Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Sony's new A9 is killer

[Orangutan]

Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.

The core argument you're making is to remind us of the recent tech past -- that technology, and the market demand for technology can evolve rapidly and unpredictably, and that companies that don't foresee this may not be able to recover. This, alone, is a plausible argument, but there are important facts that are frequently ignored by the "Canon must act now" advocates.

First, not every technological advance offers a major marketing advantage. The standard example of this is Betamax vs. VHS, I'll leave it to you to read the history for yourself. We have very good evidence from the last 10 years or so that not all advances in camera tech translate to market advantage. Even the Sony Exmor sensors bought just a slice of extra market share for Nikon, and Canon has had years to creep closer in low-ISO IQ.

Second, the horror stories of large companies fading due to their failure to see the future are not universally true. IBM is still a huge and profitable company, they've merely adjusted their business model without the PC. In those cases where it did occur (e.g. Kodak), there was a persistent disregard of clear trends before the fall, which is not the case with Canon: they've repeatedly said they think mirrorless will be an important part of the market, just not now.

In short: Canon knows FF mirrorless has a future, and are looking for it. You can bet they have prototypes and an action plan lined-up and ready to go. So far other vendors (Samsung? Fuji?) have wasted huge amounts of money to produce nice mirrorless products that flopped. FF mirrorless will come, but we don't know when...we're all still waiting for Godot.

 

[midluk]

I guess Canon will release a FF DSLR with a hybrid viewfinder before a true FF mirrorless.
I think size is no good argument for FF mirrorless cameras if you take into account the lenses needed. If you want to go small, go APS-C mirrorless (or m43). All other advantages of mirrorless cameras I can think of can also be had with a mirror.
I wouldn't be surprised if Canon introduced the possibility to attach the external EVFs of the EOS M/M6 to the 6DII.

 

[Dylan777]

Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.

The core argument you're making is to remind us of the recent tech past -- that technology, and the market demand for technology can evolve rapidly and unpredictably, and that companies that don't foresee this may not be able to recover. This, alone, is a plausible argument, but there are important facts that are frequently ignored by the "Canon must act now" advocates.

First, not every technological advance offers a major marketing advantage. The standard example of this is Betamax vs. VHS, I'll leave it to you to read the history for yourself. We have very good evidence from the last 10 years or so that not all advances in camera tech translate to market advantage. Even the Sony Exmor sensors bought just a slice of extra market share for Nikon, and Canon has had years to creep closer in low-ISO IQ.

Second, the horror stories of large companies fading due to their failure to see the future are not universally true. IBM is still a huge and profitable company, they've merely adjusted their business model without the PC. In those cases where it did occur (e.g. Kodak), there was a persistent disregard of clear trends before the fall, which is not the case with Canon: they've repeatedly said they think mirrorless will be an important part of the market, just not now.

In short: Canon knows FF mirrorless has a future, and are looking for it. You can bet they have prototypes and an action plan lined-up and ready to go. So far other vendors (Samsung? Fuji?) have wasted huge amounts of money to produce nice mirrorless products that flopped. FF mirrorless will come, but we don't know when...we're all still waiting for Godot.

I'm one of those have no time to wait for Canon to bring their FF mirorrless. Until then, my $$$ is not going to Canon camp

"So far other vendors (Samsung? Fuji?) have wasted huge amounts of money to produce nice mirrorless products that flopped" ==> where did you see Fuji products flopped? I think their mirrorless system is very enjoy and fun to shoot.

 

[Orangutan]

I'm one of those have no time to wait for Canon to bring their FF mirorrless. Until then, my $$$ is not going to Canon camp

That's fine, you should choose the products that work for you.

"So far other vendors (Samsung? Fuji?) have wasted huge amounts of money to produce nice mirrorless products that flopped" ==> where did you see Fuji products flopped? I think their mirrorless system is very enjoy and fun to shoot.

Unfortunately, not enough people agreed with you, so their sales have not been great. "Flop" does not mean it's a bad product, it means it has not been as financially successful as Fuji hoped. Looking at Amazon's ranking, it appears the XT-2 is doing OK, so I guess that's one example of a moderately successful enthusiast mirrorless, but it's still behind a bunch of Canon and Nikon reflex offerings.

