New DSLR Series Coming in 2018? [CR1]

[AvTvM]

Ummm...cough....a DSLR won't be "mirrorless"....almost by definition, it will have a mirror.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-lens_reflex_camera

To be honest, I could give a fart about whether a camera has a mirror or not, as long as it has a good optical viewfinder.

If they could build an OVF without a mirror, I would be very happy. Just imagine how glorious it would be to have a sensor that allowed through 99% of light, situated in front of a pair of stationary prisms that redirect light into a viewfinder =]

... as "glorious" and likely as icecream served steaming hot on a cold winter's day ... ;-)

smoke, mirrors, prisms, OVFs, aperture levers, chemical film, magnesium flashlights and other such contraptions have no place in digital cameras ... for obvious reasons. i like.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

Ummm...cough....a DSLR won't be "mirrorless"....almost by definition, it will have a mirror.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-lens_reflex_camera

To be honest, I could give a fart about whether a camera has a mirror or not, as long as it has a good optical viewfinder.

If they could build an OVF without a mirror, I would be very happy. Just imagine how glorious it would be to have a sensor that allowed through 99% of light, situated in front of a pair of stationary prisms that redirect light into a viewfinder =]

... as "glorious" and likely as icecream served steaming hot on a cold winter's day ... ;-)

smoke, mirrors, prisms, OVFs, aperture levers, chemical film, magnesium flashlights and other such contraptions have no place in digital cameras ... for obvious reasons. i like.

Nobody has mentioned smoke, aperture levers, chemical film or magnesium flashlights so why confuse the reader by including them in your reply?
Why can't each of us be allowed to choose whether we buy a camera with an OVF or an EVF? An OVF might not suit you but many of us prefer to use an optical viewfinder. Eventually the market will decide whether one of these technologies becomes obsolete.

 

[AvTvM]

Nobody has mentioned smoke, aperture levers, chemical film or magnesium flashlights so why confuse the reader by including them in your reply?
Why can't each of us be allowed to choose whether we buy a camera with an OVF or an EVF? An OVF might not suit you but many of us prefer to use an optical viewfinder. Eventually the market will decide whether one of these technologies becomes obsolete.

Yes. But. Only problem is, that there is PLENTY of choice of cameras with slapping mirrors and big fat heavy prisms in them, while users like me who prefer mirrorless, prism-less, noise-less, vibration-less cameras are NOT given ANY choice. At least not by Canon (or Nikon) and with 36x24mm sensor size ["FF"].

 

[Ian_of_glos]

Nobody has mentioned smoke, aperture levers, chemical film or magnesium flashlights so why confuse the reader by including them in your reply?
Why can't each of us be allowed to choose whether we buy a camera with an OVF or an EVF? An OVF might not suit you but many of us prefer to use an optical viewfinder. Eventually the market will decide whether one of these technologies becomes obsolete.

Yes. But. Only problem is, that there is PLENTY of choice of cameras with slapping mirrors and big fat heavy prisms in them, while users like me who prefer mirrorless, prism-less, noise-less, vibration-less cameras are NOT given ANY choice. At least not by Canon (or Nikon) and with 36x24mm sensor size ["FF"].

I think there is probably a good reason for that.
When you are using the larger, heavier lenses that are required to cover a full frame sensor then the size of the camera body is less of an issue - in fact I would argue that it is an advantage having a large camera body to support the weight of a large, heavy lens that was designed to be used on a full frame camera - such as the Canon 70-200 F2.8. That is exactly what Sony found when they went off down that route. Their full frame mirrorless bodies are smaller than Canon or Nikon full frame DSLRs, but the lenses are the same size and weight. Putting one of the G master lenses such as the 70-200 F2.8 (1.48Kg) on an a7 body (556g) creates a combination that is top heavy and difficult to use.
EVFs do have some disadvantages as well as advantages and there is no point in freeing up the space used by the mirror assembly and pentaprism if it is not necessary to reduce the size of the camera body.

 

[AvTvM]

Nobody has mentioned smoke, aperture levers, chemical film or magnesium flashlights so why confuse the reader by including them in your reply?
Why can't each of us be allowed to choose whether we buy a camera with an OVF or an EVF? An OVF might not suit you but many of us prefer to use an optical viewfinder. Eventually the market will decide whether one of these technologies becomes obsolete.

