Canon is gearing up for a big 2020 [CR2]

Aug 21, 2019
7
4
I already have a Sony a9 and am using with adapted Canon glass ans Sony glass. The a9 is what has transformed my thinking about what a mirrorless camera can be for professional action photographers. There is a lot to like about the Sony a9, but a lot not to like as well. Thus, I am hopeful Canon can take the pro-mirrorless camera to the next level by doing what Sony has done, but also bringing along with it awesome usability that Sony just does not have.
If Canon can come out with an a9 sensor in 36+ mp, Canon ergonomics, improved battery life, it would be transformative.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,172
1,756
Irving, Texas
Honestly, an RF 70-200mm f/2.8L would be fine, but I am waiting to see if a 70-135 f/2 comes out to match the 28-70. That wait may be futile. but I'll give it two years. By then, surely, an RF 135mm should get released.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,172
1,756
Irving, Texas
Sounds like a really bad year for mirrorless... no "normal" megapixel camera with pro features incoming.... only some needs 50+ MP! The best for the most is between 24-40MP.

Wake me up for a 40-45MP 5D- mirrorless body. With IBIS, with HIGH-MP EVF, s controll stick and double card slot.
Sleep well. Most don't need, or want, 40-45 mega pixels either. I'd bet more on 30-35 mega pixels with a new sensor.
 

mpb001

EOS T7i
Sep 10, 2016
75
60
Sounds like a really bad year for mirrorless... no "normal" megapixel camera with pro features incoming.... only some needs 50+ MP! The best for the most is between 24-40MP.

Wake me up for a 40-45MP 5D- mirrorless body. With IBIS, with HIGH-MP EVF, s controll stick and double card slot.
I agree. I have a 5DIV and like it a lot. I will not be buying a 5DV. The next Canon I plan I buying is looking like the second iteration of the first R. I think the second model will likely have IBIS and an upgraded sensor within the 36-45 MP range. I really do not even want that high a MP. It would be great if they kept it in the 30-36 MP range. I think this model will probably show up in 2021 is my guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fox40phil

cellomaster27

Capture the moment!
Jun 3, 2013
353
51
San Jose - CA
I've used that combination, but only once. (Simply because I don't have much time for recreational photography due to the demands of my work photography. I must say I was impressed with the sharpness on the R -- probably as a result of not needing AFMA. I didn't notice any slower or faster focusing than on a DSLR. Generally, I think the R tends to hunt more when shooting BIF than a DSLR. But that may be because I need to get more used to the R for that purpose. It seems like when it misses focus, it really, really misses focus and it's hard to find the subject again. I haven't tried it with the new firmware though, so don't know if that will help.
I see. I really like the 5D3 tracking system for BIF. It's not perfect but as long as my panning skills are sub-decent, I get about 80% hit rates with the AI focus. Not bad, really. I tweak and played around with what works for BIF for me in the AF menu. I can't fathom the eos R being worse than the 5D3. That would be a complete shocker. I would love to see canon come out with a 200-600mm like Sony for the RF mount. I'd imagine it'd be shorter like the 70-200 if it ever sees production. not having to deal with AFMA is amazing too!
 
Sounds like a really bad year for mirrorless... no "normal" megapixel camera with pro features incoming.... only some needs 50+ MP! The best for the most is between 24-40MP.

Wake me up for a 40-45MP 5D- mirrorless body. With IBIS, with HIGH-MP EVF, s controll stick and double card slot.
Not sure what might the numbers of ppl wanting a high mpx body quantifiable, but we are waiting for the mirrorless 5DV too. No chance we will buy one without the new sensor tech, IBIS, two card slots and MP being under the 50mpx. If it is going to be in 2021, so be it. My gut feeling is though, that Canon is "brave" enough to do it again - releasing 70+ mpx body noone asks for, just because they can.

