Is the new Canon full frame mirrorless called the EOS R?

[Stuart]

Last year on the 5th Sept they announced the Photo Marathon - https://asia.canon/en/consumer/PhotoMarathon2017/news?contentType=PRESS_RELEASE&max=30
and this year a printer app will be available from the 5th Sept - https://www.therecycler.com/posts/canon-launches-new-instant-mini-printer/

I do hope its a mirroless 6Dmk2 but ...

 

[Frederik_Bo]

I don't think it's in doubt that 120fps+ is a niche - as in literally only a small fraction of the total video currently produced and shared online is filmed that way. I happen to love the creative possibilities of high framerate video, but I don't see much non-phone content out there apart from a few dedicated 'slow motion footage of interesting things' people. I'm intrigued, what are you personally filming at 120-240fps?

Well in early september I will be shooting a couple of short fashion films for a lokal cloathing brand. As I need slo-mo and my dayli camera for stilles is a Canon 6D, I will now have to rent a camera. It might not Sound like a big deal, but everything is on a very tight budget, so renting equipment is a real constraint for me. I will probably be renting a Sony a7iii and a dji ronin, though if the price difference isn’t to big I will go for a canon c200.

So I guess I am that exact guy that Sony is trying to lure away from canon. I do both stills and video and I do a lot of stuff for small companies that can’t afford big productions.

 

[-pekr-]

Well in early september I will be shooting a couple of short fashion films for a lokal cloathing brand. As I need slo-mo and my dayli camera for stilles is a Canon 6D, I will now have to rent a camera. It might not Sound like a big deal, but everything is on a very tight budget, so renting equipment is a real constraint for me. I will probably be renting a Sony a7iii and a dji ronin, though if the price difference isn’t to big I will go for a canon c200.

So I guess I am that exact guy that Sony is trying to lure away from canon I do both stills and video and I do a lot of stuff for small companies that can’t afford big productions.

I have considered Blackmagic pocket camera, considered it being professional, as it comes from the video guys. And then I was told by canonites, that it might not have enough of a dynamic range. Now they seem to have new version with 4K, slow mo, 13 stops DR etc., for 1200$. I wonder, if that might be a good alternative? I know it is 4/3" only, but that might be relative to the whole ecosystem and needs for a wedding videos. As for stabiliser, we will go for Ronin-S, or Crane 2.

 

[Frederik_Bo]

I was just at the wedding of the son of a friend. This was a very high end wedding ($20,000 for the band!). They had video, and all of it was shot with - surprise... video cameras. Now, isn’t that amazing? Pros use the best equipment for the job.

Well I have been on professional productions that used a 5d mark II back when it was the hot video DSLR. 2 weeks ago I was on 2 music videos, produced by universal music, and we shot those on Panasonic GH 5 cameras. I don’t think everything is as black and white as you make it out to be.

 

[Frederik_Bo]

Yeah they just want something they don't really need. That is, after they purchase a camera with 1080@120, they'll use it once or twice just to have fun with slow motion and that'd be it. I agree it may be a decisive feature for many people but in reality maybe 1% of customers really need the1080@120.


And all that video is in 1080@120?

No but if only a fraction of that market uses that feature it is still a huge market.
Just like landscape photography is only a fraction of the total stills market. That does not keep canon from adding features that are useful to landscape photographers, in to their cameras, like bracketing and a tilt screen.

 

[Frederik_Bo]

I have considered Blackmagic pocket camera, considered it being professional, as it comes from the video guys. And then I was told by canonites, that it might not have enough of a dynamic range. Now they seem to have new version with 4K, slow mo, 13 stops DR etc., for 1200$. I wonder, if that might be a good alternative? I know it is 4/3" only, but that might be relative to the whole ecosystem and needs for a wedding videos. As for stabiliser, we will go for Ronin-S, or Crane 2.

I don’t think black magic is a bad choice. They are really easy to use, unlike Sony and they can do raw if you need that. Personally I make a lot of solo run and gun type stuff so I think I will go for something with both autofocus and IBIS.

 

[Mikehit]

No but if only a fraction of that market uses that feature it is still a huge market.
Just like landscape photography is only a fraction of the total stills market. That does not keep canon from adding features that are useful to landscape photographers, in to their cameras, like bracketing and a tilt screen.

What 'features' are unique to landscpe photography?

 

[Frederik_Bo]

I know I’m gonna get a lot of hate for this, even some death threats, probably meet a terrible painful end....but I hope the make an R Mount!

1) R mount plus adapter = full speed EF mount!
2) R mount opens use of old FD glass...
3) native R mount optimises design of flange distance for future updates, i.e. nikon’s plans for the Z mount.
4) optimize solutions to Ray Angle issues that plague digital sensors with wide angle lenses.
5)opens up third party lens fun and spfx lens

New era for canon as the EF electronic mount was, so its important canon does it right!

