More Than One Active Full Frame Mirrorless Project at Canon? [CR1]

[BillB]

And yet, in a very short time worthy mirrorless cameras will be produced by all three manufacturers at very reasonable prices, along with the lenses to clinch the deal, and the era of the DSLR will be over, or at least that is the way some people tell the story some of the time

'near future', 'very short time'...it would be interesting to know what people mean by these vague references.
35mm has been going for nearly a century. SLRs were invented 150 years ago. In those terms, 10 years for mirrorless to supplant it completely is a 'short time'.

AvTvM thinks he is being wonderfully prescient....I would say he is stating the bleeding obvious.

Actually very short period of time was my phrase. At one point there was a much more specific prediction of about 4 years IIRC. That would imply that all three manufacturers already have the killer camera and lenses in the design phases, or are even further along.

 

[Loswr]

What really amuses me is how some people as well as Canon / Nikon themselves are having such difficulty getting their heads around the rather simple transition from mirrorslappers to *traditional" mirrorless cameras...

What really amuses me is how some forum dwellers and Internet trolls as well as you yourself are having such difficulty getting their heads around the rather simple reality of the ILC market. dSLRs outsell MILCs, Canon outsells Sony. The only 'leapfrogging' of significance in recent years is the EOS M line rapidly surpassing most of the other established MILC brands.

 

[Mikehit]

Actually very short period of time was my phrase. At one point there was a much more specific prediction of about 4 years IIRC. That would imply that all three manufacturers already have the killer camera and lenses in the design phases, or are even further along.

I know it was your phrase and I also know you were paraphrasing a great many comments.
But to expect mirrorless interchangeable cameras to outsell DSLR in 4 years is very optimistic. To say in 4 years the 'era of the DSLR will be over' is fanciful.
I am not saying it will not happen or could not happen, but to overcome decades of perception in the camera buying public when existing mirrorless cameras have so many shortcomings is expecting a lot. And the leading mirrorless do have problems - Sony has an crap interface for a start, add into that poor after sales support and high prices on lenses and there is immediate resistance from the key demographic: the professional photographer.

So I wonder how long AvTvM thinks it will be. In stead of a paranoid Cassandra complex I would like to see an actual prediction that means anything.

 

[BeenThere]

Actually very short period of time was my phrase. At one point there was a much more specific prediction of about 4 years IIRC. That would imply that all three manufacturers already have the killer camera and lenses in the design phases, or are even further along.

I know it was your phrase and I also know you were paraphrasing a great many comments.
But to expect mirrorless interchangeable cameras to outsell DSLR in 4 years is very optimistic. To say in 4 years the 'era of the DSLR will be over' is fanciful.
I am not saying it will not happen or could not happen, but to overcome decades of perception in the camera buying public when existing mirrorless cameras have so many shortcomings is expecting a lot. And the leading mirrorless do have problems - Sony has an crap interface for a start, add into that poor after sales support and high prices on lenses and there is immediate resistance from the key demographic: the professional photographer.

So I wonder how long AvTvM thinks it will be. In stead of a paranoid Cassandra complex I would like to see an actual prediction that means anything.

I am not going to argue any of the excellent points you have made. But, I am wondering why Sony does not address any of the issues you mention. For instance their terrible camera interface/menus. One would think Sony could hire a team of software pros and human factors experts to quickly fix this problem. Question is, why don’t they do this? It would also be a fairly simple matter to set up an after sales support program that doesn’t suck, so why don’t they? Surely they must recognize these issues by now and see that they are holding back the company among pro photographers (and a lot of non pros). It seems self destructive and difficult to understand.

 

[AvTvM]

So I wonder how long AvTvM thinks it will be. In stead of a paranoid Cassandra complex I would like to see an actual prediction that means anything.

I have already stated a precise prediction. Sometimes you need to READ first, what I write instead of just trying to blindly bash me.

