Mirrorless Update - APS-C? [CR2]

[briansquibb]

For what I do with my camera, FF can pretty much compensate for using a small prime instead of a huge L zoom, just by cropping the image. APS-C is a few levels below in this regard. FF + 40/2.8 can pretty much act like APS-C + 24-70 in term of usable image resolution for screen.

Using large whites is as much a reason for IQ than closeups. I use a 200 f/2 rather than the 70-200 f/2.8 for the better IQ. The 100-400L does not compare with the 400 f/2.8 either

Well, first of all, why would you use large whites with a mirrorless camera?


Why not? Is there something saying that mirrorless IQ has to be poor?

The reply was in response to the comment about cropping rather than long lens

 

[dstppy]

See, that's where I don't get it; my wife's 4s is the *only* half way 'keepable' phone camera but it is nothing compared to any of canon's entry-level IS cameras.

Most people don't care about quality!!! All they ever do with their photos is post them on FaceSpace. They don't even make 4x6 prints. For these Non-Photo-Enthusiasts a camera phone makes more sense than a Real Camera, 'cause they can post to Social Sites directly from their Smart Phone (no computer needed).

The SX40IS type cameras are super light and get great IQ for the price ...

But you can't make a phone call on them or post to directly to SpaceFace

We're pretty sure this camera's price isn't going to be cheap and nothing is going to be revolutionary on it . . .

I'm not looking for a cheap price! I'm looking for a small/light camera and I'm willing to pay a reasonable amount of money to get it. The M4/3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 sells for $999.00 and there is a waiting list to get them, so it's not just me wanting this type of small/light camera.

Okay, this seems like the first lucid response So you're expecting the mirror less to surpass even the G-series, while still being compact (which isn't going to be necessarily cheap). That makes sense.

Re: SmartPhones
I think once people have kids, their perceptions about image quality change though . . . and $100 P&S take fabulous photos these days.

Don't get me wrong, I've had 2 iPhones, and plan to replace the one I have, but I'm ready to go back to a dedicated phone and just have a PDA (as soon as I can get one with wifi) and with privacy concerns (some places don't like cameras on their visitors) I think we'll see some non-camera choices soon.

Eventually, (some) people will realize that 1 camera, phone and 'computer' means when your phone breaks, your camera does too . . . but that's another topic entirely

Thanks for the explanation about your thoughts on the mirror less; makes more sense (for some people).

 

[ecka]

For what I do with my camera, FF can pretty much compensate for using a small prime instead of a huge L zoom, just by cropping the image. APS-C is a few levels below in this regard. FF + 40/2.8 can pretty much act like APS-C + 24-70 in term of usable image resolution for screen.

Using large whites is as much a reason for IQ than closeups. I use a 200 f/2 rather than the 70-200 f/2.8 for the better IQ. The 100-400L does not compare with the 400 f/2.8 either

Well, first of all, why would you use large whites with a mirrorless camera?

Why not? Is there something saying that mirrorless IQ has to be poor?
The reply was in response to the comment about cropping rather than long lens

You may use mirrorless with large whites, but would you buy one specifically for that purpose or choose to use it instead of your DSLR for any reason? It could be nice for video using EVF, but you can use a Z-finder on your DSLR as well.
..and yes, heavy cropping is no good for bokeh, you just have to get closer with a FF camera.

 

[jouster]

BTW there will be no future P&S cameras, they will be replaced by smart phones

Maybe someday, when they get the basics, like a shutter release button, a zoom lens, and a tripod mount.

I think you're wrong. Most people don't care about the first two things, and the thought of buying a tripod would never even occur to them. I think fewer and fewer people are going to replace their P&S cameras. Isn't that why camera companies are making these larger sensor systems in the first place? To differentiate them from phone cams in a way that is not possible with P&Ss?

 

[briansquibb]

For what I do with my camera, FF can pretty much compensate for using a small prime instead of a huge L zoom, just by cropping the image. APS-C is a few levels below in this regard. FF + 40/2.8 can pretty much act like APS-C + 24-70 in term of usable image resolution for screen.

