New diffractive optics super telephoto lenses on the way, with a new twist….. [CR1]

[Talys]

Canon glass is what it has over them whether you have existing glass or not. That and ergonomics + DPAF.



Is this more than a meme? Anyone have actual numbers? The bottom end of the 35mm film SLR market, before digital took over, would seem to prove that an SLR is not expensive to manufacture. Heck, some of those bodies may have been cheaper than an EVF all by itself.



You've never looked at CIPA sales reports, have you?

Yeah, if only mirrorless cameras were much cheaper and had features they don't, and were just better the things they're not so good at, we'd all have them and never look back.

It's just goalpost shifting: mirrorless cameras were going to totally dominate DSLR until they didn't, when it became all about full frame mirrorless, until everybody made them, and not it's all about them not being good enough and cheap enough.

If DSLRs were going to spiral to a quick death, it would have started with APSCs, but t6 remains firmly the best selling crop ILC. It really doesn't matter how many hundreds of times AvTvM/fullstop/Mirage and the like repeat it, mirrors and optical viewfinders aren't going to go to the grave anytime soon.

The a6500, m6 and m50 are all super capable cameras, yet DSLR crop cameras soldier on. If they can't do it, how are $2000+bodies going to?

 

[Talys]

Must buy Canon camera. EF lens I buy adapter + Sony body.

Adapter + EF + Sony body <<< Canon R.

The autofocus and the 'it just works factor' is so much better that usability isn't really comparable. If you want a Sony sensor, just sell the Canon and buy FE.

 

[tron]

Again, I can’t see many 1D series users being satisfied with the EOS R, so either Canon are condemning the 600 DO to poor sales, or they are planning to release an “EOS R Pro” around the same time.

Regarding your “adapter + Sony body” comment, at first I dismissed this as internet conspiracy talk, but then I remembered the fuss about RF not being adaptable to EOS M and the thought struck me that perhaps it was a conscious decision made by Canon, but it was actually to ensure that RF lenses are incompatible with Sony FE mount.... Wow, now I’m starting internet conspiracy theories!

Even EOS R Pro wouldn't cut it. Unless they make a high Mpixel mirrorless I for example would stay with my 5DsR + 400 DO II combination. Much cheaper (actually free since I already have it), smaller and most probably lighter. Also they should realize that they have a serious mirror compatible lense competitor: the Nikkor 500mm f/5.6 and act accordingly.

 

[BeenThere]

Wouldn't a 600mm DO lens for the RF mount practically the same size and weight as the equivalent EF 600mm DO lens with an EF-RF adapter? What would be the point of making RF-only supertelephoto lenses?

Because EF mount is being phased out. In two years time, practically all new ff lenses will be R mount. The older lens will still work with the adapter, but who wants to use an adapter if you don’t have to use it.

 

[tron]

Because EF mount is being phased out. In two years time, practically all new ff lenses will be R mount. The older lens will still work with the adapter, but who wants to use an adapter if you don’t have to use it.

That's why they introduced new version III EF telephoto lenses...

 

[BeenThere]

That's why they introduced new version III EF telephoto lenses...

Yes, the new v3 teles are end of the line for EF. They will be perfectly fine lenses for many years to come, and those who cling to their mirror slappers will make extraordinary images with them. But next gen will be R only.

 

[Stuart]

Whats the twist - RF?
Or a new DO tech?

 

[snoke]

but then I remembered the fuss about RF not being adaptable to EOS M and the thought struck me that perhaps it was a conscious decision made by Canon, but it was actually to ensure that RF lenses are incompatible with Sony FE mount.... Wow, now I’m starting internet conspiracy theories!

Not conspiracy. Business plan.

Canon, Nikon, Sony. All want sell camera + lens. Not just camera. Not just lens.

Use Sony + adapters then any lens. Bad business plan for Sony/Nikon/Canon. Give consumer big lens choice. Good for us.

 

[tron]

I wonder if all of you fortune tellers that predict the end of DSLRs and the EF line use Canon equipment or you are mostly internet surfers... SONY lovers - but of course not Sony owners - included...