Things will change very rapidly as soon as viable Canon and Nikon MILC systems appear. I predict 80% mirrorless sales by 2020.

to make it even more precise: i mean 80% of ILC units sold will be mirrorless, 20% will still be DSLRs. And round about 2026 Canon and Nikon will likely end production of their last mirrorslapper [top series - 1DX II and D5 successors].

btw.: I don't consider myself being wonderfully prescient. The bleeding obvious is indeed fairly obvious, except for some forum denizens.

also i take issue with your "cassandra complex" ... I don't see it as catastrophic or even slightly negative that the end of mirrorslappers is near. 8)

 

[BillB]

So I wonder how long AvTvM thinks it will be. In stead of a paranoid Cassandra complex I would like to see an actual prediction that means anything.

I have already stated a precise prediction. Sometimes you need to READ first, what I write instead of just trying to blindly bash me.

Things will change very rapidly as soon as viable Canon and Nikon MILC systems appear. I predict 80% mirrorless sales by 2020.

to make it even more precise: i mean 80% of ILC units sold will be mirrorless, 20% will still be DSLRs. And round about 2026 Canon and Nikon will likely end production of their last mirrorslapper [top series - 1DX II and D5 successors].

btw.: I don't consider myself being wonderfully prescient. The bleeding obvious is indeed fairly obvious, except for some forum denizens.

also i take issue with your "cassandra complex" ... I don't see it as catastrophic or even slightly negative that the end of mirrorslappers is near. 8)

So how close do you think Canon and Nikon are to bringing worthy full frame mirrorless cameras to market, along with the lenses necessary to clinch the deal?

 

[ahsanford]

So how close do you think Canon and Nikon are to bringing worthy full frame mirrorless cameras to market, along with the lenses necessary to clinch the deal?

That sounds like you are presuming 'thin' new mount + all new lenses (i.e. an attempt to rebuild most of EF / FX for the new mount).

Sony is only climbing that awful lens- (nation-) building mountain out of necessity -- A-mount was not competitive, and they particularly saw a big opportunity in a smaller rig. But Canon and Nikon are far less likely to cut bait and run / build a second version of one of the greatest investments and market strengths.

If either company goes thin with their mirrorless setup (and that's not an unreasonable possibility), they will much more likely start with a smattering of glass that lets users enjoy the 'smaller experience' -- 50 f/1.8, 35 f/2, etc. -- and use an adaptor for access to the huge SLR lens portfolios. Maybe, 5-10 years down the road if mirrorless really does gobble up SLR sales for them, they might consider expanding the thin mount line like Sony has.

- A

 

[BillB]

So how close do you think Canon and Nikon are to bringing worthy full frame mirrorless cameras to market, along with the lenses necessary to clinch the deal?

That sounds like you are presuming 'thin' new mount + all new lenses (i.e. an attempt to rebuild most of EF / FX for the new mount).

Sony is only climbing that awful lens- (nation-) building mountain out of necessity -- A-mount was not competitive, and they particularly saw a big opportunity in a smaller rig. But Canon and Nikon are far less likely to cut bait and run / build a second version of one of the greatest investments and market strengths.

If either company goes thin with their mirrorless setup (and that's not an unreasonable possibility), they will much more likely start with a smattering of glass that lets users enjoy the 'smaller experience' -- 50 f/1.8, 35 f/2, etc. -- and use an adaptor for access to the huge SLR lens portfolios. Maybe, 5-10 years down the road if mirrorless really does gobble up SLR sales for them, they might consider expanding the thin mount line like Sony has.

- A

I'm not presuming anything. I was asking AvTvM a question because I am confused about his assessment of the Canon and Nikon FF mirrorless camera programs. On the one hand, he seems to be saying that they are positioned to get viable mirrorless cameras to market very quickly, yet at other times he seems to be saying they don't have their act together.

