Canon's Full Frame Mirorrless Cameras [CR2]

[Generalized Specialist]

When has it been that a Canon product rumored to be coming in a year's time actually came in a year's time? The best interpretation of this is that they'll make Christmas 2019. Another interpretation is that Canon recognized that it got skunked by Sony with this set of releases and needs to go back to the drawing board for the third time now to come up with something non-embarrassing; which would match up with rumors we heard of field testing being done by some selected pros in early spring.

Something's not quite right. Soon it'll be two years since Canon released the M5, and two years since we've been told Canon is taking full frame mirrorless "seriously." Who would think that upscaling the M5 to full frame will take 3 years? Something has to have been canned.

Exactly! My guess is Canon was either going to shock and awe all of us with yet another tepid parts bin half-a$$ed release that they charge a premium for but then the A7iii happened, or they've hit some major engineering hurdles. Or both. Seems like a market Canon wants to ignore while allowing Sony to make some serious money and some seriously good cameras\lenses and gaining converts/marketshare. Canon's non-participation is leaving money on the table so that alone would suggest problems in-house.

 

[Generalized Specialist]

It is a sad life to be nothing but a Sony troll.

By Sony troll you mean yet another one of those Canon guys (10 years in my case) that switched to Sony. You know, the ones you guys all claim don't exist because no Canon user has switched yet, all of 'em are still drinking the Canon kool-aid and all is well in Canon land - nothing but kitty cats, lollipops and rainbows.

Gonna be sitting here next winter season with a big grin on my face when the year end marketshare results get reported and Canon has delayed it's FF mirrorless for the umpteenth time, and reading all the excuses you guys have trying to explain away how Canon dropped the ball.

Meanwhile Canon has everything on firesale and the Sony A7iii is going for upwards of 40% over MSRP to folks who can't wait a few weeks. And next will come the A7Siii (you know that one, the one Canon isn't even going to bother competing with, for 'reasons') and the A6x00 model and who knows what else Sony has in store for us.

 

[Etienne]

Canon has changed the mount once many years ago, moreover, the relatively recent EFM mount is only compatible with EFS through an adapter, I don't see any reason why wouldn't they do the same for the prospective EFX mount. EFX plus a 'sexy' EF adapter for, say, $500. Full stop end of story.

No one really wants another mount but 'know it alls' want to act like there will be another mount and want to stick it to Canon users by making the EF glass obsolete (in their minds)

You want a handful of folks to buy the new camera? Make a new mount
You want a gajillion folks to buy it? Keep it EF

Simple.

Exactly. Canon went all in and abandoned the old mount when it produced the EF mount because they were looking at the long haul game, and the old mount would have held them back. Mirrorless is the long haul game today. There are still areas in which the SLR outperforms mirrorless, but the gap is rapidly narrowing and in 5 or 10 years time the advances is EVF tech and mirrorless design will make the SLR much less appealing even to die-hard mirror lovers.
Canon will probably keep producing good DSLR bodies for another 10 years or more, but when it comes to mirrorless there's no end in sight. So they will not limit themselves by delaying the introduction of a new mount designed to get the most of the mirrorless bodies. The transition will include a very good "adapter" solution, but a new mount is inevitable. Sony went with a new FE mount to optimize for mirrorless as well. It's the long view that will win.
It's a win-win for Canon, they absolutely will sell a lot of new lenses with a new mirrorless mount. Legacy EF lens users will stick with DSLRs, use the adapter, or sell their old lenses and buy new ones. Either way Canon wins.

 

[Generalized Specialist]

• The product will be released
• It will sell well.
• The end.

The only problem with your theory here is teenage girls buy M50's, they don't buy FF mirrorless. Canon is selling Rebels and low end mirrorless to people shooting in green box mode trying to use the pop up flash to shoot through windows at the zoo.

Yes, there are a LOT of those types of buyers. No, those customers are not the enthusiasts or pro's asking Canon for a FF mirrorless.

 

[3kramd5]

Hey, all you switching to Sony guys, be sure to use CRguy's affiliate links so he can afford to maintain a forum where you can talk about how great your cameras are, if you ever do decide to pull the trigger rather than waiting for the new version that's only a few months off that you are sure is going to fix the problems with the current version.

I’m not a switcher. I see little point in getting rid of old gear. I tried Sony (A7Rii) for a couple years, but kept my canon stuff and eventually decided the Sony wasn’t for me.

