Canon mirrorless: Status?

[c.d.embrey]

Different cultures think in different ways. Americans are into BIGGER is BETTER. Asians seem to like Hello Kitty.

I like small cameras with prime lenses because they are inconspicuous. Many Very Serious Photo Enthusiasts like Full Frame Pro Bodies with 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses because they scream "Hey look at me!!!"

I like prime lenses between 14mmFF/28mmFF and 85mmFF/135mmFF. I don't have any need for 35mmFF to 60mmFF, they don't fit my shooting style. YMMV. What does suite my shooting style is close-focusing. An 85mm f/1.8 on a xxD (= 135mm FF) doesn't focus close enough for me. I'm much better served by an Olympus 75mm f/1.8 on a M4/3 camera (= 150mmFF).

As the world changes, different tools go into/out-of style. Will Canon pick the right tool or the wrong tool ???

 

[ahsanford]

If the #1 reason Canon isn't going all-in on mirrorless is to protect SLR (and EF lens) sales, the #2 reason has got to be the lack of clear market segmentation. In this thread alone, people have asked for different things:

• People who want a compact 2nd body that works with their Canon EF/EF-S glass.
• People who want a small set of high quality primes.
• People who want a discreet camera system, usually for shooting street or photojournalism
• People who want a simple, smaller sized camera system
• People want everything in the SLR market run shrunk down to mirrorless proportions

And people on other threads want something stylish or retro looking, have a hybrid VF, a grip, 87 color choices, etc.

And we wonder why Canon hasn't waded into this soup... : We should not be surprised EOS-M is half-baked at this point.

Consider: it's possible that Canon has put the following logic together...

'Mirrorless actually is the future, but specifically what that future's market will be is all over the place right now. It's best to let Sony/Fuji/m43 wade through the aforementioned buzzsaw of different users and different expectations, try and fail a bunch of times, until which time the market has clearly settled. Then we'll come in and roundly and thoroughly support that market with 2-3 dead on-target bodies and a proper lineup of lenses. We, Canon the almighty, believe that the market will solidify into something we can divide and conquer faster than we will lose an unacceptable level of our core professional customers. We might be wrong, we may lose the farm on this math, but it's the math we're sticking with.'

This very well may be where they are. But as a stubborn SLR guy who is admittedly intrigued with mirrorless, I hope they don't take too long to pick something and get on with more native (EF-M) lens offerings.

- A

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

another topic with several predictable replies. This one is fun though because AVTVMland is much more happy and blissful than dilbertland.

Canon hopefully have learned their lesson. Do NOT bring sub-par specced gear (EOS-M) to market, asking WAY TOO HIGH PRICES for it (EOS-M).

I definitely expect an
* EOS M3
body size like EOS-M2, AF as good as Sony A6000/5100, sensor equal, Wifi built in, flash built-in priced competitively [i.e. around USD/€ 650 including EF-M 18-55] this one is feasible
plus additionally
* a much better specced EOS M "Pro 1"
with kick-butt 7D II sensor, mirrorless class-leading DP-AF, fully articulated touch-screen 1920x1080 Full-HD res, WiFI, GPS and RT-Commander built in; 4k video like pany GH4, body size slightly smaller than Fuji XT-1, 1 thumb/select wheel in back, plus 1 dial close to shutter, priced competitively at around USD/€ 1299,-
any time soon. this one is a what you smokin one though - RT commander, built in?????


Followed somewhat later by the announcement of the Canon FF EOS XL1" and "XL 3" mirroless cams plus new short-back lens mount Canon EF-XL and initial native lens selection of 24-70/4.0 plus pancake set of 20/2.8, 50/1.8 and 75/2.8. 8) 8) 8)

Guess, which one I will pre-order!

I still think the biggest problem of mirrorless is that it lacks any kind of real identity. It wants to be small and compact but those that have the $$$ to plunk down for it also want the IQ and speed you get in a standard body - for that you need a few more years because they R&D guys are faced with the problem of having all these great optical formula's that they have to reinvent in order to size it down to 'mirrorless size.'

