EOS 100D/SL1 finally discontinued?

[ajfotofilmagem]

I believe it is possible a full frame camera as light as SL1, if this is mirror less. I personally prefer something like the 70D, which can better balance with long lenses.

Such a thing could be a sales success, if not poorly designed as EOS-M.
It would be an interesting test market to see a SL2 mirror less with Dual Pixel AF.

 

[cellomaster27]

I'd like to see an SL2 with tilt screen, side card slot, and a battery grip. The whole point is to be compact and small but I think it would be wonderful to have the grip option. Decent camera though.

 

[nhz]

I would welcome a small FF DSLR body from Canon. Similar to SL1 but FF. I already use a FF Canon DSLR and lenses, so I do not want start buying another range of lenses suitable for APS-C format.
There used to be small SLRs in the film time - e.g Minolta Dynax 3 weighing about 400g i.e. as much as SL1 DSLR today. With well integrated electronics and no need for film cassette and winding spool, it should be possible to build an FF DSLR of about the size of SL1.
I would love to have a camera like that for travel. My EOS 6D body weighs twice as much unfortunately.

Yes, that could be even better than a slightly upgraded SL1. Long ago I used Olympus OM-2, a small, light and capable 'fullframe' camera with excellent big and bright viewfinder and a dedicated series of small/compact and very high quality lenses. Same size/weight as SL1 seems unlikely to me for a FF DSLR, but there is plenty of room to downsize the 6D while adding a tilt screen, more capable AF and some other upgrades.

But I'm not holding my breath, for now these small/light cameras seem to be 'entry level' for Canon and maybe for the average Canon buyer as well (it didn't sell well at the initial, relatively high price).

Also, the weight/size advantage disappears once you start adding FF DSLR lenses, especially if you want high quality SWA zoom or maximum tele reach. For travel APS-C seems more suitable to me; with the 10-18STM, 18-55STM and 55-250STM (maybe something better instead of the kit zoom....) you have a very light/compact and capable travel kit.

 

[Sportsgal501]

I'd like to see an SL2 with tilt screen, side card slot, and a battery grip. The whole point is to be compact and small but I think it would be wonderful to have the grip option. Decent camera though.

My biggest complaint is trying to grip the SL1 comfortably, I usually end up using the Black Rapid screw on as a semi grip.Which is another reason I picked up the Pentax K-S2. Trying to shoot with the SL1 when it's under 40 degrees had me fit to be tied.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

Hoping the SL2 is in the works, picked up a Pentax K-S2 over the holidays and haven't touched my SL1.
The tilt screen on the Pentax is heaven sent, especially when your dealing with an old ACL injury that flares up with arthritis from time to time.

I'm not sure what it is about Sportsgal that piques my interest the most... her work, her posts or her cool collection of gear where she's not afraid to rock stuff other than just Canon. Particularly Pentax. (You GO Girl!) Pentax has held my curiosity for a long time since I shoot outdoors a LOT. In fact, I was about to buy my first Pentax when I got a good deal on my SL1 in 2014. SL1 used my lenses. SL1 was familiar. SL1 was a fraction of the weight of the Pentax.

So with all that said, I really want to see a SL2!! (And I have a buddy that I would like to hand my SL1 off to so I wish Canon would get moving!!)

 

[preppyak]

I believe it is possible a full frame camera as light as SL1, if this is mirror less.

Sony's been doing it for a couple of years, in fact: http://camerasize.com/compare/#448,487

The reality is that the lenses for full-frame mirrorless are still large, and so the actual size advantage isnt inherently that great: http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.393,380.21,ha,t

Not to mention the ergonomics

 

[Nininini]

I believe it is possible a full frame camera as light as SL1, if this is mirror less.