This bellyaching that there are no new lenses off the bat. Yes the M has been slow, but its a consumer platform. Hobbiest have the ef11-22 wide angle, 28mm macro , F2 22mm prime, and various zoom ranges. With the new ef-m prime coming, its got enough for its market. No less that what ef-s mount have.

Big things:
1) flippy screen
2) two card slots
3) 3.5 -4.2 million pixel evf
4) dual pixel focus
5) touch screen with touch drag
6) real EOS software and bits for speed
7) fast wireless with upload while you shoot.
8) traditional tethered USB3
9) hdmi out 4K
10) m5 button layout with programmable buttons
11) good battery, perhaps using the 5D battery size!!!!
12) fast fastfast! None if the M5 slowness with native flashes or button response.
13) $3400 price tag to ensure we get the above...

This guy gets it

 

[jolyonralph]

One thing that bugs me...

With DSLRs the APS-C cameras can use full-frame lenses. If we see an eventual shift two TWO mirrorless mounts, one for APS-C (EF-M) and one for FF (RF) then we'll lose that advantage. Cheaper FF lenses (eg 50mm) that should be idea for the APS-C world won't be compatible.

Now, if the RF mount is just a rebranding of the EF-M mount for lenses that are full frame, and RF lenses fit and work on EF-M mount cameras, then that's not a problem.

Of course, both can use EF lenses with suitable adaptors, so it's not necessarily the biggest problem. But it does add a level of confusion to the Canon lens range.

 

[MartinF.]

"R" for "retractable" - a sensor that can be moved closer to the mount to shorten flange distrance with "EF-R" lenses, but can also take EF lenses OR "retactable" for a protuding rear element on EF-R lenses, but a mount that also can take native EF lenses.
My quess is that Mirrorless from Canon will not require an adaptor but will be either an EF-S like (EF-R) solution or a moveable sensor.
Extra space between rear lens element and sensor could be used for at curtain that protect the sensor during lens changes.

 

[Frederik_Bo]

What 'features' are unique to landscpe photography?

Very few features are unique to any genre of photography, but som are way more useful in some genres then others.
I don’t know how often bracketing is used, but it is a feature that is especially useful if you want to do HDR landscape shots.
I don’t think it is unreasonable for the minority of people who does this kind of photography, to expect things like bracketing to be a standard feature.

I think the same goes for the more advanced video features. You might not be needing 120 frames all the time, but if you shoot, som what varied video content, chances are you are going to need it sometimes.

 

[fullstop]

I don’t think it is unreasonable for the minority of people who does this kind of photography, to expect things like bracketing to be a standard feature.

agreed. 1) It costs close to nothing to implement and 2) it does not get in the way of stills image quality and 3. does not negatively impact camera handling for stills capture and 4) expands stills capture functionality.

I think the same goes for the more advanced video features. You might not be needing 120 frames all the time, but if you shoot, som what varied video content, chances are you are going to need it sometimes.

not agreed. Because
1) it is not cheap to implement and cost for it has to be paid by *all* purchasers including majority of never-video users
2) it causes compromises in sensor and camera design that are either directly detrimental to optimal stills image quality or at least the money could be saved or better spent on more advanced "stills features and IQ".
3) it gets in the way of camera handling for stills capture. Unnecessary buttons ["marked in red stupid record video button in the most annoying of places for example] and unnecessarily clutter in menu system. All the way down to the tiniest details ... e.g. the "Video mode" position on some camera mode dials is wasted on folks like me.

 

[Ozarker]

"
CanonFanBoy
Bipolar. When it is happening I don't realize it.

Psssst... its happening.

Don't worry, unlike some around here I have the negative pole tied behind my back. There won't be any jumping... unlike those who threaten jumping around here all the time.

 

[Frederik_Bo]

agreed. 1) It costs close to nothing to implement and 2) it does not get in the way of stills image quality and 3. does not negatively impact camera handling for stills capture and 4) expands stills capture functionality.



not agreed. Because
1) it is not cheap to implement and cost for it has to be paid by *all* purchasers including majority of never-video users
2) it causes compromises in sensor and camera design that are either directly detrimental to optimal stills image quality or at least the money could be saved or better spent on more advanced "stills features and IQ".
3) it gets in the way of camera handling for stills capture. Unnecessary buttons ["marked in red stupid record video button in the most annoying of places for example] and unnecessarily clutter in menu system. All the way down to the tiniest details ... e.g. the "Video mode" position on some camera mode dials is wasted on folks like me.

Well it seems to me that, it is a cost bennifit analysis then. What are the costs to implementing video, in the relation to the benefits? Are there any synegies? You do a great job at outlining the potential downsides of implementing video, but what about all the upsides. I bet that there are great benefits from mergin the technologies, now and ind the future. For instance, global electronic shutters, which are of great benefit in videocameras might work there way in to stills cameras faster then they otherwise would have. This could lead to true silent shooting, higher frame rates and such. There are properly similar benefits to stills shooting, that come from the added heat dispersion, needed for video. (one could imagine that the bette cooling, would have a positive effect on noise, but I dont know)
When you have a professional mirrorless camera, you are so close to also having build a semi pro videocamera, that it seems foolish from a cost bennifit perspective not to make it some what of a hybrid.