 

[ahsanford]

I'm not presuming anything. I was asking AvTvM a question because I am confused about his assessment of the Canon and Nikon FF mirrorless camera programs. On the one hand, he seems to be saying that they are positioned to get viable mirrorless cameras to market very quickly, yet at other times he seems to be saying they don't have their act together.

My apologies. I now see what you were going after.

- A

 

[Ozarker]

So how close do you think Canon and Nikon are to bringing worthy full frame mirrorless cameras to market, along with the lenses necessary to clinch the deal?

That sounds like you are presuming 'thin' new mount + all new lenses (i.e. an attempt to rebuild most of EF / FX for the new mount).

Sony is only climbing that awful lens- (nation-) building mountain out of necessity -- A-mount was not competitive, and they particularly saw a big opportunity in a smaller rig. But Canon and Nikon are far less likely to cut bait and run / build a second version of one of the greatest investments and market strengths.

If either company goes thin with their mirrorless setup (and that's not an unreasonable possibility), they will much more likely start with a smattering of glass that lets users enjoy the 'smaller experience' -- 50 f/1.8, 35 f/2, etc. -- and use an adaptor for access to the huge SLR lens portfolios. Maybe, 5-10 years down the road if mirrorless really does gobble up SLR sales for them, they might consider expanding the thin mount line like Sony has.

- A

I'm not presuming anything. I was asking AvTvM a question because I am confused about his assessment of the Canon and Nikon FF mirrorless camera programs. On the one hand, he seems to be saying that they are positioned to get viable mirrorless cameras to market very quickly, yet at other times he seems to be saying they don't have their act together.

That's because he makes up his own "facts" and his own numbers. It is just over two years to his predicted 80% by 2020. That will come quickly.

 

[ahsanford]

I've been of the mind that Canon makes one of two mount choices, and that leads to one of three outcomes:

1) Canon chooses full EF mount mirrorless --> EF lives on in perpetuity.

2) Canon chooses thin mount mirrorless --> only a handful of smaller thin mount lenses are offered, otherwise there is an adaptor to the EF highway.

3) Canon choose thin mount mirrorless --> Canon starts the climb up Mount Awful and starts designing an entire lens portfolio from scratch in the thinner mount.

(Or some combination of 1-3 if Canon does both Full EF and Thin mounts.)

But I wonder if there's a fourth avenue. Any chance if Canon is bullish on the thin mount being not just an option but the long-term future state of the company, they might offer a service to mechanically retrofit existing EF lenses with a well-built / well-sealed mount conversion to the thin mount? This would allow folks fully converted to mirrorless to have a convenient, strong, sealed junction to all their lenses. (Yes, this would be tantamount to permanently affixing an adapter to a lens.)

Any chance Canon would do this? Because if they did indeed think Thin was the next 20-30 year future of the company, *not* offering such a service (or at least a buyback program) would start to feel like the abandonment of the EF mount just like the A mount with Sony.

- A

 

[criscokkat]

I've been of the mind that Canon makes one of two mount choices, and that leads to one of three outcomes:

1) Canon chooses full EF mount mirrorless --> EF lives on in perpetuity.

2) Canon chooses thin mount mirrorless --> only a handful of smaller thin mount lenses are offered, otherwise there is an adaptor to the EF highway.

3) Canon choose thin mount mirrorless --> Canon starts the climb up Mount Awful and starts designing an entire lens portfolio from scratch in the thinner mount.

(Or some combination of 1-3 if Canon does both Full EF and Thin mounts.)

But I wonder if there's a fourth avenue. Any chance if Canon is bullish on the thin mount being not just an option but the long-term future state of the company, they might offer a service to mechanically retrofit existing EF lenses with a well-built / well-sealed mount conversion to the thin mount? This would allow folks fully converted to mirrorless to have a convenient, strong, sealed junction to all their lenses. (Yes, this would be tantamount to permanently affixing an adapter to a lens.)

