Announcements Coming The First Week of September [CR2]

Jul 13, 2018
4
5
For me the most exciting thing is the new mount type. Whatever kind of camera body Canon will launch, they will replace it within three or four years. The new mount however, will last 30 to 40 years.

I am eager to get answers to two question.
  • will the EF-mount lenses fit onto the new camera body without adapter?
  • what about the compatibility to the M-mount? So far, all crop camera bodies can use full frame lenses from the same vendor without adapter. Canon EF-S to EF, Nikon DX to FX, Sony E-mount crop to E-mount full frame.

What about the EOS M camera bodies? There is only a limited set of M-mount lenses available. Where could get a high-end M-mount camera (EOS 7D/Nikon D500 class) the necessary tele and macro lenses from?
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Stefan K. said:
I am eager to get answers to two question.
  • will the EF-mount lenses fit onto the new camera body without adapter?
  • what about the compatibility to the M-mount? So far, all crop camera bodies can use full frame lenses from the same vendor without adapter. Canon EF-S to EF, Nikon DX to FX, Sony E-mount crop to E-mount full frame.

Welcome to CR!

The first bullet point is what we've been debating for years. No one knows.

If Canon wants to delight existing FF users, folks with a lot of EF glass, folks who accept the realities of bigger/faster/longer lenses, they'll go EF.

If Canon wants to follow suit with Sony (either defensively to also have a small camera or offensively to smash and grab X% of their share), court younger new-to-FF users, offer their own FF folks a small apparatus to do the same or similar job, they'll go with a thin mount + EF adaptor (like what EOS M did).

If they don't know what to do, or have bigger plans for mirrorless, they may offer both.

Current polling here: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=35293.msg727180#msg727180

- A
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,946
Canada
Stefan K. said:
For me the most exciting thing is the new mount type. Whatever kind of camera body Canon will launch, they will replace it within three or four years. The new mount however, will last 30 to 40 years.

I am eager to get answers to two question.
  • will the EF-mount lenses fit onto the new camera body without adapter?
  • what about the compatibility to the M-mount? So far, all crop camera bodies can use full frame lenses from the same vendor without adapter. Canon EF-S to EF, Nikon DX to FX, Sony E-mount crop to E-mount full frame.

What about the EOS M camera bodies? There is only a limited set of M-mount lenses available. Where could get a high-end M-mount camera (EOS 7D/Nikon D500 class) the necessary tele and macro lenses from?


Welcome to the Forum!


The short answer on mounts is that none of us know. Canon is kind of famous for keeping quiet right up to the official announcement.... everyone in the know is bound by non-disclosure agreements.


All of us forum regulars have lots of opinions, but none of us have facts.... beware one user in particular who claims inside knowledge and has super-long posts with fanciful claims..... None of us know. Personally, My bet is on a native EF mount that will also allow EF-S lenses to be used on a FF mirrorless, quickly followed by a FF equivalent of the M cameras and a very few slower lenses...

As for glass for M cameras, third party lenses are starting to appear.... some of which are quite interesting, like a 40mm F.85 lens!!!!

https://www.adorama.com/kal40085mb.html
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
ahsanford said:
Stefan K. said:
I am eager to get answers to two question.
  • will the EF-mount lenses fit onto the new camera body without adapter?
  • what about the compatibility to the M-mount? So far, all crop camera bodies can use full frame lenses from the same vendor without adapter. Canon EF-S to EF, Nikon DX to FX, Sony E-mount crop to E-mount full frame.

Welcome to CR!

The first bullet point is what we've been debating for years. No one knows.

If Canon wants to delight existing FF users, folks with a lot of EF glass, folks who accept the realities of bigger/faster/longer lenses, they'll go EF.

If Canon wants to follow suit with Sony (either defensively to also have a small camera or offensively to smash and grab X% of their share), court younger new-to-FF users, offer their own FF folks a small apparatus to do the same or similar job, they'll go with a thin mount + EF adaptor (like what EOS M did).

If they don't know what to do, or have bigger plans for mirrorless, they may offer both.

Current polling here: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=35293.msg727180#msg727180

- A

it depends why they are coming out with a mirrorless full frame camera, what's their business objective.

1. is it to cater to the "I want a small camera that is full frame" niche

2. or is it the "I want a more hybrid stills and video camera with a built in EVF and related technology" camera.

3. or some combination of the two

if it's 1. then they have to come out with a new mount or use the EF-M mount, or use the SL1 ergonomics and come out with an ultra tiny, ergonomically gimped EF mount mirrorless, you know, like a sony.
if it's 2 or a combination of 2 and 3, then they could use the EF mount and existing ecosystem

whatever the case may be - this is probably the most hotly debated decision inside of Canon Inc. since the FD /birth of EF mount days.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
BillB said:
ahsanford said:
3kramd5 said:
Bill, you’re suggesting canon has a long term strategy and that they don’t arbitrarily “nerf” a haphazard product line. I don’t buy it.

