New Full Frame Camera in 2014? [CR1]

[Don Haines]

This actually makes sense to me, although I've been skeptical about Canon's "need" to release a high megapixel full frame camera.

I'll go back to a prediction I make quite a while back – I can see Canon releasing a "5D HD" that offers a pixel density somewhere in the same neighborhood as the 7D (46 mp), perhaps a little less. Same body, same basic functionality (with a slower frame rate likely) just a new sensor and maybe a little faster processor.

It would give customers a choice, but keep their production costs down since many of the components could be shared by both bodies. Canon has seen the D800 sales figures, so they know that high megapixels aren't in huge demand, but they probably also know there is a small subset of customers that will pay a premium for more resolution. Give them what they want, but keep the production costs down.

Even in the face of this rumor which is contrary to some of your predictions, you're still falling back on them? The main thing I notice in this rumor, is that the "3D" will have 4k video capability. That is not "the same basic functionality" as a 5D3. This model is obviously intended to be upmarket from the 5D3. Slower frame rates for stills, no doubt...but it's going to be able to do a lot more video-wise.

I don`t think they will name it `3D`because its misleading... people will think that it can do 3D video...

Really? I know people in general are pretty stupid but THAT stupid?...
dunno

Why do you think there is no 2D? Sales would be flat

 

[tron]

I have looked closely at the A7r for that reason but there seem to be three big question marks - light leak, AF performance and IQ when using an EF adaptor.

Add to them the shutter vibration issue and the raw files with lossy compression...

 

[dslrdummy]

As you point out, the only people who have to wait are brand loyalists. Obviously some people have to be, but those who don't might as well do what some of us have done and supplement our Canon bodies with an A7r. I love mine, both with its superb native primes and my Canon EF lenses (plus a few old manual focus lenses) - so much so that I'm not sure which is my second camera....

I'm not necessarily a brand loyalist but the economic reality is that I have invested in Canon and to change to a completely incompatible brand now isn't feasible for me. I have looked closely at the A7r for that reason but there seem to be three big question marks - light leak, AF performance and IQ when using an EF adaptor. You clearly love your A7r but what is your experience with these issues if you don't mind me asking?

I don't mind at all.

1. It's not a "completely incompatible" system; they overlap. Whether they overlap enough for your purposes I can't say, of course. I would also say that for many people a complete switch to Sony wouldn't be sensible or desirable, and that I have no intention of doing so. For me it's a marvelous adjunct which, in some situations, would be my go-to camera - at least until Canon comes up with a close substitute (high resolution, mirrorless, no loss of EF performance, etc. - preferably with IBIS...).

2. The light leak applies under very limited circumstances, apparently (very long exposures in near-total darkness but with a bright light hitting part of the lens mount), and doesn't only apply to Sony cameras. Check out Roger Cicala's blog post on the subject at lensrentals. I never shoot in such conditions, so it's simply not an issue for me (or, I suspect, for 99.9% of people 99.9% of the time). The shutter-shock problem is far more real (see below).

3. AF performance with EF lenses is unquestionably inferior in terms of speed - it's not *that* slow, but if you're used to the near-instantaneous focusing you get with the best Canon lens/body combinations it will seem slow (rather comical too - it ambles towards the subject, pauses, goes a bit beyond and then comes back); and it's slow compared to native FE lenses, of course. But it's probably not inferior in terms of accuracy; in some respects it's superior: one benefit of a mirrorless body is that with on-sensor focusing there's no need to worry about back/front focusing. If you plan to use it to photograph things that don't move, it's not an issue. But don't even consider it if you want to photograph sports, children running around, herons-catching-fish, etc. and rely on AF to do so.

4. As for IQ, I've used these EF lenses: 24-105L, 28mm 2.8 IS, 40mm, 85mm 1.8, 100 L (no AF with this, but the other electronic connections work) and 70-200 f4 IS. I haven't performed anything resembling a scientific comparison of these lenses on the A7R vs 5DIII or 6D, but I feel confident in saying that not only is the image quality not inferior on the Sony body it's probably superior (I was shocked by the superb image quality I was able to get from the 85mm 1.8 when I first attached it).

