stills oriented "new 5D" for $1499 if they wanted to. If the firmware side was upgradeable to enable video stuff, people would buy it. Same for AF features available within a given module.

Where would be the advantage for Canon creating a weak link enabling people to hack into the firmware enabling it to shoot video?  Surely there is no point having the ability if you weren't going to use it anyway?  The best way to stop the hackers getting access is not to give access in the first place.

[AJ]

If this is true - the 5D3/1Dx sensor with its gapless microlenses in a tuned-down body with less AF capability and single card slot (5D2)

then

the 5D3 should have been called 5Dx or 3D, and the new entry-level camera the 5D3.

Something seems wrong....

[darryl]

Lots of rumors on where a new FF would fit in.  Here is my take.

FF sensor in a mirrorless - Most likely of all the rumors

FF sensor in a rebel with rebel specs - Plausible but not likely

FF sensor in a 7DII - No way.  You'd lose burst rate and reach.  Two things that make the 7D popular today.

FF 5DMII makover - Nope... would start tredding into 5DMIII territory

FF dumbed down version of 5DMIII - Lets talk a little about this one


Initially I thought no way.  This is stupid.  You would definitely take sales away from the 5DMIII.  Then I started to think about it.  The choice of upgrading to the 5DMIII is either a yes I will or no I'll wait for something else.  When people wait canon doesn't make money.  You want people to upgrade.  Especially if it took you 3.5 years to put out an upgrade.  That is alot of time and many people would look at that and say its time for an upgrade.  While I think this is more plausible than origanally I know they certainly wont release it any time soon.  Right now we are still in the "early adopter" stage.  Still too soon to tell how well the 5DmIII is going to do.  If it doesn't do well, there is going to be a very large market that wants to upgrade their gear but doesn't have an outlet.  Thats where something like a dumbed down version of 5DMIII comes in.  Or you cut your prices and take a hit that way.  Could be interesting.

[stabmasterasron]

I think that if Canon brings an entry level FF body to the line up, it will be significantly crappier than even the 5DmkII.  Since the 5DmkIII is obviously the successor to the 5DmkII, then an "entry level" body should logically be placed at a bar below the 5D line in performance and build quality.  I wouldn't get my hopes up that this new entry level FF camera will be all that impressive.  I'd expect disappointments in ISO performance, resolution, image quality, continuous shooting, and AF system at the minimum compared to the 5DmkIII. I also wouldn't be surprised if it is even set a bar below the 5DmkII in terms of ISO performance, resolution, and image quality.  It also would make sense for Canon to price the camera lower than $2000. Maybe this will fill the 7D price point and the 60D successor will inherit the 7D's strengths and come in at a price point just under the new entry level FF camera?

How could it be crappier than the 5dmkii?  This new entry level ff will either have the sensor of the 5dmkii (unlikely) or from the 5dmkiii or 1dx(also unlikely, i think), or it will have a completely new sensor.  So if it has one of the other, current sensors and digic 5, it will be at least equal in iq to those corresponding cameras.  If canon makes a new sensor, why would they make a sensor crappier than the 4 year old sensor from the 5dmkii?  I don't see how any new ff camera, entry level or not would take a step backwards from the 5dmkii.

It makes sense for it to be crappier than a 5DmkII if it is an "entry-level" FF camera.  The term "entry-level" means exactly that. The "5D" line is not "entry-level" right? So it would be outlandish to think that the "entry level" FF camera would outperform the 5DmkII. Although the 5DmkII is 4 years old, it is still only 1 generation old so it is impossible for Canon to add another FF camera to the lineup that is deemed "entry level" but yet outperforms a higher end FF body that is likely still widely used by many many photographers.  Let me put it this way... think back on all the technological advances in the overall DSLR lineup. Did a T3i have better image quality than a 40D? No because the T3i is "entry level" and the 40D is 1 generation older but yet one step higher in the lineup of APS-C bodies. In fact even the 20D would beat out a T3i in image quality and that's even further back in tech! So it seems like wishful thinking for an "entry level" FF camera to be equal to or better than a 5DmkII right?

So let me get this straight.  40D and 20D have higher iq than t3i.  This is because t3i is an "entry level" cam and 40D and 20D are the next level up.  Dont mean to poke a hole in your logic, but 60D and even 7D have the exact same sensor as the t3i.  And I have seen many reviews, and even dpreview, says the iq between these 3 cameras are essentially identical - same sensor, so makes sense.  So if I follow your logic then the 20D has better iq than the 7D.  I am not saying you are wrong - maybe it does, but the 7D is certainly not bellow the 20D in the pecking order of Canon cams.

