Canon High End Mirrorless Camera Talk [CR2]

[Deleted member 378875]

Surely we can guess at most aspects of the camera : Full Frame, EF lens mount, 4K - probably cropped with unpopular codec, reasonable dynamic range, and perhaps silent shutter with high FPS too and perhaps viewfinder magnification to match Sony.

But, it seems to me there is one feature which is utterly paramount above all else : In Body Stabilization for Still Shots.

This would overnight dramatically improve the low-light performance of all the great non-IS lenses - including the 16-35 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8 II, all the Canon (and Sigma Art series) Primes.

I can't think of anything which would be more likely to convince Canon owners to stick with Canon ... than if all their lenses were upgraded by 3 or 4 stops.

Anyone else agree ?

 

[sanj]

What are the advantages of mirrorless? Besides very high shutter speeds? Size and weight are not issues for me; in fact, I like how the 5D IV feels with a Sigma 135mm Art on it.

Please direct me to the thread where this was discussed. Thanks!

Size and weight are of real importance to me.

 

[Khalai]

I know a big enough sample of professionals to say it's very different with the A9 vs the previous models.

Fair enough. The A9 sales could be 10-fold more than the a7 sales, and still amount to just a drop in the ocean of the ILC market.

All aboard the Sony hypetrain

 

[Loswr]

Size and weight are not issues for me

Size and weight are of real importance to me.

Exactly. But which of you is in the majority? I have no idea...I'll just have to wait until Canon releases either a FF MILC with a native EF mount, or a compact FF MILC with an adapter for EF lenses, and then I'll know.

 

[docsmith]

What are the advantages of mirrorless? Besides very high shutter speeds? Size and weight are not issues for me; in fact, I like how the 5D IV feels with a Sigma 135mm Art on it.

Please direct me to the thread where this was discussed. Thanks!

To start, think about the benefits of Live View:

• live histogram
• focus peaking
• zebras
• seeing what the sensor sees
• spot focus anywhere

Also, once you remove the mirror apparatus (size and location) you're free to make a number of changes, as suits a particular need:

• Want it smaller and lighter? Just squeeze it together and make a smaller device
• Want 16 usable stops of DR? Use two sensors and a partial mirror to have full-time integrated HDR
• Want better light collection, color, resolution from the same pixel count? Install a trichroic prism and 3-sensor system for separate R,G,B collection.
• Want maximum size from each capture? Use a 42mm square sensor to grab the whole image circle, and never have to choose "portrait" or "landscape" at capture.
• Want a disruptive design? Make the "camera" just a large lens cap, and move all control, preview, etc. to your mobile device or VR goggles.

Are those necessarily benefits of mirrorless? Seems like several of those are introducing new, and likely complex and expensive, new technologies.

The standard "pro" list of mirrorless as I know it:

• Bodies can be smaller as you do not need the mirror box.
• Lenses can be placed closer to the sensor as you no longer need to account for space for the mirror. This, in theory, could make lenses a bit smaller. In practice...see the G-series lenses. But, there does seem to be some benefit if you look at EF-m vs EFs lenses
• FPS would no longer be limited by the motion of the mirror
• Could potentially be much quieter
• Removal of the mirror could result in a cost savings and eliminates a moving part that could fail
• On sensor AF could be wider, covering close to the entire frame

On the "Con" side:

• Many are fine with current dSLR ergonomics and do not want smaller ergonomics
• Smaller body likely equals smaller battery which could impact both number of shots per battery charge and voltage to drive AF
• Until we have a truly rapid global shutter, we will still need a mechanical shutter which will limit FPS
• New lens mount would make all of our current lenses obsolete
• No mirror eliminates the possibility of an optical viewfinder, thus you end up with electric view finders
• Until recently, sensor AF was not as fast as PDAF

I own both. I personally enjoy the 5DIII ergonomics and OVF. Is the market eventually headed mirrorless? Likely, as I hear it will eventually be less expensive to manufacture and the less expensive products do tend to win out in the long run.

