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

[Loswr]

mirrorless will "supplant", replace, make DSLRs obsolete. Just like automobiles supplanted horse-drawn carts and digital cameras supplanted film - even when horse carriages and film cameras can still be used and even bought new by a few people. and the transition will be very soon over the next 2-3 years, not in the distant future.

even the next transition in image capturing is already well underway. "computational photography" gear is making its first forays into the market. first mover lytro did not succeed in mass market, now Light L16 is at the start. we shall see whether it / that concept gets traction or if it is also a bit too ahead of its time.

end result is plain to see: mirrorless allows us to finally jettison mechanical contraptions like flapping mirrors, submirror assemblies, shutter curtains, aperture rings and the like. computational photography will allow us to finally shed the need for those large, heavy, expensive and delicate ground and polished glass blocks called lenses. collecting incoming photons and arranging them neatly into the visual patterns / images we desire can also be handled by an array of small lenses and some smart software in a small camera with incredible image quality - at a fraction of the cost, bulk, size, weight, obtrusiveness of "legacy cameras and optics".

these transitions are not an outcome of feverish dreams and personal wishlists but the result of techno-LOGICAL progress abd hard economic facts ... ability to produce better products at lower costs and sell them at even higher prices is damn attractive in any industry and market. it just makes plain sense. companies who dont board the train in time will be left behind. kodak is there and many others will follow or are in grave danger to follow if they dont move really fast now to catch the right train. just to end this post on a nice little doomsday note.

Mirrorless isn't a paradigm shift. It's not horsecart vs. car or film vs. digital. MILC vs. dSLR are just different formats of ILCs, like Betamax vs. VHS. Remember that the technoLOGICALLY superior product lost that format war. In this case, Canon is already competing —very effectively— in the new format. FF MILC is a niche market, even though you seem to think that particular tail wags the dog.

Computational photography is a potential paradigm shift, but as you say, the first attempt at that failed.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

mirrorless will "supplant", replace, make DSLRs obsolete. Just like automobiles supplanted horse-drawn carts and digital cameras supplanted film - even when horse carriages and film cameras can still be used and even bought new by a few people. and the transition will be very soon over the next 2-3 years, not in the distant future.

even the next transition in image capturing is already well underway. "computational photography" gear is making its first forays into the market. first mover lytro did not succeed in mass market, now Light L16 is at the start. we shall see whether it / that concept gets traction or if it is also a bit too ahead of its time.

end result is plain to see: mirrorless allows us to finally jettison mechanical contraptions like flapping mirrors, submirror assemblies, shutter curtains, aperture rings and the like. computational photography will allow us to finally shed the need for those large, heavy, expensive and delicate ground and polished glass blocks called lenses. collecting incoming photons and arranging them neatly into the visual patterns / images we desire can also be handled by an array of small lenses and some smart software in a small camera with incredible image quality - at a fraction of the cost, bulk, size, weight, obtrusiveness of "legacy cameras and optics".

these transitions are not an outcome of feverish dreams and personal wishlists but the result of techno-LOGICAL progress abd hard economic facts ... ability to produce better products at lower costs and sell them at even higher prices is damn attractive in any industry and market. it just makes plain sense. companies who dont board the train in time will be left behind. kodak is there and many others will follow or are in grave danger to follow if they dont move really fast now to catch the right train. just to end this post on a nice little doomsday note.

The Light L16 technology which is "a bit too ahead of its time" is based on mirrors and lenses. Quote from the Light Technology web site "Using folded optics, the L16 bounces this light off periscopic mirrors, through horizontal lens barrels and onto individual optical sensors. The result is one exquisite 52MP photo, formed from 10+ slightly different perspectives." There is no way that the mirrorless police are going to allow that to happen is there?

 

[AvTvM]

mirrorless cameras, respectively "no more moving parts inside cameras" with all the associated benefits to makers [lower cost] and to users [size/weight, WYSIWIG viewfinder, no noise, no vibration, etc.] is more than enough of a paradigm shift to guarantee total and utter success in the market. DSLRs will be supplanted, just like SLRs have supplanted rangefinder cameras [it does not not matter that a few rangefinders can still be bought new decades later].