IMO, mirrorless only really takes off when EVF tech gets substantially better and can be placed in a standard FF body (same size as 5d, 6d, and 1dx) - FF mirrorless in a pro sized body with a native EF mount = no compromising on glass.

right now the benefits of mirrorless aren't enough to the compromises one must make in glass and functionality (AF, EVF, FPS)

 

[Aglet]

from

www.mirrorlessrumors.com/cipa-data-mirrorless-cameras-shipment-growing-dslr-falling-even-in-us-and-eu

 

[unfocused]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I think everyone who wants a soup-to-nuts 'yes, we offer that' in mirrorless would be wiser to leave Canon/Nikon immediately. Fuji, Sony and the m43 gang will far, far better support your ambitions. They have multiple mirrorless body price points and all sorts of tiers of tiny/average/big sensors and cheap/okay/semi-pro build qualities. Plus, they have a ton more lenses that are native to the mount than with EF-M.

I also do not understand why folks want reach for these microscopic bodies. I might be way off here, but mirrorless needs to be small. Period. The minute the camera gets above length X with lens attached -- let's say 6-8" -- I think the upside of that tiny body is lost...

But if you want Canon/Nikon to evolve all their hardware -- lenses, bodies, flashes, etc. -- into the smaller format, give up now. Won't happen for years and years. Again, consider a company like Sony/Fuji/m43 who is actively trying to build up their mounts with more options. You'll find more joy there.

- A

I kind of agree with this. Since any mirrorless is going to require a new lens system regardless of whether you stay with Canon or Nikon or go with some other brand, I don't get all the angst over Canon not rushing into this market.

Honestly, if I were dying for a mirrorless I would buy a Fuji. (Mostly because they are cool.) But, I also have never gotten why a mirrorless camera needs to have interchangeable lenses. As "A" says, the usable range for mirrorless is about 24-85 (I might suggest it could be a little longer, but not a lot -- maybe to 110mm or so)

If Fuji were to come out with a fixed lens zoom in that range or if Canon would improve a little on the G1X, I really think those would be better options.

 

[ahsanford]

I still think the biggest problem of mirrorless is that it lacks any kind of real identity. It wants to be small and compact but those that have the $$$ to plunk down for it also want the IQ and speed you get in a standard body - for that you need a few more years because they R&D guys are faced with the problem of having all these great optical formula's that they have to reinvent in order to size it down to 'mirrorless size.'

+1. The mirrorless market is a zoo right now. A thousand options that are partially being served by the various manufacturers = a hazy, risky investment for Canon and Nikon.

IMO, mirrorless only really takes off when EVF tech gets substantially better and can be placed in a standard FF body (same size as 5d, 6d, and 1dx) - FF mirrorless in a pro sized body with a native EF mount = no compromising on glass.

-1 on that one (at least for me). FF mirrorless with an EF mount would be massive. Isn't the point of mirrorless to remove the mirror-box and skinny up all that thickness?

I think you need a new mount based on the need to thin things up, which means you need (a) all new lenses or (b) a combination of new lenses and EF/EF-S lenses on an adaptor. Canon clearly has chosen the latter.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Honestly, if I were dying for a mirrorless I would buy a Fuji. (Mostly because they are cool.) But, I also have never gotten why a mirrorless camera needs to have interchangeable lenses. As "A" says, the usable range for mirrorless is about 24-85 (I might suggest it could be a little longer, but not a lot -- maybe to 110mm or so)

If Fuji were to come out with a fixed lens zoom in that range or if Canon would improve a little on the G1X, I really think those would be better options.

I'm intrigued why more fixed-mount lenses with a simple, high quality zoom aren't offered more often. Right now, the best bet for fixed-mount lens with a small, high quality zoom are some "cheaper" APS-C Leicas or the high-end point and shoots like the Sony RX100 series or the G1X II. Fuji has the X10, X20 bodies that do this as well, I think...