But, I am one of those practical people (usually) that buys the best camera available at the time and defines "best" as fitting my personal needs. I own the G7X and M3 for size/weight advantages and the 5DIII for everything else.

Lots of articles out there on this. For example:

https://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr

 

[Khalai]

On the "Con" side:

• Many are fine with current dSLR ergonomics and do not want smaller ergonomics
• Smaller body likely equals smaller batter which could impact both number of shots per battery charge and voltage to drive AF
• Until we have a truly rapid global shutter, we will still need a mechanical shutter which will limit FPS

• New lens mount would make all of our current lenses obsolete

• No mirror eliminates the possibility of an optical viewfinder, thus you end up with electric view finders
• Until recently, sensor AF was not as fast as PDAF

Which is why I seriously doubt that Canon will abandon EF mount after three decades. Canon is thriving from their awesome glass, some of which are not found elsewhere, some of which belongs to the top tier class, which rivals even much more expensive lenses (35/1.4L II vs 28/1.4 Otus for example). I could be wrong of course, but I'd bet my all Zeiss glass, that Canon will not abandon EF mount anytime soon

 

[Loswr]

Lots of articles out there on this.

I like this one, predicting the death of the dSLR at the hands of mirrorless. It's from 2010. Kinda ironic that the headline photo is a Samsung MILC.

Then there's this one, from October 2013, which puts a 5-year time limit on the life of the consumer dSLR. Just one year left, then...poof.

 

[RGF]

another camera for canon to try experiments on. perhaps canon will get innovative

 

[chrysoberyl]

To start, think about the benefits of Live View:

• live histogram
• focus peaking
• zebras
• seeing what the sensor sees
• spot focus anywhere

Also, once you remove the mirror apparatus (size and location) you're free to make a number of changes, as suits a particular need:

• Want it smaller and lighter? Just squeeze it together and make a smaller device
• Want 16 usable stops of DR? Use two sensors and a partial mirror to have full-time integrated HDR
• Want better light collection, color, resolution from the same pixel count? Install a trichroic prism and 3-sensor system for separate R,G,B collection.
• Want maximum size from each capture? Use a 42mm square sensor to grab the whole image circle, and never have to choose "portrait" or "landscape" at capture.
• Want a disruptive design? Make the "camera" just a large lens cap, and move all control, preview, etc. to your mobile device or VR goggles.

Really - zebras? Is that an arcane term for some sort of banding?

Use two sensors and a partial mirror to have full-time integrated HDR: Why hasn't this been done, to satisfy those who require lots of DR?

Want maximum size from each capture? Use a 42mm square sensor to grab the whole image circle, and never have to choose "portrait" or "landscape" at capture: What does this have to do with mirrorless?

But thanks for your effort.

 

[Khalai]

To start, think about the benefits of Live View:

• live histogram
• focus peaking
• zebras
• seeing what the sensor sees
• spot focus anywhere

Also, once you remove the mirror apparatus (size and location) you're free to make a number of changes, as suits a particular need:

• Want it smaller and lighter? Just squeeze it together and make a smaller device
• Want 16 usable stops of DR? Use two sensors and a partial mirror to have full-time integrated HDR
• Want better light collection, color, resolution from the same pixel count? Install a trichroic prism and 3-sensor system for separate R,G,B collection.
• Want maximum size from each capture? Use a 42mm square sensor to grab the whole image circle, and never have to choose "portrait" or "landscape" at capture.
• Want a disruptive design? Make the "camera" just a large lens cap, and move all control, preview, etc. to your mobile device or VR goggles.

Really - zebras? Is that an arcane term for some sort of banding?

Use two sensors and a partial mirror to have full-time integrated HDR: Why hasn't this been done, to satisfy those who require lots of DR?

Want maximum size from each capture? Use a 42mm square sensor to grab the whole image circle, and never have to choose "portrait" or "landscape" at capture: What does this have to do with mirrorless?

