Canon EOS Rebel SL2 Coming for CP+ [CR1]

[slclick]

if canon wants to go small, mirrorless with great OV would make a much better impact.

Mirrorless with great EVF, I assume?

Otherwise please enlighten us how this will work with various lenses (like long tele zooms) and how an OVF would be more compact than an EVF ;-)

There are many folks who prefer an OVF to an EVF. So a small, light camera with OVF is exactly what we want. That's why I have a SL1. The SL2 should be also be small and light and have an OFV. Otherwise, if you want an EVF, get an M. If you want larger, get a rebel. If you want it to have all the features of a 70D, get a 70D. The whole purpose of the SL1 is that it is smaller and lighter. Not sure why the folks on here don't get it.

I completely got it but none were available for me to try hands on so I took the chance, bought one and gave it a couple weeks. Size was the determining factor (button layout primarily) for reselling it. I never had any false hopes of the IQ being anywhere near my 5D3 as I read the specs and knew what I was getting into. I just wanted portability, EF lens compatibility and an OVF. I had had the M1 before and found I had to have a VF. YMMV.

 

[Nininini]

I agree, I just want a good small DSLR with OVF.

An SL2+

Around $600

Everything from the SL1, but with
-pentaprism
-minimum shutter speed
-better AF
-weather sealing (come on, those silly rubber rings can't cost much)
-60FPS HD video
-3x lossless zoom for video like the 760D and 70D
-better handling
-small screen on top like the 760D


basically, I want the 70D in SL1 size lol

You won't get a pentaprism in a $600 dollar camera.
And while the silly rubber rings don't cost much, the grooves they fit in do add costs.

Uh, both are wrong. The Pentax k50 has both weather sealing and a pentaprism, and you can find it for $250.

Both these things cost nothing to implement, I have tons of old cameras with pentaprism.

It's just Canon trying to protect their own higher-end camera, of which I'm frankly getting a bit tired.

Crop users are still stuck at 30 FPS HD video, meanwhile sony is releasing crop cameras with 4k video and 120FPS HD video with large EVF viewfinders.

I sure am holding off buying Canon lenses to see where this is going, I'm not going to buy any more Canon lenses until I know what Canon will do in the future. They are quickly falling behind in terms of video and specs.

The SL1 and 1200D hasn't been updated in years, and the 760D is extremely costly for what it is, very outdated specs, 30FPS video, pentamirror, no minimum shutter, no weather sealing, no custom white balance.

Like I said, the SL2 better feature 60FPS HD video or this will be my last canon, I'm not going to keep buying gear with super outdated specs.

 

[applecider]

Keep the sl2 small because that is its niche. It's unreasonable to expect weather sealing like a prosumer camera because it is not. The mirror less line should not have anything to do with the SL line.

Now a better sensor more fps, better autofocus, or even gps and wifi tilt screen, would all be welcome, as long as the weight and size are controlled.

The fugi sensors like in the new 24 MP xpro 2 seem to kick donkey butt and are usable up to 52000. A clean 6400 iso would be welcome for night shooters (stars), here's hoping canon will bring something comparable to play.

 

[nhz]

Uh, both are wrong. The Pentax k50 has both weather sealing and a pentaprism, and you can find it for $250.

Both these things cost nothing to implement, I have tons of old cameras with pentaprism.

It's just Canon trying to protect their own higher-end camera, of which I'm frankly getting a bit tired.

The K50 weights 650 grams (that's a whopping 60% heavier than SL1) and while the viewfinder magnification is better than SL1 (0.92x against 0.87x) it still is a lot less than the current APS-C top models with 1.00x. The introductory price of the K-50 was $700 which is cheaper than SL1 but SL1 prices started slipping very soon after introduction because the initial price was too high for the spec.

I agree that the pentaprism itself isn't a real cost factor, but it sure means increased weight especially if you want good magnification. It's possible in a small/light body (just look at Olympus OM cameras) but it would probably increase the total cost too much - corrected for inflation those OM cameras were way more expensive than the SL1/SL2 nowadays. Same story for weather sealing: it simply means a bigger and heavier camera, not by definition but in practice because this is easier to do in a slightly bigger/heavier camera.

I also agree that Canon may be trying to protect their top models, but they may also think there is insufficient demand for a high spec, small/light body (e.g. a 70D spec camera with the size/weight of SL1). I'm sure it would increase the price and although I will gladly pay more for such a camera, the average buyer probably doesn't want to (looking at how most of Europe and US frowns on small mirrorless cameras compared to chunky DSLRs).