However, “the new version that’s only a few months off” is a nice “problem” to have. Long/contrived product cycles leave me thinking that when I want or need a new camera, unless it happens to coincide with a product release, I’m not getting the best the company is able to market at any given price point.

 

[sanj]

It is a sad life to be nothing but a Sony troll.

By Sony troll you mean yet another one of those Canon guys (10 years in my case) that switched to Sony. You know, the ones you guys all claim don't exist because no Canon user has switched yet, all of 'em are still drinking the Canon kool-aid and all is well in Canon land - nothing but kitty cats, lollipops and rainbows.

Gonna be sitting here next winter season with a big grin on my face when the year end marketshare results get reported and Canon has delayed it's FF mirrorless for the umpteenth time, and reading all the excuses you guys have trying to explain away how Canon dropped the ball.

Meanwhile Canon has everything on firesale and the Sony A7iii is going for upwards of 40% over MSRP to folks who can't wait a few weeks. And next will come the A7Siii (you know that one, the one Canon isn't even going to bother competing with, for 'reasons') and the A6x00 model and who knows what else Sony has in store for us.

I personally know 9 people who switched from Canon to Sony. 1 switched back to Canon. Rest 8 are very happy with Sony. All are professionals - working professionals. Fashion/Product photographers.

 

[Woody]

Yeah, but the obvious flaw in their logic is that Canon is 0.8-stops of DR behind.

That hasn't stopped Canon from grabbing 50% of ILC market shares. ;D

From http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/downsizers.html:

"Yes, yes, I know that some of you are screaming at your computer/tablet/phone as you read this: "but Thom, the Canon sensors suck." No, they don't. They may not quite currently hit the levels that the Nikon/Sony sensors are reaching in terms of dynamic range, but note the words "good enough" and how many times they appear in this article, in other articles and reviews, and in customer discussions.

Good Enough usually wins in the marketplace. There's usually a solid niche available for Better Than Others. But Good Enough is where the volume will be."

 

[Uneternal]

"Yes, yes, I know that some of you are screaming at your computer/tablet/phone as you read this: "but Thom, the Canon sensors suck." No, they don't. They may not quite currently hit the levels that the Nikon/Sony sensors are reaching in terms of dynamic range, but note the words "good enough" and how many times they appear in this article, in other articles and reviews, and in customer discussions.

Good Enough usually wins in the marketplace. There's usually a solid niche available for Better Than Others. But Good Enough is where the volume will be."

Its less about the good enough sensors and more about the prices. And Canon still has one of the cheapest lens ranges, especially for amateurs. In Sony land you pay almost double for every comparable spec'd lens.
And most people rather save 1000 bucks on lenses and take a pass on 2 stops of more DR.

 

[jolyonralph]

Good Enough usually wins in the marketplace. There's usually a solid niche available for Better Than Others. But Good Enough is where the volume will be."

This may well be the case for the APS-C and low-end market (even, dare I say, the 6D II market), but for the semi-pro to professional market there is a much greater awareness of the capabilities of competing equipment.

Right now if you want a FF MILC you can get a Sony. If you want a FF MILC that uses EF glass, you get a Sony and throw a Metabones or Sigma adaptor on it. Yes, those aren't as fast at autofocus as native lenses, but they are improving rapidly.

With the forthcoming Nikon FF MILC you'll likely have an adaptor sooner or later to take Canon EF glass on it (ironically it's probably easier to adapt EF lenses to the new Nikon than to adapt Nikon F mount lenses because of the mechanical legacy they have.)

And you'll have a new Canon MILC with an adaptor to take EF lenses too. There's no physical reason why EF glass adapted on the Canon shouldn't focus any more reliably and faster than on the other systems. It all depends to how well the protocol is understood by those developing adaptors (and I'm pretty certain it's very well understood by now), and the underlying focus capabilities within the cameras. Right now Canon have the edge with DPAF, but we all know this is a constant battle with the rivals doing their best to outdo each other.

But also, this leaves Canon somewhat at risk. If it becomes too easy for a Canon shooter to switch out their Canon body for a Sony body or a Nikon body and keep their lens investment, then they'll likely start buying non-Canon lenses too. And before you know it, the customer has gone. This is already happening with Sony.

