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

[Don Haines]

What I really expect to see happen is for the rebels to fade away... At some point I expect to see a much lower level FF mirrorless with Rebel like features and interface... this is where the real money is. Imagine if Canon announced a FF rebel mirrorless, perhaps a mirrorless FF SL2, for $600! Imagine the impact that would have on the market!!!!! Imagine the noise on this forum!

At the lower levels, I have my doubts about how much of a price premium the market will support for FF cameras (and lenses) compared to aps-c cameras, M and otherwise, and that leads to the question of how much more expensive it will be to make FF cameras.

Historically, with poor chip yields it cost about $15 to produce a crop sensor and $200 to produce a FF sensor. I don't know what the numbers are like now for the price, but yields are supposed to be almost identical so one would expect it to be about 3 times as much. Mirror assemblies are larger and need to be more robust for FF so that drives the price up too.....

With mirrorless, the only real difference in the electronics is the sensor itself, and it may well prove to be cheaper to make a mirrorless FF camera as you don't need the optics for the viewfinder and the separate AF module, plus all the calibration problems to go with it...

 

[Don Haines]

Canon is doomed, maybe not today or tomorrow but soon.
I've seen the future. In 2049 all the ads are for Sony.

and I shall be old and senile, talking about the good old days of film, and when telephones had mechanical dials and wires.... and instead of computers we had slide rulers..... and poor ahsanford will still be waiting for a 50F1.4....

 

[vangelismm]

Why speculate so much about a hypothetical bad adapter?

There is something wrong with current EF-m adapter?

 

[BeenThere]

What I really expect to see happen is for the rebels to fade away... At some point I expect to see a much lower level FF mirrorless with Rebel like features and interface... this is where the real money is. Imagine if Canon announced a FF rebel mirrorless, perhaps a mirrorless FF SL2, for $600! Imagine the impact that would have on the market!!!!! Imagine the noise on this forum!

At the lower levels, I have my doubts about how much of a price premium the market will support for FF cameras (and lenses) compared to aps-c cameras, M and otherwise, and that leads to the question of how much more expensive it will be to make FF cameras.

Historically, with poor chip yields it cost about $15 to produce a crop sensor and $200 to produce a FF sensor. I don't know what the numbers are like now for the price, but yields are supposed to be almost identical so one would expect it to be about 3 times as much. Mirror assemblies are larger and need to be more robust for FF so that drives the price up too.....

With mirrorless, the only real difference in the electronics is the sensor itself, and it may well prove to be cheaper to make a mirrorless FF camera as you don't need the optics for the viewfinder and the separate AF module, plus all the calibration problems to go with it...

I suspect there will be a scarcity premium for at least two years that has nothing to do with manufacturing cost.

 

[Talys]

I think that if they made a mirrorless 6D2 sized, with the articulated touchscreen AND a joystick it would sell well. Then, a year down the road, come out with a 5D sized, super tough, monster with 50fps burst and 6K video....

I would be very happy with that. The 80D's size might cause some compromises - like fewer buttons, smaller screen, etc -- that are less than ideal for my dream camera.

I do like the 80D's depth more than the 6D2, though. I know it's only a tiny difference, but I am not 6'3"

And this is the great ergonomics quandary..... how to fit a wide variety of sizes and desires? Personally, I prefer the 7D2/5D4 sized body and the joystick, but also like the articulated touchscreen of the 6D2. My wish is that they will enter the FF mirrorless segment at the bottom of the category with the mirrorless equivalent of the 6D2, and follow it up later with higher end models, like a 50fps 5D equivalent and then a 100fps iDX equivalent with 6K video This scenario is clouded considerably by my personal desire...

What I really expect to see happen is for the rebels to fade away... At some point I expect to see a much lower level FF mirrorless with Rebel like features and interface... this is where the real money is. Imagine if Canon announced a FF rebel mirrorless, perhaps a mirrorless FF SL2, for $600! Imagine the impact that would have on the market!!!!! Imagine the noise on this forum!

My prediction is that whatever they choose, there will be some very distraught forum users and calls of "Canon is doomed", and that it will sell well....

Well, in my mind, the solution is to not try to make everything fit on one camera body. Why should a studio or sports camera be the best tool for someone who is on doing a mountain hike or on a kayak, or someone who wants to discreetly take candid photographs?

I think that you are right and that eventually Rebels will give way to MILCs. However, I don't think it will be full frame, because full frame lenses will always cost more and be larger than lenses for smaller sensors. I think that eventually, APSC sensors will have better low light performance, and this will make an M5 or M6 format camera very popular.

