Two Prosumer Mirrorless Camera Bodies in Development [CR2]

jayphotoworks said:
Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.
I guess "more or less equal" does not mean "equal". That is why in math and statistics we have "equal" and "significantly different" and nothing in between.
Precisely speaking, at the end of the day, we would like to conclude that there is no "significant difference" between a Sony body and a high end DSLR in terms features such as technology, build, user experience, price and end product they produce (i.e. pictures). But even if we get there, we will have yet another body capable of doing things alongside the others that are doing it for 20-30 years!!
On the contrary, bloggers and marketing guys want to promote mirrorless as a significantly different technology, user experience, etc., which is currently groundless and is not based on any valid evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,127
451
Vancouver, BC
jayphotoworks said:
We should give Sony some credit though. They went from creating awkward Cybershots (F707) using equally awkward memory sticks to being a competitive camera brand today that is exclusively compared against its more established peers at every corner. This isn't a company that got lazy and decided to ride out their brand name because they didn't really have one. Sony was once losing money in every segment other than their Sony Pictures and Playstation brands.

Well, they also did that through the purchase of Konica Minolta, in 2006. But I give them lots of credit for pioneering the full frame mirrorless market. I think the A7R3, A73, and A9 are all pretty nice cameras. I would be happy to own one.

However, I wouldn't want to replace my Canon DSLR with one, because really, the only thing I think they do better for me is manual focus magnification in the EVF and crop mode in EVF. Those things, for me, are huge, actually. But either don't care or dislike most of the other features that set mirrorless apart, and I find that I still vastly prefer an optical viewfinder in most cases, and the autofocus and ergonomic shortcomings still put DSLRs (significantly) ahead for me.

jayphotoworks said:
Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.

It's a little less than more, though, for me.

There are many, many things I prefer about a DSLR, not the least of which is an optical viewfinder that always accurately reflects what's in front of me and consumes (nearly) no power even when you stare down it for hours. Also, Sony mirrorless cameras (and Canon EFM) are all focus-by-wire, which I still find vastly inferior to top-end L's for manual focus.

However, I am very envious of the manual focus magnification primarily because it ensures that the right part of a photo is in focus, even when the depth of field is extremely shallow.

Specifically with Sony, I find the price of their good GM lenses very high, and the quality of their lower end lenses a little lacking. For example, I was able to spend some time with the 24-105/4, which seems like a great lens, but had an absurd amount of vingetting when quite wide. I'd be ok with that on a $600 lens, but it's a $1,300 lens.

I think that Sony's will get better. I think Canon M-series APSC's are actually a more usable camera, though primarily, for me, that is because of DPAF. I look forward to Canon's FF mirrorless, and will probably buy one, though frankly, it will just be GAS.
 
Upvote 0

Chris Jankowski

6DII + various lenses, 200D + 15-85
Jul 27, 2013
50
7
vscd said:
Sony not even has a lossless RAW or the possibilty to shoot RAW together with very fine JPG. No useable weathersealing. No ergonomics. Expensive lenses. What exactly was the good thing? A good sensor... admittedly. But that's all.
Sony does offer completely lossless RAW. They introduced it about a year ago, as the customers asked for it. However, most users found out that they have not been losing anything noticeable with the compressed RAW and the size of files is much smaller. Lossless RAW is just another tick off point.
 
Upvote 0

tron

CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
5,222
1,616
Chris Jankowski said:
vscd said:
Sony not even has a lossless RAW or the possibilty to shoot RAW together with very fine JPG. No useable weathersealing. No ergonomics. Expensive lenses. What exactly was the good thing? A good sensor... admittedly. But that's all.
Sony does offer completely lossless RAW. They introduced it about a year ago, as the customers asked for it. However, most users found out that they have not been losing anything noticeable with the compressed RAW and the size of files is much smaller. Lossless RAW is just another tick off point.
They don't offer the obvious Canon does: Lossless compressed RAW!
 
Upvote 0
bhf3737 said:
jayphotoworks said:
Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.
I guess "more or less equal" does not mean "equal". That is why in math and statistics we have "equal" and "significantly different" and nothing in between.
Precisely speaking, at the end of the day, we would like to conclude that there is no "significant difference" between a Sony body and a high end DSLR in terms features such as technology, build, user experience, price and end product they produce (i.e. pictures). But even if we get there, we will have yet another body capable of doing things alongside the others that are doing it for 20-30 years!!
On the contrary, bloggers and marketing guys want to promote mirrorless as a significantly different technology, user experience, etc., which is currently groundless and is not based on any valid evidence.

