Full Frame Mirrorless in the Works [CR2]

[deleteme]

Rather than pseudo/vintage/retro camera designs with big knurled, but monofunctional dials for only one parameter. I'd like to finally see "smart, multifunctional dials" with context-sensitive visual feedback ... similar to this concept:

Right now I would like to be able to render images like that.

 

[ahsanford]

Im quite confident that most who criticize the M has never used it- at all. And most of us are not coming from 1dx's or Olympus or whatever higher order kit.

FOR TAKING PHOTOS, the camera is a little beast- and the M3, that much more so. Indeed, it coudl be better, but if it doesn tfit your needs, then you must look elsewhere, no?

For the touch screen/ no evf haters, there's ano hope for you. You can squawk about having ONLY that one magic build your looking for- and you will keep looking. The Olympus offerings are incredible, with blinding fast Af- but there's no way in hell im investing in a m43, much less Olympus with obscure lenses and customer service that cant match canon. Nope, sorry.

The g5x will be more up some of you guys alley, but lol, cant wait for the complaintrain for that one either. That tiny lil camera feels great and the fully articulating screen is boos.

It's a tool. Admittedly, I bought in when it was dirt cheap, but it continues to be a incredible investment, and the 5d3 can stay at home 90% of the time.

Soooo much to unpack there, Ash. I hear you. EOS-M takes great pictures in a small package, and has the ability to link to EF lens portfolio. That's huge.

I have shot the EOS-M, the original (but after the AF firmware update). I felt like I was shooting a tiny, laggy Rebel entirely through LiveView 12-18" from my face. It was an (at the time) $799 point and shoot experience with the added upside of nicer lenses and the ability to set my aperture. Yes, it took nice pictures, but that's about it. The entire shooting process was honestly more like a cell phone than my SLR -- awkward, uncomfortable and frustrating.

Let me ask, have you tried non-Canon mirrorless in APS-C? The majority have snappy, responsive viewfinders, much quicker focusing, higher burst, you name it. Have you shot an a6000? That rig mops the floor with EOS-M -- it's not even close. In general, for the same price point, mirrorless from other companies feels like it's 2 generations ahead of the EOS-M.

So -- my comments are not 'the grass is greener elsewhere' or that Canon is doomed or EOS-M is a bad product. I'm saying that for the same money, you can get so so so much more with someone other than Canon right now. And I personally believe that's because Canon is holding one hand behind it's back with mirrorless for fear of upstaging their bread and butter SLRs. We all know they could make a killer mirrorless system -- they just have to go and do it.

- A

 

[scyrene]

Canon had a lucky strike with the video mode in 2008 and has been sexy and a few years ahead. They probably made the Kodak mistake and thought it will remain forever. Now since 2013 Sony is ahead regarding mirrorless full frame, and when Canon comes out with an alternative in 2017+x, they will be way too late. Probably they will even come out first with another system that should protect their DSLRs, so it might be 2019 when they finally come out with a serious product. By then Sony already might have released an A7R Mark 5. And the people who jumped to this system between 2013-2019 will have no reason to go back to Canon then.

If Canon would be clever, they should go the medium format route right away. It will be very difficult to bring more than 50 megapixels to a full frame sensor combined with lowlight capabilities. Medium format sensors might be able to do that in the future. At least that's probably what Sony will deliver to Hasselblad, Pentax and Phase One next.

"Too late". Hmm. All these people talk about jumping ship from one system to another, so can it not work both ways? If Canon brought out something better than Sony (better being entirely subjective and impossible to define universally of course), why wouldn't it work the other way, with Sony customers moving to Canon? Nobody owns a market forever - this argument is made about Canon ('just because they've dominated before means nothing now' etc), but it's always rather one-sided. Either customers are mobile, in which case they can and will move back and forth, or they're loyal, in which case it's not a problem to being with (the truth is in between, but in none of these cases is a Canon FF mirrorless doomed from the outset).

 

[scyrene]

Rather than pseudo/vintage/retro camera designs with big knurled, but monofunctional dials for only one parameter. I'd like to finally see "smart, multifunctional dials" with context-sensitive visual feedback ... similar to this concept:

Instead of retro looks I'd much prefer a FF MILC along the lines of Vladimir Markovs 2012 design vision for future mirrorless cameras:

http://photorumors.com/2012/03/23/interesting-mirrorless-camera-concept/

However, since it is Canon we are talking about, a FF mirrorless body might either look like a G5X on steroids or even worse ...

http://photorumors.com/2010/07/29/canon-evil-concept/

Mate, for once, I agree (with some of it). Those dials are great.