Personally, I have no problem in having an investment in 2 complete camera systems, one for when small size or discretion matters, and one for when there's legitimate advantages to larger bodies.

 

[Ozarker]

My prediction is that whatever they choose, there will be some very distraught forum users and calls of "Canon is doomed", and that it will sell well....


Canon is doomed, maybe not today or tomorrow but soon.
I've seen the future. In 2049 all the ads are for Sony.

In the meantime I'd be happy with a 5D size body (I find 1DX too big). I wouldn't mind an adapter as long as it proves to be non impactful on quality. Something that could be permanently left on would be good.
If it could have a good focus system and 12 FPS I'd take it in a heartbeat.

People are already threatening to jump ship.

 

[Don Haines]

Personally, I have no problem in having an investment in 2 complete camera systems, one for when small size or discretion matters, and one for when there's legitimate advantages to larger bodies.

Same here....

In the Canon ecosystem, the M cameras seem the best poised to take over small and discrete, but what happens in large and high quality? I can see the 1, 5, 6, and 7 series being eventually replace with their mirrorless counterparts, but what about the crop DSLR? Do they get squeezed out? Does the XXD go FF mirrorless and the rebels go M?

We are approaching a disruption as we transit from one tech to another, but unlike the film to digital discontinuity, this one is an evolution of a sub-component and will not be as drastic.... but it sure does make for interesting times and speculation....

 

[Talys]

Personally, I have no problem in having an investment in 2 complete camera systems, one for when small size or discretion matters, and one for when there's legitimate advantages to larger bodies.

Same here....

In the Canon ecosystem, the M cameras seem the best poised to take over small and discrete, but what happens in large and high quality? I can see the 1, 5, 6, and 7 series being eventually replace with their mirrorless counterparts, but what about the crop DSLR? Do they get squeezed out? Does the XXD go FF mirrorless and the rebels go M?

We are approaching a disruption as we transit from one tech to another, but unlike the film to digital discontinuity, this one is an evolution of a sub-component and will not be as drastic.... but it sure does make for interesting times and speculation....

I think a lot of people believe that is a likely scenario. I think there will be a lot fewer budget crop DSLRs from Canon in the future, but there will be something in that space for the perceivable future.

At the moment, my 80D is still a fantastic (amazing) ISO100 studio camera. With a grip on it, there is literally nothing that another body does that I could need in that context, except for full frame field of view if I need a very wide shot. But even then, the EFS10-18 is usually pretty acceptable.

 

[Woody]

have you tried using an a7-series body with a 24-70/2.8GM or 70-200/2.8GM? I have, and I can confidently state that the ergonomics of my 1D X with the corresponding f/2.8L zooms is better. Much better.

I have tried the A7S MkII with 24-70 f/4 OSS. Ergonomics is really really awful.

 

[sanj]

I think that if they made a mirrorless 6D2 sized, with the articulated touchscreen AND a joystick it would sell well. Then, a year down the road, come out with a 5D sized, super tough, monster with 50fps burst and 6K video....

I would be very happy with that. The 80D's size might cause some compromises - like fewer buttons, smaller screen, etc -- that are less than ideal for my dream camera.

I do like the 80D's depth more than the 6D2, though. I know it's only a tiny difference, but I am not 6'3"

And this is the great ergonomics quandary..... how to fit a wide variety of sizes and desires? Personally, I prefer the 7D2/5D4 sized body and the joystick, but also like the articulated touchscreen of the 6D2. My wish is that they will enter the FF mirrorless segment at the bottom of the category with the mirrorless equivalent of the 6D2, and follow it up later with higher end models, like a 50fps 5D equivalent and then a 100fps iDX equivalent with 6K video This scenario is clouded considerably by my personal desire...

What I really expect to see happen is for the rebels to fade away... At some point I expect to see a much lower level FF mirrorless with Rebel like features and interface... this is where the real money is. Imagine if Canon announced a FF rebel mirrorless, perhaps a mirrorless FF SL2, for $600! Imagine the impact that would have on the market!!!!! Imagine the noise on this forum!

My prediction is that whatever they choose, there will be some very distraught forum users and calls of "Canon is doomed", and that it will sell well....

Well, in my mind, the solution is to not try to make everything fit on one camera body. Why should a studio or sports camera be the best tool for someone who is on doing a mountain hike or on a kayak, or someone who wants to discreetly take candid photographs?

I think that you are right and that eventually Rebels will give way to MILCs. However, I don't think it will be full frame, because full frame lenses will always cost more and be larger than lenses for smaller sensors. I think that eventually, APSC sensors will have better low light performance, and this will make an M5 or M6 format camera very popular.

