Canon's Full Frame Mirorrless Cameras [CR2]

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,942
490
Aaron D said:
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 may be one of the few people here that wants a full EF mirrorless but would end up getting a thin-mount FF mirrorless.

I value seamlessness, own a number of EF lenses and love love love my 5D3 grip, ergonomics, screen, etc. But I also would like a smaller rig for travel or unplanned outings, even if it's only smaller with a 35 f/2.8 bolted on to it.

I certainly won't be an early adopter if EOS M (original) is any indication. I'm expecting functional but underwhelming, and that says to wait for the better one to come down the road.

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,942
490
Quarkcharmed said:
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.
That will mean it is as thick/deep as an EF SLR, which will equal no size savings at all. Why do that just for a cool tilt effect?

If you want cake and eating it too (native EF + magical size savings), surely going full EF with 'EF-X' lenses protruding into the body would be the way to go. This would be a lot easier to pull off than a moving sensor plane, and these lenses (at least the portion sticking out from the EF mount) would be smaller.

Also: 'automatically moves' implies you've left the power on while you are changing out. Not everyone does that -- some folks are changing out lenses at the start of a shoot, just after the body is pulled out of their bag. There won't be a mirror to bang into, of course, but each time you start your camera there would be some shooting lag as it resets.

- A
 

martti

EOS 7D MK II
May 11, 2014
692
10
21.1144° S, 55.5325° E
Something might actually be happening as there are specials on 5D4. I got myself one. It is great. Somehow, I feel so ignorant not having an opinion about the FF mirrorless that nobody has seen yet.
My guess is that we'll see a 5D5 before the FF mirrorless.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,942
490
KirkD said:
Disappointed that Canon is not going to try to compete with Sony's high DR sensors. As a landscape photographer who needs HDR, this news is a bit of a blow.
For landscapers, this conversation seems to be an easy one. I assume:
(please straighten me out if I've missed something)

  • You don't need/want an AA filter (almost always, there are exceptions)
  • You need base ISO DR a lot more than high ISO performance (unless you shooting landscape astro)
  • You don't need first party AF (indeed, possibly no AF needed at all)
  • You are sitting on a tripod, so you don't need a super comfy grip or a jillion buttons to drive the shooting experience through the viewfinder in real time
  • You probably need to lug this on your back to get to some sweet vista, so saving size/space is probably a good thing
All of the above points to bolting your EF glass on an A7. Why not do that?

...or you can wait for the 5DSR2, which we all assume will get the on-chip ADC hotness of the 1DX2, 5D4, 80D, etc.

- A
 

WeekendWarrior

EOS M50
Jan 15, 2015
27
0
I'm curious why they keep using a Leica Q with "EOS" written on it to advertise the new Canon mirrorless camera.. lol we all know its not going to look that good
 

Cryve

EOS T7i
Jul 4, 2018
91
27
Germany
ahsanford said:
KirkD said:
Disappointed that Canon is not going to try to compete with Sony's high DR sensors. As a landscape photographer who needs HDR, this news is a bit of a blow.
For landscapers, this conversation seems to be an easy one. I assume:
(please straighten me out if I've missed something)

  • You don't need/want an AA filter (almost always, there are exceptions)
  • You need base ISO DR a lot more than high ISO performance (unless you shooting landscape astro)
  • You don't need first party AF (indeed, possibly no AF needed at all)
  • You are sitting on a tripod, so you don't need a super comfy grip or a jillion buttons to drive the shooting experience through the viewfinder in real time
  • You probably need to lug this on your back to get to some sweet vista, so saving size/space is probably a good thing
All of the above points to bolting your EF glass on an A7. Why not do that?

...or you can wait for the 5DSR2, which we all assume will get the on-chip ADC hotness of the 1DX2, 5D4, 80D, etc.

- A
whats the chance of them implementing no AA filter? i'd love if they do that, especialy for the 7d iii but so far canon hasnt kept my hopes up for that.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,942
490
Cryve said:
whats the chance of them implementing no AA filter? i would love that they would do that, especialy for the 7d iii but so far canon hasnt kept my hopes up for that.
We presume the resolution-needing folks will get a choice with the next two 5DS models, i.e. one would expect a 5DSR2 to happen.

But despite everyone making fun of Canon's video specs, they pride themselves on making cameras well built to shift from stills to video. They've introduced a ton of tech to make video work well -- DPAF + tilty-flippy + touch greaty facilitates stills folks to reel in some video. And video with an AA filter can be problematic, right?

So I've always heard that pulling the AA filter is a step towards stills / detail obsessives and a step away from all-around use. Someone please straighten me out if that's no longer the case, if AA-free sensors can now reel in great video, etc.