I think the reason why is manufacturers want lens pullthrough dollars, so the added cost / hassle of making it modular in as many body designs as possible is more profitable in the longer term. Just guessing, though.

- A

 

[Aglet]

I'm intrigued why more fixed-mount lenses with a simple, high quality zoom aren't offered more often. Right now, the best bet for fixed-mount lens with a small, high quality zoom are some "cheaper" APS-C Leicas or the high-end point and shoots like the Sony RX100 series or the G1X II. Fuji has the X10, X20 bodies that do this as well, I think...

I think the reason why is manufacturers want lens pullthrough dollars, so the added cost / hassle of making it modular in as many body designs as possible is more profitable in the longer term. Just guessing, though.

- A

...and there's that great new Panasonic too.
But I think you've nailed it, it's more about profit than making the best possible all-in-one that would meet the needs of 95% of people, 95% of the time.
Build such an ideal camera and you'll only sell a lot of them until you saturate the market, then you'll be out of customers and unable to sustain a robust operation.

 

[sdsr]

I'm intrigued why more fixed-mount lenses with a simple, high quality zoom aren't offered more often. Right now, the best bet for fixed-mount lens with a small, high quality zoom are some "cheaper" APS-C Leicas or the high-end point and shoots like the Sony RX100 series or the G1X II. Fuji has the X10, X20 bodies that do this as well, I think...

I think the reason why is manufacturers want lens pullthrough dollars, so the added cost / hassle of making it modular in as many body designs as possible is more profitable in the longer term. Just guessing, though.

You may be right about all that, though it's perhaps ironic that for some (doubtless a tiny minority) part of the appeal of mirrorless bodies is the ability to use lenses that aren't being made any more.... Plus, you have to wonder - yet again - at Sony's RX10 and the slightly newer Panasonic equivalent, with their supposedly excellent longish zoom lenses, which must make a lot of potential customers wonder why they should bother with Sony's and Panasonic's other mirrorless bodies.

As for an earlier point you were making about mirrorless needing to be small, that may end up being true from a marketing perspective, but for some of us (who knows how many - I suspect few, though) mirrorless has appeal independent of size (I prefer EVFs and the absence of AFMA-causing mirrors, for instance). But if you do want to keep it small, you can compensate quite a bit for loss of reach, while keeping decent-size sensors, if you boost resolution. The extent to which you can crop on a Sony a7r when using a very sharp lens such as the Sony/Zeiss 55mm 1.8 is remarkable. And if you don't insist on speed, Sony (85mm 2.8) and Nikon (film-era 100mm 2.8 E) have shown that you can go fairly long while remaining remarkably small and light.

 

[c.d.embrey]

I'm intrigued why more fixed-mount lenses with a simple, high quality zoom aren't offered more often. Right now, the best bet for fixed-mount lens with a small, high quality zoom are some "cheaper" APS-C Leicas or the high-end point and shoots like the Sony RX100 series or the G1X II. Fuji has the X10, X20 bodies that do this as well, I think...

Panasonic makes the FZ1000 with a 1" sensor, a fixed (=FF) f/2.8-f/40 25–400 mm lens and weighs 1.83 lbs (that's effing huge!).

Sony makes the RX10 with a 1" sensor, a fixed (=FF) f/2.8 24-200 mm lens that weighs 1.79 lbs (also effing huge).

More than a little too large to fit the description small/light.

 

[AvTvM]

I strongly resent cameras with fixed lenses. Sony RX-1 ... bah, I'd never buy it. Even with a "bolted-on" zoom lens I'd feel narrowed in. I want to be able to change lenses if I and whenever I want to. Including usi9ng my 70-200/2.8 L IS II on my EOS-M at a concert. And put the TS-E 17/4 on that same EOS-M the next day when I am urbexing at some god-forsaken abandoned textile mill in the middle of nowhere.