[stabmasterasron]

Wow, lots of different opinions on here about what this rumor means - lots of heated discussions and it is still not a confirmed product.

Lots of people think dropping a FF sensor into a lesser body would undercut sales of the 5dmkiii.  Well, do the rebels undercut sales of the 60D?  Probably.  Does the 60D undercut sales of the 7D, maybe somewhat.  Different people have different levels of money they are willing to invest in camera equipment.  If Canon's dslr offering started at the 60D, yeah they would sell many more 60D's, but they would lose many, many more customers who are not willing to pay the fee where the 60D starts. 

Bigger sensors at lower price points - this will definitely happen - sooner or later.  As dslr bodies lose ground to smaller mirrorless systems, something has to be done to offer a superior product and a reason to buy a dslr over a mirrorless system.  Some on here have said that FF sensor doesn't make you a better photographer.  Well maybe it doesn't but there is no doubt that there is a strong correlation between image quality and sensor size - I don't think anyone will disagree with that.  Higher image quality may not make you a better photographer, but it surely won't hold you back.  And it might be the edge dslr's need to fend off the mirrorless for a little while longer.

[stabmasterasron]

Lots of rumors on where a new FF would fit in.  Here is my take.

FF sensor in a mirrorless - Most likely of all the rumors

FF sensor in a rebel with rebel specs - Plausible but not likely

FF sensor in a 7DII - No way.  You'd lose burst rate and reach.  Two things that make the 7D popular today.

FF 5DMII makover - Nope... would start tredding into 5DMIII territory

FF dumbed down version of 5DMIII - Lets talk a little about this one


Initially I thought no way.  This is stupid.  You would definitely take sales away from the 5DMIII.  Then I started to think about it.  The choice of upgrading to the 5DMIII is either a yes I will or no I'll wait for something else.  When people wait canon doesn't make money.  You want people to upgrade.  Especially if it took you 3.5 years to put out an upgrade.  That is alot of time and many people would look at that and say its time for an upgrade.  While I think this is more plausible than origanally I know they certainly wont release it any time soon.  Right now we are still in the "early adopter" stage.  Still too soon to tell how well the 5DmIII is going to do.  If it doesn't do well, there is going to be a very large market that wants to upgrade their gear but doesn't have an outlet.  Thats where something like a dumbed down version of 5DMIII comes in.  Or you cut your prices and take a hit that way.  Could be interesting.

FF in a mirrorless - I don't think so.  Why?  Because the idea of mirrorless is to miniaturize everything right?  So if canon releases a mirrorless, it likely would be a compact body.  FF requires larger lenses because the lens needs to project a larger image circle.  So FF mirrorless would be small body and large lens.  The ergonomics on this would be a nighmare.  I too like the idea of having a compact FF, but having a beer can attached to a deck of cards probably won't work out well.

FF in a Rebel - probably not with this next round of rebels, but eventually yes.

FF in sub 5D mark iii - if the "entry level" ff rumor is true, this will be the case.  My guess is that it will be an xxD camera, not an xxxD camera.

[stabmasterasron]

If this is true - the 5D3/1Dx sensor with its gapless microlenses in a tuned-down body with less AF capability and single card slot (5D2)

then

the 5D3 should have been called 5Dx or 3D, and the new entry-level camera the 5D3.

Something seems wrong....

No one said we were going to get a tuned down 5D3.  Any more than the t3i is a tuned down 7D.  They share the same sensor, but the 7D is a vastly different,  more capable camera. 

[wickidwombat]

I think if there is going to be another FF this year it's going to be an uber MP monster not a bargain basement one

[maxxevv]

FF in a mirrorless - I don't think so.  Why?  Because the idea of mirrorless is to miniaturize everything right?  So if canon releases a mirrorless, it likely would be a compact body.  FF requires larger lenses because the lens needs to project a larger image circle.  So FF mirrorless would be small body and large lens.  The ergonomics on this would be a nighmare.  I too like the idea of having a compact FF, but having a beer can attached to a deck of cards probably won't work out well.

FF in a Rebel - probably not with this next round of rebels, but eventually yes.

FF in sub 5D mark iii - if the "entry level" ff rumor is true, this will be the case.  My guess is that it will be an xxD camera, not an xxxD camera.

If you look at what Leica has done with their manual lenses for the M9 and wrap a AF USM motor around them, are they likely to be as big as EF lenses of equivalent maximum aperture ?