Yes. But. Only problem is, that there is PLENTY of choice of cameras with slapping mirrors and big fat heavy prisms in them, while users like me who prefer mirrorless, prism-less, noise-less, vibration-less cameras are NOT given ANY choice. At least not by Canon (or Nikon) and with 36x24mm sensor size ["FF"].

I think there is probably a good reason for that.
When you are using the larger, heavier lenses that are required to cover a full frame sensor then the size of the camera body is less of an issue - in fact I would argue that it is an advantage having a large camera body to support the weight of a large, heavy lens that was designed to be used on a full frame camera - such as the Canon 70-200 F2.8. That is exactly what Sony found when they went off down that route. Their full frame mirrorless bodies are smaller than Canon or Nikon full frame DSLRs, but the lenses are the same size and weight. Putting one of the G master lenses such as the 70-200 F2.8 (1.48Kg) on an a7 body (556g) creates a combination that is top heavy and difficult to use.
EVFs do have some disadvantages as well as advantages and there is no point in freeing up the space used by the mirror assembly and pentaprism if it is not necessary to reduce the size of the camera body.

yes. but!
vast majority of all images are NOT captured with lenses above 100mm focal length. I also own 70-200 2.8 II and other L lenses but use them only for planned shootings. For everything else I would like to have an as small and light as possible gear - fully capable FF camera + a few moderately fast compact lenses in focal length range between 24 and 85mm - (pancake) primes and f/4.0 zooms.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

Nobody has mentioned smoke, aperture levers, chemical film or magnesium flashlights so why confuse the reader by including them in your reply?
Why can't each of us be allowed to choose whether we buy a camera with an OVF or an EVF? An OVF might not suit you but many of us prefer to use an optical viewfinder. Eventually the market will decide whether one of these technologies becomes obsolete.

Yes. But. Only problem is, that there is PLENTY of choice of cameras with slapping mirrors and big fat heavy prisms in them, while users like me who prefer mirrorless, prism-less, noise-less, vibration-less cameras are NOT given ANY choice. At least not by Canon (or Nikon) and with 36x24mm sensor size ["FF"].

I think there is probably a good reason for that.
When you are using the larger, heavier lenses that are required to cover a full frame sensor then the size of the camera body is less of an issue - in fact I would argue that it is an advantage having a large camera body to support the weight of a large, heavy lens that was designed to be used on a full frame camera - such as the Canon 70-200 F2.8. That is exactly what Sony found when they went off down that route. Their full frame mirrorless bodies are smaller than Canon or Nikon full frame DSLRs, but the lenses are the same size and weight. Putting one of the G master lenses such as the 70-200 F2.8 (1.48Kg) on an a7 body (556g) creates a combination that is top heavy and difficult to use.
EVFs do have some disadvantages as well as advantages and there is no point in freeing up the space used by the mirror assembly and pentaprism if it is not necessary to reduce the size of the camera body.

yes. but!
vast majority of all images are NOT captured with lenses above 100mm focal length. I also own 70-200 2.8 II and other L lenses but use them only for planned shootings. For everything else I would like to have an as small and light as possible gear - fully capable FF camera + a few moderately fast compact lenses in focal length range between 24 and 85mm - (pancake) primes and f/4.0 zooms.

I think you are probably saying that you should choose the right tool for the job - and I agree.
Where the size and weight of the camera and lens is the most important requirement, for example when you are travelling or for street photography, then I can see that a smaller, mirrorless camera with an MFT or an APS-C sensor would be a good option. However we were talking about full frame cameras, and this suggests that the quality of the image is the primary consideration, rather than the size of the camera. The Canon 70-200 f2.8L is very big but then so are both the Canon and Sony 24-70 F2.8, and these are likely to be lenses below the 100mm focal length that anyone using a full frame camera would consider. The Canon 24-70 F2.8 feels perfect on my 5D mk 4 and I don't think it would feel as comfortable on a smaller camera.
The Sony 24-70 F2.8 is slightly heavier than the Canon (974g vs 805g for the canon) which I think would be feel top heavy on a camera as small as the Sony A7.
The Canon combination feels just right, it gives me the clarity and responsiveness of an optical viewfinder so why the pressure to change to a mirrorless camera? If it ain't broke don't fix it.

