Hint about what to expect from Canon's step into full frame mirrorless?

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
Don Haines said:
So, in the meantime go big or go crop. No matter how much a few fanatics would like it to be so, FF camera systems will never be as small as crop systems because you need more glass to cover a larger sensor. PERIOD!

yes. BUT! :)

But an FF sensored mirrorless camera can be as small as a Sony A7 (1st gen) or even a Sony RX-1R II. And moderately fast prime lenses and f/4 zooms in the most commonly used focal length range can also be made quite compact. That's what I am after - something like a modern day, digital version of Minolta CLE system [but with f/4 zooms, not only with primes].

I do understand that other people have other preferences, and am sure that Canon will make "chunky FF mirrorless" options. I just hope, they not ONLY make large versions, but also "very compact" ones.

If Canon were to go with native EF mount - which I don't believe - then a compact system would not be possible. If they go with a new "slim" mount for FF mirrorless, then any size camera bodies and lenses are possible - from
* "XS"ultra-compact [similar to Sony RX-1R II, but with lens mount] to
* "S" [eg Sony A7 1st gen]
* "M" [eg like Sony A7 III/A9]
* "L" [like 5D] all the way to
* "XL" [1DX class]

Customers can then chose which body/bodies they want depending on their shooting scenarios/lenses used and personal preferences. I'd be very surprised if Canon would not take that approach. Only open question to me is, what they come first with? Only M? Only L? Or L + S ? And ever something in XS or not?

Ah, and I further *hope*, that smaller camera size does not automatically mean "less functionality". Ideally it would be more like a BMW Mini - it is available with basic but also with very potent engines, high-quality chassis, brakes, interieur etc. despite being a sub-compact size car.
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
fullstop said:
Don Haines said:
So, in the meantime go big or go crop. No matter how much a few fanatics would like it to be so, FF camera systems will never be as small as crop systems because you need more glass to cover a larger sensor. PERIOD!

yes. BUT! :)

But an FF sensored mirrorless camera can be as small as a Sony A7 (1st gen) or even a Sony RX-1R II. And moderately fast prime lenses and f/4 zooms in the most commonly used focal length range can also be made quite compact. That's what I am after - something like a modern day, digital version of Minolta CLE system [but with f/4 zooms, not only with primes].

I do understand that other people have other preferences, and am sure that Canon will make "chunky FF mirrorless" options. I just hope, they not ONLY make large versions, but also "very compact" ones.

If Canon were to go with native EF mount - which I don't believe - then a compact system would not be possible. If they go with a new "slim" mount for FF mirrorless, then any size camera bodies and lenses are possible - from
* "XS"ultra-compact [similar to Sony RX-1R II, but with lens mount] to
* "S" [eg Sony A7 1st gen]
* "M" [eg like Sony A7 III/A9]
* "L" [like 5D] all the way to
* "XL" [1DX class]

Customers can then chose which body/bodies they want depending on their shooting scenarios/lenses used and personal preferences. I'd be very surprised if Canon would not take that approach. Only open question to me is, what they come first with? Only M? Only L? Or L + S ? And ever something in XS or not?

Ah, and I further *hope*, that smaller camera size does not automatically mean "less functionality". Ideally it would be more like a BMW Mini - it is available with basic but also with very potent engines, high-quality chassis, brakes, interieur etc. despite being a sub-compact size car.

Fair enough, and well put. There are differences of opinion about the desirability or the various options and their practicality of the various options, but that is life.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
I personally don’t believe the notion of vendor lock in a competive market like ILCs, but many people do (e.g. “my lenses lock me to canon/Nikon/whatever” *).

What I don’t get is, once you’ve committed to buying a new line of lenses with zero pedigree (not even announced), why does brand matter one bit? Just buy whatever vendor most closely approximates the system you want, rather than barking up the tree of one specific manufacturer.