Transition is well underway already and will be completed within a short few years. Even the next transition to "truly digital imaging" - supplanting detachable large expensive lenses with in-built arrays of small cheap lenses plus smart software is already in plain sight. [e.g. Light L16 multi-lens array camera].

PS: yes, I do like cheap thrills and blatantly obvious lame pun ... just as much as Neuro

Take this "innovative Canon" ;D

 

[Loswr]

Take this "innovative Canon"

Your graphical commentary is as pithy as your text commentary.

 

[Ozarker]

Let's just not forget: "No more moving parts" also means the camera innards won't be very modular. This is especially true if the design is a thin design. If the sensor and everything else are on the same board, then the whole board needs to be replaced when something goes wrong. Canon is not going to fix things at the component level. Canon will charge for the whole board.

Do printed circuit board assemblies go bad? Darn right they do. I wonder what replacing the guts (All the guts since all on the same board) would cost? On a $3,000 camera? maybe $2,500? My numbers are made up like so many other numbers around here, but you get the point.

Anybody have a main board go bad on a high end DSLR? What did Canon charge to replace it? Just wondering.

Less to go wrong on a mirrorless camera? You mean just because there is no shutter? What about all those components on the board? How many more or less components on a mirrorless camera board? Those parts aren't moving, but they still go bad. Replace a DSLR shutter every 150,000 or more shots? That isn't expensive at all.

 

[dak723]

I love when folks talk about the longer lasting power of electronics as opposed to "mechanical moving parts!" Tell that to all the folks who had mirror-slappers that lasted 20 or 30 years while their electronics and mother boards typically fail in far less time!

As as the few relatively intelligent have pointed out over and over, mirrorless and DSLRs don't compete with one another, are just two variations of an ILC camera, and can peacefully co-exist for the next few decades.

Of course, common sense will be ignored, and the ridiculous rhetoric will now continue for many more pages....

 

[BillB]

mirrorless cameras, respectively "no more moving parts inside cameras" with all the associated benefits to makers [lower cost] and to users [size/weight, WYSIWIG viewfinder, no noise, no vibration, etc.] is more than enough of a paradigm shift to guarantee total and utter success in the market. DSLRs will be supplanted, just like SLRs have supplanted rangefinder cameras [it does not not matter that a few rangefinders can still be bought new decades later].

Transition is well underway already and will be completed within a short few years. Even the next transition to "truly digital imaging" - supplanting detachable large expensive lenses with in-built arrays of small cheap lenses plus smart software is already in plain sight. [e.g. Light L16 multi-lens array camera].

PS: yes, I do like cheap thrills and blatantly obvious lame pun ... just as much as Neuro

Take this "innovative Canon" ;D

If all of this turns out to be true, I would expect a significant shrinkage in the market for FF cameras. I don't see how FF cameras and lenses can compete with aps-c and similar formats on size and price and any FF IQ advantages seem to be shrinking. Optical physics and the production costs of FF sensors are very real things. Small, high IQ 16-35 and 24-70 FF zooms comparable to the current heavy weights are at this point mythical and I doubt this will soon change, whether they are constant F4.0 or not. Certainly Sony's performance so far is not reassuring on this score, or anyone else's for that matter. It looks to me like FF is going to be bigger and more expensive no matter what, so alpine hikers and their ilk are going to tend to carry smaller format cameras, just as they do now.

 

[AvTvM]

Small, high IQ 16-35 and 24-70 FF zooms comparable to the current heavy weights are at this point mythical and I doubt this will soon change, whether they are constant F4.0 or not. Certainly Sony's performance so far is not reassuring on this score, or anyone else's for that matter.

Sony has demonstrated both: how compact a goood FF camera can be [RX1 RII] and how using the designed for APS-C E-mount also for their FF system causes huge problems and way too big lens designs.

