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

[BillB]

I think it is almost certain that their first FF camera will be spun as an enthusiast camera, not as a professional camera. It is just not going to be competitive enough with the Sony cameras for anything else.

It is probably going to be in D6 territory on their first attemp and they will see how things go from there.

At the pro level, a Canon mirrorless would have to compete with some pretty good Canon DSLR's as well.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I think it is almost certain that their first FF camera will be spun as an enthusiast camera, not as a professional camera. It is just not going to be competitive enough with the Sony cameras for anything else.

It is probably going to be in D6 territory on their first attemp and they will see how things go from there.

It will likely be aimed at enthusiasts because that's a very profitable segment.

Since Canon FF ILCs continue to outsell Sony FF ILCs, and Canon APS-C MILCs outsell Sony APS-C MILCs, the idea that Canon can't compete with Sony in any market segment they choose to enter is not supported by the available facts. But then, making statements unsupported by facts is the one area in which you've amply demonstrated your expertise.

 

[ahsanford]

I think it is almost certain that their first FF camera will be spun as an enthusiast camera, not as a professional camera. It is just not going to be competitive enough with the Sony cameras for anything else.

Enthusiast, pro, whatever: at whatever level they choose to come in, they will be underspec'd to Sony. That's a near certainty.

But they aren't trying to sell this to the general market. The first 2-3 years of this thing being out (in whatever models/sizes/specs they sell) will be aimed squarely at existing Canon users.

So I think it just needs to roughly match the specs of the SLR segment it is 'claimed' to be. It doesn't have to have IBIS, eye AF, etc. It just needs to be a Canon mirrorless setup that natively uses Canon glass, speedlites, and accessories and has familiar Canon controls. As EOS M has shown, this approach will sell just fine.

- A

 

[Talys]

Not by much if the Sony G master lenses are any indication. Those lenses are similar in size/weight to their EF counterparts. If you want less intrusive, use a smaller format (i.e. EOS M) with smaller-apertured lenses.

Most people who shoot long hours with the A7/A9 also use a grip. A Sony with a grip and a 2.8 zoom is the same size as a DSLR.

If you want to be unobtrusive, but have an ILC, there's already some perfect solutions -- go buy a Canon M5 or Sony A6500.

Hmm... isn't that what I was implying?

I hope so... I was agreeing with you

 

[Mikehit]

I think it is almost certain that their first FF camera will be spun as an enthusiast camera, not as a professional camera. It is just not going to be competitive enough with the Sony cameras for anything else.

Enthusiast, pro, whatever: at whatever level they choose to come in, they will be underspec'd to Sony. That's a near certainty.

But they aren't trying to sell this to the general market. The first 2-3 years of this thing being out (in whatever models/sizes/specs they sell) will be aimed squarely at existing Canon users.

So I think it just needs to roughly match the specs of the SLR segment it is 'claimed' to be. It doesn't have to have IBIS, eye AF, etc. It just needs to be a Canon mirrorless setup that natively uses Canon glass, speedlites, and accessories and has familiar Canon controls. As EOS M has shown, this approach will sell just fine.

- A

Yep. All they need to do is release a mirrorless to bring FF mirrorless to Canon World. As long as it quietens criticism of Canon and secondly make people think a bit harder about ditching in favour of Sony. The latest M series have been fairly well received, so the M series with a larger sensor (body size and mount is not really relevant here) would, I think, be a very good start.
But of course all the complainers will do is move the goal posts so they can continue complain about Canon's lack of development.

 

[Talys]

I think it is almost certain that their first FF camera will be spun as an enthusiast camera, not as a professional camera. It is just not going to be competitive enough with the Sony cameras for anything else.

Enthusiast, pro, whatever: at whatever level they choose to come in, they will be underspec'd to Sony. That's a near certainty.

But they aren't trying to sell this to the general market. The first 2-3 years of this thing being out (in whatever models/sizes/specs they sell) will be aimed squarely at existing Canon users.

So I think it just needs to roughly match the specs of the SLR segment it is 'claimed' to be. It doesn't have to have IBIS, eye AF, etc. It just needs to be a Canon mirrorless setup that natively uses Canon glass, speedlites, and accessories and has familiar Canon controls. As EOS M has shown, this approach will sell just fine.

- A

Yep. All they need to do is release a mirrorless to bring FF mirrorless to Canon World. As long as it quietens criticism of Canon and secondly make people think a bit harder about ditching in favour of Sony. The latest M series have been fairly well received, so the M series with a larger sensor (body size and mount is not really relevant here) would, I think, be a very good start.
But of course all the complainers will do is move the goal posts so they can continue complain about Canon's lack of development.

