Announcements Coming The First Week of September [CR2]

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
fullstop said:
otoh IBIS not very likely with Canon

I think it’s just a matter of time. Maybe not the next released camera or two, but they will eventually implement it.
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,350
552
fullstop said:
Each iteration of their cameras since about 2008 [when they lost leadership in CMOS sensors] matches roughly the specs that previous gen product should already have had to be fully competitive in IQ, functionality and performance.

You seem to have an odd definition of 'competitive'. Everything Canon has done has outsold the Sony equivalent so it would suggest that for the customer, everything they have done has been 'competitive'.
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
fullstop said:
yes. touch-sensitive "vari-angle" LCDs were already invented and implemented in Canon EOS 650D//Rebel T4i announced June 8, 2012.

The EOS 650D also becomes the first SLR from any manufacturer to feature a touchscreen. This is of the capacitive (contact sensitive) rather than resistive (pressure sensitive) type, behaving like that of a typical smartphone. In Live View and Movie modes the screen can be used to specify the point of focus and (optionally) release the shutter. It also supports iPhone-like multi-touch and gestures.

But hell no, the 6D [announced after 650D on September 17, 2012] could of course not feature such an "advanced" feature. It had to be reserved for the otherwise useless 6D Mk. II years later. This is exactly the kind of marketing nerfing that is so irksome with Canon.

So Canon was state of the art in touchscreen in 2012. They were state of the art in 2017. But you think the should have been 2017 state of the art in 2012. Got it.
 

rjbray01

Canon Forever
Jan 19, 2017
134
75
kiwiengr said:
rjbray01 said:
The reason now is different is because practically every potential camera buyer is already carrying an outstanding camera built into their mobile phone.

The camera sales market is shrinking : with increasingly complex camera functions being addressed by the phone capabilities.

I would expect fewer MILC sales to translate to fewer suppliers : survival of the fittest.

Rubbish... one has a good smart phone (S8)... one has an excellent DSLR (5D4). I don't use the camera to make phone calls.. and the reverse option applies.

that "reverse option" being "I don't use my phone to take pictures"

hmm ... not sure you are in the majority there
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,208
1,524
rjbray01 said:
The reason now is different is because practically every potential camera buyer is already carrying an outstanding camera built into their mobile phone.

The camera sales market is shrinking : with increasingly complex camera functions being addressed by the phone capabilities.

I would expect fewer MILC sales to translate to fewer suppliers : survival of the fittest.
Moving a camera design toward a smartphone camera design is a sure way to lose competition against smartphones.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,946
Canada
fullstop said:
yes. touch-sensitive "vari-angle" LCDs were already invented and implemented in Canon EOS 650D//Rebel T4i announced June 8, 2012.

The EOS 650D also becomes the first SLR from any manufacturer to feature a touchscreen. This is of the capacitive (contact sensitive) rather than resistive (pressure sensitive) type, behaving like that of a typical smartphone. In Live View and Movie modes the screen can be used to specify the point of focus and (optionally) release the shutter. It also supports iPhone-like multi-touch and gestures.

But hell no, the 6D [announced after 650D on September 17, 2012] could of course not feature such an "advanced" feature. It had to be reserved for the otherwise useless 6D Mk. II years later. This is exactly the kind of marketing nerfing that is so irksome with Canon.
Canon is a conservative company. If you want to have state of the art, they are the wrong company to get your camera from. You would be far better off to sell all your gear and get Panasonic, after all, they are "slightly ahead of out time".....

Seriously though, companies like Panasonic are going to introduce new features and gadgetry before a company like Canon will. And be prepared to upgrade on every model release to make sure that you have the best and newest....

All Canon has to offer are cameras where they have taken the time to make sure everything works properly, and a very good lens lineup. Who wants a camera that they can depend on instead of the latest sensor-shift pixel shuffling interpretation... No pro wants a simple unit that "just works no matter what" or the best service in the industry...or the kind of stability where they can take the lens off of their 20D, pop out the battery, and use both on the latest release...