- A
 

Cryve

EOS T7i
Jul 4, 2018
91
27
Germany
ahsanford said:
Cryve said:
whats the chance of them implementing no AA filter? i would love that they would do that, especialy for the 7d iii but so far canon hasnt kept my hopes up for that.
We presume the resolution-needing folks will get a choice with the next two 5DS models, i.e. one would expect a 5DSR2 to happen.

But despite everyone making fun of Canon's video specs, they pride themselves on making cameras well built to shift from stills to video. They've introduced a ton of tech to make video work well -- DPAF + tilty-flippy + touch greaty facilitates stills folks to reel in some video. And video with an AA filter can be problematic, right?

So I've always heard that pulling the AA filter is a step towards stills / detail obsessives and a step away from all-around use. Someone please straighten me out if that's no longer the case, if AA-free sensors can now reel in great video, etc.

- A
i would also be interested in this.
I have an 80d (24mp, AA filter) and have compared it with a friend who has a nikon d 500 (21mp, no AA filter) and even tho he has 3 mp less his pictures have more detail. I know lenses play a role but the lenses we used are about on par with sharpness.

So as far as i know AA makes a huge difference and i would REALLY like to see no AA in the 7d iii for wildlife stills
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,942
490
WeekendWarrior said:
I'm curious why they keep using a Leica Q with "EOS" written on it to advertise the new Canon mirrorless camera.. lol we all know its not going to look that good
Speak for yourself.

Pretty bodies without any grip to wield L lenses looks pretty damn awful to me. Go slap the 35 f/1.4L II in that picture on to a first-gen EOS M and tell me how your wrist feels in 60 seconds.

The Leica Q looks like it's made for people with Lego hands -- they (and Sony with the RX1R cameras) only get away with it because it's a fixed-lens design.

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,942
490
Cryve said:
So as far as i know AA makes a huge difference and i would REALLY like to see no AA in the 7d iii for wildlife stills
'Huge' can be debated. I remember Kai Wong comparing the D800 vs. the D800E years back and stating only lenses at their absolute sharpest apertures showed improvement.

While Uncle Rog at LR showed more improvement with 5DS R over the 5DS, but it varied as a function of the quality of the lens:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests/

I think it helps. I don't shoot video or (that many) screen doors or patterned fabrics, so I am inclined to try an AA-free camera. But I'm not sure Canon's going to give me one in my preferred FF all-arounder (5D#) segment.

- A
 

Cryve

EOS T7i
Jul 4, 2018
91
27
Germany
ahsanford said:
Cryve said:
So as far as i know AA makes a huge difference and i would REALLY like to see no AA in the 7d iii for wildlife stills
'Huge' can be debated. I remember Kai Wong comparing the D800 vs. the D800E years back and stating only lenses at their absolute sharpest apertures showed improvement.

While Uncle Rog at LR showed more improvement with 5DS R over the 5DS, but it varied as a function of the quality of the lens:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests/

I think it helps. I don't shoot video or (that many) screen doors or patterned fabrics, so I am inclined to try an AA-free camera. But I'm not sure Canon's going to give me one in my preferred FF all-arounder (5D#) segment.

- A
i looked at the links and it eased my mind a bit. even tho the difference at the shaprest glass they compared was about 10% it was only about 5 ish % with lower quality glass.

When i compared my 80d to his d500 i used my tamron 150-600g2 and he his nikkor 200-500. I thought bouth are about the same from online reviews but it seems like his copy might be sharper then?

maybe a well made canon 200-500 (instead of an unrealistic 200-600) could be very nice then, if it is really sharp.

i hope i didnt divert too much from the full frame mirrorless discussion but this was important to me
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,942
490
Also, going back to CR Guy's original post on this thread, calling any of these offerings 'the flagship one' would be a terrible error, IMHO.

Sony and Nikon continue to push a 'best FF (non-gripped)' body narrative with supercameras of late: A7R3, A99-II, D850, etc. They are trying to push a cake-and-eat-it-too camera with high resolution, high framerate, and a top top sensor. This is not Canon's approach to segmentation -- not at all.

It would be foolish to frame something up as a flagship offering when the competition might drive Canon to follow suit with a supercamera of their own. To call it flagship at launch would imply that Canon thinks their own FF segmentation assumptions are correct and that they can tip their hand that this will be the nicest FF mirrorless offering that will be coming.

It would be wiser to simply call it a rig for professionals and enthusiasts alike, see how it does in the market and ratchet up/down lines with future offerings (possibly as planned, possibly course-corrected based on market reception, sales, etc.).

