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

[haggie]

I’m very confident we’re going to see something announced before the end of Q1 in 2019

I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a “development” announcement at Photokina if the camera itself isn’t ready for production

If this turns out to be true dates for Canon's brand new FF mirrorless, what would that mean for the introduction of the 7D Mk III?
Would Canon introduce 2 high-profile (and probably also: high-stake) cameras in the same period/at the same time?

 

[Loswr]

3. Reducing size means reducing ergonomics, battery life, less processing capacity

Some people are OK with this.

Some aren't. The question is, which group will buy more FF MILCs? I don't know the answer, but I suspect Canon has a fairly accurate guess.

It's also important to remember that the numbers in each group may change over time.

Of course. In part, at least, because when Canon releases one form factor, those who would buy one will buy one, directly reducing the number in the 'would buy' camp.

 

[ahsanford]

IMHO, talking about mirrorless reducing size in general does the feature decisions a disservice. Canon could make an A7-thin body with a chunky mount, or they could make a thicker full EF body with a dainty mount grip (typo sorry), or one that's just a hair bigger than a deck of cards from the rear view.

I see Canon as having to make careful decisions about three form factors in particular:

• Grip size and its spacing from the mount --> I think something fairly chunky is best because we are 100% going to mount heavier glass to this thing. As far as spacing goes, ask Sony users -- their grip is comically too close to the mount and fingers don't have enough room with large diameter barrel GM lenses attached. That A7/A9 grip is the photography equivalent of flying in coach. Also: chunkier grip = bigger battery and a greater likelihood we get the top display we love on our nicer SLR bodies.
  
  
• Body thickness front to back --> this is principally about the mount depth needed. But if Canon chose full EF, they still could put parts of the body on a diet as they don't need room for a pentaprism, mirror box, etc. See the odd but understandable Sigma mirrorless system which employs 'lens tube' sort of approach to space the lens appropriately far enough away from the sensor.
  
  
• Footprint of the back of the camera (i.e. the height and width when looking at the LCD side) --> Canon went amazingly small here with the first EOS M models, but as many have pointed out, these had P&S powershot ergononomics, not what you want in a proper camera. I hope Canon is not 'different for different sake' here and does with some touchscreen-heavy interface -- I hope we get a joystick and control wheel for seamlessness with our SLRs when we're shooting with two bodies.

My vote? Full sized grip + [whatever the mount decision needs, thin or EF, I don't care] + Full form factor in the back for proper 5D-like controls. So make it 5D-like or (if a thin mount) make it a 'thin 5D' and keep the rest about the same.

- A

 

[Talys]

IMHO, talking about mirrorless reducing size in general does the feature decisions a disservice. Canon could make an A7-thin body with a chunky mount, or they could make a thicker full EF body with a dainty mount, or one that's just a hair bigger than a deck of cards from the rear view.

I see Canon as having to make careful decisions about three form factors in particular:

• Grip size and its spacing from the mount --> I think something fairly chunky is best because we are 100% going to mount heavier glass to this thing. As far as spacing goes, ask Sony users -- their grip is comically too close to the mount and fingers don't have enough room with large diameter barrel GM lenses attached. That A7/A9 grip is the photography equivalent of flying in coach. Also: chunkier grip = bigger battery and a greater likelihood we get the top display we love on our nicer SLR bodies.
  
  
• Body thickness front to back --> this is principally about the mount depth needed. But if Canon chose full EF, they still could put parts of the body on a diet as they don't need room for a pentaprism, mirror box, etc. See the odd but understandable Sigma mirrorless system which employs 'lens tube' sort of approach to space the lens appropriately far enough away from the sensor.
  
  
• Footprint of the back of the camera (i.e. the height and width when looking at the LCD side) --> Canon went amazingly small here with the first EOS M models, but as many have pointed out, these had P&S powershot ergononomics, not what you want in a proper camera. I hope Canon is not 'different for different sake' here and does with some touchscreen-heavy interface -- I hope we get a joystick and control wheel for seamlessness with our SLRs when we're shooting with two bodies.

My vote? Full sized grip + [whatever the mount decision needs, thin or EF, I don't care] + Full form factor in the back for proper 5D-like controls. So make it 5D-like or (if a thin mount) make it a 'thin 5D' and keep the rest about the same.