Personally, I have no problem in having an investment in 2 complete camera systems, one for when small size or discretion matters, and one for when there's legitimate advantages to larger bodies.

Me too. Currently my APSC system is Sony 6500 with some really brilliant Sigma and Zeiss lenses. Very happy with them. Also very happy with my heavy full frame Canon cameras and heavy lenses. Different applications.

 

[pj1974]

I am very excited to see Canon's progress into the (FF) mirrorless world.
For context, my digital photography journey in a nutshell:
- 1999 first Digital P&S
- 2005 first DSLR (Canon 350D).
- 2018 first Mirrorless (Canon M5)

After seeing some interesting signs in the M50, I am relatively optimistic Canon is going to provide reassuringly high quality mirrorless offerings in the relatively near future: both in the APS-C sensor size, and the 35mm (aka 'FF') format.

The favourite Canon DSLR I own is my 80D camera. The sensor provides great IQ, body size suits my hands well, (though I do miss the joystick of my 7D) and feature-set rich. I have about 8 EF/EF-S lenses.

I love my Canon M5 - it's great as an additional & small camera. (I own 4 EF-M lenses). It's feature set is adequate- and I do appreciate the handling.
The M5's DPAF works very well - I have tested speed and reliability / accuracy against my 80D and they are essentially identical (also using my EF to EF-M adaptor)

So what I would like in a 'more pro' / FF Canon mirrorless? Even quicker AF, improved subject tracking and better handling in low light (-3 to -4EV would be ideal).

A mirrorless FF Canon the size of a 80D, being about 200gr lighter, would be ideal - and where wide angle lenses could be significantly smaller / lighter than the current FF DSLR lenses, would be much appreciated. A FF mirrorless with the feature set of a 80, at the price point that is similar to the 6DmkII would be great.
Can Canon do this... I think they can, and are pulling the technology together (as per the interview / article).

If Canon can (or need to!) create a new mirrorless "FF" mount that is compatible with existing EF, EF-S and EF-M lenses, all the better.
Looking forward to the future.....

Paul

 

[AvTvM]

And this is the great ergonomics quandary..... how to fit a wide variety of sizes and desires?

where is the problem?

When Canon introduces FF mirrorless system with a new "slim" EF-X mirrorless mount, they can and will offer mirrorless camera bodies in ALL sizes ... from XXS [Sony RX-1R II size but with mount] all the way to XXXL [1D X sized] ... and each model will find its targeted market segment. As in the past with DSLRs, many customers will buy 2 or 3 different sized bodies ... to best fit different capture situations and photographic tasks. All existing EF lenses will continue to work with the help of a "Canon Advanced Lens Device" [to avoid the hated label "lens mount adapter"] - easy to explain, no major problem. Even "no adapters"-forum posters will - mostly - quickly get over it. And Canon will be selling new, improved lenses in EF-X mount by the millions for years to come ... instead of selling a few copies of marginally iterated Mk. II,III,IV,V .. versions of EF glass.

BUT if canon were to keep EF mount for FF mirrorless, there will be no option for XS and S size mirrorless cameras. There would also be no option to make and sell XS, S, and M sized mirrorless FF lenses. And there would be *significantly less lens sales for many years to come*.

Both "no, sorry, we dont have that" factors would shut Canon out of not so small - and growing (!) - market segments of [aging and decently affluent] enthusiasts looking for "smaller/lighter gear, but with FF sensor capabilities and its advantage over APS-C sensors - any one or more of the following: high rez, good DR, excellent low light performance, shallow DOF ... as first and only system or as secondary, additional system.

If "stupid me" can figure this out, I am sure even "stupid Canon" will. 8)

 

[Yasko]

where is the problem?

When Canon introduces FF mirrorless system with a new "slim" EF-X mirrorless mount, they can and will offer mirrorless camera bodies in ALL sizes ... from XXS [Sony RX-1R II size but with mount] all the way to XXXL [1D X sized] ... and each model will find its targeted market segment. As in the past with DSLRs, many customers will buy 2 or 3 different sized bodies ... to best fit different capture situations and photographic tasks. All existing EF lenses will continue to work with the help of a "Canon Advanced Lens Device" [to avoid the hated label "lens mount adapter"] - easy to explain, no major problem. Even "no adapters"-forum posters will - mostly - quickly get over it. And Canon will be selling new, improved lenses in EF-X mount by the millions for years to come ... instead of selling a few copies of marginally iterated Mk. II,III,IV,V .. versions of EF glass.

