Does Canon really deserve this?

[RLPhoto]

If MF, then I'd also want it mirrorless. Rather than a cubic -blad-style mirrorslapper. That rumor about a Sony 50MP MF in a Mamiya 7 style body would be along my preferences. Zero slapping, zero vibration, zero noise. And more compact.

http://photorumors.com/2014/10/24/more-details-on-the-rumored-sonyzeiss-and-mamiya-medium-format-digital-rangefinder-cameras/

I'd just like sony to make a sony branded back for H-Series and Mamiya for the 8000$ price of the 645z. Then the system is modular and if you like mirrorless, they could make a mirrorless body for LF lenses like Phase1 did.

 

[Sella174]

As long as it is recognized that there is a huge difference between Canon can't build and Canon choosing not to build. I have not read anything that would indicate that Canon can't build a quality mirrorless system.

For completeness, also add may not ... for perhaps Canon doesn't own or have a license for a crucial patent.

 

[jrista]

As long as it is recognized that there is a huge difference between Canon can't build and Canon choosing not to build. I have not read anything that would indicate that Canon can't build a quality mirrorless system.

For completeness, also add may not ... for perhaps Canon doesn't own or have a license for a crucial patent.

I don't think that Canon is lacking patentability to make a good mirrorless. I just think that the full potential for the mirrorless market is not all that well defined. Well, maybe it is well defined, that definition is not well recognized. I really don't want a microbody mirrorless. I don't know why that's where everyone went with the first rounds of mirrorless cameras. I want a DSLR-style body. That's one of the reasons I really like the NX1...it's basically a DSLR...just a small one and without the mirror. I would actually PREFER it be bigger, especially if I was going to use larger lenses on it (like the forthcoming 300mm f/2.8 Samsung supertele).


If/when the DSLR manufacturers realize that there is potentially a huge market for mirrorless cameras that are not microscopic in size, then I think they will have nailed it. Even better, make a hybrid device...one that can operate mirrorless with an EVF if the user chooses, or switch back to mirrorslapping OVF mode on demand.

 

[AvTvM]

... I want a DSLR-style body.
... I really like the NX1...
.. I would actually PREFER it be bigger, especially if I was going to use larger lenses on it (like the forthcoming 300mm f/2.8 Samsung supertele).
...
Even better, make a hybrid device...one that can operate mirrorless with an EVF if the user chooses, or switch back to mirrorslapping OVF mode on demand.

Such a device would indeed be BIGGER. But you might still not like it, since it would be fairly top-heavy with a "really big hump" to accomodate both: [an even more more complex] viewfinder prism AND the EVF [panel+electronics].

 

[jrista]

... I want a DSLR-style body.
... I really like the NX1...
.. I would actually PREFER it be bigger, especially if I was going to use larger lenses on it (like the forthcoming 300mm f/2.8 Samsung supertele).
...
Even better, make a hybrid device...one that can operate mirrorless with an EVF if the user chooses, or switch back to mirrorslapping OVF mode on demand.

Such a device would indeed be BIGGER. But you might still not like it, since it would be fairly top-heavy with a "really big hump" to accomodate both: [an even more more complex] viewfinder prism AND the EVF [panel+electronics].

It depends on how you design it. You could simply have something like a shutter over the EVF screen, and just project it off the same prism as the mirror does, or something along those lines. It doesn't necessarily require a huge hump.

 

[scyrene]

That's one reason, certainly. Perhaps image quality doesn't matter to you. It matters to me, as do better AF, frame rate, etc., which is why I own a 1D X.

We are discussing why anyone would choose the 6D over the 70D, so throwing the best DSLR ever into the mix is out of bounds.

The reasons are obvious. I gave one, there are others.

[sarcasm]So the conclusion is that a "full-frame" camera with a mediocre, entry-level AF system trumps a "crop-frame" camera with a terrific, state-of-the-art AF system. Got it.[/sarcasm]

Well it rather depends what you're shooting. Sport, birds in flight - you need good AF, high shutter speed. For landscapes, most macro, a lot of portraiture and even street work, AF is much less important, and image quality (which the full frame will trump the crop in many circumstances) comes to the fore.