 

[Nininini]

current APS-C top models with 1.00x

no APS-C camera has a 1.00x viewfinder, no full frame camera has one (excluding mirrorless)

go borrow a full frame or APS-C, whatever you're missing, and compare them, full frame have a much larger viewfinder, but still nowhere near 1.00x

http://danny.id.au/photography/equipment/dslr-viewfinder-sizes.html


Pentax K50 has a 0.61x viewfinder, which is more than rebels

 

[Jopa]

What I loved about it was when paired with a 40 pancake it made a great 'you forget you've packed it' dslr. The perfect glovebox camera.

Exactly my thoughts

 

[nhz]

current APS-C top models with 1.00x

no APS-C camera has a 1.00x viewfinder, no full frame camera has one (excluding mirrorless)

go borrow a full frame or APS-C, whatever you're missing, and compare them, full frame have a much larger viewfinder, but still nowhere near 1.00x

http://danny.id.au/photography/equipment/dslr-viewfinder-sizes.html


Pentax K50 has a 0.61x viewfinder, which is more than rebels

It depends on how you define magnification; I referenced the 0.87x and 0.92 values of the SL1 and K50, with this definition APS-C DSLRs like Canon 7D2 have 1.00x magnification (using 50mm lens). This is the definition used by most manufacturers and e.g. DPReview, one can argue about the lower values (in FF terms) but the difference between cameras remains the same.

Fact is, the K50 has slightly more magnification than SL1 and some APS-C cameras like 7D2 have significantly more magnification than K50.

 

[derrald]

What it won't have is AFMA.

 

[ablearcher]

If priced reasonably and not castrated too much in terms of features, I might be interested. This will help to get by for the time being while Canon figures out the mirrorless. With pricing that Sony has for its glass and the size of that glass, I don't see a lot of reasons for myself to add another system (I'm looking for something light for travel). THis might do just fine for travel and casual everyday use.

I bought the SL1 with the same mindset, a stop gap. ...that didn't work out the way I want, so I ended up buying the Sony A6000 and was in initially in love with it. I said... 90% of my work can be done with it. ...then, since that, I have purchased a 6D and 7D mk2. There is no substitute for the big dslr. Having said that, I love the A6000 for it's endless flexibility with adapting to a huge spectrum of lens, of all mounts and makes. I use a Sony LAEA4 for A mount glass and a Contax G metabones adapter for my Zeiss Contax G glass. I will never give up the A6000 for that reason alone. ...as for the SL1, it's my dedicated desktop studio camera for eBay stuff.

Thank you for the post. May I ask what exactly didn't work out with SL1 to the extent that you decided to invest into another system and picked A6000?

Sorry for the delay in responding. When I was looking at the SL1 initially, the primary draw was the size. ...It's smaller, so I'll carry it more and shoot more, and I will accept it's differences from my 7D. When I got it, cool, it was smaller, but AF, FPS, slower, and no improvement in image quality to my 7D, I ended up realizing I couldn't accept it for the reasons I wanted to buy it for. ...so, when I heard about the A6000, and watched all those youtube videos about canon and nikon's dslrs are a thing of the past, and Sony mirrorless cameras are next big thing, blah, blah, blah. ...I fell for it and jumped in.

Thank you for the response, I appreciate this. This does make sense.
All I want from the SL2 (or whatever the name will be) is a better sensor and AF. And a reasonable price, of course. This will be ideal for travel considering I already have the lenses.

 

[whatta]

current APS-C top models with 1.00x

no APS-C camera has a 1.00x viewfinder, no full frame camera has one (excluding mirrorless)

go borrow a full frame or APS-C, whatever you're missing, and compare them, full frame have a much larger viewfinder, but still nowhere near 1.00x

http://danny.id.au/photography/equipment/dslr-viewfinder-sizes.html


Pentax K50 has a 0.61x viewfinder, which is more than rebels

It depends on how you define magnification; I referenced the 0.87x and 0.92 values of the SL1 and K50, with this definition APS-C DSLRs like Canon 7D2 have 1.00x magnification (using 50mm lens). This is the definition used by most manufacturers and e.g. DPReview, one can argue about the lower values (in FF terms) but the difference between cameras remains the same.