Thats why, if we look at this in terms of marketing alone and not technology, it's essential that Canon builds a system that can use EF lenses, but with a new mount that would allow new lenses to be built that do tie people into the Canon system for the future!

 

[Kit.]

Exactly. Canon went all in and abandoned the old mount when it produced the EF mount because they were looking at the long haul game, and the old mount would have held them back. Mirrorless is the long haul game today. There are still areas in which the SLR outperforms mirrorless, but the gap is rapidly narrowing and in 5 or 10 years time the advances is EVF tech and mirrorless design will make the SLR much less appealing even to die-hard mirror lovers.

Indeed. Canon has 3 to 8 more years to finalize a new mount design that will better suit the future needs of the future MILCs (maybe even with non-rectangular sensors).

No need to hurry.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

It is a sad life to be nothing but a Sony troll.

By Sony troll you mean yet another one of those Canon guys (10 years in my case) that switched to Sony. You know, the ones you guys all claim don't exist because no Canon user has switched yet, all of 'em are still drinking the Canon kool-aid and all is well in Canon land - nothing but kitty cats, lollipops and rainbows.

Gonna be sitting here next winter season with a big grin on my face when the year end marketshare results get reported and Canon has delayed it's FF mirrorless for the umpteenth time, and reading all the excuses you guys have trying to explain away how Canon dropped the ball.

Meanwhile Canon has everything on firesale and the Sony A7iii is going for upwards of 40% over MSRP to folks who can't wait a few weeks. And next will come the A7Siii (you know that one, the one Canon isn't even going to bother competing with, for 'reasons') and the A6x00 model and who knows what else Sony has in store for us.

I personally know 9 people who switched from Canon to Sony. 1 switched back to Canon. Rest 8 are very happy with Sony. All are professionals - working professionals. Fashion/Product photographers.

Sadly I feel I must agree with this observation. Even some of the most highly respected and dedicated Canon photographers have started taking an interest in Sony since the A7 iii was announced.
I have 2 Canon full frame DSLRs, 4 Canon speedlites and over 12 Canon lenses so I am not what you might call a Sony troll.
For the past few months I have been saving up for the Canon 400mm F2.8L. It is a very expensive lens, but I thought about it carefully and decided that am willing to pay that price for the best quality. Then the Sony 400mm F2.8 was announced. It is 1Kg lighter than the Canon and if recent reviews are to be believed then the focussing is precise and accurate so despite its price it looks very tempting.
Personally I don't care whether the camera I use is a DSLR or it uses mirrorless technology. All that is important to me is the results I can achieve and at the moment it is the choice of high quality lenses that is keeping me loyal to Canon. However, with Sony announcing more and more lens choices that gap is narrowing and the new 400mm F2.8 might be the lens that finally persuades me to change brand.

 

[neuroanatomist]

But also, this leaves Canon somewhat at risk. If it becomes too easy for a Canon shooter to switch out their Canon body for a Sony body or a Nikon body and keep their lens investment, then they'll likely start buying non-Canon lenses too. And before you know it, the customer has gone. This is already happening with Sony.

Sure, and that is probably significant...to people who believe anecdotes = data. Sadly, there seem to be quite a few of such people on this forum. Perhaps merely unfortunate victims of educational systems that do not emphasize STEM.

Meanwhile, the data show Canon maintaining ~50% market share and Sony not gaining any, and internally-generated forecasts from both Canon and Sony suggest that's not going to change in the near future.

 

[Generalized Specialist]

Meanwhile, the data show Canon maintaining ~50% market share and Sony not gaining any, and internally-generated forecasts from both Canon and Sony suggest that's not going to change in the near future.

True, but also the reality of that statement is the vast majority of those Canon sales are Rebels and other lower end gear. You know, the folks who almost never buy another lens or other accessory and the camera more than likely stays at home in the closet for months and months at a time. That's your reason Canon has only released a small handful of lenses in the last 6 years for EF-M mount. What came first - the chicken or the egg? In this case it's what came first, a good Canon EF-M body or the lenses to go with it? By concentrating on a budget buyer who rarely buys better glass, why offer better glass in the first place?

With Sony the sales are in the more enthusiast/pro end and that means more glass, etc...