I was merely attempting to facilitate your following your assertion to a logical conclusion, but apparently you are unable to do so.

But I did.

Sure you did – typewriters were your logical conclusion. :

The moral of the story (regarding typewriters) is that one year you are on top of the world, selling thousands upon thousands of units, and the next year you sell nothing, and the year after that you file for bankruptcy. Good sales today doesn't necessarily mean good sales tomorrow.

I think the analogy is flawed. Sure, wordprocessors (and then computers) replaces typewriters for most purposes. That doesn't mean your predictions about future camera technologies are proven. You're just saying what feels right to you, without providing evidence.

 

[scyrene]

This is an interesting time to be a photograph enthusiasts. The rapid developments in software and hardware of the mirror-less cameras is quite frankly amazing. It is not so interesting if you are Canon. They seem to be doing their own thing. The lack of interest (apparent or imaginary) or inability of Canon to change with the times is concerning. The half baked EOS M system which actual sells well in Japan is a poor excuse for a mirror-less system. It could even be forgiven if it was released around the same time as the Sony NEX system. But they learned nothing from Sony's early missteps. If the Rebel sales go to mirrorless Canon is poorly positioned. The camera market is shrinking. Canon could possibly profit by reducing the number of Rebel models to one. Consolidating features into fewer APC cameras. Lowering R&D cost.

I expect that Canon will eventual get mirror-less right. It could fill in the low end right along the Rebel cameras with one prosumer model (with EFV) so satisfy the critics. I do not thing they can do it without eating into there own Rebel sales. The question is when. I say get on with it already.

Canon OWNS the pro full frame Market. That will not change anytime soon.
I fully expect that Canon will release a true full frame rebel.


On a side note: (but I may be misremembering it was a long time ago.)
I vaguely remember reading an interview of one of the Canon executives. I read around 9 years ago. Most of it covered the recently released 5D. In it the Canon executive basically stated that he expected most DSLR to eventual be full frame. That as soon as the manufacturing could was perfected that ASPH would be fazed out. Eventual the full frame sensor could be cheep enough to put in a Rebel. He just shrugged when asked what would happen to the EF-s mount.

It basically covered Canons road map from then to the present. It was also part of a 10 year plan. So focusing on full frame is right in line with early Digital camera plans.

As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested

 

[jrista]

This is an interesting time to be a photograph enthusiasts. The rapid developments in software and hardware of the mirror-less cameras is quite frankly amazing. It is not so interesting if you are Canon. They seem to be doing their own thing. The lack of interest (apparent or imaginary) or inability of Canon to change with the times is concerning. The half baked EOS M system which actual sells well in Japan is a poor excuse for a mirror-less system. It could even be forgiven if it was released around the same time as the Sony NEX system. But they learned nothing from Sony's early missteps. If the Rebel sales go to mirrorless Canon is poorly positioned. The camera market is shrinking. Canon could possibly profit by reducing the number of Rebel models to one. Consolidating features into fewer APC cameras. Lowering R&D cost.

I expect that Canon will eventual get mirror-less right. It could fill in the low end right along the Rebel cameras with one prosumer model (with EFV) so satisfy the critics. I do not thing they can do it without eating into there own Rebel sales. The question is when. I say get on with it already.

Canon OWNS the pro full frame Market. That will not change anytime soon.
I fully expect that Canon will release a true full frame rebel.


On a side note: (but I may be misremembering it was a long time ago.)
I vaguely remember reading an interview of one of the Canon executives. I read around 9 years ago. Most of it covered the recently released 5D. In it the Canon executive basically stated that he expected most DSLR to eventual be full frame. That as soon as the manufacturing could was perfected that ASPH would be fazed out. Eventual the full frame sensor could be cheep enough to put in a Rebel. He just shrugged when asked what would happen to the EF-s mount.

It basically covered Canons road map from then to the present. It was also part of a 10 year plan. So focusing on full frame is right in line with early Digital camera plans.

