Some Canon Mirrorless Talk [CR2]

[nads]

The fact that Canon has not put a mirrorless body to market of the same specification as the competition has does not, whatsoever, mean that they are behind in mirrorless tech. There isn't a technology out there in a mirrorless body that is beyond Canon's ability to produce. On the opposite side, Canon has AF technology that the competition does not have access to.

I've heard this a lot: "there's nothing Canon can't pull off" / "Canon could drop a AAA mirrorless product on the market whenever it gets around to it" / "just take* DPAF + an amazing EVF + some new lenses, and POW." Personally, I think it's one thing to have all the Lego pieces of tech in a big pile and it's another thing entirely to Frankenstein all of that together into a highly performing package on a first try. Only so much of the EOS-M experience will apply as it currently lacks DPAF, an integral EVF, a chunkier body design, etc.

Do you (or anyone else in this forum) honestly believe Canon's first FF mirrorless offering will be as responsive as 2nd/3rd gen mirrorless rigs from the competition? Will the control layout make sense and not frustrate us? Will it have an EVF that lays everything out just the way you'd like it? Will it be free of peculiar lens compatibility issues or battery conservation problems? I don't think so at all.

I'm not saying 'Canon is behind in mirrorless tech' as a rant that the sky is falling, 'I'm leaving the fold', etc. -- far from it. I'm just saying that they need to walk before they run -- regardless of how well they run in more the mature SLR segments today.

(Agree with the rest of what you said, btw. Good post, thx.)

- A

* In full disclosure, I've certainly alleged this a few times, but more as an aspirational statement for a much better camera, not that Canon would nail that Frankenstein on the first offering.

I honestly do believe they could drop such a product and make it just as reponsive. They can physically build the package and put the software together to make it go.

The company that has years of experience dropping a camera that is only barely better than Nikon's best, and inferior in at least a few key specifications isn't going to do that though.

Canon does not need to walk before it can run. It could go from stand still to sprint between prototype and production. Canon simply has no reason to run and has long proven that the preference is to pass the competition by the slightest margin possible (when even interested in passing the competition).

I do believe this: FF Mirrorless isn't coming in the next 18 months from Canon. They aren't even going to stand up on the FF front. Any statement that they are is a rumor in my book. There will be movement in mirrorless and Canon leadership has said as much. What is missing is any meaningful statement from Canon leadership regarding FF mirrorless.

 

[rrcphoto]

things will be fine
could just stick the same battery in as in the 5D IV - meaning 12+ Whrs, hopefully; that should yield 500+ shots. Canon has the tech savvy and can buy the cells ... no technical problem here

want to explain how you pulled that out of your ass when the 80D only does 300 shots on liveview with a smaller sensor and the same battery?

 

[rrcphoto]

Do you (or anyone else in this forum) honestly believe Canon's first FF mirrorless offering will be as responsive as 2nd/3rd gen mirrorless rigs from the competition? Will the control layout make sense and not frustrate us? Will it have an EVF that lays everything out just the way you'd like it? Will it be free of peculiar lens compatibility issues or battery conservation problems?

I think they are close. if you see the 1DX and the 80D liveview systems.

as far as control layout and design.

Sure they can come close. the smaller rebel chassis. the Sl1 chassis are form factors that are probably a good starting point.

IF they are sticking with an EF mount - which makes sense on so many fronts, then ergonomically Canon has decades of experience there. how much frustration would depend on the focus. is it prosumer ie: 80D/6D ergonomic patterns, consumer (rebel), professional (7D/5D)..

if they go short registration distance and more of an M brick.. well who knows really.

 

[TeT]

I think the only thing holding Canon back was an acceptable (to them) AF system (speed tracking etc) ; That seems to have been everyone else main problem as well. So yes, I believe their first FF offering will be on par with the industry.