BUT if canon were to keep EF mount for FF mirrorless, there will be no option for XS and S size mirrorless cameras. There would also be no option to make and sell XS, S, and M sized mirrorless FF lenses. And there would be *significantly less lens sales for many years to come*.

Both "no, sorry, we dont have that" factors would shut Canon out of not so small - and growing (!) - market segments of [aging and decently affluent] enthusiasts looking for "smaller/lighter gear, but with FF sensor capabilities and its advantage over APS-C sensors - any one or more of the following: high rez, good DR, excellent low light performance, shallow DOF ... as first and only system or as secondary, additional system.

If "stupid me" can figure this out, I am sure even "stupid Canon" will. 8)

There are already S sized mirrorless cameras from Canon, just not FF.
The "problem" with bigger sensors is, you need bigger aperture lenses that are generally bigger and thus a bigger body facilitates holding an otherwise sometimes more imbalanced device.
I am not saying there is no sense in having a smaller body design with a lens that IS smaller than other FF lenses, for example like the 40 mm pancake or a wide angle lens that would profit from a shorter flange distance.

But these are special cases. There is no general "Canon needs to go for a new mount" or "Canon has to go on with EF mount".
In general, the benefits of a smaller body are much less obvious when you have large FF lenses snapped onto the body. That's a fact. Else, the handling gets much worse.
On the plus side you could use a by design smaller lens (short focal length prime) with a smaller body which would play into a nice handling and small body, in this case.

So no need for sassy claims like "why won't anybody get that?".

 

[AvTvM]

There are already S sized mirrorless cameras from Canon, just not FF.
The "problem" with bigger sensors is, you need bigger aperture lenses that are generally bigger and thus a bigger body facilitates holding an otherwise sometimes more imbalanced device.

there are NO "XS"-sized FF MILCs in the entire market yet. There are no (more) "S"mall sized FF MILCs in the entire market [Sony A7 1st gen was one] . There are only "M" sized FF MILCs in the market currently [Sony A7 II and III series].

Canon and people like Neuro would conclude from that "there are hardly any buyers for XS and S FF MILC systems out there". I conclude from it: "there are interesting market segments totally uncovered at the moment. So lets use this incredible stupidity of our competitors - namely Nikon and Fuji - and combat Sony why they are still at fairly low market share ... go ahead, let's test the waters with some decent, small FF MILC products at decent prices and see how many we sell. And be ready to ramp up production facilities in the space vacated by our dying mirrorslapper business of yesteryear ... "

PS: FF MILCs with a "bigger" sensor than APS-C offer all the photographic opportunities of a smaller sensor at SMALLER apertures (not bigger) ... eg. FF f/2.0 DOF needs f/1.4 APS-C lens - the latter likely being bigger and for sure more expensive. And using smaller, lighter, cheaper f/4 zooms and 1 stop higher ISO is absolutely equivalent in imaging performance to using big, fat, heavy and expensive f/2.8 zooms on APS-C sensors.

 

[Loswr]

Canon and people like Neuro would conclude from that "there are hardly any buyers for XS and S FF MILC systems out there". I conclude from it: "there are interesting market segments totally uncovered at the moment.

The difference is that Canon has asked buyers, whereas you and I have not. Also note that covering 'interesting market segments totally uncovered at the moment' is only profitable if those segments are large enough to drive a positive ROI...and you have zero evidence that is the case.

 

[AvTvM]

So no need for sassy claims like "why won't anybody get that?".

well, there seems to be.

just look at things from a general, pure logics point of view.

Plan A: new "slim" mount. Everything possible. Small and big cameras. Small and big lenses. Plus new possibilities and freedoms in lens design. Full backwards compatibility with all existing EF lenses. Plus possibility to use many other lenses from Canon [FD] and other manufacturers - if so inclined. Plus uch higher lens sales for Canon, as many customers - existing and new - will pick up new versions of lenses ... immediately or over the years to come ... whenever they would like to get "enhanced capabilities and performance" from IQ to AF to lens-mount protocol/E-TTL flash etc.

Plan B: keep EF mount] - allows only for a small subset of solution A. Only bulky cameras possible. Only relatively bulky lenses possible, even in most frequently used focal length range. Much lower lens sales over many years to come.

Now why should or would Canon go for clearly inferior plan B?
Only because some forum denizens "just don't get it" and are clamoring for "no adapter!" to continue using their old EF shards?

Surely not. ;D

 

[Loswr]

AvTvM, I know you have an M camera. Do you have an EF mount adapter? Do you use it? Do you like it?