As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested

Exactly! The technology is fine. It just needs to be stuffed into the right package.

 

[AvTvM]

As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested

You and a few others may not be interested.
I and many others are. Looking forward to lighter, smaller gear that is more capable than older, larger, antiquated stuff.

Sony A9 may come sooner than you think, and be bettet and smaller, too.

 

[Sportsgal501]

As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested

Speak for yourself as you get older your old bones and limps are not going to be too fond of lugging heavy DSLR's around, whether it be on your neck, on your shoulders (Black Rapid) or in a backpack. But Advil and Aleve will be happy as two peas in a pod.

 

[Robert Welch]

As far as I know, Canon is the leading camera maker in the world, so they are doing something right.

However, as with cars, there is a lot of competition and the differences between makers is not relatively great. In such a market, it's easy to quibble on various points, and make mountains out of mole hills. Not that all detractors are doing so. There are big things like the inferior dynamic range of Canon sensors when compared to Sony/Nikon cameras. Then there is the lack of competitive mirrorless lineup. However, the dual pixel sensor technology is way ahead of everyone else, and gives Canon a big advantage in the video market and will serve them well when they do produce a viable mirrorless product. So they are far from out of the game, but they are being pushed, and that is a good thing for us, the photographers who use their products.

 

[jrista]

As far as I know, Canon is the leading camera maker in the world, so they are doing something right.

However, as with cars, there is a lot of competition and the differences between makers is not relatively great. In such a market, it's easy to quibble on various points, and make mountains out of mole hills. Not that all detractors are doing so. There are big things like the inferior dynamic range of Canon sensors when compared to Sony/Nikon cameras. Then there is the lack of competitive mirrorless lineup. However, the dual pixel sensor technology is way ahead of everyone else, and gives Canon a big advantage in the video market and will serve them well when they do produce a viable mirrorless product. So they are far from out of the game, but they are being pushed, and that is a good thing for us, the photographers who use their products.

It's only a good thing if Canon actually steps up to the plate they are being pushed towards. It should also be noted that DPAF-like technology (and some of it much more advanced) is already being patented by Canon's competitors...so the edge will not remain Canon's for long.

 

[tcmatthews]

This is an interesting time to be a photograph enthusiasts. The rapid developments in software and hardware of the mirror-less cameras is quite frankly amazing. It is not so interesting if you are Canon. They seem to be doing their own thing. ...

As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested

Speak for yourself as you get older your old bones and limps are not going to be too fond of lugging heavy DSLR's around, whether it be on your neck, on your shoulders (Black Rapid) or in a backpack. But Advil and Aleve will be happy as two peas in a pod.

Had to fix this because I do not like Giant 1D sized DSLR.

I prefer smaller cameras like the 60D and 6D at the largest. But even they are a little large when traveling light. There is room for improvement in ergonomics in the Canon Rebel line cameras can be both small and ergonomic. Current Rebels are just to roundish. The EOS M would have been much better if it was a little longer. The battery was turned sideways (or made lager) and turned into a grip.

I think that cameras are best when they can balance out with the lens. It is ridiculous to expect good ergonomics with a giant lens and a tiny camera. That said cameras like the Nex 6 are great with prime lens no longer than 135mm-200mm.

The supper-telephoto lens user is always going to want something larger.

 

[Marauder]

The trend in high end mirrorless cameras is that they are getting larger not smaller. The NX1, which I've used, isn't any smaller or lighter than a DSLR. I'd expect the A9 when it arrives to be similar. Although the small chassis MLC's generate a lot of "gee how'd they do that" buzz, the "lens with a camera attached" ergo's are off-putting for a lot of serious shooters. You may not agree, but that's what many think.

edit .. Interestingly, the only bundle that's available for the NX1 includes a battery grip. Doesn't sound to me like smaller and lighter is what they are going for.

