Are These The Next Canon Cameras To Be Announced? [CR1]

[Mikehit]

Canapologists ...

Its taken you two incarnations and three years to come up with that? How very clever of you.

I've just come up with a word to describe your diatribes....Canawhiney.

 

[fullstop]

i am here
1. to learn as early as possible what Canon *may* bring next. Yes, I realize it's rumors.
2. because i am a paying Canon customer and like to share what I like and dislike about their products
3. because I have the same right as everybody else to express my opinion and criticize any company's strategies, practices and products
4. definitely not be an "apologist". LOL. Not for Canon, and not a single bit more for Sony, Nikon, Fuji and the 7 sensor dwarfs
5. to take part in more or less founded speculation about where (stills) imaging gear and the market as a whole is going
6. not to troll in the sense that I would write things solely to rile up others. But I don't mind if my opinions often do so.

;D

 

[Don Haines]

just more camera's from a company that many of us are frustrated with yet that frustration is never listened too,

What stops you from buying some other brand, then?

Apparently most of the people who comment on this forum have given up on Canon and, thus, presumably buy other product.

Prior to the news release in respect of the 70~200 2.8L III, most were saying there could not be much to do in order to upgrade a damn fine lens. After the release there were multiple complaints about the lack of change.

It would seem that most are Canon bashers, aka trolls....

I think the majority were still expecting a more significant update, if not optically then in other ways. For example a new feature, a filter window in the hood, updated IS, something. Not just some coatings and a paintjob.

As always, I think we should wait until the tests are in. This lens is already superb. The question of what they needed to do isn’t something we can guess at.

Slight improvements in focus consistency, IS, contrast, flare, etc. All of that can be improved just enough to make the lens noticeably better. Internal changes to the mechanics won’t be advertised in a quick marketing blurb, but can also make a noticeable difference. We don’t need a completely revised optical formula every time. The closer one gets to perfection, the less one can do to improve it further, without a radical re-do, which could bring the price way up.

Notice that the price is just about where it was. I was very surprised to see that. I thought we would be looking down the barrel of $3,000, considering how much more the II was over the I.

It will be interesting to see how the AF speed fares.....

 

[Don Haines]

When people start complaining about niche uses like tethered shooting, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something to be unhappy about.

Bullsh*t.

You may not think it's important, and in fact I stated as such in my message. But for me this isn't a minor complaint, it's a critical application for how I wish to use the camera.

I have no doubt that it would have almost zero commercial loss to Canon if they don't have decent tethering.

And from all accounts the M50 does, so the M5 II should too.

that's actually good news. i didn't know that and went looking for information:

10. Send images to smartphone WHILE shooting through the app or EOS utility
The EOS M50 has the ability to continuously send images to your smartphone while you are shooting. You are then able to see at a glance what you have taken, what is sharp and what can be transferred to social platforms later on. The camera is also the first EOS M-series camera that can also take advantage of Canon’s EOS Utility software, so that you are able to be tethered to a computer and use the large screen of your computer to accurately grab focus and fire the camera. This is great when you are shooting flatlays at home, where the camera is at an awkward position. Nearly all camera functions are available with EOS Utility and you can even fire the shutter from the software as well!

http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2018/eos-m50/eos-m50-listicle.shtml

that was actually important for me as well, because it allows the EOS-M's to be used as pretty much the go-to deep sky astro cameras.

that makes the M5 Mark II by itself a pretty much a mandatory "must upgrade"

My understanding when Magic lantern went hunting for a solution with the original M's and tethering that it was a problem with EOS utility more than the M's themselves. Both sides must have gotten fixed in some of their sub releases for this to work.

I actually don't care about smartphone tethering (not that this isn't important to other people), but tethering to PC using the full desktop application, and being able to set camera exposures and check focus on a laptop is critical to me.

In a heartbeat, I would buy a 1D priced Canon if there were that had wireless tethering that is as fast as today's USB2 tethered speeds. I would probably buy a 5D priced Canon if one came out where the USB tethering to a PC were at similar speeds to UHSII cards (like, 300MB/s using a USB3 tether).

