Some Canon Mirrorless Talk [CR2]

[ichiru]

I moved from the 5D3 to the A7Rii, after comparing it to the 5DS. Size had zero impact on the decision.

I don't shoot sports. I spend most of my time working at wide apertures either shooting portraits (where the Sony's Eye-AF is absolutely amazing), or shooting live theatre (where the wider DR of the Sony sensor is huge). I don't miss having to microadjust lenses, or having to toss huge numbers of shots because focus was inexplicably off, despite perfect placement of the focus spot. I don't miss explaining to a headshot client that they really shouldn't pick that shot as one of their finals because the camera didn't quite nail it. My keeper rate, in terms of focus accuracy at least, has gone through the roof. I've also been spoiled by the possibilities that open up with an EVF. I sold my 5D3, but still have a 5D2 and a 7D, and in dimly lit situations they are downright painful to use now.

That said, in some circumstances, what I do miss is Canon color science. Skintones, in particular, require more fiddling in post. I've gotten the hang of it, but I'm still not crazy about that.

If Canon does come out with a FF mirrorless, with more DR (and ideally, facial recognition with Eye-AF), compatible with EF mount lenses, I'd jump back over in a heartbeat, regardless of how big or small it is, just to get back to Canon colors. (you listening Canon? probably not, sigh)
[/quote]

Thanks for sharing your experience. I am really tempted to switch over to Sony but I'll hold off until September-October hoping Canon is indeed listening!

 

[Don Haines]

The most interesting aspect of this rumor is this:

...the camera will use a newly designed 24mp full frame image sensor.

Interesting because, if true, it almost certainly means the 5DIV will use the same 24 mp sensor. We finally know an important specification for the 5DIV.

I think this forum would go absolutely insane if the 5DIV was mirrorless Boy would that get people going......

 

[rrcphoto]

EF-M is the same size as the E mount, so yes. however does canon have full frame sensors that would work on a short registration distance camera?

If they can physically fit a full frame sensor into the EFM mount why would the short registration distance matter.
They did with with the rebel sensor, so I don't understand how a full frame sensor would be any different.

The issue i see is from the lens side, the current efm lenses most likely wont cover (image circle) a full frame sensor, so they would need to release ones that do. This could involve new designs if they want to get it smaller, or use the SLR design and add the extra spacing as what an adapter would do.

because the angle of incident of light hitting the microlenses and pixels.. you get corner color casting. the 24Mp APS-C sensor in the M3 is already prone to this.

that's why shoving the 80D sensor would be a meh move. the sensor isn't optimized for short registration distances. a full frame? even worse.

 

[rrcphoto]

Nothing like a mirrorless rumor to get the forum juices flowing.

A few thoughts:

1) I'm skeptical about a full-frame mirrorless Canon rumor. People always ignore the fact that Sony is a niche player in the camera world. They went all in on mirrorless simply because that was the only niche available to them – they could not compete against Nikon and Canon in the DSLR market. It was the only route available and the market statistics that we have access to would indicate that they haven't been all that successful. Sony market share is flat.

Agreed, but canon can then build a smaller and lighter full frame camera. that would be the only reason I could see them doing it - think SL1 sized full frame.

I can't see it replacing anything in thier lineup (ie: WHY would they make the 5D mirrorless or the 6D?) - but canon said they were going to create more cameras to hit specific markets. so making a camera for this market would certainly be an idea and not unheard of.

one of the keys that canon did on the 80D that doesn't get much press is that AF in liveview and in video is quick / smooth even for L lenses.

if DPAF works well for any EF lens, the time is pretty ripe to toss a full frame sensor into a very small body and see if it sticks.

 

[AvTvM]

Bolted-on adapter nozzle. Plus huge lens. Way to go! :
Luckily it's not from Canon.

Upcoming Sigma SD quattro MILCs [APS-C and APS-H].
Really cannot understand why a few people would prefer a camera-nozzle over a much more versatile detachable adapter which can be used with both:
A) compact native short flange-distance lenses

B) with existing EF-lenses - as needed and preferred.