Canon could (theoretically) learn from both.

 

[BillB]

Small, high IQ 16-35 and 24-70 FF zooms comparable to the current heavy weights are at this point mythical and I doubt this will soon change, whether they are constant F4.0 or not. Certainly Sony's performance so far is not reassuring on this score, or anyone else's for that matter.

Sony has demonstrated both: how compact a goood FF camera can be [RX1 RII] and how using the designed for APS-C E-mount also for their FF system causes huge problems and way too big lens designs.

Canon could (theoretically) learn from both.

True enough, but another way of saying that is as of now, nobody has a lens mount in production that is suitable for for the strategy that you anticipate, which would seem to lead to some uncertainty about how soon all this is going to happen. In fact, one of the three companies who are to lead us to the mirrorless promised land is committed to a lens mount that doesn't work very well. And then there is Nikon who seems to be making a big bet on the future of DSLR's.
So it may be up to Canon to pull this rabbit out of the hat.

With the RX1R II, Sony did come up with a radical solution to the interchangeable lens mount problem, but that has its limitations as well. Sony may also have demonstrated the pricing issues associated with using a very high end FF sensor.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

mirrorless cameras, respectively "no more moving parts inside cameras" with all the associated benefits to makers [lower cost] and to users [size/weight, WYSIWIG viewfinder, no noise, no vibration, etc.] is more than enough of a paradigm shift to guarantee total and utter success in the market. DSLRs will be supplanted, just like SLRs have supplanted rangefinder cameras [it does not not matter that a few rangefinders can still be bought new decades later].

Transition is well underway already and will be completed within a short few years. Even the next transition to "truly digital imaging" - supplanting detachable large expensive lenses with in-built arrays of small cheap lenses plus smart software is already in plain sight. [e.g. Light L16 multi-lens array camera].

PS: yes, I do like cheap thrills and blatantly obvious lame pun ... just as much as Neuro

Take this "innovative Canon" ;D

This is the type of thing that really annoys me. When I go into a camera shop, above all I want there to be a choice and this will not be possible if one technology replaces all the others "totally and utterly." I have no objection to there being a wide range of mirrorless cameras available, but I also want there to be some alternatives such as DSLRs, compact cameras and range finders. Why the urge to rob everyone of their right to purchase the products they want?
It reminds me of what happened in the mid 1980s when CDs began to replace vinyl records. The major record companies forced the issue by refusing to supply vinyl records to the distributers, offering the CD as a "suitable" replacement. The CDs cost three times as much to buy, they were smaller and lighter making them easier to store and distribute and production costs were very low - it was a no brainer. Some people even argued that CDS were capable of producing a better sound than the same recording on vinyl. Yet 30 years later most of these record companies no longer exist, and the last time I went to one of the few record shops that still exist what did I find? Almost half the shelf space was occupied by vinyl records, that same technology that was doomed and set to be obsolete by the end of the 1980s.

 

[bhf3737]

Let's just not forget: "No more moving parts" also means the camera innards won't be very modular. This is especially true if the design is a thin design. If the sensor and everything else are on the same board, then the whole board needs to be replaced when something goes wrong. Canon is not going to fix things at the component level. Canon will charge for the whole board.

Do printed circuit board assemblies go bad? Darn right they do. I wonder what replacing the guts (All the guts since all on the same board) would cost? On a $3,000 camera? maybe $2,500? My numbers are made up like so many other numbers around here, but you get the point.

Anybody have a main board go bad on a high end DSLR? What did Canon charge to replace it? Just wondering.

Very good point.
From reliability engineering perspective, failure rate (i.e. failure per unit time) of components of a typical electronic system is (<< means much less than):
computing hardware << electro-mechanical hardware << computing software << power unit.
In other words, power unit (batteries, etc.) fails the most and computing printed circuit board should fail the least. However, in recent years, many manufacturers have replaced soldering material with good thermal retention to cheaper material that cracks with frequent temperature changes. This has contributed to finding computing boards fail more and more and their failure rate is now almost in-par with the electro-mechanical hardware parts.
The point is that from failure and longevity perspective there is not much difference between electronic boards with no moving parts and electro-mechanical parts with moving components.
We can also conclude that in camera systems overheating not only affects the sensor but also all the rest of the electronic boards. It will affect longevity and may probably function as a "kill switch".