At the time I decided to buy an A7R I had used one exclusively with Canon lenses - it was because the results were so good that I wanted one, and it was not until I had owned it for a while that I bought the two native FE primes; they're superb too, especially the remarkable 55mm 1.8.

Having said all that, there may well be Canon lenses that don't work as well on the two Sony A7s - I have no first hand knowledge one way or another - but based on what I've read the main problems are with wide angle Leica lenses due to a design that simply doesn't apply to Canon lenses. I would also add that if you want to use old Canon MF lenses, it's far easier to manually focus on a mirrorless camera (thanks to magnification and focus peaking) than it is on any dslr, especially if you use wide apertures; and Sony's focus peaking and magnification work at least as well as anyone else's.

5. One flaw you didn't mention is the much-discussed shutter-shock. This is real, and, in my experience, shows up if your shutter speed is 1/100-1/125, regardless of the lens (apparently it's worse if you use a tripod, but I don't and thus can't comment). It doesn't seem to be a problem at other speeds, including slower speeds (though you may encounter the usual too-slow-shutter problems if you're not using a lens with IS; IS has no effect on shutter-shock, of course); I've taken plenty of sharp photos at 1/60 (a speed these cameras seem inordinately fond of if you let them decide the shutter speed). If you avoid 1/100-1/125 you'll be fine.

I hope some of this helps. Far more competent/savvy/knowledgeable people than I have written about all of this, though, so don't rely too much on what I've written!

That's very helpful, many thanks for taking the time.

 

[mkabi]

This actually makes sense to me, although I've been skeptical about Canon's "need" to release a high megapixel full frame camera.

I'll go back to a prediction I make quite a while back – I can see Canon releasing a "5D HD" that offers a pixel density somewhere in the same neighborhood as the 7D (46 mp), perhaps a little less. Same body, same basic functionality (with a slower frame rate likely) just a new sensor and maybe a little faster processor.

It would give customers a choice, but keep their production costs down since many of the components could be shared by both bodies. Canon has seen the D800 sales figures, so they know that high megapixels aren't in huge demand, but they probably also know there is a small subset of customers that will pay a premium for more resolution. Give them what they want, but keep the production costs down.

Even in the face of this rumor which is contrary to some of your predictions, you're still falling back on them? The main thing I notice in this rumor, is that the "3D" will have 4k video capability. That is not "the same basic functionality" as a 5D3. This model is obviously intended to be upmarket from the 5D3. Slower frame rates for stills, no doubt...but it's going to be able to do a lot more video-wise.

I don`t think they will name it `3D`because its misleading... people will think that it can do 3D video...

Really? I know people in general are pretty stupid but THAT stupid?...
dunno

Well, think about it... how would you explain to a friend who doesn`t know anything about DSLRs?

Sample conversation (the conversation doesn't have to go this particular way... just hypothetically):

You: Yo Canon is releasing the 3D... or... did you check out the new Canon 3D?
Friend: What is a Canon 3D?
You: Well, its a DSLR camera that shoots both stills and video
Friend: Does it do 3D video?
You: Ummmm... no....
Friend: Then why call it 3D?
You: **Shrug** Internal conversation with your own self - I knew they shouldn't have called it the 3D... stupid... stupid... stupid...

 

[atkinsonphoto]

Just picked up the new 4D from the future store. Timespace will never look the same again. It's got slo-time exposure and fast forward frame rates of 10 seconds+. AF connects seamlessly to my neck chip/eye link/contact lens. The contact is a 12-400mm L IS-TS (Time Stablization). What a multiverse monster!

 

[JohnDizzo15]

I'd like to see quad-pixel technology come out... with a sensor where you can bin all four sub-pixels together and have a 10Megapixel FF sensor with kick-ass low light capacity or access the sub-pixels and have a 40Megapixel high resolution sensor....

