Three Sensors Being Tested for Canon Full Frame Mirrorless? [CR1]

[ahsanford]

If your information is true, why does Canon always have to start out behind the competition out of the gate? Sony has a wonderful 42 MP mirrorless sensor. Nikon has 46 MP sensor that will probably end up in at least one version of its mirrorless camera. Worse yet, if Canon starts out behind the competition now, with Canon's four-year new-camera cycle, they will be even further behind the competition in just a few years.

Because being behind the competitions' body/sensor specs -- and let's be honest, that's the only place they really are behind -- has not hurt their sales, so rushing to market parity on body horsepower specs like MP, fps, etc. would represent Canon just burning money symbolically to show that they are a proud company and care about bestnest / mostness / awesomeness. Foolish companies do that.

They are wise to put as little tech in there as they need to get the sale at the price they want. I hate this, of course, but clearly better competitive body specs aren't stealing market share from them, so why should they change? Until people actually leave the EF big tent for greener grass elsewhere, their MO won't change.

- A

 

[BillB]

If your information is true, why does Canon always have to start out behind the competition out of the gate? Sony has a wonderful 42 MP mirrorless sensor. Nikon has 46 MP sensor that will probably end up in at least one version of its mirrorless camera. Worse yet, if Canon starts out behind the competition now, with Canon's four-year new-camera cycle, they will be even further behind the competition in just a few years.

Because being behind the competitions' body/sensor specs -- and let's be honest, that's the only place they really are behind -- has not hurt their sales, so rushing to market parity on body horsepower specs like MP, fps, etc. would represent Canon just burning money symbolically to show that they are a proud company and care about bestnest / mostness / awesomeness. Foolish companies do that.

They are wise to put as little tech in there as they need to get the sale at the price they want. I hate this, of course, but clearly better competitive body specs aren't stealing market share from them, so why should they change? Until people actually leave the EF big tent for greener grass elsewhere, their MO won't change.

- A

More pixels gives you more resolution, but how much change in resolution does it take to be significant? The answer depends partly on how big you want to print. However, for purposes of internet wrangling, resolution is one of those magic numbers, where any difference becomes significant, whether or not you are ever going to actually print anything.

 

[fullstop]

What surprises me the most is the back-focus. 10 - 12.5mm is very short given that Sony is 18mm as is the EF-M, It also adds to certain optical challenges.

+1
makes me actually wonder about likelihood of this patent ever showing up as a real product.

3 sensors - great. Like Sony A7 / R / S

 

[jolyonralph]

We don’t need 36MP ....

I think what you mean is that you don't need 36mpx.

If all you're doing is taking full-frame photos, without cropping, and using them for prints then sure, you don't need more than 24mpx, but if you're doing more than just this, for example if you're taking photos of wildlife, or aviation photos, or anything much else out of the ordinary, and you want to crop in, then every megapixel counts.

This is why I'm convinced there will be at least 2 models launched, and I would actually be somewhat surprised if the highest resolution version is "only" 36mpx.

I was somewhat expecting to see a 28mpx base model (including antialiasing filter) and a 50mpx 'R' model (without filter). In this case the 5DSR II may become redundant.

 

[Mikehit]

Oh, why does my name have the Powershot under it? I don’t have a Powershot, and I didn’t bother listing my equipment.

Because you only have 15 posts to your name so are 'entry levels. As you get more posts you will be rewarded by being upgraded to 7D2, 5DIV and more. If you say something naughty you will be relegated to Nikon D850.

 

[Talys]

If your information is true, why does Canon always have to start out behind the competition out of the gate? Sony has a wonderful 42 MP mirrorless sensor. Nikon has 46 MP sensor that will probably end up in at least one version of its mirrorless camera. Worse yet, if Canon starts out behind the competition now, with Canon's four-year new-camera cycle, they will be even further behind the competition in just a few years.

What are you talking about?

If you're conflating mirrorless and DSLR, Canon already has a 50 megapixel camera.

IMO, 36 mp would be a perfect full frame enthusiast starting point, although from a marketing perspective 40+ looks nice.

 

[ahsanford]

This is why I'm convinced there will be at least 2 models launched, and I would actually be somewhat surprised if the highest resolution version is "only" 36mpx.

I was somewhat expecting to see a 28mpx base model (including antialiasing filter) and a 50mpx 'R' model (without filter). In this case the 5DSR II may become redundant.

There will be a whole platform of bodies released eventually, but other than the 5DS/5DSR move -- largely identical cameras -- Canon doesn't shoot out more than one > $1000 body at a time, especially in altogether new markets for them.

So I see a single 6D2-ish mirrorless body coming out and then Canon will intensely listen to the market on how it performs, how it could be better / more attractive to existing vs. competitive customers, etc.

I've chopped up Keith's chart from NL below to just show EOS M. Other than an EVF + DPAF surely being on every FF mirrorless model, Canon might take a similar approach here -- put one out, take the money from pent-up enthusiast demand, listen to the market, add more functionality into future models and then proliferate the line at numerous price points. Sure, the crop market and where Canon's tech was in 2012 is quite different than where it is today, but it's a glimpse into how they've climbed this mountain before.