*this is routinely demonstrated to be false when people see shiny new series II lenses and replace their series I, and then see series III lenses and replace their series II, and then see DO lenses and replace their non-DO.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,946
Canada
BillB said:
fullstop said:
Don Haines said:
So, in the meantime go big or go crop. No matter how much a few fanatics would like it to be so, FF camera systems will never be as small as crop systems because you need more glass to cover a larger sensor. PERIOD!

yes. BUT! :)

But an FF sensored mirrorless camera can be as small as a Sony A7 (1st gen) or even a Sony RX-1R II. And moderately fast prime lenses and f/4 zooms in the most commonly used focal length range can also be made quite compact. That's what I am after - something like a modern day, digital version of Minolta CLE system [but with f/4 zooms, not only with primes].

I do understand that other people have other preferences, and am sure that Canon will make "chunky FF mirrorless" options. I just hope, they not ONLY make large versions, but also "very compact" ones.

If Canon were to go with native EF mount - which I don't believe - then a compact system would not be possible. If they go with a new "slim" mount for FF mirrorless, then any size camera bodies and lenses are possible - from
* "XS"ultra-compact [similar to Sony RX-1R II, but with lens mount] to
* "S" [eg Sony A7 1st gen]
* "M" [eg like Sony A7 III/A9]
* "L" [like 5D] all the way to
* "XL" [1DX class]

Customers can then chose which body/bodies they want depending on their shooting scenarios/lenses used and personal preferences. I'd be very surprised if Canon would not take that approach. Only open question to me is, what they come first with? Only M? Only L? Or L + S ? And ever something in XS or not?

Ah, and I further *hope*, that smaller camera size does not automatically mean "less functionality". Ideally it would be more like a BMW Mini - it is available with basic but also with very potent engines, high-quality chassis, brakes, interieur etc. despite being a sub-compact size car.

Fair enough, and well put. There are differences of opinion about the desirability or the various options and their practicality of the various options, but that is life.

I agree. It all depends on what Canon's market research tells them is the way to go. We don't know. Some of us think big, some think small, but we are all guessing.

My personal guess, and I REALLY emphasise that it is a guess, is that they will first come out with an EF mount FF about the size of a 6D2, and most of the reason for the guess is that they already have the full suite of lenses that will work on it. Will they later come out with a new form factor and new lenses? Who knows! Only time and Canon will tell, and Canon is famous for keeping quiet....

For my personal needs, I would be better off with a smaller body and lenses as it would be awesome for canoe and hiking trips.... but when I look around me on these trips I see P/S cameras and cell phones. Even with an M and a couple F6.3 lenses I would still have the biggest camera.... Eyes bug out when I lift up my Tamron 150-600 :) That sucker is heavy to pack and lighter would be better......
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
3kramd5 said:
I personally don’t believe the notion of vendor lock in a competitive market like ILCs, burn many people do (e.g. “my lenses lock me to canon/Nikon/whatever” .

To me it is very real. Canon EF and EF-M (!) lenses really are the main reason I have not switched to another brand.

Long time ago, when Nikon launched the D300, I had a clearly inferior Canon 40D. It was primarily due to the fact Nikon had [and has!] no APS-C zoom lens that could have replaced my "go-to zoom", the Canon EF-S 17-55 / 2.8 IS that I did not switch but waited it out - until Canon finally came along with the 7D.

The last few years were similar. I want to consolidate from FF + APS-C to only one FF sensored mirrorless system. Nikon has nothing mirrorless of interest at all. mFT is not for me. Fuji has only crop sensors and lenses and I am not willing to pay a lot for yet another crop system, even when the lenses are optically fine.

So, my only choice right now would be Sony. While I do find the A7 III "mildly tempting", I cannot say the same about the Sony FE lenses. Generally they are 1. bigger than I want, due to poorly chosen lens mount parameters for FF image circle and 2. not enough bang for the buck. Always a lot more expensive than Canon without necessarily being optically superior.

That's the main reason why I'm still waiting for Canon FF mirrorless system. Or Nikon. But I have even less faith in Nikon than in Canon in that regard. And I prefer the Canon UI. :)
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Don Haines said:
My personal guess, and I REALLY emphasise that it is a guess, is that they will first come out with an EF mount FF about the size of a 6D2, and most of the reason for the guess is that they already have the full suite of lenses that will work on it. Will they later come out with a new form factor and new lenses? Who knows! Only time and Canon will tell, and Canon is famous for keeping quiet....