Intriguing

 

[Lawliet]

I'd like to see quad-pixel technology come out... with a sensor where you can bin all four sub-pixels together and have a 10Megapixel FF sensor with kick-ass low light capacity or access the sub-pixels and have a 40Megapixel high resolution sensor....

Phase One beat you on that idea!
Admitted, going from ISO800 to ISO3200 that way won't get anybody from FF/APS-C-Land excited, but the idea is there.

 

[wickidwombat]

This actually makes sense to me, although I've been skeptical about Canon's "need" to release a high megapixel full frame camera.

I'll go back to a prediction I make quite a while back – I can see Canon releasing a "5D HD" that offers a pixel density somewhere in the same neighborhood as the 7D (46 mp), perhaps a little less. Same body, same basic functionality (with a slower frame rate likely) just a new sensor and maybe a little faster processor.

It would give customers a choice, but keep their production costs down since many of the components could be shared by both bodies. Canon has seen the D800 sales figures, so they know that high megapixels aren't in huge demand, but they probably also know there is a small subset of customers that will pay a premium for more resolution. Give them what they want, but keep the production costs down.

Even in the face of this rumor which is contrary to some of your predictions, you're still falling back on them? The main thing I notice in this rumor, is that the "3D" will have 4k video capability. That is not "the same basic functionality" as a 5D3. This model is obviously intended to be upmarket from the 5D3. Slower frame rates for stills, no doubt...but it's going to be able to do a lot more video-wise.

I don`t think they will name it `3D`because its misleading... people will think that it can do 3D video...

Really? I know people in general are pretty stupid but THAT stupid?...
dunno

Well, think about it... how would you explain to a friend who doesn`t know anything about DSLRs?

Sample conversation (the conversation doesn't have to go this particular way... just hypothetically):

You: Yo Canon is releasing the 3D... or... did you check out the new Canon 3D?
Friend: What is a Canon 3D?
You: Well, its a DSLR camera that shoots both stills and video
Friend: Does it do 3D video?
You: Ummmm... no....
Friend: Then why call it 3D?
You: **Shrug** Internal conversation with your own self - I knew they shouldn't have called it the 3D... stupid... stupid... stupid...

you should give yourself an uppercut for having that conversation with someone that knows nothing about cameras in the first place, as 1) they dont care 2) would rather take selfies for their social media outlet of choice with their phone...

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

The reason they haven't come out with the thing you personally want is that they don't have to. They will produce new products when the market demands them. Until then, they'll milk (MILC?) the R&D they already have invested in the current line.

Granted the camera business is much different so this is maybe slightly sketchy of a comparison, but such an attitude isn't always the best for a company. Look at Atari, the engineers wanted them to release an advanced new computer with GUI and mouse and multi-tasking and crazy level graphics and audio but the management said they hadn't finished milking the old 8bit line yet and saw no point in it. Who uses an Atari home computer today? Plenty of other such cases.

Canon is a large, diversified company with a lot of R&D and clever management. I would be surprised if they don't have the basic tech available when the need (==strong market pressure) arises. If some other company starts out-competing the 5D3 and 1DX, I am confident that Canon can match their products in a year or less.

The fact that Canon HAS not put advanced tech in the cameras does not mean they CAN not do so.

I'm not sure they have had the tech for more DR and it didn't seem like they cared enough early on. Anyway, Atari had the tech and the point is they didn't use it until well they didn't have enough money left to use it and the tech went to CBM and by that time the MAC had already come out (and while vastly inferior, all the Apple fanboys and Windows fanboys made it hard for anything to strike at that point with the impact it could have had it arrived earlier). But anyway the two scenarios are different.

 

[Lawliet]

I'm not sure they have had the tech for more DR and it didn't seem like they cared enough early on. A

What could stop them from reading the individual sensor cells of a dual pixel at different amplifications? Blending the exposures isn't exactly beyond high school math either. I.e. thats what you can get via Magic Lantern, just without the potential resolution loss, because you don't have to fall back to sensels that where meant to provide spatial data.