 

[ahsanford]

Bolted-on adapter nozzle. Plus huge lens. Way to go! :
Luckily it's not from Canon.

Upcoming Sigma SD quattro MILCs [APS-C and APS-H].

Really cannot understand why a few people would prefer a camera-nozzle over a much more versatile detachable adapter which can be used with both compact native short flange-distance lenses or with existing EF-lenses - as needed and preferred.

I could see it both ways:

Why you'd want a skinny body + modular EF adaptor:

• With some slower native lenses (say an f/2.8 prime), you'd have a smaller construct to carry around. (with faster / larger lenses, this advantage appears to get watered down as the lenses are about as large as FF SLRs.
• It would be possible to adapt some older lenses and use focus peaking through the viewfinder.

Why you'd want an integral EF mount (i.e. AvTvM called it a 'camera nozzle' like in the Sigma pic below):

• If you already own a boatload of EF glass, you probably aren't buying some mirrorless mount only lens.
• Less pieces, less things to fail, less seams/gaps to let in dust/dirt/moisture, etc.
• It's simpler. When the mount is integral, you can never leave the adapter in another bag at home by mistake.
• One would think an adaptor might slow the AF as compared to a full/native EF mount? (someone please correct me if this is not true and I'll edit this)

I'm sure others can build on both of these lists: from Canon's perspective, from a videographer's perspective, etc.

- A

 

[unfocused]

The most interesting aspect of this rumor is this:

...the camera will use a newly designed 24mp full frame image sensor.

Interesting because, if true, it almost certainly means the 5DIV will use the same 24 mp sensor. We finally know an important specification for the 5DIV.

I think this forum would go absolutely insane if the 5DIV was mirrorless Boy would that get people going......

Umm...maybe the sarcasm went over my head. But, I meant that it is highly unlikely that the mirrorless camera will get its own sensor. So, the obvious choice would be to use the same 24 mp sensor in the 5DIV and the mythical mirrorless full-frame camera. I would have to be smoking something really strong to believe the 5D would go mirrorless. (Maybe in three or four generations if electronic viewfinders improve sufficiently, but not anytime soon.)

 

[Don Haines]

The most interesting aspect of this rumor is this:

...the camera will use a newly designed 24mp full frame image sensor.

Interesting because, if true, it almost certainly means the 5DIV will use the same 24 mp sensor. We finally know an important specification for the 5DIV.

I think this forum would go absolutely insane if the 5DIV was mirrorless Boy would that get people going......

Umm...maybe the sarcasm went over my head. But, I meant that it is highly unlikely that the mirrorless camera will get its own sensor. So, the obvious choice would be to use the same 24 mp sensor in the 5DIV and the mythical mirrorless full-frame camera. I would have to be smoking something really strong to believe the 5D would go mirrorless. (Maybe in three or four generations if electronic viewfinders improve sufficiently, but not anytime soon.)

No Sarcasm from me.... I think you are right.

 

[eosuser1234]

Would not be suprised both new mirrorless canons will have EF-M mounts, one will be full frame and use the current Canon EF-M to EF adaptor for EF lenses. The other will be APS-C sensor, just like the current line. The new EF-M lenses will have the EF-M mount but be usable on full frame, and when an older EF-M lense is used, the camera will just crop to APS-C.
If you want to make a compactish camera, it makes sense to have compactish lenses. The EF mount lenses are not compact at all.

Whatever it becomes, it will be interesting, lets just hope they can lead this segment instead of playing catch up. Living in Japan, you see more and more mirrorless cameras here every day literally. Japanese population demographic is getting older, and lighter cameras are appreciated.

 

[rrcphoto]

Really cannot understand why a few people would prefer a camera-nozzle

because we're using our brain.

- the vast majority of people that purchase an EF mount mirrorless would use EF lenses on it, and canon really doens't care two bits if you can use leica lenses on it (which you can some anyways)
- no adapter maintains a higher precision of alignment than using an adapter.
- there is no difference in actual depth having the EF mount native to the camera.
- also ergonomically, it keeps the wider part of the lenses further away from your hand grip.
- it simplifies canon's development of a sensor, since they can use the same glass stack, and same microlens / sensor design for both mirrorless and OVF cameras.

and finally .. the EF mount has a significant amount of adaptability if that's your thing. little range finder lenses, no. but in reality what percentage of the population blows their load in their pants over that?

canon can create a smaller, quieter, fairly half decent ergonomic mirrorless full frame camera using the EF mount and it will suit the majority of people just fine.

