What’s next from Canon?

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
Canon have outright stated that is what they consider pro. A LOT of pros consider other cameras pro.
Canon has said that a lot in the past, but not so much since the introduction of the 5D Mark III with a 1-series level AF system and dual card slots.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
I'd be very interested in a high megapixel mirrorless camera but only if it has specs good for birding/wildlife, namely great focus and tracking, good high ISO performance and fast fps. Introduce it with a new 100-400 or 200-600 lens and I'm on board!
Yeah, and I'd like a high performance sports car that gets 60 mpg, too.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
how do you suffer backfocus with a mirrorless, is that not a mirror issue?
It can also be a lens issue, specifically if the AF motor doesn't move exactly the amount the camera tells it to, particularly in high speed shooting modes when the camera might not do a "confirmation" AF reading after the lens has moved. It can also be a loose lens/camera interface that allows the lens to move slightly in relation to the sensor after AF has been locked.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
I'm wondering as well, how can a focal plane-based focusing camera (that is, one that uses main sensor for focusing) front/back focus?
It can be a lens issue, specifically if the AF motor doesn't move exactly the amount the camera tells it to, particularly in high speed shooting modes when the camera might not do a "confirmation" AF reading after the lens has moved. Or it can be a lens issue where the AF position is not held between AF lock and exposure. It can also be a loose lens/camera interface that allows the lens to move slightly in relation to the sensor after AF has been locked.
 

Cryve

EOS 80D
Jul 4, 2018
108
70
Germany
What is your testing methodology?
The camera has a feature where when you press the af-on button, when reviewing pictures, it zoomes in very close and exactly there, where the camera focused.
when i take pictures in generall, but also on a tripod, then the area a few centimeters behind the position i wanted to focus on is clearly sharper then what i (and the camera) focused on.

its consistent across all images, but its a very small backfocus. My dealership clearly saw the error when i showed them and could also replikate it themselves, but the sony repair center here in germany can currently not reprocude it and i dont know why. its super obvious to me, and all my friends can see it. dunno why the sony center cant see it.
i currently have it in repair and it seems like they are gonna send it back saying "camera works fine"... then i dont have any legal basis for a refund or even a working camera because the repair shop says it works -.-

Edit: the repairshop has the Camera AND Lens with that the dealer and i can see the backfocus, so either way either on the lens or camera they should be able to find the backfocus but they dont.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
I'm really glad that so many "pro" cameras and lenses will be released in the next few months but would like to know when we will have any new EF-S lenses and/or entrly level cameras with a bit improved performance. Let's say an 1200D Mark II with 18 MP sensor but all 9 cross-type and f/5.6 sensitive AF-points and Digic 6 processor.
That upgrade (and more) is called the EOS RebelT7i/800D. I doubt you'll ever see all cross-type AF points in the 1xxxD series.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
I use the 5DSr for landscape, architecture, macro, focus-stacking, etc. Although 83mp would be interesting to work with, the file processing times would certainly be very long. I could imagine someone using such a high megapixel count for action and wildlife but I could never imagine how I would do that. It will be interesting to see what such a camera body looks like if it arrives. I would certainly consider something along those lines as a replacement for the 5DSr. The mirrorless system would work perfectly well for my purposes.
Do you mean the 5Ds R?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
I’m very much waiting for the higher MP Eos R. For one project I have been shooting TS-E lenses on a 5Ds in low light. Getting pixel sharp with those lenses, in those conditions is a chore without an EVF.
If you are wanting pixel sharp images, surely you are using a tripod? Why not use the magnified AF with Live View?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
For many 5D owners like me hoping to move to mirrorless, an 80mp camera is too much. So I hope you’re wrong on that and we get both
Is it possible criscokkat was talking about the 5Ds and 5Ds R replacements being combined, not the 5Ds and the 5D Mark IV replacements?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
Regarding new DSLRs, all I know is that the 5DIV has seen some price drops consistent with being replaced in the next 12 months.
The entire Canon EOS line (other than perhaps the 1D X Mark II) has seen price drops recently. It seems to be based more on market demand than product cycles at this point. As the overall market continues to shrink, Canon seems to have decided to compete more on price than they have in the past.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
This is purely a marketing perception. My 5Ds has taken over everything...including sports, wildlife, and airshows...and the only thing I find wanting is the RAW buffer depth. It's even handling astro very well. I'm not sure why Canon pitched it as a 'narrow use' camera other than to preserve the higher USA price, or why so many reviewers presented it that way. There weren't any real differences (for stills) between it and the 5D3 except of course for that gorgeous sensor, and it handles every photographic situation well. Someone might point out file size or processing times, but you can always shoot in 28mp mraw.

Those looking for a true 5D4 equivalent mirrorless for stills will likely be satisfied by the high resolution R if they just use mraw when they don't want the full 83mp. The drawback will be the price, not a use or situation limiting spec.

