Canon's Full Frame Mirorrless Cameras [CR2]

bergstrom

Photographer
Feb 23, 2015
175
41
CanoKnight said:
By the time these hit, everyone will own a Sony. But not to worry because it will be spec'ed well below the Sony and priced well above it.
if they don't come under the same price as the a7iii did, they are shooting themselves in the foot. Commercial suicide.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
ahsanford said:
Jim Saunders said:
If it will mount EF lenses and sync flash at 1/1000 I'm interested.
Don't you need a leaf shutter in the lens for that to be possible?

- A
The advantages of leaf shutters are overestimated because people don't understand what they do at higher shutter speeds (heavy vignetting and an effective second aperture, also they need very fast flash times that severely limit the flash output), global shutters have the potential to offer the kinds of advantages most think of when they think of leaf shutters but they still have issues and good ones, due to the processing power and electronic layout needed, seem to be expensive (and nothing can overcome the flash output speed issue except big money). I believe global shutters are the way forward though, and in ten years we will be wondering why anybody ever didn't have them. A bit like vertical moving focal plane shutters followed on from horizontal moving focal plane shutters, why would anybody ever make a horizontal moving focal plane shutter!
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
BillB said:
Alternatively, the idea all along may have been to give to the new less expensive mirrorless the sensor that everybody wanted the 6DII to have
Sure. I never said dropping the 6D2 sensor into another camera would be a good idea. :D

I'm not bashing the 6D2 -- I'm sure it take lovely pictures. But Canon absolutely hosed every amateur landscapers with a 6D1 by telling them their prayers were answered for a new camera with an amazing new sensor... and that new camera was a $3299 5D4.

In effect, the 6D2 was Canon apologizing to all 5D users that a lower priced product would never have a better sensor than their beloved 5D ever again.

- A
 

Attachments

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,305
539
bergstrom said:
CanoKnight said:
By the time these hit, everyone will own a Sony. But not to worry because it will be spec'ed well below the Sony and priced well above it.
if they don't come under the same price as the a7iii did, they are shooting themselves in the foot. Commercial suicide.
Maybe price competitive with the A7III, but don't see why they need to come in under it, unless you want to figure lenses into the equation.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
bergstrom said:
If the flagship models doesn't have the same features as the sony a7iii and more , then forget it. People will just stick with the sony.
Right, because the 5D4 and 6D2 -- wildly underspec'd to their Sony counterparts -- were both unmitigtated disasters. :p

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
bergstrom said:
CanoKnight said:
By the time these hit, everyone will own a Sony. But not to worry because it will be spec'ed well below the Sony and priced well above it.
if they don't come under the same price as the a7iii did, they are shooting themselves in the foot. Commercial suicide.
Canon isn't trying to win the general market with this first pass. They are trying to sell everyone Canon users an FF mirrorless camera to use their Canon glass with. Just like they did with EOS M in crop.

They don't give two hoots about Sony right now -- the first wave of FF mirrorless is to pluck the lowest of hanging fruit and get a fat payday from the pent-up demand of current users who don't want to switch systems, buy new lenses, etc. I think it will be priced relative to the Canon SLR it is spec'd like.

- A
 

infared

Kodak Brownie!
Jul 19, 2011
1,411
11
tron said:
I do not understand people wanting another mount. It will be kind of optimal only for some fixed wide angle lenses and nothing else.

See a comparison between Canon 5DMkIV and Sony A7RIII all using 24-70 2.8 lenses

https://camerasize.com/compact/#682.286,724.515,ha,t
Good point. I am very happy with all my current cameras (Canon: FF extensive kit, Olympus: VERY extensive kit with mutiple bodies)...but if I could buy a GREAT (Don't screw this up Canon!), mirrorless body for my existing EF lenses, I would gladly pay for it. The more features the better!!!!!!!! They need to get it right the first time after joining the party soooooooooo late!!!
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
infared said:
tron said:
I do not understand people wanting another mount. It will be kind of optimal only for some fixed wide angle lenses and nothing else.

See a comparison between Canon 5DMkIV and Sony A7RIII all using 24-70 2.8 lenses

https://camerasize.com/compact/#682.286,724.515,ha,t
Good point. I am very happy with all my current...but if I could buy a GREAT ( don't screw tis up Canon!), body for my existing EF lenses, I would gladly pay for it.
They have to do both a new and EF mount, I think.

Why? There's a large chunk of the prospective mirrorless buying folks out there who routinely say "Mirrorless is all about being small", aka 'If you just pull the mirror out of an SLR in the same footprint, why even make it?' These folks' opinions on the matter don't seem to change -- they find a smaller body + lens combo to be attractive. You cannot talk these folks down or explain to them that you've overthought this issue to the point that they should concede the point to you.