Seriously, Canon is a conservative company......
 

sdz

EOS RP
CR Pro
Sep 13, 2016
262
209
Pittsburgh, PA
edoorn said:
I'm not sure Canon can afford to release a lack lustre ff mirrorless. Sony has raised the bar to a new standard and the Nikon offerings (mind you; this is Nikon's first serious attempt at a mirrorless, if you ignore the 1 camera's) seem to be on par with that. Anything less and I'm quite sure a significant people interested in mirrorless FF will consider switching and lose confidence. So they need it to be a very good and worthy camera. They've had experience now with several M bodies so this should be no limitation.

This. Canon sells cameras and lenses, but it is losing the image quality race at the high end save for Canon color, at which it excels. So, Canon faces a technical challange. Dropping the mirror is less important than achieving better sensor tech and on camera computing power.
 

bergstrom

Photographer
Feb 23, 2015
324
191
what worries em is the "at least one mirrorless camera will be announced". Can they not release the BIG one and focus all their attention on that and blow away the specs of the sony a7iii and be the camera that people can't stop talking about. Or am I just asking too much?
 

amorse

EOS R
Jan 26, 2017
823
1,113
www.instagram.com
rjbray01 said:
kiwiengr said:
rjbray01 said:
The reason now is different is because practically every potential camera buyer is already carrying an outstanding camera built into their mobile phone.

The camera sales market is shrinking : with increasingly complex camera functions being addressed by the phone capabilities.

I would expect fewer MILC sales to translate to fewer suppliers : survival of the fittest.

Rubbish... one has a good smart phone (S8)... one has an excellent DSLR (5D4). I don't use the camera to make phone calls.. and the reverse option applies.

that "reverse option" being "I don't use my phone to take pictures"

hmm ... not sure you are in the majority there
I think there is a considerable difference in intent with phone photography.

I have a reasonably good smartphone and a 5D IV as my main camera. Personally, I never use my smartphone for artistic photography - I've just been far too spoiled by the low light performance of a proper DSLR. In my experience, most (not all) phone photos fall apart in low light and with any sort of magnification or pixel peeping. For now, I really only use my phone's camera to take the odd selfie with friends at events, or take pictures of my car at the airport so I know where I parked - anything where quality isn't what I'm looking for: only convenience.

I think this is why the compact market has diminished - a phone camera is very well suited to those uses, but as soon as there are specific quality demands a proper ILC is hard to beat. I hate to use my own anecdotal evidence, but I have seen quite a number of people who have purchased up-market ILCs because they got into photography using their phone, and then started seeking out some of the benefits provided by a more advanced camera. If anything, I would suspect that the camera phone market has largely killed the compact camera market but pushed remaining buyers up market into ILCs.

Sure, creative software and pre-packaged formulas for specific photo effects are now accessible to smartphone users to create an ILC-like result, but at its core this is contrary to the value of ILCs. ILCs allow the user to create whatever they can imagine (for those that are willing to learn how), while smartphone effects only replicate a finite number of pre-packaged things users might like to create. ILCs give you control to create anything, while smartphones give you a menu of things they can deliver. There is value in both propositions to be fair, but neither can replace the other currently.
 

amorse

EOS R
Jan 26, 2017
823
1,113
www.instagram.com
bergstrom said:
what worries em is the "at least one mirrorless camera will be announced". Can they not release the BIG one and focus all their attention on that and blow away the specs of the sony a7iii and be the camera that people can't stop talking about. Or am I just asking too much?
I don't think you're asking too much, but also I don't think that is in line with Canon's business model, so I don't think they will do it. I don't think Canon wants to be competing on specs or else they'd have to re-release gear very rapidly - i.e. Sony releases a new camera and now Canon has to respond right away? That's an expensive proposition with little benefit to Canon. Their current business model has put them in the lead, so I doubt they'd stray far from what they're already doing.
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
bergstrom said:
what worries em is the "at least one mirrorless camera will be announced". Can they not release the BIG one and focus all their attention on that and blow away the specs of the sony a7iii and be the camera that people can't stop talking about. Or am I just asking too much?

not for me. And not by the standards Canon customers should apply towards a supplier.

But ... according to a few forum members here, I guess you are asking way too much of Canon. "Canon is a conservative company" describes a fact - but often it also smells of "condoning/appreciating/excusing that".