- A

One other thing is vertical height of the camera. The focus on the grip-to-lens distance often eclipses the fact that even small hands are too large, vertically, for the A7/A9 bodies' vertical height, if you're holding the camera for prolonged periods (like hours). If you are using a heavier lens (like any zoom lens that you'd want to mount on a $3000 camera), what happens is that the bottom of the camera grip, where the battery compartment is, digs in to the lower palm until it eventually becomes painful. That's why Sony sells a $150 half-grip-extender... thing.

I think that Canon's conservative design will result in a vertically stacked lens, viewfinder, and hotshoe (this is my preferred configuration by far, anyways).

I totally agree about the grip size and spacing. The thing with reconfiguring the camera is that it always ends up with some kind of sacrifice like fewer controls or smaller screen. I think that there is a segment of the midrange enthusiast crowd that would welcome that; but there is a segment of the enthusiast crowd and definitely a big chunk of the professional crowd that doesn't want to sacrifice functionality at the cost of size.

At the end of the day, I don't think any single design will make everyone happy. The solution is to have 2 camera styles -- a full frame EFM for people who just want better available light / lower light photographs; and an full size rig for people who think xxD/xD is the right size for a camera.

And then ultimately, something professionally oriented that is 1D format.

 

[kiwiengr]

3. Reducing size means reducing ergonomics, battery life, less processing capacity

Some people are OK with this.

But are the Pro's & the EoL people happy with this? I use a 5DIV, I don't want less battery time... I wouldn't even want a different battery... and charger...

 

[Orangutan]

3. Reducing size means reducing ergonomics, battery life, less processing capacity

Some people are OK with this.

But are the Pro's & the EoL people happy with this?

I'm sure Canon will consider that question in the market positioning of the product.

I use a 5DIV, I don't want less battery time... I wouldn't even want a different battery... and charger...

I'm sure Canon will consider that question in the market positioning of the product.

You're just one person; your needs are important only if you represent a large segment of the market. Change will happen eventually, it's just a question of when.

 

[Ozarker]

I think the camera will have the same basic form factor as a 5D series camera and almost the same features. Maybe a new sensor and obviously higher frame rate for stills.

People will complain no matter what the design is, because that is all some people can do... especially those who aren't in the market for this camera to begin with. Others just don't know how to count their blessings.

I'm confident the camera will be comfortable in the hand as that is very important. I'm also confident it will work very reliably, won't double as a canteen or camp stove, and have the finest product support in the industry. It will take the EF and EF-s lenses just like the APS-c line does. So sort of a new mount? (Just to be controversial)

What about size and weight savings on the "L" end? Maybe that's where the DO lenses eventually come into wide use as they are developed.

Can't wait to find out... but I'm hoping for a 5D Mark V myself. I like the sound of the mirror.

 

[dave hoppus]

Hopefully some identlical specs as the Leica Q:
Shutter up to 1/16000s
ISO up to 50.000
At least 24mp
Video don‘t know, but probably 4K 24/25/30 and FullHD 48/50/60/120fps

That would allow to kick Wetzlar‘s ass because if interchangeable lenses.

Dave

 

[Talys]

People will complain no matter what the design is, because that is all some people can do... especially those who aren't in the market for this camera to begin with. Others just don't know how to count their blessings.

Seriously!!!

 

[ahsanford]

I think that Canon's conservative design will result in a vertically stacked lens, viewfinder, and hotshoe (this is my preferred configuration by far, anyways).

Agree completely. Good topic to bring up.

Anyone see this differently? Any chance we see them play left-to-right offsets with the viewfinder or hotshoe? Perhaps offset the VF like a rangefinder?

- A

 

[ahsanford]

The thing with reconfiguring the camera is that it always ends up with some kind of sacrifice like fewer controls or smaller screen. I think that there is a segment of the midrange enthusiast crowd that would welcome that; but there is a segment of the enthusiast crowd and definitely a big chunk of the professional crowd that doesn't want to sacrifice functionality at the cost of size.

I am an enthusiast and I want proper physical controls like my 5D.