As for recent 32mpx APS-C released, if it is indeed an upgraded sensor tech, I just wonder, what would be its performance, if released in a 24mpx form. So far it seems like guys have to use downsampling and other tricks to convince themselves, that the IQ is not worse than the former 24mpx generation. Well, apart from the read-out speed and such goodies. What I am talking here is the necessity to go higher in mpx.

On the other hand, my feeling about the new APS-C release is kind of - positive (thinking of buying m6 II). It seems new generation of sensor tech is here and there is always room for improvement for the years to come. Not sure new high mpx FF could have some mode to use just part of the sensor for the 20-30mpx readout, but that would mean crop and a huge waste of resources, if used permanently? So - keeping the fingers crossed that the high mpx FF is not the new FF standard for years to come. Coming home from wedding with 2-3K+ images keeps our HD space occupied enough even today ...
 

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
549
424
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
My gut feeling is though, that Canon is "brave" enough to do it again - releasing 70+ mpx body noone asks for, just because they can.
I do ask for 80mp+ body. 70 or 60 would also do, but I'd be disappointed if it's less than 60.

There's no disadvantages apart from the raw file size, and if it becomes an issue, that can be fixed by enabling the lossy compression in raw.

Rapid shooting may also be affected but I don't care about high fps.
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,049
1,432
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I see. I really like the 5D3 tracking system for BIF. It's not perfect but as long as my panning skills are sub-decent, I get about 80% hit rates with the AI focus. Not bad, really. I tweak and played around with what works for BIF for me in the AF menu. I can't fathom the eos R being worse than the 5D3. That would be a complete shocker. I would love to see canon come out with a 200-600mm like Sony for the RF mount. I'd imagine it'd be shorter like the 70-200 if it ever sees production. not having to deal with AFMA is amazing too!
The challenge I'm having with the R and action has a lot to do with my own habits. I've gotten very used to moving the focus point by using my thumb on the touch screen. With subjects that aren't moving fast, it works beautifully, but then when I switch to action, I realize too late that my thumb isn't going to be able to keep up with fast moving subjects and I have to revert back to my old DLSR habits. Mostly just a matter of adapting to different conditions.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,413
860
As for recent 32mpx APS-C released, if it is indeed an upgraded sensor tech, I just wonder, what would be its performance, if released in a 24mpx form. So far it seems like guys have to use downsampling and other tricks to convince themselves, that the IQ is not worse than the former 24mpx generation.
No one has to use any tricks to see that the 32mp sensor is better than the 24mp sensor. And if the new sensor was a 24mp model, its performance would be the same as the 80D and you would be complaining about Canon reusing an "old" sensor.
 

GoldWing

Canon EOS 1DXMKII
Oct 19, 2013
110
70
Los Angeles, CA
en.wikipedia.org
Why do they announce flagships so close to the Olympics? What if something goes wrong and they won't have a moment to fix that? Also would't it be better for business to promote next Olympics flagship way ahead of the even to squeeze more cash on that fact?
I really don't get this.
I agree with you. Many of us will need a great deal of time with a new body to adjust workflow. Production and Post Production will be affected. Also, why would my shop budget for new bodies we can't account for "bug fix time".

The 1DX and the 1DXMKII both had bugs that were worked out after time. Mirror Box and Circut Boards come to mind right off the bat.

I can't see too many of us who have to get "money shots" placing 3 1DX III's in our kits vs. 3 IDXII's and letting CPS carry the load in Tokyo. I'd rather use a CPS Body and wait until after Tokyo to see "if" we want to adopt the platform. If Canon had given us more time.... perhaps this would have changed.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,155
577
Why do they announce flagships so close to the Olympics? What if something goes wrong and they won't have a moment to fix that? Also would't it be better for business to promote next Olympics flagship way ahead of the even to squeeze more cash on that fact?
I really don't get this.
Because Canon has the prototypes in the hands of their advisory photographers for a year or so before they announce them. They make sure everything works *before* it is released.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,155
577
My baseless prediction is that they'll also offer up a 7D III, based on the 90D sensor, with dual processors, supreme autofocus, and the rest of the 7D stuff that sets it apart. A rugged cropper.

