Mirrorless Camera & New Full Frame Coming Second Half 2012? [CR2]

[stabmasterasron]

Wow, lots of different opinions on here about what this rumor means - lots of heated discussions and it is still not a confirmed product.

Lots of people think dropping a FF sensor into a lesser body would undercut sales of the 5dmkiii. Well, do the rebels undercut sales of the 60D? Probably. Does the 60D undercut sales of the 7D, maybe somewhat. Different people have different levels of money they are willing to invest in camera equipment. If Canon's dslr offering started at the 60D, yeah they would sell many more 60D's, but they would lose many, many more customers who are not willing to pay the fee where the 60D starts.

Bigger sensors at lower price points - this will definitely happen - sooner or later. As dslr bodies lose ground to smaller mirrorless systems, something has to be done to offer a superior product and a reason to buy a dslr over a mirrorless system. Some on here have said that FF sensor doesn't make you a better photographer. Well maybe it doesn't but there is no doubt that there is a strong correlation between image quality and sensor size - I don't think anyone will disagree with that. Higher image quality may not make you a better photographer, but it surely won't hold you back. And it might be the edge dslr's need to fend off the mirrorless for a little while longer.

 

[stabmasterasron]

Lots of rumors on where a new FF would fit in. Here is my take.

FF sensor in a mirrorless - Most likely of all the rumors

FF sensor in a rebel with rebel specs - Plausible but not likely

FF sensor in a 7DII - No way. You'd lose burst rate and reach. Two things that make the 7D popular today.

FF 5DMII makover - Nope... would start tredding into 5DMIII territory

FF dumbed down version of 5DMIII - Lets talk a little about this one


Initially I thought no way. This is stupid. You would definitely take sales away from the 5DMIII. Then I started to think about it. The choice of upgrading to the 5DMIII is either a yes I will or no I'll wait for something else. When people wait canon doesn't make money. You want people to upgrade. Especially if it took you 3.5 years to put out an upgrade. That is alot of time and many people would look at that and say its time for an upgrade. While I think this is more plausible than origanally I know they certainly wont release it any time soon. Right now we are still in the "early adopter" stage. Still too soon to tell how well the 5DmIII is going to do. If it doesn't do well, there is going to be a very large market that wants to upgrade their gear but doesn't have an outlet. Thats where something like a dumbed down version of 5DMIII comes in. Or you cut your prices and take a hit that way. Could be interesting.

FF in a mirrorless - I don't think so. Why? Because the idea of mirrorless is to miniaturize everything right? So if canon releases a mirrorless, it likely would be a compact body. FF requires larger lenses because the lens needs to project a larger image circle. So FF mirrorless would be small body and large lens. The ergonomics on this would be a nighmare. I too like the idea of having a compact FF, but having a beer can attached to a deck of cards probably won't work out well.

FF in a Rebel - probably not with this next round of rebels, but eventually yes.

FF in sub 5D mark iii - if the "entry level" ff rumor is true, this will be the case. My guess is that it will be an xxD camera, not an xxxD camera.

 

[stabmasterasron]

If this is true - the 5D3/1Dx sensor with its gapless microlenses in a tuned-down body with less AF capability and single card slot (5D2)

then

the 5D3 should have been called 5Dx or 3D, and the new entry-level camera the 5D3.

Something seems wrong....

No one said we were going to get a tuned down 5D3. Any more than the t3i is a tuned down 7D. They share the same sensor, but the 7D is a vastly different, more capable camera.

 

[wickidwombat]

I think if there is going to be another FF this year it's going to be an uber MP monster not a bargain basement one

 

[maxxevv]

FF in a mirrorless - I don't think so. Why? Because the idea of mirrorless is to miniaturize everything right? So if canon releases a mirrorless, it likely would be a compact body. FF requires larger lenses because the lens needs to project a larger image circle. So FF mirrorless would be small body and large lens. The ergonomics on this would be a nighmare. I too like the idea of having a compact FF, but having a beer can attached to a deck of cards probably won't work out well.

FF in a Rebel - probably not with this next round of rebels, but eventually yes.

FF in sub 5D mark iii - if the "entry level" ff rumor is true, this will be the case. My guess is that it will be an xxD camera, not an xxxD camera.

If you look at what Leica has done with their manual lenses for the M9 and wrap a AF USM motor around them, are they likely to be as big as EF lenses of equivalent maximum aperture ?