 

[AvTvM]

In cameras i have no worries re. theoretical lifespan of electronics vs. mech lifespan. Repairs generally have become almost irrelevant in practice. Any sort of failure after warranty period economically pretty much a total loss to customer - in DSLRs as well as in mirrorless cameras. Just consider those latest flat rates for even totally minor repairs Canon is introducing in Japan. Skilled repair people have become way too rare and too expensive.

As long as a digital camera lasts me 5 years without hiccups I am fine. After that I want a newer, improved model anyways. So in practice .. pretty much a moot point.

 

[Ozarker]

Repairs generally have become almost irrelevant in practice. Any sort of failure after warranty period economically pretty much a total loss to customer - in DSLRs as well as in mirrorless cameras.

That isn't true. I had a broken shutter replaced. I believe it cost me about $250. That included a cleaning and tuning. That is far from a total loss. Canon had my camera back to me in a week. Sony would probably still have my camera or say it is unrepairable. I believe the sensor is the most costly part. I'm sure others here have probably had repairs done and can chime in.

 

[bhf3737]

In cameras i have no worries re. theoretical lifespan of electronics vs. mech lifespan. Repairs generally have become almost irrelevant in practice. Any sort of failure after warranty period economically pretty much a total loss to customer - in DSLRs as well as in mirrorless cameras. Just consider those latest flat rates for even totally minor repairs Canon is introducing in Japan. Skilled repair people have become way too rare and too expensive.

As long as a digital camera lasts me 5 years without hiccups I am fine. After that I want a newer, improved model anyways. So in practice .. pretty much a moot point.

A thread of argument in favor of mirrorless cameras was that they are more reliable because of not having moving components. The point is that it is simply not true, and quite the opposite, because of the small form factor and inefficient heat management, poorly designed and rushed mirrorless cameras may fail more frequently.
BTW. Cameras are "professional devices" and are designed to last about 100K TBF (time between failures) equivalent to almost 12 years life span. Service mechanisms are in place to support the users during this period. They are not "toys" that one may get bored with them in 5 years or so!

 

[Loswr]

Cameras are "professional devices" and are designed to last about 100K TBF (time between failures) equivalent to almost 12 years life span. Service mechanisms are in place to support the users during this period. They are not "toys" that one may get bored with them in 5 years or so!

Maybe not to you or me...

 

[DaviSto]

It looks to me like FF is going to be bigger and more expensive no matter what, so alpine hikers and their ilk are going to tend to carry smaller format cameras, just as they do now.

And as crop format cameras get better and better, and smaller and smaller, what have they got to lose and why should they ever be interested in all that heavy FF stuff?

IMHO the competition that lighter/smaller but less ergonomic short flange distance FF ILCs will face in future is increasingly going to be from crop mirrorless bodies. Not in the USA, and not in Europe, but globally, I think Canon already has the highest volume of sales in that segment.

 

[Sporgon]

even the next transition in image capturing is already well underway. "computational photography" gear is making its first forays into the market.

Pah, I've been practicing in computational photography since 2005; I don't see it changed the world

 

[mb66energy]

Hopefully they will do it:

One for the pure EF mount party and
one for the "I want to adapt different things"-party!

A guarantee for more peace in forums and the photo (gear) world

 

[sanj]

;D say 2019..........Sony will have released like 10 full frame models by then.....

CAnon soooo behind, ugh.

Yes, Sony will have released 10 models by then, and they will still all be crap. What does that tell you?

By what standard are the Sony camera's crap sir? Have you used any? I have and they are wonderful.

 

[Sporgon]

• Mirror slap = RIP
  

Canon 5Ds/r = RIP mirrorslap