Canon Will Announce Their First Full Frame Mirrorless in 2018 [CR3]

[Don Haines]

It was not clear to me that you were meaning exclusively non IS glass on a non IS platform; I may have read that quoted line out of context. That being said, I’m not convinced canon will never make in body IS.

In body IS is best for shorter focal lengths....

In lens IS is best for longer focal lengths.....

In lens IS degrades with faster lenses, as the elements are heavier, and therefore harder to move...

Panasonic has a camera that uses both.... and apparently using both together beats using one or the other....


I can easily see in body IS appearing in the future on both Nikon and Canon cameras.....

 

[3kramd5]

It was not clear to me that you were meaning exclusively non IS glass on a non IS platform; I may have read that quoted line out of context. That being said, I’m not convinced canon will never make in body IS.

In body IS is best for shorter focal lengths....

In lens IS is best for longer focal lengths.....

Panasonic has a camera that uses both....


I can easily see in body IS appearing in the future on both Nikon and Canon cameras.....

As does sewknee.

 

[canonographer]

For Canon's sake, I hope they come out with something competitive. I'm just not convinced they're up to it anymore. They seem to be more focused on diversifying than on dominating a diminishing market.

Wow, you seem genuinely concerned about Canon's financial well being and future.
I am sure they appreciate that.

Frankly, I AM concerned. Like most people on this site, I love camera gear. I want to see more competition not less, and I would love to see Canon give me a reason to dream about coming back.

We'll see soon enough I guess, but I'm rooting for them.

 

[neuroanatomist]

For Canon's sake, I hope they come out with something competitive. I'm just not convinced they're up to it anymore. They seem to be more focused on diversifying than on dominating a diminishing market.

Wow, you seem genuinely concerned about Canon's financial well being and future.
I am sure they appreciate that.

Frankly, I AM concerned. Like most people on this site, I love camera gear. I want to see more competition not less, and I would love to see Canon give me a reason to dream about coming back.

We'll see soon enough I guess, but I'm rooting for them.

Don't worry. When Canon does come out with a FF MILC, it will fall short of the current Sony models when you compare the spec sheets. Armchair internet experts will predict doom. Meanwhile, in the real world —you know, the one where people buy cameras and take pictures— the camera will be a commercial success. But as a FF camera, it will remain a niche product in the EOS lineup.

If you want to worry for a company, worry for Sony. They led the APS-C MILC segment until Canon launched the EOS M line, at which point Sony ran to the FF MILC segment (just like they ran away from DSLRs because they couldn't compete in that CaNikon-dominated segment). Once Canon and Nikon enter the FF MILC segment, where can Sony run next to find profit? Well, at least their sensors will live on...

 

[Jack Douglas]

".... and I would love to see Canon give me a reason to dream about coming back."

A dreamer. This is ridiculous for someone stating the wonders of what they have just bought into.

Jack

 

[edoorn]

Canon (and Nikon) just need to make sure whatever they release is on par of course (or close), but they can make their offerings more interesting by making sure the ergonomics and ease of use of the menu's is better.

"The new Nikon mirrorless camera will have a nice finish and a very comfortable grip. The overall handling/feeling is supposed to be excellent - this is coming from somebody who is/has tested the camera." (from Nikon Rumors)

If Canon can do the same (and I'm quite sure they will) that would be a big plus.

 

[fullstop]

Imagine there's no mirror
It's easy if you try
No big lenses or bellows
Above us only sky
Imagine all the photons lining up today ...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one.

-----

i am dreaming of a shirt-pocket-sized computational camera without detachable lenses but IQ and photographic possibilities far beyond any of today's cameras and glass bricks. Looking at Canon I seriously doubt it will come from them, even if they had a working prototype today. "It could be bad for their highly profitable camera brick and polished glass lens business".

But ... I am not concerned. Not at all. Someone else will sell me one soon enough.

 

[Talys]

Imagine there's no mirror
It's easy if you try
No big lenses or bellows
Above us only sky
Imagine all the photons lining up today ...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one.

-----

i am dreaming of a shirt-pocket-sized computational camera without detachable lenses but IQ and photographic possibilities far beyond any of today's cameras and glass bricks. Looking at Canon I seriously doubt it will come from them, even if they had a working prototype today. "It could be bad for their highly profitable camera brick and polished glass lens business".

But ... I am not concerned. Not at all. Someone else will sell me one soon enough.

I'm dreaming of a tricorder and orbital sensors that can capture every spectrum of light from 80000 m away and reproduce holographic models that also convey texture and smell.

In the meantime I'm having fun with my 6D2

 

[Hector1970]

If Canon made a mirrorless equivalent to the 5DIV with 10 FPS I’d be happy to pick it up.
Having a 5DSR I’m not convinced more MPs are useful.
More intelligent focusing systems would be useful. One that’s really good with bird in flight would be great.

 

[Kit.]

Sometimes it has the opposite effect. In the 1980s when Kodak was making 80% net margin on color film, they chose to not enter the digital camera market, which they could have owned, [notkodakpology]for fear it would have hurt their recurring sales[/notkodakpology].