One of the reasons why EF glass has to be that big is because of the lens backplane to focal plane of sensor. The further it is, the bigger it has to be. For a mirrorless system, this distance can in theory be reduced to almost zero. Practically, about 1mm. Current EF lenses and EF-S lenses is in the range of 20-35mm. M4/3 lenses about 12-20mm. Leica somewhere in there. Flange distance does not directly co-relate to the backplane distance, though it will have some influence in the overall scheme of things.

But it is not very likely for now that the Canon mirrorless will be FF. Too big a jump for the market to accept and also, the limited range of lenses that's specifically designed for such a 'high-end' mirrorless camera to take-off successfully. It will possibly carry the same sensor as the G1x if market penetration is the objective. However, if Canon decides to do something that turns the market on its head, and grab some of the Leica 'halo', a FF mirrorless system is not out of the question either, they have the sensors as well as the resources already. Just need to create additional adaptor mounts that allow the use of EF and EF-s lenses with full AF functionality on such a camera.

As for a sub-5dMkIII, that's very unlikely if the market differentiation is to be achieved. For Canon, 'entry' means the lowest spec's that the market is willing to accept. And that was the same thing that prompted the creation of the original Rebel. It had the 'minimum specifications' which the market was willing to accept for the targeted market prices of sub US$1000/- back then. For this case, as it is now, the entry specifications is more or less what the current or upcoming Rebel carries if the target market price is to be US$1500-US$2000 ( which I assume is the market threshold for a 'basic' FF DSLR here). The 1100D is below 'entry' for most people, which it shows in comparison when you look at the numbers moved/sold compared to the current and past Rebel models.

 

[stabmasterasron]

FF in a mirrorless - I don't think so. Why? Because the idea of mirrorless is to miniaturize everything right? So if canon releases a mirrorless, it likely would be a compact body. FF requires larger lenses because the lens needs to project a larger image circle. So FF mirrorless would be small body and large lens. The ergonomics on this would be a nighmare. I too like the idea of having a compact FF, but having a beer can attached to a deck of cards probably won't work out well.

FF in a Rebel - probably not with this next round of rebels, but eventually yes.

FF in sub 5D mark iii - if the "entry level" ff rumor is true, this will be the case. My guess is that it will be an xxD camera, not an xxxD camera.

If you look at what Leica has done with their manual lenses for the M9 and wrap a AF USM motor around them, are they likely to be as big as EF lenses of equivalent maximum aperture ?

One of the reasons why EF glass has to be that big is because of the lens backplane to focal plane of sensor. The further it is, the bigger it has to be. For a mirrorless system, this distance can in theory be reduced to almost zero. Practically, about 1mm. Current EF lenses and EF-S lenses is in the range of 20-35mm. M4/3 lenses about 12-20mm. Leica somewhere in there. Flange distance does not directly co-relate to the backplane distance, though it will have some influence in the overall scheme of things.

But it is not very likely for now that the Canon mirrorless will be FF. Too big a jump for the market to accept and also, the limited range of lenses that's specifically designed for such a 'high-end' mirrorless camera to take-off successfully. It will possibly carry the same sensor as the G1x if market penetration is the objective. However, if Canon decides to do something that turns the market on its head, and grab some of the Leica 'halo', a FF mirrorless system is not out of the question either, they have the sensors as well as the resources already. Just need to create additional adaptor mounts that allow the use of EF and EF-s lenses with full AF functionality on such a camera.

As for a sub-5dMkIII, that's very unlikely if the market differentiation is to be achieved. For Canon, 'entry' means the lowest spec's that the market is willing to accept. And that was the same thing that prompted the creation of the original Rebel. It had the 'minimum specifications' which the market was willing to accept for the targeted market prices of sub US$1000/- back then. For this case, as it is now, the entry specifications is more or less what the current or upcoming Rebel carries if the target market price is to be US$1500-US$2000 ( which I assume is the market threshold for a 'basic' FF DSLR here). The 1100D is below 'entry' for most people, which it shows in comparison when you look at the numbers moved/sold compared to the current and past Rebel models.

Yes, as i was writing my previous post, I thought of the Leica, and even wrote something about it, but erased in before I posted. It was explained to me that Leica can get away with small lenses because they are manual focus and the camera is a rangefinder. Not sure how being a rangefinder effects lens size, that is just what I was told and I never had the motivation to look any further into it. And I don't know anything about the backplane focal distance issue - I will take your word for it.