I say this because I have a lingering suspicion Sony is going to pull a Sony and announce something absurdly spec'd the week (if not the very same day) Canon and Nikon out their FF mirrorless products. Like an A9 II or A7R IV or something with the specs of a fanboy fever dream.

- A
 
Oct 14, 2014
7
2
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.
I would disagree. Current Canon users are waiting for Canon to release something so they can still use their lenses.

But, I would agree that some of them are just waiting to see how serious Canon is before making the jump. If Canon doesn't show a REAL interest with these two releases, then I think a lot of Canon shooters that want to go mirrorless will move to Sony.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,942
490
jeffpoker said:
But, I would agree that some of them are just waiting to see how serious Canon is before making the jump. If Canon doesn't show a REAL interest with these two releases, then I think a lot of Canon shooters that want to go mirrorless will move to Sony.
Agree, but Canon simply won't go pound for pound with Sony as (a) it's not their MO to overpromise and underpromise on the shooting experience and (b) they are they market leader and they do not have to pack this thing up like an A7 to sell well.

However, I do think that if Canon does indeed just roll out a time-adjusted 5D4 spec sheet as 'flagship' and a time-adjust 6D2 spec sheet at 'entry-level' and then have the audacity to overcharge the SLR equivalents for the privilege, even Canonites would be angry.

The easiest way to overcome that is to roll out 1-2 awesome and exclusive things that the mirrorless camera does something unassailably better than the SLR or is altogether new for the industry. Something clear, unique, definable, and useful. One or two of these things:

  • An utterly silent shutter for weddings.
  • +3 fps over the SLR equivalent since there is no longer a mirror.
  • Offer a sensor with a defeatable AA filter.
  • Next-gen DPAF (QPAF I guess?).
  • Literally strip it down for weight, like 50% of the same-spec'd SLR (go carbon fiber?)
I'm not saying make the entire camera better than the SLR equivalent slot it is filling -- that's not possible in some respects (tracking AF, responsiveness, battery life, etc.). But give the camera something different other than the core mirrorless functionality.

- A
 

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
236
72
jeffpoker said:
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.
I would disagree. Current Canon users are waiting for Canon to release something so they can still use their lenses.

But, I would agree that some of them are just waiting to see how serious Canon is before making the jump. If Canon doesn't show a REAL interest with these two releases, then I think a lot of Canon shooters that want to go mirrorless will move to Sony.
That's the case for me. I'll hold out until these cameras are released to decide if I'll hop to the A7III. The Sigma adapter available makes it little easier to transition since I don't use much AF.
 

transpo1

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 12, 2011
719
70
ahsanford said:
WeekendWarrior said:
I'm curious why they keep using a Leica Q with "EOS" written on it to advertise the new Canon mirrorless camera.. lol we all know its not going to look that good
Speak for yourself.

Pretty bodies without any grip to wield L lenses looks pretty damn awful to me. Go slap the 35 f/1.4L II in that picture on to a first-gen EOS M and tell me how your wrist feels in 60 seconds.

The Leica Q looks like it's made for people with Lego hands -- they (and Sony with the RX1R cameras) only get away with it because it's a fixed-lens design.

- A
Have to agree with this- the Leica looks pretty and it would be lovely to have a retro design but it's just not ergonomic or practical. Canon would never do it, seeing as how one of the tenets of the EOS system was comfort and usability and they prefer their more modern design aesthetic.

Having used a Fuji X-T2 for a couple months now, I am well aware of this trade-off. This is the same reason Fuji recently released the X-H1 with a bigger grip for better ergonomics with heavier lenses.
 

dak723

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
434
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.
HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!

People who actually care if the camera works as spec'd won't be going over to Sony any time soon. I prefer cameras that actually work as well or better than the specs indicate, which is why I will be taking a close look at Canon's mirrorless offerings.

I've tried Sony FF and I will not be stupid enough to get suckered again.

And, oh, by the way, take your %#&*$% troll comments elsewhere. They aren't welcome here.
 

dak723

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
434
Quarkcharmed said:
Come on Canon. 30Mpix in a flagship 2019 model isn't satisfactory. We want more pixels and better DR for landscapes.
Who is we? I would prefer nothing over 24MP - which is far more pixels than I have ever needed.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,893
283
KirkD said:
Disappointed that Canon is not going to try to compete with Sony's high DR sensors. As a landscape photographer who needs HDR, this news is a bit of a blow.
5Div architecture is perfectly competitive. If canon built a raw converter to exploit the additional highlight stop burried in the DCRAW subframe, it could best all the 135-format competition.

Personally, I think it’s a good thing that canon doesn’t “try to compete” with individual specifications.