Canon Full Frame Mirrorless [CR2]

[unfocused]

I still don't get why people that are happy with the status quo and current Canon products waste their time in a forum that obviously is all about future Canon products with obviously changed or additional features.

Because some people are grounded in reality. They recognize that the quality of even the least expensive DSLRs available today are vastly superior to what was available just a few years ago. They therefore don't feel the urge to rant and rave because Canon isn't making the exact toy they want. They also might find it amusing that some people so desperately need to find flaws in everything that they go to extremes to find "defects" that are at best questionable and at worst non-existent. Many people also enjoy speculating about what the future might hold, even if they are basically satisfied living in the present.

I still don't get why people who are unhappy with the status quo and current Canon products waste their time in a forum that obviously has no impact on the product development decisions that Canon has and will be making.

Because it's not about actually effecting any change or even affecting any decisions, it's about being generally dissatisfied with their lot in life and thinking that a thing will make it all better. Or more accurately, largely insignificant changes in things will make it all better.

The arguments are so bitter because the stakes are so low.

 

[ahsanford]

Just curious: what enthusiastically sought-after new features have been implemented in the short-term?

• Sony-level DR? No
• FF mirrorless? No, and apparently not for a year or more.
• Video / liveview features (e.g. zebras, focus peaking)? No
• Specific lenses? No
• Hybrid viewfinder? No
• Multiple card slots in all prosumer cameras? No
• Specific feature mix / price-point? No
  

If they're watching, it's only for comedy value.

Well doi. AvTvM told us why all those No's on your list happened...



- A

 

[hubie]

Taking the mirror out of the equation, EF and EF-S are the same (same flange distance & radius, and same electronics), except EF-S are made for smaller sensors.

So how is an EF-S mount an option?

Do all EF-S lenses have an image circle that covers a FF sensor, and Canon will make some trick to prevent EF lenses from being mounted on mirrorless FF bodies?

So a lens that doesn't work properly with ff you would consider the same (even though its the same mount) just because the flange distance is the same? Only in some focal ranges they work, sometimes with heavy vignetting only.

Another lens mount for ff mirrorless is not acceptable to me, too. How much money is wasted just for the body alone? Well, I would still be happy with a good 6D mk ii approach anyway .

 

[drob]

Why is full frame mirrorless such a wanted product? Sony has shown that as soon as you start mounting pro level glass on it the size factor is NOT an advantage anymore. I'd just be happy with a DSLR that is competitive and innovative at a good price point.

 

[Mikehit]

I still don't get why people that are happy with the status quo and current Canon products waste their time in a forum that obviously is all about future Canon products with obviously changed or additional features.

I don't see why some people cannot understand that the realists among us are happy with the status quo but would be wow'ed by a Rebel-sized version of the 1Dx2 (without compromising weather-sealing), a camera that recorded 25hours of full frame 4k video (battery permitting), allowed multi-platform lenses, switchable OVF/EVF, all at a cost of 6,000 bucks.
The only difference between them and you is that they don't whine like a kid whose Christmas has been spoiled and predict the downfall of the Evil Empire Conspiracy because the final product is not what you want. But then again by your own admission no-one makes the product you want which sort of gives a hint why Canon haven't made it.

 

[David Littleboy]

Why is full frame mirrorless such a wanted product? Sony has shown that as soon as you start mounting pro level glass on it the size factor is NOT an advantage anymore. I'd just be happy with a DSLR that is competitive and innovative at a good price point.

Because you get things like the Cosina 10mm f.5.6 lens. Because some other lenses (e.g. 16-35, 24-105) could be made (somewhat) better, lighter, and cheaper. And because it could be lighter and easier to use. It wouldn't necessarily replace the DSLR, but it could be a nice complement. But you need a new mount with a 15mm flange distance.

(And you don't have to flap a stupid mirror ridiculously in bust mode.)

For the nonce, the M5's 11-22 and 18-55mm lenses are insanely tiny and (apparently) quite good. The latter is cheap as all getout (it was US$120 or so here), and according to Canon's (calculated) MTF charts, one of the better normal lenses for APS-C. If Canon could do for full frame what the M5 does for APS-C, many of us would be happy campers.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Why is full frame mirrorless such a wanted product?

What makes you think it is? Outside of AvTvM's head, and his utterly unsupported claims of the 'millions of buyers clamoring for it', there's really no evidence for a huge demand.

 

[Antono Refa]

Why is full frame mirrorless such a wanted product? Sony has shown that as soon as you start mounting pro level glass on it the size factor is NOT an advantage anymore. I'd just be happy with a DSLR that is competitive and innovative at a good price point.

Because you get things like the Cosina 10mm f.5.6 lens.