Using large whites is as much a reason for IQ than closeups. I use a 200 f/2 rather than the 70-200 f/2.8 for the better IQ. The 100-400L does not compare with the 400 f/2.8 either

Well, first of all, why would you use large whites with a mirrorless camera?

Why not? Is there something saying that mirrorless IQ has to be poor?
The reply was in response to the comment about cropping rather than long lens

You may use mirrorless with large whites, but would you buy one specifically for that purpose or choose to use it instead of your DSLR for any reason? It could be nice for video using EVF, but you can use a Z-finder on your DSLR as well.
..and yes, heavy cropping is no good for bokeh, you just have to get closer with a FF camera.

I think long term DSLRs will go so we will end up with full size with EVT

If the compact mirrorless with exchangeable lens takes off then I would expect to see white lens for them with a native mount.

To have compact and full size bodies would mean the end of the Rebel sized bodies and format.

 

[ecka]

I think long term DSLRs will go so we will end up with full size with EVT

It may be so. (I hope)

If the compact mirrorless with exchangeable lens takes off then I would expect to see white lens for them with a native mount.

I wouldn't . I think that a lens adapter would work just fine. However it may be coming much much later, when all the Pro DSLR series will be replaced by mirrorless systems.

To have compact and full size bodies would mean the end of the Rebel sized bodies and format.

Not everybody wants a smaller body, many are using battery grips with their Rebels, 60Ds/7Ds/5Ds and they like the size of it.

 

[TrumpetPower!]

It seems like many people are underestimating "image quality" just because they don't care.

Oh, believe me. I care about image quality. That's why I use a 5DIII and my favorite lens right now is a tossup between the TS-E 24 II and the 400 f/2.8 II -- and why I've got an iPF8100 sitting ten feet away from me.

But you and me, we're not the market that Canon is targeting with the mirrorless cameras. And, in that market, the APS-C sensor is overkill -- but, of course overkill in a good way such that it gives the users plenty of margin for error without any significant penalty.

Of the list of problems that a mirrorless camera is meant to solve, image quality isn't even on the radar. And of the list of problems that a full-frame sensor can potentially solve...well, there isn't even any hint of a hypothetical overlap with the list of problems that mirrorless is supposed to solve. Full frame is only needed when the image quality (including resolution, low-light capability, control over depth of field, and the rest) of APS-C isn't good enough, and we've already established that APS-C is <i>far</i> more than good enough for the target market.

Cheers,

b&

 

[briansquibb]

Not everybody wants a smaller body, many are using battery grips with their Rebels, 60Ds/7Ds/5Ds and they like the size of it.

I cannot work with the small bodies - 1 series is ideal for me

Likewise I dont like the 5Dx size without grips as I shoot a lot in portrait mode which is a killer for the hands

 

[RLPhoto]

Not everybody wants a smaller body, many are using battery grips with their Rebels, 60Ds/7Ds/5Ds and they like the size of it.

I cannot work with the small bodies - 1 series is ideal for me

Likewise I dont like the 5Dx size without grips as I shoot a lot in portrait mode which is a killer for the hands

Mirrorless = Compact with good IQ and a basic lens selection.

 

[briansquibb]

Not everybody wants a smaller body, many are using battery grips with their Rebels, 60Ds/7Ds/5Ds and they like the size of it.

I cannot work with the small bodies - 1 series is ideal for me

Likewise I dont like the 5Dx size without grips as I shoot a lot in portrait mode which is a killer for the hands

Mirrorless = Compact with good IQ and a basic lens selection.

That might be how it starts ....

Not sure how good IQ and basic lens selection works unless you mean a limited range?

 

[Lee Jay]

BTW there will be no future P&S cameras, they will be replaced by smart phones

Maybe someday, when they get the basics, like a shutter release button, a zoom lens, and a tripod mount.

I think you're wrong. Most people don't care about the first two things, and the thought of buying a tripod would never even occur to them. I think fewer and fewer people are going to replace their P&S cameras. Isn't that why camera companies are making these larger sensor systems in the first place? To differentiate them from phone cams in a way that is not possible with P&Ss?