It would be foolish to assume these folks are idiots, or that they don't recognize that size savings go out the window with pro glass. I believe these folks are well read and understand the fine print, recognize that a thin mount means adaptors, that a thin mount does not remotely herald the end of EF, that new native lenses will have to be purchased, and yes, in some case, a similar overall size with faster glass. And yet, that's still the camera they want.

And Canon is (possibly) prepared to accept them as 'mind made up' segments of the market, and give them the camera they want.

So I want EF personally, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if Canon leads with a thin mount and follows with EF later.

- A
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,367
2,109
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
BillB said:
I would be very reluctant to recommend a fullframe camera to anyone who isn't interested in printing on A3 paper or maybe even larger, and even then I might well suggest starting with something smaller. The minimum buyin cost for printing A3 using a fullframe camera is something north of $5000, with any kind of lens selection at all. And then there is the investment in time needed to learn how to use that equipment well. This is not pictures of grandchildren in the park territory.
This is a point that needs to be driven home repeatedly.

Full frame cameras are a niche market. Full frame mirrorless cameras are a niche within a niche.

Anyone who thinks that Canon's or Nikon's entrance into the full frame mirrorless camera market is either "disruptive" or will have a significant impact on the viability of any manufacturer is sadly mistaken.

Yes, this represents a potentially lucrative market, otherwise Canon and Nikon would not be entering the market. But it is in no way going to be a game changer or have a significant impact on the overall trends in digital photography.

It's fun to debate these esoteric points about lens mounts, etc., but please keep in mind that all of this amounts to a very small portion of the market.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
unfocused said:
Full frame cameras are a niche market. Full frame mirrorless cameras are a niche within a niche.
...except for a good chunk of people who disagree with that second part. Some folks believe mirrorless will eventually supplant SLRs (I do, though not anytime soon), so they are a niche of the FF market today but will be the FF market down the road.

As such, some folks think it's a big deal. I happen to be one of them. I believe Canon and Nikon feel this way as well (despite their lack of public activity in this segment) and have been very very very carefully sizing up the market and making very careful decisions about how to enter it.

I appreciate how few FF bodies are in the wild vs. crop, vs. cell phones, etc. but the FF ecosystem is where the good stuff happens and it's fun to speculate about. :D

- A
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,262
1,920
Canada
+1.....

remember when people were saying that digital cameras would never replace film :) When they can build a mirrorless camera that costs less to manufacture than a comparable DSLR, you know which way the manufacturers are going to lean....
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,305
539
ahsanford said:
unfocused said:
Full frame cameras are a niche market. Full frame mirrorless cameras are a niche within a niche.
...except for a good chunk of people who disagree with that second part. Some folks believe mirrorless will eventually supplant SLRs (I do, though not anytime soon), so they are a niche of the FF market today but will be the FF market down the road.

As such, some folks think it's a big deal. I happen to be one of them. I believe Canon and Nikon feel this way as well (despite their lack of public activity in this segment) and have been very very very carefully sizing up the market and making very careful decisions about how to enter it.

I appreciate how few FF bodies are in the wild vs. crop, vs. cell phones, etc. but the FF ecosystem is where the good stuff happens and it's fun to speculate about. :D

- A
But as you point out, even if mirrorless takes over the fullframe niche, apparently there will still be two subniches, the big camera people and the little camera people. And we don't know at this point how many of the little camera fullframe people there will really be when the little camera people have to choose between expensive fullframe little cameras and even smaller less expensive aps-c cameras. Canon may be in a good position to lure both the big camera people and the little camera people, while Sony and Nikon seem to be more tilted toward the little camera side, without much presence in the aps-c world. Sony may have actually figured out a way to get caught in the middle, mostly because of the size and price of many of its lenses. Apparently Nikon is going to try to open the bidding with a $4K camera, with the one available native lens included as part of the kit.
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,367
2,109
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
ahsanford said:
unfocused said:
Full frame cameras are a niche market. Full frame mirrorless cameras are a niche within a niche.
...except for a good chunk of people who disagree with that second part. Some folks believe mirrorless will eventually supplant SLRs (I do, though not anytime soon), so they are a niche of the FF market today but will be the FF market down the road.

As such, some folks think it's a big deal. I happen to be one of them. I believe Canon and Nikon feel this way as well (despite their lack of public activity in this segment) and have been very very very carefully sizing up the market and making very careful decisions about how to enter it.