Its a cool lens, but how many copies does it sell?

 

[drob]

Why is full frame mirrorless such a wanted product?

What makes you think it is? Outside of AvTvM's head, and his utterly unsupported claims of the 'millions of buyers clamoring for it', there's really no evidence for a huge demand.

Seems like the thread suggests it. It would be cool as mirrorless are fun but honestly I'd rather just have a DSLR that improves on sensor tech and other up to date user improvements.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Why is full frame mirrorless such a wanted product?

What makes you think it is? Outside of AvTvM's head, and his utterly unsupported claims of the 'millions of buyers clamoring for it', there's really no evidence for a huge demand.

Seems like the thread suggests it. It would be cool as mirrorless are fun but honestly I'd rather just have a DSLR that improves on sensor tech and other up to date user improvements.

This thread is a CR2 rumor. There was a CR2 rumor about the imminent release of the 100-400 II...in 2010. That release happened...four years later.

 

[Ozarker]

Biggest draw to mirrorless for me is the size reduction... I would not be opposed to a ff mirrorless with some sort of new mount with L equivilent lenses.. Not sure how they could get L glass quality in a smaller package though

And that's the rub, at full frame sensor size, once you factor in the lens (assuming fast L glass and not say the shorty forty) the size/weight savings on the body become pretty much negligible. I think you need to drop down to APS-C to really appreciate a size savings by moving to a mirrorless system.

People who claim a size and weight advantage have never actually compared size and weight.

It is something they read on a forum, it sounds good to them, so they just parrot the mantra.

https://photographylife.com/the-mirrorless-hype

The Sony must be a joy to hold. It looks like an ergonomic nightmare to me.

If Canon comes to market with a FF mirrorless camera it will have good ergonomics and actually have users who want to use the native lenses. Watch out metabones! Well, metabones will be okay. Sony users will still need the adapters.

 

[ahsanford]

The Sony must be a joy to hold.

Those new G Master lenses are massive, I agree. The A7 flange distance is never going to change, but I could see a much chunkier grip body come down the pike before too long.

- A

 

[Ozarker]

no matter what rumors say ... there WILL HAVE To BE a new native mirrorless FF mount. Anything else makes no sense. Simple reason: long EF-mount does not allow for small mirrorless cameras. Market for small(er) camera bodies is much larger than market segment wanting big, fat cameras.

So yes, for a short transitional period there will be 4 Canon lens mounts, but within 5 years there will only be 2 left: EF-M (APS-C) and "EF-X" (FF). EF-S will be phased out first, EF will be maintained longer, especially for those lenses where short flange distance does not bring any optical and/or size advantages (e.g. tele lenses).

And yes, stupid Canon is highly likely to first bring an expensive *fixed lens* FF camera ("rich man's point and shoot"] 4 years after Sony RX-1/R/II. Canon entry will be even more expensive, have a lesser sensor but a better user interface.

All of it just to make us wait an extra 1 or 2 years until we finally get a - hopefully worthwhile - Canon mirrorless FF interchangeable lens camera system. Until then, my Canon purchases will be kept to a minimum. Stupid, Canon!

Blah, blah, blah. Sony's system is small. Blah, blah.

 

[neuroanatomist]

So yes, for a short transitional period there will be 4 Canon lens mounts, but within 5 years there will only be 2 left: EF-M (APS-C) and "EF-X" (FF).

Short transitional period? Like the 12 years during which Canon made both FF dSLRs and 35mm film SLRs?

And you're predicting the death of the dSLR in five years? : ;D : Yeah, that was predicted in 2010. Then in 2011. In 2012. Then in 2013, 2014, and 2015. At the rate the market share is shifting, a 'dead in 5 years' prediction for dSLRs should come true when that prediction is made in about 2026.

 

[rrcphoto]

The Sony must be a joy to hold.

Those new G Master lenses are massive, I agree. The A7 flange distance is never going to change, but I could see a much chunkier grip body come down the pike before too long.

- A

must be a joy to hold as well in that setup with gloves or somewhat thick fingers.

 

[Luds34]

Why is full frame mirrorless such a wanted product?

What makes you think it is? Outside of AvTvM's head, and his utterly unsupported claims of the 'millions of buyers clamoring for it', there's really no evidence for a huge demand.

Seems like the thread suggests it. It would be cool as mirrorless are fun but honestly I'd rather just have a DSLR that improves on sensor tech and other up to date user improvements.

+1 I'm eagerly awaiting the 6D2 next spring. Or I may get stupid and upgrade to a 5D4. Either way, at full frame sizes and the lenses I like to attach, I want the current size camera bodies and please give me an OVF.

