Canon's Full Frame Mirorrless Cameras [CR2]

[ahsanford]

And all this would seem to be a pretty good benchmark of the practical importance of maxing the DR of modern equipment, as opposed to bickering about magic DPR/DXO magic DR numbers voodoo. Well, if it is going to be any work, I don't want to bother with it....

Slightly disagree in that the bickering matters here as PBD is claiming the 5D4 delivers the most DR. This could very well turn out to be true but require a time investment, capture workflow changes, post-processing workflow changes, etc. to achieve that performance.

But I agree that Sony sensors don't make you jump through those hoops. Point: Sony sensors. Again, if I'm just shooting landscape work on a tripod, I'd already own an A7R2 or A7R3. 42 MP + No AA + one extra stop base ISO DR natively available / easily 'gettable' in existing RAW processing tools is a winning combination for that application, IMHO.

Don't get me wrong, I think some clever people (like with ML playing around with Dual ISO on the 5D3) back-doored a clever use of the file format DPRAW creates to do something Canon didn't plan. Cool. But it'd be a hell of a lot nicer if I could just capture files and use them. Sony appears to be doing that. Again, I prefer Canon for a mountain of reasons, but if I just shot landscapes, Sony would appear to have the better 'film' right now.

- A

 

[3kramd5]

do you know how to get the max dynamic range from a file in post? Please, check greg benz (lumenzia creator) or Jimmy McIntyre (raya pro creator) flows. They both used D810 and now D850 (the ones with max dynamic range)..

It’s not really about getting the maximum from a file, it’s about mapping what tones you recorded and wish to display to whatever your final medium is.

 

[BillB]

And all this would seem to be a pretty good benchmark of the practical importance of maxing the DR of modern equipment, as opposed to bickering about magic DPR/DXO magic DR numbers voodoo. Well, if it is going to be any work, I don't want to bother with it....

Slightly disagree in that the bickering matters here as PBD is claiming the 5D4 delivers the most DR. This could very well turn out to be true but require a time investment, capture workflow changes, post-processing workflow changes, etc. to achieve that performance.

But I agree that Sony sensors don't make you jump through those hoops. Point: Sony sensors. Again, if I'm just shooting landscape work on a tripod, I'd already own an A7R2 or A7R3. 42 MP + No AA + one extra stop base ISO DR natively available / easily 'gettable' in existing RAW processing tools is a winning combination for that application, IMHO.

Don't get me wrong, I think some clever people (like with ML playing around with Dual ISO on the 5D3) back-doored a clever use of the file format DPRAW creates to do something Canon didn't plan. Cool. But it'd be a hell of a lot nicer if I could just capture files and use them. Sony appears to be doing that. Again, I prefer Canon for a mountain of reasons, but if I just shot landscapes, Sony would appear to have the better 'film' right now.

- A

True enough, but I am wondering whether we have reached a point where there is very little practical significance in any differences that may exist. Do the DR magic numbers have any importance in the real world.

 

[RayValdez360]

Call me crazy but couldnt a mirrorless canon by default have an eletronic lens adapter be the norm. basically have a removable adapter for the mirrorless lens but for EF lens, you take this small adapter out and it allows the legacy EF lens to sit inside or go deeper into the camera a bit to make up for the shorter local flange distance??? Couldnt this work and be the solution. Of course they have to work out the electronics, ease of removal, and make sure the "default adapter" is sturdy for professional use. Am I the only person here that has thought of this???

 

[ahsanford]

Call me crazy but couldnt a mirrorless canon by default have an eletronic lens adapter be the norm. basically have a removable adapter for the mirrorless lens but for EF lens, you take this small adapter out and it allows the legacy EF lens to sit inside or go deeper into the camera a bit to make up for the shorter local flange distance??? Couldnt this work and be the solution. Of course they have to work out the electronics, ease of removal, and make sure the "default adapter" is sturdy for professional use. Am I the only person here that has thought of this???

Something like it has been discussed. Build a full EF mount body but have two lines of lenses: EF and 'EF-X' (only works on mirrorless) that has a good percentage of it's overall length filling the space where the mirror used to be. The lenses are just as long but 20-25mm of that length gets trapped inside of the body.

You don't need an adaptor (at all) and you get an EF-X + body lens size savings as you are sneaking lens length into the body.

In my mind, any idea involves new lenses and clever tricks with adaptors has to deliver a smaller package as a reward for doing so or the 'keep it small' camp will get turned off. To them, if the concept doesn't allow for a smaller overall construct, why are you making a second line of lenses? Why add the adaptor and the confusion?