Indeed! The small factor is fine for a street photographer's tool, which is why most mirroress cameras went with rangefinder style designs. Not an issue with a 25-50mm prime. But, when you start slapping on large glass the small factor advantage erodes an actually becomes a detriment. So, one of the commonly touted advantages of a MILC (small size and light weight) either becomes a detriment or you make your MILC the same size as a DSLR to improve large telephoto handling. Although you still have the other principal MILC advantage of seeing the exposure changes you make reflected in the EVF, the disadvantages of lag (especially under low light), lower quality view and higher battery consumption. MILC's are interesting cameras---but it's a huge mistake to assume they've rendered the classic DSLR obsolete. This is especially true for action/wildlife/sports shooting!!!

 

[jocau]

As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested

You and a few others may not be interested.
I and many others are. Looking forward to lighter, smaller gear that is more capable than older, larger, antiquated stuff.

Sony A9 may come sooner than you think, and be bettet and smaller, too.

Late January/begin February 2015 to be more precise (at least for the announcement, if we can rely on SonyAlphaRumors).

 

[npherno]

The trend in high end mirrorless cameras is that they are getting larger not smaller. The NX1, which I've used, isn't any smaller or lighter than a DSLR. I'd expect the A9 when it arrives to be similar. Although the small chassis MLC's generate a lot of "gee how'd they do that" buzz, the "lens with a camera attached" ergo's are off-putting for a lot of serious shooters. You may not agree, but that's what many think.

edit .. Interestingly, the only bundle that's available for the NX1 includes a battery grip. Doesn't sound to me like smaller and lighter is what they are going for.

Indeed! The small factor is fine for a street photographer's tool, which is why most mirroress cameras went with rangefinder style designs. Not an issue with a 25-50mm prime. But, when you start slapping on large glass the small factor advantage erodes an actually becomes a detriment. So, one of the commonly touted advantages of a MILC (small size and light weight) either becomes a detriment or you make your MILC the same size as a DSLR to improve large telephoto handling. Although you still have the other principal MILC advantage of seeing the exposure changes you make reflected in the EVF, the disadvantages of lag (especially under low light), lower quality view and higher battery consumption. MILC's are interesting cameras---but it's a huge mistake to assume they've rendered the classic DSLR obsolete. This is especially true for action/wildlife/sports shooting!!!

I think Canon does deserve some blame. Personally, I have grown to hate the stratification of their cameras, missing features and incremental updates.

I am not tied to a body. Bodies come and go. I don't care about if the camera is mirrorless or DSLR, I just want the best image quality, at a reasonable price. I would wait for Canon and the 5DIV but I think I will probably buy a A7S or A9 with an adapter when they arrive. If Canon releases a good product by the time I buy a new body, I will go back. Easy. For pro studio shoots, I don't see much an A7 series isn't great at.

 

[Sportsgal501]

This is an interesting time to be a photograph enthusiasts. The rapid developments in software and hardware of the mirror-less cameras is quite frankly amazing. It is not so interesting if you are Canon. They seem to be doing their own thing. ...

As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested

Speak for yourself as you get older your old bones and limps are not going to be too fond of lugging heavy DSLR's around, whether it be on your neck, on your shoulders (Black Rapid) or in a backpack. But Advil and Aleve will be happy as two peas in a pod.

Had to fix this because I do not like Giant 1D sized DSLR.

I prefer smaller cameras like the 60D and 6D at the largest. But even they are a little large when traveling light. There is room for improvement in ergonomics in the Canon Rebel line cameras can be both small and ergonomic. Current Rebels are just to roundish. The EOS M would have been much better if it was a little longer. The battery was turned sideways (or made lager) and turned into a grip.

I think that cameras are best when they can balance out with the lens. It is ridiculous to expect good ergonomics with a giant lens and a tiny camera. That said cameras like the Nex 6 are great with prime lens no longer than 135mm-200mm.

The supper-telephoto lens user is always going to want something larger.

;D I like the Rebels size and I liked the idea of the 7D Mark II and was ready to get one until I held one, heavier than my 50D so I had to pass.

 

[Lawliet]

As far as I know, Canon is the leading camera maker in the world, so they are doing something right.