 

[moreorless]

The issue really is that the EOS M was not really targeted at the typical western camera forum user, that might be changing a bit now and in the future but I think its clear that the reason it was released was to compete with ultra small APSC mirror less in Asia.

 

[Bernard]

The issue really is that the EOS M was not really targeted at the typical western camera forum user, that might be changing a bit now and in the future but I think its clear that the reason it was released was to compete with ultra small APSC mirror less in Asia.

I've been surprised at how popular the M is with (presumably) Japanese tourists in Europe.

I think Canon has picked the right approach: design cameras for the people who actually buy and use them, not for internet shut-ins who feel the need to opine. That probably explains why they sell more cameras than anyone else. You would never know that from reading the comments section on geek sites.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The issue really is that the EOS M was not really targeted at the typical western camera forum user, that might be changing a bit now and in the future but I think its clear that the reason it was released was to compete with ultra small APSC mirror less in Asia.

I've been surprised at how popular the M is with (presumably) Japanese tourists in Europe.

I think Canon has picked the right approach: design cameras for the people who actually buy and use them, not for internet shut-ins who feel the need to opine. That probably explains why they sell more cameras than anyone else. You would never know that from reading the comments section on geek sites.

Originally, the M system sold so poorly in the US and Canada that it was cancelled, and the inventory sold out on ebay at fire sale prices. However, in Asia, its a huge market, and the market is growing in the USA. Canon USA has agreed to give them another try. If they do not sell, its unlikely that we will see more of the "M" models in the USA. Canon has surveyed US buyers multiple times, and the answer has always been that they perceive a large DSLR as being the best camera. This perception is what drives sales more than technical specs.

At least a part of the reason lies in the tendency for North American and Europeans to have larger hands and many have been unhappy with the lack of a viewfinder.

Price, as always is king. There are a few who buy the highest price models as a status symbol, but they are a exception. Experienced photographers buy a camera based on their intended use, but they do not drive the low end market.

 

[TeT]

I am looking forward to a Canon Mirrorless FF that performs as well as my Canon 6D in a smaller body.

I would probably give the M3 a shot now except that I need both viewfinder and Flash at times...

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

There used to be a time when conceptual designs were floated to test potential market reaction. This FF Canon mirrorless discussion seems to me to be one of those kinds of market tests.

Alas, if it is a test, the FF mirrorless ship has already sailed and Canon will be doing nothing more than playing catch-up. That much should be obvious. Even to Canon's marketing and sales teams.

 

[tcmatthews]

The issue really is that the EOS M was not really targeted at the typical western camera forum user, that might be changing a bit now and in the future but I think its clear that the reason it was released was to compete with ultra small APSC mirror less in Asia.

I've been surprised at how popular the M is with (presumably) Japanese tourists in Europe.

I think Canon has picked the right approach: design cameras for the people who actually buy and use them, not for internet shut-ins who feel the need to opine. That probably explains why they sell more cameras than anyone else. You would never know that from reading the comments section on geek sites.

Originally, the M system sold so poorly in the US and Canada that it was cancelled, and the inventory sold out on ebay at fire sale prices. However, in Asia, its a huge market, and the market is growing in the USA. Canon USA has agreed to give them another try. If they do not sell, its unlikely that we will see more of the "M" models in the USA. Canon has surveyed US buyers multiple times, and the answer has always been that they perceive a large DSLR as being the best camera. This perception is what drives sales more than technical specs.

At least a part of the reason lies in the tendency for North American and Europeans to have larger hands and many have been unhappy with the lack of a viewfinder.

Price, as always is king. There are a few who buy the highest price models as a status symbol, but they are a exception. Experienced photographers buy a camera based on their intended use, but they do not drive the low end market.

The Canon M sold poorly in the USA because it had the feature set of a Nex5 the price of a Nex7 and the performance of a 2 year old NEX3. It was marketed nowhere. The average American has never seen or heard of the Canon M. The Sony cameras were in Wal-Mart and Best Buy all around the country. You cannot sell something if it is not in the store.

Canon USA seems to be making the same mistakes with the M3. It is to expensive for what it is and it is already $100 off list price. I understand they are much more reasonably priced in Asia. As you said price is King.

If Canon is going to try a full frame mirrorless. It will need to be competitive with the Sony A7II series both in price and features. They will also need to market the camera.

 

[Bob Howland]

The issue really is that the EOS M was not really targeted at the typical western camera forum user, that might be changing a bit now and in the future but I think its clear that the reason it was released was to compete with ultra small APSC mirror less in Asia.

I've been surprised at how popular the M is with (presumably) Japanese tourists in Europe.

I think Canon has picked the right approach: design cameras for the people who actually buy and use them, not for internet shut-ins who feel the need to opine. That probably explains why they sell more cameras than anyone else. You would never know that from reading the comments section on geek sites.