My ever-shifting opinion is that Canon will go thin FF mirrorless for the enthusiasts / smaller 2nd body / travel people and eventually (say 2 years later) offer a full EF one for the pros.

I just don't see Canon rebuilding the core/guts of EF in a thinner mount, and I don't see them making a push towards general working pros and require they use an adaptor 75% of the time. I believe the easiest option for them is:

  • A line of thin FF mirrorless bodies with 3-5 crucially small lenses + EF adaptor for the rest
  • A line of full EF bodies for higher end needs, tougher build, chunkier grip, etc.
  • The EF portfolio lives on at full steam.
  • The thin mount lens portfolio is carefully contained to prevent it getting big/huge/fast. It's much easier to point an enthusiast or small form factor fans at an adaptor for the odd bigger lens need than it is for Canon to tell pros that they need an adaptor almost all the time.

- A
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,401
4,029
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Don Haines said:
...So, in the meantime go big or go crop...

Although I am a little perplexed by how much cameras and lenses have been super-sized over the past 50 years. My original F1 and its lenses were much closer in size to Rebels than to today's full frames. And yet, in those days the cameras had tons of wasted space with room for cassettes and take up reels that aren't needed anymore.

The SL series shows that they can pack most of same electronics into a much smaller body.

Even lenses have grown in size, although that may be because we've gone from primes to zooms and incorporated IS and autofocus motors that didn't exist at the time.
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,350
552
Part of the thing to address will be who it is aimed at as the primary market.

Professionals, on the whole, will have telephotos or f2.8 zooms (gross generalisation I know) and they would probably favour a 6D2 sized body.
Professionals/enthusiasts wanting a back up - you would go smaller body, maybe a new mount with adapter for EF lenses. Quite a few on this very forum have things like the SL2 as a second body so would it be that much of an issue?
Amateurs who go after the SL2 sized because they want something more compact. To them, mount design is probably not an issue....but they do like to 'have a camera like what professionals use' so we are back to the first option.

Then there is the vocal, and vastly over-represented youtube vlogger/technofreak. They will be happy with nothing less than a direct competitor to the Sony series. No matter what Canon do they will probably find reason to decry it: so why even try to appease them :). More seriously, Canon is unlikely to hit this level on the first iteration so they will probably be pragmatic and be happy initially with something to make the statement "we can do it too".

The more I think about it the more I think along the lines of a back up for pro/enthusiast with a new mount...but it is the adapter that has me flipping. As said before, if you are creating a new camera with new lenses then you reduce the reasons for brand loyalty - and I can't help feeling an under-spec Sony with Canon ergonomics would be quite interesting.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
fullstop said:
3kramd5 said:
I personally don’t believe the notion of vendor lock in a competitive market like ILCs, burn many people do (e.g. “my lenses lock me to canon/Nikon/whatever” .

To me it is very real. Canon EF and EF-M (!) lenses really are the main reason I have not switched to another brand.

Right, but for this new MILC you want a new mount and new lenses. So it’s not your EF and EF-M lenses for which you are electing to wait for an acceptable canon camera, it’s that you’re assuming canon will make smaller new lenses and better UI than Sony. The latter is probably true, although the iii series cameras have some pretty good UI (in some ways better than anyone else since they’re extensively customizable with all the of mapping functions). The former? That’s a coin toss.

The third party native Sony FE lenses are typically pretty good and typically smaller than Sony’s “GM” line (Sigma Art notwithstanding), as are the smaller aperture lenses (naturally). I had the batis 25 and 85. Size wise they felt pretty good on that small body (A7R2).
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,401
4,029
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Mikehit said:
...Canon is unlikely to hit this level on the first iteration so they will probably be pragmatic and be happy initially with something to make the statement "we can do it too"...

I've seen this reasoning a lot on this forum and I don't understand it. Why would Canon not want to hit it out of the park on its first attempt? And, why couldn't they?