Sub 5dmkiii - I didn't not mean it would be a 5Dsomething. I meant it would be a lower specification than the 5Dmkiii - which "entry level ff" should mean by definition. Whether it makes it into something called a rebel or rebel like in specification - we will see.

 

[takoman46]

I think that if Canon brings an entry level FF body to the line up, it will be significantly crappier than even the 5DmkII. Since the 5DmkIII is obviously the successor to the 5DmkII, then an "entry level" body should logically be placed at a bar below the 5D line in performance and build quality. I wouldn't get my hopes up that this new entry level FF camera will be all that impressive. I'd expect disappointments in ISO performance, resolution, image quality, continuous shooting, and AF system at the minimum compared to the 5DmkIII. I also wouldn't be surprised if it is even set a bar below the 5DmkII in terms of ISO performance, resolution, and image quality. It also would make sense for Canon to price the camera lower than $2000. Maybe this will fill the 7D price point and the 60D successor will inherit the 7D's strengths and come in at a price point just under the new entry level FF camera?

How could it be crappier than the 5dmkii? This new entry level ff will either have the sensor of the 5dmkii (unlikely) or from the 5dmkiii or 1dx(also unlikely, i think), or it will have a completely new sensor. So if it has one of the other, current sensors and digic 5, it will be at least equal in iq to those corresponding cameras. If canon makes a new sensor, why would they make a sensor crappier than the 4 year old sensor from the 5dmkii? I don't see how any new ff camera, entry level or not would take a step backwards from the 5dmkii.

It makes sense for it to be crappier than a 5DmkII if it is an "entry-level" FF camera. The term "entry-level" means exactly that. The "5D" line is not "entry-level" right? So it would be outlandish to think that the "entry level" FF camera would outperform the 5DmkII. Although the 5DmkII is 4 years old, it is still only 1 generation old so it is impossible for Canon to add another FF camera to the lineup that is deemed "entry level" but yet outperforms a higher end FF body that is likely still widely used by many many photographers. Let me put it this way... think back on all the technological advances in the overall DSLR lineup. Did a T3i have better image quality than a 40D? No because the T3i is "entry level" and the 40D is 1 generation older but yet one step higher in the lineup of APS-C bodies. In fact even the 20D would beat out a T3i in image quality and that's even further back in tech! So it seems like wishful thinking for an "entry level" FF camera to be equal to or better than a 5DmkII right?

So let me get this straight. 40D and 20D have higher iq than t3i. This is because t3i is an "entry level" cam and 40D and 20D are the next level up. Dont mean to poke a hole in your logic, but 60D and even 7D have the exact same sensor as the t3i. And I have seen many reviews, and even dpreview, says the iq between these 3 cameras are essentially identical - same sensor, so makes sense. So if I follow your logic then the 20D has better iq than the 7D. I am not saying you are wrong - maybe it does, but the 7D is certainly not bellow the 20D in the pecking order of Canon cams.

Ok so I did a test with a 20D, 50D, T3i, and 7D shooting the same image a while back and came to my conclusion. I'm not sure if what you say is true regarding the 7D, 60D, and T3i sensor and I will have to look into that for myself. I find it very hard to believe that they all share the identical sensor. So my findings were that the 50D actually had almost identical image quality to a 7D with all the same settings. The 7D just had about 1.5-2 stops better ISO performance than the 50D. The 20D has much lower resolution at 8.2 megapixels so the resolving power is not even close to the other 3 cameras and I saw a noticeable difference in image quality between the 20D, and 50D/7D. However, the T3i just sucked horribly compared to the 20D, 50D, and 7D. My cousin has a T3i so when I get a chance, I'll take another set of comparative shots to post here. I don't my 20D, 50D, and 7D anymore though. Would you settle for 5DmkII or 5DmkIII shots? lol. I'll have to call around to see if any of my friends have a 60D or 7D for comparison. Btw, the original comparison was shot with the EF 50 f/1.2L with available sunlight on a cloudless day at ISO 100 with a tripod on all cameras. All cameras were set to identical f/stops, shutter speeds, white balance, faithful color profile, center point focus, and Raw format, throughout the range of the tests.

 

[wickidwombat]

I think if there is going to be another FF this year it's going to be an uber MP monster not a bargain basement one

It is going to need more than just lots of megapixels if it wants to be stop the exodus to the D800.