Originally, the M system sold so poorly in the US and Canada that it was cancelled, and the inventory sold out on ebay at fire sale prices. However, in Asia, its a huge market, and the market is growing in the USA. Canon USA has agreed to give them another try. If they do not sell, its unlikely that we will see more of the "M" models in the USA. Canon has surveyed US buyers multiple times, and the answer has always been that they perceive a large DSLR as being the best camera. This perception is what drives sales more than technical specs.

At least a part of the reason lies in the tendency for North American and Europeans to have larger hands and many have been unhappy with the lack of a viewfinder.

Price, as always is king. There are a few who buy the highest price models as a status symbol, but they are a exception. Experienced photographers buy a camera based on their intended use, but they do not drive the low end market.

The Canon M sold poorly in the USA because it had the feature set of a Nex5 the price of a Nex7 and the performance of a 2 year old NEX3. It was marketed nowhere. The average American has never seen or heard of the Canon M. The Sony cameras were in Wal-Mart and Best Buy all around the country. You cannot sell something if it is not in the store.

Canon USA seems to be making the same mistakes with the M3. It is to expensive for what it is and it is already $100 off list price. I understand they are much more reasonably priced in Asia. As you said price is King.

If Canon is going to try a full frame mirrorless. It will need to be competitive with the Sony A7II series both in price and features. They will also need to market the camera.

+1, especially the part about the M system being marketed nowhere. It also doesn't help that online, a Rebel SL1 with 18-55 lens can be purchased for $500. The SL1 body may be larger than the M3 but, except for depth and even with a full-sized EF lens mount, it is smaller than the Sony A7II series bodies. It's going to be really interesting to see what lens mount Canon uses for its FF mirrorless body.

 

[Pitbullo]

I am looking forward to the Canon FF mirrorless, as I am thinking of getting a Sony A7II next year. If I could stay with Canon all would be great. I like Canon. However, as many are saying, they want to use their EF-lenses, and dont want a new mount. I dont really get that. I also want to use my lenses on a Canon mirrorless, but with an adapter. I really hope they shorten the flange distance so we can use legacy lenses like we can on the Sony cameras. Apart from the EVF, the enormous amount of lenses that can be used is one of the greatest strengths of the mirrorless Sonys.

 

[StudentOfLight]

I am looking forward to the Canon FF mirrorless, as I am thinking of getting a Sony A7II next year. If I could stay with Canon all would be great. I like Canon. However, as many are saying, they want to use their EF-lenses, and dont want a new mount. I dont really get that. I also want to use my lenses on a Canon mirrorless, but with an adapter. I really hope they shorten the flange distance so we can use legacy lenses like we can on the Sony cameras. Apart from the EVF, the enormous amount of lenses that can be used is one of the greatest strengths of the mirrorless Sonys.

Which legacy lenses are you hoping to resurrect and how good are they by today's standards? How would they hold up to the current crop of 24/36/42/50 MP sensors?

 

[Don Haines]

I am looking forward to the Canon FF mirrorless, as I am thinking of getting a Sony A7II next year. If I could stay with Canon all would be great. I like Canon. However, as many are saying, they want to use their EF-lenses, and dont want a new mount. I dont really get that. I also want to use my lenses on a Canon mirrorless, but with an adapter. I really hope they shorten the flange distance so we can use legacy lenses like we can on the Sony cameras. Apart from the EVF, the enormous amount of lenses that can be used is one of the greatest strengths of the mirrorless Sonys.

Which legacy lenses are you hoping to resurrect and how good are they by today's standards? How would they hold up to the current crop of 24/36/42/50 MP sensors?

That's the $64,000.00 question......
The current crop of lenses is vastly superior to those of 30 years ago.....
When I started in photography, you shot with primes because zooms SUCKED!!! Now we have lenses like the 70-200 and the 24-70 (not to mention 200-400) that are sharper than those primes were..... I have an FD mount 800F5.6 at work and my Tamron 150-600 gives me more detail of distant objects..... I am not nostalgic about mounting them on a new body, we have come so far in materials, coatings, and precision manufacturing that they are relegated to paperweight status....

 

[Luds34]

Bottom line, if you want "small size/low weight mirrorless," you want APS-C or m4/3 mirrorless, period. FF mirrorless discussion should not include size, as that argument is already lost to the size of FF lenses which will remain large due to physics. Comparing body size and weight as if it makes a difference is a bit silly when a telephoto lens obliterates any chance of true portability with FF mirrorless and further calls into question the ability for small body FF mirrorless cameras to handle large FF telephoto lenses in terms of ergonomics.