I have to agree that the more or less equal really depends on what you shoot. For myself, the major compromise I had to live with shooting on Canon was the video feature-set or lack thereof. For most still shooters, I can fully understand why they would view Canon as the best solution. For hybrid or video work, I'm not so sure. Sony's feature set and ergonomics for video acquisition far outpace any of Canon's non-cinema line offerings. I mentioned all of these before, but the latest A7R3 and A7III have separate button configuration for stills vs video. Sony understands that many of the people buying their videos have specific video requirements and has catered the camera ergonomically to be dual-purpose, not just a stills camera with some video sprinkled on top. This extends to the intelligent hotshoe that has pins for various audio inputs like the XLR kit, etc. without separate cables. At the same time, they also understand the "people that need serious video buy a real video camera" mantra, by not throwing in a high bit-rate codec that burns through memory cards and requires transcoding to edit.

My hope is that the upcoming mirrorless bodies from Canon address some of these things. The fact the M50 has DPAF and 4K, although not together, is a good sign for things to come from an upcoming flagship from Canon. In addition, Nikon and Canon are both jumping into mirrorless this year, either as a reaction from Sony's push into this space or simply because they see the evolution of cameras being mirrorless rather than DSLRs. Once all of the manufacturers are more or less on the same playing field within mirrorless and we actually start to see the decline of traditional DSLRs, I feel the real innovation can start. Then it is simply a matter of what they put into the silicon whether that be AI, machine learning or computational photography.
 
Upvote 0

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,127
451
Vancouver, BC
jayphotoworks said:
bhf3737 said:
jayphotoworks said:
Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.
I guess "more or less equal" does not mean "equal". That is why in math and statistics we have "equal" and "significantly different" and nothing in between.
Precisely speaking, at the end of the day, we would like to conclude that there is no "significant difference" between a Sony body and a high end DSLR in terms features such as technology, build, user experience, price and end product they produce (i.e. pictures). But even if we get there, we will have yet another body capable of doing things alongside the others that are doing it for 20-30 years!!
On the contrary, bloggers and marketing guys want to promote mirrorless as a significantly different technology, user experience, etc., which is currently groundless and is not based on any valid evidence.

I have to agree that the more or less equal really depends on what you shoot. For myself, the major compromise I had to live with shooting on Canon was the video feature-set or lack thereof. For most still shooters, I can fully understand why they would view Canon as the best solution. For hybrid or video work, I'm not so sure. Sony's feature set and ergonomics for video acquisition far outpace any of Canon's non-cinema line offerings. I mentioned all of these before, but the latest A7R3 and A7III have separate button configuration for stills vs video. Sony understands that many of the people buying their videos have specific video requirements and has catered the camera ergonomically to be dual-purpose, not just a stills camera with some video sprinkled on top. This extends to the intelligent hotshoe that has pins for various audio inputs like the XLR kit, etc. without separate cables. At the same time, they also understand the "people that need serious video buy a real video camera" mantra, by not throwing in a high bit-rate codec that burns through memory cards and requires transcoding to edit.

My hope is that the upcoming mirrorless bodies from Canon address some of these things. The fact the M50 has DPAF and 4K, although not together, is a good sign for things to come from an upcoming flagship from Canon. In addition, Nikon and Canon are both jumping into mirrorless this year, either as a reaction from Sony's push into this space or simply because they see the evolution of cameras being mirrorless rather than DSLRs. Once all of the manufacturers are more or less on the same playing field within mirrorless and we actually start to see the decline of traditional DSLRs, I feel the real innovation can start. Then it is simply a matter of what they put into the silicon whether that be AI, machine learning or computational photography.

That's a pretty good point. As a person who has shot less than 9 videos since DSLRs could record videos, I could care less if they removed video from my cameras entirely, but even being uninterested in those features, I can see how the Sony appears to have many more video-centric features. And anyways, a viewfinder may be a better way to shoot, and you can't do that with an OVF while recording video, obviously.

All that said, I really dislike the look of cheaply made Sony home videos (by other people) that have autofocus hunting where they haven't edited it out.
 
