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

[ahsanford]

they can co-exist. As long as i get to buy Pure stills cameras.

Here's the last significant 'pure stills' camera from a major manufacturer:

And by last, I mean the last flippin one the world ever will see.

I respect Fullstop's comment about messing with buttons and controls -- a fair insight (albeit a fairly picky one). I ultimately think this is a referendum on:

• What we want to read about here (many of us tune out when 10:2:2 or codecs or video crop get cited). For some, seeing video comments is similar to hearing a different language on the radio and immediately changing the channel.
  
  
• Whether or not a 'pure stills' or heavily stills-flavored camera should still have an AA filter. (To a still person who isn't shooting fabrics or screen doors all day, the AA filter becomes the concession they wish Canon would stop making to video folks.)

But video is simply not going away, esp. as we (someday) move into an era of mostly mirrorless ILCs, pulling stills from better and better quality video, etc.

- A

 

[Mikehit]

I don't care how much this thing is I just hope it does video well. We already know canon kills it on the photo side but the video has been lacking. Please give us a workable 4k and atleast 120fps at 1080 for video. The 1dx II is too damn big to haul around all the time. Flippy screen would be nice.

What - you mean you can' t take decent video with any camera out there? I suggest it is your skills rather than the camera that is lacking.

 

[CanoKnight]

I'm not a ringer on video, but it seems things went like this:
2) Canon does some financial soul-searching as to how best to make money off of this.
3) Canon launches the Cinema EOS line.
- A

Actually Red was a big factor behind the cinema EOS line. Red made a big splash in 2007 which had Hollywood enamored and Canon looking at their own success with the 5D2 a year later, reasoned there was a big untapped market for pro video in Red's price range. That's when they decided to downplay video in their prosumer dslrs going forward. But the world has changed. Today there are brilliant products from Sony and Panasonic that do both photo and high quality video while Canon keeps recycling the same s***.

 

[mixxinmel]

man i really hope they dont drop the ball like Nikon did with the Z6 and Z7. They need to get this one right or else Sony will be gaining my money. But i will wait and see what they do and if nothing but disappoint us like they have done in the past. We as Canon users want Eye Auto Focus, Dual Card Slots, EF mount Natively or with adapter, In body Stabilization and Canons color science and also Focusing system of the Canon 5D Mark 4. Do this and im sure we all will be Happy Campers.

 

[ahsanford]

man i really hope they dont drop the ball like Nikon did with the Z6 and Z7. They need to get this one right or else Sony will be gaining my money. But i will wait and see what they do and if nothing but disappoint us like they have done in the past. We as Canon users want Eye Auto Focus, Dual Card Slots, EF mount Natively or with adapter, In body Stabilization and Canons color science and also Focusing system of the Canon 5D Mark 4. Do this and im sure we all will be Happy Campers.

'Satisfy my list of demands and everyone will be all right.'

This sounds more and more like a hostage situation as we get closer to launch.

- A

P.S. Welcome to CR!

 

[Ozarker]

man i really hope they dont drop the ball like Nikon did with the Z6 and Z7. They need to get this one right or else Sony will be gaining my money. But i will wait and see what they do and if nothing but disappoint us like they have done in the past. We as Canon users want Eye Auto Focus, Dual Card Slots, EF mount Natively or with adapter, In body Stabilization and Canons color science and also Focusing system of the Canon 5D Mark 4. Do this and im sure we all will be Happy Campers.

I'm a Canon user and couldn't care less about eye AF or in body IS. And no, everyone would not be a happy camper. You meant that you would be a happy camper. I'm already a happy camper.

We've got another "ship jumper" here.

 

[ahsanford]

I'm a Canon user and couldn't care less about eye AF or in body IS. And no, everyone would not be a happy camper. You meant that you would be a happy camper. I'm already a happy camper.

Just curious from the M50 users: how slick/competent/effective is the Eye AF on that camera? How does it do with large aperture primes? Is it a good presumption that technology will scale well to FF? Do you use it often?

- A

 

[JordanRushing]

I'm already a happy camper.

Then why are you on a thread about a new camera if you're already happy with what you have?

 

[cgc]

Or maybe the RF mount has the same mounting ring as an EF but RF lenses protrude well into the camera housing to get a lower flange distance (i.e. the mount is not at the end of the lens, but part way up the barrel to make up that flange difference). It could mean that the camera housing doesn't save size, but some RF lenses could be more like pancake lenses on the body so the mounted size is reduced (for lenses where that's possible i.e. wide angle, slow aperture). EF-S protrudes into the housing somewhat and the lenses are built so they won't mount on EF mount cameras - I wonder if they could do the same with RF but have a more pronounced protrusion into the body?