 

[CarlTN]

This actually makes sense to me, although I've been skeptical about Canon's "need" to release a high megapixel full frame camera.

I'll go back to a prediction I make quite a while back – I can see Canon releasing a "5D HD" that offers a pixel density somewhere in the same neighborhood as the 7D (46 mp), perhaps a little less. Same body, same basic functionality (with a slower frame rate likely) just a new sensor and maybe a little faster processor.

It would give customers a choice, but keep their production costs down since many of the components could be shared by both bodies. Canon has seen the D800 sales figures, so they know that high megapixels aren't in huge demand, but they probably also know there is a small subset of customers that will pay a premium for more resolution. Give them what they want, but keep the production costs down.

Even in the face of this rumor which is contrary to some of your predictions, you're still falling back on them? The main thing I notice in this rumor, is that the "3D" will have 4k video capability. That is not "the same basic functionality" as a 5D3. This model is obviously intended to be upmarket from the 5D3. Slower frame rates for stills, no doubt...but it's going to be able to do a lot more video-wise.

I don`t think they will name it `3D`because its misleading... people will think that it can do 3D video...

Really? I know people in general are pretty stupid but THAT stupid?...
dunno

Well, think about it... how would you explain to a friend who doesn`t know anything about DSLRs?

Sample conversation (the conversation doesn't have to go this particular way... just hypothetically):

You: Yo Canon is releasing the 3D... or... did you check out the new Canon 3D?
Friend: What is a Canon 3D?
You: Well, its a DSLR camera that shoots both stills and video
Friend: Does it do 3D video?
You: Ummmm... no....
Friend: Then why call it 3D?
You: **Shrug** Internal conversation with your own self - I knew they shouldn't have called it the 3D... stupid... stupid... stupid...

you should give yourself an uppercut for having that conversation with someone that knows nothing about cameras in the first place, as 1) they dont care 2) would rather take selfies for their social media outlet of choice with their phone...

Lol @ "give yourself an uppercut".

I only used the term "3D" because that's what was referred to in the ongoing rumor. I doubt they would call it "3D" also...they'd probably calling "EOS Ashton Kutcher Butcher"...

 

[Don Haines]

What about a 4D? It's just a matter of time

 

[wickidwombat]

What about a 4D? It's just a matter of time

No then all the Physicists would get confused they might think it were referring to advanced hypothetical spacial relationships beyond the current acknowledged 3 Dimensions... :-*

 

[Hannes]

What about a 4D? It's just a matter of time

No then all the Physicists would get confused they might think it were referring to advanced hypothetical spacial relationships beyond the current acknowledged 3 Dimensions... :-*

erm, you mean four? Or was it eleven

 

[mkabi]

What about a 4D? It's just a matter of time

No then all the Physicists would get confused they might think it were referring to advanced hypothetical spacial relationships beyond the current acknowledged 3 Dimensions... :-*

Why do you think they went from 1D and then straight to 5D?
Bypassing 2D, 3D and 4D... then 7D.... whoops we missed the 6D so lets fill that space too...
I don't think they would ever do a 2D, 3D or 4D... simply because its a pun waiting to happen...

 

[Ivan Muller]

As you point out, the only people who have to wait are brand loyalists. Obviously some people have to be, but those who don't might as well do what some of us have done and supplement our Canon bodies with an A7r. I love mine, both with its superb native primes and my Canon EF lenses (plus a few old manual focus lenses) - so much so that I'm not sure which is my second camera....

Thanks for your impressions! the A7R , with its few drawbacks, like shuttershock, slower ef- AF still seems ideal if you want a hefty resolution increase over the 20-22mp Canon sensors. Its available now, we now what the drawbacks are, and its considerably cheaper than a 5d3 and only slightly more than a 6d. Whats not to like?