IMO, Canon should keep it simple:

Line 1: EOS M, APS-C mirrorless using EF-M lenses
Line 2: EOS 6DM, FF mirrorless variant using 6D chassis, updated electronics and EF lenses

The slightly lesser depth a shorter flange can provide is not worth the sacrifice in ergonomics or lens compatibility in full frame, as full frame will remain relatively large as a result of the large lenses anyway.

+1

Yes, yes, yes. Summed up my feelings on the subject nicely.

 

[Pitbullo]

I am looking forward to the Canon FF mirrorless, as I am thinking of getting a Sony A7II next year. If I could stay with Canon all would be great. I like Canon. However, as many are saying, they want to use their EF-lenses, and dont want a new mount. I dont really get that. I also want to use my lenses on a Canon mirrorless, but with an adapter. I really hope they shorten the flange distance so we can use legacy lenses like we can on the Sony cameras. Apart from the EVF, the enormous amount of lenses that can be used is one of the greatest strengths of the mirrorless Sonys.

Which legacy lenses are you hoping to resurrect and how good are they by today's standards? How would they hold up to the current crop of 24/36/42/50 MP sensors?

TBH I dont really know as I have not studied those lenses (I shoot Canon crop today). However, looking at the Sony forum it seems like people are adapting all sort of lenses. Not just for their qualities, but also for the price. Older lenses tent to be quite cheap compared to modern lenses. I want that option! It would be silly to leave this possibility out when they have the chance to leave it in.

 

[ahsanford]

TBH I dont really know as I have not studied those lenses (I shoot Canon crop today). However, looking at the Sony forum it seems like people are adapting all sort of lenses. Not just for their qualities, but also for the price. Older lenses tent to be quite cheap compared to modern lenses. I want that option! It would be silly to leave this possibility out when they have the chance to leave it in.

Yep, that's part of this massive tradeoff. (There is a poll on this right now -- please participate, thx)

Imagine two identical cameras in every way other than the flange distance. The grips are identical. The controls are identical. The weight is identical (drink the Kool-Aid, I know it can't be exactly the same). Now imagine if the flange distance to the sensor is the only thing different between the two.

Small flange distance

Pros:

• Skinny body front to back
• Adaptation of older or non-Canon lenses is possible
• Speedboosters possible? (I'm not well read on those)
• Since the lens is closer to the sensor, you don't need as tall a flash to shoot over a standard FL lens without shading the subject, so a lower profile speedlite could be used, I guess (I'm reaching here)

Cons:

• Added cost -- Canon could be will be jerks and make you buy that EF adaptor
• Performance with old lenses -- will adaptored EF lenses work as quickly/effectively as on a native EF mount?
• You won't have any new native glass to use on day 1 -- perhaps only 1-2 lenses
• You will live in a two mount world until all of your lenses are available in the new format

EF flange distance

Pros:

• All EF lenses work perfectly on day 1.
• You don't need to live in a two mount world. EF only = simpler, and you aren't staring at a scenario where you might need to offload your EF glass someday.
• You investment cost for getting into the mirrorless world is less -- you already own lenses and you don't need an adaptor.

Cons:

• It will be unnecessarily thick front to back.
• Adapting older / non-Canon lenses is off the table

I'm sure I missed a bunch of things, but that's how I see it. I'm leaning slightly towards the EF option, but that's from an admittedly ignorant position of thinking that an adapter would hurt performance/responsiveness/AF speed of the EF glass. That may not turn out to be true.

(There is a poll on this right now -- please participate, thx)

- A

 

[fotonunta]

When Canon will release the next pro camera, i thinks Sony will release A7S3, that will beat every competitor. I have a lot of L lenses and i am thinking... should i switch to Sony. Come on Canon release the next FF camera!

 

[neuroanatomist]

When Canon will release the next pro camera, i thinks Sony will release A7S3, that will beat every competitor. I have a lot of L lenses and i am thinking... should i switch to Sony. Come on Canon release the next FF camera!

Yes, Canon had better release their next pro FF camera soon, or else all the pros will flock to Sony in droves for the superior AF tracking, stellar battery life, supremely well-designed ergonomics and menu UI, and most importantly Sony's industry-leading customer support and repair turnaround.

:

 

[privatebydesign]

When Canon will release the next pro camera, i thinks Sony will release A7S3, that will beat every competitor. I have a lot of L lenses and i am thinking... should i switch to Sony. Come on Canon release the next FF camera!

Yes, Canon had better release their next pro FF camera soon, or else all the pros will flock to Sony in droves for the superior AF tracking, stellar battery life, supremely well-designed ergonomics and menu UI, and most importantly Sony's industry-leading customer support and repair turnaround.

:

Neuro, you forgot the Sony class leading lens line up and flash system!