There's autofocus speed. If you compare current Canon mirrorless vs Sony, AF speed is far superior, with it being particularly noticeable in lower light and at longer telephoto ranges. And, it's much smoother, too.

 

[ahsanford]

Yep. All they need to do is release a mirrorless to bring FF mirrorless to Canon World. As long as it quietens criticism of Canon and secondly make people think a bit harder about ditching in favour of Sony. The latest M series have been fairly well received, so the M series with a larger sensor (body size and mount is not really relevant here) would, I think, be a very good start.
But of course all the complainers will do is move the goal posts so they can continue complain about Canon's lack of development.

Yeah. The naysayers will continue to (fairly) point out all the tech-per-dollar Sony is offering, but Sony has to commit to offering more than Canon in each body offering because (a) they lack the platform scale/benefits/upsides of EF and (b) they are chasing the market leader.

There will come a day where Sony's built up supporting ecosystem of stuff, ergonomics, reliability, service rivals Canon. I'm guessing that's when Canon might start to sweat losing business and might move to market-parity body-spec-wise. But that's going to be a while.

- A

 

[BillB]

I think it is almost certain that their first FF camera will be spun as an enthusiast camera, not as a professional camera. It is just not going to be competitive enough with the Sony cameras for anything else.

Enthusiast, pro, whatever: at whatever level they choose to come in, they will be underspec'd to Sony. That's a near certainty.

But they aren't trying to sell this to the general market. The first 2-3 years of this thing being out (in whatever models/sizes/specs they sell) will be aimed squarely at existing Canon users.

So I think it just needs to roughly match the specs of the SLR segment it is 'claimed' to be. It doesn't have to have IBIS, eye AF, etc. It just needs to be a Canon mirrorless setup that natively uses Canon glass, speedlites, and accessories and has familiar Canon controls. As EOS M has shown, this approach will sell just fine.

- A

Yep. All they need to do is release a mirrorless to bring FF mirrorless to Canon World. As long as it quietens criticism of Canon and secondly make people think a bit harder about ditching in favour of Sony. The latest M series have been fairly well received, so the M series with a larger sensor (body size and mount is not really relevant here) would, I think, be a very good start.
But of course all the complainers will do is move the goal posts so they can continue complain about Canon's lack of development.

There's autofocus speed. If you compare current Canon mirrorless vs Sony, AF speed is far superior, with it being particularly noticeable in lower light and at longer telephoto ranges. And, it's much smoother, too.

It's not that hard to come out ahead in the spec fights if your get to cherry pick your specs. If you get to make up the rules and to keep score, it's pretty easy to win. Especially if you get to use imaginary magic numbers.

 

[Talys]

It's not that hard to come out ahead in the spec fights if your get to cherry pick your specs. If you get to make up the rules and to keep score, it's pretty easy to win. Especially if you get to use imaginary magic numbers.

lol... so true. What a weird world we live in, now. It's like the photography version of "Fake News". Someone will surely give you numbers that you like!

Yeah. The naysayers will continue to (fairly) point out all the tech-per-dollar Sony is offering...

I have regretted almost every major purchase that I've ever made mostly on the basis of specs-per-dollar.

Usually, specs-per-dollar ends up being a way for me to justify spending less money; and usually, I end up getting what I pay for!

 

[dak723]

If you offer a high quality, reliable product, you don't need to impress with lots of specs. This is what Canon does.

If you offer a lower quality product, you need to impress with more specs. This is what Sony does.

In my opinion, of course. But it is funny how many suckers fall for the specs. ;D

 

[fullstop]

there are specs and there are other specs. Some materialize in every image captured, some don't ever. some i don't care for (eg "4k" or any form of video capture), others i do care for quite a bit:
stills image quality, AF performance, responsiveness, straightforwardness of user interface, reliability, pricing ...
some specs are "paper relevant only", many others count in real life and with every single capture.

While Sony does not lead in all "specs dimensions", Canon has allowed them to do so in some and get darn close in many others. Canon (and Nikon) sat pretty much helplessly like lane ducks, iterated their mirrorslappers, made half-assed attempts at mirrorless (Nikon 1 anybody?) and let Sony become a true and formidable challenger on the way to take #2 spot in the stills imaging market. Had Canon acted just a bit more proactively it would not have happened.

