See-Saw
The back and forth on Canon entering the EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lenses) market continues. This time appearing in Amateur Photographer magazine.
“Canon is ‘proceeding with the development’ of a mirror-less interchangeable lens camera to compete against models launched by Panasonic, Olympus and Samsung, a senior Canon DSLR official is reported to have told the Japanese press.”
There will be no EVIL camera in 2010 from Canon as we’ve reported before. 2011, we may see one.
It is strange to hear that a “senior Canon official” has spilled the beans on development. The rest of the article goes on to say what is obvious, if there’s demand………. they’ll build it.
Read More: Amateur Photographer
cr
|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
I hope they build one that can use existing EF/EFS lenses. I’d buy one for it’s compact size and it should come with 12mm pancake.
Am I the only one who thinks EVIL cameras are just plain ugly. Maybe I’m old-school but I think the prism shape is what gives a DSLR its own character and persona, without it, they all look like matchboxes, cut with the same cookie-cutter without any identity of their own.
ugly, not really but it does make up in weight and size. I love my G series and EVIL will let us change lenses-so I don’t have to lug my gear around on family vacations.
Hopefully it’ll use a 1.6x sensor, as opposed to a Four-Thirds or smaller sensor.
Completely agree. However, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1, Panasonic Lumix DMC-G10, Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2, Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH1, and Samsung NX10 don’t do too badly in that aspect.
As long it doesn’t compete with the EOS/EOS Rebel lineup, I’m game.
I probably would buy one as an advanced PowerShot, not a low-end EOS.
agreed. I would never drop my DSLRs for a rangefinder system but would love to get a GF1 equivalent that would take Canon lenses. that would be downright peachy
Didn’t I tell you this several%
and maybe revive my 30-year old FD lenses.
I think that’s a given.
So what? It’s the appearance of the photos that matter. Not the box.
Indeed you did. Under the 2.0.4 firmware posting.
Might do well to just list what you know is under development in point form. Or message Canon Rumours Guy Directly.
I wouldn’t mind switching over to a EOS EVIL system.
You are not the only one but there are others who think otherwise. The only reason for DSLRs to be shaped the way they are, is the technology used (mirror+pentaprism/pentamirror). New concepts deserve new design paradigms. I hope that with its mirror-less camera Canon will do something really revolutionary (design-wise) as they did for example with T-90.
Why not a FF EVIL Sensor? If they could do it for 35mm Film why not FF Sensor? An FF EVIL with EF mount. They could name it the EOS D-EVIL or the EOS EVIL-D.
The marketing team would be multi orgasmic. Everyone would get a EOS Devil plush toy.
They would Sponsor Manchester United.(Perhaps they will launch it when AIG sponsor ship ends?)
And any other sports team with a Devil as their mascot.
yes some lenses would be nice…
“Why not a FF EVIL Sensor?”
Cost, FF mirroless camera would cost more than a crop-sensor DSLR.
“Why not a FF EVIL Sensor?”
FF evil sensor with the lens I use today will be a dream that come true whatever the cost.
i heard it’s gonna be a 60mp 6×7 chip with zero noise at iso 100000000000
I am really looking for one of these camera from Canon. The reasoning is a little different than you might expect, but EXTREMELY valuable:
I’d buy one for my fiancé. Getting my better half a smaller, compact camera with exceptional image quality that can use a library of lenses I already own? Yes please.
EVIL…one of the couple of things that Canon could do to LIKELY get me spending more $$$, while I’m trying to behave otherwise. (The other being a FF Rebel-ish body).
I don’t think I would give up my DSLR, but even a Rebel is sometimes difficult to take along when I’m packing for a business trip and don’t have much room camera equipment.
Basically…DSLR when I have room, EVIL when I don’t.
Currently for me it’s DSLR when I have room, IXUS when I don’t. After all, even the worst photo is better than none at all.
An EVIL probably still won’t fit into my pants’ pockets while my IXUS does.
It might not compete with the EOS line, but the Rebel line might take a bit of heat in the lower segments.
EVIL cameras should be able to give entry-level DSLRs a run for their money… and as long as they use the EF-S lenses, the consumer has a road for upgrades that would largely benefit Canon.
EOS-VFL
(Electro Optical System – Viewfinder-less)
No such thing as zero noise.
No such thing as “zero noise”.