- A

 

[neuroanatomist]

What surprises me the most is the back-focus. 10 - 12.5mm is very short given that Sony is 18mm as is the EF-M, It also adds to certain optical challenges.

You seem to be confusing flange focal distance (mount surface to sensor, 18mm for EF-M/Sony E) with back focus distance (rear element to sensor, varies by lens and can vary by focal for zoom lenses). Many EF-M/EF-S lenses have a rear element that protrudes into the camera body, meaning their back focus distance is less than the flange focal distance for the mount. But yes, that short a back focus distance can result in optical design/performance challenges.

 

[amorse]

But there is always the option of releasing slower lenses to reduce the over all size. I guess my question for people who really need a less conspicuous body is are they willing to give up some aperture in order to shrink the kit?

For those that want a smaller body, sure.

But the rest of us 100% will be bolting on our standard f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes on these bodies on. day. one.

Canon isn't making mirrorless expressly to make a smaller camera. That's just one of the markets for this camera.

- A

I agree that many of us (myself included) would value the ergonomics and performance over reducing the size of the camera, but Canon's mantra on camera release has always seemed to favour purpose-built devices rather than the good/better/best formula seen elsewhere. For instance the 1D series was focused on speed and durability, the 5DS focused on maximum resolution, the 5D being a balance between the two, and the 6D being an entry level offering with weight savings. In the crop series of cameras Canon did explore a small camera which was priced higher than other entry level cameras (SL2), but there really isn't a comparable option in full frame.

If we know Canon is testing several mirrorless bodies and sensors, how can we be sure that only one mirrorless camera is coming? I can't help but wonder if Canon will try to fill a full frame/minimum size, niche with one of their mirrorless offerings, because the opportunity may be there with the right glass. Right now, the smallest full frame option from Canon is a 6D with a 40mm pancake, which is still pretty chunky. I'm not sure that every camera body needs to be designed to fully manage a big lens ergonomically, depending on how the camera is used - I'm not sure I'd be comfortable mounting a very big lens to a T100 with its plastic mount for instance.

While my opinion is not likely reflective of the broader community, I would jump all over a full frame M6 as an emergency lightweight backup to my 5DIV (despite the ridiculous ergonomics that would create). I've been in a few weight/size-restricted situations where I almost lost my 5D: I now see some value in keeping a bare-bones extra light camera with great sensor performance on hand in the event of catastrophic failure or damage.

 

[captainkanji]

I wonder what features Canon will leave out of the FF mirrorless. It will probably be something like focus peaking since I’m interested in some Zeiss primes. I guess I’m just too pessimistic.

 

[unfocused]

I know nothing about Canon's development cycles, but just common sense makes me think that if they are just now testing three different sensors in the middle of 2018, it's highly unlikely that a full-frame body is going to come to market anytime this year.

 

[Antono Refa]

If your information is true, why does Canon always have to start out behind the competition out of the gate? Sony has a wonderful 42 MP mirrorless sensor. Nikon has 46 MP sensor that will probably end up in at least one version of its mirrorless camera. Worse yet, if Canon starts out behind the competition now, with Canon's four-year new-camera cycle, they will be even further behind the competition in just a few years.

And what percentage of photographer actually cares about such high resolution?

I rarely print anything A4, for which any Canon DSLR released in the past decade would be sufficient. I recently printed a photo 27" x 40". So the viewing distance was ~6', and I could have printed it @ 100DPI. That translates to ~11MP, so I needed a camera one model better than a 10yo.

[Ah, yes, I hear the "8K screens are around the corner, everybody will want a >32MP camera" argument coming around the corner. Yet, more and more people view everything on a phone with a screen diagonal shorter than their d*cks, pardon my french.]

 

[ahsanford]

I agree that many of us (myself included) would value the ergonomics and performance over reducing the size of the camera, but Canon's mantra on camera release has always seemed to favour purpose-built devices...

Appreciate the perspective. I think the wildcard is that this is a new market with pent-up demand in general and not in specifics.

In others words, some modest but non-trivial percentage of this forum (recognizing that we are not remotely the market at large) will snap up the first FF mirrorless offering on day one. These folks have been waiting for a long time for a host of reasons* -- it could be smaller, it's a lighter second body for events, should be able to higher FPS-per-dollar without a mirrorbox limiting things, it'll be new and exciting, I finally can shoot MF glass handheld for under $6000, etc.

Then, after the Black Friday like pre-ordering storm abates, Canon needs to deliver not only a product but their vision of the segmentation of the market. They may very well just go like for like with the various FF SLRs they sell, or their vision may be to sell the perfect mirrorless to be used alongside your SLR. They possibly might tweak the specs/usefulness/identity of each FF mirrorless offering to fit their read on the future state of the market:

6D2 mirrorless --> go all in on small/light and make a FF SL2, so speak.