 

[Eldar]

This is not a camera for me. However, that does not mean I think it is a poor camera. I just read a hands on review from a team of (in my view) objective and competent reviewers. They were not allowed to publish any images yet, but they were clearly very impressed. It will be interesting to read the indepth reviews in a couple of weeks time.

 

[Loswr]

Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.

The question is, when will mirrorless will eat the dSLR market for lunch? And regarding FF mirrorless, when —if ever— will it be more than a nibble from the lunch plate?

 

[arthurbikemad]

I've never yet seen a EVF that comes close to a DSLR, perhaps I have not tried a "decent" mirror less camera, or perhaps I am stuck in my ways or old fashioned, one thing that is overlooked IMO with say in my case the 1DX2 and 5D3/4/whatever is the wonderful viewfinder, the 1DX2 has the best viewfinder I have ever used. There is a lot to be said for looking through the glass, I can't see myself anytime soon looking thorough ten grands worth of glass via a tiny LCD no mater how many pixels it may have, IMO when you use a DSLR you see the world diferently than a mirror less camera. The new Sony looks amazing and I am sure it will be when it hits the market, call me a Canon fan boy but Sony has failed with me many times re customer support, Canon on the other hand have been amazing, as for CPS, I have to thank them for looking after me for many years and still work on bugs I find this very day.

 

[Jack Douglas]

What the hell, I just posted a response to neuroanatomist's smugness and it got deleted. Put it back!

It amazes me that anyone would want to display this kind of ongoing commentary in public (ah, but it's anonymous, of course ). I'd be embarrassed. At the very least I'd say, "thanks for the alternate viewpoint, that gives me more to think about". So, Neuro may be smug, who cares, but at least he's capable of clear reasoning and presenting solid information.

Jack

 

[slclick]

I've never yet seen a EVF that comes close to a DSLR, perhaps I have not tried a "decent" mirror less camera, or perhaps I am stuck in my ways or old fashioned, one thing that is overlooked IMO with say in my case the 1DX2 and 5D3/4/whatever is the wonderful viewfinder, the 1DX2 has the best viewfinder I have ever used. There is a lot to be said for looking through the glass, I can't see myself anytime soon looking thorough ten grands worth of glass via a tiny LCD no mater how many pixels it may have, IMO when you use a DSLR you see the world diferently than a mirror less camera. The new Sony looks amazing and I am sure it will be when it hits the market, call me a Canon fan boy but Sony has failed with me many times re customer support, Canon on the other hand have been amazing, as for CPS, I have to thank them for looking after me for many years and still work on bugs I find this very day.

I have to say I am impressed by the EVF in my Pen F. Fast startup, adjusting to changes and true to life. Sure it's not like my 5D3 but fwiw it's nothing to complain about. It sure beats the Fuji I looked at. I'm starting to really like the wysiwyg.

 

[Don Haines]

Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.

The question is, when will mirrorless will eat the dSLR market for lunch? And regarding FF mirrorless, when —if ever— will it be more than a nibble from the lunch plate?

I could see the 6D2 being mirrorless.... It is possible, but I doubt it....

As far as "eating Canon's lunch" goes, I agree with you. Crop cameras are by far the bulk of Canon's sales, and whatever happens in FF land is not going to make or break the company. That said, there is most definitely a space for, and a need for, a FF mirrorless camera in Canon's lineup, but until they get the technical details sorted out and get it packaged and priced to sell sufficient quantities to make it worthwhile, we will not see one. After all, just because they can make one is not sufficient reason to do so, it has to be worth while to the company and it's plans for the future to do so...... and that is information that only Canon has, and us users can only speculate about...

 

[IglooEater]

At $1,000 more than a 5D IV and with Sony lenses generally overpriced in comparison to Canon and Nikon, I'm not seeing this as attracting much of a market outside of early adopting specs geeks.

Agree with you on the value proposition, but the A9's 20 fps, 1/32000 shutter, no EVF blackout, etc. says that that Sony is actually attempting to undercut the 1DX2/D5 sports/wildlife crowd more than it is trying to get higher dollars over the 5D4. Sure, Sony lacks the long glass, a bomb-proof build quality and an integral grip, but hey, reason never stopped them before.

FWIW, I believe that Sony believes the A7 platform acquits itself quite nicely vs. the 5D line.

- A

Yea, that's what I thought too. My knee jerk reaction was to find it expensive but then realized in CaNikon land the equivalents (specification-wise) are considerably more expensive.