More speculative - Maybe a hybred optical/LCD viewfinder that allows switching to "mirrorless" mode with the resultant DPAF and increased frame rate. Would be very cool for sports/action on a budget.

I wonder if they'll throw out any more EF-M lenses, or if that format is going to slide into oblivion. I would love to see an ultra-wide, and a short tele prime, along with some sort of f/4 normal zoom, like 15-60 or something like that. Just dreaming here - I know that there's only so much $$ in the development budget.
Canon has all but officially announced there will not be a 7D Mark III. Canon never officially announces they do not plan to bring a particular rumored product to market. Nikon has officially announced there will be no DSLR replacement of the D500. So it seems both Canon and Nikon are abandoning the concept of an ASP-C DSLR with a high frame rate and top class AF system.

As far as the EF-M lenses go, every lens released so far for the EF-M mount has been around 2.4 inches in diameter. One might assume that any future EF-M lenses would also be restricted to a maximum front element of around 56mm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ah-Keong

Joules

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2017
379
304
Hamburg, Germany
So far it seems like guys have to use downsampling and other tricks to convince themselves, that the IQ is not worse than the former 24mpx generation.
Downsampling is no trick. I think you mean that noise at 1:1 pixel viewing is worse?

That is simply thinking about resolution the wrong way. You're likely viewing your image on a monitor with a fixed size. If you view your image so that it fills the monitor and each image pixel is displayed by one monitor pixel, you are essentially looking at an extreme crop of the image.

You are likely familiar with the concept of cropped images (or images from a crop sensor) appearing more noisy. With a modern sensor, that noise is mostly coming from fluctuations in the light source it self, called shot noise. It is not the fault of the sensor, but a limit of physics.

So what you do is instead of magnifying your image so far that the pixels are displayed 1:1 when comparing noise between images is you magnify the images so that they match each other in terms ofnfield of view, if you imaging comparing shots from a test scene that show the same image. This way, the shot noise has the same contribution to both images and the only difference comes from the noise introduced by the sensor, so dark current and read noise.

Of course if the compared images have different resolutions, one will be downscaled or upscaled more. For comparing the sensor quality, this does not matter though. If you want to measure physics, go ahead and do your comparison at 1:1 for each image, resulting in different field of views and different amount of crop.

That doesn't seem to be a fair comparison though. If you had looked at the images at the same field of view, the higher resolution would simply allow the corresponding sensor to capture more detail. Which isn't such a bad thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene and Sharlin

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,155
577
Downsampling is no trick. I think you mean that noise at 1:1 pixel viewing is worse?

That is simply thinking about resolution the wrong way. You're likely viewing your image on a monitor with a fixed size. If you view your image so that it fills the monitor and each image pixel is displayed by one monitor pixel, you are essentially looking at an extreme crop of the image.

You are likely familiar with the concept of cropped images (or images from a crop sensor) appearing more noisy. With a modern sensor, that noise is mostly coming from fluctuations in the light source it self, called shot noise. It is not the fault of the sensor, but a limit of physics.

So what you do is instead of magnifying your image so far that the pixels are displayed 1:1 when comparing noise between images is you magnify the images so that they match each other in terms ofnfield of view, if you imaging comparing shots from a test scene that show the same image. This way, the shot noise has the same contribution to both images and the only difference comes from the noise introduced by the sensor, so dark current and read noise.

Of course if the compared images have different resolutions, one will be downscaled or upscaled more. For comparing the sensor quality, this does not matter though. If you want to measure physics, go ahead and do your comparison at 1:1 for each image, resulting in different field of views and different amount of crop.

That doesn't seem to be a fair comparison though. If you had looked at the images at the same field of view, the higher resolution would simply allow the corresponding sensor to capture more detail. Which isn't such a bad thing.
To put it more simply:

If one is viewing images at 100% (one image pixel = one screen pixel) on a 23" FHD (1920 x 1080) monitor with about 92 ppi:

For a 24 MP camera one is looking at a piece of a 65 x 44 inch enlargement.
For a 32 MP camera one is looking at a piece of a 76 x 50 inch enlargement.

