Canon Full Frame Mirrorless is Definitely Coming, and The Wait Won't Be as Long as We Thought

[TAF]

I'm curious to see if they run a dual release, a mirrorless version and a mirrored version of the next 5d, biggest difference would be the evf vs ovf. Most of the other features could be matched, and that'd keep a foot on each side if the line

Wouldn't it be a hoot if they released a 5DV and a 5DVm simultaneously, at the same price point? The m would have some additional features that are only possible with mirrorless (is there anything that a mirrored camera can do that a mirrorless cannot?), but would otherwise be identical.

That would be ht ultimate market survey!

 

[3kramd5]

(is there anything that a mirrored camera can do that a mirrorless cannot?)

Yes, everything involving the OVF.

 

[privatebydesign]

I am one not to wait till next year and anticipate what will be coming and whether my L lens will be good on this Canon FF mirrorless. My 60D is about to retire and vacation is on the horizon.
Remember not too long ago alot of anticipation went into 6D mk ii but it was a let down. While the filed tests are in progress on the Sony A7iii, I will spend the $2000 when it is available. Compare to 6D mk ii in terms of pricing and specs .. it's a no brainer.

So tell us about the letdown, when YOU used the 6D2 how did it let you down? Or, do you mean by internet camera YouTube pundits? Really, this is tiring. The reality of the 6D2 is that people reading about it bash it and users and owners love it.

I've noticed the 6D MkII is having a bit of a renaissance lately with several high profile YouTubers and social media types now saying it has an excellent combination of features for high end vlogging. FF, touch screen, tilt flip screen, Canon colors etc etc, they are beginning to pass up on the 4k as it takes so much time and storage space and few people end up viewing it anyway due to transmission limitations.

It could be a very savvy marketing ploy by Canon but it does tick a lot of boxes for a lot of people.

 

[ahsanford]

(is there anything that a mirrored camera can do that a mirrorless cannot?)

If you strip away the major design/system decisions (grip, mount, form factor) that lead to mirrorless looking/feeling different than SLRs and just focus on the core photo taking ability, the differences are significant but (in my mind) fairly small in number. If an identical mount / grip / form factor mirrorless rig and SLR were offered side by side, my 'SLR wins' column is as follows:

• The VF doesn't require (much) power to use --> far better battery life (unless you're shooting in LiveView all day)
• The detail/reality/feel of the VF is better
• The OVF and AF feels more present and responsive

And, this last bit being more commentary than a hard truth, but SLR users know what they'll be getting. The core SLR technology has been mastered over countless product iterations; in comparison, the components of mirrorless are all understood but they simply don't have the system flight hours logged that SLRs do. So SLR users generally get a highly consistent user experience, where it's amazing to read mirrorless system reviews and Company A has a wretched EVF, Company B still hasn't figured out focus peaking, Company C doesn't understand the basic ergonomic realities of the size of the human hand, etc. -- you just never hear that stuff for an SLR. Folks are just angry/happy at feature set, AF and IQ.

That's not to say mirrorless is clearly second fiddle. It's not. It just shines in other ways. Whether one is better than the other depends on your needs.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

I've noticed the 6D MkII is having a bit of a renaissance lately with several high profile YouTubers and social media types now saying it has an excellent combination of features for high end vlogging. FF, touch screen, tilt flip screen, Canon colors etc etc, they are beginning to pass up on the 4k as it takes so much time and storage space and few people end up viewing it anyway due to transmission limitations.

It could be a very savvy marketing ploy by Canon but it does tick a lot of boxes for a lot of people.

Stills: The 6D1 userbase had a good swath of amateur landscapers who didn't need 1-series or 5-series feature sets. So for that camp to not get on-chip ADC is still a slap in the face to me. I'm rarely critical of Canon -- not an apologist so much as respectful that there's some savvy marketeers at work -- but I truly think they laid an egg on that single decision.

Video: No 4K is a letdown, but even if 4K happened, it probably would have gotten heavily shackled (huge crop, limited codec/bitrate options, etc). I know it's a big deal for some people, but they are welcome to find other cameras with tilty-flippy and DPAF and 4K (good luck with that).

But other than those two things, it's a compelling user experience: FF sensor + tilty-flippy + touchscreen + DPAF + Canon ergonomics/reliability + native connectivity to EF is a powerful value proposition.

- A

 

[neuroanatomist]

The VF doesn't require power to use --> far better battery life (unless you're shooting in LiveView all day)

Just to be pedantic, with most current higher-end Canon cameras (i.e. ones with a transmissive LCD) that's technically not true. While it doesn't require much power, it still requires some...and draws it whether the camera is powered on or not. If you haven't tried it, look through the VF with the camera powered off, then pull the battery and look through the VF again.

