What’s next from Canon in 2020?

slclick

135L
Dec 17, 2013
3,877
1,679
I have used 5D's for a long time now... I am waiting to see how this develops, but would love to see 135mm f/2.
I usually use 5D mark III, 50mm 1.2 and 135mm f/2 90% of the time.
The 28-70 2.8 doesn't seem like a replacement because of the weight.

But bring on the 135L and I will probably change systems.
Bring on the R5 and I will use my 135L with it.
 

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
310
248
I think we'll see both EF and RF versions of new Super Telephoto lenses that can be sent to Canon to be converted from one mount to the other.
Amen. And the beauty is that with virtually no engineering resources, then can announce a whole slew of new RF lenses for professionals. Nearly doubling the RF lens selection in a snap. Certainly the 400 and 600 IS III models can be offered in RF. Others maybe, or just await until they (300, 500) are imminently freshened.

Maybe sooner, but certainly by (or with) the announcement of the R1, when "Mirrorless Turns Pro." Imagine the forest of white long lenses as a backdrop for the new body.

If there are low-volume orphans or lenses with imminent replacements they might not bother.

As I've said before I'll bet Canon is selling essentially no big whites to those whose primary camera is an RF. That might not yet be a big market, but as mirrorless grows it will become apparent and your prediction will come true.

I think Canon will be happy to have twice as many SKUs for big whites, and won't mind the inventory issues, but if they did, they might adopt my patent-pending invention of an RF-mount lens provided with a dematable (for EF) adapter that is not readily removed when the lens is mounted.
 
Jesus here we go again! Where are you going to see 8K? certainly not at the Cinema (8K is oversampled to 4K and still even 2K). Where are the 8K UHD TVs? and are you going to stand just in front of the TV to benefit from 8K? 8K in a standard cinema with a 54ft diagonal screen would put you between the screen & the front row anything further back than the front row is effectively 4K and further back, 2K.
He literally wasn't even referring to whether 8K was practical or not. He was talking about necessary Mp to achieve 8K. Not sure why you're arguing something he wasn't even talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quackator

cayenne

EOR R
Mar 28, 2012
2,123
223
It weighs nearly 1kg and costs over 2 grand. I'm sure it's great but I'm not sure it's a good fit for me.
I never got around to getting the EF 50 1.2.....so I'll likely get the R5, and EF adapter for all my current glass....and likely the 50 1.2 RF lens will be my first RF lens purchase....

cayenne
 

max

EOS T7i
Jul 20, 2010
67
8
40 or 45MP are prerequisite for 8k, depending on wether it is UHD 8k or DCI 8k.
There's no way around it.
8K resolution consists of 7680 x 4320 pixels (4320p - or the equivalent of 33.2 Megapixels)
Does it need some extra for some reason? (non sarcastic).
I remember that some cameras don't use the full fram for video, that's why I am asking.
 

Stephen Stanford

I'm New Here
Feb 17, 2020
9
7
The sensor would be 3:2 so the pixel ratio would be 7680 x 5120 (39,321,600) or 40MP for standard 8K.
If it filmed wide 8K (8192 x 4320) then with the 3:2 sensor the pixel resolution would have to be 8192 x 5461 (44,736,512) or 45MP
 

CanonFanBoy

Really O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
4,702
2,622
Irving, Texas
Jesus here we go again! Where are you going to see 8K? certainly not at the Cinema (8K is oversampled to 4K and still even 2K). Where are the 8K UHD TVs? and are you going to stand just in front of the TV to benefit from 8K? 8K in a standard cinema with a 54ft diagonal screen would put you between the screen & the front row anything further back than the front row is effectively 4K and further back, 2K.
Aren't 8k televisions available right now? Think I saw some on Amazon. Yup. There are several 8k UHD televisions there right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stephen Stanford

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
Will the R6 have the 6Dmk2 sensor on IBIS?
You don't get more reach with a cropped sensor, reach is determined by the focal length of the lens, the image size is the same, what is different is the sensor size. To use a math analogy, the numerator stays the same, the denominator is reduced, which leads to the misconception that you are getting more reach with cropped sensors. It's an illusion that it is bigger, it's not bigger, just looks bigger as it takes up more space on a smaller sensor. When you think about it logically, obviously it isn't actually any closer, and the lens doesn't have any more reach, that dirty little misconception figured into some of early digital purchases. The benefit of the the 7D was the dual Digic processors, with one dedicated to AF, like the 1DX.

Personally, I don't know why they continue to make cropped sensors, in a contracting market, one would think less R&D and the economy of scale would out weigh the costs savings of producing a smaller sensor, I guess not. Not sure why they continue with the Rebel series, seriously, why not get that target population into an RP/RF format?
The balance between pixel density and frame rate and cost.

The 5Ds had the same pixel density as the 7D mark II. One can go 10 fps for 31 raw images for $1700. The other can only do 5 fps for 14 raw images for $3500. (prices over most of the time they have been on the market.)

