We assume that camera manufacturers primarily compete in the technology they bring to market. That's false, however. They compete over market share and profit rates. Brand pride aside, Canon will want to catch up to Sony in order to maintain its market share within the FF IL market. It will eventually need to bring technically competitive mirrorless cameras to market that will replace the 7D, 5D and 1D camera platforms. It will need to achieve this while the market for dedicated cameras shrinks.I strongly suspect that Canon is waiting for a new sensor to debut the Pro R (and that it explains their delay in releasing one). I think they would have released a Pro R already if they thought they could, but with all the flack they got for recycling sensors in the R and RP could you imagine if they did it in an even more expensive camera? I don't think it would fly at all.
I'm reluctant to even bring this up but I did see some idiot on some forum referencing this video as proof that using the adapter introduced focusing errors:Have you seen an account where the EF to RF converters did not work flawlessly?
Canon has 17 months to sort that out. The A9 was Sony's 1st mirrorless full frame sports bodyYes, but Sony does not have the sort of problem with continuous AF and FPS that Canon appears to.
If the mirror movement limits the number of max. frames per second, then why not use the DPAF and take two or three pictures before the mirror moves back again. I think, pros are able to follow a bird or plane with short black out periods.Sure. And what's the difference between the 1DX2's 14 and 16fps modes? The latter can only be done with live view.
Look, if folks love their OVFs I'm not gonna argue with 'em. But the mechanics of articulating a mirror up and down 14 times a second is a huge limiting factor, especially when you think about all the stuff that has to *also* happen when the mirror is up or down (shutter curtains/the actual exposure, metering, focus, etc) and waiting for the damn thing to settle down (the mirror bounces for almost as long as it spends in motion)
Mirrorless removes an insanely complicated optical path and reduces the mechanical complexity at the expense of processing required to work with the increased data off the sensor. If I were designing a camera (and thank god I'm not) I know which problem I'd rather be trying to solve.
I like the way they are proceeding. Others have rushed in to be first and made real turkeys, example the screw drive AF. Canon waited 2 years before they replaced the F-1 with a pro AF camera the EOS 1. Also with digital they came out with other models until they were sure they had most all the boxes checked. They learned this when Nikon came out with the F and they had the R2000. They were destroyed in the pro realm until the EOS 1 was introduced and then they literally wiped the floor with Nikon and all others.You've made a good point here. No one in their right mind will replace a 1DxII with something that's not as competent. So the Rf Pro (1Dr?) would need to be sufficiently better for a working pro to chop in their great whites and Pro DSLR's. Canon can't make a half baked Pro Rf...they have to literally knock it out of the park and into orbit to generate the competitive need to chop formats. I'm guessing Canon already have worked that out and are waiting until they have cracked that particular nut in a major way....in the mean time...oh...here's an Rp...it's very nice...
The card is a minuscule cost compared to a 6,000 dollar camera. CFast is a dead format. But they might do it as you say as the last gasp for the CFast and the likely last Pro DSLR they make. But if they want to really bring out hyper fast shooting or FF 4K at 120p in this new pro camera the CFexpress would make more sense.Makes no sense at all if Canon is not part of that association, and CFast does the job for now anyway, and existing users will not want to switch cards yet again.
How does the Sony a9 do overall as a pro level camera? There is more than just being fast.Sony appears to have done that with their A9. Canon has at least 2 more RF bodies to release within 17 months.
I believe it is not the size nor the being mirrorless per se.And why is that, if I may ask?
What is it about mirrorless technology that makes it so much superior to a DSLR, for the 1D series?
A camera is a tool, just like a hammer. Are you gonna get rid of the black hammers because the red ones look better ...and have better DR..., even if they aren't any lighter or more durable?
I can see some benefits for the lower tier cameras, especially silent shutter for concerts, weddings, etc, but who the hell cares about the mirror slapping on a stadium with thousands of people yelling from their guts?
Camera size? No difference, and if there is one, that would be a mistake from Canon. Just image an A9 with a 600mm lens; just ridiculous!
Camera weight? Same as above.
EVF instead of OVF; which one would you prefer to use for a long time, like a couple of hours?
WYSIWYG? Pro's know better than that; they don't need to see the picture before they take it. Especially for night sport events, it's all a compromise and the exposure triangle is set in stone: 1/1000s, F/2.8, ISO 3200 or 6400, give or take.
In harsh conditions the woolly mammoths will survive while the butt-naked elephants will not
Actually Sony struggles with AF in video compared to Canon's DPAF.Yes, but Sony does not have the sort of problem with continuous AF and FPS that Canon appears to.
A bird photographer friend of mine sold his 1DX2 for an A9 to match with his Canon 600 Series 2 lens. He's very happy with it and is not looking at moving back to DSLR.How does the Sony a9 do overall as a pro level camera? There is more than just being fast.
Durability, long lenses, ie 600mm, 800mm, Ease of use including menus, and other checklist items that Canon and Nikon have that Sony completely lacks to this date.
Consumer/enthusiast/pixel peepers bells and whistles do not seem to be major factors to actual working pros around the world.
Because as of now, continuous DPAF + Live View (including EVF view) throughput is much bigger a bottleneck that the mirror. The 1DX2 does NOT have Servo autofocus in Live View! The 16fps figure is with AF locked.If the mirror movement limits the number of max. frames per second, then why not use the DPAF and take two or three pictures before the mirror moves back again. I think, pros are able to follow a bird or plane with short black out periods.
14 fps in classic mode, 28 with DPAF support.
Spot on.It is comical that people in here think we who shoot professionally just go out and buy new shit at the drop of a hat or announcement. I shoot professional motocross and road racing, I work with people and magazines that supply and use 1dmkiv’s, 1dx mki’s, 300mm version ones and all sorts of old gear still. I use my 1dxmkii and a 1dc, for me and those like me to say I’m going to get rid of allllll my super telephotos and these two bodies that work perfectly for a few mega pixels or new mount with no proven reliability are high. I do video as well and I have a c200 for that, it will take something ungodly drastic to get me to replace my 1dxmkii and 1dc. If it is not getting me more money, then there is no reason to purchase. We want a big bulky durable camera that can get drenched, dropped, and beaten,familiar grip and button layout and not some lightweight camera that doesn’t balance out our super telephotos with terrrible ergonomics. Mega pixels will not make me or other professionals think we should get this new camera but if improved autofocus and 10bit internally recorded video to Cfast is a thing then yes we professionals will consider. I like Cfast, I like it a lot, and 2 Cfast slots would be nice but one is still fine, having a 1tb Cfast makes having a second slot close to moot. The 1dxmkii is an incredible and reliable camera, it will be hard to beat.