There's times where I will happily take the time to tether to my 15" laptop rather than using the small screen on my phone via wireless. I've got a 15ft usb cord in my kit just for this purpose.
Recently I set up to take a series of sunset shots and took all the shots tethered about 12ft away from my camera sitting in a lawn chair with my laptop on my lap and eating pretzels and having a beer all at the same time! LOL

HA!

I was doing the same thing from my hammock in my gazebo..... while outside the mosquitoes whined..... well, not quite the same thing, no beer and pretzels, I had beer and potato chips.....

 

[Durf]

When people start complaining about niche uses like tethered shooting, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something to be unhappy about.

Bullsh*t.

You may not think it's important, and in fact I stated as such in my message. But for me this isn't a minor complaint, it's a critical application for how I wish to use the camera.

I have no doubt that it would have almost zero commercial loss to Canon if they don't have decent tethering.

And from all accounts the M50 does, so the M5 II should too.

that's actually good news. i didn't know that and went looking for information:

10. Send images to smartphone WHILE shooting through the app or EOS utility
The EOS M50 has the ability to continuously send images to your smartphone while you are shooting. You are then able to see at a glance what you have taken, what is sharp and what can be transferred to social platforms later on. The camera is also the first EOS M-series camera that can also take advantage of Canon’s EOS Utility software, so that you are able to be tethered to a computer and use the large screen of your computer to accurately grab focus and fire the camera. This is great when you are shooting flatlays at home, where the camera is at an awkward position. Nearly all camera functions are available with EOS Utility and you can even fire the shutter from the software as well!

http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2018/eos-m50/eos-m50-listicle.shtml

that was actually important for me as well, because it allows the EOS-M's to be used as pretty much the go-to deep sky astro cameras.

that makes the M5 Mark II by itself a pretty much a mandatory "must upgrade"

My understanding when Magic lantern went hunting for a solution with the original M's and tethering that it was a problem with EOS utility more than the M's themselves. Both sides must have gotten fixed in some of their sub releases for this to work.

I actually don't care about smartphone tethering (not that this isn't important to other people), but tethering to PC using the full desktop application, and being able to set camera exposures and check focus on a laptop is critical to me.

In a heartbeat, I would buy a 1D priced Canon if there were that had wireless tethering that is as fast as today's USB2 tethered speeds. I would probably buy a 5D priced Canon if one came out where the USB tethering to a PC were at similar speeds to UHSII cards (like, 300MB/s using a USB3 tether).

There's times where I will happily take the time to tether to my 15" laptop rather than using the small screen on my phone via wireless. I've got a 15ft usb cord in my kit just for this purpose.
Recently I set up to take a series of sunset shots and took all the shots tethered about 12ft away from my camera sitting in a lawn chair with my laptop on my lap and eating pretzels and having a beer all at the same time! LOL

HA!

I was doing the same thing from my hammock in my gazebo..... while outside the mosquitoes whined..... well, not quite the same thing, no beer and pretzels, I had beer and potato chips.....

Yes, beer goes great with potato chips too!!!

Sometimes it's quite nice to kick back and relax and having a large laptop monitor to dial in settings while taking multiple shots of one subject as the light changes....

I found a 15ft usb cable on amazon for 10 bucks! It sure does come in handy occasionally.

10 bucks well spent!

 

[Mikehit]

i am here
1. to learn as early as possible what Canon *may* bring next. Yes, I realize it's rumors. OK
2. because i am a paying Canon customer and like to share what I like and dislike about their products Fair enough. But you make assumptions about Canon's motives then criticise Canon's actions based on that hypothesis - have you ever heard of the 'straw man' argument? You also use those assumptions to say they don't know what they are doing, but they clearly do or they would stay as the number one for so long -that is not to say they are doing everything right but it means they are doing more things right than they are doing wrong. And you also ciriticise them based on your narrow egotistical view of what Canon should be giving to you personally - and instead of admitting that you take the line that you speak for untold millions.
3. because I have the same right as everybody else to express my opinion and criticize any company's strategies, practices and products Yes, you do. But the statments you make to support your POV show a total ignorance of product development and marketing.
4. definitely not be an "apologist". LOL. Not for Canon, and not a single bit more for Sony, Nikon, Fuji and the 7 sensor dwarfs In your case, the opposite of 'apologist' is 'troll'.
5. to take part in more or less founded speculation about where (stills) imaging gear and the market as a whole is going More exactly, you want your view ot be accepted unchallenged.
6. not to troll in the sense that I would write things solely to rile up others. But I don't mind if my opinions often do so. But you do mind. You simply want to be heard without anyone gainsaying you - you refuse to acknowledge when someone has countered your argument and no matter how unfounded or how out of step your comments are with reality if anyone disagrees with you you label them an apologiost or a shill for Canon. How is that not trolling? You aren't interested in debate, merely spouting your myopic views repeatedly