Upvote 0

Chris Jankowski

6DII + various lenses, 200D + 15-85
Jul 27, 2013
50
7
The DPReview has just published comprehensive and detailed review of Sony a7 III:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7-iii-review

This is well worth reading to know what is the current state of the aart in prosumer FF mirrorless.

It was surprising to me to find how far Sony has moved in the 5 years since the release of their first FF mirrorless - a7.

If Canon can deliver an FF mirror less body with:

- at least 80% of the Sony a7 III features
- at a comparable price
- with good provisions for reliable use of EF lenses
- no major screw ups or artificially removed functionality
- and till the end of 2019

then I'll buy such body to supplement my DSLR.
 
Upvote 0

hmatthes

EOS-R, RF and EF Lenses of all types.
Chris Jankowski said:
The DPReview has just published comprehensive and detailed review of Sony a7 III:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7-iii-review

This is well worth reading to know what is the current state of the aart in prosumer FF mirrorless.

It was surprising to me to find how far Sony has moved in the 5 years since the release of their first FF mirrorless - a7.

Very good review, factual and mostly unbiased. The A7-III may be tempting but needing a Metabones Model V to support my glass is rather off-putting. My friends tell me that using an adapter is far from optimal and I agree in principle. But selling their "L" lenses, they moan about the over-priced equivalent(?) Sony lenses!

CPS loaned me a EOS M5 with Canon's EF adapter and I found absolutely no problems with compatibility, focus, usage, and EXIF using my "L" glass. This is because the same manufacturer engineered the body, the adapter and the lens.

So I shall wait, impatiently, for Canon's FF Mirrorless -- hopefully aimed at the 5D-xx crowd.

I'm still shooting the original 6D and using a 5D-IV whenever possible. Oh, and a Leica Q which shows me how amazing 24mp is on full frame when the same manufacturer builds both body and lens!

Come on Canon, my savings are ready for depletion!
 
Upvote 0

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,127
451
Vancouver, BC
hmatthes said:
Chris Jankowski said:
The DPReview has just published comprehensive and detailed review of Sony a7 III:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7-iii-review

This is well worth reading to know what is the current state of the aart in prosumer FF mirrorless.

It was surprising to me to find how far Sony has moved in the 5 years since the release of their first FF mirrorless - a7.

Very good review, factual and mostly unbiased. The A7-III may be tempting but needing a Metabones Model V to support my glass is rather off-putting. My friends tell me that using an adapter is far from optimal and I agree in principle. But selling their "L" lenses, they moan about the over-priced equivalent(?) Sony lenses!

CPS loaned me a EOS M5 with Canon's EF adapter and I found absolutely no problems with compatibility, focus, usage, and EXIF using my "L" glass. This is because the same manufacturer engineered the body, the adapter and the lens.

So I shall wait, impatiently, for Canon's FF Mirrorless -- hopefully aimed at the 5D-xx crowd.

I'm still shooting the original 6D and using a 5D-IV whenever possible. Oh, and a Leica Q which shows me how amazing 24mp is on full frame when the same manufacturer builds both body and lens!

Come on Canon, my savings are ready for depletion!

The adapters are a nightmare, because they seem good until you miss a whole bunch of shots because of slow AF, AF hunting, strange voodoo or outright crash. :( Don't use one except for lenses that you use only very infrequently, in my opinion.

The review has a lot of pros/cons that are fact-based, and remarkably, actually looks like someone tried to use the camera. The list of what they didn't like for sports/wildlife photography is actually pretty close to what I don't like -- and those are kind of a deal-killer for me.

It does mention that AF in continuous is at the aperture you set, not the widest aperture; it doesn't mention that AF is always slower than a modern PDAF DSLR that's same-priced or higher, and it also doesn't mention that AF in single-shot is contract detect and annoyingly hunts even when you have tons of light.

I too look forward to a Canon mirrorless, as the M5 simply feels like a better photography experience than the A7/A9 series. If they can carry that over to the full frame offering, I'll be pretty happy. Oh, as long as there is a flippy screen, too! :D
 
Upvote 0

cellomaster27

Capture the moment!
Jun 3, 2013
361
52
San Jose - CA
Talys said:
hmatthes said:
Chris Jankowski said:
The DPReview has just published comprehensive and detailed review of Sony a7 III:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7-iii-review

This is well worth reading to know what is the current state of the aart in prosumer FF mirrorless.

It was surprising to me to find how far Sony has moved in the 5 years since the release of their first FF mirrorless - a7.

