Updated list of unreleased Canon gear

Jul 29, 2017
62
30
25
Exeter, UK
#41
The pricing of the EOS R is worrying. They have priced a $1600 camera at $2350 forcing any lower end models to also be noncompetitive.We have seen this before where the 5DIV was priced over $3000 forcing the 6DII to be priced at launch at $2000 and then rapidly reduced just a month later.

The $3000+ mark should be for high res (40+ MP), high dynamic range (14+ stops) camera with full frame 4K, dual card slots and IBIS. For example the A7RIII, D850 (I know, no IBIS) and Z7 (I know, no dual cards).

The $2000 mark should be for mid range cameras like the A7III and Z6.

Entry level cameras like the EOS R should be around $1600.
 
Likes: mirage

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
273
108
Frankfurt, Germany
#42
People watch ads and trust marketers. Mirrorless and small matrices are beneficial to manufacturers, they are cheaper to manufacture.



I fully support. Very accurate expression!
Thank you very much. Good to know that there still are SLR principle supporters out there. As long as a decent number of photographers will buy them, I hope that those complex cameras still will be built.
 
Oct 17, 2018
15
5
48
Moscow
smorovoz.com
#44
Now I have 5 cameras: 5D M3, EOS M3, M6, M50 and G7X M2. I need to choose only 2 cameras, and the rest is to sell.

My choice: 5DM3 and EOS M6! Mirror for a photo, EOS M6 - for vlog!

EOS M50 for a novice photographer is the best choice. 200D, 2000D, 4000D can not argue with the EOS M50 for photos. The EOS M50 is a good mirrorless, but I don’t want to buy 5-7 batteries to alternate them every 30 minutes.

Why does Canon do this? A mystery to me!
 
Oct 26, 2013
1,047
243
#45
I disagree. People who have wanted mirrorless cameras haven't been denied anything.

First, mirrorless cameras even up to A7R2 were pretty horrible. Those viewfinders, for my purposes, were just not usable, and there were too many other sacrifices that had to be made just to... well I'm not sure what.

And that's what it all comes down to. At the end of the day, I don't really care about whether my camera has a mirror or not. I want a photograph. Which tool is better to give me that photograph? The novelty of a EVF or all the other nifty gizmos wear out pretty quickly -- in the context of hundreds of photos of day -- and what I really want is something in my hands that gives me more pictures I'm happy with.

5, 10, or 25 years from now, will my camera have a mirror? I really don't care. Whatever solution is better overall as a system is the one that I'll choose. I'm not attached to a mirror, but I do like fast autofocus under conditions where less light hits the sensor; I do like an AF system where an illuminator will let me focus at good distances without consideration to ambient light; I do like a camera system that has a battery that will last through a day. And for the time being, even with the great EVFs today, I do prefer the actual optical image through the lens.

Certainly, 5 or 10 years ago, mirrorless cameras were not a great option for most types of photography; hence my comment that nothing has been denied from you. Technology in something you like just hadn't gotten there yet.

I am happy for you and other mirrorless shooters that you feel that you have more choice today. I think that's great that the choice is there fore you. I was simply commenting that there are far more mirrorless shooters that say "Death to mirrors!" than DSLR shooters who say, "death to mirrorless!".

Right now, for me, mirrorless is mostly a novelty with relatively few real benefits. But they are a fun novelty, and I've spent money on lots of stuff that I ultimately don't use much, so I will buy more mirrorless cameras. Until they "get there", however, I'll probably still reach for my DSLR for a lot of stuff.

I don't resist change -- I just don't embrace it without immediate, tangible benefits to me, and I'm not willing to buy several iterations of beta products to support an idea, hoping it will get to where I want it to be.

All smart, reasonable responces. Any reasoning photographer understands that there are benefits and drawbacks to both systems. A birder or wildlife photographer - and perhaps many sports photographers - will prefer the OVF and especially the battery life of the DSLR - perhaps for many years to come - if not always. For others, the benefits of mirrorless will make it their preferred choice. Personally, I have come to like the WYSIWYG exposure of the EVF and both my cameras are now mirrorless. If I did bird and wildlife photography, then I would certainly choose a DSLR.

As you say, photographers will choose what works best for them. It's the techno-geeks and those who just want to show off the latest "gadget" that are making all the proclamations about the greatness of mirrorless, in my opinion.
 
