Canon Full Frame Mirrorless to use Dedicated Sensor [CR2]

[Mr Majestyk]

Hilarious to think the 6DII sensor would even be considered. The camera would be DOA if they made that mistake again. Another site has reported sensors between 36 and 48MP are being tested, but they need more than a good sensor for it to succeed. What compelling reason will they give us to use this, especially if it retains EF mount. Will they finally get serious about 4K video, what shooting speed and will the AF be competitive with the best out there like A9, will be feature rich rather than gimped in typical Canon fashion.

The good news Nikon will be first cab off the rank and it will be very interesting to see what their vision is for FF mirrorless, given they were saying they will make best camera in the market.

 

[Jopa]

That's exciting. Just hope they will keep the EF mount.

 

[dolina]

Unpopular opinion but is diversifying to a lot of camera SKUs really wise in a market environment that has been shrinking for nearly a decade?

 

[ahsanford]

Hilarious to think the 6DII sensor would even be considered. The camera would be DOA if they made that mistake again. Another site has reported sensors between 36 and 48MP are being tested, but they need more than a good sensor for it to succeed. What compelling reason will they give us to use this, especially if it retains EF mount. Will they finally get serious about 4K video, what shooting speed and will the AF be competitive with the best out there like A9, will be feature rich rather than gimped in typical Canon fashion.

You appear to define success at being competitively spec'd. As Canon has repeatedly shown, the best spec'd rig per dollar does not sell the best.

As much as I don't want them to do this, I have the utmost confidence that dropping the 6D2 sensor into a well designed mirrorless rig would sell just fine. We might pillory them on a forum for doing it, but it would sell very, very well. Hear me out.

My argument: there is a small but growing highly energized portion of the Canon userbase that very much wants a mirrorless rig beyond what EOS M can do -- be it a higher-end EOS M rig or a FF rig. Tired of waiting for Canon, they have rented (or outright bought) a competitive mirrorless rig, either a Fuji or Sony most likely. For whatever reason, be it the Fuji sensor size or poor Sony ergonomics/controls/lens options, those systems do not completely scratch the itch for them and they have either lived with multiple systems (and pined for one to unite them all) or they simply returned to Canon for its lenses, ergonomics, reliability, etc.

The take-home message here? There are folks who love Canon for everything it offers more than the value proposition / potential return of investment of moving to a new system. Canon owns these people. Anything basically competent and well-designed that Canon offers will have these folks pre-ordering on day one.

That is why a 6D2 sensor dropped into a mirrorless rig -- be it a nice thin one that someday might adapt Nikkor or Canon FD glass OR a full EF mount design that is a seamless 2nd body for the hordes of current Canon FF shooters -- would sell just fine.

- A

 

[jolyonralph]

That's exciting. Just hope they will keep the EF mount.

I think a new mount is more and more likely.

The majority of buyers won't have an arsenal of old lenses they want to use, and they have to consider how to market a new camera vs competition from Nikon, Sony, etc.

A heavier camera using heavier lenses and, added to this, a bunch of these lenses (with older focusing motors) that really don't perform as well as they should on mirrorless either due to focus speed or due to noise - this will not do well for Canon in the inevitable head-to-head reviews. Sure you'll buy one, but will anyone else?

I'd be twice as likely to buy a camera with a new mount than with EF.

 

[-pekr-]

Hilarious to think the 6DII sensor would even be considered. The camera would be DOA if they made that mistake again. Another site has reported sensors between 36 and 48MP are being tested, but they need more than a good sensor for it to succeed. What compelling reason will they give us to use this, especially if it retains EF mount. Will they finally get serious about 4K video, what shooting speed and will the AF be competitive with the best out there like A9, will be feature rich rather than gimped in typical Canon fashion.

You appear to define success at being competitively spec'd. As Canon has repeatedly shown, the best spec'd rig per dollar does not sell the best.

As much as I don't want them to do this, I have the utmost confidence that dropping the 6D2 sensor into a well designed mirrorless rig would sell just fine. We might pillory them on a forum for doing it, but it would sell very, very well. Hear me out.