Very good review, factual and mostly unbiased. The A7-III may be tempting but needing a Metabones Model V to support my glass is rather off-putting. My friends tell me that using an adapter is far from optimal and I agree in principle. But selling their "L" lenses, they moan about the over-priced equivalent(?) Sony lenses!

CPS loaned me a EOS M5 with Canon's EF adapter and I found absolutely no problems with compatibility, focus, usage, and EXIF using my "L" glass. This is because the same manufacturer engineered the body, the adapter and the lens.

So I shall wait, impatiently, for Canon's FF Mirrorless -- hopefully aimed at the 5D-xx crowd.

I'm still shooting the original 6D and using a 5D-IV whenever possible. Oh, and a Leica Q which shows me how amazing 24mp is on full frame when the same manufacturer builds both body and lens!

Come on Canon, my savings are ready for depletion!

The adapters are a nightmare, because they seem good until you miss a whole bunch of shots because of slow AF, AF hunting, strange voodoo or outright crash. :( Don't use one except for lenses that you use only very infrequently, in my opinion.

The review has a lot of pros/cons that are fact-based, and remarkably, actually looks like someone tried to use the camera. The list of what they didn't like for sports/wildlife photography is actually pretty close to what I don't like -- and those are kind of a deal-killer for me.

It does mention that AF in continuous is at the aperture you set, not the widest aperture; it doesn't mention that AF is always slower than a modern PDAF DSLR that's same-priced or higher, and it also doesn't mention that AF in single-shot is contract detect and annoyingly hunts even when you have tons of light.

I too look forward to a Canon mirrorless, as the M5 simply feels like a better photography experience than the A7/A9 series. If they can carry that over to the full frame offering, I'll be pretty happy. Oh, as long as there is a flippy screen, too! :D

If this rumored camera comes out by September, I'll buy pre-order it before my trip to Asia. I love my 5D3 but it's big and I'll be backpacking to 6-7 countries. I figure the lighter and smaller, the better. I do want the full frame sensor rather than the aps-c mirrorless offerings. I never pre-ordered anything but this may be it. Please don't disappoint me Canon!! You've been soooooo good at that! ;D :'(
 
Upvote 0
Mar 26, 2014
1,443
536
hmatthes said:
CPS loaned me a EOS M5 with Canon's EF adapter and I found absolutely no problems with compatibility, focus, usage, and EXIF using my "L" glass. This is because the same manufacturer engineered the body, the adapter and the lens.

This is because the manufacturer engineered the body so as to make the adapter trivial. If Canon chooses a whole new mount for FF MILC, it might be unable to produce an adapter that would make the whole system work.
 
Upvote 0
D

Deleted member 380306

Guest
We've not had too much talk of the CFFM camera in a few weeks, I was looking forward to hearing or seeing something more concrete on this front, after coming from a Sony A7ii to a Canon 6d2 I'd be willing to jump right in and buy one, I doubt we'll see a release this year and it will be interesting to see the actually specs, cost and the way the reviewers react when Canon show up with the long awaited FFM and if the M50 is anything to go by it will be a cracking camera but I think with a high price tag so as to protect the flag ship style DSLR cameras... Just my thoughts!
 
Upvote 0
It has to be the same EF mount or it will be a few and hard road. Besides, as crappy as the Sony electronics are, I am using the EF with Metabones and I deal with it just fine in studio. It just has bad response times in the field and hunting, etc...besides the electronic glitches it sometimes has...

I would be SUPER HAPPY to have a adapter solution. THIS IS the right way to go. I sure am not buying a new set of lenses. If I was I would have gotten the Sony's already. But the Sony is not a camera first. It is a Electronic device and the camera plays catchup. Not so on the Canons. The Canon mirrorless will have to be at least 40+ mpixels for me to change, as my 5D3/4 are doing fine along the A7RII/III. I use all 4 and the Sony is great in studio while it fails on the field. Sony viewfinder is a joke next to Canon. Also the electronics is just not reliable. Canon is OK in studio, but the Sony is more practical with live view.
Size is not an issue for either system. This is the lamest argument when you get into the lenses. With the Canon a batt grip is not needed, now same for the A7rIII, a bit smaller. Big deal. Its actually horrible ergo to hold. Maybe all Canon needs is a Live View addition to the existing system. I think some hybrid transparent mirror was something Nikon had in the works.
 
Upvote 0