Fact is, the K50 has slightly more magnification than SL1 and some APS-C cameras like 7D2 have significantly more magnification than K50.

magnification is very much misleading for smaller sensors.
I found this site very useful for actual comparison (35mm eq):

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-sl1/canon-sl1DAT.HTM
Viewfinder Magnification (35mm equivalent):0.54x
Viewfinder Magnification (nominal/claimed):0.87x
(more or less like my 400d which is very small)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-7d-mark-ii/canon-7d-mark-iiDAT.HTM
Viewfinder Magnification (35mm equivalent):0.63x
Viewfinder Magnification (nominal/claimed):1.00x

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5d-mkiii/canon-5d-mkiiiDAT.HTM
Viewfinder Magnification (35mm equivalent):0.71x
Viewfinder Magnification (nominal/claimed):0.71x

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a6300/sony-a6300DAT.HTM
Viewfinder Magnification (35mm equivalent):0.70x
Viewfinder Magnification (nominal/claimed):1.07x

 

[nhz]

magnification is very much misleading for smaller sensors.
I found this site very useful for actual comparison (35mm eq):

The whole definition is arbitrary - based on 50mm as standard lens, which doesn't make much sense for APS-C but that's how it is defined, and without a universal 'standard lens' focal length for APS-C there is no good alternative. As long as everyone is using the same definition in a comparison there is nothing misleading about it.

But for those who don't understand where the numbers come from, a comparison list with the two different definitions like you quote above can help

 

[nhz]

Am I the only one who prefers a smaller magnification inside the viewfinder?

Probably ;-)

For me the viewfinder magnification can't be high enough (although there probably is a practical limit somewhere above 1.0x where it gets impossible for the average user to view everything). A big (and bright, sharp, undistorted) view is very important for an 'immersive' experience, being in touch with the subject.

If you wear glasses or for other reasons have problems with the eyepoint some compromise may be necessary.

 

[slclick]

Bigger isn't always better

Thank you, the magnification chatter while SOMEWHAT on topic was wearing me down. Back to the supposed SL2....

I would like to see

Same form factor with an improved button/dial/joystick layout and proper back button focusing
Digic 6
A few more AF points
Good ISO to 3200, decent at 6400


What I don't need:

wifi
GPS
Touchscreen
Flip screen
Cutesy colors or white bodies as if I'm shooting in the tundra

 

[Poz]

I agree with applecider and others here - Canon should concentrate on keeping size and mass down, as that is the 'standout feature' for the camera. From my own, admittedly niche, point of view the only advance I'm really keen on is the sensor. It seems obvious that a previously released sensor will get piggy-backed into the new camera, but which one? I imagine that cost will be the primary determining factor, but maybe other things will come into play here.

I can imagine Canon not wanting to close down a production facility for sensors if they reason they can still sell lots of them in a new body, but what do people think - would economics push the other way? Will that mean the sensor is inevitably going to be the one from the current Rebel, or does the 70D sensor get a look in?

 

[nhz]

I agree with applecider and others here - Canon should concentrate on keeping size and mass down, as that is the 'standout feature' for the camera.

The current SL1 is similar size/weight as competiting cameras from e.g. Nikon that do have a tilt screen and many better features. So IMHO Canon either have to make it even lighter and smaller (I guess that would mean ergonomics really down the drain unless there is a radical redesign ... doesn't sound attractive to me but maybe it sells) or add functionality like a tilt screen and better AF while keeping similar size/weight (the 750D/760D is still a significant step up in size/weight).

 

[LonelyBoy]

I can imagine Canon not wanting to close down a production facility for sensors if they reason they can still sell lots of them in a new body, but what do people think - would economics push the other way? Will that mean the sensor is inevitably going to be the one from the current Rebel, or does the 70D sensor get a look in?

The 70D sensor with DPAF will be too expensive. I'd strongly expect the 24mpx Rebel sensor.

 

[Sporgon]

It's possible in a small/light body (just look at Olympus OM cameras) but it would probably increase the total cost too much - corrected for inflation those OM cameras were way more expensive than the SL1/SL2 nowadays.

True about the price. An Olympus OM-1 fully mechanical film camera retailed in the UK in 1976 at £199.99 with a 50 mm f/1.7 lens. Depending on how you calculate it that's in the region of £950 now.

 

[Poz]

Hmm. You know, every day that goes by without an announcement from Canon about the SL2 is bad news - Canon have stopped making the SL1, and they know that the kind of person who bought one of those is probably going to be interested in it's direct replacement. No announcement (or rumour of same) means it is fractionally more likely that there will not be a replacement model - and those who are waiting for an SL2 will start considering the alternatives... :-\

 

[nhz]

Hmm. You know, every day that goes by without an announcement from Canon about the SL2 is bad news - Canon have stopped making the SL1, and they know that the kind of person who bought one of those is probably going to be interested in it's direct replacement. No announcement (or rumour of same) means it is fractionally more likely that there will not be a replacement model - and those who are waiting for an SL2 will start considering the alternatives... :-\

On the other side, for optimists any delay is a sign that Canon takes their time and is going to make bigger changes in the SL2

We should know more by April or so (otherwise SL2 won't be available for the summer season). If not announced by then it becomes more likely that SL1 will be replaced by something else, like a mirrorless alternative.

 

[axtstern]

At least for CP+ we can shelf this rumor...