Canon Mirrorless Information? [CR1]

[Caps18]

It means nothing to me if I can't use my EF lenses.

I can see where going smaller would be better, but if I am carrying my big lenses around, I'm not going to see much benefit over my 5Dm2. It's not like I would take this mirrorless camera over the 5Dm2 traveling or anything.

I would rather have a G1x as a backup camera to get into events and such that restrict DSLRs is the only reason.

 

[Hesbehindyou]

Canon won't be able to arouse any of my interest in their products until they fix their low ISO dynamic range.

Yet you've posted 126 times in this forum. I'd say you're already interested!

To those asking for FF, it's a niche product due to the cost of the sensor (and possibly also the cost of making the lenses compared to those for smaller cameras). It'll likely happen, but perhaps when the product and technology have been proved such that they can make a profit on what will be a high cost, relatively low volume model.

 

[Nostrada]

Canon won't be able to arouse any of my interest in their products until they fix their low ISO dynamic range.

Yes, because that was always such a big issue and no-one ever bought any Canon camera due to their low ISO dynamic range being completely inadequate. I mean, rumor has it that once, in Tibet (or was it San Francisco?), there was a philosopher who preached that it was all about the man taking the photo, not the equipment, and also devised a system for exposing a photo based on a 10EV system that would work for pretty much everything but, while the man achieved a relative degree of success, his theories were dismissed and proved to be inaccurate by the highly-trained interned trolls.

Last but not least, from what I heard, Nikon can't get any customers for the D800 since medium format cameras, costing only 20 times as much, have greater DR at the same low ISO - and everybody knows that you only need to shoot at low ISO's, and no one ever complained that the image quality at higher ISO is inadequate, since no one ever shoots at higher ISOs.

In conclusion, I whole-heartedly agree with your perspective.

 

[ecka]

I still want it to be FF, good size (not pocketable) + good grip (with a BIG battery in it) + all the necessary wheels and buttons + vari-angle LCD. Am I crazy? :-\
Perhaps there is a better chance to see something like that from Sony ... NEX-9 ?

 

[ontarian]

I still want it to be FF, good size (not pocketable) + good grip (with a BIG battery in it) + all the necessary wheels and buttons + vari-angle LCD. Am I crazy? :-\
Perhaps there is a better chance to see something like that from Sony ... NEX-9 ?

A full frame NEX-9 would have my dollar the minute it started shipping.

 

[ecka]

I still want it to be FF, good size (not pocketable) + good grip (with a BIG battery in it) + all the necessary wheels and buttons + vari-angle LCD. Am I crazy? :-\
Perhaps there is a better chance to see something like that from Sony ... NEX-9 ?

A full frame NEX-9 would have my dollar the minute it started shipping.

Yes, but I must warn you, it may be 36mp, just like D800. Is there mRAW/sRAW feature in NEX cameras?

 

[ontarian]

I still want it to be FF, good size (not pocketable) + good grip (with a BIG battery in it) + all the necessary wheels and buttons + vari-angle LCD. Am I crazy? :-\
Perhaps there is a better chance to see something like that from Sony ... NEX-9 ?

A full frame NEX-9 would have my dollar the minute it started shipping.

Yes, but I must warn you, it may be 36mp, just like D800. Is there mRAW/sRAW feature in NEX cameras?

Not that I'm aware of, I'm happy to shoot jpg most of the time though, I'm a quantity shooter.

 

[Woody]

Last but not least, from what I heard, Nikon can't get any customers for the D800 since medium format cameras, costing only 20 times as much, have greater DR at the same low ISO - and everybody knows that you only need to shoot at low ISO's, and no one ever complained that the image quality at higher ISO is inadequate, since no one ever shoots at higher ISOs.

Except the D800 captures greater low ISO dynamic range AND offers much better high ISO performance than medium format cameras. ;D

The D7000 also leaves any Canon APS-C camera in the dust as far as sensor performance is concerned.

 

[Neeneko]

To those asking for FF, it's a niche product due to the cost of the sensor (and possibly also the cost of making the lenses compared to those for smaller cameras). It'll likely happen, but perhaps when the product and technology have been proved such that they can make a profit on what will be a high cost, relatively low volume model.

This is why, ideally, they would produce a range of mirrorless cameras all at the same time, showing that they can support a new system from the low end up through high end.

Sure FF is a niche, but it is a growing one, and it is one that the mirrorless cameras have not really touched yet. Canon could really make themselves stand out and get a head start on what will probably be a significant niche long term.

 

[dr croubie]

Come on Canon, go full frame or don't bother. One major camera company should help the serious amateur masses adapt to digital just about any vintage 35mm lens ever made in the native as designed 35mm capture format. We already have a sea of near beer EVIL mirrorless bodies that bring old lenses to digital but only in 1.5x and 2x crop formats.

But if canon bring out a shorter-flange Mirrorless FF (or even APS-C) body, won't that just kill your business for the FD-EF adapters? Sure, you could probably make FD - EF-m (i'm calling the mirrorless mount EF-m btw) adapters, maybe sheaper than the official canon adapters, but the tolerances won't need to be so tight so eventually you'll just get undercut by $5 chinese ones.

Don't get me wrong, i'd love a mirrorless FF, i'd be second in the queue behind you for a FF nex-9 (or a Leica M10 if it gets live-view). But it's bad enough competing with NEX and m4/3 owners for FL/FD lenses, bringing in a FF mirrorless is going to make those lenses even more expensive.

Seeing as FF mirrorless is still probably inevitable within 3 years (hopefully sooner), i'm off to ebay to stock up...

 

[dr croubie]

I can see where going smaller would be better, but if I am carrying my big lenses around, I'm not going to see much benefit over my 5Dm2. It's not like I would take this mirrorless camera over the 5Dm2 traveling or anything.