(Chart below to make the point: the left side is all about seamlessness and what mirrorless tech can do for folks already comfortably living with a pile of EF lenses an FF SLR bodies. The right side is overwhelmingly about size -- even if you can't save that much space with bigger/faster lenses.)

- A

 

[Ozarker]

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

I was thinking the same thing: "Please, please, please don't let that shape be Canon's future direction. Ugly and painful looking." It's amazing what Leica can get away with.

 

[privatebydesign]

At this point you have to "wash it through some intermediate step", but if DR is that important to you (in general not you specifically) then it seems like a fair enough step to get the DR 'needed'. It is certainly the highest performing DR from a 135 format sensor if you know how to use it, ie ETTR and additional processing step.

There's a reason Sigma Foveon sensors didn't take off, right? You had to assemble those files through clunky third party tools, didn't you?

Were I shooting a 5D4 today, DPRAW would be dead to me if I needed to wash it through 3rd party workflow. That's not worth a stop to me. Canon should actively lobby to get that functionality baked into ACR and Lightroom, and pronto.

- A

What it's worth to you wasn't the point. I was answering the comment that Canon still lag well behind Sony in DR, they do not. Even if you just use the simple RAW file from the 5D MkIV there is less than 0.8 stop of difference between the best from Canon, Sony and Nikon. There was a time when the DR comments did have a point, that time has long passed. Further, if ultimate DR from one shot is your primary objective in the 135 format sensor department, the 5D MkIV is king.

Yes, i am very interested in the conclusions by photonstophotos.

I know maybe it is more work in the field, but when you worked a lot of pictures, you are confident what you can achieve. In the case of post, do you know how to get the max dynamic range from a file in post? Please, check greg benz (lumenzia creator) or Jimmy McIntyre (raya pro creator) flows. They both used D810 and now D850 (the ones with max dynamic range). If you want to get the maximum from your files, you need to do some workflow. It is not only to move the shadow slider to the right the right way to extract the information from the file.

And both use blending multiple exposure techniques to get the images they want, ergo the less than one stop difference isn't good enough to make the difference to one shot for these guys. I have Raya Pro and have had for years, indeed it is the only blending program I now use other than LR 32 bit blending for simple brackets.

And all this would seem to be a pretty good benchmark of the practical importance of maxing the DR of modern equipment, as opposed to bickering about magic DPR/DXO magic DR numbers voodoo. Well, if it is going to be any work, I don't want to bother with it....

As above, nobody cares if you personally are interested in it or not, or if you can be bothered to do the work needed to realize it, the point was if you want the maximum DR from a 135 format sensor then the answer is the 5D MkIV. And that flies in the face of the original comment I was replying to that said Canon have to deliver more DR than Sony in a next generation sensor, they already do in this generation.

P.S. Have you seen how Sony have not only plateaued in DR development but have actually done a Nikon and reduced the DR in their latest offerings?

 

[Quarkcharmed]

I guessed tilting sensor only as a side effect, not the goal. A new mount with protruding lenses is no better because the body will still be thick. It doesn't matter whether the sensor moves or the lens protrudes, you still need certain room for the old EF mount + sensor configuration.
Protruding lenses would be quite awkward in many regards, for example, you won't be able to mount them on other mirrorless cameras, you will have greater chances to damage the guts of the camera when mounting. The mount will be hugely incompatible with the rest of the world. At the same time, Tamton and Sigma will now struggle much more, maybe it's a plus for Canon (not for us).

That will mean it is as thick/deep as an EF SLR, which will equal no size savings at all. Why do that just for a cool tilt effect?

If you want cake and eating it too (native EF + magical size savings), surely going full EF with 'EF-X' lenses protruding into the body would be the way to go. This would be a lot easier to pull off than a moving sensor plane, and these lenses (at least the portion sticking out from the EF mount) would be smaller.

Also: 'automatically moves' implies you've left the power on while you are changing out. Not everyone does that -- some folks are changing out lenses at the start of a shoot, just after the body is pulled out of their bag. There won't be a mirror to bang into, of course, but each time you start your camera there would be some shooting lag as it resets.

- A

 

[Ozarker]

...boy oh boy is Sony gonna be WHACKING Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Olympus, Leica, Hasselblad, Phase-One, etc RIGHT ON THEIR HEADS with the biggest bluntest set of new Micro-4/3rds, APS-C, FF and MF+ camera bodies and audio/video/stills formats seen yet! It is literally going to be a slaughter of the technological innocents. They're all toast after this intro!...

About as reliable as this:

...BUT...we DO have another software surprise for you which should be happening right around this coming Wednesday....

