The reason I had asked was I am sure I read years and years ago when Zeiss released the ZE lenses that they had worked with Canon. If you cast your mind back to those days people buying cheap Tamron and Sigma glass would often worry about how the next year's camera would break compatibility etc and the lenses cease to work. I would be surprised if Zeiss released lenses that put consumers in that position but I have googled it and can't find any reference to it so maybe I am wrong.Pretty sure that Canon will not directly cooperate with Zeiss or Voigtlander, they never did before (as far as I know). I think they are too proud of their proven ability to make very good lenses by themselves. Plus, there were always offerings from other manufacturers for the EF mount, Sigma, Tampon, Tonika... Zeiss without direct cooperation. So they can rely on the other manufacturers to come up with lenses for the RF mount, including manual focusing lenses, - IF Canon manages to get a big enough share of the FF ML market. (I am pretty sure they will.)
Sony had to be more open in terms of cooperation when they started with their A7 series, since a fast growth of a decent, attractive lens selection for their E mount was vital for establishing their new camera line. Plus, the first FF lenses from Sony were mostly quite mediocre quality, what has changed in the past years, now they really do serious business. Btw I always have to silently giggle when I see their shiny, much too white lenses. Sony behaves like a hip hopper who managed to successfully overcome his poor roots, made a lot of fresh money, and who now tries to look like old money
The big difference from before 2010 to now is Sony's approach. They have completely changed the rules of the game, brining in huge economies of scale and massive investment to sensor fabrication, leveraging all the tens of millions of phone and other consumer sensors they sell.Looks like you entered photography after 2010. In the decade before, Canon was leading the pixel race, and the 5D II was the first FF camera with HD video, which was a game changer in video business. Nikon particularly was in trouble. Canon advanced CMOS sensor tech when all other manufacturers preferred CCD, because CMOS was said to be too noisy - but in the end it opened up leading video capabilities for Canon back then. Unfortunately, after 2010, Canon really slowed down sitting on their laurels and let Sony pull ahead. Btw this typical for electronics industry, Sony had the better CMOS technology because they invested later in their production lines. I just mention this because such an oscillation between being very innovative and very conservative in the camera sector is quite typical for Canon's history. So let's see what future will bring.
Sounds sensible. Much as I dislike the weight I would consider the 28-70/2 instead of the 24-70 if there is a body with IBIS.mjg79 Interesting analysis. I only have to say that in my opinion it was smart move that Canon put IS on their 2.8 zooms (15-35 and 24-70) because it is exactly what could increase their sales. Even the 70-200 got a huge reduction in weight and a variable reduction in size depending on zoom position. I believe they made their mirrorless system even more competitive and appealing (At least it worked with me who use these two zooms for low light interiors) Also if I recall correctly they have a patent regarding the IS and IBIS cooperation. So add the extreme 28-70 f/2 zoom and the two f/1.2 prime lenses with superb IQ and you have quite a start in mirrorless systems irrespective of cameras which anyway will soon be replaced with better ones. It's a win win.
Nice way to alienate a HUGE group of pro shooters.The 5D line has been the wedding and event shooters go to gear for years. No reason to stop that because of Sony. Is that what 'some people' think Canon might be doing here? Bowing to Sony? Canon will do as Canon sees fit...old school, rock solid.Forget the Jack of all trades 5D camera as they are always a compramise.
Specifically targetted cameras that do what they are indended extremely well.
1. High resolution detail, low ISO optimised with extended DR.
2. Low resolution camera with excellect video codecs/features/DR.
Then later on bring in the mid reolution high frame rate/high ISO verion when we have more long RF telephotos for the 5D/1DX events shooters.
I'm hoping for a high res camera and separtare video focused RF Canon please.
Why, would they not be interested in a mid reolution high frame rate/high ISO R camera as I mentioned?Nice way to alienate a HUGE group of pro shooters.The 5D line has been the wedding and event shooters go to gear for years. No reason to stop that because of Sony. Is that what 'some people' think Canon might be doing here? Bowing to Sony? Canon will do as Canon sees fit...old school, rock solid. Meanwhile, dictation software has a long way to go it seems.