I’d much rather put a G11 or S90 in my pocket than an IXUS/ELPH/IXY.
Just my take.
It is not my dept, but
I have seen 4 bodies in mocked up form.
2 had EOS lenses attached
1 had a lens I did not recognise attached (it was a mock up too)
1 had FDn lens attached
2 had fixed screens
1 had hinged screen
1 had swivel screen
they all had direct print buttons!
all had lenses attached so I could not see sensor size but my guess at this stage would be either the APS-C or even the APS-H. The latter makes a huge amount of sense. It opens a new market for the 1.3 sized chip, the 1D MkV is FF, so scalable production could continue. It would give the market a real choice too and put Canon in a class leading position from the outset. But it depends an awful lot of marketing and what they convince the bosses they can sell.
Not much help for those that are interested, but that is it for now.
EOS-1D Mark V is full-frame? But I thought one of the trademarks of the EOS-1D line is an APS-H sensor!
The EVF better have at least 1040k dots with a 60fps refresh rate.
If it has a 1040k dot EVF with a 60fps refresh rate and visible AF points, then maybe. Otherwise, no go.
Absolutely not. There was strong discussion on whether the Mk IV should be FF or APS-H. There is a need for wide angle high fps coverage. The choice was another lens line for just one or two lenses specifically for the APS-H camera. There was strong feeling against this as there is no way to reverse engineer people from putting EF-? lenses on FF cameras and it could lead to market confusion. The 1D MkIV is the last of the line for APS-H pro models. At the MP we have now cropping FF can basically replace crop factor anyway for tele use, but many 1D using pros want wider angles. The development teams for the 1D MkV have not been fully sorted yet, but there is little, if any, focus on APS-H development.
What about this (from the MkIV review)?
“I would like to address the issue of why we cannot get a high speed full frame camera yet. This was explained to me by a Canon engineer. As you know when you take a shot the photons of light create an electrical charge on the sensor which end up on our cards as an image. After the image is shot the charge must be cleared from the sensor for the next shot. Here is where we hit a technical glass ceiling. For the 16MP on a H size sensor (1.3 crop) they can clear this charge in sufficient time to blast off at a high burst rate (10f/s). However when you go [higher megapixels or larger sensors] they cannot clear the charge fast enough at 10f/s and the result is ghosting-like a double exposure on a film camera after the first shot. By the time you get say to your 15th shot in a burst the image looks like hell. They have experimented with this and this is how they have seen this problem. They are working on the problem which is really an electrical engineering circuitry problem and since we now can split neutrons I am sure they will come up with an eventual solution.”
I’d say anybody that believes that believes we couldn’t fit a better AF system into the 5D MkII. Whilst there are technological limitations, and the sensor teams are working hard in different areas, it is just not true that a 20 frame burst at 10fps on a 36mmx24mmx16mp R&D sensor is seriously compromised, even now, in two years it will not be any issue for longer bursts either. At the moment no final decisions have been made. There is no way the 1D MkV will go to market with less than 10 fps. It will have a FF sensor and my best guess is it will be between 16-19MP (techs want 16 marketing want 19), it is hoped the low light performance will effectively end the iso race, it will certainly attain a new level of usable high iso performance.
Mirror less exchangeable lenses cameras is the future of the high end camera. The SLR design is no longer the only option for WYSIWYG in the current digital age. Mirror less design offers a few advantages high end users care about. One of Canon high end film cameras (can’t recall the model name) has a transparent mirror to overcome the lap time of mirror flip.
I hear you.
But what would be the difference between the EOS-1D and EOS-1Ds lines in the next iterations?
EOS 1N RS had the pellicle mirror system :)
Basically the same as now. The 1D will be a general photography tool but more capable, the emphasis will be on high iso performance and fps, with comparatively, lower MP with slightly reduced (compared to the 1Ds) video functionality but with a FF sensor. Or, most working photography pros dream camera. The 1Ds will keep pushing the MP boundary, until diffraction limits are hit at f1.2 there is still more IQ to come out of a 36×24 sensor. The high iso capability will be left to the 1D, the 1Ds will be squarely aimed at MF studio work, but cheaper, and low iso very high quality imaging with controlled lighting will be its forte. The 1Ds will have more, and higher quality, video functionality that will fit in with higher quality, controlled lighting, video work.
That is the 1D/1Ds road map as of 5-March-2010.
