Canon's Full Frame Mirorrless Cameras [CR2]

[sdz]

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.

This. Canon sells lens for its mirrorless cameras, but also for its different kinds of Canon DSLRs. It just so happens that the owners of those EF lens provide an enormous pre-existing market for a mirrorless camera with an EF mount. That fact alone significantly lowers the cost of entry into the mirrorless camera market for EF lens owners. They do not need to buy new lenses. They do not need to sell their old lenses and even their DSLRs. This fact also creates a compelling economic incentive for Canon to use the EF mount on its FF mirrorless camera. An EF mount on a new Canon mirrorless FF camera would accelerate the move by Canon owners into the mirrorless camera market. Why, then, would a rational firm, one that seeks profit, destroy a large market in which it has a monopoly position? Canon seems rational. But, I might be wrong.

Naturally, if Crapple were to buy Canon, as a rumor suggested, then I would expect Apple/Canon to discover ways to render legacy Canon gear obsolete while also falling behind Sony, Nikon, Fuji, etc. in most areas save price. A new mount for a mirrorless FF camera would provide one place to begin that wrecking operation.

 

[BXL]

There's a large chunk of the prospective mirrorless buying folks out there who routinely say "Mirrorless is all about being small", aka 'If you just pull the mirror out of an SLR in the same footprint, why even make it?' These folks' opinions on the matter don't seem to change -- they find a smaller body + lens combo to be attractive."

A 24-70mm f1:2.8 lense is never small. Just look at Sonys SEL-2470GM G Master. If someone wants smaller lenses, than the m43 system is the only option left.

 

[bhf3737]

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.

Just being curious: Besides being slow to focus, do the X brand cameras with adapted Canon EF lenses can do in-camera corrections for distortion, vignetting, softness, color shift, etc.? Do they respond/sync well in flash photography?
There are many image quality related features that depend on the combination of lens and camera and I guess we cannot replace one with something else and expect to get the exact same results. IMHO, the whole story of adapting lenses is a gimmick and may be good enough for experimentation and fun by YouTubers but definitely not appropriate for pro quality photos and pro photographers.

 

[BXL]

When they can build a mirrorless camera that costs less to manufacture than a comparable DSLR, you know which way the manufacturers are going to lean....

The problem is not the price of the body but the lens ecosystem. Sony has nice sensors and bodys but the lenses are really expensive and that's Sony's problem. I wouldn't switch from Canon to Sony do to the lenses and that's why I wait and see what Canon has to offer in the future. If Canon introduces a new mount and I have to invest into new lenses, I might switch to Sony, Fuji or Nikon. If Canon offers a proper solution for my "old" EF-Lenses, I might stay with Canon. If Canon offers a competitive DSLR - and the 5D IV and the 5DsR are competitive DSLRs - I definitely stay with Canon.

 

[scyrene]

+1.....

remember when people were saying that digital cameras would never replace film When they can build a mirrorless camera that costs less to manufacture than a comparable DSLR, you know which way the manufacturers are going to lean....

With the greatest of respect, people make all sorts of predictions, and most are wrong. That prediction X was wrong does not mean prediction Y will be. I don't reject the proposition that mirrorless may replace mirrored, but I've heard it for years and not much has changed, it may well be a totally different technology becomes mainstream, and mirrorless cameras as we think of them now are never more than a passing thing - although obviously anything without a mirror could be given that label.

 

[ahsanford]

Why would a rational firm destroy a market in which it has a monopoly position?

To open: I'd love EF, too. But we shouldn't pretend like reasons to not go with EF are all petty, pointless, purely commercial or will spell the end of EF.

Going with a new mount is not destroying a monopoly -- it's expanding the business. EF does not die off if a new mount arrives. Treat a new mirrorless mount like you would the EF-M mount: it's just another option while EF keeps plugging away.

And what does a thin mount option deliver that EF mirrorless cannot?

