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

[StoicalEtcher]

I read the following within this month's CPS Newsletter (UK version at any rate) from an interview with one of its ambassadors, Jasper Doest:

Is there anything that you feel Canon could add to its repertoire, to make a positive difference to your photography?:
"I'm still hoping for a full-frame mirrorless system. Canon's DSLRs are doing an amazing job for me. However, when working with people I notice a Canon EOS-1D X Mark II or even a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV with a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens can be intrusive. People don't respond as much to smaller camera systems, which makes it much easier to become a fly on the wall when working on documentary shots."

Article is at : https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/stories/jasper-doest-documentary-wildlife/?utm_source=mc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=0103-201805N_11052018&utm_content=hq_pro-en_a_1_image1_M1A&utm_id=0103-201805n

I could be too cynical or, alternately, naive, but I always assume Canon writes up articles and posts them to give some aid to its marketing direction. So, given the comment, do we think the full frame mirrorless is bound to be smaller? Not looking to re-open debate on what you want, rather: does this point us in the actual direction?

Stoical

 

[Random Orbits]

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.

 

[unfocused]

...given the comment, do we think the full frame mirrorless is bound to be smaller?...

Given the comment, I think Canon's full frame mirrorless is bound to be marketed as smaller.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The Canon CEO has mentioned numerous times that the consumer market wants smaller cameras, while pros are happy with or even want large camera.

Since lenses do not get much smaller if at all with FF bodies (they can be a few mm shorter), I'm surprised that their Ambassador is not aware of that. It really makes me wonder, he seems to think a 24-70 f/2.8L for mirrorless would be compact.


The M series with its smaller sensor allows for APS-C sized lenses and a smaller system as long as you stick to smaller apertures.

 

[Don Haines]

...given the comment, do we think the full frame mirrorless is bound to be smaller?...

Given the comment, I think Canon's full frame mirrorless is bound to be marketed as smaller.

It would be child's play for Canon to make one sized like the SL-1.... In fact, this is what I expect Canon's first foray into FF mirrorless to look like.... and, given some field experience, a 5D sized body with the same ergonomics to follow.....

 

[BillB]

I read the following within this month's CPS Newsletter (UK version at any rate) from an interview with one of its ambassadors, Jasper Doest:

Is there anything that you feel Canon could add to its repertoire, to make a positive difference to your photography?:
"I'm still hoping for a full-frame mirrorless system. Canon's DSLRs are doing an amazing job for me. However, when working with people I notice a Canon EOS-1D X Mark II or even a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV with a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens can be intrusive. People don't respond as much to smaller camera systems, which makes it much easier to become a fly on the wall when working on documentary shots."

Article is at : https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/stories/jasper-doest-documentary-wildlife/?utm_source=mc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=0103-201805N_11052018&utm_content=hq_pro-en_a_1_image1_M1A&utm_id=0103-201805n

I could be too cynical or, alternately, naive, but I always assume Canon writes up articles and posts them to give some aid to its marketing direction. So, given the comment, do we think the full frame mirrorless is bound to be smaller? Not looking to re-open debate on what you want, rather: does this point us in the actual direction?

Stoical

You may be giving Canon too much credit for the left hand knowing what the right hand is doing. Canon seems to be holding information on its fullframe mirrorless developmentpretty close, so the people involved in producing the article you read may not know any more than you do.

 

[pwp]

The Canon CEO has mentioned numerous times that the consumer market wants smaller cameras, while pros are happy with or even want large camera.

For personal use, smaller is generally going to be most useful. A Panasonic G9 is my current compact option. For professional use, especially if you're in a position to be reassuringly expensive, clients like to perceive bang for their buck. Sometimes big is better. Perception is a weird thing. There are a lot of jobs that would be perfectly serviced by my G9, but a gripped 5D Mk4 or 1DX is usually the first choice. I can't tell you how often I get the super dumb comment like "oh wow that's a big camera". Sigh...

Same to a degree with lighting. Plenty of jobs can be perfectly lit with a Speedlight setup, but perception requires the Einsteins and 86 inch PLM's. It's a lot of nonsense of course, but understanding those client perceptions is part of running a successful business.

I'm so old I used to shoot film. Gasp! I knew I'd get an entirely different response from some portrait clients depending whether I pulled out the relatively compact EOS 1n or the seriously oversized Mamiya RZ67. What a brick!

I'm a 100% likely buyer of the FF mirrorless regardless of its size. Small is fine. I'd just add a grip anyway.

-pw

 

[edoorn]

I know Jasper Doest as quite an honest photographer so I do believe it's really his words, not from the marketing department. However, they might not have asked the question if they didn't want him anything saying about this subject right?

 

[StoicalEtcher]

I know Jasper Doest as quite an honest photographer so I do believe it's really his words, not from the marketing department. However, they might not have asked the question if they didn't want him anything saying about this subject right?

I tend to agree with you - the photographer gives an honest opinion, but the question is either loaded, or perhaps the answer is particularly likely to make it through to final print if it is "on message". Mind you, I'm also inclined to agree with BIIIB that we can't assume the left hand knows what the right hand is doing.

I remain interested, in any event, to see what Canon produces next.