It seems ideal paired with Canon mf lenses like the 24ts, which I have, and which I many times wished that it was attached to a more dense sensor. The Canons work fien except when you want to print large. I have a HP Z2100 44 inch printer and its very easy to see when sensors fall apart on paper...

I'm not necessarily a brand loyalist but the economic reality is that I have invested in Canon and to change to a completely incompatible brand now isn't feasible for me. I have looked closely at the A7r for that reason but there seem to be three big question marks - light leak, AF performance and IQ when using an EF adaptor. You clearly love your A7r but what is your experience with these issues if you don't mind me asking?

I don't mind at all.

1. It's not a "completely incompatible" system; they overlap. Whether they overlap enough for your purposes I can't say, of course. I would also say that for many people a complete switch to Sony wouldn't be sensible or desirable, and that I have no intention of doing so. For me it's a marvelous adjunct which, in some situations, would be my go-to camera - at least until Canon comes up with a close substitute (high resolution, mirrorless, no loss of EF performance, etc. - preferably with IBIS...).

2. The light leak applies under very limited circumstances, apparently (very long exposures in near-total darkness but with a bright light hitting part of the lens mount), and doesn't only apply to Sony cameras. Check out Roger Cicala's blog post on the subject at lensrentals. I never shoot in such conditions, so it's simply not an issue for me (or, I suspect, for 99.9% of people 99.9% of the time). The shutter-shock problem is far more real (see below).

3. AF performance with EF lenses is unquestionably inferior in terms of speed - it's not *that* slow, but if you're used to the near-instantaneous focusing you get with the best Canon lens/body combinations it will seem slow (rather comical too - it ambles towards the subject, pauses, goes a bit beyond and then comes back); and it's slow compared to native FE lenses, of course. But it's probably not inferior in terms of accuracy; in some respects it's superior: one benefit of a mirrorless body is that with on-sensor focusing there's no need to worry about back/front focusing. If you plan to use it to photograph things that don't move, it's not an issue. But don't even consider it if you want to photograph sports, children running around, herons-catching-fish, etc. and rely on AF to do so.

4. As for IQ, I've used these EF lenses: 24-105L, 28mm 2.8 IS, 40mm, 85mm 1.8, 100 L (no AF with this, but the other electronic connections work) and 70-200 f4 IS. I haven't performed anything resembling a scientific comparison of these lenses on the A7R vs 5DIII or 6D, but I feel confident in saying that not only is the image quality not inferior on the Sony body it's probably superior (I was shocked by the superb image quality I was able to get from the 85mm 1.8 when I first attached it).

At the time I decided to buy an A7R I had used one exclusively with Canon lenses - it was because the results were so good that I wanted one, and it was not until I had owned it for a while that I bought the two native FE primes; they're superb too, especially the remarkable 55mm 1.8.

Having said all that, there may well be Canon lenses that don't work as well on the two Sony A7s - I have no first hand knowledge one way or another - but based on what I've read the main problems are with wide angle Leica lenses due to a design that simply doesn't apply to Canon lenses. I would also add that if you want to use old Canon MF lenses, it's far easier to manually focus on a mirrorless camera (thanks to magnification and focus peaking) than it is on any dslr, especially if you use wide apertures; and Sony's focus peaking and magnification work at least as well as anyone else's.

5. One flaw you didn't mention is the much-discussed shutter-shock. This is real, and, in my experience, shows up if your shutter speed is 1/100-1/125, regardless of the lens (apparently it's worse if you use a tripod, but I don't and thus can't comment). It doesn't seem to be a problem at other speeds, including slower speeds (though you may encounter the usual too-slow-shutter problems if you're not using a lens with IS; IS has no effect on shutter-shock, of course); I've taken plenty of sharp photos at 1/60 (a speed these cameras seem inordinately fond of if you let them decide the shutter speed). If you avoid 1/100-1/125 you'll be fine.