Canon would get publicly devastated for putting 6DII sensor into the mirrorless whatever. We can bet on that. Everyone knows they can do better than the 6DII sensor and we are talking a camera at least one year away. I can guarantee you, that FF mirrorless is so important to them, that there is exactly a zero chance for them to do such a marketing mistake again ....

 

[Etienne]

Exciting, sure. But it's probably two years before you can get your hands on this camera.
Sony might have all my mirrorless money before this camera hits the shelves.

 

[ahsanford]

I think a new mount is more and more likely.

The majority of buyers won't have an arsenal of old lenses they want to use

A heavier camera using heavier lenses

I'd be twice as likely to buy a camera with a new mount than with EF.

(truncated your quote above)

Speaking to those bits, I fully get why some want a new mount. I still can't tell what Canon will do -- there are upsides and downsides to either a skinny or full mount depending on how/what you shoot.

But I'm sure you get that newer FF lenses will be just as big and as heavy as they are for FF SLRs, minus perhaps a 5-10% weight savings with better engineering plastics substituting for some historically metal parts. But physics is physics: a mirrorless version of (say) a 35mm f/1.4 or 24-70 2.8 will probably be just as big and heavy as the EF variant unless Canon wants to throw IQ out the window and dramatically simplify the design for size and weight reasons.

Much more likely -- if Canon goes with a new mount -- f/2 IS will replace f/1.4 primes and f/4 IS will replace f/2.8 zooms in the new system to much more directly manage size and weight. I'd be stunned if Canon jumped right into a new mount with max aperture glass similar to the priciest L lenses. They will keep it small and allow folks to adapt their pricey L glass if so desired.

And when you say arsenal of older lenses, sure, the FD adapting crowd will be a tiny userbase. But folks who want to use their older EF glass will be legion as Canon will simply not offer certain things in the new mount. People will slap their trusty old 24-70 f/2.8L I, 180mm Macro, 5x Macro, T/S, etc. lenses on their from day one of this system's release.

- A

 

[funkboy]

Personally I think that an APS-H size sensor (with e.g 6D-size pixels) would be sufficient for a large-sensor mirrorless camera, & help keep the size & weight down while still being a significant step up from the APS-C crowd.

Nice thought, but the marketing people at Canon wouldn't let this even get past the conversation stage. I have always been a great fan of APS-H, notably the brilliant 1D MkIV, but don't expect for a moment that we'll ever see another APS-H body from Canon.

I agree they'd shoot down APS-H if it's an interchangeable lens camera, but if it's a super-powershot (for which they've done custom oddball-sized sensors before)...

16ish really good APS-H MP with a 24-100 f/2.8-4.5ish (equiv.) lens in a compact integrated powershot body would be pretty fantastic. 135mm would be even better on the long end but I'd consider 100mm the minimum telephoto equivalent for such a camera.

 

[ahsanford]

Canon would get publicly devastated in camera forums and enthusiast photography websites for putting 6DII sensor into the mirrorless whatever. We can bet on that. Everyone knows they can do better than the 6DII sensor and we are talking a camera at least one year away. I can guarantee you, that FF mirrorless is so important to them, that there is exactly a zero chance for them to do such a marketing design decision mistake again ....

Amended that for you.

I'd like to ask the forum a question: can anyone connect positive sensor scores with higher sales (or lower sensor scores with lower sales) for me?

With some variability, Leica continues to offer relatively ordinary / mundane FF sensors yet they are not being consumed by the better tech below. Luxe branding and apple-like commodity fetishism aren't the sole reason why they sell at the prices they do. Their cameras are really well made, have a unique (rangefinder) userbase almost cornered, and and offer some wonderful optics for those that don't mind fighting through MF lens use.

Canon has been behind EXMOR and the various licensed incarnations of it (specifically on the low ISO end that gets them punished in DXO-like scoring) for years yet it continues to the lead the market in sales.

I contend that folks on camera forums care about sensors -- specifically base ISO DR -- so much more than just about every camera market level's actual userbase does. It matters, don't get me wrong, but I think it matters far far less than the bigger picture of ecosystem, lenses, ergonomics, reliability, service, etc.