 

[Don Haines]

There's times where I will happily take the time to tether to my 15" laptop rather than using the small screen on my phone via wireless. I've got a 15ft usb cord in my kit just for this purpose.
Recently I set up to take a series of sunset shots and took all the shots tethered about 12ft away from my camera sitting in a lawn chair with my laptop on my lap and eating pretzels and having a beer all at the same time! LOL

HA!

I was doing the same thing from my hammock in my gazebo..... while outside the mosquitoes whined..... well, not quite the same thing, no beer and pretzels, I had beer and potato chips.....

Yes, beer goes great with potato chips too!!!

Sometimes it's quite nice to kick back and relax and having a large laptop monitor to dial in settings while taking multiple shots of one subject as the light changes....

I found a 15ft usb cable on amazon for 10 bucks! It sure does come in handy occasionally.

10 bucks well spent!

I have an "active" 50 foot USB cable which gives me a lot of flexibility. I find that the wireless range of Canon cameras is around ten to 15 feet, so this gets me more range. I have also never connected a phone to the cameras as I find the small size of the screen to make it not worthwhile, but an iPad screen is a whole different story!

 

[Talys]

There's times where I will happily take the time to tether to my 15" laptop rather than using the small screen on my phone via wireless. I've got a 15ft usb cord in my kit just for this purpose.
Recently I set up to take a series of sunset shots and took all the shots tethered about 12ft away from my camera sitting in a lawn chair with my laptop on my lap and eating pretzels and having a beer all at the same time! LOL

HA!

I was doing the same thing from my hammock in my gazebo..... while outside the mosquitoes whined..... well, not quite the same thing, no beer and pretzels, I had beer and potato chips.....

Yes, beer goes great with potato chips too!!!

Sometimes it's quite nice to kick back and relax and having a large laptop monitor to dial in settings while taking multiple shots of one subject as the light changes....

I found a 15ft usb cable on amazon for 10 bucks! It sure does come in handy occasionally.

10 bucks well spent!

I have an "active" 50 foot USB cable which gives me a lot of flexibility. I find that the wireless range of Canon cameras is around ten to 15 feet, so this gets me more range. I have also never connected a phone to the cameras as I find the small size of the screen to make it not worthwhile, but an iPad screen is a whole different story!

Me too, and I use it. Sadly, I sent my 80D, a couple of strobes on stands, and a Microsoft Surface Book flying once when I tripped on the wire, sent everything crashing into everything else

Amazingly, everything still worked afterwards, including the Surface Book, which dropped on the ground hard enough to separate the screen from the base. I would love a super-fast wireless instead of that cable.

 

[neuroanatomist]

i am here

...to be a Canowhiner.

Mikehit definitely nailed it.

 

[cellomaster27]

Face palm......... did I have my hopes up way too much for a FF mirrorless?? wow... I don't like Sony but what other options is there? I want a canon full frame mirrorless!! :'( :'( :'(

 

[Aussie shooter]

Face palm......... did I have my hopes up way too much for a FF mirrorless?? wow... I don't like Sony but what other options is there? I want a canon full frame mirrorless!! :'( :'( :'(

No. Canon will release a FF mirrorless sooner rather than later. As for Options. You could get a Leica. or go all out with something like a GFX 50. Even better than FF. Or just get the Sony.