Any chance Canon would do this? Because if they did indeed think Thin was the next 20-30 year future of the company, *not* offering such a service (or at least a buyback program) would start to feel like the abandonment of the EF mount just like the A mount with Sony.

- A

What if the mount was the same, but the expected difference to the sensor was different?

In a Canon "pro sized body", couldn't they have a small track that moved the whole sensor mount closer to the lens if a EF-'X' lens was mounted, and pulled itself further back if an older EF lens was mounted? If in a pro sized body the size of the camera didn't change much because of ergonomics, they'd have room to shift the location of the sensor. They could then sell thinner lighter cameras that did not shift (and required an adapter) in the 80d/6d space.

The big problem I see in this is how to you rectify working with the M mount? Maybe a microshim that could be added to them to make them mount on an EF-M mount? If the microshim was semi-permanently mounted you could firmly attach them to the end of your lens. You just wouldn't be able to swap them between a pro and non pro body without removing that - but 95% of us don't do that.

 

[ahsanford]

That's because he makes up his own "facts" and his own numbers. It is just over two years to his predicted 80% by 2020. That will come quickly.

In a sense, AvTvM is a doomsday prophet for SLRs.

When the end of times prediction is passed, he'll have no choice but to do what all responsible doomsday folks do: offer a new date in the future. ;D

That said, I honestly do agree with the broad strokes of most SLRs eventually going away in favor of mirrorless. I just disagree on when 'eventually' is.

- A

 

[BillB]

I've been of the mind that Canon makes one of two mount choices, and that leads to one of three outcomes:

1) Canon chooses full EF mount mirrorless --> EF lives on in perpetuity.

2) Canon chooses thin mount mirrorless --> only a handful of smaller thin mount lenses are offered, otherwise there is an adaptor to the EF highway.

3) Canon choose thin mount mirrorless --> Canon starts the climb up Mount Awful and starts designing an entire lens portfolio from scratch in the thinner mount.

(Or some combination of 1-3 if Canon does both Full EF and Thin mounts.)

But I wonder if there's a fourth avenue. Any chance if Canon is bullish on the thin mount being not just an option but the long-term future state of the company, they might offer a service to mechanically retrofit existing EF lenses with a well-built / well-sealed mount conversion to the thin mount? This would allow folks fully converted to mirrorless to have a convenient, strong, sealed junction to all their lenses. (Yes, this would be tantamount to permanently affixing an adapter to a lens.)

Any chance Canon would do this? Because if they did indeed think Thin was the next 20-30 year future of the company, *not* offering such a service (or at least a buyback program) would start to feel like the abandonment of the EF mount just like the A mount with Sony.

- A

A variant of the first option would be for Canon to develop a mount analogous to the EF-S, in which EF lenses would be native to all cameras, and lenses could be built for the mirrorless cameras that protrude into the camera body, with a lockout that would prevent these lenses being mounted on a DSLR. This approach would eliminate the need for adapters, and maximize the number of lenses that would be native to all cameras.

 

[AvTvM]

... I was asking AvTvM a question because I am confused about his assessment of the Canon and Nikon FF mirrorless camera programs. On the one hand, he seems to be saying that they are positioned to get viable mirrorless cameras to market very quickly, yet at other times he seems to be saying they don't have their act together.

what is confusing? I am saying

1. Mirrorless sales are currently still well below DSLR sales *because and ONLY because* there have been no worthwhile offerings from Canon and Nikon who jointly have 75% market share for interchangeable lens cameras.

2. As soon as Canon and Nikon are going to offer worthwhile mirrorless systems both with APS-C sensors and FF sensors, mirrorless sales will quickly exceed DSLR sales. Given the current level of rumor noise regarding Canon and Nikon FF MILC systems, I predict that within 2 years from now 80% of all ILC sales will be mirrorless, 20% will be still DSLRs.