In full disclosure, I continue to shake my head that the on-chip ADC hotness worthy of an 80D appears to have been left out of the 6D2 sensor. I believe it was a poor decision for that market segment. But I have yet to see any negative sales numbers from Canon or big price reduction that would imply the sensor inside is hurting its sales.

- A

 

[unfocused]

I think a new mount is more and more likely.

The majority of buyers won't have an arsenal of old lenses they want to use

A heavier camera using heavier lenses

I'd be twice as likely to buy a camera with a new mount than with EF.

(truncated your quote above)

Speaking to those bits, I fully get why some want a new mount.

But I'm sure you get that newer FF lenses will be just as big and as heavy as they are for FF SLRs...physics is physics: a mirrorless version of (say) a 35mm f/1.4 or 24-70 2.8 will probably be just as big and heavy as the EF variant...

...Much more likely -- if Canon goes with a new mount -- f/2 IS will replace f/1.4 primes and f/4 IS will replace f/2.8 zooms in the new system to much more directly manage size and weight...

...folks who want to use their older EF glass will be legion...

Agreed. Not sure why anyone would think that buyers would be completely new to the Canon system and not already have a significant investment in lenses. Any full frame camera is targeted to people who are already Canon customers.

I have to wonder if a better and more likely alternative for those who want the smallest lenses possible, might be an expanded range of pancake primes.

 

[unfocused]

Canon would get publicly devastated in camera forums and enthusiast photography websites for putting 6DII sensor into the mirrorless whatever. We can bet on that. Everyone knows they can do better than the 6DII sensor and we are talking a camera at least one year away. I can guarantee you, that FF mirrorless is so important to them, that there is exactly a zero chance for them to do such a marketing design decision mistake again ....

Amended that for you.

I'd like to ask the forum a question: can anyone connect positive sensor scores with higher sales (or lower sensor scores with lower sales) for me?...

...I continue to shake my head that the on-chip ADC hotness worthy of an 80D appears to have been left out of the 6D2 sensor. I believe it was a poor decision for that market segment. But I have yet to see any negative sales numbers from Canon or big price reduction that would imply the sensor inside is hurting its sales.

Agree also with this. On the other hand, I expect that when the mythical full-frame unicorn mirrorless finally arrives, it will not be an under $2,000 item, but closer in price the 5DIV. So, while I don't believe Canon made a "mistake" in using the sensor it did for its entry-level full-frame DSLR, I do believe that they will not put a bargain sensor in a high-end mirrorless.

 

[ahsanford]

Agree also with this. On the other hand, I expect that when the mythical full-frame unicorn mirrorless finally arrives, it will not be an under $2,000 item, but closer in price the 5DIV. So, while I don't believe Canon made a "mistake" in using the sensor it did for its entry-level full-frame DSLR, I do believe that they will not put a bargain sensor in a high-end mirrorless.

Entirely possible.

I still think they will start modestly and climb up from a 6D2-like feature set over time, but it is entirely possible they chase margins with something pricey. They could go after either higher-end 5D/5DS-level users or (gulp) put out a prestige-y showpiece to one percenters for huge dollars (think Leica Q, Nikon Df, Sony RX1R, etc. possibly a fixed lens, etc.).

Whichever way they go, I expect the mirrorless variant of whatever they release to cost more than the SLR variant it was based on for a host of reason (newness/firstness, lower volumes will need a higher sales price for margins, etc.).

- A

 

[infared]

Hilarious to think the 6DII sensor would even be considered. The camera would be DOA if they made that mistake again. Another site has reported sensors between 36 and 48MP are being tested, but they need more than a good sensor for it to succeed. What compelling reason will they give us to use this, especially if it retains EF mount. Will they finally get serious about 4K video, what shooting speed and will the AF be competitive with the best out there like A9, will be feature rich rather than gimped in typical Canon fashion.

You appear to define success at being competitively spec'd. As Canon has repeatedly shown, the best spec'd rig per dollar does not sell the best.

