Canon Asking Select Professionals What They Want in a Mirrorless Camera
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
L
Loswr
Guest
Mikehit said:
It's a long-standing 1-series feature, so it seems Canon thinks it's pretty reliable.
Just to be clear, with evaluative metering the exposure is linked to the AF point, but the rest of the scene is also considered. Only the 1-series cameras can spot meter (where only the spot is considered) at the AF point, all other cameras can spot meter only in the center, so you must meter then AE lock and recompose.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
Thats the one feature I discovered when using the touch panel and live view on my SL2. The exposure adjusted right at the spot I touched. I hadn't noticed it on my 5D MK IV, so I checked it, and it does as well, but it seems to do a better exposure job, so the difference was not so striking.
Most of the time, the feature is not used, but in shooting event an stage photos with lots of light and dark areas, it makes a huge difference.
Upvote
0
Here are my proposals:
1) Make a joint venture with Samsung, take the sensor tech from their NX1 and make it fullframe.
2) Put this sensor in the 1DX Mark III, 5D Mark V and 6D Mark III, there should also be two or 3 mirrorless options on the same level as 5D and 6D. These should be compatible with existing lenses or at least just use a simple adapter to make them fully compatible.
3) Stop crippling lower grade models unneccesarily. The whole lineup should have 4K video, dual pixel AF and AF sensors that are not just cramped in the middle.
4) The 6D models and mirrorless cameras also should be affordable.
5) To separate higher models, give them more megapixels, better processors, faster series capturing, IPX water protection and other premium goodies.
6) Dont rest on the dual pixel pillow and develop features, nobody yet has. Like dual pixel + defocus + depth sensor depthmap calculation which allows to blur backgrounds even better than a smartphone.
=> Lean back and watch how Canon rises to the top again.
1) Make a joint venture with Samsung, take the sensor tech from their NX1 and make it fullframe.
2) Put this sensor in the 1DX Mark III, 5D Mark V and 6D Mark III, there should also be two or 3 mirrorless options on the same level as 5D and 6D. These should be compatible with existing lenses or at least just use a simple adapter to make them fully compatible.
3) Stop crippling lower grade models unneccesarily. The whole lineup should have 4K video, dual pixel AF and AF sensors that are not just cramped in the middle.
4) The 6D models and mirrorless cameras also should be affordable.
5) To separate higher models, give them more megapixels, better processors, faster series capturing, IPX water protection and other premium goodies.
6) Dont rest on the dual pixel pillow and develop features, nobody yet has. Like dual pixel + defocus + depth sensor depthmap calculation which allows to blur backgrounds even better than a smartphone.
=> Lean back and watch how Canon rises to the top again.
Upvote
0
I was hoping that they would have been asking these questions a couple years ago. This means that a pro mirrorless camera is still years away.
Upvote
0
Random Orbits said:
Based on the story that just dropped today here at CR:
http://www.canonrumors.com/bcn-rankings-are-out-canon-continues-to-dominate-dslrs-further-growth-in-mirrorless/
They remain dominant in SLRs and lens sales, and they are #2 in mirrorless... to an m43 company.
Apparently not having FF mirrorless isn't hurting Canon all that much at all.
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
True, but I'd rather Canon take Sony's lunch away. ;D
It doesn't take that much effort/expense to ask your target customer what they want. Incorporating their suggestions in products is a whole different matter. Unfortunately, what questions you ask in marketing affects the answers you get. Hopefully Canon asked enough of the right ones early enough.
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
If I did not have the legacy glass to cloud my judgement and was looking for a mirror less crop camera, I would pick Oly over Canon any day of the week..... better features, better specs, more glass......
I find it to not be a surprise that they are #1 in mirrorless, they are a hard act to follow.
Now as to FF mirrorless..... it’s Sony with a decided lack of competition..... let’s see what happens when Nikon and Canon enter the fray..... Nikon seems to be coming into the battle with a new mount (more lens incompatibility), and I would not be surprised in the least if Canon came in with an EF Mount (140,000,000 lenses in the field) and even using the same old LP-E6 battery. Show me another camera maker where they have kept the same battery over so many cameras and so many years!
Upvote
0
Random Orbits said:
When it comes to the DSLR market they have majored on asking them what would make the camera more enjoyable to use and improve their workflow (whereas Sony have majored on flashy functions).