 

[dak723]

Face palm......... did I have my hopes up way too much for a FF mirrorless?? wow... I don't like Sony but what other options is there? I want a canon full frame mirrorless!! :'( :'( :'(

And you can't wait another year or less? The rumors from the very start were for an announcement by the end of 2018 and release in 2019. A few rumors have mentioned a possible 2018 release.

For heaven's sake, I thought people whining "Are we there yet?" were all under 12.

 

[melgross]

When people start complaining about niche uses like tethered shooting, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something to be unhappy about.

Bullsh*t.

You may not think it's important, and in fact I stated as such in my message. But for me this isn't a minor complaint, it's a critical application for how I wish to use the camera.

I have no doubt that it would have almost zero commercial loss to Canon if they don't have decent tethering.

And from all accounts the M50 does, so the M5 II should too.

I honestly don’t find tethering, for this camera, to be a selling point for 99.99% of the buyers of it.

I’m not saying that I’m against it, just that it isn’t what people are going to be concerned about. You’re one of that small few.

You know the selling points for 99.99% of buyers? Wow, you must know a lot of people!

I know enough people to know that almost none uses tethering. It’s really not that hard to extrapolate out. I get it that when someone wants a feature, they think that a lot of others do.

 

[melgross]

When people start complaining about niche uses like tethered shooting, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something to be unhappy about.

Bullsh*t.

You may not think it's important, and in fact I stated as such in my message. But for me this isn't a minor complaint, it's a critical application for how I wish to use the camera.

I have no doubt that it would have almost zero commercial loss to Canon if they don't have decent tethering.

And from all accounts the M50 does, so the M5 II should too.

And that’s all I’m saying. As I also said that I’m not against the feature either. I didn’t expect this to become so contentious.
I honestly don’t find tethering, for this camera, to be a selling point for 99.99% of the buyers of it.

I’m not saying that I’m against it, just that it isn’t what people are going to be concerned about. You’re one of that small few.

I do wish people actually read what others say before commenting. I said right at the very start that I may be the only person concerned about this (clearly I'm not, but there aren't many of us).

 

[Talys]

When people start complaining about niche uses like tethered shooting, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something to be unhappy about.

Bullsh*t.

You may not think it's important, and in fact I stated as such in my message. But for me this isn't a minor complaint, it's a critical application for how I wish to use the camera.

I have no doubt that it would have almost zero commercial loss to Canon if they don't have decent tethering.

And from all accounts the M50 does, so the M5 II should too.

I honestly don’t find tethering, for this camera, to be a selling point for 99.99% of the buyers of it.

I’m not saying that I’m against it, just that it isn’t what people are going to be concerned about. You’re one of that small few.

You know the selling points for 99.99% of buyers? Wow, you must know a lot of people!

I know enough people to know that almost none uses tethering. It’s really not that hard to extrapolate out. I get it that when someone wants a feature, they think that a lot of others do.

I would be surprised if only 1 user out of a thousand who buy $1k+ cameras ("prosumer") thought tethering was a useful feature.

I think that if the interest were that low, major camera manufacturers wouldn't be ensuring that some form of tethering capability was available for its cameras, and go to the effort of updating the tools to ensure compatibility every time there are major OS version changes that require it.

 

[melgross]

When people start complaining about niche uses like tethered shooting, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something to be unhappy about.

Bullsh*t.

You may not think it's important, and in fact I stated as such in my message. But for me this isn't a minor complaint, it's a critical application for how I wish to use the camera.

I have no doubt that it would have almost zero commercial loss to Canon if they don't have decent tethering.

And from all accounts the M50 does, so the M5 II should too.

I honestly don’t find tethering, for this camera, to be a selling point for 99.99% of the buyers of it.

I’m not saying that I’m against it, just that it isn’t what people are going to be concerned about. You’re one of that small few.

You know the selling points for 99.99% of buyers? Wow, you must know a lot of people!

I know enough people to know that almost none uses tethering. It’s really not that hard to extrapolate out. I get it that when someone wants a feature, they think that a lot of others do.

I would be surprised if only 1 user out of a thousand who buy $1k+ cameras ("prosumer") thought tethering was a useful feature.