 

[AvTvM]

AvTvM, I know you have an M camera. Do you have an EF mount adapter? Do you use it? Do you like it?

yes. i do have the Canon EF-M/EF adapter and do use it, when i really want/need to mount a (large) EF or EF-S lens. Most often this is the EF-S 60 which handles and performs quite well - also with adapter. Prefer the longer focal length over the EF-M 28 Macro.

Next often I use the EF 50/1.8 STM ... whenever i want/need a faster + (relatively) longer focal length than what is available as native EF-M lens. Also handles very well with adapter. My cheap and simple "shallow DOF Portrait setup" ... in absence of an EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM lens.

Additional bonus with the Canon lens adapter i the included (detachable!) tripod foot that works with every Canon lens including those that dont come with lens ring/tripod foot or where Canon would want me to buy a lens-specific ring at insane prices and sometimes also hard to find.

Sometimes I also use EF 70-200/2.8 - eg. at concerts, when want 2 bodies along ... wide-angle eg 24-70/2.8 II on my 5D3. E.g. on me and EF-M + 70-200/2.8 L IS on tripod further back in room ... i dont shoot video, but it would presumably also work well for video.

And ocassionally I use my M as crop sensor tele extender .. .eg. tried out the Tamron 150-600 some time ago ... on both 5D 3 and on EOS M ... on static subjects [don't shoot sports or BIF or wildlife] ... eg trying to get "full moon over certain buildings or landscape features" ... where i always am focal length limited and want to use crop factor for max. tele effect / FOV ... 600mm x 1.6 -> 960mm ... handling of combo [on tripod] was good, AF performance with Tamron 150-600 was borderline ... whimpy LP-E12 battery had difficulty moving focal group i guess ...

I find the Canon EF/EF-M adapter well made, very compact, not grossly overpriced ... and handling easy. When i am "moon-chasing in the field" or some similar city-scape activity i typically have only 1 large (EF-mount) lens along ... and leave the adapter on the lens, when i switch to an EF-M lens in between.

Overall I do think I am pretty representative for what people might do in terms of adapting EF lenses to a small mirrorless body [no matter whether crop or FF].

I am very tired of always hearing "size advantage of small body is gone, as soon as one attaches large lenses to it".Of course it is. But hey, thats not, what i want. Or only on special occasions. What i want is a small, as universal and capable as possible set - camera body + a few small lenses. And the possibility to occasionally also use larger lenses - when needed and not available/possible "in small". I do not want to regularly a small mirrorles body with huge Zeiss Otuses or XXL big whites ... handheld. And nobody else in their right mind would.

All i want ... is a SMALL, LIGHT, CAPABLE, noise- and vibration-free MILC as my "universal" camera ... and for best possible IQ, DR, rez, low light capabilities and shallow DOF-potential I want a good FF sensor in it, rather than a "half-frame" APS-C one.

Due to many years of familiarity with Canon / EOS user interface and my firm belief it is overall "best in class", I would prefer if it came from Canon. So basically i am waiting for a "modern day, digital equivalent" to the [legendary, analog] Minolta CL system. At Minolta prices of course, not at Leica prices. And with the added possibilities to use all of the Canon EF lenses with a simple little "adapter" whenever I want to.

PS: yes, i am 100% sure i am not the only one waiting for such a setup.

 

[Loswr]

Thanks, AvTvM. I also have the adapter...I don't usually use it, although I bring it while traveling as an emergency backup in case my 1D X fails. I've used it with the 100L macro, and the 85L. Both are fine on a tripod, for handheld use both suck eggs. I suspect most users don't typically use tripods (which is why Canon got away with omitting the tripod foot from the later kit-included EF mount adapters).

PS: yes, i am 100% sure i am not the only one waiting for such a setup.

I agree...but that's irrelevant. The question is how many people are waiting for such a setup, vs. how many would prefer to mount their EF lenses directly. You don't know the answer, nor do I. Canon likely has a good guess, which they will indirectly share with us when they annuonce a FF MILC and the mount therein.

 

[AvTvM]

I suspect most users don't typically use tripods (which is why Canon got away with omitting the tripod foot from the later kit-included EF mount adapters).

if you ask me, then it was rather some "innovative Canon controller type" saying "leave out the foot ... it will save us 99 cent on each kit" ...

if i view that move positively: it opens up the market for EdMika, RRS, Novoflex and a dirty dozen Chinese CNC milling shops to bring a *really right" tripod foot for Canon adapters to market ... the one with Arca dovetail grooves built in.

I mean .. how much innovation does it take to obsolete one of the 3 parts in this image ... stupid, Canon!