Too true, but its not just the D800 on its own it's target audience being primarily landscape togs means the D800 + 14-24 Nikkor make it a formidable combo at a reasonable price

 

[DarkKnightNine]

This comes from someone that is probably the most accurate of any source with stuff months off from coming to market. Specs and the like are never decided this far in advance. I have heard there are multiple camera configurations in the wild right now.

If I had to wager, a 5D3 minus the AF, frame rate and build quality. $1999 anyone?

What would be the point of such a camera? Don't we already have the 5D Mark II to fill those shoes? The only things anyone were really looking for in the Mark II to Mark III upgrade were the frame rate, AF and build quality. The problem was everyone was expecting it two years ago. After fours of waiting, most were disappointed that Canon didn't use that time innovate instead fixing the obvious.

 

[DarkKnightNine]

There's no such thing as an "entry level" full-frame camera...makes zero sense marketing/business wise. The Cine-DSLR will obviously be full-frame. I can see a market for a 1DsMkIII-esque studio replacement in terms of a 3D/4D high MP monster but not suggesting that is coming, however much more market for that than cannibalizing the investment Canon has made in the 60D, 7D (7D II) etc. with a $2,400 full frame camera...UNLESS it shot only stills which would make no sense really given phones are shooting 1080P video now. The 5D3 is the "entry-level" full-frame camera if you want to use that term; and the 1Dx is the flagship full-frame camera, certainly room in between them for a studio, high MP body. There will not be a 5DX, that was a creation of this site I think, not seen anything from Canon on a "5DX", the Cine-4K DSLR is not going to be in the 5D line, it is meant for an entirely different market, the market it was announced at, Hollywood, with the C-300. There will not be a <$3000 full frame camera from Canon this year, period...if ever.

The 5D Mark II will remain current into the fall, and for the moment it's entry level. It also sells extremely well after all these years. Reports I have from a few retailers is sales haven't slowed since the 5D3 was announced. If anything there was a surge in sales. There is definitely a market for a $2000 full frame camera.

Craig, with that being said, what have you heard about sales for the 5D Mark III? Am I a sucker for being an early adopter? I get the feeling they aren't going to sell as many as their marketing people would like at the present price point and will eventually have a huge reduction in price (remembering Sigma's goof with the SD1). Canon has gotta a whiff of their own "shiite" and arrogantly thinks it's Channel No. 5.


IMO, the 5D Mark III is overpriced for no other reason other than Canon thinks they can get away with it. Nikon took a more realistic approach with the pricing for their D800 and it seems like they care more about their customers than trying to milk them with minor overpriced upgrades.

 

[DarkKnightNine]

I think they've definitely left the door open for another FF body to replace the 5D2. And it'll have to be different enough to be compelling.

Give it a price tag around $2500-2700,
single Digic 5,
3 to 4 fps at full res of...
7680x5120. (39.3MP)
kitted with new, lower cost 24-105 IS zoom they patented last year.

Take some nice features off the 7D/5D3 but hobble it with another low-end AF system, maybe as good as the 7D's at best. Will make a great studio cam and will be able to do basic HD video with good IQ. Maybe 720p at 60fps.

Could work as a landscaper IF they can get past the pattern noise and bump the Dynamic Range up to better than the 5D3 - good luck with that if they stick with the tech they're using now. :-\

It'll be a below-the-belt blow to the D800 and maybe help satiate those of us heavily into Canon gear and thinking of moving over to the camera with the little red slash on its handgrip.

I'll be watching for it, patient and hopeful but with a pessimistic attitude born of continual disappointment.

Being a Canon user these days means that we wait for years to be disappointed. I sold my 1D Mark IV to cover some of the cost of my 5D Mark III. The thing is I'm still not sure if I got a better camera out of the deal. Only time and shooting with it will tell. On paper I should be thrilled, but in the studio I'm just not thoroughly convinced yet.


It seems like Canon lacks imagination. Even the C300 could have been so much more. They could have hit the ground running with that camera but instead they chose to craw into Hollywood with features already available from other manufactuers at a cheaper price. Like the new 5D Mark III, the C300 seems outrageously overpriced in this market for what it brings to the table. There's nothing in the specs that looks to the future. Instead everything seems to look to fixing what wasn't there from the past. That's why I say Canon lacks imagination. At the very least they could have included USB 3.0 (of even better Thunderbolt) connectivity in the Mark III and 1DX. They could and probably should have included an XQD memory card slot like the D4. That would have made me think they were looking toward the future.