 

[Loswr]

yes. but!
vast majority of all images are NOT captured with lenses above 100mm focal length. I also own 70-200 2.8 II and other L lenses but use them only for planned shootings.

You're being your usual astute self, I see...assuming that your usage patterns represent the majority of ILC users. For many years, Canon has bundled an 18-55mm and a 55-250mm lens in Rebel/xxxD 2-lens kits...so perhaps Canon doesn't know what sort of lenses people want (very unlikely given their sales history), or perhaps users are just chucking the 55-250's into the bin (also quite unlikely, given that 'soccer moms and dads' often need a telezoom to photograph their kids' sports), or you simply don't know what you're talking about (very likely, given your posting history on CR).

In addition to the 55-250mm lenses, there are lots of 18-135mm and 18-200mm lenses out there, and 10-20% of the time those are used at the long end (source, since unlike you I am able to provide actual data to support my claims).

But hey, you go right on making ASSumptions and pulling numbers from your nether orifice, and stating all of them as facts. :

 

[AvTvM]

vast majority of all images are NOT captured with lenses above 100mm focal length.

In addition to the 55-250mm lenses, there are lots of 18-135mm and 18-200mm lenses out there, and 10-20% of the time those are used at the long end (source, since unlike you I am able to provide actual data to support my claims).

so even on your "stats source" which draws on 500pix, flickr etc. only but not on instagram, facebook etc. ... you are saying 80-90% of images are NOT shot at the long end ... which is what I'd called "vast majority".

Furthermore even on your stat source, look at the 5 most used lenses ... all of them in the 24-105mm FL range. As per my statements.

Also, I have reported you for the incessant ad hominem attacks and insults you are hurling at me, Neuro. I will consequently do so every time.

 

[Loswr]

so even on your "stats source" which draws on 500pix, flickr etc. only but not on instagram, facebook etc. ... you are saying 80-90% of images are NOT shot at the long end ... which is what I'd called "vast majority".

It's OK if you want to ignore the large 'other' category in the focal length data, I'm sure you just assume that category fits your viewpoint. I mean, 80% of the focal range of a 55-250mm lens is over 100mm, but, just go ahead and ignore that 'other' category.

EDIT: as for your instagram/Facebook comment, if your statement about the 'vast majority of images' was meant to include cell phone cameras, then you are certainly correct about the vast majority being shot with lenses <100mm. Of course, in that case your comment is utterly irrelevant in a discussion on the topic at hand. Not that you have displayed any reluctance to make utterly irrelevant statements.

Also, I have reported you for the incessant ad hominem attacks and insults you are hurling at me, Neuro. I will consequently do so every time.

Go ahead. As I've stated before, if you make unsupported and ridiculous statements, ridicule will ensue. Reasonable, logical statements will beget responses of similar ilk.

 

[Mikehit]

so even on your "stats source" which draws on 500pix, flickr etc. only but not on instagram, facebook etc. ... you are saying 80-90% of images are NOT shot at the long end ... which is what I'd called "vast majority".

Furthermore even on your stat source, look at the 5 most used lenses ... all of them in the 24-105mm FL range. As per my statements.

Also, I have reported you for the incessant ad hominem attacks and insults you are hurling at me, Neuro. I will consequently do so every time.

Do you know how many images are cropped to mimic a photo taken longer than 100mm? I don't...
Do you know how many of those lenses were used on APS-C with an effective focal length longer than 100mm? I don't...

I think taking metrics from a sample that represents 15% of the total images is pushing things...

 

[AvTvM]

you can argue all you want. The vast majority of stills images captured is done so with lenses between 24 and about 100mm [FF FOV equivalent]. Crops in post are a different story. Should not be mixed up.

 

[Loswr]

you can argue all you want. The vast majority of stills images captured is done so with lenses between 24 and about 100mm [FF FOV equivalent]. Crops in post are a different story. Should not be mixed up.

You can repeat yourself as often as you want, but that doesn't make you correct. It does however, make you annoying.

 

[Mikehit]

Crops in post are a different story. Should not be mixed up.