There is no reason whatsoever to limit myself - or even worse - let others limit me to a 24-85 eq. FOV.

Since Sony has proven, that a capable, full-frame mirrorless camera does not have to be any bigger than a mFT or APS-C one ... that's what I really want.

And btw. the mirrorless market (with lens mount) is no zoo, it is fairly simple. There are currently only four tiers to it,. and it will shrinkt to only two some time soon:

• 1" ... Nikon 1 ... bound to die. Sensor too small. Only one player without much of clue. Dead end, stay away.
• mFT - many players. also a dead end. Sensor too small relative to camera and lens size. Glass does not scale proportionately. Will be around for some years to come though. Enjoy it, while it lasts. Market leaders: Oly, Panasonic
• APS-C ... very reasonable budget alternative. One stop less photographic opportuniities at significantly lower cost than FF. As in DSLRs. Will survive for many years to come. Clear market leader: Sony/E-Mount.
• FF - 135 format. 36-24. Getting more affordable by the day. ANd really small. Inclduing nice pancakes that don't cost an arm and a leg. Clear market leader and innovator: Sony.
  

Rather simple, isn't it?

Canon? So far ... nowhere. EOS-M a success due to fantastic, but totally unwanted price/value position. And thanks to APS-C lenses that are small, really good IQ and dirt cheap. Hang in there and clamor for more and better things to come (bodies!)

 

[Haydn1971]

I still think FF Mirrorless is a flash in the pan, Mirrorless is most about being small, why shrink the body to fit a bigger sensor when most people couldn't tell the difference between a photo taken on a crop vs one taken on a FF

Mirrorless is here to stay, APS-C/M43 is where it will stay profitable, DSLR's will evolve into a Mirrorless world eventually, maybe 2-3 pro generations from now, we will be debating the merits of a Mirrorless full frame pro sized 5D/1D model range, mirrors will slowly drop away from the cheaper models, leaving a range of Mirrorless cameras with small EOS-M style, medium sized consumer APS-C models and pro sized APS-C & FF models

 

[ahsanford]

• 1" ... Nikon 1 ... bound to die. Sensor too small. Only one player without much of clue. Dead end, stay away.
  mFT - many players. also a dead end. Sensor too small relative to camera and lens size. Glass does not scale proportionately. Will be around for some years to come though. Enjoy it, while it lasts. Market leaders: Oly, Panasonic
  APS-C ... very reasonable budget alternative. One stop less photographic opportuniities at significantly lower cost than FF. As in DSLRs. Will survive for many years to come. Clear market leader: Sony/E-Mount.
  FF - 135 format. 36-24. Gettinmg more affordable by the day. ANd really small. Inclduing nice pancakes that don't cost an arm and a leg. Clear market leader and innovator: Sony.
  

Thank you -- you actually are making my point for me. IQ isn't everything in this market. In mirrorless, the needs are so wide and varied that the size of the sensor very well may not be the best way to 'tier' the market! A huge sensor typically means bigger lenses, and the folks in this market don't always welcome that. Size, features, and useability and IQ seem to be judged hand in hand in this market.

Food for thought: We're seeing some pros drop 'two sensor sizes down' and opt for the m43 rigs, while Sony is offering (effectively) a point and shoot FF rig with a fixed lens?! Up is down! Dogs and cats living together -- mass hysteria!

Sprinkle in the availability of grips, hybrid VFs and weathersealed options and you see what I'm getting at -- each sensor size is trying to say "Yes we can" to as much as possible, and the definitive 'best' / market leader has not yet surfaced. All we know is that Sony has great FF sensors, Fuji has very good sensors and the ergonomics/soul of an older film camera, and that people really love their m43 rigs for some reason. None are a train wreck, none are categorical winners, and all are still innovating.