Besides seeing current camera settings and such (which you get in both EVF and OVF) the main purpose I use either for is framing/composition of the shot. The WYSIWYG claims many argue just isn't there in any of the EVFs I'm used with colors often not being very accurate, brightness etc.

And shooting outdoors in bright sunlight. The beauty of an OVF is that it's brightness increases proportionally with ambient light. An OVF is very bright on a sunny day, not usually the case for an EVF. Also, I'm usually wearing sun glasses and my personal experiences have had issues at time with the very bright ambient light (reflecting from my sunglasses or coming in from just the correct angle behind me) not triggering the eye sensor and not turning on the EVF as I bring my eye to the viewfinder to take the shot. Obviously there are some less then ideal work arounds, but again, just issues I don't have shooting with a DSLR.

 

[setterguy]

Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless [CR2]- Using a Sony A7

I have been a Canon user for decades and now use a 7DII and a 6D with L glass but have been intrigued with the Sony A7 mirrorless camera. I purchased one about six weeks ago and the experience has been very enlightening. I really spent a significant amount of time trying to fully understand the Sony which will continue be a work in progress. However having just completed almost a month trip to Italy, France and Switzerland I have to admit that the A7 is a fantastic landscape camera. It is beautiful to hold but looses some of that compactness when you match it up with Canon glass. I used a Sigma MC 11 EF-E mount converter which works really well with the Canon fixed and zoom lenses. The real beauty of the camera is its AF capability and the ability with the EVF to actually see what the picture will look like. As you change, F-stop, speed, ISO settings you see the difference in the viewfinder. The smaller foot print takes awhile to get comfortable with but once you use it and switch back to my 6D the camera seems huge. I look for lots of improvement in the months and years ahead with this technology. One major disappointment is no GPS, secondly the battery life is terrible but overall Sony has done an outstanding job and it is directly related to the camera output of fantastic images. I am anxious to see if Canon can approach Sony's present level of technology with the new Mirrorless full frame camera.

 

[j-nord]

I think there are a couple arguments for mirrorless:

1) EVF - for exposure preview and in particular with customizable options of what data to display
2) no mirror can allow for higher fps
3) Size and weight can improve if you are happy to use slower/compact lenses.

I don't think #1 and #2 are technologically at a point where I find them compelling over DSLR, particularly when you factor in some of the current cons to mirrorless such as AF and battery consumption. This technology will definitely improve in the not so distant future but I won't be jumping on any 1st gen FF mirrorless system from Canon.

 

[JP]

The way I see it happening... is in the way the D30 preceded the 1D, after Nikon came out with their D1.. Gosh... remember how the D1 changed the world..? I sure do... Every newspaper bought their staff shooters D1 cameras and Nikon lenses, plus a Tamron 14mm f3.5, and sold their Canon film gear to make it happen... That was because Nikon did their homework, and they took a huge chunk of the professional market away from Canon..........until Canon released the 1D.. slowly, the newspapers dropped their "crappy".. Nikon stuff and switched back to Canon, because Canon had a much better product...

Watch and see what happens with Canon.. I'm guessing from experience, when Canon introduces their FF Mirrorles camera body, it will be significantly better than a Sony (or Nikon) product..

 

[bluenoser1993]

Biggest draw to mirrorless for me is the size reduction... I would not be opposed to a ff mirrorless with some sort of new mount with L equivilent lenses.. Not sure how they could get L glass quality in a smaller package though

And that's the rub, at full frame sensor size, once you factor in the lens (assuming fast L glass and not say the shorty forty) the size/weight savings on the body become pretty much negligible. I think you need to drop down to APS-C to really appreciate a size savings by moving to a mirrorless system.

People who claim a size and weight advantage have never actually compared size and weight.

It is something they read on a forum, it sounds good to them, so they just parrot the mantra.

https://photographylife.com/the-mirrorless-hype

The Sony must be a joy to hold. It looks like an ergonomic nightmare to me.

If Canon comes to market with a FF mirrorless camera it will have good ergonomics and actually have users who want to use the native lenses. Watch out metabones! Well, metabones will be okay. Sony users will still need the adapters.

In the comments after the article it was said that FF has no purpose any longer due to wide angle lenses like the Sigma 8-16mm. Without disputing the image quality of the comparable lenses, I'd have to say a statement like this can't be made until the day comes that someone makes a 10mm tilt-shift for APS-C. The TS-E 17mm is the main driving force behind me wanting to add a FF body to my kit.

I'm no professional, I wouldn't even claim to be the maker of great images, I just enjoy the challenge and process of trying to improve. I don't think it is possible to be so general as people like to be when stating equipment requirements that can satisfy the masses.