Agree. I think Canon does have a long-term strategy on core technology, but it also monkeys around in all sorts of ways to set up this pyramid of features/prices/enticements to get you to step up and pay more.

Just off the cuff:

6D2 not getting an on-chip ADC sensor
No spot metering at an off-center AF point unless you get a 1-series body
The WiFi SD card not being made compatible with the 5D3 (this one's picky, I admit)
Single card slot in the 6D2
No coexistence of DPAF and 4K for the M50
Flash sync: 6-series 1/180, 5-Series 1/200, 1-series 1/250

We can call those things nerfing, 'strategic feature omission' or too expensive to implement for that price point -- doesn't really matter. It's business, I get it. We are not entitled to tech that is offered at the same market slot / price point as the competition.

- A

Agreed. Trying to figure out why specific features did or did not end up on a specific camera is speculative at best, but I don't think that refutes the idea that Canon has had a coherent mirrorless technology development based on dual pixel technology.

Having said that, the 6DII sensor decision is baffling to me. Was it a cost decision? Was the original idea to get the 6DII to market before an ADC chip could be ready, but for some reason delays screwed up the timing? Was Canon being Canon and simply ignoring the foreseeable internet firestorm because in their opinion the 6DII sensor was just fine, no matter what DPR was going to say?

I suspect they were producing full frame sensors on two lines simultaneously, one capable of on-dye ADC and one not. Similarly, the newer A7Riii doesn’t have a stacked sensor like the older A9. Both have production overlap despite coming to market at different times, and they require different processes.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
BillB said:
Having said that, the 6DII sensor decision is baffling to me. Was it a cost decision? Was the original idea to get the 6DII to market before an ADC chip could be ready, but for some reason delays screwed up the timing? Was Canon being Canon and simply ignoring the foreseeable internet firestorm because in their opinion the 6DII sensor was just fine, no matter what DPR was going to say?

Your guess is as good as mine. Could have been:

  • Internal production capacity for on-chip stuff was already committed at the time

  • On-chip FF sensors were costing Canon a fortune at the time and this was a way to make the margins work on a $2099 locked in starting price point

  • There was a deliberate attempt to never have a 6-series sensor ever outperform a 5-series sensor ever again (to protect the prestige/price of the 5-series), etc.

  • [insert your guess here]
- A
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
3kramd5 said:
BillB said:
ahsanford said:
3kramd5 said:
Bill, you’re suggesting canon has a long term strategy and that they don’t arbitrarily “nerf” a haphazard product line. I don’t buy it.

Agree. I think Canon does have a long-term strategy on core technology, but it also monkeys around in all sorts of ways to set up this pyramid of features/prices/enticements to get you to step up and pay more.

Just off the cuff:

6D2 not getting an on-chip ADC sensor
No spot metering at an off-center AF point unless you get a 1-series body
The WiFi SD card not being made compatible with the 5D3 (this one's picky, I admit)
Single card slot in the 6D2
No coexistence of DPAF and 4K for the M50
Flash sync: 6-series 1/180, 5-Series 1/200, 1-series 1/250

We can call those things nerfing, 'strategic feature omission' or too expensive to implement for that price point -- doesn't really matter. It's business, I get it. We are not entitled to tech that is offered at the same market slot / price point as the competition.

- A

Agreed. Trying to figure out why specific features did or did not end up on a specific camera is speculative at best, but I don't think that refutes the idea that Canon has had a coherent mirrorless technology development based on dual pixel technology.

Having said that, the 6DII sensor decision is baffling to me. Was it a cost decision? Was the original idea to get the 6DII to market before an ADC chip could be ready, but for some reason delays screwed up the timing? Was Canon being Canon and simply ignoring the foreseeable internet firestorm because in their opinion the 6DII sensor was just fine, no matter what DPR was going to say?

I suspect they were producing full frame sensors on two lines simultaneously, one capable of on-dye ADC and one not. Similarly, the newer A7Riii doesn’t have a stacked sensor like the older A9. Both have production overlap despite coming to market at different times, and they require different processes.

i doubt it had anything to do with lines.

DPAF would require pretty tight design rule fabrication with or without ADC's.

Canon has to consider the cost over the lifecycle of the camera, Canon Japan gets very little back in the way to covert manufacturing, QA, parts and materials.

it could very well be just dollars and cents. it's cheaper / faster to make a sensor without ADC than it is with ADC. there's less complexity to the sensor.

I also suspect that the 6D Mark II both had ADC's on sensor anyways, however, a less complex single slope and single stage CDS and to save costs, they simply used that sensor and scaled it to 26mp.

people think that ADC's on chip are what made EXMOR,etc so great, it wasn't. it was the dual stage CDS before and after ADC that reduced the error / thus noise down to next to nothing. ADC's will always have a 1-2 bit error rate and drift depending on temperature, only with increased problems being shoved on a sensor dye. without CDS to remove that ADC error, you get banding, noise and a bunch of other problems.

that's my theory but i'm not about to spend 2000 at chipworks to prove it lol

here's a snippet about EXMOR.
 