I hope some of this helps. Far more competent/savvy/knowledgeable people than I have written about all of this, though, so don't rely too much on what I've written!

That's very helpful, many thanks for taking the time.

 

[ecka]

What about a 4D? It's just a matter of time

No then all the Physicists would get confused they might think it were referring to advanced hypothetical spacial relationships beyond the current acknowledged 3 Dimensions... :-*

Why do you think they went from 1D and then straight to 5D?
Bypassing 2D, 3D and 4D... then 7D.... whoops we missed the 6D so lets fill that space too...
I don't think they would ever do a 2D, 3D or 4D... simply because its a pun waiting to happen...

I think they went from EOS 1 to EOS 1D and then from EOS 5 to EOS 5D later. So, there is a deeper, historical explanation for that. Canon can call their cameras whatever they want (Rebel "terminators" or Kiss series), I really don't care. However, I wouldn't call any camera a 2D or 3D, because it would be awkward and confusing, specially when using internet search engines (?shopping) and that could be affecting sales very much. If 6D was released just a few years earlier, then it could have been called 5D something (like 5D WG). Nobody is trying to fill any spaces between numbers , they are just numbers.

 

[Menace]

What about a 4D? It's just a matter of time

No then all the Physicists would get confused they might think it were referring to advanced hypothetical spacial relationships beyond the current acknowledged 3 Dimensions... :-*

erm, you mean four? Or was it eleven

Well it's three plus one for the usuall spacetime as well as the extra seven that are tightly curled up and cannot be verified with current technology/physics.

 

[This_Is_Cinerama]

Here is the situation:

You have a 6D. You have never felt completely satisfied with it for many reason. Reasons that could include 5DmkIII envy, CF, focus points and overall build etc. It is personal and may or may not make sense to everyone.

Most importantly, you feel you are not getting the most out of your 70-200mm 2.8L II or 85mm f1.2 in some situations.

You have the opportunity to trade in the 6D for a reasonable price and pay the difference on a 5DmkIII. You are completely happy with this potential transaction. Ultimately a loss in original investment, yes, but finally getting into the 5DmkIII you have lusted after.


Here is the question:

With all the recent rumors of a mkIV, sensor/focus technology etc etc. would you pull the trigger on the 5DmkIII or continue to wait, potentially until 2015?

Time is somewhat of an issue, as I want to keep shooting. Also, I would spend the extra money on a MKIV, but would not be comfortable with a price point like the current 1D X.


I'm looking for general thoughts and opinions, because I'm torn.

Many thanks, cheers!

 

[candyman]

Here is the situation:

You have a 6D. You have never felt completely satisfied with it for many reason. Reasons that could include 5DmkIII envy, CF, focus points and overall build etc. It is personal and may or may not make sense to everyone.

Most importantly, you feel you are not getting the most out of your 70-200mm 2.8L II or 85mm f1.2 in some situations.

You have the opportunity to trade in the 6D for a reasonable price and pay the difference on a 5DmkIII. You are completely happy with this potential transaction. Ultimately a loss in original investment, yes, but finally getting into the 5DmkIII you have lusted after.


Here is the question:

With all the recent rumors of a mkIV, sensor/focus technology etc etc. would you pull the trigger on the 5DmkIII or continue to wait, potentially until 2015?

Time is somewhat of an issue, as I want to keep shooting. Also, I would spend the extra money on a MKIV, but would not be comfortable with a price point like the current 1D X.


I'm looking for general thoughts and opinions, because I'm torn.

Many thanks, cheers!

Welcome to CR

You feel you are not getting the most out of the 70-200. Can you give more info on that?
I would say go for the 5D III if you are really not satisfied with the 6D. That will make you happy for the coming period. We don't know if a MKIV will arrive in 2015.
Where I live an occasion 5D MK III is offered for around 2295 euro. In one year from now that might be 1700euro. Still good money. So if the 5D IV will arrive, you can add some good money. But most important, you will be happy with the results of your shooting today until next year while using the 5D MK III.