Sony's foray into stills imaging gear could have ended with their ill-devised and deservedly ill-fated SLT/A-mount series of "mirrored bricks". All it would have taken from Canon would have been a "halfway decent", compact mirroless FF system 5 years ago when Sony launched the original A7 triplet (A7/R/S). Sony would have been dead in their tracks from day 1. Now Canon (and even more so Nikon) face a much bigger challenge to come up with an (overall) really winning mirrorless FF system. Not impossible by any means, but much harder than 5 years ago.

Same for APS-C systems: Fuji would not have gotten a leg on the ground, had Canon launched their APS-C mirrorless system with an EOS M50 as a start - specs and features. plus two more EF-M lenses. But no, Canon "held back on specs" and tried to charge outlandish prices for their underspecced 1st gen EOS M. as a result they had to give it away in a big firesale and Fuji has successfully established a small foothold in the market. Almost all Fuji mirrorless sales could easily have been Canon sales. Almost all Sony A7/A9 sales could easily have been Canon sales.

no amount of "smoke and mirrorslapping" can hide the serious mistakes Canon and Nikon management made. no speculation needed, looking at the facts is sufficient to understand the picture. Canon's relative success in a shrinking market is mostly "inert mass still in motion" - large customer base, strong brand name - like a large oil tanker, it won't stop on a dime. but it can run aground quicker than Sony may decide to end selling stills image gear.

 

[jolyonralph]

To be fair Canon did have a poor start with the EOS M range, but they are now selling very well. Don't underestimate the power of the Canon brand, especially at the lower end.

 

[BillB]

there are specs and there are other specs. Some materialize in every image captured, some don't ever. some i don't care for (eg "4k" or any form of video capture), others i do care for quite a bit:
stills image quality, AF performance, responsiveness, straightforwardness of user interface, reliability, pricing ...
some specs are "paper relevant only", many others count in real life and with every single capture.

While Sony does not lead in all "specs dimensions", Canon has allowed them to do so in some and get darn close in many others. Canon (and Nikon) sat pretty much helplessly like lane ducks, iterated their mirrorslappers, made half-assed attempts at mirrorless (Nikon 1 anybody?) and let Sony become a true and formidable challenger on the way to take #2 spot in the stills imaging market. Had Canon acted just a bit more proactively it would not have happened.

Sony's foray into stills imaging gear could have ended with their ill-devised and deservedly ill-fated SLT/A-mount series of "mirrored bricks". All it would have taken from Canon would have been a "halfway decent", compact mirroless FF system 5 years ago when Sony launched the original A7 triplet (A7/R/S). Sony would have been dead in their tracks from day 1. Now Canon (and even more so Nikon) face a much bigger challenge to come up with an (overall) really winning mirrorless FF system. Not impossible by any means, but much harder than 5 years ago.

Same for APS-C systems: Fuji would not have gotten a leg on the ground, had Canon launched their APS-C mirrorless system with an EOS M50 as a start - specs and features. plus two more EF-M lenses. But no, Canon "held back on specs" and tried to charge outlandish prices for their underspecced 1st gen EOS M. as a result they had to give it away in a big firesale and Fuji has successfully established a small foothold in the market. Almost all Fuji mirrorless sales could easily have been Canon sales. Almost all Sony A7/A9 sales could easily have been Canon sales.

no amount of "smoke and mirrorslapping" can hide the serious mistakes Canon and Nikon management made. no speculation needed, looking at the facts is sufficient to understand the picture. Canon's relative success in a shrinkibg market is mostly "inert mass still in motion" - large customer base, strong brand name - like a large oil tanker, it won't stop on a dime. but it can run aground quicker than Sony may decide to end selling stills image gear.

My take on this is a little different than yours. I think that Canon's "serious mistake" was to take the time to develop dual pixel sensor technology as the foundation technology for its mirrorless effort. The decision was made quite a a while ago now, and it meant that it didn't take a "first to market" path in dealing with Sony or Fuji. You may be right about Nikon, and Canon may have missed the boat by waiting on dual pixel technology to make a a big mirrorless push, but I don't think the dual pixel technology reflects "inert mass in motion".

 

[fullstop]

while certainly "highly useful", i personally consider DP quite a bit overrated and overhyped. It is not the "magic trick" that trounces all other sensor tech and AF systems. Looking for example at Sony A9 as well as A7 III, excellent AF performance can obviously also be achieved without DP technology.