Attachments

  • csm_exmor-figure1.jpg
    csm_exmor-figure1.jpg
    41.6 KB · Views: 427

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
rrcphoto said:
I also suspect that the 6D Mark II both had ADC's on sensor anyways, however, a less complex single slope and single stage CDS and to save costs, they simply used that sensor and scaled it to 26mp.

people think that ADC's on chip are what made EXMOR,etc so great, it wasn't. it was the dual stage CDS before and after ADC that reduced the error / thus noise down to next to nothing. ADC's will always have a 1-2 bit error rate and drift depending on temperature, only with increased problems being shoved on a sensor dye. without CDS to remove that ADC error, you get banding, noise and a bunch of other problems.

that's my theory but i'm not about to spend 2000 at chipworks to prove it lol

I'm no EE or chip designer, so as an engineer in another field I feel like a proper hack distilling this down to 'on chip ADC' or 'off chip ADC' sort of terminology, but what you've written doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. ;D

I am referring to the PTP guy describing a straighter DR vs. ISO relationship (aka "on chip ADC", EXMOR, etc.) on the low end vs. the hockey-stick J-curve (aka "off chip", Canon before the change: 5D3 / 6D2 / 70D / 7D2, etc.).

I'll stick with "on-chip ADC" until I hear a better offering.

- A
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-07-13 at 12.09.15 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-07-13 at 12.09.15 PM.png
    91.6 KB · Views: 79

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
fullstop said:
But i really want "AI-AF" to *reliably and precisely* do the job.

Eventually I could see a connected camera with sophisticated processing get the ability to learn subjects for the purposes of AF. Say you're going after birds, you load a module so the camera recognizes and prioritizes bird-shaped things. That's probably a long way off, but not infeasible. A manufacturer could even sell subject-specific modules.

ethanz said:
Don Haines said:
3kramd5 said:
rrcphoto said:
that's my theory but i'm not about to spend 2000 at chipworks to prove it lol

Where’s your forum community spirit? ;D

Just ask Harry.... I'm sure he designed it :)

He would BUY the chip and test it HIMSELF.

Nah, the company he freelances for would buy it and in his spare time he’d use it to develop a cure for all cancerous growth and promise to give it away for free, but then the bossman would squash it and instead he’d get his own helicopter and a few hundred acres of land in Malibu (for which that helicopter would come in handy. Traffic amirite?)
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
ahsanford said:
rrcphoto said:
I also suspect that the 6D Mark II both had ADC's on sensor anyways, however, a less complex single slope and single stage CDS and to save costs, they simply used that sensor and scaled it to 26mp.

people think that ADC's on chip are what made EXMOR,etc so great, it wasn't. it was the dual stage CDS before and after ADC that reduced the error / thus noise down to next to nothing. ADC's will always have a 1-2 bit error rate and drift depending on temperature, only with increased problems being shoved on a sensor dye. without CDS to remove that ADC error, you get banding, noise and a bunch of other problems.

that's my theory but i'm not about to spend 2000 at chipworks to prove it lol

I'm no EE or chip designer, so as an engineer in another field I feel like a proper hack distilling this down to 'on chip ADC' or 'off chip ADC' sort of terminology, but what you've written doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.

except on chip ADC was most likely implemented in the generational leap with the 750D

there's a good case to be made until you have chipworks data, that the 80D was in fact the second generation of ADC on sensor.

this we can determine from actual images of the sensors themselves that Canon supplied.

700D to 750D when through a dramatic pinout change, similar to the 70D to 80D, same as the 5D Mark III to the 5D Mark IV and the 6D to 6D Mark II.

You could state that there's reason to believe that all the latest generation of canon sensors all have ADC's on sensor of some form.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
rrcphoto said:
except on chip ADC was most likely implemented in the generational leap with the 750D

there's a good case to be made until you have chipworks data, that the 80D was in fact the second generation of ADC on sensor.

I never knew that! Has one ever investigated this?

- A
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
ahsanford said:
rrcphoto said:
except on chip ADC was most likely implemented in the generational leap with the 750D

there's a good case to be made until you have chipworks data, that the 80D was in fact the second generation of ADC on sensor.

I never knew that! Has one ever investigated this?

- A

nope because most of them just stick to the ADC is what was done.

however the T6i pinout;

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/dslr/eos-rebel-t6i-ef-s-18-55mm-is-stm

located here more closely matches the 80D than it does the prior analog era chips such as the 70D:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/dslr/eos-70d

atypically the many more pins are generally required for digital on chip

this was all done well before the 80D (T6i was released on April 2015) versus the 80D on Feb 2016.