 

[privatebydesign]

At $1,000 more than a 5D IV and with Sony lenses generally overpriced in comparison to Canon and Nikon, I'm not seeing this as attracting much of a market outside of early adopting specs geeks.

Agree with you on the value proposition, but the A9's 20 fps, 1/32000 shutter, no EVF blackout, etc. says that that Sony is actually attempting to undercut the 1DX2/D5 sports/wildlife crowd more than it is trying to get higher dollars over the 5D4. Sure, Sony lacks the long glass, a bomb-proof build quality and an integral grip, but hey, reason never stopped them before.

FWIW, I believe that Sony believes the A7 platform acquits itself quite nicely vs. the 5D line.

- A

Yea, that's what I thought too. My knee jerk reaction was to find it expensive but then realized in CaNikon land the equivalents (specification-wise) are considerably more expensive.

But you can get a new 1DX MkII and 100-400 for $6,800, a Sony A9 and 100-400 is going to cost you $7,750 with grip and comparable battery power. By any measure the Sony is overpriced.

That is not to say I don't see a lot of interest in features like silent shooting, no blackout time, shutter speed range, etc etc, but how anybody can start leveling the Sony against the Canon 1DX MkII and Nikon D5 at this time is laughable. Next generation or two if they dig deep and get the lenses, flashes, and service/support, otherwise the idea of making serious inroads into that 1DX MkII/D5 market is simply not happening.

 

[Dylan777]

I'm one of those have no time to wait for Canon to bring their FF mirorrless. Until then, my $$$ is not going to Canon camp

That's fine, you should choose the products that work for you.

"So far other vendors (Samsung? Fuji?) have wasted huge amounts of money to produce nice mirrorless products that flopped" ==> where did you see Fuji products flopped? I think their mirrorless system is very enjoy and fun to shoot.

Unfortunately, not enough people agreed with you, so their sales have not been great. "Flop" does not mean it's a bad product, it means it has not been as financially successful as Fuji hoped. Looking at Amazon's ranking, it appears the XT-2 is doing OK, so I guess that's one example of a moderately successful enthusiast mirrorless, but it's still behind a bunch of Canon and Nikon reflex offerings.

Using Amazon camera ranking is not the way to say Fuji sales are not well. Without looking at amazon data, my guess those rebels are the top choices - not 5d4, 1dx and xt2 etc...

Keep in mind xt2, xpro2 and other Fuji are not designed to compete with Rebels or m5/m6.

 

[Orangutan]

Amazon

Keep in mind xt2, xpro2 and other Fuji are not designed to compete with Rebels or m5/m6.

It's also behind D750, 5DMkIII, 80D, 5DMk4, 6D, D810 and 70D.

 

[HarryFilm]

"....But you can get a new 1DX MkII and 100-400 for $6,800, a Sony A9 and 100-400 is going to cost you $7,750 with grip and comparable battery power. By any measure the Sony is overpriced.

That is not to say I don't see a lot of interest in features like silent shooting, no blackout time, shutter speed range, etc etc, but how anybody can start leveling the Sony against the Canon 1DX MkII and Nikon D5 at this time is laughable. Next generation or two if they dig deep and get the lenses, flashes, and service/support, otherwise the idea of making serious inroads into that 1DX MkII/D5 market is simply not happening. ...."

---

In terms of Stills Photography, the A9 even WITH the 20 fps and decent focus, is NOT QUITE UP TO the 1DxMk2 or the D5 where ergonomics and speed-of-end-user-operations is a critical factor. The big two cameras from Canon and Nikon are BUILT from the get go for pro sports, action and wildlife photographers and the A9 simply does not have the base ergonomics for really high end pro stills work.

That said, if you're on the VIDEO SIDE of things then the poorer ergonomics are livable since the final end result (based on demo videos I've seen!) seem to make the A9 the BETTER camera than the 5Dmk4 and 1Dxmk2 and the D5 for video shooters!

The base reason for that, is I can buy extra 3rd party rigging gear which can compensate for the poorer ergonomics and currently worse lens selection. So as a mostly video shooter, the GREAT VIDEO QUALITY on the Sony A9 can be my primary focus and I will CHANGE the rigging to my liking using 3rd party products so that I can live and work with it for professional level video work and the odd time I do a still photos job!