Especially when it should not be technically or economically "impossible" for Canon to "blow away Sony A7 III specs". Well, to really get on par with those Sony sensors, Canon might have to procure a new sensor fab, but many of the Sony specs would be really easy to match or surpass. Starting with a smart choice of lens mount parameters for their FF mirrorless system. On that one I have full confidence in Canon, on most other areas ... not so. They are an ULTRA-conservative company and worse, they have been largely resting on their laurels for the last 10 years. :)
 

rjbray01

Canon Forever
Jan 19, 2017
134
75
amorse said:
rjbray01 said:
kiwiengr said:
rjbray01 said:
The reason now is different is because practically every potential camera buyer is already carrying an outstanding camera built into their mobile phone.

The camera sales market is shrinking : with increasingly complex camera functions being addressed by the phone capabilities.

I would expect fewer MILC sales to translate to fewer suppliers : survival of the fittest.

Rubbish... one has a good smart phone (S8)... one has an excellent DSLR (5D4). I don't use the camera to make phone calls.. and the reverse option applies.

that "reverse option" being "I don't use my phone to take pictures"

hmm ... not sure you are in the majority there
I think there is a considerable difference in intent with phone photography.

I have a reasonably good smartphone and a 5D IV as my main camera. Personally, I never use my smartphone for artistic photography - I've just been far too spoiled by the low light performance of a proper DSLR. In my experience, most (not all) phone photos fall apart in low light and with any sort of magnification or pixel peeping. For now, I really only use my phone's camera to take the odd selfie with friends at events, or take pictures of my car at the airport so I know where I parked - anything where quality isn't what I'm looking for: only convenience.

I think this is why the compact market has diminished - a phone camera is very well suited to those uses, but as soon as there are specific quality demands a proper ILC is hard to beat. I hate to use my own anecdotal evidence, but I have seen quite a number of people who have purchased up-market ILCs because they got into photography using their phone, and then started seeking out some of the benefits provided by a more advanced camera. If anything, I would suspect that the camera phone market has largely killed the compact camera market but pushed remaining buyers up market into ILCs.

Sure, creative software and pre-packaged formulas for specific photo effects are now accessible to smartphone users to create an ILC-like result, but at its core this is contrary to the value of ILCs. ILCs allow the user to create whatever they can imagine (for those that are willing to learn how), while smartphone effects only replicate a finite number of pre-packaged things users might like to create. ILCs give you control to create anything, while smartphones give you a menu of things they can deliver. There is value in both propositions to be fair, but neither can replace the other currently.

It might not be much longer until mobile phones contain arrays of lenses, which will do for their cameras what arrays of radio telescopes did for astronomy ...

https://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/research-news/optical-phased-array-replaces-camera-lens-2017-06/

To quote the article "Once scaled up, this technology can make lenses and thick cameras obsolete."
 

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
359
186
nbaresejr said:
My Best Guess for the FF specs.

30.4mp- new sensor with BIS (we have seen patents that canon is working on BIS sensors). Dynamic range needs to be about 1 stop better then the current 5d4. This would make it about equal to anything currently out there from Sony.
Digic 8 or 8+ processor
Excellent EVF
DPAF with the fastest AF performance of any Canon mirrorless camera to date (I would say by far)
3.0" Vari Angle LCD Screen
4k, no crop
Wifi, NFC, Bluetooth
5 Axis Image Stabilization (currently on M50)
10 FPS (minimum)-m50 does 9.5

Eye AF (currently on m50)
200+ AF points (m50 has 143)


Depending on how they are adapting the EF lenses to this camera, with specs like that it would be a homerun. I would pay $3000 for that camera.

Everything sounds good. I'm more cautious about 1 stop DR. Maybe 1/2 stop improvement and no IBIS.
4K with lesser crop and less bitrate and color depth and more flexible file format.
I also expect EF compatible mount either via adapater (new mount) or native.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
rjbray01 said:
amorse said:
rjbray01 said:
kiwiengr said:
rjbray01 said:
The reason now is different is because practically every potential camera buyer is already carrying an outstanding camera built into their mobile phone.