3. DSLR sales will then taper off towards zero over a number of years ... until the last new mirrorslapper is built and sold ... most likely to a collector. ;-) ... I guesstimate around 2026.

And I do NOT see the end of mirrorslappers as a catastrophic event. ;D

So I am neither a "doomsday prophet" nor a Cassandra. If anything you may call me a prophet of new, better things to come ... very soon.

 

[ahsanford]

what is confusing? I am saying

1. Mirrorless sales are currently still well below DSLR sales *because and ONLY because* there have been no worthwhile offerings from Canon and Nikon who jointly have 75% market share for interchangeable lens cameras.

2. As soon as Canon and Nikon are going to offer worthwhile mirrorless systems both with APS-C sensors and FF sensors, mirrorless sales will quickly exceed DSLR sales. Given the current level of rumor noise regarding Canon and Nikon FF MILC systems, I predict that within 2 years from now 80% of all ILC sales will be mirrorless, 20% will be still DSLRs.

3. DSLR sales will then taper off towards zero over a number of years ... until the last new mirrorslapper is built and sold ... most likely to a collector. ;-) ... I guesstimate around 2026.

1 = Sure.

2 or 3 = AAA grade nonsense. The Kobe Beef of nonsense.

See the red text above -- in this, you are correct. Until CaNikon go mainstream in high unit sales market segments with mirrorless (I mean a mirrorless Rebel, a mirrorless D5500, etc.), the transition from mirrors to mirrorless can't possibly take place in high numbers.

But to presume that CaNikon simply offering those things will zero-out SLR sales in record time is nonsense. SLRs will still be sold alongside those new mirrorless offerings, and likely with SLRs at a slightly cheaper price due to higher volumes and because they see mirrorless as a chance to charge extra.

For sales to flip to 80/20 on units in mirrorless in 2+ years would require CaNikon to brazenly abandon the mirror completely from their biggest cash cow lines and only offer mirrorless products immediately, or to offer initial mirrorless alternatives to SLRs at slashed prices to sway consumers. They are not going to do either of those things.

Mirrorless will take over, but it's going to take a number of camera generations to do it.

- A

 

[BillB]

... I was asking AvTvM a question because I am confused about his assessment of the Canon and Nikon FF mirrorless camera programs. On the one hand, he seems to be saying that they are positioned to get viable mirrorless cameras to market very quickly, yet at other times he seems to be saying they don't have their act together.

what is confusing? I am saying

1. Mirrorless sales are currently still well below DSLR sales *because and ONLY because* there have been no worthwhile offerings from Canon and Nikon who jointly have 75% market share for interchangeable lens cameras.

2. As soon as Canon and Nikon are going to offer worthwhile mirrorless systems both with APS-C sensors and FF sensors, mirrorless sales will quickly exceed DSLR sales. Given the current level of rumor noise regarding Canon and Nikon FF MILC systems, I predict that within 2 years from now 80% of all ILC sales will be mirrorless, 20% will be still DSLRs.

3. DSLR sales will then taper off towards zero over a number of years ... until the last new mirrorslapper is built and sold ... most likely to a collector. ;-) ... I guesstimate around 2026.

And I do NOT see the end of mirrorslappers as a catastrophic event. ;D

So I am neither a "doomsday prophet" nor a Cassandra. If anything you may call me a prophet of new, better things to come ... very soon.

Thanks for clearing that up. My confusion has come from the relationship between Points 1 and Point 2. If I am following you, you are saying that Point 1 is essentially historical and Canon and Nikon are now in the early days of Point 2, which will lead quickly to dominance of the ILS camera market by mirrorless. Obviously, your assessment of the speed of this change, and the ratio between mirrorless and DSLR sales at any point in time is judgmental, and others may differ.

 

[neonlight]

It makes sense that Canon will offer an APSC and FF mirrorless. The speed at which these take over the market from DLSR will depend I think on two factors: (1) a decent fast bright EVF and (2) preferably a global electronic shutter so that there is no need for a conventional shutter either. Completely silent, and if can use EVF professionals might accept them.