I remember it differently. They actually tried to create the market when the technology wasn't yet ready, with products much worse than film competition, and got burned.

I would have to guess that neither of you has tried the latest generation of Sony cameras, because your examples of DSLR benefits are outdated.

So, how are the startup times of "the latest generation of Sony cameras"?

Still slower than even of my SD870 IS about 10 years ago?

 

[Sanjay]

it's great news that canon will announcing the first full frame Mirrorless camera in 2018.
but i want to know what about the lenses???
recently i bought Canon EF 24-70mm 2.8 L USM II
it will be compatible with new mirrorless full frame???

 

[fullstop]

it's great news that canon will announcing the first full frame Mirrorless camera in 2018.
but i want to know what about the lenses???
recently i bought Canon EF 24-70mm 2.8 L USM II
it will be compatible with new mirrorless full frame???

in all likelihood: yes.
To mount EF lenses a simple little Canon "extension tube" will likely be required.
IQ should be identical [unless different sensors].
AF performance will most likely be as good on a mirrorless camera as it is in liveview mode on a DSLR [with same technology sensor, e.g. DP-AF or not].

Just out of curiosity: may I ask for the reasons you are interested in a mirrorless [Canon] camera with FF sensor? Thx!

 

[PerKr]

People keep asking what's the benefit of a mirrorless camera. That's the wrong question. The right question is, what is the benefit of a DSLR?

Fast startup time, long battery life, more responsive viewfinder with higher dynamic range, dedicated AF sensor... just to name a few.

I shoot plenty sports in dim gyms, so I need AF that can handle such scenes. So far haven't seen mirrorless which is even remotely close to my 1DX. That's my biggest reason for keeping 1DX in the bag. For the studio stuff, it's different completely, so mirrorless could fit that realm very nicely.

OVF is still way better in my mind, but I'm sure in some near-ish future the EVF is close enough that the other improvements make it better in general.

I would have to guess that neither of you has tried the latest generation of Sony cameras, because your examples of DSLR benefits are outdated.

Don't get me wrong there are still reasons not to buy into Sony's ecosystem, but the reasons you list above aren't among them.

AF performance, battery life, dynamic range, EVF superiority to name a few, all fall within the Sony column. I would put the focus tracking of my A7 III up against the 1DX any time. That's with a $2K camera, let alone the $4,500 A9 w/ 20 fps, no blackout shooting 693 focus points that cover most of the sensor. I'm telling you, this stuff just works, and it works like a charm.

For Canon's sake, I hope they come out with something competitive. I'm just not convinced they're up to it anymore. They seem to be more focused on diversifying than on dominating a diminishing market.

Battery life for mirrorless still isn't good. Number of pictures is a poor measure there. The battery in my old 350D lasted for days, adding a second battery in my battery grip was never something I needed to consider. With mirrorless, not having a second battery feels somewhat risky. All this due to the viewfinder and rear screen.

And OVF is still better in some ways. Possibly the most expensive mirrorless cameras now have EVFs that have improved immensely but in my experience the WYSIWYG thing is far overrated in most cases. Not to mention what a PITA it is when you head into the studio and the camera manufacturer didn't think to make it easy to deactivate the WYSIWYG feature.

Still, we are headed for a mirrorless future and I hope Canon makes something good out of it. Something that both works well and looks good (no, I don't like the styling of the M-series). And that they keep at least one OVF option alive.

 

[Kit.]

And OVF is still better in some ways. Possibly the most expensive mirrorless cameras now have EVFs that have improved immensely but in my experience the WYSIWYG thing is far overrated in most cases. Not to mention what a PITA it is when you head into the studio and the camera manufacturer didn't think to make it easy to deactivate the WYSIWYG feature.

I'd say that for an experienced photographer, WISIWYG is actually better suited for a studio. In the field, where the photographer has little direct control over the lighting, a knowledge of what exactly is in those blown out highlights and whether it's worth salvaging won't hurt.

That could also be made work with EVF (by underexposing the sensor for EVF display), but it wouldn't be WYSIWYG anymore.

 

[edoorn]

Well, what PerKr I think refers to is the fact that when you use flash, you don't want the real time view of the EVF since you'll see nothing but black . However I believe most mirrorless camera's will switch this off when a flash or trigger is attached?

In field situations where you have no control I see the value of an EVF because you can directly assess if your lighting is correct and highlights not blown out. Of course you can nail that too with an OVF but with an EVF, no more looking on the back of the LCD is needed. For people that need to work fast (think weddings for example) this could be very useful.

Furthermore, the current Sony batteries seem to be doing quite well and give the same amount of shots as a dslr, as far as the reviews say at least.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Not to mention what a PITA it is when you head into the studio and the camera manufacturer didn't think to make it easy to deactivate the WYSIWYG feature.

I'd say that for an experienced photographer, WISIWYG is actually better suited for a studio.