As much as I don't want them to do this, I have the utmost confidence that dropping the 6D2 sensor into a well designed mirrorless rig would sell just fine. We might pillory them on a forum for doing it, but it would sell very, very well. Hear me out.

Canon would get publicly devastated for putting 6DII sensor into the mirrorless whatever. We can bet on that. Everyone knows they can do better than the 6DII sensor and we are talking a camera at least one year away. I can guarantee you, that FF mirrorless is so important to them, that there is exactly a zero chance for them to do such a marketing mistake again ....

um...you may underestimate Canon's arrogance. Anything is possible.
For instance:
Canon could clearly have offered the 5DIV in AA and non-AA filter versions just to satisfy all of us committed lens holders. They did not.
There are many many more examples of simple accommodations on their very expensive cameras over the years, that competitors have had (like image bracketing abilities on the 5DII, etc.) that clearly should have been included on the camera. I am not talking huge new sensors...etc..
Every body I have bought I have said...I can't believe I paid $3500 for this body that some feature is limited or does not have a feature that is on entry level cameras.
It cannot be oversight. I chalk it up to arrogance and increasing their profit margin. I am sure that everyone here knows the kinds of omissions I am talking about. I am not saying why didn't the 5DIV have a sensor comparable to the Sony...I am saying ..... why did they not offer the existing sensor with and without AA Filter. I LOT of people would have bought the latter.
There is no excuse for that in 2017.
...but as the man said above... I still bought the camera. ... I just do not like the Canon corporation and a lot of their decisions.
I own Olympus cameras, too....And they always give more than I expect. Not less.

 

[YuengLinger]

Unpopular opinion but is diversifying to a lot of camera SKUs really wise in a market environment that has been shrinking for nearly a decade?

I think Canon is willing to have more than the optimal number of bodies in production now as the price of transitioning to mirrorless only, say within less than a decade.

Which is why I'm very much hoping the lens mount on any new FF mirrorless remains EF.

As for the sensor, maybe asked and answered, but doesn't the FF form factor need a sensor with curved edges in order to utilize the EF mount without needing a short "chimney" to space the rear element away from the sensor?

 

[FramerMCB]

I think we're all in agreement that it will probably be called the M1, and Canon have been rebranding/positioning their EOS M line to match the 'European' EOS naming conventions... See below:

1D/M1 - Professional 'Halo' Product/Highest Performance
5D/M5 - Professional/High Performance
6D/M6 - Entry level Professional/Enthusiast High Performance

x0D/Mx0 - Enthusiast/Performance (This whole theory hinges on what the M20 will look like...)

x00D/Mx00 - Entry level (Ever wonder why the successor to the M10 was the M100? I think this is why...)

The potential M20 and the existence of the M100 cameras are really what bring this idea to life, but it would be nice to have some congruity between the two product lines. What do you all think?

Not all of us.

I believe the M series will stay as APS-C. According to your theory, the M6 would be FF, and the m3 would be a high end camera.


I think a new series is needed for a FF mirrorless, the M series consists of entry level or near entry level cameras that are APSC and never intended to be high end.

I could see a FF as a 6DM, I do not think that a 1 series or even a 5 series Mirrorless is yet in the works. It will be entry level FF.

I agree. I believe a FF Mirrorless rig from Canon will necessitate a brand new line for marketing/differentiation and clearer/cleaner branding. I would be somewhat shocked if Canon branded this new FF mirrorless rig in their "M" line up. I have no idea about what the new naming convention might be other than to be similar to their DSLR branding: 1DX - FF/top-of-the-line/best; 5Dxx - FF/pro/loaded; 6Dxx - FF/entry level; xxD - pro-sumer/upmarket amateurs/great feature set. And the question on everyone's mind, and one that several have suggested an answer to already, is where in the line-up will their first FF mirrorless model fall? I think it will be somewhere between the 5D IV and the 6D II as far as build and feature set. I say this as I don't expect them, at least for the first few years, to have more than 2-3 models. So the first here, with plans for a professional grade introduced about 1 year later.