5 years ago a decent hybrid AF system [on-sensor PD-AF + CD-AF] as in Sony's first gen A7/R/S) would have been "more than good enough" in Canon FF MILCs to stop Sony in their tracks. Canon would have sold a boatload of FF bodies and then more boatloads of Mk. II and Mk. - "with vastly superior, pure magic, Canon exclusive DP technology".

 

[BillB]

while certainly "highly useful", i personally consider DP quite a bit overrated and overhyped. It is not the "magic trick" that trounces all other sensor tech and AF systems. Looking for example at Sony A9 as well as A7 III, excellent AF performance can obviously also be achieved without DP technology.

5 years ago a decent hybrid AF system [on-sensor PD-AF + CD-AF] as in Sony's first gen A7/R/S) would have been "more than good enough" in Canon FF MILCs to stop Sony in their tracks. Canon would have sold a boatload of FF bodies and then more boatloads of Mk. II and Mk. - "with vastly superior, pure magic, Canon exclusive DP technology".

Dual pixel is not just a high end AF solution. It is now being used all the way down the food chain to the M-50. Anyway, my point wasn't that Canon was right with its dual pixel choice. My point was that Canon wasn't as sleepy and stupid as you make them out to be.

 

[fullstop]

of yes, very nice. With dual pixel sensor EOS M50 now focusses about as good/fast/precise as a Sony A6300 did ... already 3 years ago. Without DP.

 

[Mikehit]

of yes, very nice. With dual pixel sensor EOS M50 now focusses about as good/fast/precise as a Sony A6300 did ... already 3 years ago. Without DP.

Every comparison I read is that in low light, DP is superior. Do you have experience//knowledge to the contrary?

 

[Durf]

of yes, very nice. With dual pixel sensor EOS M50 now focusses about as good/fast/precise as a Sony A6300 did ... already 3 years ago. Without DP.

Every comparison I read is that in low light, DP is superior. Do you have experience//knowledge to the contrary?

Many don't realize that Canon (and Nikon for that matter) have for many years now established themselves for the pro and semi-pro photographer community as heavy duty workhorse camera systems with a proven dependability and reliability tract record. Many pros and semi-pros are still happily using the older 5D mark iii's and getting great results etc.

Sony has only just recently resolved their over-heating problems and issues with photographers having to carry pockets full of batteries, not to mention their lack of a wide variety of lenses to choose from.

Sony is still in their "beta testing" phase so to speak for pro's in my opinion and haven't proven themselves as reliable and dependable as Canon or Nikon yet.

Several of their camera's (IN MY OPINION) I'm sure are great camera's and will get the job done, but for the most part they are mostly popular and sensationalized through marketing tactics only, specifically through the internet and not through long term proven reliability and dependability years of usage by pro's and semi-pros.

Just my 2 cents worth!

 

[Sharlin]

while certainly "highly useful", i personally consider DP quite a bit overrated and overhyped. It is not the "magic trick" that trounces all other sensor tech and AF systems. Looking for example at Sony A9 as well as A7 III, excellent AF performance can obviously also be achieved without DP technology.

DPAF is a "magic trick" when you consider the bigger picture that includes both still and video. For stills only it's great but not ultra-revolutionary compared to the AF tech of Sony etc. But as far as I know for video it's easily superior to anything else out there. Not to mention that yes, Canon's only real competitor in terms of total ILC marketshare is still Nikon, and Nikon's sensor-based AF story is... not great.

 

[fullstop]

re. Canon's step into FF mirrorless:

"If I were Canon CEO for a day" 8) ;D I'd pull a "digital Rebel" on Sony (and Nikon). ;D

Remember Canon EOS 300D ... first digital SLR priced at 999? And how it changed the marketplace and gave Canon dominance over Nikon in the huge non-pro market? In one fell swoop! Today I'd hammer Sony with *the most compact* and "first ever FF MILC at USD/€ 999

Basically an FF equivalent of the EOS M50 - complete with 5D4 sensor, inclduing "nominal, but useless 4k". ofc with new slim mount, along with a small starting lens line-up of similarly cost-effective and optically decent lenses - "FF equivalents" to how EF-M lenses are positioned. Full compatibility with all EF glass ever made - little adapter will be sent to all registered purchasers of MILC Rebel who request one. Free of charge, courtesy Canon. Little gifts go a long way with customers.

Higher end products? Yes of course! All sorts of them, including super chunky, fully sealed, fully pro beasts - will follow after the first couple millions of the "MILC Rebel" have been sold.