Crops are important. They show you the image the person wishes to have taken. I would venture that many people with something like a 5D3 will have a medium telephoto in their bag, and it is equally likely that on the day they went for a walk with the family they wanted to travel light and decided to leave the telephoto at home and crop the wider image.
Mine is an opinion. Yours is an opinion. But taking the metrics from a sample of 15% and applying that to the whole population then stating it as 'fact' is pure sophistry.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

you can argue all you want. The vast majority of stills images captured is done so with lenses between 24 and about 100mm [FF FOV equivalent]. Crops in post are a different story. Should not be mixed up.

You can repeat yourself as often as you want, but that doesn't make you correct. It does however, make you annoying.

It doesn't really matter. The point I was trying to make was that high quality lenses that were designed for full frame cameras tend to be large. My favourite lens is the Canon 35mm F1.4L ii. Its focal length is well below 100mm and yet at 760g it is more than 200g heavier than a Sony A7ii (body only).

 

[Jopa]

mirrorless ... noise-less, vibration-less cameras

Apparently you've never shot the original A7r

 

[AvTvM]

mirrorless ... noise-less, vibration-less cameras

Apparently you've never shot the original A7r

the totally inadequate shutter on A7 first series was pne of the main reasons i did notcswitch back then but biught another Canon mirrorslapper (5D3) ... definitely my last one however. depending on eventual canon FF Milc and Sony A7/R III (dont need A9 machine gun, 5-6 fps is enough for my shooting) ... and possible Nikon FF Milc ... will decide my next system.

 

[Loswr]

you can argue all you want. The vast majority of stills images captured is done so with lenses between 24 and about 100mm [FF FOV equivalent]. Crops in post are a different story. Should not be mixed up.

You can repeat yourself as often as you want, but that doesn't make you correct. It does however, make you annoying.

It doesn't really matter. The point I was trying to make was that high quality lenses that were designed for full frame cameras tend to be large. My favourite lens is the Canon 35mm F1.4L ii. Its focal length is well below 100mm and yet at 760g it is more than 200g heavier than a Sony A7ii (body only).

Agreed, look at Sony's G-Master series. The only thing likely to change that in the future is the implementation of curved sensors.

 

[ahsanford]

Agreed, look at Sony's G-Master series. The only thing likely to change that in the future is the implementation of curved sensors.

+1. No room for your fingers, in many cases physically longer than their EF counterparts, focus-by-wire [throw up in mouth face] and overpriced to boot. Pass.

- A

 

[James Larsen]

What I want to see is Canon be a little more innovative. The 6DII is really a disappointment in quite a few ways. Not saying it's a bad camera - it's good. But it should've been better.

Anyway, a camera like the 80D with 4k video (C-Log, not that MJPEG format), 1080 120fps, peaking, zebras, and a little bit better ISO performance would be an awesome all-rounder.
Really wish Canon would put out something like that...

 

[Ozarker]

For the second time in the last couple of months, we’re being told that a new DSLR series will be announced some time in 2018.
Neither source could name the series, only that it appeared as a “new DSLR series” in a presentation.
If we’re thinking out loud, I think these would be the obvious candidates.
EOS Cinema DSLR - A cinema DSLR camera to replace the discontinued EOS-1D C. This has been talked about numerous times over the years.
EOS-1D Xs - A high megapixel pro series body. Since the amalgamation of the 1D line back in 2009, we’ve always wondered if we’d get a camera like this to truly replace the EOS-1Ds Mark III.
EOS APS-C Cinema DSLR - A cheaper 4K cinema alternative that would “protect” the Cinema EOS lineup of cameras.
Hopefully this will bring a bit more information to the surface. For the moment, this is a [CR1] rumor, so please treat it as such.

...and maybe a Full Frame Mirrorless.

Some think that the EOS numbering has recently become stable ad predictable even for the M series.

No complete overlap between DSLRs and Mirrorless, but it could sound like:
100D/200D in Europe (SL1/2 in other Countries) and EOS M100: basic and small models
6D and M6: enthusiast models
5D and M5: more advanced models
Therefore, I expect to see a M1 (full frame mirrorless) as ambitious as a 1D(x).
We'll see.

Except that a M6 does not equal a 6D. An M5 does not equal a 5D.