5D4 mirrorless --> go big, offer the second cam on the wedding or journo shooter's shoulder, maximizing seamlessness of use when you switch bodies and offer 1-2 critical things to augment what their SLRs cannot do -- manually focus quickly in a super dark room, seamlessly drop into quick video work from the viewfinder or offer a perfectly silent shooting mode.

1DX4 mirrorless (i.e. surely not soon) --> go huge in a tank-like body built for superwhites (not that A9 nonsense) and deliver explosive framerates with top tracking AF.

...and so on, you get the point.

*I just don't think that overarching vision is clear to Canon yet given how fragmented we are as a market. For all their work in segmenting FF so effectively, for mirrorless we are jumping in the pool for a jillion little reasons. I think Canon will put out something safe, conservative and works well and wait to see the response.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

I know nothing about Canon's development cycles, but just common sense makes me think that if they are just now testing three different sensors in the middle of 2018, it's highly unlikely that a full-frame body is going to come to market anytime this year.

Sure, but there's also potentially a glut of better-than-Rebel body releases that are all timing out to the second half of next year, leaving a lovely open window from Q4 '18 - Q2 '19 wide open with nothing major (body-wise) slated to happen. It might be nothing, it might be an altogether new thing we never saw coming, etc. but it might be FF mirrorless.

- A

 

[jolyonralph]

I know nothing about Canon's development cycles, but just common sense makes me think that if they are just now testing three different sensors in the middle of 2018, it's highly unlikely that a full-frame body is going to come to market anytime this year.

We have heard before the Canon have had two products pretty much ready to go to production and then chosen one almost at the last minute. This could be a similar thing. It also makes sense to keep multiple options open just in case some nasty problem is found with one of the sensor choices.

 

[stevelee]

Oh, why does my name have the Powershot under it? I don’t have a Powershot, and I didn’t bother listing my equipment.

Because you only have 15 posts to your name so are 'entry levels. As you get more posts you will be rewarded by being upgraded to 7D2, 5DIV and more. If you say something naughty you will be relegated to Nikon D850.

It was sort of neat that I've had a couple of ratings like that recently that were camera models I actually own and use.

 

[jolyonralph]

I wonder what features Canon will leave out of the FF mirrorless. It will probably be something like focus peaking since I’m interested in some Zeiss primes. I guess I’m just too pessimistic.

Fear not, focus peaking is in all of the EOS M cameras so there's no chance it'll be missing from the new camera.

 

[BeenThere]

I know nothing about Canon's development cycles, but just common sense makes me think that if they are just now testing three different sensors in the middle of 2018, it's highly unlikely that a full-frame body is going to come to market anytime this year.

There was no mention of when the testing started. Could have been going on for awhile?

 

[Don Haines]

I know nothing about Canon's development cycles, but just common sense makes me think that if they are just now testing three different sensors in the middle of 2018, it's highly unlikely that a full-frame body is going to come to market anytime this year.

There was no mention of when the testing started. Could have been going on for awhile?

Also, just exactly what kind of testing is it? Is it an engineering proof of concept test? Is it testing the software? Is it thermal testing? Is it beta testing before the production run? Testing could mean that we are anywhere between the start of the project and an official announcement later today....

 

[unfocused]

I know nothing about Canon's development cycles, but just common sense makes me think that if they are just now testing three different sensors in the middle of 2018, it's highly unlikely that a full-frame body is going to come to market anytime this year.

There was no mention of when the testing started. Could have been going on for awhile?

Also, just exactly what kind of testing is it? Is it an engineering proof of concept test? Is it testing the software? Is it thermal testing? Is it beta testing before the production run? Testing could mean that we are anywhere between the start of the project and an official announcement later today....

Not trying to debate a topic I know nothing about, but just asking some questions:

Three sensors. Doesn't that mean they are trying to decide which one to proceed with?

Testing period. How long -- One month, two months, six months, one year? Canon being on the conservative side and wanting to make sure their first full-frame mirrorless is a competition-killer would argue against a short testing period. True, we don't know how long they have been testing, but presumably, as soon as you start testing there is a risk that the information gets leaked.

Review results -- Canon is conservative and wants to make sure they get it right. Would they review the results for one month? two months? six months? two days?

Final decision to proceed. The results must be kicked upstairs for a committee to make a final decision, right? What's a reasonable time period for a big organization to make that decision?

Manufacturing ramp up. How long does it take to modify the sensor fabrication lines to produce the new sensor?

Other manufacturing processes. Is it just a matter of plugging the sensor into a pre-existing body design, or does each different sensor require slightly different electronics, etc., within the camera body itself?

Actual manufacturing and stocking? How long does it take to start the manufacturing line, print the manuals, boxes, shoot the promotional videos, build up the needed stock, etc. etc.

Some of this can take place once a decision has been made, but it still takes time before the product can hit the shelves.

Of course, this is a CR1 rumor, so it's pretty doubtful anyway.