I might be a little more sympathetic to your plight, if camera manufactures were starting to add, xlr inputs, SDI out and SD harddisc readers to stills cameras. But they are not.

 

[scyrene]

- Huge lens selection available form 11mm to 600mm (or if you want to count up to the 1200mm..)

Don't forget the 800L!

 

[transpo1]

So now when a manufacturer produces a body that you do not want, it is called 'losing their way'?
The 5D2 gave them a view on which way the market was headed and they made a decision based on that feedback - and their decision was that if people were serious about video they would buy into a dedicated video system. Whether you agree with that decision is one thing, but just because you do not agree with it does not necessarily mean they are 'losing their way'.
And I know you hate looking at sales figures as a judgement as to whether they got their marketing decision right, but the Cxxx system has been successful and since the introductoin of the 5D2 theyhave increased and consolidated their market share.

So it looks to me like at the time their decision was the correct one.
The next question is whether the market place has changed and it seems it has. The success of a company is how quickly and effectively they can change with it. In the product development cycle the growth of DSLR-based video is still very young (not even one of Canon's lifecycles) so I suggest you hold fire before accusing them of 'losing their way'.

Nah, I won’t- they lost their way, their momentum and their leadership with regards to DSLR video.

Canon’s risk averse culture prevented them from leading the way with FF video in DSLRs and MILC and now they are playing catch up in that regard.

Now they will risk cannibalizing their DSLRs to get the MILC money and one hopes they finally see the value of FF 4K in a stills hybrid body to meet the specs of competitors.

Just because you don’t like the truth, doesn’t make it go away.

 

[scyrene]

Canon’s “point” with the 5D4 was twofold: 1) we don’t want to include 4K video functionality that would cannibalize our other products 2) Even if we did, we don’t think 4K sells cameras.

This is supposition - we don't know for sure what their reasoning was. My guess would be either they didn't think it was a priority on a 5 series camera when it was launched, and perhaps some technical details about heat dissipation or data thoughput.

Both points were wrong, and they have basically now admitted this by putting 4K in more products moving forward.

Even if your suppositions above were correct, this conclusion does not necessarily follow. If they didn't think it was necessary when the 5D4 was launched, that doesn't mean things haven't changed in the meantime (or even that they had an internal roadmap for introducing it in future models even back then). And if it was a technical challenge, maybe they've solved it.

And yet, in an era when even our iPhones can shoot 240fps 1080p, doesn’t it make sense for camera manufacturers to compete with what many average smartphone owners can do?

First, you do realise that some things are easier to implement on a phone? A tiny sensor with a big computer attached - less heat generated, and much more processing power. People who claim that because a phone can do X, every high end camera should also do it seem to have no conception of the difference in how those devices work (not to mention, just because a phone has a spec, doesn't mean the output quality matches that of a dedicated camera). Second, on a more general point: high end ILC cameras are not competing with camera phones for the most part. People in the market for a 5D4 or even a 6D2 are considering spending thousands of dollars on a big, heavy, complicated device - they either have a need that only this type of device can fulfil, or they have enough money that it does't matter. And virtually everyone buying these cameras already has a phone anyway.

 

[Kit.]

Very few features are unique to any genre of photography, but som are way more useful in some genres then others.
I don’t know how often bracketing is used, but it is a feature that is especially useful if you want to do HDR landscape shots.
I don’t think it is unreasonable for the minority of people who does this kind of photography, to expect things like bracketing to be a standard feature.

Bracketing was a standard feature since film photoghraphy for cameras that were able to take burst shots, where it was not used for HDR landscapes.

 

[scyrene]

Well it seems to me that, it is a cost bennifit analysis then.

I think it's fair to assume everything in Canon's cameras is subject to a cost-benefit analysis (and every other manufacturer too!). A great deal of the arguing on these forums can be boiled down to - some people think that, however odd a decision may seem to us, the company has looked into it and decided that including or exclusing a feature was (or wasn't) worth the cost for the benefit - while others (I'm not talking about you incidentally, this is a general point; the people tending to throw around terms like 'fanboy') think it's a big conspiracy, and Canon are somehow cynical or mean or even stupid.

Fundamentally, we all have slightly different needs and desires, and no device can satisfy them all.

 

[ecpu]

Don't worry, unlike some around here I have the negative pole tied behind my back. There won't be any jumping... unlike those who threaten jumping around here all the time.

There will be jumping to Sony if this camera doesn't deliver... for me at least. I've already sold two of my three canon bodies and most of my lenses. I'm ready to go, but would prefer to stay if they deliver a good camera that works for me for both photo and video work.