Canon's revenue in 2019 was 3.951 trillion Yen, Sony's 8.665 trillion Yen, so Sony is a bit more than double size of Canon. So, Sony is indeed a heavier weight, but overall they depend much more on consumer markets than Canon, who does also a lot of business for industrial partners. If the worst happens, they could start buying Sony sensors, like Nikon and like Canon already does with smaller sensors. The disadvantage for us customers then would be a lack of competition, Sony would establish a sensor monopole. Monopoles are always bad for economics. So let's hope that the David Canon can stand against Goliath Sony. A strong competition is important for further technical progress.The big difference from before 2010 to now is Sony's approach. They have completely changed the rules of the game, brining in huge economies of scale and massive investment to sensor fabrication, leveraging all the tens of millions of phone and other consumer sensors they sell.
Sensor fabrication is a bit like memory production - it's an area where the theory of economies of scale actually works out almost like in a textbook. Canon was indeed often ahead of Nikon, but that was a commercial light heavyweight fighting a middleweight. Now there's a big heavyweight and I am not so sure Canon can simply click their fingers and get ahead again in sensors.
I actually don't think it matters and will matter less and less. The clean shadows when raising 5 stops was always irrelevant to 99% of photographers. Sony's ability to offer high frame rates and high resolution in one has been good for them but that is something Canon will gradually approach.
But you can't just assume that the way competition was when it was largely Nikon v Canon will be repeated when it's Sony v Canon. The sums of money Sony has sunk into their sensor business is huge, literally billions of dollars they have borrowed and invested over the past decade.They spotted the growth in smartphone cameras, they realised that almost every element of modern life, from security systems to self driving cars were going to require advanced sensors and they made a wise call.
As tech matures of course it spreads out so I don't see any real danger for Canon, they have probably been through the worst of it around 2010-2015, I suspect it will become like smartphone CPUs - once they are all good enough it ceases to matter so much.
Enjoy your site! Keep up the good work!I thought about this .. is it really going to be that much better than oversampling from 20MP or 24MP?
versus taking a low MP sensor?
I would assume you would want to oversample - since that, with clever algorithms can reduce noise even further.
I could see it when you couldn't oversample because of feasbility - sure low MP is fine, but since Canon has already shown they can, why would you want this?
versus something like the 20MP 1DX sensor that can output nearly 6K RAW for you to post process down to 4K to your hearts content?
RAW probably wont get used all that often by most folks. i think that was a really smart hat-tip however to the higher end users who want cameras in a smaller form factor compared to a big Arri or RED rig to get high quality RAW footage in Log that grades extremely well with those major cameras RAW footage. Wht we've seen Canon DSLRs w/ ML used in a number of major films to get in places other cameras cantversus something like the 20MP 1DX sensor that can output nearly 6K RAW for you to post process down to 4K to your hearts content?
The A7S has AWFUL rolling shutter so low MP doesnt make global shutter a given. That said if this Digic X is as fast as they say, perhaps it CAN achieve global shutter on perfect 8.8 MP full frame 4k . Hence another reason you dont want a bigger sensor that oversamplesHigher resolutions don't correspond to significant impacts on low light performance though.
A lower resolution sensor will most likely allow very quick read out, meaning very little rolling shutter
Actually they are about 3x the size of Canon. Market Cap today:Canon's revenue in 2019 was 3.951 trillion Yen, Sony's 8.665 trillion Yen, so Sony is a bit more than double size of Canon.
DIGIC X has zip to do with global shutter.The A7S has AWFUL rolling shutter so low MP doesnt make global shutter a given. That said if this Digic X is as fast as they say, perhaps it CAN achieve global shutter on perfect 8.8 MP full frame 4k . Hence another reason you dont want a bigger sensor that oversamples
I assumed processing power related to how much raw data could be handled in a single burst as opposed to a rolling readout. I could be mistaken. I understand however he shutter itself also has to physically be able to accommodate, and whether Canon would equip the sensor with this is another conversation.DIGIC X has zip to do with global shutter.