But thanks for your effort.

Square mirror requires very long flange distance. Sans mirror, it's much more feasible, even with current lenses and mounts

 

[Orangutan]

What are the advantages of mirrorless? Besides very high shutter speeds? Size and weight are not issues for me; in fact, I like how the 5D IV feels with a Sigma 135mm Art on it.

Please direct me to the thread where this was discussed. Thanks!

To start, think about the benefits of Live View:

• live histogram
• focus peaking
• zebras
• seeing what the sensor sees
• spot focus anywhere

Also, once you remove the mirror apparatus (size and location) you're free to make a number of changes, as suits a particular need:

• Want it smaller and lighter? Just squeeze it together and make a smaller device
• Want 16 usable stops of DR? Use two sensors and a partial mirror to have full-time integrated HDR
• Want better light collection, color, resolution from the same pixel count? Install a trichroic prism and 3-sensor system for separate R,G,B collection.
• Want maximum size from each capture? Use a 42mm square sensor to grab the whole image circle, and never have to choose "portrait" or "landscape" at capture.
• Want a disruptive design? Make the "camera" just a large lens cap, and move all control, preview, etc. to your mobile device or VR goggles.

Are those necessarily benefits of mirrorless? Seems like several of those are introducing new, and likely complex and expensive, new technologies.

Yes: you can't do those until you remove the OVF/focus mirror. 3-chip video cameras have been in use a long time, it's not new. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-CCD_camera. Only the last item is really "new," and CamRanger is a pretty close approximation.

 

[chrysoberyl]

The standard "pro" list of mirrorless as I know it:

• Bodies can be smaller as you do not need the mirror box.
• Lenses can be placed closer to the sensor as you no longer need to account for space for the mirror. This, in theory, could make lenses a bit smaller. In practice...see the G-series lenses. But, there does seem to be some benefit if you look at EF-m vs EFs lenses
• FPS would no longer be limited by the motion of the mirror
• Could potentially be much quieter
• Removal of the mirror could result in a cost savings and eliminates a moving part that could fail
• On sensor AF could be wider, covering close to the entire frame

On the "Con" side:

• Many are fine with current dSLR ergonomics and do not want smaller ergonomics
• Smaller body likely equals smaller battery which could impact both number of shots per battery charge and voltage to drive AF
• Until we have a truly rapid global shutter, we will still need a mechanical shutter which will limit FPS
• New lens mount would make all of our current lenses obsolete
• No mirror eliminates the possibility of an optical viewfinder, thus you end up with electric view finders
• Until recently, sensor AF was not as fast as PDAF

I own both. I personally enjoy the 5DIII ergonomics and OVF. Is the market eventually headed mirrorless? Likely, as I hear it will eventually be less expensive to manufacture and the less expensive products do tend to win out in the long run.

But, I am one of those practical people (usually) that buys the best camera available at the time and defines "best" as fitting my personal needs. I own the G7X and M3 for size/weight advantages and the 5DIII for everything else.

Lots of articles out there on this. For example:

https://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr

Thank you; this is what I hoped for. For me, I don't see a great benefit to mirrorless at this time. But it is interesting to see it discussed.

 

[chrysoberyl]

Square mirror requires very long flange distance. Sans mirror, it's much more feasible, even with current lenses and mounts

This thread is interesting! So why not a 36mm square sensor? Personally, I have no problem with square images.

