Canon's FF Mirrorless Camera Will Have Same Internals as EOS 6D Mark II

[pedro]

Hi, maybe you've seen this as well over at the CW site
For what it's worth...

Contains a claim for a mirrorless FF body based on the upcoming 6DII...
Also contains the recent rumored specs published here

After yesterday’s rehash of all our EOS 6D Mark II rumors, I am glad I’ve got a new and fresh rumor. This rumor should also redefine (=nullify) a weird EOS 6D Mark II rumor I got some time ago.

I’ve been told (thanks) that the upcoming full-frame mirrorless camera we are sure Canon is working on, will have the same internals (bar the mirror box etc) as the upcoming EOS 6D Mark II. That’s to say that Canon’s full-frame mirrorless camera will most likely have the same specifications as the EOS 6D Mark II. They will relate like the EOS M5 and the EOS 80D.

This rumor is credible. Building a full-frame mirrorless camera using the EOS 6D Mark II components makes a lot of sense. Taking a successful DSLR and stripping it of all the mirror box related stuff worked with the EOS M5, it will work again with the full-frame MILC. This must work fine for Canon: taking the sensor, circuits, electronics, AF etc from a DSLR and fitting everything in a mirrorless camera body.

So far, this is the rumored specification list for the EOS 6D Mark II, which we think will also apply to Canon’s full-frame mirrorless camera.

All new sensor, rumored to have 28MP (we reported first here and here and here)
Dual SD slots (does not apply to MILC)
Tilting LCD (we reported first here)
Touchscreen (we reported first here)
DIGIC 7
Aiming for a sub $2000 USD body only price (we told you first here)
DPAF (we reported first here)
Possibly 4K in some capacity (we were told no 4K, 1080p 60fps instead)
Wifi, NFC & Wireless charging (we reported first in 2015)
Larger viewfinder (does not apply to MILC)
New AF system (we reported first here, does not apply to the MILC)
The EOS 6D Mark II is expected to be announced before Summer 2017. I not sure yet when Canon’s full-frame MILC will be announced. It may be towards the end of 2017.

Stay tuned…

Kr Peter

 

[Loswr]

This rumor is credible.

Given the credibility of the site, their definition of credible is simply not credible.

 

[ScottD]

I assume the Canon FF DSLR lenses would not work on this mirrorless or is this a wrong assumption.

Thank you.

Scott Dunham

 

[kphoto99]

I assume the Canon FF DSLR lenses would not work on this mirrorless or is this a wrong assumption.

Thank you.

Scott Dunham

Very likely it would work with an extension tube

 

[Don Haines]

There is absolutely nothing that says that a Canon FF mirrorless camera will not be the same form factor as existing FF cameras and will not use the EF lenses.

Look at your 6D, or your 5D4, and try to imagine where all the controls will fit on a tiny body.... Then think about how it will fit your hands and how it will balance once you put your L glass on it..... Then think about the ASTRONOMICAL expense of producing a whole new lineup of lenses, particularly when most of them are not significantly smaller than the previous lens mount.... and think about the buying public which has an expectation of what a higher level camera will look like..... and the odds of keeping the same form factor start to look like a certainty.

 

[ahsanford]

There is absolutely nothing that says that a Canon FF mirrorless camera will not be the same form factor as existing FF cameras and will not use the EF lenses.

Look at your 6D, or your 5D4, and try to imagine where all the controls will fit on a tiny body.... Then think about how it will fit your hands and how it will balance once you put your L glass on it..... Then think about the ASTRONOMICAL expense of producing a whole new lineup of lenses, particularly when most of them are not significantly smaller than the previous lens mount.... and think about the buying public which has an expectation of what a higher level camera will look like..... and the odds of keeping the same form factor start to look like a certainty.

Don, I happen to agree with you (as does about 2/3 of the forum based on polling), but I also think there's enormous room for a devil's advocate position on this in which Canon goes with a new, thin 4th mount.

Consider:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Just because it's ergonomically bereft doesn't mean Canon will prevent it from ever occurring: people adapt large glass on EOS-M, don't they?