Now for video I don't expect the high resolution R to be top of the line. It would be nice to be wrong here, but even the Sony A7r's have lower quality video than their 24mp brothers. It's just too much data to scale down at high quality. But for stills the 5Ds/sR are not actually narrow use cameras, and I don't expect the high resolution R to be either.
Haven't you noticed that the latest cameras Canon has introduced with .cr3 raw files and C-RAW do not include the M-RAW and S-RAW options?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
I don’t need the “pro” R body if that means a 1DX type. What I need is a 5D equivalent, with redundant card slots and at least 8fps. If an 80mp body is what canon chooses to release at this juncture in the schedule, I can only guess that they are consolidating the 5D and 5Ds equivalents into a single camera for the RF Mount. If that is true, then I really hope that they have a solution for those of us that don’t want or need 80mp. Say, 40 or 30mp M-RAW option would be perfect.
Since moving to CR3 raw files, Canon has not included the M-RAW and S-RAW options in those cameras.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
Added via a firmware update no less!

Jokes aside, a few ideas occur to me regarding OVF DPAF that I'm sure Canon engineers have considered at some point:
  • Make use of main sensor DPAF "snapshots" during continuous shooting to augment discrete PDAF information
  • Replace the PDAF and/or metering sensor with a, say, a few megapixel combined DPAF/metering sensor
  • Rip out the discrete PDAF sensor and secondary mirror and use main sensor DPAF instead
Do you realize the current 90D "metering sensor" is basically an RGB+IR 220,000 pixel CMOS sensor? And that the 1D X Mark II, 1D X, 5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, 80D, 77D, Rebel T7i/800d, etc. have similar RGB+IR metering sensors?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
Added via a firmware update no less!

Jokes aside, a few ideas occur to me regarding OVF DPAF that I'm sure Canon engineers have considered at some point:
  • Make use of main sensor DPAF "snapshots" during continuous shooting to augment discrete PDAF information
  • Replace the PDAF and/or metering sensor with a, say, a few megapixel combined DPAF/metering sensor
  • Rip out the discrete PDAF sensor and secondary mirror and use main sensor DPAF instead
As for ripping out the mirror, it's called "Live View."
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
40 or 30mp M-RAW option would be perfect, provided there is no an IQ loss associated with shooting in M-RAW.
Have you not noticed that the newer EOS cameras with .cr3 raw files do not include the M-RAW and S-RAW options?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
It’s not that big of a bump. The 5Ds and 5Dr were both 50.6 mp. That’s about the same % of a jump from 5d3 to 5d4.
But the jump from a 30MP 5D Mark IV (or even 24MP 5D Mark III) to an 80+ MP EOS Rs is a LOT bigger than the jump from a 24MP 5D Mark III to a 30 MP 5D Mark IV. Why do you keep conflating people coming from a 30MP 5D Mark IV with people coming from a 50MP 5Ds/5Ds R?
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
I bet a 80 Mpix camera will have a 20 Mpix RAW mode where each image pixel has data from its own R, GG, B cells which might give you unprecedented IQ at medium high resolutions and that is one reason for such a camera.
In situations where resolution is required (with the right lens, tripod/enough light) you can do the "Bayer-trick" and you have 80 MPix.
Just with the 20 MPix mode file size would be 14+15+14 =43 bits per pixel resulting in 40...60 MByte files (with lossless compression). But this is half the file size and maybe 1/10th of the computing power (no debayering) so should be much faster compared to 80 MPix full res files.
20 MPix mode - Screen and small prints
80 MPix mode - large advertising posters, BIF for those who search the bird afterwards
You'd still need to debeyer. The colors of the filters in the Bayer mask are far from the colors we use in our RGB reproduction systems. Particularly in the "red" channel, most Bayer masks are centered on about 590nm (which is a slightly orange version of yellow) rather than 640nm, which is what we use for "Red" in RGB additive (screens that emit light) trichromatic color reproduction systems. The "blue" filters in a Bayer mask are usually centered around 455nm, instead of 480nm "Blue", and the "green" filters are centered at around 540nm, rather than 525nm "Green".

1574006194376.png
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
70 135 f/2 would be very nice including 10 sessions in a fitness studio (2kg +)
I would be satisfied with a 100mm macro with f/2 resolving my dilemma with two lenses (2.8 macro + 2.0 100mm).
Add an RF 50 f/2 macro and this would maybe my preferred setup if I will ever switch to FF.
The problem with making a 100mm f/2 macro is that it's really difficult (and expensive, and heavy) to do flat field correction required for macro lenses out past an around f/2.8 sized entrance pupil. The EF 100mm f/2 leaves a lot of field curvature uncorrected (which is often desirable in a portrait lens, as it gives smoother out of focus areas), but field curvature is a death sentence for a macro lens (which doesn't worry about out of focus areas as much since it's specifically designed to image flat 2D objects at close distances).
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,241
627
I don't understand why they don't care about the EF-M series, why they released m6 mk ii but let it limit with a row of shit lenses, I only use 32mm and 22mm, honestly I don't like using adapters
There's a big difference between an "adapter" that merely provides needed spacing between an EOS-M body and an EOS EF lens that are both part of the EOS system and use protocols built on the same core and an "ADAPTER" meant to put a lens from one manufacturer on a camera from another manufacturer. The EF to RF and EF to EOS-M "adapters" are simpler and less likely to cause image degradation, exposure, or AF performance issues than Canon's EF 1.4X or Ef 2X extenders are.