At this point it seems like Canon's strategy is to make us another 2-4 years to add something simple like USB 3.0, add another $500 to the price tag and call it the 5D Mark IV.

 

[DarkKnightNine]

Another thing:

Why would Canon make a 4K Cinema-focused DSLR, a DSLR?

Why the need for the "R"? and optical viewfinder? Isn't the camera always going to be in live view with the mirror up?

Isn't that a waste of cost and space? If photography is secondary on that camera, I don't get the design.

And why the 1 series body with vertical grip? So odd.

Wouldn't it make more sense as a mirror less camera that had an articulating EVF, an ergonomics more like a small medium format camera?

Yes that would make perfect sense, which exactly why Canon is probably NOT going to make it. ;D

 

[pakosouthpark]

OMG seriously?????? i've been waiting for this!! but i was going to buy the 5dmk2 anyways!! now i have to wait!! anyone have any ideas to when its expected the entry level full frame??

 

[D_Rochat]

OMG seriously?????? i've been waiting for this!! but i was going to buy the 5dmk2 anyways!! now i have to wait!! anyone have any ideas to when its expected the entry level full frame??

It's just a CR2 with very little and vague information. You could be waiting a long time just to be disappointed. The 5D II is still a great body and it's available now.

 

[ssrdd]

these guys trying very hard to make us forget how bad is 5Dmk3. So this NEW rumor...

Would you care to explain how the 5D mkIII is a "bad" camera please?

its best for the stills, but not for video, even after 3years of its big brother..
i have been playing with it since i got one, and very much disappointed, it might be 0.5% improvement in video.
in dslr video segment , it seems nikon started the revolution and it took over it agin with d800. 5d's are all in between.

I don't use it for stills though.

I just dont know when Nikon started the revolution in DSLR video, couse i tought Nikon released the D700 and it vas a great DSLR but a month or two later Canon released the 5d2 and had a great video funktion and it destrojed the D700 in sales just because of the video and its quality (ok not just video but the overall package)

So im not realy sure Nikon started the Video revolution inDSLR's

You might wanna check D90 which is the first dslr started 720p video recording, then the rest of....

 

[Vikmnilu]

Dear all,

first post ever here! Quite interesting topic, as I am planning to upgrade my 10 D (yes, still with that one soon. IN fact I almost bought a 5D mark II last night, but I lost the auction... anyway

In my opinion, an "entry level" full frame would be something like the actual 600 D with maybe some specs from a higher model (e.g. 60D-7D) but with a full frame sensor maybe taken from a mark ii or mark iii.

I kind of have different opinion about what is this entry level, it depends if it refers to entry level to FF if you are already a phtographer or to get into FF without an idea of photography. I think both are compatible, but Canon may want the second most, or both

I am sorry, I do not see any sense (for someone who is just an amateur) in paying 2000 euros for a camera, even if it is considered here as cheap. It is true that I am actually willing to pay that myself nowadays, but after some time thinking and some years taking pictures. An entry level in that sense for me would be less than 1000 euros or max 1500 euros. I dont see any casual photographer pay more than that for a camera. Maybe some do though

I think it is maybe not feasible, but if it has the specs of a 600 D I dont see its value higher than 1000-1200 euros.

So I guess I wil go for the mark II anyway.. or if I get crazy enough for the mark III and hoping that will last for life..... hei, if the 10D has lasted 7 years and I bought it already used.. why not?

Cheers from Finland!

Victor

 

[samirachiko]

The 5D MK3 is amazing! ;D However the price is scary. Tooooo expensive!!!! If I were rich I would take it immediately. This type of camera is for a narrow niche of people. If they will make a full frame really cheap, in my opinion, they sell a lot of it. However, the 5d mk3 disappointed me a lot for the fact that he hasn't a swivel screen: after all these years of waiting this was a really important feature for a camera like this...

 

[D_Rochat]

I'm glad they didn't put one on. It's just a feature that I'll never use and has the potential to break.

 

[Marsu42]

I'm glad they didn't put one on. It's just a feature that I'll never use and has the potential to break.

A full metal body has the tendency to break, too, if you throw it under a truck. So it's about circumstances and a bit careful usage - and since I got a 60d I don't see how I could break the screen if I only turn it in safe circumstances. And if the screen is turned towards the camera for protection, it's even safer for transport in something other than a soft cushioned camera bag.

 

[briansquibb]

Looking at other manufacturers recent offerings, we may be in for a ff Canonet priced about $1500