[*]No one at all said that a thin flange decision with FF mirrorless would mean a full clone of the EF portfolio. If they went with a 4th mount, it's much more likely they'd only offer a handful of shorter FL lenses (where the aggregate camera + lens size could stay small), say in the 24-50mm range. Anything else you need would send you towards an adaptor and EF glass.
[/list]

Again, there are so many reasons Canon should go full EF with FF mirrorless, but not everyone agrees with that. Canon may actively try the 'small game' again with FF despite all common sense, perhaps in an effort to court a new generation of photographers.

- A

 

[Crosswind]

Consider:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Just because it's ergonomically bereft doesn't mean Canon will prevent it from ever occurring: people adapt large glass on EOS-M, don't they?


[*]No one at all said that a thin flange decision with FF mirrorless would mean a full clone of the EF portfolio. If they went with a 4th mount, it's much more likely they'd only offer a handful of shorter FL lenses (where the aggregate camera + lens size could stay small), say in the 24-50mm range. Anything else you need would send you towards an adaptor and EF glass.
[/list]

Again, there are so many reasons Canon should go full EF with FF mirrorless, but not everyone agrees with that. Canon may actively try the 'small game' again with FF despite all common sense, perhaps in an effort to court a new generation of photographers.

- A

I use my M5 exclusively with the EF/EF-M adapter and it doesn't feel bad at all to use EF lenses only, because the camera itself has so good ergonomics.

Canon - IMO - should definitely go full EF with their FF mirrorless - there's nothing wrong with that.
For example; if I'd buy into EF-M (while having several EF lenses), it'd be a hassle to quickly change lenses between two different systems (EF/EF-M), because of the adapter - I tried it myself with the EF-M 11-22. Great overall performance, but it didn't feel right alongside all my EF glass (too small, no IS on/off switch - had to go to the menu everytime I wanted to save energy or when on a tripod - and changing between lenses got a bit complicated). That's something you can only find out if you have it in your hands. Of course I knew that it is a smaller lens with no IS switch before I bought it, but I haven't thought that it would be such a drawback for me. I have sent it back. If the 11-22 would be EF-S mount type, so I have to use it with adapter, I would probably keep it (even without IS switch on the lens). There's the EF-S 10-18mm, but it's not convincing me regarding image quality. I wouldn't want to ever take off the adapter on my M5, because I do not want that extra step just for changing lenses. So that's why I hope that Canon will go for a full blown EF-mount type, regardless of what that means for camera size/weight. It's not just the size and weight why someone would buy into a FF mirrorless.

I'd like if they stay with the "kind of retro"-design. I like it a lot.

But... do you really think that Canon is actively working on a FF mirrorless? Don't get me wrong - I feel that'd be great, but I'm very pessimistic in that regard.

(and please excuse me for my not-so-perfect english or any grammar mistakes - I try my best)

 

[kphoto99]

What is wrong with this scenario:
The FF mirror less camera has a flange distance that is exactly 25mm shorter then the EF mount.
People who have EF lenses attach the 25mm extension tube to the camera and leave it there permanently so they can use all the EF lenses all the time.

Canon makes some small FL lenses just for the mirrorless camera for people who want to save on size.

If 25mm is to much of a difference then substitute 12mm for 25mm in the above paragraph.

 

[Luds34]

and the odds of keeping the same form factor start to look like a certainty.

I for one agree and have said as much.

 

[pokerz]

High refresh rate EVF, good battery life (1000shots) in a tiny body please

 

[danski0224]

The Sigma sd Q/H is a mirrorless camera that retains the mirror box depth of their DSLR cameras, so the design idea has precedent. The "built in" extension tube isn't removable.

If Canon got the EVF right, I'd seriously consider one.

 

[dak723]

Once you get to FF, even a mirrorless camera is not going to be small - so size would not be the selling point for FF mirrorless. Pros and high end enthusiasts are going to want the same type of performance - which means a huge battery unless you are happy with 300-500 shots per charge since mirrorless is far more of a battery drainer. You can reduce the height and even the width of the body a certain amount, but reducing the flange distance is essentially meaningless as far as size reduction. The grip is already wider than the flange distance in a good ergonomic body, and once you put lenses on the body, the size savings in that direction are minimal. Plus, reducing the flange distance creates all sorts of issues as far as getting enough light into the corners of the larger FF sensor. It would seem absurd for Canon to create a new line of high quality L lenses for a new mount.