Even if cost differences are eliminated, given the same generation of technology the smaller sensor will always be able to give faster frame rate for more frames at the same pixel density. Only if a heretofore unseen technology that allows Canon to double the frame rate when only reading part of the sensor (but still in full bit depth) surfaces will this change.

As for the Rebels, that path is already pretty clear: EOS M.
 
  • Like
Reactions: myplanet

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
Given two sensors with nearly identical pixel density....


30MP Canon EOS R / 5D4 on 400mm lens = effective 400mm reach

32MP Canon 90D on 400mm lens = effective 640mm reach
Nah, the 20 MP 7D mark II and the 50 MP 5Ds have identical pixel density.

A FF camera with identical pixel density to the 90D would weigh in at 80 MP, not 45 MP.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
Just means that you can't use a teleconverter with a protrusion. The protruding elements aren't a fundamental requirement of teleconverters.
Not having protruding elements appears to limit the ability to give the highest image quality, though.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
I know this is a big generalization, but I think you can categorize the Sony fans and switchers as being mostly gear-heads. They refer to "new tech" or the "latest tech" as if cameras were a new technology that is evolving quickly. In reality, there has been virtually no difference in the last 2 or 3 generation of anyone's cameras in terms of IQ - and only minor slow changes in other areas. But gear-heads are interested in having the latest - almost a need to have the latest. Whether they actually believe that the latest tech will be visible in their photography, I can't say. Whether they are most interested in boasting to others who don't have the latest is also a possibility, in my opinion.

The other non gear-head group (probably a minority on internet forums from what I can tell) would be mostly interested in exactly the things you mention. They don't compare specs from the various brands, they look at what is most important to them. They interpret value - not as which camera has the most specs, but the overall quality of the product. The first group looks at Sony and constantly says, " I get more value for the price." I would respond that having better color is not an additional spec item, but is more important. All cameras have ergonomics, so it's even on the spec sheet, but clearly not even in practice. The same for the other items you mention.

I think camera companies are not too concerned with switchers. They make a lot of noise on forums, but camera companies are more interested in serious photographers. People who are in it for the long haul. People who aren't looking for a tech gadget, but a tool as part of their photo equipment. And that means lenses - which you can use for a lifetime, where the camera's lifespan is probably 7-10 at the most.
GAS is all that is keeping the ILC industry afloat. The real photographers are such a small group compared to the GASsers that if they were the only market for upper level cameras then cameras like the 1-series would cost upwards of $10K and the 5D series would cost what the 1-series currently does.

All one has to look at are new lens designs, which are all offerings sacrificed on the altar of the Gods of the Flat Test Chart, because the GASsers all want the SHARPEST lens (as measured by how sharp the corners/edges are of a flat test chart shot at relatively close distance), even when that design costs compromises like rougher out of focus rendering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
that's not really possible.
cRAW wouldn't change a thing for fps.
It would reduce the amount of data per image that has to be written to the card.

At ISO 100 the 90D has uncompressed raw files that are about 38.6 MB. The same scene using C-RAW is only 24 MB at the same 32 MP resolution.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
Absolutely not. The lens is basically an EF 100–400mm f/4.5-5.6 L II but with extra 100mm at the tele end added so there’s less need for an extender. Canon’s white L lenses don’t have three-figure prices. That just does not happen.
EF 70-200mm f/4 L
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
I'm not sure IBIS will ever make it into the DSLR's .. and if it does, it will be limited because of the communication limits of the EF mount.
So Canon's early transition to an all electronic mount in 1987 is finally catching up to bite them in the butt?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: canonnews

navastronia

EOS RP + 5D Classic
Aug 31, 2018
421
484
All one has to look at are new lens designs, which are all offerings sacrificed on the altar of the Gods of the Flat Test Chart, because the GASsers all want the SHARPEST lens (as measured by how sharp the corners/edges are of a flat test chart shot at relatively close distance), even when that design costs compromises like rougher out of focus rendering.
Will you cite some examples, preferably with comparison images, so that I and surely others can see if we agree? Is the OOF rendering of the RF 85/1.2 L demonstrably worse than that of the EF 85/1.2 L II? Surely, we have all already seen how the two compare in sharpness.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
Oops, true :D It's around 700 € here. But surely that's the only one under €$£1000?
With U.S. Dollars, the price is pre-tax, not post-tax as in Europe. So a high three-digit price in the U.S. for any particular lens probably means a low four-digit price for the very same lens in Europe.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,907
1,040
Even if at the worst case they make it work only for non IS lenses (finding them by using a lens database the way they use it for jpeg correction) it will still be useful like when using lenses like 85 1.2L, 135 2L, 24-70 2.8L I and II (to name but a few).
It should also then be possible to turn off the lens IS and use it with IS lenses, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tron