The 16% higher enlargement ratio of the 32 MP camera would make the same performance look worse at 100%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules

Joules

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2017
379
304
Hamburg, Germany
My gut feeling is though, that Canon is "brave" enough to do it again - releasing 70+ mpx body noone asks for, just because they can.
Not sure new high mpx FF could have some mode to use just part of the sensor for the 20-30mpx readout, but that would mean crop and a huge waste of resources, if used permanently?
The M6 II has exactly that kind of crop mode, where it reads only half of the pixels on the 32.5 MP sensor, which in combination with reading only 12bit allows it to do its 30 FPS Burst shooting mode.

I believe the introduction of that feature on a low cost mirrorless body is what spelled the doom for the 7D III. I believe Canon will implement a slightly more refined version of this feature in the high MP R body.

Let's assume that the throughout of the M6 II is not the maximum that Canon can do now and that the high res R and 1DX III will go above the 32.5 * 14 = 455 MP/s throughput. Maybe they'll manage 500 MP/s.

At 83.2 MP that yields 6 FPS and in 32.5 MP crop mode (1.6 crop) it delivers 15.4 FPS. In the M6 II that mode uses an electronic shutter. The 1DX II shutter does full sensor coverage in live view at 16 FPS. Maybe they'll add something like that. Or is it even possible to simply not make the shutter travel along the entire sensor to improve speed? I don't know.

The point is, there are definitely voices for a 7D III. But what could a 7D III offer over the high res R if it really gets such a treatment? Yes, an optical viewfinder. But if the high Res R really becomes what I think it will, it's a nice way for Canon to suck some extra cash out of the 7D III folks. For folks that don't have the cash and don't need the glamor, there's the 90D. And the people that are neither are apparently to few to justify making a new camera just for them in this time of declining sales.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,155
577
The M6 II has exactly that kind of crop mode, where it reads only half of the pixels on the 32.5 MP sensor, which in combination with reading only 12bit allows it to do its 30 FPS Burst shooting mode.

I believe the introduction of that feature on a low cost mirrorless body is what spelled the doom for the 7D III. I believe Canon will implement a slightly more refined version of this feature in the high MP R body.

Let's assume that the throughout of the M6 II is not the maximum that Canon can do now and that the high res R and 1DX III will go above the 32.5 * 14 = 455 MP/s throughput. Maybe they'll manage 500 MP/s.

At 83.2 MP that yields 6 FPS and in 32.5 MP crop mode (1.6 crop) it delivers 15.4 FPS. In the M6 II that mode uses an electronic shutter. The 1DX II shutter does full sensor coverage in live view at 16 FPS. Maybe they'll add something like that. Or is it even possible to simply not make the shutter travel along the entire sensor to improve speed? I don't know.

The point is, there are definitely voices for a 7D III. But what could a 7D III offer over the high res R if it really gets such a treatment? Yes, an optical viewfinder. But if the high Res R really becomes what I think it will, it's a nice way for Canon to suck some extra cash out of the 7D III folks. For folks that don't have the cash and don't need the glamor, there's the 90D. And the people that are neither are apparently to few to justify making a new camera just for them in this time of declining sales.
What about those who want to keep an optical viewfinder (that doesn't suck the life out of batteries when using the viewfinder for long periods between bursts of shots), a 200,000+ shutter life rating, and a body built like a tank? The 90D doesn't offer #2 and #3, and no mirrorless offers #1. There seem to be more than a few of us.

Canon seems to think it can nudge us into a 1D X Mark III, which will cost 3X the 7D Mark II and almost certainly give up a lot of ground in terms of pixel density (the 20.2 MP 7D Mark II has the same pixel density as a 51 MP FF camera).
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee