Why WOULD Canon make another SLR/DSLR now?

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,043
375
If statistics could work with a dataset composed of a single data point, your logic is ok. Fortunately, real world is quite different than that. o_O
You have real world data indicating sensor degradation (outside of lab-based testing of organic sensors)? Please share. What’s the failure mechanism, and how is it quantified?
 

bhf3737

---
Sep 9, 2015
402
343
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
You have real world data indicating sensor degradation (outside of lab-based testing of organic sensors)? Please share. What’s the failure mechanism, and how is it quantified?
No I don't. The camera manufacturers will collect it. The hypothesis is that continuously exposing the sensor to light will increase surface heat and may lead to pixels burn out. It should be empirically verified by failure data, e.g. number of pixels burnt in a sample set selected from a batch of sensors (pre release) and reported sensor failure from users of cameras (post release).
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,043
375
No I don't. The camera manufacturers will collect it. The hypothesis is that continuously exposing the sensor to light will increase surface heat and may lead to pixels burn out. It should be empirically verified by failure data, e.g. number of pixels burnt in a sample set selected from a batch of sensors (pre release) and reported sensor failure from users of cameras (post release).
It’s a fine enough theory, and may be applicable to some minor degree. If it were a major concern I’d expect to see short lives in video cameras.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
467
439
In terms of specs, a Sony A9 can easily compete with a Canon EOS 1.
In real life: not a single chance.
Durability, battery life, lens quality, service, ergonomy, sealing and, above all, a much better viewfinder, all speak for the EOS 1..
It's only for vintage lenses (focusing with a closed diaphragm) that mirrorless is better. That's why, having many Leica lenses, I took an EOS R.
Yet, I'm still waiting for the 5D 5..., the EOS 1 being too heavy for my purposes.
 
Last edited:

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,258
2,298
Immaturity of technology, unproven longevity and sensor degradation are specific problems that mirrorless has and DSLR does not. We should either perform some stress test or wait 10+ years to have enough data to evaluate/justify the mirrorless technology. Meanwhile DSLR will continue to sell and serve the needs.
Mirrorless cameras have been in the consumer market for 20+ years. I still have a working one from 1998. The 10+ years were up ages ago. Mirrorless technology is proven. It’s just a case of what is currently better for our particular purposes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4fun

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
What I would be interested in seeing is the 5DV coming in with both mirrorless option and DSLR at about the same time.
+1

Exactly what i have been asking for a long time. Actually i would like to see 4 versions:

1) 5Dv DSLR with 4k video, EF mount

2) 5Ds DSLR pure stills, same specs, but no video/audio recording, 15% lower price for "no hybrid use"

3) 5Rv mirrorfree, 4k video, R mount, same specs and price as DSLR 1)

4) 5Rs mirrorfree, pure stills, same specs but no video/audio recording, 15% lower price (= like option 2)

launch, promote ("get the right camera for YOUR style") and sell for a year, then publish units sold or at least percent split for the 4 versions.

My prediction for split would be:
5 : 20 : 35 : 40% for above versions
:)
 

Bennymiata

EOS 6D MK II
DSLR's will continue to sell well for many years to come and not necessarily because of any inherent advantage, but because to the shopper with $500 or $1,000 to spend on a new camera for the family - they'll buy the most professional looking camera.
A small mirrorless looks like a toy compared to a cheap DSLR, and to some people, the bigger the better.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
467
439
Why WOULD Toyota make another manual transmission car now?
Why WOULD Toyota make another manual transmission car now?
Do not forget that the US are not the only market for Toyota.
There are still masses of Toyotas with stick -shift transmissions!
And many photographers who WANT a DSLR!
"New" isn't always better for everybody.
 

koenkooi

EOS RP
Feb 25, 2015
365
208
The only reasons I can come up with:

  • so EF lens-users don't need an adapter... but is this a reason? Such a user could just keep the adapter permanently mounted on an RF body, right?
  • the viewfinder resolution sucks, in my opinion, compared to a real view... but am I the only one who thinks so? Is there a resolution and dynamic range that would somehow make the LCD good enough for literally everyone?
Does anyone know enough about sensors in mirrorless cameras to know if there are any ways that SLR sensors are strictly superior? For instance, my 1-DsMkIII sensor "heats up" in live view mode and gets noisier. Is this something that mirrorless cameras have to simply live with, or is this a problem that no longer exists?
Can you qualify what you mean by 'make another SLR'? Product development cycles tend to be quite long, do you mean:
  • Why would Canon start developing a DSLR right now?
  • Why would Canon finish developing DSLRs already in the pipeline right now?
  • Why would Canon produce a new DSLR right now?
 

slclick

EOS 3
Dec 17, 2013
2,975
459
I'd love to hear how adapting the R to EF has no or little enough degradation to make folks jump into the system with a mess of EF glass in their stable. I've been using the M5 since it was released and enough time and use to know that I am pretty much done with the multiple body experimenting and believing I can mix and match without much caving. My 5D3 fits my needs alone and investing in a separate and not replacement set of lenses such as a strictly ML line is going to do nothing but drum up countless future packing conundrums and wish I had taken X over Y anxious moments. PLease Canon, just one more...5D5?
 
Mar 14, 2012
2,274
157
I'd love to hear how adapting the R to EF has no or little enough degradation to make folks jump into the system with a mess of EF glass in their stable. I've been using the M5 since it was released and enough time and use to know that I am pretty much done with the multiple body experimenting and believing I can mix and match without much caving. My 5D3 fits my needs alone and investing in a separate and not replacement set of lenses such as a strictly ML line is going to do nothing but drum up countless future packing conundrums and wish I had taken X over Y anxious moments. PLease Canon, just one more...5D5?
I have a mess of EF glass, and I was skeptical of moving to the R. If I were starting over going into the Canon system, I'd pick the R over the 6DII and use the adapter as necessary. I've played with the adapter with some EF lenses, and it works well. The R focuses better for single shot especially with fast glass than my 5D4 with off center AF points and I didn't have any problems with long telephotos either. I haven't tried the R for servo for something like a soccer game yet. However, I still have a 5D4 and I still prefer it for motion and larger lenses, so I'm now using 2 cameras (the R replaced my 5D3). Once a R camera comes out that is better than the 5D4, then I'll just carry mirrorless bodies with a mess of EF and some RF glass, and that will simplify the setup greatly.

Having both EF and R bodies and both EF and RF lenses does complicate things. The easiest way is to just use EF glass and carry the EF-R adapter. But really, the reason for getting the R is the superior glass (RF 50 and 28-70), hence the conundrum. The R with the RF 35 is a compact setup. However, in your case, I'd wait a year. Wait for something better for the 5D4 to arrive and/or wait for the RF 16-35/24-70/70-200 to come out. I'm expecting IS to be on at RF 24-70, and I'd expect the RF counterparts to be better or lighter or both than their current EF counterparts. This first year is a transition year. The direction that Canon wants to go is clear, but for many, it is not yet time to transition to the news system. For me, I saw some good deals and jumped in. Without the deals, I'd be waiting like you... but the RF 50L is sweet!
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
mirrorfree cameras can be made at significantly lower cost. While cost of components may be still be close today for MILCs vs. DSLRs (EVF vs. OVF/prism, mirror/submirror
assembly, detached Phase-AF unit), key to savings is rather the degree of automation possible in production, assembly, quality control all the way to after sales service (eg. warranty repairs, cost if repairs, spare part logistics needed) etc.

It is way easier and less costly to assemble and QC cameras without moving mechanical parts in the lightpath that need to be mounted, lubricated and kept working at 10+ fps for > 100k actuations with tolerances of 1/100mm.

it is way easier to build camera where focus plane and image plane cannot possibly get out of alignment, by design. Compared to time, effort, equipment and cost needed to meticulously measure, test, shim, adjust, calibrate exact positions of sensor and lots of mechanical components. Just remember Canon's problems with 1D III AF system some years ago ...

MILCs can be made 100% automated by fairly simple "robots"/equipment. DSLRs require a good amount of skilled human labour and/or much more intricate equipment - both at significantly higher cost.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,379
1,728
mirrorfree cameras can be made at significantly lower cost.
Yeah, you keep saying that but you finally admitted (at least once) that you really don't know and as usual you have no data to support your claim. Incessant repetition of something false does not make it true.


MILCs can be made 100% automated by fairly simple "robots"/equipment.
Why did Roger find manual alignment screws for the sensor plate in the EOS R? Because alignment to the mount plane is critical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ethanz