 

[docsmith]

On the "Con" side:

• Many are fine with current dSLR ergonomics and do not want smaller ergonomics
• Smaller body likely equals smaller batter which could impact both number of shots per battery charge and voltage to drive AF
• Until we have a truly rapid global shutter, we will still need a mechanical shutter which will limit FPS

• New lens mount would make all of our current lenses obsolete

• No mirror eliminates the possibility of an optical viewfinder, thus you end up with electric view finders
• Until recently, sensor AF was not as fast as PDAF

Which is why I seriously doubt that Canon will abandon EF mount after three decades. Canon is thriving from their awesome glass, some of which are not found elsewhere, some of which belongs to the top tier class, which rivals even much more expensive lenses (35/1.4L II vs 28/1.4 Otus for example). I could be wrong of course, but I'd bet my all Zeiss glass, that Canon will not abandon EF mount anytime soon

Agreed, but let's not forget the long term impacts. If there is a true benefit, then Canon should introduce a new mount. In the long run, it will pay off. If the benefit is small or negligible, I expect Canon to stick with the EF mount. Either way, I expect a long transitional period.

In another thread, about 6 months ago, I predicted that Canon would be selling dSLRs until ~2030, so another 13 years, or 12 years after the release of the "high end" mirrorless body. Technically, that is enough time for 3 more generations of the 5D and 1Dx bodies, my guess would be that we see 2 more generations (2020 and 2025). If there is a mount change, that is enough of a transitional period.

 

[rrcphoto]

Too far out to speculate, but yeah, they should take note of where Sony is going in mirrorless.

except a negligible amount of people are purchasing sony's .. so why repeat a mistake?

I used to have the same opinion when it was the A7 but the amount of people I know who are buying A9's in pairs as well is staggering. Professional wedding photographers are inhaling them off the shelves. Interestingly a lot of folks are leaving Nikon due to the similarities in sensor output but less so with Canon.

well, looking at bhphotovideo and amazon.. they don't appear to be flying off the shelves there. the only ones that seem to be flying off the shelves is the 5D Mark IV.

 

[unfocused]

Fourth Quarter 2018 is a long ways away. A lot can change between then and now. But it will give people on this forum lots to argue about in the meantime and that may be why someone slipped that slide into the presentation.

My thoughts.

I can't see a fourth lens mount from Canon. So I would guess either APS-C with existing EF-M mount or full-frame with EF mount.

Full frame is not guaranteed. The Fuji X-Pro is certainly high-end and not full-frame. The 7DII is high-end. I could see a 7DIII and a high-end mirrorless sharing the same sensor. We've had like a gazillion pages of discussion about how the new 6DII sensor is no better than the 80D. One might reasonably expect the 7DIII sensor to be even better than the 80D sensor, so perhaps Canon is confident that they won't need to go full-frame.

We don't have access to Canon's market research, so we don't know what the driving factors are behind mirrorless. If it is size, then APS-C is the more likely sensor size. If it is something else, then a full-frame sensor is possible -- but I'd like to know what that "something" might be.

 

[Ditboy]

Introduced Q4 of 2018? Kiss it goodbye Canon, Sony will be way too far out front to catch. Been a Canon user for 40 years. I went to a Sony a9 demo this weekend. It's the real deal. When they add some serious long glass, the tide will turn. Sony is playing it really smart too, marketing to Canon users. The rep had a metabones adaptor for EF glass and passed it around with a 24-70 mounted. "Buy our bodies now and convert glass to native Sony as you can" is the feeling I got. 2019? Too late. The sidelines will still be white lenses, but with Sony on them. And for those who don't shoot sports or nature, Fuji is positioned well right now too.

 

[Yasko]

I know a big enough sample of professionals to say it's very different with the A9 vs the previous models.

Fair enough. The A9 sales could be 10-fold more than the a7 sales, and still amount to just a drop in the ocean of the ILC market.

Never underestimate the power of tenth

 

[H. Jones]

Introduced Q4 of 2018? Kiss it goodbye Canon, Sony will be way too far out front to catch. Been a Canon user for 40 years. I went to a Sony a9 demo this weekend. It's the real deal. When they add some serious long glass, the tide will turn. Sony is playing it really smart too, marketing to Canon users. The rep had a metabones adaptor for EF glass and passed it around with a 24-70 mounted. "Buy our bodies now and convert glass to native Sony as you can" is the feeling I got. 2019? Too late. The sidelines will still be white lenses, but with Sony on them. And for those who don't shoot sports or nature, Fuji is positioned well right now too.