 

[ahsanford]

The VF doesn't require power to use --> far better battery life (unless you're shooting in LiveView all day)

Just to be pedantic, with most current higher-end Canon cameras (i.e. ones with a transmissive LCD) that's technically not true. While it doesn't require much power, it still requires some...and draws it whether the camera is powered on or not. If you haven't tried it, look through the VF with the camera powered off, then pull the battery and look through the VF again.

I knew someone would call me on the transmissive bit. You got me.

Updated.

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

I've noticed the 6D MkII is having a bit of a renaissance lately with several high profile YouTubers and social media types now saying it has an excellent combination of features for high end vlogging. FF, touch screen, tilt flip screen, Canon colors etc etc, they are beginning to pass up on the 4k as it takes so much time and storage space and few people end up viewing it anyway due to transmission limitations.

It could be a very savvy marketing ploy by Canon but it does tick a lot of boxes for a lot of people.

Stills: The 6D1 userbase had a good swath of amateur landscapers who didn't need 1-series or 5-series feature sets. So for that camp to not get on-chip ADC is still a slap in the face to me. I'm rarely critical of Canon -- not an apologist so much as respectful that there's some savvy marketeers at work -- but I truly think they laid an egg on that single decision.

Video: No 4K is a letdown, but even if 4K happened, it probably would have gotten heavily shackled (huge crop, limited codec/bitrate options, etc). I know it's a big deal for some people, but they are welcome to find other cameras with tilty-flippy and DPAF and 4K (good luck with that).

But other than those two things, it's a compelling user experience: FF sensor + tilty-flippy + touchscreen + DPAF + Canon ergonomics/reliability + native connectivity to EF is a powerful value proposition.

- A

To your first point, you make an unsubstantiated assumption that the MkI owners automatically make up a significant number of the MkII expected sales. I don't think that is true, even the 1 and 5 series user base has traditionally skipped generations, so even if market research showed 6D buyers not moving up to the 5 series then the number of 6D MkI users going to a 6D MkII, whatever the improvements, is not significant enough to try to target them.

 

[ahsanford]

To your first point, you make an unsubstantiated assumption that the MkI owners automatically make up a significant number of the MkII expected sales. I don't think that is true, even the 1 and 5 series user base has traditionally skipped generations, so even if market research showed 6D buyers not moving up to the 5 series then the number of 6D MkI users going to a 6D MkII, whatever the improvements, is not significant enough to try to target them.

Fair, but that doesn't mean Canon completely disregards who is using that platform today when they design the next version. 6D1 users absolutely are part of the target market of the 6D2.

Also, 'try to target them' implies on-chip ADC would be an exxxxxtra special carrot to lure them into buying a 6D2. I think if you ask most any person here, on-chip ADC wasn't remotely a 50-50 'we might get it' sort of offering -- it was a stone cold expectation in 2017. I still find it a fairly shocking omission from that product in that regard.

But you make a very fair point: sequels are hardly aimed at just their current userbase. 80D users who love their on-chip ADC sensor and were considering a jump up to a 6D2 would probably have been p---ed about this decision as well.

- A

 

[Talys]

The VF doesn't require power to use --> far better battery life (unless you're shooting in LiveView all day)

Just to be pedantic, with most current higher-end Canon cameras (i.e. ones with a transmissive LCD) that's technically not true. While it doesn't require much power, it still requires some...and draws it whether the camera is powered on or not. If you haven't tried it, look through the VF with the camera powered off, then pull the battery and look through the VF again.

I knew someone would call me on the transmissive bit. You got me.

Updated.

- A

There is a very practical difference, however, to me as a bird-in-flight photographer.

Whether a Canon is on, off, or in sleep, as I bring it to my eye I see what's through the viewfinder, and I can position my lens to allow autofocus to do its job.

On the other hand, even if a mirrorless is on, the viewfinder is not powered unless I bring my eye close to it. As I'm settling in to take the shot, there are precious fractions of a second lost. If it's in sleep or just turned on, the blackout period is longer. Half or a third of a second doesn't feel like much, but every moment counts.

If Canon were to make a professional mirrorless, I hope that there is a High Performance mode, where the EVF is constantly powered. Yes, I would hate the battery draw, and I don't relish requiring 4 batteries for an afternoon. However, I hate missing shots even more.

 

[ahsanford]

On the other hand, even if a mirrorless is on, the viewfinder is not powered unless I bring my eye close to it. As I'm settling in to take the shot, there are precious fractions of a second lost. If it's in sleep or just turned on, the blackout period is longer. Half or a third of a second doesn't feel like much, but every moment counts.

If Canon were to make a professional mirrorless, I hope that there is a High Performance mode, where the EVF is constantly powered. Yes, I would hate the battery draw, and I don't relish requiring 4 batteries for an afternoon. However, I hate missing shots even more.