• It protects Canon from the threat of being sold against with the perception of newer, smaller tech being 'next generation'. Canon will have a small FF ILC option as well to fend that off.
• It gives existing Canonites the option to take less volume of kit with us (for travel, leisure, etc.) when we want to.
• Canon might offer an ultra-ultra-small gripless body that photographers could pack in a tiny footprint in a bag as a second body: think EOS M (original) body, just scaled up a bit. It would take up the space of a portable hard drive in your bag.
• It lets Canon pursue new customers that are intimidated by a larger camera or do not want such an indiscreet instrument. Think cool kids on IG, 1%-ers with money to burn, Fuji fashionistas who long for something better than crop that isn't a > $10K medium format investment, etc. In no uncertain terms, this is nontrivial new money for Canon to pursue.
• It lets old-timers and tinkerers adapt glass. Shoot FD again. Shoot competitive glass -- you finally can give that Nikkor 14-24 2.8, 105 1.4 or 28 1.4 a go.

And nothing precludes Canon from simply offering a full EF mount mirrorless later. If existing FF customers truly freak out at life with an adaptor for (what might turn out to be) the very small number of thin mount lenses they end up making, Canon can always slide out a full-on mirrorless peer with a 5D or 6D title and all will be well.

- A

 

[scyrene]

What a joke. Canon has become one of the laughing stocks of the industry.

: : :

 

[ahsanford]

I think the heart of all this mount heartburn is that some folks are convinced a new mount for FF mirrorless spells the end of EF.

Let's unpack that and possibly reassure some folks:

• Unit sales of FF cameras are simply not what they once were. I'm not convinced Canon has the appetite, patience, werewithal, etc. to rebuild even a core 20 lenses of EF, let alone 60+. It's much more in their best interests to keep the good ship EF in fighting shape with periodic updates.
  
  
• As everyone here will (correctly) tell you, if size is the principal motivation behind a new mount, virtually no size is saved if you want to shoot faster than f/2 primes, faster than f/4 zooms, or longer than (roughly) 85mm or so. Looking at TDP using those criteria, 28 out 39 EF primes and 23 out of 28 EF zooms would not save you any space on a thin mount. So Canon would be (effectively) doubling its inventory for a good ~ 75% of its lenses just to obviate the need for an adaptor. That doesn't make any sense to do.
  
  
• I have yet to hear some new compelling camera to lens communication technology or 'new jazzy thing' that a thin new mount would uniquely enable that would make these new lenses more attractive that could not be implemented with a full EF mount.

I interpret all of this to mean that if a thin mount FF mirrorless is coming, it would have to be a gangbusters hit for Canon to put more than an EF-M level spread of lenses out into the world. So I just don't see a thin mount ever getting the full FE treatment like Sony has done. At best, they might drop a couple 'GM-like' pro lenses in the staple pro areas (24-70 2.8, maybe a 70-200 2.8.) and that will be it.

- A

 

[scyrene]

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.

I can't tell if this is a joke but if not : : :

 

[Yasko]

The image for the full frame camera with the 35 f/1.4 always surprises me. A camera completely without a grab handle / knob. :
A little too simplistic thoughts flew into this.

 

[ahsanford]

The image for the full frame camera with the 35 f/1.4 always surprises me. A camera completely without a grab handle / knob. :
A little too simplistic thoughts flew into this.

f/2 and it works. See the RX1R II.

But yes, I agree. The minute it can bolt on EF (even through an adaptor), someone will grab a 70-200 f/2.8 and slap it on there. This thing needs a grip, IMHO, and a chunky one.

- A

 

[BillB]

Why would a rational firm destroy a market in which it has a monopoly position?

To open: I'd love EF, too. But we shouldn't pretend like reasons to not go with EF are all petty, pointless, purely commercial or will spell the end of EF.

Going with a new mount is not destroying a monopoly -- it's expanding the business. EF does not die off if a new mount arrives. Treat a new mirrorless mount like you would the EF-M mount: it's just another option while EF keeps plugging away.

And what does a thin mount option deliver that EF mirrorless cannot?