Someone earlier in this thread attempted to explain “why we cannot get a high speed full frame camera yet.”
The 5D II and 1Ds III can get 30 or 60 FPS off a full frame sensor no problem for video, so how does that fit with the charge clearing theory?
So did the Pellix QL in 1965. Canon have a strong history and much untapped work in pellicle mirror R&D. I would be surprised to not see it resurrected at some stage.
The 1Ds MkIII can do 5fps at full resolution. The 5D MkII can do 30fps at reduced resolution. Video is very different to full resolution imaging.
Put in a word to your superiors that it’s the EOS-1D line that should have better video features, since the guys making the next March of the Penguins will be using EOS-1Ds, and unlike users of the EOS-1Dss, won’t be able to exercise the same level of control.
With the popularity of EOS HD rising, Canon ought to bring out an EF 135 f/2.8L IS USM With Softfocus for that dreamy “flashback” effect in videos.
Just my two cents.
There has to be delineation for the 1Ds, so the 1D will not have the video functionality of the 1Ds (as currently planned), it will be much better than even updated MkIV’s will be though so no issues for penguin shooting. But there is a real interest to see how far the video can be pushed in the 36×24 format and for that the 1Ds will have some additions.
The lens suggestion would get me laughed out of the office though, sorry. Get some Vasaline and put it on a UV filter on the 135 f2, or if you need IS, the 100 macro IS.
Holy. The Vaseline suggestion is pretty hilarious. I think I’ll stick with the ancient Softfocus lens. I’m not sure what’s wrong with my suggestion, though.
So let me get this straight: The EOS-1D will be competition for the Nikon D3S-type, while the EOS-1Ds will fight with the Nikon D3x-type line?
I told you before, we need resolution to take to AMC theatres. Even in the EOS-1D line. Don’t forget that March of the Penguins was a box-office film. Plus, IMAX is often for nature films more than controlled situations.
You want to distinguish between the EOS-1D and EOS-1Ds lines? How about making the distinguishing factor the stills quality?
Thinking at the moment is the 1D MkV with FF will better both the Nikon models in their current form, but so they should, the only caveat will be that it will have fewer MP than the D3x. But the 1Ds MkV will have many more (so will the 1Ds MkIV). The 1Ds MkV is slated to be a different league camera, digital imaging has been a steep learning curve with 1D models getting held back to sustain 1Ds models, the next generation will see a clearer focus and supportable difference between the bodies. 20MP or so is estimated to be ideal for a general photography balance between resolution, fps and iso performance. There will always be people who want much more resolution though and are happy with slower fps and reduced iso performance. This will be the 1Ds MKV and it will be the platform for very high quality video. It will not rival iMax, anybody that says a 36mmx24mm sensor can is talking nonsense, it should equal the best current DMR upconverted 35mm filmstock though. It won’t be iMax, but it will be very very good.
And will the EOS-1D Mark V capture video with the resolution of cinema film? Or only the EOS-1Ds Mark V?
Will the AF range be widened in the EOS-1D Mark V to give it a wider range? If not, then it will have a smaller comparative range than the EOS-1D Mark IV. I doubt people would take kindly to that!
Not unless you believe 20 odd MP at 10fps can match a 24fps film movie camera. Can enough detail be wrung out of the 1Ds MkV video performance to match 35mm film stock? Purists will say no but Canon would like to show them different. Whoever is right, videographers will love the fight.
Well, fine, but will the EOS-1D Mark V use its full resolution for video?
Maybe ~20 megapixels can’t match 35mm movie film, but I do think you could fill a cinema screen without too much pixellation.
So let it shoot ~20 megapixels at 24fps!
That is all to be worked out, and not imminently. Don’t forget though that regular movie 35mm frames are only 22mmx16mm and even Super 35 is cropped down to 24mmx10mm.
I don’t know but I very much doubt it. The 45 point array started with the EOS 3, the area it covers has stayed constant, there are technical constraints in changing that, and also legal ones. Having said that 1Ds owners don’t worry too much and work with the system as it is. It is certainly not seen as a priority. If I was to speculate then I would consider in camera cropping to be a fair option, that would negate any criticism of AF coverage or the lose of the crop/tele “advantage”.
oops loss not lose!
Heh :P That’s why we have Canon Rumours! :DD Canon can scour around and find out what will be highly anticipated…
That’s fair.