With both of these I think that mirrorless could quickly displace DSLRs (say within 5 years) but whether these innovations are ready remains to be seen.

 

[AvTvM]

... I was asking AvTvM a question because I am confused about his assessment of the Canon and Nikon FF mirrorless camera programs. On the one hand, he seems to be saying that they are positioned to get viable mirrorless cameras to market very quickly, yet at other times he seems to be saying they don't have their act together.

what is confusing? I am saying

1. Mirrorless sales are currently still well below DSLR sales *because and ONLY because* there have been no worthwhile offerings from Canon and Nikon who jointly have 75% market share for interchangeable lens cameras.

2. As soon as Canon and Nikon are going to offer worthwhile mirrorless systems both with APS-C sensors and FF sensors, mirrorless sales will quickly exceed DSLR sales. Given the current level of rumor noise regarding Canon and Nikon FF MILC systems, I predict that within 2 years from now 80% of all ILC sales will be mirrorless, 20% will be still DSLRs.

3. DSLR sales will then taper off towards zero over a number of years ... until the last new mirrorslapper is built and sold ... most likely to a collector. ;-) ... I guesstimate around 2026.

And I do NOT see the end of mirrorslappers as a catastrophic event. ;D

So I am neither a "doomsday prophet" nor a Cassandra. If anything you may call me a prophet of new, better things to come ... very soon.

Thanks for clearing that up. My confusion has come from the relationship between Points 1 and Point 2. If I am following you, you are saying that Point 1 is essentially historical and Canon and Nikon are now in the early days of Point 2, which will lead quickly to dominance of the ILS camera market by mirrorless. Obviously, your assessment of the speed of this change, and the ratio between mirrorless and DSLR sales at any point in time is judgmental, and others may differ.

yes. full ack.

 

[Loswr]

what is confusing? I am saying

1. Mirrorless sales are currently still well below DSLR sales *because and ONLY because* there have been no worthwhile offerings from Canon and Nikon who jointly have 75% market share for interchangeable lens cameras.

2. As soon as Canon and Nikon are going to offer worthwhile mirrorless systems both with APS-C sensors and FF sensors, mirrorless sales will quickly exceed DSLR sales. Given the current level of rumor noise regarding Canon and Nikon FF MILC systems, I predict that within 2 years from now 80% of all ILC sales will be mirrorless, 20% will be still DSLRs.

3. DSLR sales will then taper off towards zero over a number of years ... until the last new mirrorslapper is built and sold ... most likely to a collector. ;-) ... I guesstimate around 2026.

And I do NOT see the end of mirrorslappers as a catastrophic event. ;D

So I am neither a "doomsday prophet" nor a Cassandra. If anything you may call me a prophet of new, better things to come ... very soon.

Nothing confusing about what you're saying, except that you are clearly confused by reality.

1. Canon's EOS M series is a worthwhile offering...after all, even you bought one, which would be totally irrelevant if not for the fact that enough others bought M's to give Canon 2nd place in global MILC market share.

2. FF ILCs comprise only a small fraction of total ILC sales, the clear majority of ILCs sold are crop sensors. So, a FF MILC offering from Canon or Nikon isn't going to significantly move the needle from dSLRs to MILCs for the overall market.

3. As stated by ahsanford, dSLR sales won't really taper off relative to MILCs unless and until Canon and Nikon shift their entry-level offerings (Rebel/xxxD and D3xxx/5xxx lines) to mirrorless.

What all your BS really amounts to is that you want Canon to make the camera system you want...a compact FF MILC, packed with every feature you can imagine, and a collection of small, high IQ lenses tailored to your specific wants. You've managed to convince yourself that if Canon makes your heart's desire, it will somehow cause a major shift in the ILC market. At best, that's hubris...but mostly it's just pathetically sad and delusional.