I know I'm not. I'm not talking about the masses that don't give a damn about photography or their photos - they already use useless cell phones for pictures and videos. I'm talking about cameras for enthusiasts and above.

 

[RLPhoto]

Not everybody wants a smaller body, many are using battery grips with their Rebels, 60Ds/7Ds/5Ds and they like the size of it.

I cannot work with the small bodies - 1 series is ideal for me

Likewise I dont like the 5Dx size without grips as I shoot a lot in portrait mode which is a killer for the hands

Mirrorless = Compact with good IQ and a basic lens selection.

That might be how it starts ....

Not sure how good IQ and basic lens selection works unless you mean a limited range?

Well, I wont want/need a 200mm F/2 to go with it but an adapter so you could if you'd like.

24mm prime eqiv.

50mm prime eqiv.

100mm prime eqiv.

and a 18-55mm & 55-300mm zooms for the consumers. Done. 8)

 

[TrumpetPower!]

BTW there will be no future P&S cameras, they will be replaced by smart phones

Maybe someday, when they get the basics, like a shutter release button, a zoom lens, and a tripod mount.

I think you're wrong. Most people don't care about the first two things, and the thought of buying a tripod would never even occur to them. I think fewer and fewer people are going to replace their P&S cameras. Isn't that why camera companies are making these larger sensor systems in the first place? To differentiate them from phone cams in a way that is not possible with P&Ss?

I know I'm not. I'm not talking about the masses that don't give a damn about photography or their photos - they already use useless cell phones for pictures and videos. I'm talking about cameras for enthusiasts and above.

But that's just the thing. The only "camera enthusiasts and above" who buy Rebels and G-series PowerShot models are starving students and spendthrifts, and they're such a small part of the market that Canon doesn't care much about them.

Most of those who buy G-series PowerShot cameras are the masses who don't give a damn about photography but want something a bit better than run-of-the-mill, and most of those who buy Rebels are the same but with more disposable income (think soccer moms with a T3I and a $200 75-300 on the sidelines). Mirrorless will be perfect for them.

The set of "enthusiasts and above" who want full frame but aren't willing to put up with the physical size of a 5DIII is virtually nonexistent (though, granted, vocal).

Again, Canon is going to keep making cheap PowerShot cameras in a dozen different colors until cell phones eat up that market. Mirrorless will take over G-series PowerShot and Rebels both, and the XD series will remain pretty much as it is for a long time to come (except, of course, for the same sorts of improvements as always).

b&

 

[ecka]

It seems like many people are underestimating "image quality" just because they don't care.

Oh, believe me. I care about image quality. That's why I use a 5DIII and my favorite lens right now is a tossup between the TS-E 24 II and the 400 f/2.8 II -- and why I've got an iPF8100 sitting ten feet away from me.

But you and me, we're not the market that Canon is targeting with the mirrorless cameras. And, in that market, the APS-C sensor is overkill -- but, of course overkill in a good way such that it gives the users plenty of margin for error without any significant penalty.

Of the list of problems that a mirrorless camera is meant to solve, image quality isn't even on the radar. And of the list of problems that a full-frame sensor can potentially solve...well, there isn't even any hint of a hypothetical overlap with the list of problems that mirrorless is supposed to solve. Full frame is only needed when the image quality (including resolution, low-light capability, control over depth of field, and the rest) of APS-C isn't good enough, and we've already established that APS-C is <i>far</i> more than good enough for the target market.

Cheers,

b&

I believe you . However, when I don't need high image quality, I don't even need a big sensor camera for that shot, P&S or a smartphone would do. When I look at all the 5D2 features, I realize that I don't really need a DSLR. What I need is FF mirrorless. If only Leica M9 had LiveView, EVF and was like 4 times cheaper : ...
For example, I never (or like once a year) use P, Av, Tv, B, CA or AUTO. All I want is C1,C2 and M mode + autoISO, autoSS, autoF settings in it. So, it is possible to integrate the whole mode dial into the ON/OFF switch and add a 3rd dial + some buttons instead. Simple is perfect. Or maybe that's just me...