But you still haven’t explained to me what’s so ridiculous about my absolutely brilliant suggestion of an EF 135mm f/2.8L IS USM with Softfocus lens.
Whilst I wouldn’t say it is not a “brilliant” idea, truth is sales of the very good quality 135 softfocus are not what could be called enthusiastic. The very few people that use them love them, but that doesn’t make a serious upgrade worth investing in. Actually to upgrade it to an L would not be too difficult, to upgrade it to an L with IS and softfocus would be more of a challenge.
Is ??D over?
And give us a hint as to the next announcement date, please!
Unfortunately I’d have to be high up in marketing to tell you both those. Marketing is not the captain of the ship, but it is the helmsman, and all too often they tell the navigator what to do.
I wouldn’t want to lead people on, in my area/dept I do get to see some interesting stuff, though nowhere near everything, but it is not marketing, if I knew I would say. My best guess would be no, any which way you look at it there is too big a price difference between a kitted 7D and a kitted T2i, even if you start to take 7D discounting into account. The last of the T1i’s need to go to let the price of the T2i ease, when stock levels are where remaining items can be absorbed then any 60D announcement would be imminent. With regards the next decent announcement, my guess would be marketing are sitting on at least three product launches at any one time. The key teles are done, the 24-70 replacement is done, there are at least two more lenses done, the 1Ds MkIV is done and I am sure there are other projects that have not been through my dept at all. Sorry I can’t be more helpful.
Does the replacement for the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM contain an IS element?
The one I have seen and held does.
Are you from Canon Inc., Canon U.S.A., or Canon Europe?
Do people at the branches have any say in the design of products? Or only the guys at Canon Japan?
Canon Inc makes all design decisions, they solicit input from everywhere but nobody else has any input whatsoever. Don’t forget that domestic sales are the strongest, single, driving force.
Are you from Canon, Inc.?
That stinks, doesn’t it? I don’t plan on moving to Nippon to join Canon, Inc.’s staff anytime soon.
Not really, Canon is a medium sized corporate company. Each division has to have a direction that is very relevant to its own market. The domestic market makes up differing percentages of each divisions output so the market demands and foreign input is different for each product range.
The camera market in Japan makes a higher percentage of camera sales than, for instance, some of the medical imaging equipment lines, the US is a bigger market percentage for that, so product lines are affected more by US input. The HQ bosses in Tokyo do not have an interest in cameras directly, the camera division answers to them but is a semi autonomous sector. They are given performance targets and expected to meet them.
So camera division model ranges and lineups are decided by Japanese decision makers in a Japanese company in Japan for an important Japanese market. Toyota USA makes pickup trucks in the US that just wouldn’t sell in Japan. Don’t think there is no dialogue, there is, hence differing market model names etc. But the decisions in the camera division are 100% Japanese.
Camera division pre-production testing, which is in flux at the moment, does take a broader outlook, they realise different markets use the same product very differently. They try very hard, within their budget, to walk the line between production limitations, financial limitations and the dwarves in marketing (who have a much bigger budget). High quality international market based and orientated Alpha and Beta testers are very very important. But then that opens up its own problems.
Well, yes, I do appreciate the fact that we Americans do not have to suffer the “Kiss” naming theme.
But surely America, Europe, Australasia, Africa (the West) buy more cameras than the Japanese alone?
Of course, and don’t forget the Middle East, and the rest of Asia, not to mention the Chinese, what a market! (though West Africa is not as big as South Africa and even that is not a big market)
But if you tried to make these decisions by international committee you would end up with a mess. Besides the home market has a disproportionate amount of prestige, it is very important. Where input has a consensus from different areas then it will be considered. But if the Japanese home market has another opinion then the home market opinion will, invariably, win out. The most obvious example would be the direct print button. Worldwide an unpopular “feature”, but a good marketing point in the domestic market.
I find the direct print button to be for lazy people.
But didn’t they have that Italian (German?) guy working on the T90?
Only as a high profile styling exercise. Colani (German) did a superb job and the move into the EOS 1, and subsequent pro models, is an obvious one (the AF road map was well in place by the T90’s release) . But it was a Japanese decision to use an outside stylist, again, just like in the car market. The Italians can design cars way better than they can make them. Not all Canon Inc employees, or sub contractors, are Japanese.