...Anyways there IS A VERY DIFFERENT SURPRISE coming
your way, so keep watching ON THIS FORUM HERE in
the next 5 to 7 days to see what's up on that end!

It's a dooozy of a surprise !!!!!! ;-) ;-)

To remind everyone:

Harry,

On 29th April, you said:

...BUT...

we DO have another software surprise for you which should be happening right around this coming Wednesday....

Well it's now over a week later than you indicated, and we're still waiting.

So...? Have you got anything, or not?

(I think we know the answer.)

Still waiting...

June 5. Still waiting....

June 13. Still waiting...

July 5: Still waiting

Be gentle. He's on a work break.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

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.

 

[Woody]

From http://dslrbodies.com/newsviews/who-leads-who-follows-who.html:

"Canon — Initially a follower in film SLR, eventually a leader in autofocus SLR; then a follower in DSLR that again flipped to leader; then a follower in mirrorless which may be flipping to leader. Sense a pattern there? Canon isn't generally the first mover, but when they move they move. I think that anyone who underestimates the EOS M and whatever full frame mirrorless Canon decides to produce needs to rethink their position. I'd call Canon opportunistic and well managed. I wouldn't call them the innovator that's going to trigger the next changeover in camera designs by leading the way, but they are quick to understand when that changeover is occurring. Follower that becomes a Winner."

 

[Loswr]

From http://dslrbodies.com/newsviews/who-leads-who-follows-who.html:

"Canon — Initially a follower in film SLR, eventually a leader in autofocus SLR; then a follower in DSLR that again flipped to leader; then a follower in mirrorless which may be flipping to leader. Sense a pattern there? Canon isn't generally the first mover, but when they move they move. I think that anyone who underestimates the EOS M and whatever full frame mirrorless Canon decides to produce needs to rethink their position. I'd call Canon opportunistic and well managed. I wouldn't call them the innovator that's going to trigger the next changeover in camera designs by leading the way, but they are quick to understand when that changeover is occurring. Follower that becomes a Winner."

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

 

[takesome1]

They don't give two hoots about Sony right now

- A

I would disagree wiith you on this point. When you ask enthusiast's/pro's who the leader is in FF mirrorless, they would have to answer Sony. Yes, they are he only ones in that segment so they 'win' by default, but they are the leaders in that market and have a well sorted out camera and lens lineup already in place. Anything and everything Canon releases in this market segment WILL BE compared thoroughly to the Sony's and Canon will be playing catch up.

Plus, with the constant delay's Canon is doing they give Sony more and more time to release even better bodies and glass and then there's the aftermarket to fill in any blanks.

Sad to see Canon going all Kodak here but I've said it before so will say it again - they have no one to blame but themselves.

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

 

[justawriter]

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.

 

[USsp40uk]

I think that 5DM4 like DSLM will be a new 30.4mp sensor, the Digic 8 processor, at least 12 FPS, AF points 99 to 199 or 249 all cross points, with Canon Log included full frame, 4K useable codec, and IBIS. It will be a great camera. Price between 1900-2500 US$. Is that the only Full Frame that release in Mirrorless?
I also think that if bring out 7DMII/III DSLM will be have a 24.1mp sensor, Digic 8 processor, 12 FPS, AF points 99-199 all cross points, with Canon Log included, no extra crop 4K useable codec, and IBIS. I will be a great camera. Price between 1400- 1900 US$.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

I wouldn't also mind a small attachable sachet for a bottle of water, foldable mini-tripod retracting to the bottom of the camera and a Swiss Army knife next to the battery compartment. Or I just don't know how else Canon is going to compete with Sony. They don't want to improve on sensors, so must innovate in other areas such as multi-functionality.

I think that 5DM4 like DSLM will be a new 30.4mp sensor, the Digic 8 processor, at least 12 FPS, AF points 99 to 199 or 249 all cross points, with Canon Log included and full frame 4K useable codec. It will be a great camera. Price between 1900-2500 US$. Is that the only Full Frame that release in Mirrorless?
I also think that if bring out 7DMII/III DSLM will be have a 24.1mp sensor, Digic 8 processor, 12 FPS, AF points 99-199 all cross points, with Canon Log included and no extra crop 4K useable codec. I will be a great camera. Price between 1400- 1900 US$.

 

[slclick]

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.

 

[[email protected]]

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.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

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.

 

[slclick]

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.

I'll tell you why, because EF-S is small potatoes and if it's anywhere near a Prosumer or better, the potential buyers will be current owners of actual high quality glass (EF, not EF-S) and you will alienate millions of shooters by creating a new mount.