If this were the case, then weather sealing shouldn't be impacted, mount adapters wouldn't be needed, and the same size saving options could be possible. The only caveat here would be no using an adapter to mount mirrorless lenses from other systems to the Canon system (not that Canon would mind), unlike Nikon's mirrorless which now has the lowest flange distance and should be able to mount anything once adaptors are built.

You have just summarized what I have been thinking in the last weeks. The Canon mount could be wide enough for that use. Only wide angle lenses take advantage of short flange distances: these lenses could be redesigned for "the new mount" as you say. The rest of the current Canon collection, including standard zooms, is already OK.

In fact, a Sony mirrorless with the Canon adapter is bulkier compared to any Canon DSLR. The following example demonstrates this: despite the Sigma 35 Art is 1 mm longer compared with the Canon 24-70 F4L, the Canon system is overal shorter and with much better ergonomics!. Since Sony lenses aren't at all smaller compared to Canon ones (except extreme wide angles) there is not much of an advantage, if any...

 

[Deleted member 379512]

I'm a Canon user and couldn't care less about eye AF or in body IS. And no, everyone would not be a happy camper. You meant that you would be a happy camper. I'm already a happy camper.

We've got another "ship jumper" here.

Just curious from the M50 users: how slick/competent/effective is the Eye AF on that camera? How does it do with large aperture primes? Is it a good presumption that technology will scale well to FF? Do you use it often?

- A

I'm not an m50 user, but on the Sony, I use it nearly every time I'm framing with people. It's not perfect, but it does make things much easier overall. Especially as I usually shoot landscapes, so I able to worry less about where the focus point is, and more on getting a better composition.

The ibis is also excellent to have, I really hope Canon implement this in their ff mirrorless. I'd be hesitant to get a new Canon without it

 

[greymuth]

What if RF == "Reduced-flange EF" -- the same mounting ring and electrical as EF with an reduced flange distance (say 12 mm shorter)?
If you attach a EF lens, you will still get infinity focus but with reduced near-focus range. If you need the full focus range, just add an extension tube.

 

[peterzuehlke]

I like the "R" designation. I've shot Canon since the FD days and have often referred to the company as Pirates. So maybe it's really Arrrrrrr.....

 

[vangelismm]

Eye AF is the solution for the bad AF spread points in FF DSRL´s. At least for wide open portraits.

 

[Kit.]

I'm not an m50 user, but on the Sony, I use it nearly every time I'm framing with people. It's not perfect, but it does make things much easier overall. Especially as I usually shoot landscapes, so I able to worry less about where the focus point is, and more on getting a better composition.

But does it work any better than any other face detection with hybrid autofocus sensors?

 

[tmc784]

I wont be obsessed on mirrorless cameras, I love DSLR.

 

[Deleted member 379512]

But does it work any better than any other face detection with hybrid autofocus sensors?

I haven't been able to try it on the Canon 5dmk4 in stills yet, so can't compare them directly - I'd assume they're close but not the same, but mostly as Canon have come out with an eye AF in the m50, as well as the standard face detection.

Using the back screen on the 5dmk4 for portraits is difficult (clumsy?), but for video it has been decent in face detection

 

[ahsanford]

Then why are you on a thread about a new camera if you're already happy with what you have?

What -- forums are only group therapy for the aggrieved who don't get what they want?

Some people may want to chat about the technology that might be coming. Or they might want to understand what all the mirrorless fuss is about.

- A

 

[ken]

I'm a Canon user and couldn't care less about eye AF or in body IS. And no, everyone would not be a happy camper. You meant that you would be a happy camper. I'm already a happy camper.

We've got another "ship jumper" here.

Ugh. Intolerant responses like this make me wish there was a "mute" button so that I don't have to see responses from specific posters.

 

[Kit.]

Ugh. Intolerant responses like this make me wish there was a "mute" button so that I don't have to see responses from specific posters.

Doesn't "Ignore" button do what you want?

 

[scyrene]

I think it is mostly the very popular stuff that gets re-uploaded. I am guessing that the re-oploads only comprise a relatively small fraction of the actual 400 hours a minut, worth of uploads. But lets say re-uploads were 50% of all uploads. 200 hours a minut, is still staggering and that is on youtube alone.

You mention droneshots as being popular. The DJI Maveric drone is actually capable of 120 frames/s in 1080p, so they thought it was important enough to incorporate. The Iphone has been capable of 240 frames/s since version 6, and I see a lot of those super slo-mo videos on instagram, from people my age and younger. I call that pretty casual use of slo-mo.

Now I know High frame rates are a lot harder to implement on larger, high megapixel sensors. But to say that the utility of slo-mo is to niche to prioritise in a high end DSLR or Mirrorles , really clashes with my experience as a creator and a consumer of media content.

But I guess we will never know, less we conduct a thorough study

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?