The camera sales market is shrinking : with increasingly complex camera functions being addressed by the phone capabilities.

I would expect fewer MILC sales to translate to fewer suppliers : survival of the fittest.

Rubbish... one has a good smart phone (S8)... one has an excellent DSLR (5D4). I don't use the camera to make phone calls.. and the reverse option applies.

that "reverse option" being "I don't use my phone to take pictures"

hmm ... not sure you are in the majority there
I think there is a considerable difference in intent with phone photography.

I have a reasonably good smartphone and a 5D IV as my main camera. Personally, I never use my smartphone for artistic photography - I've just been far too spoiled by the low light performance of a proper DSLR. In my experience, most (not all) phone photos fall apart in low light and with any sort of magnification or pixel peeping. For now, I really only use my phone's camera to take the odd selfie with friends at events, or take pictures of my car at the airport so I know where I parked - anything where quality isn't what I'm looking for: only convenience.

I think this is why the compact market has diminished - a phone camera is very well suited to those uses, but as soon as there are specific quality demands a proper ILC is hard to beat. I hate to use my own anecdotal evidence, but I have seen quite a number of people who have purchased up-market ILCs because they got into photography using their phone, and then started seeking out some of the benefits provided by a more advanced camera. If anything, I would suspect that the camera phone market has largely killed the compact camera market but pushed remaining buyers up market into ILCs.

Sure, creative software and pre-packaged formulas for specific photo effects are now accessible to smartphone users to create an ILC-like result, but at its core this is contrary to the value of ILCs. ILCs allow the user to create whatever they can imagine (for those that are willing to learn how), while smartphone effects only replicate a finite number of pre-packaged things users might like to create. ILCs give you control to create anything, while smartphones give you a menu of things they can deliver. There is value in both propositions to be fair, but neither can replace the other currently.

It might not be much longer until mobile phones contain arrays of lenses, which will do for their cameras what arrays of radio telescopes did for astronomy ...

https://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/research-news/optical-phased-array-replaces-camera-lens-2017-06/

To quote the article "Once scaled up, this technology can make lenses and thick cameras obsolete."


Light is supposedly working on a phone. Their L16 camera wasn’t exactly a resounding success, maybe they’ll have more by pairing it with cellular farcebook and twitter connectivity.
 

amorse

EOS R
Jan 26, 2017
823
1,113
www.instagram.com
rjbray01 said:
amorse said:
I think there is a considerable difference in intent with phone photography.

I have a reasonably good smartphone and a 5D IV as my main camera. Personally, I never use my smartphone for artistic photography - I've just been far too spoiled by the low light performance of a proper DSLR. In my experience, most (not all) phone photos fall apart in low light and with any sort of magnification or pixel peeping. For now, I really only use my phone's camera to take the odd selfie with friends at events, or take pictures of my car at the airport so I know where I parked - anything where quality isn't what I'm looking for: only convenience.

I think this is why the compact market has diminished - a phone camera is very well suited to those uses, but as soon as there are specific quality demands a proper ILC is hard to beat. I hate to use my own anecdotal evidence, but I have seen quite a number of people who have purchased up-market ILCs because they got into photography using their phone, and then started seeking out some of the benefits provided by a more advanced camera. If anything, I would suspect that the camera phone market has largely killed the compact camera market but pushed remaining buyers up market into ILCs.

Sure, creative software and pre-packaged formulas for specific photo effects are now accessible to smartphone users to create an ILC-like result, but at its core this is contrary to the value of ILCs. ILCs allow the user to create whatever they can imagine (for those that are willing to learn how), while smartphone effects only replicate a finite number of pre-packaged things users might like to create. ILCs give you control to create anything, while smartphones give you a menu of things they can deliver. There is value in both propositions to be fair, but neither can replace the other currently.

It might not be much longer until mobile phones contain arrays of lenses, which will do for their cameras what arrays of radio telescopes did for astronomy ...

https://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/research-news/optical-phased-array-replaces-camera-lens-2017-06/

To quote the article "Once scaled up, this technology can make lenses and thick cameras obsolete."