Ummmmm...no. Often in a studio, you want complete control over the lighting, which means all of the light picked up by the camera comes from your strobes. That means a narrow aperture (I use f/11 - f/14), shutter at Xsync (1/200 s - 1/250 s), and low ISO (100-400). Those camera settings are intended to eliminate the contribution of ambient light, so in typical studio lighting when the strobes aren't firing, WYS will be essentially black.

 

[Kit.]

Not to mention what a PITA it is when you head into the studio and the camera manufacturer didn't think to make it easy to deactivate the WYSIWYG feature.

I'd say that for an experienced photographer, WISIWYG is actually better suited for a studio.

Ummmmm...no. Often in a studio, you want complete control over the lighting, which means all of the light picked up by the camera comes from your strobes. That means a narrow aperture (I use f/11 - f/14), shutter at Xsync (1/200 s - 1/250 s), and low ISO (100-400). Those camera settings are intended to eliminate the contribution of ambient light, so in typical studio lighting when the strobes aren't firing, WYS will be essentially black.

Oh, I was thinking about static subjects and modeling light, where you could just crank up the ISO for the setup.

 

[bwud]

Do it with a MF 200-400mm lens on a perched bird (where you've got to be quick), through a magnified viewfinder, with no IS or IBIS... That was kinda the point. Please go back and read the beginning of the conversational sidebar.

Here you’re moving the goal posts. Nowhere in the original chain did a moving subject arise, nor did the lack of IBIS. That was a caveat you later added.

BTW: What was your magnification factor on the lamp post? 10X looking through the viewfinder? Looks like you were in "Live View" at 6.2X to me. Not the same. Not what we were talking about.

I have no idea, whatever the camera does. Maybe it was only 6, fine, makes little difference. If you’re concerned with 10X the FOV of 50mm (as in the original post), you should not be brushing off 6.2X the FOV of 400.

Through the viewfinder, sir. Handheld. No tripod, No sandbag (tummy). lol

Yes, I know we were talking about using the viewfinder. Unfortunately I can not hold a camera with a big lens to my face and also hold a second camera on it to show what I’m doing and also manually focus; I’m at least one arm shy of that capability . I did it that way rather than just posting a picture to head off the “I don’t believe that was from a focus magnified manual focus setup” reply.

It’s *easier* and faster to control it when using two hands and the VF rather than one finger while aiming with a breathing “sandbag.” I’ve taken numerous photos, even of birds, with just that configuration.

I'll see what I can do tomorrow with a 200mm lens (to simulate 400mm FOV) on my Olympus. Through the viewfinder and IBIS off since Canon probably won't have IBIS.

Alright, if you want to hamstring your camera to demonstrate that not having new technology makes shooting more difficult, go for it. That’s an obvious conclusion.

Can I do it at 400mm at 10X with all the stabilization turned off aiming quickly at a small subject? Probably not. Will canon have in body stabilization with the first generation? Probably not. Will they eventually? Probably. It’s a powerful tool and while canon can sometimes be slow to adopt, when they do, they typically do it well. Canon’s execution is second to none in this market.

 

[Don Haines]

Not to mention what a PITA it is when you head into the studio and the camera manufacturer didn't think to make it easy to deactivate the WYSIWYG feature.

I'd say that for an experienced photographer, WISIWYG is actually better suited for a studio.

Ummmmm...no. Often in a studio, you want complete control over the lighting, which means all of the light picked up by the camera comes from your strobes. That means a narrow aperture (I use f/11 - f/14), shutter at Xsync (1/200 s - 1/250 s), and low ISO (100-400). Those camera settings are intended to eliminate the contribution of ambient light, so in typical studio lighting when the strobes aren't firing, WYS will be essentially black.

Oh, I was thinking about static subjects and modeling light, where you could just crank up the ISO for the setup.

I do both.....

 

[bwud]

Not to mention what a PITA it is when you head into the studio and the camera manufacturer didn't think to make it easy to deactivate the WYSIWYG feature.

I'd say that for an experienced photographer, WISIWYG is actually better suited for a studio.

Ummmmm...no. Often in a studio, you want complete control over the lighting, which means all of the light picked up by the camera comes from your strobes. That means a narrow aperture (I use f/11 - f/14), shutter at Xsync (1/200 s - 1/250 s), and low ISO (100-400). Those camera settings are intended to eliminate the contribution of ambient light, so in typical studio lighting when the strobes aren't firing, WYS will be essentially black.

Oh, I was thinking about static subjects and modeling light, where you could just crank up the ISO for the setup.

I do both.....

I use both monolights with modeling lamps, and speedlights.With monos, I tend to shoot mirrorless. With speed lights, I use SLR.

Although my mirrorless camera has a mode to turn off exposure preview (which it perplexingly calls “settings effect”), it is only grossly emulating an optical viewfinder. It’s still displaying a digital signal, presumably with an equivalent “shutter speed” associated with the readrate of the sensor. It would be interesting to see if the EVF is darker in that mode with the Sony A9 since it reads the sensor much more rapidly than the A7 series.

Granted I only have a sample size of two, both from the same manufacturer (Sony a7r ii and a7r iii), but unless other manufacturers have significantly better technology, low light viewfinding is still the domain of SLR.