 

[stochasticmotions]

What I am really interested in is the other part of the rumour...a couple other DO lenses. I'm hoping that something like the nikon 500 5.6 might be coming and even more interesting would be a new DO zoom. This time it would be great to see something longer than the 70-300, maybe a 200-600 DO at 5.6. Either way, a lighter and longer travel kit that can come with me on planes where they weigh you with your kit would be amazing with what ever the next EOS R camera brings.

 

[criscokkat]

Whats the twist - RF?
Or a new DO tech?

Both, I think.

https://cpn.canon-europe.com/conten...es/multi_layer_diffractive_optical_element.do

If you look at the canon page above on the DO 400 there are additional considerations to think about. The light is bent on a much more severe path on the DO lens, which means it needs to be straightened out again to deal with the longer distance on the EF lens to the sensor. Since mirrorless is closer to the rear lens, they might be able to actually get rid of the straightening lens that you see in the EF DO lens illustration as the location of that lens element is pretty close to where the sensor will be.

We know canon made very little changes to the electronics on the sensor compared to the 5dIV, but there were reports that one of the changes were on the microlenses on the surface of the sensor. Maybe they've optimized it to work with more severe light angles? That means it could dramatically shorter. It also seems like it's much harder to do IS in a DO lens than a normal lens - but if the other rumors of future cameras having in-camera IS it could be quite a package.

 

[nchoh]

Yeah, if only mirrorless cameras were much cheaper and had features they don't, and were just better the things they're not so good at, we'd all have them and never look back.

It's just goalpost shifting: mirrorless cameras were going to totally dominate DSLR until they didn't, when it became all about full frame mirrorless, until everybody made them, and not it's all about them not being good enough and cheap enough.

If DSLRs were going to spiral to a quick death, it would have started with APSCs, but t6 remains firmly the best selling crop ILC. It really doesn't matter how many hundreds of times AvTvM/fullstop/Mirage and the like repeat it, mirrors and optical viewfinders aren't going to go to the grave anytime soon.

The a6500, m6 and m50 are all super capable cameras, yet DSLR crop cameras soldier on. If they can't do it, how are $2000+bodies going to?

The T6 is the best selling ILC because it hits the sweet spot of price, IQ and usability. For example, I had a couple of years playing with my T2i with some really nice glass. When it came time I couldn't justify the price of a 7D2 and settled for the T6s. I had a bump up in fps, a bump up in mp and a bump up in usability (more focus points and a tilty-flippy touch screen).

I believe that Canon will move as fast as possible to establish the EOS R in order to thwart Sony's market share expansion. However, I also believe that Canon will manage their market segmentation carefully, hence, they will not ditch EF lenses nor DSLRs just because it seems like the hot topic on this site. Indeed, Canon will keep producing DSLRs as long as consumers want to buy them and they are profitable to sell.

The question remains as to what the future Canon lineup will look like. Nobody has really ventured a guess because nobody really knows. Take the 7D2 for example, we all know it's Canon BIF shooter. We know what the 5D series is for; serious photographers. Will a single capable R camera replace them both? How about the 6D? It's the low-end FF DSLR. With cheaper camera prices, does it make sense to have a low end MILC? How will the 2 lines coexist? I think it will take at least 2 years for Canon to figure out their longer term strategy on how to position their DSLR and MILC lines alongside each other.

 

[Adrianf]

Canon has to remember that with mirrorless it is now competing not only with other manufacturers but also with its own DSLR products. I just hope that its loyal customers are not pushed into something inferior just to get rid of a mirror. The new stuff has to be better than the equivalent DSLR in every respect. As for the big whites, who really cares about a few grams when the kit weighs kilograms. IMHO they should stick to EF mount until pro DSLR sales are dead, thus leaving everyone's options open.

 

[tron]

Canon has to remember that with mirrorless it is now competing not only with other manufacturers but also with its own DSLR products. I just hope that its loyal customers are not pushed into something inferior just to get rid of a mirror. The new stuff has to be better than the equivalent DSLR in every respect. As for the big whites, who really cares about a few grams when the kit weighs kilograms. IMHO they should stick to EF mount until pro DSLR sales are dead, thus leaving everyone's options open.

Right now EOS R competes with 6D2. Even 5DIV is better not only in battery and in having dual cards but on sensor too having more DR - the EOS R sensor shows banding sooner than 5DIV a step backward. Intrestingly enough this is the same with NIkon. D850's sensor being better than Z7's (in the same way).