• It protects Canon from the threat of being sold against with the perception of newer, smaller tech being 'next generation'. Canon will have a small FF ILC option as well to fend that off.
• It gives existing Canonites the option to take less volume of kit with us (for travel, leisure, etc.) when we want to.
• Canon might offer an ultra-ultra-small gripless body that photographers could pack in a tiny footprint in a bag as a second body: think EOS M (original) body, just scaled up a bit. It would take up the space of a portable hard drive in your bag.
• It lets Canon pursue new customers that are intimidated by a larger camera or do not want such an indiscreet instrument. Think cool kids on IG, 1%-ers with money to burn, Fuji fashionistas who long for something better than crop that isn't a > $10K medium format investment, etc. In no uncertain terms, this is nontrivial new money for Canon to pursue.
• It lets old-timers and tinkerers adapt glass. Shoot FD again. Shoot competitive glass -- you finally can give that Nikkor 14-24 2.8, 105 1.4 or 28 1.4 a go.

And nothing precludes Canon from simply offering a full EF mount mirrorless later. If existing FF customers truly freak out at life with an adaptor for (what might turn out to be) the very small number of thin mount lenses they end up making, Canon can always slide out a full-on mirrorless peer with a 5D or 6D title and all will be well.

- A

Canon might also go the other way and roil the EF mount camera first, simply because there a lot of EF lenses and EF shooters out there now, and then later follow with the camera with a new short flange distance lens mount. That would avoid the embarrassing position of starting out with a cute new little camera without much in the way of native lenses, a position that Nikon seems to be heading for.

 

[ahsanford]

Canon might also go the other way and roil the EF mount camera first, simply because there a lot of EF lenses and EF shooters out there now, and then later follow with the camera with a new short flange distance lens mount. That would avoid the embarrassing position of starting out with a cute new little camera without much in the way of native lenses, a position that Nikon seems to be heading for.

Sure, and the poll we've got going would (somewhat) back you up on that:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=35293.0

(Most folks are skeptical on staggering two versions if two versions are happening, but it's 2:1 on EF before 'thin' for the six folks who see a staggered approach happening.)

But the "cute new little camera without much in the way of native lenses" is exactly how the A7 brand started, isn't it?

- A

 

[BillB]

Canon might also go the other way and roil the EF mount camera first, simply because there a lot of EF lenses and EF shooters out there now, and then later follow with the camera with a new short flange distance lens mount. That would avoid the embarrassing position of starting out with a cute new little camera without much in the way of native lenses, a position that Nikon seems to be heading for.

Sure, and the poll we've got going would (somewhat) back you up on that:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=35293.0

(Most folks are skeptical on staggering two versions if two versions are happening, but it's 2:1 on EF before 'thin' for the six folks who see a staggered approach happening.)

But the "cute new little camera without much in the way of native lenses" is exactly how the A7 brand started, isn't it?

- A

Well, Sony wasn't the second or third cute new kid on the block, and they didn't have a bunch of EF lenses to get people's attention. The two cameras may be announced at the same time, but I think that likely the EF version will be first to market, especially if it has the 5DIV sensor.

 

[sebasan]

I tried this new soft that adds 1 stop of DR. Shot several landscpae sessions. It's useful somewhat, but in some merged HDR+DPRAW shots, when I tried to recover the deliberately overexposed highlights, they got a strong green cast I couldn't get rid of. I used in-camera histogram for exposure, maybe I over-over exposed the shots. But in general this method takes a lot of guessing and is, in general, unreliable.

I have the same problem doing some tests with the 50mm f/1.8. I think it is a problem of the software which split the file. It is necessary to warn dprslit developers of this problems because it is a beta version yet, and they need to correct some errors. I don't think you need a lot of guessing, but if you are not so comfortable with the field procedure, instead of 1 stop overexposure, you can overexpose 0.5 stops and probably if something fail, the main file will have a lot of details in the shadows and recover some of the highlights (not all of them). In the end, the difference in DR between D850, A7RIII and the 5DIV is aprox half a stop, so no worries.

 

[ahsanford]

Well, Sony wasn't the second or third cute new kid on the block, and they didn't have a bunch of EF lenses to get people's attention. The two cameras may be announced at the same time, but I think that likely the EF version will be first to market, especially if it has the 5DIV sensor.