They certainly have the resource available. And they've no doubt been researching this for years. I'm not suggesting that their first full frame mirrorless with be the perfect body for everyone. There are some baked-in decisions that will be guaranteed to disappoint no matter what they do (lens mount for example). But, I find it very unlikely they will unveil a "beta" version and in effect say, "we'll do better next time."
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
unfocused said:
Mikehit said:
...Canon is unlikely to hit this level on the first iteration so they will probably be pragmatic and be happy initially with something to make the statement "we can do it too"...

I've seen this reasoning a lot on this forum and I don't understand it. Why would Canon not want to hit it out of the park on its first attempt? And, why couldn't they?

They certainly have the resource available. And they've no doubt been researching this for years. I'm not suggesting that their first full frame mirrorless with be the perfect body for everyone. There are some baked-in decisions that will be guaranteed to disappoint no matter what they do (lens mount for example). But, I find it very unlikely they will unveil a "beta" version and in effect say, "we'll do better next time."

Careful not to conflate quality with excitement. No one's saying they'll put out a clunky lemon of a first try. I expect it to work very well. I just don't think they'll swing for the spec fences with their first offering. Why?

1) As they've constantly shown, there is no need to give more spec-per-dollar yet. Sony isn't stealing Canon share (yet). Canon can continue to maximize profits by charging more for lesser body specs provided it is well designed, handles well, etc.

2) Though mirrorless offers pros (and cons) to all levels of photography, the foaming-at-the-mouth pent up mirrorless demand is surely the highest with enthusiasts. So I see the $2k-ish lower-spec FF body setting sales records while a $3K+ spec FF body has more discerning users that will be more skeptical at first.

So I'm expecting an extrapolated-for-2018-level take on on the 6D2 specs. Perhaps a 6D2 spec list with 4K and an on-chip ADC sensor -- nothing more. No IBIS, no high MP x high fps supercamera, nothing to challenge/threaten the same-spec'd SLR that sits next to it in the portfolio, etc. It'll just be solid and that's it.

- A
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
unfocused said:
Mikehit said:
...Canon is unlikely to hit this level on the first iteration so they will probably be pragmatic and be happy initially with something to make the statement "we can do it too"...
I've seen this reasoning a lot on this forum and I don't understand it. Why would Canon not want to hit it out of the park on its first attempt? And, why couldn't they?
They certainly have the resource available. And they've no doubt been researching this for years. I'm not suggesting that their first full frame mirrorless with be the perfect body for everyone. There are some baked-in decisions that will be guaranteed to disappoint no matter what they do (lens mount for example). But, I find it very unlikely they will unveil a "beta" version and in effect say, "we'll do better next time."

Depends whether Canon has seen the light and goes "all-in" on mirrorless FF - as they should, and *hopefully* will as they won't be selling many mirrorslapppers any longer in the not so distant future. Basically a mirrorless 1DX-III in an "A9 sized" body - to show Sony [and Nikon!] "who's boss". Priced ... very high. Innovative Canon should be able to pull it off. Big question mark will be new native lenses to go with it. Maybe similar to Sony, first 2 primes, maybe an EF-X 50/1.4 IS Nano USM ;D ;D ;D for a start and a mirrorless version of the 85/1.4. Plus a new, "really good" EF-X 24-105/4.0 zoom? And definitely a "native" Canon EF adapter. :)

Or they repeat what they done with mirrorless APS-C ... first 3 generations of EOS M clearly not fully competitive with "best in class". But, they managed to target the right audience with the most COMPACT (!) products that were "just good enough" and "lowest prices for decent APS-C lenses in the market". And because there are so many potential buyers who want SMALL, decent and affordable mirrorless cameras, EOS M system has been selling well. It took Canon 5 full years to finally come up with APS-C mirrorless cameras [M5/M6, M50] that are "technically" fully competitive [although many Fuji fanbois will dispute that].

Or both. Hi-end plus enthusiast lineup. 2 or even 3 cameras at start. 1 video-centric. :)

Will be interesting to see which route Canon takes.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
fullstop said:
Depends whether Canon has seen the light and goes "all-in" on mirrorless FF - as they should, and *hopefully* will as they won't be selling many mirrorslapppers any longer in the not so distant future. Basically a mirrorless 1DX-III in an "A9 sized" body - to show Sony [and Nikon!] "who's boss".