Google back to the beginning of the year and look up Canon's and Sony's profit statements, I don't think you'll see that Canon is 5x what Sony's camera division is, actually, I think you'll be a bit surprised at the numbers. Yet Canon still wants to ignore this market. They done gone full Kodak. It's comical to see the pace Sony is moving compared to Canon. Forget the bodies for a moment, look at all the glass Sony has come out with in the last few years.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Google back to the beginning of the year and look up Canon's and Sony's profit statements, I don't think you'll see that Canon is 5x what Sony's camera division is, actually, I think you'll be a bit surprised at the numbers.

No, nothing surprising there.

Forget the bodies for a moment, look at all the glass Sony has come out with in the last few years.

From 2014 to 2018, Sony has released 22 lenses for their ILCs.
From 2014 to 2018, Canon has released 26 lenses for their ILCs.

Both lists include prosaic lenses like the 50/1.8 and 18-xx variable aperture kit zooms, generalist higher-end lenses like 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 and f/4 zooms, and niche lenses like 11/12-24mm UWA zooms and Canon's TS-E Macro lenses. Canon had to round out their EF-M line, and Sony had to add many standard 'pro-grade' lenses that were missing from their lineup, while Canon updated those lenses.

But wait...you had a point, right? Something about all the lenses Sony has released recently, which you probably thought was more than Canon, wasn't it? Oh well, better luck next time.

 

[jolyonralph]

But wait...you had a point, right? Something about all the lenses Sony has released recently, which you probably thought was more than Canon, wasn't it? Oh well, better luck next time.

Now, I'm not trying to argue against you here, but I want to simply provide more information:

The 25 new lenses that Canon have launched since 2014 include:

4 EF-M lenses
5 EF-S lenses
16 EF Lenses

Out of these, All the EF-M lenses were new.

On the EF-S lenses, the 10-18, 24mm pancake and 35mm macro are brand new, the 18-135 is an update to an existing lens and the 18-55 f/4-5.6 is a smaller - and slower - version of the standard kit lens.

With the EF lenses we ave some good solid new designs and the 50mm 1.8, the 24-105 f/4 II. the 70-300 IS II, and I would argue both the new 70-200 versions as being relatively minor incremental upgrades. The 16-35 III was a major upgrade on the II, as was the 100-400 II over the I. But this is where I'm getting subjective rather than scientific.

Sony appear to have released 27 lenses for the FE and E mounts within the same time: (or 25 and two teleconverters if you count those separately). Oh, and if we're counting EF, EF-S and EF-M together we probably should also count the three A mount lenses that Sony released in 2015, giving us a total of 30.

FE 400mm F2.8 GM OSS
E 18-135 F3.5-5.6 OSS
FE 24-105 F4 G OSS
FE 100-400 F4.5-5.6 GM OSS
FE 85mm F1.8
FE 100mm F2.8STF GM OSS
FE 12-24mm F4 G
FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM
FE 50mm f2.8 Macro
E PZ 18-110 F4 G OSS
FE 50mm F1.8
FE 24-70 F2.8 GM
FE 70-200 F2.8 GM
Teleconverter 1.4x
Teleconverter 2x
FE 50mm F1.4 ZA
FE 85mm F1.4 GM
FE 70-300 F4.5-5.6 G OSS
FE 28mm F2
FE 35mm F1.4 ZA
FE 90mm F.2.8 Macro G OSS
FE 24-240 F3.5-6.3 OSS
FE PZ 28-135 F4 G OSS
FE 16-35 F4 ZA OSS
E 18-50 F4-5.6
FE 24-70 F4 ZA OSS (announced 2013, launched 2014)
FE 70-200 F4 G OSS (announced 2013, launched 2014)

I won't bother listing the A lenses because no-one cares about A lenses.


So, whoever said " look at all the glass Sony has come out with in the last few years. " has a point, not in comparing numerically with Canon, because they're almost level, but comparing the range of lenses that Sony have released, and what they have managed, in such a short time, to bring to their mounts.

Of course, in the first four years of EF (1987-1990) there were 34 lens releases!

 

[neuroanatomist]

So, whoever said " look at all the glass Sony has come out with in the last few years. " has a point, not in comparing numerically with Canon, because they're almost level, but comparing the range of lenses that Sony have released, and what they have managed, in such a short time, to bring to their mounts.

Of course, in the first four years of EF (1987-1990) there were 34 lens releases!