+1. People talk about 'responsiveness of an EVF' and we get into a coarse discussion of lag that only skims the top of the need. Folks who capture action have really high expectations of responsiveness, and that includes EVF wake up time, lag, refresh rate, blackout time during burst shooting, etc.

So as much as I was surprised at how few things made my list of what an SLR does definitively better than a same mount / same form factor / same spec'd mirrorless setup, those things are absolutely vital to some folks. They are not small considerations.

- A

 

[Talys]

(is there anything that a mirrored camera can do that a mirrorless cannot?)

Yes, everything involving the OVF.

And more. These come to mind --

1. Autofocus effectively in poor light.
2. Autofocus effectively using flash illuminators
3. Constantly provide an image to the viewfinder, even when it's not right against your eye *
4. Last a full day of shooting on a single battery

* It's possible, but it isn't available in any camera I'm aware of -- probably because battery life would then be miserable.

 

[ahsanford]

1. Autofocus effectively in poor light.

Sure, agree -- but I am also intrigued to amplify light with an EVF and use any AF lens as an MF lens with focus peaking in really dark environments.

That could possibly net in-focus shots that an OVF without a focusing screen (i.e. the vast majority of our SLRs) could not reel in, like -5 EV or worse. Have any mirrorless owners tried something like this before?

Don't get me wrong, it wouldn't be quick, reliable or fun to do. But it could reel in some shots an SLR could not.

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

To your first point, you make an unsubstantiated assumption that the MkI owners automatically make up a significant number of the MkII expected sales. I don't think that is true, even the 1 and 5 series user base has traditionally skipped generations, so even if market research showed 6D buyers not moving up to the 5 series then the number of 6D MkI users going to a 6D MkII, whatever the improvements, is not significant enough to try to target them.

Fair, but that doesn't mean Canon completely disregards who is using that platform today when they design the next version. 6D1 users absolutely are part of the target market of the 6D2.

Also, 'try to target them' implies on-chip ADC would be an exxxxxtra special carrot to lure them into buying a 6D2. I think if you ask most any person here, on-chip ADC wasn't remotely a 50-50 'we might get it' sort of offering -- it was a stone cold expectation in 2017. I still find it a fairly shocking omission from that product in that regard.

But you make a very fair point: sequels are hardly aimed at just their current userbase. 80D users who love their on-chip ADC sensor and were considering a 6D2 would probably have been p---ed about this decision as well.

- A

I'm not saying Canon don't make mistakes, I am saying most of our assumptions are probably unfounded and inaccurate, which means assumptions based on those assumptions will almost certainly be even further from a fact based observation.

We don't know what the 5D MkII sales were against projections even though many people said the AF not getting upgraded was a let down. We don't know what the 6D MkII sales have been against projections so we don't even know if Canon did a good job or not! But, considering the B&H price is only $100 off launch price and CPW deals are not yielding 15% off launch price I don't see any signs of fire sale or distress pricing which leads me to think that maybe Canon are pretty comfortable with their 6D MkII feature set. I think we can be pretty sure they have the margins in it to win an aggressive price war with Sony against the A7III if they wanted to.

All of which ends up creating the biggest question, apart from the small group of forum warriors, and worriers, who is to say what the mistakes are that Canon make and how meaningful they are? If you never know the benchmark they set themselves you can never know if they hit it, or not!

 

[neuroanatomist]

That could possibly net in-focus shots that an OVF without a focusing screen (i.e. the vast majority of our SLRs) could not reel in, like -5 EV or worse. Have any mirrorless owners tried something like this before?

An example of -5 EV is 1/15 s, f/1.4, ISO 102400 – do you honestly think such a shot would be one you'd keep? Ok, if it was of Elvis and Bigfoot in flagrante delicto in a coal mine, maybe...but otherwise?

The only utility I see for that is if lighting a nearly-black scene with flash in the absense of an on-board AF assist lamp (e.g. using Canon's RT system with an ST-E3-RT in the hotshoe – and in that case, I'd put a 600EX-RT on the camera for the AF assist, without the flash firing if I wanted all the light to come from off-camera strobes).

 

[ahsanford]

An example of -5 EV is 1/15 s, f/1.4, ISO 102400 – do you honestly think such a shot would be one you'd keep? Ok, if it was of Elvis and Bigfoot in flagrante delicto in a coal mine, maybe...but otherwise?

The only utility I see for that is if lighting a nearly-black scene with flash in the absense of an on-board AF assist lamp (e.g. using Canon's RT system with an ST-E3-RT in the hotshoe – and in that case, I'd put a 600EX-RT on the camera for the AF assist, without the flash firing if I wanted all the light to come from off-camera strobes).