 

[Loswr]

Really cannot understand why a few people would prefer a camera-nozzle

because we're using our brain.

...

canon can create a smaller, quieter, fairly half decent ergonomic mirrorless full frame camera using the EF mount and it will suit the majority of people just fine.

But for AvTvM, it won't be the PERFECT CAMERA to MEET HIS EVERY NEED. :

 

[d]

I could see it both ways:

Why you'd want a skinny body + modular EF adaptor:

• With some slower native lenses (say an f/2.8 prime), you'd have a smaller construct to carry around. (with faster / larger lenses, this advantage appears to get watered down as the lenses are about as large as FF SLRs.
• It would be possible to adapt some older lenses and use focus peaking through the viewfinder.

Why you'd want an integral EF mount (i.e. AvTvM called it a 'camera nozzle' like in the Sigma pic below):

• If you already own a boatload of EF glass, you probably aren't buying some mirrorless mount only lens.
• Less pieces, less things to fail, less seams/gaps to let in dust/dirt/moisture, etc.
• It's simpler. When the mount is integral, you can never leave in another bag at home by mistake.
• One would think an adaptor might slow the AF as compared to a full/native EF mount? (someone please correct me if this is not true and I'll edit this)

I'm sure others can build on both of these lists: from Canon's perspective, from a videographer's perspective, etc.

- A

I'll take the version with the camera nozzle, please, for the reasons you've given above (durability, simplicity, already own a bunch of EF glass). I think if like the Sigma SD Quattro picture earlier, the "nozzle" protrusion distance is equal to or less than that of the grip, you can't really complain about any size penalty for "including" the adaptor as part of the body.

One possible benefit of a modular EF adaptor might be the inclusion of a tripod mount in its design, to better balance the small body with a potentially much heaver lens, if needing to mount on a tripod.

d.

 

[d]

because we're using our brain.

- the vast majority of people that purchase an EF mount mirrorless would use EF lenses on it, and canon really doens't care two bits if you can use leica lenses on it (which you can some anyways)
- no adapter maintains a higher precision of alignment than using an adapter.
- there is no difference in actual depth having the EF mount native to the camera.
- also ergonomically, it keeps the wider part of the lenses further away from your hand grip.
- it simplifies canon's development of a sensor, since they can use the same glass stack, and same microlens / sensor design for both mirrorless and OVF cameras.

and finally .. the EF mount has a significant amount of adaptability if that's your thing. little range finder lenses, no. but in reality what percentage of the population blows their load in their pants over that?

canon can create a smaller, quieter, fairly half decent ergonomic mirrorless full frame camera using the EF mount and it will suit the majority of people just fine.

Agreed. Canon's goal isn't to create a body for users to mount their third-party lenses onto; they want those users to buy Canon lenses instead. Likewise, releasing a body that compels an existing Canon shooter to add it to their arsenal would seem to me a greater initial priority over trying to attract existing mirrorless users from other systems. But I admit my insight is very limited

d.

 

[unfocused]

...

...the camera will use a newly designed 24mp full frame image sensor.

Interesting because, if true, it almost certainly means the 5DIV will use the same 24 mp sensor. We finally know an important specification for the 5DIV.

When Canon released the 21MP 5D Mark II, sales of the 21MP 1Ds Mark III took a big hit.

And you know this because??? Let me guess, you read something on the internet.

If this mirrorless camera has 24MP and the 5DIV has 24MP, Canon will lose money if the mirrorless is significantly cheaper than he 5DIV. Thus if the mirrorless gets 24MP then the 5DIV will have more MP to maintain its position and price.

Because more MP means higher price? Not.

Why would a full-frame mirrorless be cheaper?