I appreciate how few FF bodies are in the wild vs. crop, vs. cell phones, etc. but the FF ecosystem is where the good stuff happens and it's fun to speculate about. :D

- A
Don Haines said:
+1.....

remember when people were saying that digital cameras would never replace film :) When they can build a mirrorless camera that costs less to manufacture than a comparable DSLR, you know which way the manufacturers are going to lean....
BillB said:
But as you point out, even if mirrorless takes over the fullframe niche, apparently there will still be two subniches, the big camera people and the little camera people. And we don't know at this point how many of the little camera fullframe people there will really be when the little camera people have to choose between expensive fullframe little cameras and even smaller less expensive aps-c cameras. Canon may be in a good position to lure both the big camera people and the little camera people, while Sony and Nikon seem to be more tilted toward the little camera side, without much presence in the aps-c world. Sony may have actually figured out a way to get caught in the middle, mostly because of the size and price of many of its lenses. Apparently Nikon is going to try to open the bidding with a $4K camera, with the one available native lens included as part of the kit.
All good points. I'm just trying to keep things in perspective. As Bill pointed out earlier, the cost of entry into the full frame world remains very high. Out of reach for at least 90% of the population in wealthy countries.

I can't shake the feeling that this forum is obsessed with full frame when the real action may be in APS-C and smaller. If size and cost are driving forces, the EOS-M and the SLx lines hold far more potential growth and opportunity for innovation than full frame.
 

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
853
689
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
Come on Canon. 30Mpix in a flagship 2019 model isn't satisfactory. We want more pixels and better DR for landscapes.

As to the universal mount compatible to EF, mark my words, it'll be a shifting sensor. You attach an EF lens and the sensor automatically moves backwards. A bit thicker body will be needed (compared to Sony) but well worth the compatibility. As a side effect, you also get an in-body tilt like in large format film cameras. This will kill all the competitors.
 

snoke

EOS RP
Jul 20, 2017
302
47
New camera have 5D Mark IV sensor? Can't understand Canon.

Reason: stop eat 5Ds Mark II lunch?

Nikon + Sony eat Canon lunch now.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
Don Haines said:
+1.....

remember when people were saying that digital cameras would never replace film :) When they can build a mirrorless camera that costs less to manufacture than a comparable DSLR, you know which way the manufacturers are going to lean....
We *believe* it will cost more because they won't need:

  • Mirrorbox, mirror, moving armatures, etc.
  • OVF components: pentaprism, OVF screen, diopter adjustment, etc.
  • Secondary mirror for AF

But we don't know the costs for the EVF (could be super high res, articulating, magnify-able, etc.) or any added computational componentry to support full time DPAF use, added cooling burden, etc.

And SLRs get huge cost savings through volumes FF mirrorless could only dream of right now.

So, yes, it will be cheaper... someday. Not out of the gate. I'm expecting a product that will be charged at a premium vs. the same-spec'd SLR. Does the same job in a smaller footprint, so please pay (idk) $300 more for the privilege.

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
unfocused said:
I can't shake the feeling that this forum is obsessed with full frame when the real action may be in APS-C and smaller. If size and cost are driving forces, the EOS-M and the SLx lines hold far more potential growth and opportunity for innovation than full frame.
A+. Agree completely. APS-C has simultaneously all of these things going for it:

  • Way more units and dollars flowing in
  • Much higher percentage of first-time camera buyers = fewer dug-in obsessives who resist certain changes, more folks willing to trust the manufacturer to figure out the hard bits for them
  • The 800 pound EF gorilla is not on the brand's shoulders for future decisions: there are far fewer lenses to worry about obsoleting, replacing, or having to 'keep' up with developments on another mount.
  • Much lower risk (I mean financial exposure) of existing users in this market taking their business to another company

Which equals waaaaaay less headwind for innovation. You are spot on.

And while we in FF get spun up about on chip ADC and BR goo and what not, crop has delivered the following firsts for Canon:

  • Tilty-flippy, touchscreen, etc.
  • Illuminated macro
  • Super sharp pancake lenses (EOS M's happened before the EF 40, right?)
  • STM, Nano USM and power zoom for hybrid shooters who want smooth video AF
  • The super tiny SL# brand

- A
 

Aaron D

Hey!
Jul 21, 2016
187
161
Kansas City
www.aarondougherty.com
It would be foolish to assume these folks are idiots, or that they don't recognize that size savings go out the window with pro glass.
ahsanford is a rare rational mind in the blog-o-sphere! Give him cookies!

Yes, there are those of us who would like a smaller camera. EVEN IF it's only small-ish with certain lenses that are optimized to a short flange distance and EVEN IF it has no effect on most other lenses.

I don't expect my 5d4 to be the last camera I own. Same with my current lenses. I earn my living with these things and they are tools. I don't love my cameras though I like them a lot, they're tools and I will buy more when I need to. I'm excited to see the technology advance, it's fun. We can be outraged by current and future failures in the techno-minutia arms race, but if we can collectively take a deep breath, I don't imagine there's anyone on this list who would complain that Canon takes nasty photos or are impossible to hold in their hands.

[/rant] and apologies.

A