Again, I'm not arguing for Canon/Nikon to avoid this market, but it makes some sense that they let this chaotic primordial ooze of a market evolve further before trying to conquer it.

- A

 

[AvTvM]

Again, I'm not arguing for Canon/Nikon to avoid this market, but it makes some sense that they let this chaotic primordial ooze of a market evolve further before trying to conquer it.

there is nothing chaotic in the mirrorless market. Definitely less so than in the artificially crippled, "marketing-differentiated" world of DSLRs. Batteries, Battery grips, external WFT-Wifi bricks ... all of them totally incompatible even within one manufacturers line of cameras! Canon offering 5 different APS-C mirror-slappers in parallel - 1200D, 100D, 700D, 70D, 7D/7D II at the same time .. Nikon running 3 different APS-C DSLRs, all with the same sensor in parallel and moving towards 5 different FF DSLRs in parallel- D610, D810, Df, D4s + one new rumored. And to make the mess even worse ... all of these grandfather-DSLRs "video-optimized", although mirrorless cams will always win the video game. Naturally. No mirror to be flapped out of lights' way all the time!

Now where's the primordial ooze? The mess. The clunkiness. The mirror-slappin. Fat, greasy, old and heavy 19-century mechanical tech stuff? Looks rather like Jurassic Park to me. Soon to go extinct.

 

[dickgrafixstop]

How about a mirrorless full frame camera stuck in an AE1 type body? No autofocus, full manual controls and good
battery life. Oh, wait - that's a Fuji XT1 in manual mode.

 

[unfocused]

Again, I'm not arguing for Canon/Nikon to avoid this market, but it makes some sense that they let this chaotic primordial ooze of a market evolve further before trying to conquer it.

Correct.

It's a small, immature and volatile market that is very overcrowded right now. The technology still leaves much to be desired. Most of the buyers will never own more than one lens (heck most DLSR buyers never get more than lens) so it's not like people will be locked into a particular system.

Canon and Nikon have the resources to take it slowly and see what develops. They haven't ignored the market, but they aren't as desperate as the other players, so they have the luxury of waiting and watching.

If they see the market growing, they will pounce. But for now, I can't blame them for not wanting to join the little guys who are bleeding to death.

 

[josephandrews222]

...every post on this page is very very good and demonstrates why this site is worth reading.

The 'M', even without a viewfinder, is a decent device...(we own three of them)...and is fun to use--with a better low-light sensor and improved auto-focus abilities, Canon's next mirrorless will be a winner, I think.

 

[Zv]

I've had my M for over a year. I originally bought it as a novelty / occasional use camera and partly to see what the mirrorless fuss was all about. I recently took it to Seoul as well as my 5D2. To my surprise I ended up using the M a lot more than the DSLR simply because hauling a backpack all day long got quite painful. Maybe I'm out of shape but it's a vacation damn it and I don't need or want a workout. The M was a blessing and together with the 11-22mm lens it pretty much covered what I wanted to shoot.

Point is I love DSLRs but I'm starting to think a small compact mirrorless makes a heck of a lot more sense for holidays and general use. Which is what a lot of people will want a camera for. I love the M as it is, even with its flaws I can work around and its still an enjoyable experience. All Canon need to do IMO really is improve upon it slightly and support the system to make it even better. Seriously, that 11-22mm lens is amazing! I highly recommend any wide angle fans to give a go! To have an image stabilized ultra wide zoom on a APS-C sensor / camera the size of your fist is incredible! Why is this not more popular??

 

[SiliconVoid]

"Point is I love DSLRs but I'm starting to think a small compact mirrorless makes a heck of a lot more sense for holidays and general use."

- They absolutely do, that is why so many people own both..

 

[zlatko]

How about a mirrorless full frame camera stuck in an AE1 type body? No autofocus, full manual controls and good
battery life. Oh, wait - that's a Fuji XT1 in manual mode.

But the XT1 doesn't meet your criteria ... it's not full frame.