 

[Blaze]

I disagree that the "only reason for full-frame is image quality, and APS-C is already overkill for the largest desktop printers." Full frame sensors are not good just for extra resolution; they gather more than twice as much light as an APS-C sensor. That makes a big difference to me shooting sports in low light.

But that's just image quality again. Boost the ISO by a stop or two and you get pretty much the same shot as on full frame, just with more noise. Now, downsample that frame to 1024x768, to post on the Web or send in an email, and the noise vanishes.

Would you be satisfied with the image quality? Obviously not. But 99 44/100% of Rebel owners would be thrilled with it, and that's why we're not going to see a full-frame mirrorless.

b&

That works if you still have an extra stop or two of ISO available and don't care about losing a significant amount of dynamic range (it's not just a difference in noise). But then DR is "just image quality" as well, I suppose.

As far as what to expect, it really boils down to who the mirrorless is marketed towards. If they target the Rebel buying populous (and that's where the profit is to be made), it would indeed be silly to put a FF sensor in it.

 

[drjlo]

CanonRumors is now reporting possibly APS-C sensor the Canon mirrorless

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/mirrorless-update-aps-c-cr2/

 

[TrumpetPower!]

Simple is perfect. Or maybe that's just me...

It's not just you...but you and your brethren are not only one of the smallest minorities in Canon's set of customers, you're also generally willing to make do with the offerings they have. Either you'll decide you're okay with APS-C and go with mirrorless for its pocketability, or you'll decide you can live with the bulk of a 5DIII.

The target audience for mirrorless (again, think of soccer moms) won't put up with the extra expense for full frame, and the target audience for full frame (wedding pros and the like) couldn't give a damn about camera size and will laugh at you if you suggest they can do without the viewfinder.

I feel your pain, but Canon doesn't....

b&

 

[TrumpetPower!]

As far as what to expect, it really boils down to who the mirrorless is marketed towards. If they target the Rebel buying populous (and that's where the profit is to be made), it would indeed be silly to put a FF sensor in it.

You've got it.

And, yes -- the soccer mom on the sidelines with a Rebel and a 75-300 has no clue what dynamic range is or why she'd care about not having it. Indeed, she'd just think you were a sleazy salesman trying to upsell her with something she doesn't really need, like that $100 tripod the last one foisted off on her that she hasn't even used once.

Besides, auto-adjust makes those dark areas look brighter, and it only takes one click in Picassa.

Cheers,

b&

 

[ecka]

Simple is perfect. Or maybe that's just me...

It's not just you...but you and your brethren are not only one of the smallest minorities in Canon's set of customers, you're also generally willing to make do with the offerings they have. Either you'll decide you're okay with APS-C and go with mirrorless for its pocketability, or you'll decide you can live with the bulk of a 5DIII.

Yes, I'll be just another unsatisfied customer, who would buy a FF mirrorless camera from whatever manufacturer that actually make such a camera, and then sell my Canon toys the next day .

The target audience for mirrorless (again, think of soccer moms) won't put up with the extra expense for full frame, and the target audience for full frame (wedding pros and the like) couldn't give a damn about camera size and will laugh at you if you suggest they can do without the viewfinder.

I feel your pain, but Canon doesn't....

b&

Who decided that there has to be only one Canon mirrorless? Why not 2 or 3 ... and one of those could be FF

 

[c.d.embrey]

Simple is perfect. Or maybe that's just me...

No, I agree, for most things (including photography), simple is best.

But when it comes to discussions on fora (like Canon Rumors), simpleminded rules the day

WhyTF are we discussing the IQ of the 5D3 when the subject is an APS-C Mirrorless camera (that may or may-not be announced).

WTF have Big Whites got to do with mirrorless cameras ??? Most photographers don't shoot BIF. The longest lens I use on APS-C is an 85mm f/1.8, so the rumored APS-C Mirrorless will be OK, for me.

BTW, I couldn't care less about your big hands