That path of thinking can go horribly wrong - on the more graceful side GM's/big 3's market share hasn't recovered 40 years after relying on the trope, and how well Nokia handled similar disruptive changes in technology is in recent memory.

However, the dual pixel sensor technology is way ahead of everyone else, and gives Canon a big advantage in the video market and will serve them well when they do produce a viable mirrorless product.

What are the practical implications of DPAF in comparison to the PDAF the others use? First you trade an already dense grid of cross type sensor points for a slightly denser array of linear type points. Second you need separate readouts for AF and image generation(otherwise you could use AF while recording HD60p video or during LV sequences). The latter part in it's full severity is a consequence of Canons readout pipeline, but you'd still feel some impact in any technology that uses also image data. Now what do you gain? The ability to track subjects that are only a few pixels across without relying on contrast and motion vectors. Yet you want those two data set for subject identification anyway, but preferable at the highest possible update frequency.

 

[AvTvM]

However, the dual pixel sensor technology is way ahead of everyone else, and gives Canon a big advantage in the video market and will serve them well when they do produce a viable mirrorless product.

What are the practical implications of DPAF in comparison to the PDAF the others use? First you trade an already dense grid of cross type sensor points for a slightly denser array of linear type points. Second you need separate readouts for AF and image generation(otherwise you could use AF while recording HD60p video or during LV sequences). The latter part in it's full severity is a consequence of Canons readout pipeline, but you'd still feel some impact in any technology that uses also image data. Now what do you gain? The ability to track subjects that are only a few pixels across without relying on contrast and motion vectors. Yet you want those two data set for subject identification anyway, but preferable at the highest possible update frequency.

Excellent points! That's where samsung's NX1 AF system seems to be way ahead. Even if DPAF certainly has further potential. But canon seems to not have solved as much in hardware and to rely more on software ... In which they are not necessarily the best and greatest either. Definitely canon has not yet been able to convert dpaf into a competitively fast live view AF system. Not in the 70D and not in the 7D II.

 

[AvTvM]

One slightly "larger" mirrorless entry does not make a trend yet. And compared to 7d ii the nx1 is still smallish.
I understand that many regulars here often use long/large tele lenses eg for birding, wildlife - and therefore don't mind or prefer larger camera bodies.

I prefer cameras as small as possible for a given sensor size and control set/UI. I want to use only 1 universal camera. so that i am totally used to one user interface and can operate it "blindfolded".

When i go mountaineering or biking, i put a pancake lens on it and carry it in a small case on the left shoulder strap of my backpack - ready for immediate access.

When i go for a street photography walk, i want to carry small camera plus small pancake in my hand (eos m + 22).

When i am on a touristy, non-photo city trip i take it along in a small shoulder bag with pancake, kit zoom and wide zoom lens (eos m + 22 + 11-22 + 18-55),

when i occasionally shoot a wedding or more often a concert i want to put a battery grip on for more ergonomical portrait shots and for more battery power and to provide better balance with larger f/2.8 zooms (eos m fails here),

and when i ocassionally go to the zoo or to a national park i also put the grip on and the 100-400 II plus 1.4x converter ... Plus tripod.

And if i were into video as well, i'd put the thing into some rig and set it on top of that tripod or on a slider or dolly or whatever. With or without vertical grip - depending on nature and duration of shoot.

All with one SMALL and LIGHT camera.

You can always and easily make a small camera bigger and heavier. But you cannot make a large, heavy camera smaller and lighter.

The trend in high end mirrorless cameras is that they are getting larger not smaller. The NX1, which I've used, isn't any smaller or lighter than a DSLR. I'd expect the A9 when it arrives to be similar. Although the small chassis MLC's generate a lot of "gee how'd they do that" buzz, the "lens with a camera attached" ergo's are off-putting for a lot of serious shooters. You may not agree, but that's what many think.

edit .. Interestingly, the only bundle that's available for the NX1 includes a battery grip. Doesn't sound to me like smaller and lighter is what they are going for.