Sony's been doing it for a couple of years, in fact: http://camerasize.com/compare/#448,487

The reality is that the lenses for full-frame mirrorless are still large, and so the actual size advantage isnt inherently that great: http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.393,380.21,ha,t

Not to mention the ergonomics

yep, getting the weight down of full frame is pointless, the moment you put a tele on it completely tips over

mirorrless full frame should actually be made heavier for proper balance

A7II IS 556 g

the SONY 24-240 AND 70-200 are both 800 grams

both of these are handheld lenses, and both completely unbalance the camera


compare that to the SL1 400 grams body, and 55-250 STM 375 grams, completely in balance

 

[nhz]

yep, getting the weight down of full frame is pointless, the moment you put a tele on it completely tips over

mirorrless full frame should actually be made heavier for proper balance

You are right when assuming that someone wants a 'complete' kit, but some people just need one lens (prime or zoom) and a very capable camera that goes with it, in a small package. In that case a small mirrorless body does make sense, even with FF sensor; with a suitable lens, the size/weight will still be significantly smaller compared to a FF DSLR.

When people want a focal length range from SWA to long tele with good optical quality, downsizing the camera body only isn't going to help. In that case an APS-C body (mirrorless or DSLR) with less bright lenses would be a better starting point.

Regarding weight (and grip) for proper balance: it's telling that most mirrorless cameras have very little choice in serious tele lenses (i.e. long and bright, high quality). Not the best combination ...

 

[old-pr-pix]

My experience is opposite that of dak723. Stuff I do is either for the web or published in smaller formats so ultimate IQ is not required. Nevertheless, I've found the Oly OMD's to be better for me than the Canon crop bodies in most situations.

I went with the OMD E-M5's vs. the SL-1 because of the size and weight difference in the lenses as much as the bodies themselves. OMD's can be really small or can be bulked up by adding a grip or grip plus battery pack. Plus the OMD E-M5 and most of my lenses are fully weather sealed. Sample from Camersize.com shows - left to right - SL-1 w/18-135 (~29-216 FF equivalent FOV), SL-1 w/18-55 (~29-88 FF eq. FOV), OMD-EM5II w/14-150 (~28-280 eq. FOV) and OMD-EM5II w/14-42 pancake (~28-84). Other shot is from: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM showing IQ comparison of SL-1 left and E-M5II right at 400 ISO.

I still like my Canon gear better, but I'm finding I tend to grab the Olympus stuff more and more. It's just easier to take. The more I use the EVF the more I rely on it's capabilities (pure representation of EV compensation, shot preview in viewfinder, etc.)

 

[Nininini]

Ugh, olympus, I'll take an SL1 with a fast 40mm prime with 0 barrel distortion over an olympus with a low quality collapsible slow zoom lens with horrible barrel distoriton and horrible CA.

The canon bodies have built in CA corrrection, olympus does not. The canon have IS in their zoom lens, the olympus does not. Canon have very good JPEG engines, olympus is only average.

 

[Nininini]

Regarding Olympus, this is a company that has completely fallen out of grace for me. When a company causes the deaths of patients because their endoscopes aren't properly sealed, and then tries to hide this, until the FDA and patients and families of patients who died, intervene...you should be out of business at that point. If they can't even seal medical instruments properly, they can't weather seal a camera either.

Let alone their massive accounting scandal, paying off criminal gangs and government officials, denials, banking fraud, tax fraud, kidnappings. You could make a hollywood movie out of this company.

I won't buy an olympus camera just out of principle. When you buy an olympus camera, you're not just buying a camera, you're buying decades of corruption, corruption so bad that it puts FIFA to shame. Eventually this company is going to collapse onto themselves, because the same people that are involved in criminal activities, are still the same people on the olympus governing board.

Every year some board members of Olympus are charged with criminal activity.

 

[Sportsgal501]

Hoping the SL2 is in the works, picked up a Pentax K-S2 over the holidays and haven't touched my SL1.
The tilt screen on the Pentax is heaven sent, especially when your dealing with an old ACL injury that flares up with arthritis from time to time.