I think that if the interest were that low, major camera manufacturers wouldn't be ensuring that some form of tethering capability was available for its cameras, and go to the effort of updating the tools to ensure compatibility every time there are major OS version changes that require it.

Once you put a computer into a product, you’re compelled to just lump more features in. Look at the menus. Pages and pages of mostly useless features. But it costs almost nothing to add them, once it’s just software. So sure, companies add features that almost no one uses, or even knows about - just because...

And tethering just sounds like a cool thing to have.

 

[mb66energy]

Having some Canon glass I am really interested in a new solid body (200D and EOS M are my latest cameras and while fairing well not the most solid kind of bread) since the release of the 5D Mark iii .
At the moment I cannot see really interesting bodies from Canon - M50 seems to be o.k., but the only advantages compared to a 2nd 200D are EVF for some video work and the compatibility to Canon FD lenses.

But after looking at some FF work with the 5D (i) I am longing for the FF look with an updated sensor and full compatibility with my existing lenses + EVF for video + possibility to use older glass.

At the moment (lasting ~ 5 years) Canons product line saves a lot of money for me. Which is there just waiting to be spent.

Because of a missing 50mm lens with good MFD and distance scale I ordered the Yongnuo 1.8 50mm ii lens while waiting for a stabilized 50mm lens from Canon with f/1.4 max aperture. In terms of lenses for me the same situation ....

 

[bwud]

Once you put a computer into a product, you’re compelled to just lump more features in. Look at the menus. Pages and pages of mostly useless features. But it costs almost nothing to add them, once it’s just software.

Hmm.

We make software-defined radio products, developing from the circuit-board level up. The software effort almost always costs more than the hardware effort.

Sure, software is more easily mitigated in mass production due to the low recurring costs, but "almost nothing" is a vast understatement. You have to develop a feature, integrate that feature into the code load, regression test to ensure nothing went wrong with the rest of the code - which it will so then you'll have to trouble shoot and repeat until regression testing passes. It's labor intensive.

 

[Adelino]

When people start complaining about niche uses like tethered shooting, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something to be unhappy about.

Bullsh*t.

You may not think it's important, and in fact I stated as such in my message. But for me this isn't a minor complaint, it's a critical application for how I wish to use the camera.

I have no doubt that it would have almost zero commercial loss to Canon if they don't have decent tethering.

And from all accounts the M50 does, so the M5 II should too.

I honestly don’t find tethering, for this camera, to be a selling point for 99.99% of the buyers of it.

I’m not saying that I’m against it, just that it isn’t what people are going to be concerned about. You’re one of that small few.

You know the selling points for 99.99% of buyers? Wow, you must know a lot of people!

I know enough people to know that almost none uses tethering. It’s really not that hard to extrapolate out. I get it that when someone wants a feature, they think that a lot of others do.

I would be surprised if only 1 user out of a thousand who buy $1k+ cameras ("prosumer") thought tethering was a useful feature.

I think that if the interest were that low, major camera manufacturers wouldn't be ensuring that some form of tethering capability was available for its cameras, and go to the effort of updating the tools to ensure compatibility every time there are major OS version changes that require it.

Once you put a computer into a product, you’re compelled to just lump more features in. Look at the menus. Pages and pages of mostly useless features. But it costs almost nothing to add them, once it’s just software. So sure, companies add features that almost no one uses, or even knows about - just because...

And tethering just sounds like a cool thing to have.

Plus it would be a huge feature for those who do use. But I agree probably very few people use it.

 

[Talys]

... regression test to ensure nothing went wrong with the rest of the code - which it will so then you'll have to trouble shoot and repeat until regression testing passes.

People who aren't in the product/software development industry don't consider regression testing =X

As you add stuff, you need to make sure it doesn't break stuff that's already there and working, and as a product becomes more complex, this becomes more and more time consuming and complicated, both to test and fix. What sometimes sounds very simple to someone unfamiliar with the project may actually add weeks of work.

In a hypothetical world, we like to think of abstraction that allows all of the different parts fit into each other using defined interfaces, and in this universe, you can change/upgrade any subassembly as long as its external interfaces remain unchanged. But in the reality of complex products, this is a fantasy.