One of the reasons why EF glass has to be that big is because of the lens backplane to focal plane of sensor. The further it is, the bigger it has to be. For a mirrorless system, this distance can in theory be reduced to almost zero. Practically, about 1mm. Current EF lenses and EF-S lenses is in the range of 20-35mm. M4/3 lenses about 12-20mm. Leica somewhere in there.  Flange distance does not directly co-relate to the backplane distance, though it will have some influence in the overall scheme of things.

But it is not very likely for now that the Canon mirrorless will be FF. Too big a jump for the market to accept and also, the limited range of lenses that's specifically designed for such a 'high-end' mirrorless camera to take-off successfully. It will possibly carry the same sensor as the G1x if market penetration is the objective. However, if Canon decides to do something that turns the market on its head, and grab some of the Leica 'halo', a FF mirrorless system is not out of the question either, they have the sensors as well as the resources already. Just need to create additional adaptor mounts that allow the use of EF and EF-s lenses with full AF functionality on such a camera. 

As for a sub-5dMkIII, that's very unlikely if the market differentiation is to be achieved. For Canon, 'entry' means the lowest spec's that the market is willing to accept. And that was the same thing that prompted the creation of the original Rebel. It had the 'minimum specifications' which the market was willing to accept for the targeted market prices of sub US$1000/- back then. For this case, as it is now, the entry specifications is more or less what the current or upcoming Rebel carries if the target market price is to be US$1500-US$2000 ( which I assume is the market threshold for a 'basic' FF DSLR here). The 1100D is below 'entry' for most people, which it shows in comparison when you look at the numbers moved/sold compared to the current and past Rebel models.

[stabmasterasron]

FF in a mirrorless - I don't think so.  Why?  Because the idea of mirrorless is to miniaturize everything right?  So if canon releases a mirrorless, it likely would be a compact body.  FF requires larger lenses because the lens needs to project a larger image circle.  So FF mirrorless would be small body and large lens.  The ergonomics on this would be a nighmare.  I too like the idea of having a compact FF, but having a beer can attached to a deck of cards probably won't work out well.

FF in a Rebel - probably not with this next round of rebels, but eventually yes.

FF in sub 5D mark iii - if the "entry level" ff rumor is true, this will be the case.  My guess is that it will be an xxD camera, not an xxxD camera.

If you look at what Leica has done with their manual lenses for the M9 and wrap a AF USM motor around them, are they likely to be as big as EF lenses of equivalent maximum aperture ?

One of the reasons why EF glass has to be that big is because of the lens backplane to focal plane of sensor. The further it is, the bigger it has to be. For a mirrorless system, this distance can in theory be reduced to almost zero. Practically, about 1mm. Current EF lenses and EF-S lenses is in the range of 20-35mm. M4/3 lenses about 12-20mm. Leica somewhere in there.  Flange distance does not directly co-relate to the backplane distance, though it will have some influence in the overall scheme of things.

But it is not very likely for now that the Canon mirrorless will be FF. Too big a jump for the market to accept and also, the limited range of lenses that's specifically designed for such a 'high-end' mirrorless camera to take-off successfully. It will possibly carry the same sensor as the G1x if market penetration is the objective. However, if Canon decides to do something that turns the market on its head, and grab some of the Leica 'halo', a FF mirrorless system is not out of the question either, they have the sensors as well as the resources already. Just need to create additional adaptor mounts that allow the use of EF and EF-s lenses with full AF functionality on such a camera. 

As for a sub-5dMkIII, that's very unlikely if the market differentiation is to be achieved. For Canon, 'entry' means the lowest spec's that the market is willing to accept. And that was the same thing that prompted the creation of the original Rebel. It had the 'minimum specifications' which the market was willing to accept for the targeted market prices of sub US$1000/- back then. For this case, as it is now, the entry specifications is more or less what the current or upcoming Rebel carries if the target market price is to be US$1500-US$2000 ( which I assume is the market threshold for a 'basic' FF DSLR here). The 1100D is below 'entry' for most people, which it shows in comparison when you look at the numbers moved/sold compared to the current and past Rebel models.

Yes, as i was writing my previous post, I thought of the Leica, and even wrote something about it, but erased in before I posted.  It was explained to me that Leica can get away with small lenses because they are manual focus and the camera is a rangefinder.  Not sure how being a rangefinder effects lens size, that is just what I was told and I never had the motivation to look any further into it.  And I don't know anything about the backplane focal distance issue - I will take your word for it.

Sub 5dmkiii - I didn't not mean it would be a 5Dsomething.  I meant it would be a lower specification than the 5Dmkiii - which "entry level ff" should mean by definition.  Whether it makes it into something called a rebel or rebel like in specification - we will see.