I'm not sure what it is about Sportsgal that piques my interest the most... her work, her posts or her cool collection of gear where she's not afraid to rock stuff other than just Canon. Particularly Pentax. (You GO Girl!) Pentax has held my curiosity for a long time since I shoot outdoors a LOT. In fact, I was about to buy my first Pentax when I got a good deal on my SL1 in 2014. SL1 used my lenses. SL1 was familiar. SL1 was a fraction of the weight of the Pentax.

So with all that said, I really want to see a SL2!! (And I have a buddy that I would like to hand my SL1 off to so I wish Canon would get moving!!)

LMAO. .....took me a while to recognize you need a nice piece of glass.

Bodies come and go, at this point camera bodies have become like cars, upgrading every couple of years.
We wasn't doing this when it was just Minolta, Canon, Nikon, Olympus and Ricoh back in the day.You kept that metal body with all it's battle scars from being dropped or using it to hit someone for "years".

I'm still holding on to something Canon made but this tilt screen on the Pentax K-S2 is a blessing for my knees and seems the Nikon 500 understands you an be durable,weatherproof and have a tilt screen.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

Sportsgal... you crack me up! And I agree. Seems it's a different world now when it comes to bodies.... film bodies lasted forever. Digital bodies must be upgraded to get better film (sensor) and hence, better pictures.

I'll tag you sometime when I'm closer to buying a Pentax! Getting nice glass that can go the distance is a always desirable! 8)

 

[old-pr-pix]

Nininini -- clearly you have strong feelings against Olympus. I'm only relaying my own experience and reasons for selecting OMD's. YMMV. I'm not here to market Olympus, yet, I feel inclined to provide some balance to your highly biased comments... 1) True, the Oly pancake zoom isn't the finest quality lens, but it is very good not horrible as you imply. As I said, my use is for web and standard page publications. For that it is excellent. If one prefers primes, go with the 17mm instead with no loss in size advantage. 2) True, Olympus does not have IS in its zoom lenses, instead it has outstanding IBIS which I find to be better than most of my Canon lens IS systems. Your allegation that Canon's jpeg's are better is hard for me to verify. In my experience they seem identical although I haven't done scientific head-to-head comparisons. Reviewers seem to indicate Olympus jpeg's are excellent.

As to the corporation, my interest is in whether they provide the tools I need and stand behind them. I've had no concern in that regard. I am aware of the financial issues you highlight; but, my recollection is that Olympus themselves (their CEO per WSJ article) first revealed those concerns and initiated an internal investigation. At the time it was felt unfortunately they were reflective of all too common practices throughout Japan. Your allegation that corporate officers are sent to jail every year is somewhat dramatic. Certainly there were several charges filed as the investigation unfolded; but Olympus today is a much different organization than when this scandal was unveiled.

As to endoscopes, I'm not sure what that has to do with cameras. From what I've read, there is an industry wide issue that involves all manufacturers, not just Olympus, and has to do with difficulty properly cleaning and sanitizing the used devices. Sealing isn't the issue. Perhaps you can educate me here. The sealing on the OMD so far has been excellent. Using it in driving rainstorms is not a problem.

 

[nhz]

Nininini -- clearly you have strong feelings against Olympus. I'm only relaying my own experience and reasons for selecting OMD's. YMMV. I'm not here to market Olympus, yet, I feel inclined to provide some balance to your highly biased comments... 1) True, the Oly pancake zoom isn't the finest quality lens, but it is very good not horrible as you imply. As I said, my use is for web and standard page publications. For that it is excellent. If one prefers primes, go with the 17mm instead with no loss in size advantage. 2) True, Olympus does not have IS in its zoom lenses, instead it has outstanding IBIS which I find to be better than most of my Canon lens IS systems. Your allegation that Canon's jpeg's are better is hard for me to verify. In my experience they seem identical although I haven't done scientific head-to-head comparisons. Reviewers seem to indicate Olympus jpeg's are excellent.