Because the smartest place to start in FF mirrorless are with the most demanding / most mirrorless-skeptical people, who routinely carrying more lens weight than body weight, and have bumper stickers on their cars that say "You can pry my mirror out of my cold, dead hands."

Even Sony wasn't foolish enough to start there.

I'd love to see A9 vs. A7III sales units. I'd bet it's an order of magnitude difference.

- A
 

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,109
407
Vancouver, BC
ahsanford said:
fullstop said:
Depends whether Canon has seen the light and goes "all-in" on mirrorless FF - as they should, and *hopefully* will as they won't be selling many mirrorslapppers any longer in the not so distant future. Basically a mirrorless 1DX-III in an "A9 sized" body - to show Sony [and Nikon!] "who's boss".

Because the smartest place to start in FF mirrorless are with the most demanding / most mirrorless skeptical people, who routinely carrying more lens weight than body weight, and have bumper stickers on their cars that say "You can pry my mirror out of my cold, dead hands."

Even Sony wasn't foolish enough to start there.

I'd love to see A9 vs. A7III sales units. I'd bet it's an order of magnitude difference.

- A

At least, and doubly so because the a9 is a camera without a lens. For the sports and wildlife folks, you max out at 400/5.6 or 560/8. While that is ok for hobbyists, it doesn't cut it at the high end. And for the hobbyists, an A7 of some sort will be just fine.
 

jayphotoworks

EOS RP
Aug 11, 2016
267
111
neuroanatomist said:
jayphotoworks said:
The A9 is 100% silent and was designed to be used in e-shutter mode natively. The only need for the mechanical shutter is when you are shooting with a flash which creates a visual disturbance anyways.

Or if your subject is moving sufficiently fast that a shutter speed of faster than ~1/150 s is needed to stop the motion. Personally, I typically use at least 1/250 s even when my kids aren't moving all that fast. But hey, even though my kids don't like jello, maybe you do. :)

In real world performance, it is close enough to not have as large of an impact as you would like to highlight. You can find a video on youtube demonstrating the A9's e-shutter with a golf swing. Yes, there is a slight rolling shutter effect in some of the shots, but a mechanical FP shutter is not immune to this either at 1/250. If you consider an average golf club head moves at 93.5mph across the frame, and many of the shots are usable on the A9 and you think you are somehow going to see jello on an A9 with your kids running around, perhaps that jello is coming from somewhere else, maybe from between the eyes :p
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
ahsanford said:
fullstop said:
Depends whether Canon has seen the light and goes "all-in" on mirrorless FF - as they should, and *hopefully* will as they won't be selling many mirrorslapppers any longer in the not so distant future. Basically a mirrorless 1DX-III in an "A9 sized" body - to show Sony [and Nikon!] "who's boss".

Because the smartest place to start in FF mirrorless are with the most demanding / most mirrorless skeptical people, who routinely carrying more lens weight than body weight, and have bumper stickers on their cars that say "You can pry my mirror out of my cold, dead hands."

THAT is indeed an argument I am willing to accept. :)
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,350
552
fullstop said:
unfocused said:
Mikehit said:
...Canon is unlikely to hit this level on the first iteration so they will probably be pragmatic and be happy initially with something to make the statement "we can do it too"...
I've seen this reasoning a lot on this forum and I don't understand it. Why would Canon not want to hit it out of the park on its first attempt? And, why couldn't they?
They certainly have the resource available. And they've no doubt been researching this for years. I'm not suggesting that their first full frame mirrorless with be the perfect body for everyone. There are some baked-in decisions that will be guaranteed to disappoint no matter what they do (lens mount for example). But, I find it very unlikely they will unveil a "beta" version and in effect say, "we'll do better next time."