 

[NancyP]

The mirrorless camera that I want is the full-frame Foveon sensor Sigma Quattro ILC, and its announced EF to Quattro adapter (and Nikon F mount to Quattro adapter). The Sigma sensor has its own look, and if you work within its limitations (needs low ISO), the files are lovely. This is a camera intended for landscape, architecture, static macro, other non-action photography. However, I hope that Sigma also works on its ergonomics, on the in-camera processing speed, and on the Sigma Photo Pro (SPP) RAW converter / editor. And, maybe a battery grip, because mirrorless cameras, esp. Sigma Foveon, are battery eaters. Yes, upcoming Quattro full frame will have DNG option, but SPP editor is designed for the sensor native RAW file, and ought to be polished up (admittedly, my experience is with the relatively small Sigma DP Merrill APS-C size sensor fixed-prime-lens cameras, which produce native RAW files (.x3f) approx. 50 M each).

For action and general use, the mirrorslappers are my go-to.

 

[NancyP]

The 6D is also the camera for low light and astrolandscape photography, adapted lenses, manual focus lenses (because it has interchangeable screens). I am using it until it dies, same with 7D2. So far, 20 MP is enough for the small prints I make.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Sean.
I think what you are actually seeing is the difference poking 11.1v (1 series) in to a focus motor versus the 7.2v (7,6,5 series) normally used makes when driving the focus system. I believe I have read from Canon that is why the 1 series drive the lenses faster.
I guess they could give all their cameras the built in grip needed for the bigger battery, then they could all drive the lenses at the same speed but then they would all be 1 Series bodies and they would have to differentiate them some other way.
It’s just the same as leaving out the aircon and central locking on a base model car!

Cheers, Graham.

I only have to move a lens from a 1D body to a 5D or 7D and compare focus speed to see they do alter lens performance to product differentiate bodies.

 

[Sean C]

Hi Sean.
I think what you are actually seeing is the difference poking 11.1v (1 series) in to a focus motor versus the 7.2v (7,6,5 series) <snip> 1 Series bodies and they would have to differentiate them some other way.
It’s just the same as leaving out the aircon and central locking on a base model car!

Yep. That's an intentional design choice though. If they chose, they could have a standard voltage and drive with more current on the 1D or a lower series with a battery grip. You just adjust the focus motor winding gauge/turns to the voltage.
My point was that they play segmentation games now to artificially make one body better. If they want a quick transition, they could 'fix' RF performance disparities by artificially limiting new EF bodies. They do that now...

 

[Talys]

Whether we favor mirrorless over DSLR or not, fact is that if Canon wants to compete with Sony, they need "native" super tele lenses, or, to put it differently, a full line of EOS R lenses.
I think this has already started with with what could be the world's best standard zoom (2/28-70) and the 1,2/50 mm, maybe the DO superteles will follow....

All Canon has to do to create native super telephotos is build the converter into the existing EF and add an additional control ring. Presto, native RF. There's nothing optically wrong with the existing EF supertelephotos, they're not going to get smaller, and they're not going to get lighter (due to a RF mount change).

The real question is, who is going to rush out to buy an RF 200-400.

I hope everyone, so that I can buy a cheap EF 200-400 While they are at it, they can sell me their 1DX2 for cheap too

 

[Talys]

Yep. That's an intentional design choice though. If they chose, they could have a standard voltage and drive with more current on the 1D or a lower series with a battery grip. You just adjust the focus motor winding gauge/turns to the voltage.
My point was that they play segmentation games now to artificially make one body better. If they want a quick transition, they could 'fix' RF performance disparities by artificially limiting new EF bodies. They do that now...

But then the batteries wouldn't last as long on the smaller bodies, or, all bodies would need bigger batteries, which isn't really desirable to some people (not everyone wants a 1D sized body, right?). They could get creative and make it so a gripped 5D performed better than an ungripped 5D, too.

But anyways, the successful manufacturer balances featureset and price point across their portfolio, which Canon does pretty well, in my opinion. For everyone that complains that lower end bodies are more limited than higher end bodies, would it be preferable if Sony, Nikon and Canon only made one camera each, their best camera, and they were all priced at $3,500?

I think most people who say, "I don't like how Canon artificially limits..." are really saying, "There are features I really like in the 1D, but I don't want to pay that much for it."