I haven't used Olympus for a long time, but I was a very happy Olympus OM user for many years, used their digital cameras around 15 years ago and have looked at the m43 system some years ago. I always liked their jpeg output and even now I think that Olympus is often a bit nicer than Canon for jpeg - but it's mostly a matter of taste, and I now only shoot RAW so hardly relevant.

For me the main limitation of m43 was always that there was no native high quality tele glass available, a problem that many mirrorless systems have. You either had MF lenses or compromised image quality and relatively slow AF. They now finally have two good lenses for 'wildlife' in the pipeline (Oly 4/300 and Panny 100-400) but I wonder if they will sell well considering the price; most people who need such lenses have moved to DSLR platforms and I doubt they will come back soon.

And there is the main problem IMHO: the Olympus m43 cameras are good quality, and they can provide very nice images (just a tad below a good Canon APS-C DSLR) but you have to buy the high quality lenses and those are on average far more expensive than good glass for Canon, and when it comes to high quality zooms they are not very compact either (keeping equivalent aperture in mind when comparing). The high price compared to mid-level Canon glass is probably related to sales volume so I don't expect that to change.

As to 'company scandals': yes, who knows what is going on behind the scenes at Canon or Nikon. So many major Japanese companies have been exposed for this type of bad management behavior in recent years. Someone who doesn't want to buy their cameras because of this should start with terminating all their bank accounts, because what has been going on there over the last years was much worse ...

 

[rrcphoto]

I see this being taken up by the following...with somewhat around the same size as the SL1 - perhaps a little smaller.

a EOS-Mx with an included EF to EF-M focal reducing adapter

included 2.36Mdot EVF, regular sized LP-E6 to increase up to 500 shots per charge, nice articulated LCD, 5-6 fps,etc,etc.

something like the A3000 but not so laughingly sad as the A3000.

 

[nhz]

I see this being taken up by the following...with somewhat around the same size as the SL1 - perhaps a little smaller.

a EOS-Mx with an included EF to EF-M focal reducing adapter

included 2.36Mdot EVF, regular sized LP-E6 to increase up to 500 shots per charge, nice articulated LCD, 5-6 fps,etc,etc.

something like the A3000 but not so laughingly sad as the A3000.

Such an EOS-Mx would probably be too expensive at the moment due to EVF, or have too much limitations compared to an SL1/SL2 (for AF/tracking etc.). Higher price, more battery drain, slower AF probably, a bit better for video maybe - not much buyer incentive. I think it is a bit too early for such a transition but at some point in the next 1-2 years it might happen.

 

[rrcphoto]

I see this being taken up by the following...with somewhat around the same size as the SL1 - perhaps a little smaller.

a EOS-Mx with an included EF to EF-M focal reducing adapter

included 2.36Mdot EVF, regular sized LP-E6 to increase up to 500 shots per charge, nice articulated LCD, 5-6 fps,etc,etc.

something like the A3000 but not so laughingly sad as the A3000.

Such an EOS-Mx would probably be too expensive at the moment due to EVF, or have too much limitations compared to an SL1/SL2

hard to say. assuming canon actually got it's act together it may be CLOSE.

the SL1 was released at 649 body only and 799 with a 18-55.

there's room there.

of course, if they shoved the 6D sensor in there ..

 

[michi]

After I gave up on the EOS M, I purchased a SL1 and am very happy with it. I really do hope they come out with a SL2, maybe with a 7DII sensor and a tilt screen. Same size or smaller and I'm in.
If they can come up with a small full frame sensor camera, even better. Then I can get rid of my EF-S lenses too and just have one system.

 

[Maximilian]

Anyone here who's thinking about a SL2 announcement @ CP+ in February?

HI Crosswind!

I would at least wait until CP+ before you make any decission.
Craig (CR Guy) stated that there was no real information/rumor about a SL2 yet.
But maybe Canon can pull the rabbit out of the hat... who knows...?

But if I were you I'd try out the SL1 (if you didn't do that already) and make up my mind before it's out of stock.