I think Canon and Nikon will announce within a day of each other. If there's a chance of a large smash and grab moment with converting users, it could happen here.

Imagine if Nikon goes thin and Canon goes EF? Folks could swap sides both ways (based on which camp they are in on 'keep it seamless' vs. 'keep it small').

Imagine if both Nikon and Sony stay with FX and EF? Sony would certainly get some new users that day.

Imagine if Nikon chooses either -- thin or thick -- and Canon offers both mounts? Canon could landgrab the camp that got left out by Nikon.

I'm not saying the world will turn on its head overnight because of this, but there is an electric combination of pent-up interest in mirrorless + a passion for a given direction on the mount + a lingering air of 'my company isn't pushing hard enough' that might lead some to panic / get angry / flee to (perceived) greener pastures. I don't personally feel this way, but goodness do I find the market-driving mechanics of this fascinating!

- A

 

[WeekendWarrior]

I'm curious why they keep using a Leica Q with "EOS" written on it to advertise the new Canon mirrorless camera.. lol we all know its not going to look that good

Speak for yourself.

Pretty bodies without any grip to wield L lenses looks pretty damn awful to me. Go slap the 35 f/1.4L II in that picture on to a first-gen EOS M and tell me how your wrist feels in 60 seconds.

The Leica Q looks like it's made for people with Lego hands -- they (and Sony with the RX1R cameras) only get away with it because it's a fixed-lens design.

- A

Owning a 5D Mark IV as well as a Leica Q I can say the Canon has better grip to hold , and has weather sealing/change lenses. But on the other hand the Leica Q in smaller, lighter, quieter, sharper an packs better image quality despite having 6 less MPs (though the canon will exceed in extreme low light). I can fit the Leica Q in a super tiny bag, or around my neck all day with 0 fatigue what so ever. Also after adding on a case the Q gets much easier to hold. I guess it just depends what you need it for. 90% of my canon photos were taken on a 24mm so the 28mm was not much of a compromise at all.

 

[ahsanford]

90% of my canon photos were taken on a 24mm so the 28mm was not much of a compromise at all.

I am 100% one of the weird people who loves ILCs but might be perfectly happy with an X100, RX1R or Q. 28-35 is a money, desert island single FL for me.

(I only rant about 50s because we don't have a good one! )

- A

 

[BillB]

Well, Sony wasn't the second or third cute new kid on the block, and they didn't have a bunch of EF lenses to get people's attention. The two cameras may be announced at the same time, but I think that likely the EF version will be first to market, especially if it has the 5DIV sensor.

I think Canon and Nikon will announce within a day of each other. If there's a chance of a large smash and grab moment with converting users, it could happen here.

Imagine if Nikon goes thin and Canon goes EF? Folks could swap sides both ways (based on which camp they are in on 'keep it seamless' vs. 'keep it small').

Imagine if both Nikon and Sony stay with FX and EF? Sony would certainly get some new users that day.

Imagine if Nikon chooses either -- thin or thick -- and Canon offers both mounts? Canon could landgrab the camp that got left out by Nikon.

I'm not saying the world will turn on its head overnight because of this, but there is an electric combination of pent-up interest in mirrorless + a passion for a given direction on the mount + a lingering air of 'my company isn't pushing hard enough' that might lead some to panic / get angry / flee to (perceived) greener pastures. I don't personally feel this way, but goodness do I find the market-driving mechanics of this fascinating!

- A

Maybe a lot of people will decide to sit on the sidelines until the dust settles, with nobody buying much of anything for a while. Everything has a pretty hefty price tag. If people start thinking about switching brands, then lens purchases become an important part of the puzzle. At some point, somebody could start dropping prices to try to grab some market. With the A7III Sony already has to some extent. This could take a while to sort itself out. DPR should have a field day.

 

[ahsanford]

At some point, somebody could start dropping prices to try to grab some market. With the A7III Sony already has to some extent.

I wouldn't say 'to some extent'. We don't know their production costs of course, but I see the A7 III as a plain-faced giveaway-at-cost to buy share and subsequently pull through some (pricey, presumably higher margin) lens sales. But I could be wrong.

- A