Stoical 8)

 

[snappy604]

I hope it is smaller than existing SLRs and something better than the new sony a7 III ;-)

I think it would be a big gain to be able to switch from existing canon EF glass and more discreet compact glass as needed. Essentially switch between a pro camera when you need it, to a general purpose compact when you just want something small/light to carry. Carrying my 80D even with a prime is bulky.

Interestingly I just tried the A7 III for an hour with a friend and with the sigma adapter all my canon and sigma glass was quite usable. It answered my concerns about my investment in the glass of an ecosystem and it seems you don't need to ditch to switch. The EVF responsiveness was also quite good, I think enough to give up optical.

It really hammered home the possibilities of a mirrorless and I hope to see something comparable soon from Canon.

 

[Tugela]

The Canon CEO has mentioned numerous times that the consumer market wants smaller cameras, while pros are happy with or even want large camera.

Since lenses do not get much smaller if at all with FF bodies (they can be a few mm shorter), I'm surprised that their Ambassador is not aware of that. It really makes me wonder, he seems to think a 24-70 f/2.8L for mirrorless would be compact.


The M series with its smaller sensor allows for APS-C sized lenses and a smaller system as long as you stick to smaller apertures.

You mean like the 40mm? That thing on a 1D makes the camera look ridiculous.

Something like the 1D is immediately obvious because of it's size, irrespective of what lens is attached to it. A smaller camera is less intimidating to people in your scene.

Lenses can be pretty small if they are fixed focal length and aperture is in a more normal range. You don't need fast glass for most situations.

 

[BillB]

If you are photographing people who might notice, you might want a wide aperture zoom, and there aren't many small wide aperture zooms around. So, there would seem to be a limit on how much less obstrusive a mirrorless design would be, unless you are willing to shoot with a prime or a slower zoom.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Canon seems to be fairly well in control. They would not publish the comments unless they were relevant. Given that they have patented a converter for a new FF lens mount to EF, they are, at very least strongly considering a new lens for a FF mirrorless. The body can indeed be made smaller, none of the claptrap for the mirror is needed. But, cooling of the sensor gets difficult, and light falloff at the edges of the sensor for a short flange back lens is a problem to be solved. They have multiple patents for that as well, but they seem expensive to implement, and just how well they would work with a adapted EF lens is not mentioned in the patents.

In spite of my desire to see a EF mount mirrorless, I do believe that we will see a entirely new mount. Its unlikely that this would have been published unless that were happening.

 

[Durf]

At this point it really doesn't matter what Canon does.....just as long as they come out with a strong 4K with a decent file size camera that has a Sony Badge duct-taped to the front of it. (it doesn't even need to take pictures!) lol

The camera tech "this camera is better than that camera" arguments and ridiculous hupla now a days is like watching political bickering on CNN etc....

I'll shoot Canon DSLR's till the day I die and I don't even have any desire to ever own a tiny toy like mirrorless camera that's so small it feels like a little point and shoot in my big hands regardless of how much better of a camera it may be.

Soon people will be complaining that their camera can't tie their shoes for them too....

When I go out and shoot I totally prefer a full size DSLR rather than something I can only hold on to with just a few finger tips only.

 

[dickgrafixstop]

I'd like to see a full frame mirrorless camera the size of the AE1 or A1 even if it means a new mount. The M series is too small, the rebels about the right size (if not with the right features). If there is a new mount, I hope that someone makes an adapter for both EF and FD lenses.

 

[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.

 

[Random Orbits]

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?

 

[fullstop]

canon undestands the size/weight issue very well. that's why they made the EOS M system compact, light, decent and good bang for the buck.

that's why they will also make *most of* the upcoming FF mirrorless system very compact. For the rather small minority/market niche of users who prefer large bodies, Canon will also haüpily sell 1 expensive big "flagship brick" and fat battery grips for every milc body, just as they do for DSLRs of almost any size from rebel to 5d series. canon will also continue to make and sell all EF lenses that would not profit sizewise from a shorter FFD mirrorless mount. however, the FF mirrorless cameras will all come with new, "slim mount" plus a simple adapter for full backwards compatibility with EF glass ...FD adapters will likely not be made by canon, but come from 3rd party makers.

mirrorless allows for both: smaller, yet fully competent gear desirable to most users as well as large bricks for the few who prefer it that way. Canon will happily cater to both groups. myself i am looking forward to very compact FF sensored cameras and fully FF capable, moderately fast compact primes and f/4 zooms in the most frequently used focal length range. that way i only need to carry along big, heavy gear when i really need it and when it does not matter much (planned shootings, studio, tripod-based work, eg). 90% of the time i can go small and light. oh yes!

 

[ahsanford]

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.

Yes on the lens but not on the body size -- not at all. The Sony vert grip doesn't make the standard integral grip any chunkier or further from the mount. It just gives you room for your pinkie finger in the front and the base of your thumb / CMC joint. It's still a tiny body.

So: no. The A7/A9 is not the same size as any FF DSLR that Canon or Nikon currently sell. It is smaller in a bad way (IMHO) that leaves no room for your fingers against the barrel of a pro lens. I will always cite the A7 pic from Bryan Carnathan (below), which highlights the problem.

Sony might make very small finger recess changes in the grips over time, but the basic grip size and spacing from the mount remains terribly problematic for the person slinging f/2.8 zooms all day.

- A

 

[Tugela]

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.