You can argue how closely the requirements of a pro match the requirements of the general market but it seems to have worked. Whether that same logic will apply to mirrorless we will have to see.
Upvote
0
hne said:
And don't forget the Contax G series. That's a 35mm rangefinder system with very small and very good lenses (by Zeiss) that also have auto focus (however rudimentary). The 45mm f2 is very, very highly regarded, and the thing is pretty small and lightweight. I used to figure the Leicas and other RF lenses like them were small because of no AF. But the Contax proves that wrong. Now, maybe to have modern, very fast and accurate AF for FF does require a larger lens. But I'm not so sure...
Upvote
0
Mikehit said:
And Canon has developed a mirrorless lineup (M series) while maintaining it's profitability, which is no easy feat. Companies that face declining market share/margins are more desperate, and they do riskier things. Sometimes it works (Sony), other times, the company goes out of business. It is hard to keep a company profitable in a competitive market, but it is very easy for management to ruin companies. When the original M first came out, it was ridiculed as a powershot with a removable lens, which it was. Even the Nikon 1 system won higher praise. And now, the Nikon 1 system is basically dead, and Canon has learned from its mistakes and the M series now have really good cameras.
And in hindsight, it would have been nice if Canon got a bunch of pros in the office with a Sony A7 or A7R a few years ago, and asked them what they liked about the mirrorless technology. Low light AF -- DSLRs win, but for tracking eyes or objects, mirrorless can win because they have a lot more AF points. I'm not surprised that Canon asks its target audience for input, I just wish it was initiated earlier when many of us could see the threat that Sony projected years ago.
The original M was a mis-step. They got it right for Japan, but not worldwide. I got the original M for about 300. I just sold it for about 150, and I kept the 22 f/2 lens, so I didn't lose much on it at all. M2 wasn't sold in the USA, and M3 arrived late. I just replaced the M1 and M3 with the M5, and I really like it. It's the first time that the M felt like a Rebel replacement. For a 1 or 5 series replacement, they have to get the design right the first time, and it needs to be better than the existing DSLR technology. Not easy to do, but I think Canon now has most of the pieces in place.
I think that Canon's first FF mirrorless offering should be EF mount to shore up the markets using 6D, 5D and 1D series. Once that is done, they can release a smaller FF mirrorless with a new mount with only a few lenses (a la EF-M) and have an adapter bridge to the rest of the EF family of lenses.
Upvote
0
scyrene said:
It is something of a derived value.
According to the text books (anatomy and forensics), humans are (statistically speaking) proportional. So in general, you will find that people who are tall will have large hands and feet, while those who are short will have smaller hands and feet. Yes, there are exceptions, but broadly speaking, that is what you find.
This URL is the average height by country for adult males and females:
http://www.wecare4eyes.com/averageemployeeheights.htm
So folks in Asia are a bit shorter than those of us in the West, and thus have smaller hands. Ergo, it is not unreasonable to assume they would prefer smaller cameras.
However, having said that, finger length does not track so cleanly:
http://www.handresearch.com/diagnostics/finger-length-around-the-world-international-populations.htm
While hand span does seem to:
http://www.smallpianokeyboards.org/hand-span-data.html
All of which further complicates things. Narrow hands with long fingers will find one layout appealing, while wider hands with short(er) fingers will prefer something else. And how far your fingers will spread will of course also affect how you like your grip.
All of which again is going to result in different populations preferring different size cameras.
I am certain that Canon has in house research detailing all of this, which no doubt factors into their designs.
Upvote
0
Whether you want a big, medium or small camera is not just about hand size. It has a lot to do with how and when you use and carry your camera. I have small hands and can easily hold and use the M5. But I also owned the 6D for years and had no trouble holding and using that camera. But, in the end, I sold it. Mainly, the weight became far more important than the size -especially when carrying a bag with camera and two or three lenses for extended periods of time. For me, weight is still far more important than size. I also found that most times I had the camera, I also had my dog on a leash. So, with just the camera and attached lens, the 6D was far to big, heavy and cumbersome to take with me. I also own a hip camera bag that can hold an M5 or my Olympus E-M1, but would not be big enough for a FF DSLR. As this is the most convenient bag I own for taking the camera and the dog, it plays a part in deciding what size camera I would be looking at getting. Hand size ends up having little or nothing to do with it.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