 

[rrcphoto]

There is absolutely nothing that says that a Canon FF mirrorless camera will not be the same form factor as existing FF cameras and will not use the EF lenses.

Look at your 6D, or your 5D4, and try to imagine where all the controls will fit on a tiny body.... Then think about how it will fit your hands and how it will balance once you put your L glass on it..... Then think about the ASTRONOMICAL expense of producing a whole new lineup of lenses, particularly when most of them are not significantly smaller than the previous lens mount.... and think about the buying public which has an expectation of what a higher level camera will look like..... and the odds of keeping the same form factor start to look like a certainty.

agreed.
if you look at a 6D, 5D,etc - the depth of the EF mount is the least of the camera's height / width / depth as an issue.

changing from the EF mount offers no size savings.

 

[goldenhusky]

I understand different people have different requirements and priorities. Honestly I do not care about the size, I want the following features and I am willing to pay up to $3500 for such a Canon camera. certainly any weight reduction would be nice but I am OK if it weighs as much as 5d4.

50 MP FF sensor with the latest tech like the 80D and 5D4
EF Mount. No new mount please
At least 10 FPS shooting
DPAF
I don't care about AF points as long as the camera tracks moving subjects very well. Sounds like in the mirror less world and even in live view shooting there is no way to select individual AF points. I know this for a fact on the A6300 and even on M3. I shoot primarily Canon tried Sony but so not very happy with it. Could not stand M3 due to shutter lag so returned it.
Weather sealed
Flash Sync speed 1/250 seconds
ISO sensitivity 50-32000
Dual UHS ii SD card slots
Fully articulating touch screen
IBIS
NFC, WiFi and GPS
Battery life matching DSLRs. I know Mirror less consumes more power. Canon should come up with a larger capacity battery.
Shutter response as good as 5D4
Good ergonomics like a DSLR
4K @ 60 fps video with a better codec, i really do not care about C log
1080p @ 120 FPS
720 @ 240 FPS
4K video out in HDMI

I know I am day dreaming here but given that we are in 2017 I guess this is not a unrealistic ask.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

There seems little point to a mirrorless camera that has the same form factor, You could put any recent DSLR into live view and have a effectively mirrorless camera. So they take out the mirror and gut the autofocus system, and then add $500 to the price. How many would go for that? I expect that many would, but if they just called that switch a Mirrorless Mode switch rather than Liveview, many would figure it out.

Canon has been sitting in a quandary. The Asian Market likes smaller cameras, the US and European markets like larger cameras. As noted, a new body and mirrorless mount requires a large investment, both for manufacturing, but also for the customer. Its taken years to come out with just a handful of M lenses.

 

[mistaspeedy]

So we'll finally get a full frame Canon camera that auto-focuses accurately with all Sigma lenses

 

[danski0224]

There seems little point to a mirrorless camera that has the same form factor, You could put any recent DSLR into live view and have a effectively mirrorless camera. So they take out the mirror and gut the autofocus system, and then add $500 to the price. How many would go for that? I expect that many would, but if they just called that switch a Mirrorless Mode switch rather than Liveview, many would figure it out.

The biggest advantage would be an EVF.

I have often found the rear LCD to be almost useless in bright sunlight. Then there is the whole holding the camera at arms length (certainly away from the normal position) to use the rear LCD as the viewfinder.

I would welcome a FF Canon mirrorless, as long as they didn't gut the feature set... and I don't want something teeny tiny either. A 5D size body would be nice and a 1D series body would be perfect for me.

 

[slclick]

This could go to 12 pages but it will still be a canon timepiece rumor, take it as you will.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

This could go to 12 pages but it will still be a ********* rumor, take it as you will.

One of the dumbest ones at that. Why would a mirrorless camera have all the internals that are used for mirror control and PD autofocus? A whole bunch of stuff could go away, (and be replaced by new).

 

[Crosswind]

and I don't want something teeny tiny either. A 5D size body would be nice and a 1D series body would be perfect for me.

I'd clearly prefer the size and form factor of a Sony A7s.

If it is as huge as the 5D or 1D, there's no point for me buying it. In that case I'd stay with the APS-C M-series, even if that means a bit less quality than FF. Size/weight is much more important to me. But if it is only slightly larger than the M5, it'd be okay - kind of in between M5 and 6D.