As a photojournalist that just tried out an A9 this past weekend.. I'm not sold at all. The EVF was terrible even in high performance mode, which really surprised me since all I've heard about online is "how great the EVF is," but I guess the greatness comes from how terrible they always have been. I wasn't a fan of the ergonomics or the menu system and found it extremely un-intuitive at every turn. Even with just the 70-200 on it I despised the size of it, and adding the grip really didn't do much for me either. It's an uncomfortable camera in general. I would absolutely hate to imagine putting some real long glass on it. As someone that depends on getting the shots to pay the bills, it really makes no sense to switch to something that will only get in the way of how I shoot.

But even beyond that, as a platinum professional service member, it's going to take a lot more than improving the problems with the A9 to get me to even begin thinking about changing brands, and that goes for most of the professional news/sports organizations that I know that depend on professional services day in and day out. That simply won't change in the course of a few years. Once Canon decides to drop their own flagship, professional mirrorless camera, I'm sure it will be at a time when the technology is actually there.

 

[HarryFilm]

Adding some fuel to this NEW CAMERA rumour fire, I am adding my juicy tidbit
from an update of one of my previous posts where I alluded to a VERY HIGH END medium format Canon camera using a 1Dx Mark 2 body style with possibly a 65mm/70mm-type medium format sensor.

See original post:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=32297.0

I also alluded to a grainy Skype video seen that seemed to correlate to just such a system.

Now the interesting thing is that I have SEEN a much clearer Skype-streamed copy of that video from Germany containing a now much more obvious large medium format unmistakeably Canon Camera design that was definitely used on a football pitch (i.e. soccer field for you Americans) in Munich, Germany (i.e. Olympiapark sports complex)

I also have a better ability to make a direct comparison of the actual size and I can say it is twice the size of a 1Dxmk2 and depthwise from front-to-back is about twice the depth of the 1Dxmk2. I can also say the lenses are HUGE and probably very heavy but I think I can live with that since it has been told to me over and over again by my Germany/Netherlands contacts that it shoot 25 fps at 50 megapixels
48 bit colour (16-bits per colour channel!) onto user-specified INTERNAL SSD hard disks OR CFAST cards OR BOTH! It has ALSO been told to me over and over again that it shoots 50 megapixel 25 fps 48bit colour RAW and 4:4:4 Wavelet-based JPEG-2000 images. It HAS the ability to shoot 50/60 fps 4K video sampled from the ENTIRE SENSOR area and NOT cropped. It HAS an articulating OLED touchscreen with a stated resolution of 1920 x 1200 (that's a weird resolution!), a 3.5mm microphone input jack AND a headphone/audio output jack! 10-bit 4:2:2 MP4-style (is it Canon AVC?) video codec will be there at the starting gate along with CLOG 1/2/3 as told to me!

It is obvious to me that the design of the mirrorless camera and it's construction indicates a well-along body and lens design that is nearly production ready. It has again, been iterated over and over again to me that the 56mm by 42mm CMOS Bayer Pattern Global Shutter Sensor resolution is 8192 by 6036 pixels (4:3 aspect ratio) and the individual photosite size is 6.82 microns per pixel with a 14.5 EV at ISO 100 of Dynamic range (that's BETTER than the 1Dx Mk2!). Mid-2018 seems to be an announce date window with a price point being somewhere between 12 000 Euros to 16 000 Euros!

THAT is the information that has been repeated to me over and over again from said tech head/engineering types who seem to KNOW A LOT ABOUT the internal specifications of the camera AND who have shown me a MUCH BETTER COPY of a video that was taken at Olympiapark sports complex in Munich, Germany.

Let the comments rip and tear into this!

But in MY BOOKS --- I saw what I saw and I am pretty sure what I saw was a FULLY WORKING Canon Medium Format STILLS camera!