Depends whether Canon has seen the light and goes "all-in" on mirrorless FF - as they should, and *hopefully* will as they won't be selling many mirrorslapppers any longer in the not so distant future. Basically a mirrorless 1DX-III in an "A9 sized" body - to show Sony [and Nikon!] "who's boss". Priced ... very high. Innovative Canon should be able to pull it off. Big question mark will be new native lenses to go with it. Maybe similar to Sony, first 2 primes, maybe an EF-X 50/1.4 IS Nano USM ;D ;D ;D for a start and a mirrorless version of the 85/1.4. Plus a new, "really good" EF-X 24-105/4.0 zoom? And definitely a "native" Canon EF adapter. :)

Or they repeat what they done with mirrorless APS-C ... first 3 generations of EOS M clearly not fully competitive with "best in class". But, they managed to target the right audience with the most COMPACT (!) products that were "just good enough" and "lowest prices for decent APS-C lenses in the market". And because there are so many potential buyers who want SMALL, decent and affordable mirrorless cameras, EOS M system has been selling well. It took Canon 5 full years to finally come up with APS-C mirrorless cameras [M5/M6, M50] that are "technically" fully competitive [although many Fuji fanbois will dispute that].

Or both. Hi-end plus enthusiast lineup. 2 or even 3 cameras at start. 1 video-centric. :)

Will be interesting to see which route Canon takes.

W are you so obsessed with Canon never selling another mirrorslapper? A company like Canon is perfectly capable of catering to both markets - and despite your short sighted egocentric view of the marketplace I see DSLRs having a role for quite a few years yet: shrinking, admittedly but they will be around.

Try operating a camera short on real-estate with squishy buttons while wearing gloves. You can do that far more easily with the 1Dx2 or 5D4.

So yes, they can keep you happy while also selling DSLRs.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Talys said:
At least, and doubly so because the a9 is a camera without a lens. For the sports and wildlife folks, you max out at 400/5.6 or 560/8. While that is ok for hobbyists, it doesn't cut it at the high end.

Sure, but the notion that the A9 wasn't a smash success because it lacked lenses it's just the tip of the iceberg there. The form factor is disastrous for long days of large lens use. 20 fps is great if you like electronic shutters, and if you don't -- if there are flickering lights, if you are panning, etc. -- enjoy throttling down to (I think it was) 5 fps.

The A9 is an example of Sony saying "Our marketing reports that folks love how we push the envelope with our body designs, and we're just one more great body away from finally cracking that nut and stealing CaNikon pro units. Engineering: give me a supercar, stat -- a real 1DX2/D5 killer. Screw that stupid integral grip, because all mirrorless for all use cases for all levels of experience thinks that smaller is better. Engage. No. Stop talking about lenses. People don't go nuts on social media about lenses."

- A
 

Attachments

  • Han A9 Lenses.jpg
    Han A9 Lenses.jpg
    85.6 KB · Views: 206

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
It is true that Canon has not released a FF mirrorless, but I wonder how far behind Sony Canon really is. Is Canon really at square one? One question is how much Canon has learned in developing its aps-c mirrorless cameras that has been helpful to its FF mirrorless development. Another question is how relevant the Liveview capabilities of the Canon FF frame cameras have been to the FF mirrorless development. Does Canon really have to do much more than swap out the mirror of a 5DIV for an EVF?
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
BillB said:
It is true that Canon has not released a FF mirrorless, but I wonder how far behind Sony Canon really is. Is Canon really at square one? One question is how much Canon has learned in developing its aps-c mirrorless cameras that has been helpful to its FF mirrorless development. Another question is how relevant the Liveview capabilities of the Canon FF frame cameras have been to the FF mirrorless development. Does Canon really have to do much more than swap out the mirror of a 5DIV for an EVF?

No, not really. One could argue that the M5 checked off the two biggest missing pieces we had been waiting for (except for 4K) in a proper mirrorless rig: DPAF + integral EVF.

I'm sure there are real world implementation challenges when you try to scale an M5 up to FF terms (power consumption with an FF sensor that is always effectively in LiveView, cooling during 4K if they go with at tiny body, etc.) but there are no major components or subsystems in FF mirrorless that Canon can't cobble together from their combined M5 + FF SLR experience. (Right?)

- A