No doubt technology will keep moving and current formats will not likely hold back the tide. As it stands today, and for at least the next few years, there is a distinct gap between what a phone can do and what an ILC can do - and both are targeting different market segments. I'm confident that this won't always be true, but it is today. My only point was that right now and for the next little while there will certainly be a market for dedicated cameras, especially those which provide functionality not currently available on a phone.
 
Personally, I can't wait to see what Canon has up its sleeve...also interested in what Nikon is going to put out there as well. Each of these companies is going to show us something that will excite some photographers and will disappoint others, but it will be good to see the direction each is wanting to take us.

It has taken Sony numerous generations of changes to get to the point that the cameras they have now work well and provide some unique things and will take another couple of generations to get things that Canon and Nikon learned years ago about how photographers work efficiently.

If Canon can take the excellent dual pixel autofocus they have and be able to drive their lenses close to as quickly as the latest Sony telephoto do for subject tracking, I will be very impressed. I doubt that will happen right away but I think that is more to do with how the current lens hardware and software is designed to be driven rather than limits of what Canon can do with the new camera.

The bigger dark horse in the race is Nikon, they have not yet shown on sensor autofocus that is anywhere close to Canon or Sony for video or tracking. Nikon's latest SLRs are excellent but they are a mystery as to where they will come into this market this time.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
stochasticmotions said:
The bigger dark horse in the race is Nikon, they have not yet shown on sensor autofocus that is anywhere close to Canon or Sony for video or tracking. Nikon's latest SLRs are excellent but they are a mystery as to where they will come into this market this time.

Nikon also has the Ghost of Tiny Mount Diameter's Past past to contend with. They couldn't support autofocusing f/1.2 lenses as Canon did, and Canon folks constantly reminded them of that. So I'm not surprised at all that Nikonians are pride-wise geeked about the prospect of these f/0.95 lenses that have been rumored -- I surely wouldn't want to have to carry those lenses, though! :eek:

Sony is (IMHO) a far more clear and present danger to Nikon than Canon. Canon is the bigger target, surely, but it has been preparing for FF mirrorless with core tech for some time. Nikon is (on paper) less prepared to offer a competitive FF mirrorless offering. Further, Nikon's been running with stellar Sony sensors forever, and the last 5-10 years have shown that sensors don't flip marketshare. Nikon needs core technology upgrades (liveview, video, something resembling DPAF) far more than they need to shut up the f/1.2 boo-birds.

So even if they go with a spec beast of a mirrorless D850 as rumors imply, if it handles poorly, has iffy AF, etc. they will be in some serious trouble.

- A
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
ahsanford said:
stochasticmotions said:
The bigger dark horse in the race is Nikon, they have not yet shown on sensor autofocus that is anywhere close to Canon or Sony for video or tracking. Nikon's latest SLRs are excellent but they are a mystery as to where they will come into this market this time.

Nikon also has the Ghost of Tiny Mount Diameter's Past past to contend with. They couldn't support autofocusing f/1.2 lenses as Canon did, and Canon folks constantly reminded them of that. So I'm not surprised at all that Nikonians are pride-wise geeked about the prospect of these f/0.95 lenses that have been rumored -- I surely wouldn't want to have to carry those lenses, though!

the 52 / .9 is 10 inches long.

:eek:
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
rrcphoto said:
ahsanford said:
stochasticmotions said:
The bigger dark horse in the race is Nikon, they have not yet shown on sensor autofocus that is anywhere close to Canon or Sony for video or tracking. Nikon's latest SLRs are excellent but they are a mystery as to where they will come into this market this time.

Nikon also has the Ghost of Tiny Mount Diameter's Past past to contend with. They couldn't support autofocusing f/1.2 lenses as Canon did, and Canon folks constantly reminded them of that. So I'm not surprised at all that Nikonians are pride-wise geeked about the prospect of these f/0.95 lenses that have been rumored -- I surely wouldn't want to have to carry those lenses, though!

the 52 / .9 is 10 inches long.

:eek:

Again: No one said (a) that lens is ever happening or (b) a f/0.9 lens was a good idea.

But fanboys will lord that over Canon ad infinitum. Or at least until this next mirrorless venture is as big a disaster as the Nikon 1 was and Canon can buy Nikon. 8)

- A