 

[ahsanford]

As for the sensor, maybe asked and answered, but doesn't the FF form factor need a sensor with curved edges in order to utilize the EF mount without needing a short "chimney" to space the rear element away from the sensor?

EF lens compatibility with a future FF mirrorless mount is 99% likely to be:

• A full EF mount with a flat (traditional) sensor -- the full flange distance we see on our FF SLRs. This will be done with either a full-blown FF SLR style body (perhaps for handling familiarity to existing users who want a seamless transition between the primary SLR and backup mirrorless body) or possibly a thinner smaller body with a built-in 'chimney'/protrusion in just the lens mount area to maintain the proper spacing (the recent Sigma APS-H Quatro platform does this).
  
  
• A thinner than EF mount with flat (traditional) sensor -- this will be like the A7/A9 platform and require an adaptor to 'get back' the full flange distance of the EF mount.

Notice that list does not include a curved sensor. There's a huge opportunity to reduce lens size, weight and complexity with a curved sensor, but one would think it would dramatically complicate EF lens compatibility. If I understand the curved sensor sales pitch, it would only work in the 2nd (thin body) option above and the corresponding adaptor would have to invert/account for the flat plane of the EF image circle to have it work well on the curved sensor behind it. For that reason, I don't think any platform that must work with a large number of existing lenses (i.e. Canon or Nikon's new mirrorless platforms) will opt for a curved sensor.

Curved sensors will happen someday, but surely it will be in a fixed lens setup at first or standalone ILC system before someone embarks on an ambitious new FF system with it.

- A

 

[Loswr]

If I understand the curved sensor sales pitch, it would only work in the 2nd (thin body) option above and the corresponding adaptor would have to invert/account for the flat plane of the EF image circle to have it work well on the curved sensor behind it.

Recall that Canon filed a patent for a sensor with variable curvature which could be altered 'on the fly', because different focal lengths would optimally need different sensor curvatures. One end of the range of possible curvatures in the patent was zero, i.e. flat. So, a sensor that could be varied from flat to curved would be directly compatible with EF lenses and newly-designed lenses for a curved sensor.

 

[jolyonralph]

a skinny or full mount depending on how/what you shoot.

Much more likely -- if Canon goes with a new mount -- f/2 IS will replace f/1.4 primes and f/4 IS will replace f/2.8 zooms in the new system to much more directly manage size and weight. I'd be stunned if Canon jumped right into a new mount with max aperture glass similar to the priciest L lenses. They will keep it small and allow folks to adapt their pricey L glass if so desired.

...

People will slap their trusty old 24-70 f/2.8L I, 180mm Macro, 5x Macro, T/S, etc. lenses on their from day one of this system's release.

You're right. Smaller, slower, lighter lenses will be the default options for this form factor. And that's just fine for most people. My primary lens on the A7RII is the Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 - because it's a stunning performer optically.

Of course, I could carry a 35mm f/1.4L II on my 5DSR around my neck all day, but would I use it as much as I do the lighter combo? No. Would I enjoy using it as much? probably not.

Photography is about taking photos, and different kit is appropriate for different people. I have no doubt that a large full-frame EF-mount mirrorless would be popular with many people, but it's not my preferred choice.

 

[ahsanford]

If I understand the curved sensor sales pitch, it would only work in the 2nd (thin body) option above and the corresponding adaptor would have to invert/account for the flat plane of the EF image circle to have it work well on the curved sensor behind it.

Recall that Canon filed a patent for a sensor with variable curvature which could be altered 'on the fly', because different focal lengths would optimally need different sensor curvatures. One end of the range of possible curvatures in the patent was zero, i.e. flat. So, a sensor that could be varied from flat to curved would be directly compatible with EF lenses and newly-designed lenses for a curved sensor.

A+, yes, variable curvature sensor would solve this EF compatibility zanyness.

But goodness, do you see a company jumping from [rigid / flat] all the way to [flexible / variably curved] on a first foray into curved sensors? Wouldn't a layup of a curved sensor fixed lens rig be a logical place to tinker with a curved sensor before swinging for the fences?

- A