And suddenly people will migrate from DSLRs to Mirrorless? Nope. Only a small percentage of customers are interested in mirrorless. Putting the same sensor in both models will not impact 5D IV sales in the least.

 

[ahsanford]

because we're using our brain.

[truncated]
canon can create a smaller, quieter, fairly half decent ergonomic mirrorless full frame camera using the EF mount and it will suit the majority of people just fine.

Agreed. Canon's goal isn't to create a body for users to mount their third-party lenses onto; they want those users to buy Canon lenses instead. Likewise, releasing a body that compels an existing Canon shooter to add it to their arsenal would seem to me a greater initial priority over trying to attract existing mirrorless users from other systems. But I admit my insight is very limited

d.

With respect to d and rrcphoto -- who I very much agree with -- allowing someone to use older lenses is value-add whether you personally think adapting old glass is worthy or not. Some customers (say AvTvM?) will value this, and in turn, that makes it valuable to Canon in the form of keeping people in the ecosystem, raising loyalty, happiness, etc.

Now will *I* do this? Do I have a crate of old FD lenses lying around? Did I inherit my Dad's old lenses? No. But some people dig that, and surely this was folded into one of (presumably at least) two really detailed business plan scenarios in this very very very important decision for Canon.

- A

 

[Jopa]

the camera will use a newly designed 24mp full frame image sensor. This camera will be designed to use EF lenses

That's awesome - no converters BS. Need dis. Exciting times lie ahead!

 

[j-nord]

I vote that if canon releases an EF mount mirrorless body the first model is going to suck and will be very cut down compared to a similar dslr body. By suck I mean 1-2 major compromises that will be addressed in later generations.

 

[ahsanford]

I vote that if canon releases an EF mount mirrorless body the first model is going to suck and will be very cut down compared to a similar dslr body. By suck I mean 1-2 major compromises that will be addressed in later generations.

That's more a prediction than a vote, but yes, that seems pretty likely. There is enough pent up 'I want FF mirrorless in the Canon ecosystem' interest that the first offering will likely have a large number of early adopters, even with a simple, stripped down FF setup.

Expect the compromises to be pretty obvious given what they've already fielded in the APS-C space -- general responsiveness, AF speed and the EVF will be far off the pace from Sony.

But I expect the handling/ergonomics to be good right out of the gate. Whether they opt for a full blown DSLR ergonomic/UI/menu/knobs experience or not remains to be seen, but they'd be wise to leverage a chunky grip, top LCD and knobs in 'Canon-familiar' places. This is one area they may not surprise us so much as reassure us.

- A

 

[9VIII]

I feel like the most satisfied photography gear collectors right now are going to be D810 owners. That body is probably going to stay near top of the line for quite a while.

Of course most of the professional photographers out there are still happily clicking away with their 1Ds3's.

I'm still kind of confused about why Canon doesn't put the 50MP sensor in a 1D body.
Maybe they're saving that for the 1DX MkIII so that they can keep the number 3 in common for their premium portrait/landscape body.

 

[ahsanford]

I'm still kind of confused about why Canon doesn't put the 50MP sensor in a 1D body.

Agree. I think people with $7k in their pocket shouldn't have to choose between a 1D feature set OR a 50 MP sensor. It makes sense to go back to the 1D# and 1Ds# setup and offer a high-res sensor in a studio/landscape-oriented body.

But if I had to guess why they did this -- and this is mere speculation -- perhaps Canon thought through all the 1DX goodies a 1Ds3 person can't get on their 50 MP 5DS rigs aren't that important to a studio/landscape photographer:

* They don't need a shutter rated for 400k cycles
* They don't need a machine gun framerate
* They don't need an integral grip
* They don't need a world class servo AF setup

Now I've obviously omitted a ton of juicy 1-series goodies that have nothing to do with shooting sports at 16 fps that a prior 1Ds3 owner would love to have back. But with the only show in town (FF) with 50 MP, perhaps Canon feels the 5DS might be good enough for 1Ds3 owners.

...or the sports market continually evolves and asks for more and has the money to pay for a new 1D rig every four years and the landscape/studio crowd doesn't. This could solely be a financial call.

- A