Nov 8, 2011
3,792
159
#46
All smart, reasonable responces. Any reasoning photographer understands that there are benefits and drawbacks to both systems. A birder or wildlife photographer - and perhaps many sports photographers - will prefer the OVF and especially the battery life of the DSLR - perhaps for many years to come - if not always. For others, the benefits of mirrorless will make it their preferred choice. Personally, I have come to like the WYSIWYG exposure of the EVF and both my cameras are now mirrorless. If I did bird and wildlife photography, then I would certainly choose a DSLR.

As you say, photographers will choose what works best for them. It's the techno-geeks and those who just want to show off the latest "gadget" that are making all the proclamations about the greatness of mirrorless, in my opinion.
Very well said...
 
Nov 8, 2011
3,792
159
#47
For some inexplicable reason, some people are just totally hostile to the idea of a mirror and optical viewfinder, and wish that all camera manufacturers would stop making DSLRs so that people would stop buying DSLRs.

You don't really see DSLR users stamping their feet and screaming for camera manufacturers to stop making mirrorless products, though.

*Eyeroll*
You are spot on. I think of them as immature internet surfers some of which are photographers too. It is the reason I sometimes avoid to comment on threads so as to avoid wasting time and getting angry. Patience 2019 and 2020 will come with many new bodies. Let's just enjoy the ones we have :)
 
Aug 21, 2018
39
3
#49
I'm expecting 26MP, Digic7 slight improvement in video and a new badge. Meaning I will be shooting my 80D till it dies. But I am more than willing to be pleasantly surprised.
Why do you think they will use them Digic 7 and not Digic 8 processor for the camera?
 
Feb 25, 2015
132
39
#52
[..]The EOS M50 is a good mirrorless, but I don’t want to buy 5-7 batteries to alternate them every 30 minutes.

Why does Canon do this? A mystery to me!
For small cameras I have the M1, M10 (came free with the 15-45mm lens) and 100D. Those all use the same battery, so having 5-7 LP-E12 is very useful in that situation. The aftermarket versions I have perform the same as the Canon version.
I'd really like to replace the M1 with the rumoured-to-be-released-soon M6II, but that will probably take an LP-E17 :(
 

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
273
108
Frankfurt, Germany
#53
In fact, I don't like this ideologically - or even pseudo-religiously - boosted furor with which some people fight for ML against SRL type cameras. For me, a camera is simply a good or not so good tool for my needs, and I am interested in images as results, in the technology only so far that it works smoothly for me. The funny thing about today's ML cameras is that they look so conservative. For me, that's just alright, because it shows that the camera-user interfaces are quite mature at least for current technology. But I always have to smile a bit if ML fans rant on how conservative DLSRs are (they are, of course), and then they praise their close-to-classic SLR supersized Sonys.

I can imagine that in some decades in the future, when people will have tiny camera sensor chips implanted in their eyes that are controlled by their brains, those people will have some fun reading those old camera technology discussions of today ;)
 
Jul 30, 2010
873
11
#57
Mirrorless and DSLR will co-exist for a long time, just like Leica and Exakta has been co-exist for over half of a century. There is no way in sight that the
For small cameras I have the M1, M10 (came free with the 15-45mm lens) and 100D. Those all use the same battery, so having 5-7 LP-E12 is very useful in that situation. The aftermarket versions I have perform the same as the Canon version.
I'd really like to replace the M1 with the rumoured-to-be-released-soon M6II, but that will probably take an LP-E17 :(
I have both M1 and M2. The biggest drawback is that I cannot use them under the sunlight. I got the M50 4 months ago. Now I am a happy camper. The EVF is a necessity under the sun. unless small size is a must, EVF should be considered.
 
Feb 25, 2015
132
39
#58
[..]
I have both M1 and M2. The biggest drawback is that I cannot use them under the sunlight. I got the M50 4 months ago. Now I am a happy camper. The EVF is a necessity under the sun. unless small size is a must, EVF should be considered.
I think each person has their own threshold for when a screen becomes unusable. After setting the LCD brightness to full all the time I personally haven't had a situation where the M was unusable in direct sunlight. With EF-M lenses I can almost always use my left hand to shade the screen. Having said that, I find the M10 screen horrifying to use since Canon turned sharpness and saturation up to 11, not matter the amount of sunlight :)

For me the M needs to be tiny, so I really don't want an EVF, the M50 is too close to the size of the 100D to be worth buying. About 70-80% of the pictures I take with the M are with the MP-E65 of insects and spider, I'm not flexible enough to see through the EVF/OVF when trying to reach most of their hiding spots!