That said, I have zero desire for single purpose-dedicated knobs like a host of retro rigs employ. See the X-T2 below. I expressly do not want that.

I love my 5D's controls and would want something highly similar if possible.

- A

 

[scrup]

If Canon uses a new short flange mount, existing EFM users will be pissed.

Lets hope Canons releases FF mirrorless in EF and EFM mount.

 

[jolyonralph]

I am an enthusiast and I want proper physical controls like my 5D.

That said, I have zero desire for single purpose-dedicated knobs like a host of retro rigs employ. See the X-T2 below. I expressly do not want that.

I love my 5D's controls and would want something highly similar if possible.

There are certainly a few things that could be a LOT easier with the ergonomics on the 5D series.

For example, changing focus mode. But I do agree in general it's relatively well thought out.

Also, a dedicated exposure compensation dial is a GREAT THING. I love it on the M5 and similarly on the A7RII. It bugs me that I have to juggle buttons to do this on the 5DSR especially if I'm looking down the viewfinder at the time. Of course, it's not as useful without mirrorless, but if you're going to a mirrorless camera then you do not want exactly the same button settings and layout as on a DSLR because the way you shoot and compose is going to be different.

This is something Canon have already got right with the M5, so I expect them to do this well on any FF mirrorless.

 

[zim]

I really hope this will be a big ass camera that has an EF mount.

 

[Ozarker]

I really hope this will be a big ass camera that has an EF mount.

You and me both.

 

[TAF]

So, what are the odds that given an on-sensor ADC and the ability to crop (and hence increase frame rate), Canon will provide something extra special to the new user - slow motion video?

Perhaps a 640x480 at 1500fps or so?

That would open an entirely new market area for them.

It would certainly be intriguing.

 

[slclick]

The thing with reconfiguring the camera is that it always ends up with some kind of sacrifice like fewer controls or smaller screen. I think that there is a segment of the midrange enthusiast crowd that would welcome that; but there is a segment of the enthusiast crowd and definitely a big chunk of the professional crowd that doesn't want to sacrifice functionality at the cost of size.

I am an enthusiast and I want proper physical controls like my 5D.

That said, I have zero desire for single purpose-dedicated knobs like a host of retro rigs employ. See the X-T2 below. I expressly do not want that.

I love my 5D's controls and would want something highly similar if possible.

- A

I had an Olympus Pen F and the controls drove me mad, so mad I sold it for an M5 and could not have been happier. The single thing I miss is the awesome control over B&W jpegs. BFD, I'll live. Canon will not cramp it's dials I guarantee that and I will wait until 2026 to have them get it right.

 

[Don Haines]

So, what are the odds that given an on-sensor ADC and the ability to crop (and hence increase frame rate), Canon will provide something extra special to the new user - slow motion video?

Perhaps a 640x480 at 1500fps or so?

That would open an entirely new market area for them.

It would certainly be intriguing.

640x480 at 1500fps would certainly be spectacular......

I have an Olympus P/S that can do it at 480fps.... it is pretty neat for small birds and (of course) cats If the sensor was designed for such operation on a FF canon they should be able to get away with that.... possibly even 960fps

That one feature alone would interest a number of people.

Anoher possibility is: Take a large buffer, fast storage, and have a full size image burst rate of 60 or 120 frames per second. That would have the pro sports shooters tripping over each other trying to get thier hands on one...

We have no idea what's coming or when, and the speculation is fascinating. This will be interesting!

 

[YuengLinger]

I predict a new lens mount, a few new lenses out of the gate, along with a heavily marketed magic adapter for ef mount.

 

[AvTvM]

Canon has gotten themselves into the mirrorless lens mount dilemma ... just like Sony has. Both companies were stupid enough to design a new mirrorless short-FFD lens mount for APS-C image circle only ... [EF-M, E-Mount], posing major challenges to design lenses for FF image circle [see Sony FE lineup - too long, too big and way too expensive] .

Had [stupid] Canon made the EF-M only a few millimetres wider and the FFD a few millimetres longer, they could have moved from EF and EF-S to one universal mirrorless mount ... to handle not only APS-C [EOS M series] but also FF sensors - without compromising future lens designs.