I'd take the mirrorless travelling, and have the SLR for more specialised shots.
But depends how you travel, if you're taking a 600mm f/4 IS II, the camera on the end won't make much difference if it's NEX-sized or a 1DX.

 

[Leadfingers]

I'm still struggling with "EF compatibility, but not EF mount." If you can't mount it, it's not compatible....by definition.

...Unless they're talking about an adapter, but that's far from clear.

Anyway, if Canon releases a mirrorless camera that doesn't support EF-(S) lenses, that will be a huge failure (in my opinion). I can't think of a reason that rings true that would compel them to contrive a new form factor.

/shrug

 

[dr croubie]

I'm still struggling with "EF compatibility, but not EF mount." If you can't mount it, it's not compatible....by definition.

I presume they're talking about a short-flange mount (like 10-25mm), and an electronic adapter 20mm or so thick to a real EF mount, so you can use any EF mount lens with full autofocus and IS.
Ergo, electronically compatible with regards to AF and IS signals, but not EF mount because it's shorter.

 

[Ivar]

Also, a better DR than the 5D3 would be nice.

Come on Canon, go full frame or don't bother.

+24.36

 

[tmrgrs]

Canon has already missed the boat for many potential mirrorless buyers and it's probably too late now except for brand conscious Canon enthusiasts. They'll sell at the big retailers to walk-in dummies no doubt but just like the Nikon mirrorless, but not so much to the many many tech-savvy enthusiasts who have already bought in to this technology with m4/3 or the NEX.

I've just recently sold off my 5D2 and all of my EOS fast primes after being a Canon DSLR user for nearly a decade and now have the E-M5 & E-PL3 along with couple of fast primes and a couple of zooms. There are more fast primes and constant aperture fast zooms coming later this year for m4/3 and there's no looking back now regardless of what Canon introduces for me. Adios Canon!

 

[moreorless]

Re: 14 and 24MP?

I wonder who will be supplying the sensors for those...

If they're both Canon and 24MP is APS-C, does that mean we should also expect to see 24MP APS-C DSLRs from Canon later in the year too?

There were rumours of a Canon 24MP sensor in one or both of the 650D and 70D.

As far as mirrorless primes go I don't think you can nesserally take Canon's lack of EF-S primes as a sign. There are plenty of smaller EF primes to fill that market where as with mirrorless the expectaion is obviously for something smaller.

To me the real key to the higher end mirrorless market seems like it may well be who can get out a quality zoom first. Olympus's 12-50 seems to have disapointed many but something with either than 24mm equivilent or a constant 2.8 and good IQ would I'd say have a bigger factor in desiding who comes out ontop that differences in bodies.

 

[ecka]

Canon has already missed the boat for many potential mirrorless buyers and it's probably too late now except for brand conscious Canon enthusiasts. They'll sell at the big retailers to walk-in dummies no doubt but just like the Nikon mirrorless, but not so much to the many many tech-savvy enthusiasts who have already bought in to this technology with m4/3 or the NEX.

I've just recently sold off my 5D2 and all of my EOS fast primes after being a Canon DSLR user for nearly a decade and now have the E-M5 & E-PL3 along with couple of fast primes and a couple of zooms. There are more fast primes and constant aperture fast zooms coming later this year for m4/3 and there's no looking back now regardless of what Canon introduces for me. Adios Canon!

If the size and style of your camera system is more important than the actual images it produces (or it's just good enough), then there is nothing wrong with choosing m/43 or NEX. It may be the right choice if you don't care about the involved compromises. Looking at the m4/3 results I'm not convinced that it is much better than a premium P&S (like G1 X), while NEX APS-C sensor being more attractive which still cannot compete with Full Frame beauty.

 

[c.d.embrey]

If the size and style of your camera system is more important than the actual images it produces (or it's just good enough), then there is nothing wrong with choosing m/43 or NEX. It may be the right choice if you don't care about the involved compromises. Looking at the m4/3 results I'm not convinced that it is much better than a premium P&S (like G1 X), while NEX APS-C sensor being more attractive which still cannot compete with Full Frame beauty.

It all depends on what you are doing. I shoot advertising with a Canon APS-C. I know of some ads that were shot with M4/3 and even one cover shot with M4/3.

Always use the right tool for the job. And sometimes M4/3 is the right tool.

When the Canon mirrorless and it's lenses arrive, I'll take a look. If they are the right tools I'll buy into the system. If not I'll look elsewhere.

 

[seta666]

As a macro photographer I would like a small APS-C camera to back up my EOS 5D; but as some other said either canon fixes their low DR at base ISO (which sucks) or this camera will be a NEX (together with the 400$ NEX-EF adapter so I can use the MP-E).
And please, with cable release and flash socket!!!

 

[ecka]

If the size and style of your camera system is more important than the actual images it produces (or it's just good enough), then there is nothing wrong with choosing m/43 or NEX. It may be the right choice if you don't care about the involved compromises. Looking at the m4/3 results I'm not convinced that it is much better than a premium P&S (like G1 X), while NEX APS-C sensor being more attractive which still cannot compete with Full Frame beauty.

It all depends on what you are doing. I shoot advertising with a Canon APS-C. I know of some ads that were shot with M4/3 and even one cover shot with M4/3.

Always use the right tool for the job. And sometimes M4/3 is the right tool.

When the Canon mirrorless and it's lenses arrive, I'll take a look. If they are the right tools I'll buy into the system. If not I'll look elsewhere.

Yes, like I said, if it's good enough, then why not ?... I've seen some advertising and covers shot with Canon PowerShot G10 and it's fine when used with good lighting setup (and it is possible to add some fake shallow DoF in post-processing).