I was trying not to say explicitly that Sony had a lot of catching up to do in terms of lenses...but that's the reality. Meanwhile, Canon improved some lenses, but in essence their lineup is really solid and has been for some time, whereas Sony was (and still to some extent is) lacking. Meanwhile, Canon has had the freedom/luxury to add things like TS-Macro lenses and wide-angle macro lenses, and to update already-excellent lenses.

 

[infared]

Yeah, but the obvious flaw in their logic is that Canon is 0.8-stops of DR behind.

That hasn't stopped Canon from grabbing 50% of ILC market shares. ;D

From http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/downsizers.html:

"Yes, yes, I know that some of you are screaming at your computer/tablet/phone as you read this: "but Thom, the Canon sensors suck." No, they don't. They may not quite currently hit the levels that the Nikon/Sony sensors are reaching in terms of dynamic range, but note the words "good enough" and how many times they appear in this article, in other articles and reviews, and in customer discussions.

Good Enough usually wins in the marketplace. There's usually a solid niche available for Better Than Others. But Good Enough is where the volume will be."

Why not make them better?

 

[dak723]

Meanwhile, the data show Canon maintaining ~50% market share and Sony not gaining any, and internally-generated forecasts from both Canon and Sony suggest that's not going to change in the near future.

True, but also the reality of that statement is the vast majority of those Canon sales are Rebels and other lower end gear. You know, the folks who almost never buy another lens or other accessory and the camera more than likely stays at home in the closet for months and months at a time. That's your reason Canon has only released a small handful of lenses in the last 6 years for EF-M mount. What came first - the chicken or the egg? In this case it's what came first, a good Canon EF-M body or the lenses to go with it? By concentrating on a budget buyer who rarely buys better glass, why offer better glass in the first place?

With Sony the sales are in the more enthusiast/pro end and that means more glass, etc...

Google back to the beginning of the year and look up Canon's and Sony's profit statements, I don't think you'll see that Canon is 5x what Sony's camera division is, actually, I think you'll be a bit surprised at the numbers. Yet Canon still wants to ignore this market. They done gone full Kodak. It's comical to see the pace Sony is moving compared to Canon. Forget the bodies for a moment, look at all the glass Sony has come out with in the last few years.

You've answered your own questions, but apparently can't grasp the answer.

You can't compare the lens selection for an APS-C camera with that of a FF camera because they have a different target market. The Canon M lenses cover all the bases and fit the target market who are looking for good quality, but affordable lenses that cover the entire focal range. The target market want generalized lenses rather than specialty lenses. For FF, you have a different market that is willing to spend far more money on a lens and is looking for specialty lenses.

You indicate that Canon want to ignore the Pro/Enthusiast market - although it is hard to believe that you haven't noticed that Canon makes numerous FF DSLRs and continues to produce many EF lenses. For what market do you think those cameras and lenses are for?

And every time you mention Kodak you only show your ignorance and the fact that you can't help repeating the usual troll responses. Kodak was the first to get into digital cameras and was the top selling digital camera maker in the US as late as 2005. Although Kodak did make some of the earliest digital SLRs, the vast majority of their cameras were point and shoots. Their digital camera sales began to fall off rapidly when Canon, Nikon and other camera companies began getting serious about digital - and had the benefit of also making lenses. So being first - and being very successful at first - is no guarantee for success in the long run. So all those that are saying Canon is too late in entering the mirrorless FF game may be right, but really have no basis for their opinion. Who succeeds in the long run has little to do with who was first.

You say that Canon has delayed its mirrorless FF for the umpteenth time. That's an odd statement to make as the initial rumors - as well as most every one since - has said Canon will announce their FF mirrorless in late 2018 and start selling them in 2019. Seems to be right on target.

Oh, I forgot, you have to make up stuff to bash Canon.

 

[Kit.]

Why not make them better?

Trade-offs.

Trying to make them better for one market niche can make them worse for other market niches.

First of all, every change involves resources that could otherwise be spent differently (sometimes better).

 

[BXL]

By the time these hit, everyone will own a Sony. But not to worry because it will be spec'ed well below the Sony and priced well above it.

Why should everyone own a Sony? I used the A7 a couple of times and even though it's a nice camera I prefer the 5D IV/5DsR and the canon ecosystem or the Fuji X-Series. Sony might be good but they're not the best. If the size of sensor is important, why fill frame if you can get medium frame like the Fuji GXF or the Hasselblad X1S?