-5EV would be more of a parlour trick, I admit, but it has come up in less extreme situations.

My venerable 50 f/1.4 USM (and I'm sure other older lenses) would actually be usable in dimly lit rooms, concert venues, etc. as I could override the AF and use peaking. That would honestly be useful to me.

- A

 

[Talys]

1. Autofocus effectively in poor light.

Sure, agree -- but I am also intrigued to amplify light with an EVF and use any AF lens as an MF lens with focus peaking in really dark environments.

That could possibly net in-focus shots that an OVF without a focusing screen (i.e. the vast majority of our SLRs) could not reel in, like -5 EV or worse. Have any mirrorless owners tried something like this before?

Don't get me wrong, it wouldn't be quick, reliable or fun to do. But it could reel in some shots an SLR could not.

- A

Oh, there are plenty of things to love about mirrorless too; don't get me wrong.

I think focus magnification is at the top of my list of likes. It makes manual focus, and even supported autofocus very accurate.

I have mixed feelings about light amplification. It looks and works great when the room is dim, but frankly, I can see with an OVF anyways, and autofocus with an AF illuminator works perfectly from a DSLR. Things like focus peaking work much worse without good light, by the way. Right about when I'd start to really want light amplification, image is extremely grainy and not very easy to focus. Plus, focus peaking works only on the very highest contrast edges. Again, I prefer to use a flash illuminator.

I don't have any significant experience with a mirrorless other than the Sony. On the Sony, there is ONE AF illuminator that actually lights up a traditional cross pattern. The other ones, including first party flashes, do not light, except the camera has a red light that pretty much everyone agrees does more harm than good). The cross pattern will actually light up for as long as it takes for the lens to autofocus. The caveat, however, is that it still takes forever for the lens to autofocus in dim/dark.

My suspicion is that the way mirrorless autofocus using the main sensor is simply different from the AF sensor in DSLRs, so they can't take advantage of quickly autofocusing on the projected pattern as do DSLRs. I don't know the science of it.

Now, I expect that this will improve over time. When mirrorless autofocus works better with flash photography in dark conditions from a practical perspective (strip away cool tech; I just want to take photos that are composed right and in-focus), I will be much more receptive.

The only utility I see for that is if lighting a nearly-black scene with flash in the absense of an on-board AF assist lamp (e.g. using Canon's RT system with an ST-E3-RT in the hotshoe – and in that case, I'd put a 600EX-RT on the camera for the AF assist, without the flash firing if I wanted all the light to come from off-camera strobes).

Just use the Yongnuo E3-RT It has an AF illuminator, and it works with first-party Canon flashes

I'm up to owing FOUR of those controllers, now, lol.

 

[djkraq]

Seeing how the new C700 Full Frame was just now released, I feel pretty comfortable that the new Canon Mirrorless will be EF Mount. Is this a good thing? I think yes. I don't use and don't care about adapted lenses. If I can only use Canon mount lenses, I'm ok with that. I have no reason to put a Sony lens on my Canon body. I think this is an awesome move for Canon if they are going this route. I really hope they keep the size of the 5D series and add more electronics such as IBIS or something like it.

As I said earlier, it seems like with the release of the C700 FF, Canon seems to be keeping the EF Mount for future FF cameras. No way they be so stupid to create a new system (new FF Mirrorless) just to abandon their newly released cinema committed workhorse.

 

[neuroanatomist]

As I said earlier, it seems like with the release of the C700 FF, Canon seems to be keeping the EF Mount for future FF cameras. No way they be so stupid to create a new system (new FF Mirrorless) just to abandon their newly released cinema committed workhorse.

Will a FF cinema camera actually be an industry 'workhorse'? I'm not sure that's true...

Even if it does become true, the number of FF MILCs sold to consumers will vastly dwarf the number of $33K C700FFs sold, so suggesting that the C700FF reflects the FF MILC mount choice sounds like the tail wagging the dog.

 

[Talys]

Seeing how the new C700 Full Frame was just now released, I feel pretty comfortable that the new Canon Mirrorless will be EF Mount. Is this a good thing? I think yes. I don't use and don't care about adapted lenses. If I can only use Canon mount lenses, I'm ok with that. I have no reason to put a Sony lens on my Canon body. I think this is an awesome move for Canon if they are going this route. I really hope they keep the size of the 5D series and add more electronics such as IBIS or something like it.

As I said earlier, it seems like with the release of the C700 FF, Canon seems to be keeping the EF Mount for future FF cameras. No way they be so stupid to create a new system (new FF Mirrorless) just to abandon their newly released cinema committed workhorse.

Great point. My money is on a ef compatible native mount that supports EFS style recessed lenses for when it makes sense.