For the high end stills work, I will bring our 5Ds/r cameras or rent a Phase-One because the ONLY REASON I need 50+ megapixels is SOMETIMES I print photos at 48 x 36 inches AND LARGER for wall displays at trade shows.

---

I can definitely say that at least for QUALITY VIDEO WORK, the Sony A9 Definitely BEATS the 5dMk4, matches the 1Dmk2, and eats the D5 for lunch! For Stills, the Canon 1DxMk2 is still Numero Uno for Sports Action/Wildlife because my perceived better Ergonomics versus the close 2nd Nikon D5.

For 50+ megapixels, Numero Uno is Phase One, Hasselblad and then the Canon 5Ds/r.

For COMPACT pro still photo and video cameras, the Olympus OM-D E-M1 I thought was PERFECT for a GREAT PRICE as an excellent video and stills camera in a RUGGED COMPACT FORM FACTOR!

AND for us old-timers I STILL LIKE my Sinar ultra wide FILM-BACK camera for those extra-special and ultra-wide format landscape photos you can't get using any digital back yet. For those special metallic prints I push out at 96 inches by 24 inches at a 4:1 widescreen aspect ratio!

 

[Hector1970]

This is a dangerous camera for Canon. Canon sells its mid range gear on the perception they are the best. They are the brand that stands out at football and other sporting events. The A9 lacks the glass to go with it. It would be a big decision by Sony to invest in a new line of glass. 20FPS is attractive to sports shooters if the long glass is available. It's not available now so Canon are fine now and have time still to make a good mirror less camera.

 

[Orangutan]

This is a dangerous camera for Canon. Canon sells its mid range gear on the perception they are the best. They are the brand that stands out at football and other sporting events. The A9 lacks the glass to go with it. It would be a big decision by Sony to invest in a new line of glass. 20FPS is attractive to sports shooters if the long glass is available. It's not available now so Canon are fine now and have time still to make a good mirror less camera.

It might be, and I hope it is -- that would be good for market competition. However, it needs to perform up to the standard of a 1-series, and be as reliable as a 1-series, and be supported like a 1-series. I can imagine serious sport shooters getting one to try, but they'll keep the old reliable handy until it proves itself.

 

[Roo]

Amazon

Keep in mind xt2, xpro2 and other Fuji are not designed to compete with Rebels or m5/m6.

It's also behind D750, 5DMkIII, 80D, 5DMk4, 6D, D810 and 70D.

You may think that the Fuji sales figures aren't great but what do Fuji think of them? If they're hitting their own sales projections then it's not a problem.

 

[Orangutan]

Amazon

Keep in mind xt2, xpro2 and other Fuji are not designed to compete with Rebels or m5/m6.

It's also behind D750, 5DMkIII, 80D, 5DMk4, 6D, D810 and 70D.

You may think that the Fuji sales figures aren't great but what do Fuji think of them? If they're hitting their own sales projections then it's not a problem.

Sure, that's fair. But the originator of this thread was asserting that Canon should feel threatened by the new Sony A9 FF mirrorless. Fuji may be happy with their sales (and that's good for all of us), but the point remains that there is currently no serious market threat to enthusiast/pro digital reflex cameras. If the A9 lives up to its spec hype then things could change in the next year or two, but not yet.

 

[[email protected]]

Why A9 is a killer for one part of market, and not for another

The vast majority of people shooting action/news don't use large aperture big whites. Their newspaper will buy them the 70-200, and maybe they'll have the 100-400 II kicking around.

People who do pro sports, college sports, high end professional action work will use the big whites, such as the 600 II, 400 2.8 II, etc.

So when the A9 comes out along with a 100-400, they're pretty much covered for a very large portion of the market.

Using Canon glass on the Sony neuters the A9 because the FPS goes from 20 down to 10. That makes it just a nice extra capability in case you need to use a Canon lens briefly. This will not appeal to the high end of the market, but that might be an order of magnitude smaller than the other.

Whether a person or organization values the 20 fps and a few other new features higher than the ergonomics of the Canon, reliability, pro service, etc., is a matter of personal judgement. Point is that the A9 is going to be a player in those decisions for a goodly portion of the super-fast shutter market.

The more I look at the stats and the hands-on writings of various bloggers, I don't think I'd consider it myself, but I'm glad it's there keeping the heat on Canon.