 

[hmatthes]

It might be as simple as a mirrorless 6D (small FF) with Canon's unquestionably superior interface, controls, glass and support. They already have the glass, the infrastructure, the sensor (1dXII), the network of dealers and support, the quality control.
The usability means that all users of Canon APS-c cameras know how to use the FF models.
Enough of all this stuff... I want a Canon FF sensor with Canon firmware, user interface, and support.
Just do it Canon -- all this "small camera" crap is just that -- crap. Put a 70~200 on it and the body size disappears. Even a 100 f2.8 Macro makes it a mute point.
Keep complaining, all I want is a FF Canon.

 

[TAF]

SL1 becomes basically a full frame mirrorless.

including the registration distance for the EF mount does not really add any to the size of a camera, if there is a grip.

Keep the price in the same range as the SL1, and they'll get my money.

The SL1 is right at the minimum of what I consider a comfortable to hold camera. Anything smaller is simply too small for me.

(I have an M, and while it has its place, I find it is not that useful, and mine may shortly become an IR model)

Camera ergonomics - perhaps the biggest challenge to meet.

 

[Maximilian]

SL1 becomes basically a full frame mirrorless.

including the registration distance for the EF mount does not really add any to the size of a camera, if there is a grip.

Keep the price in the same range as the SL1, and they'll get my money.
[truncated]

A FF (full frame!) mirrorless camera in a pricerange of the SL1?
Man, I'd really like to get what you take.

Sorry, for beeing offensive, but if the cheapest Canon FF DSLR offering in the market is at about 1.400,- €/$
you cannot expect them to cut off some 1.000,- €/$ in a mirrorless offer.

Please wake up!

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

We've been hearing about how Canon will introduce competitive mirrorless products for several years. 2015 was supposed to be the year Canon launch a pro-sumer camera and we know how that turned out. Now we have a repeat where 2016 will be the year (with new product available in 2017?).

Looking at this from a market/marketing perspective, Canon may not have any incentive to add new products to their lineup, even if the technologies were well within their reach to develop (which it must be, afterall these are just imaging system, right?).

One answer as to why Canon is not introducing new products at the rate other companies are may be in the sales data - http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

"speedy fisher" over on Mirrorless Rumor's forum had (in part) this to say - "For anyone with the slightest analytical background the raw CIPA data recently is incredibly interesting. As a taste, here's Jan 2015 to Jan 2016 direct comparison figures with a bit more detail:...

DSLRs sales down 12% in volume but a whopping 29% in value. Average camera selling price 50.1k in 2015, 40.4k yen in 2016 (19% drop).

Mirrorless sales are up 22% in volume, and 49%(!!!) in value. Average camera selling price 40.7k in 2015, 49.6k yen in 2016 (22% increase)..."

What's going on here? In falling markets (such as DSLRs are currently experiencing), sellers are dropping prices to keep their volumes up. Their gross margins are being hit, but I'll bet the volumes are keeping their production lines open, even as their sales channels are being stuffed. This is a common strategy for companies wishing to "ride out" a downturn in their markets.

What we might not know is what Canon's R&D is as a percentage of sales. If their R&D investments increased, we could guess that Canon believes the market will turn around, _or_ that by introducing new products they could swiftly recoup their R&D investments _and_ increase their Gross Margins. In a down market.

However, if Canon's R&D as a percentage of sales is steady or dropping, then we could easily guess that they'll "ride out the storm" with their current product offerings. As of late 2015 Canon reportedly still owned 40+ percent of the overall consumer imaging market.

Looked at differently we could ask: What would a Canon mirrorless system do for Canon that they don't already have in their current product offerings? What marketing or technical advantage would mirrorless bring them that would turn into sales?

Would it be better Banner Specs than current their product offerings? Sony is a real tough competitor in this space. I can't imagine Canon investing nearly what Sony has in sensor development and networked electronics.

Would it be that Canon could bring real technological distinction in ways their DSLRs currently don't? It seems difficult to believe. Canon is an old fashioned camera company, and not a network-aware/network-capable electronics company.

Would Canon feel that better Gross Margin would improve their Bottom Line? If so, there are many ways of improving Gross Margin _without_ introducing new products. Remember, new products are expensive in terms of R&D, new tooling, new manufacturing processes, marketing, and sales generation.

Would Canon feel the need to have a "me too" product so as to claim they're competing in the mirrorless market? Possibly. If Canon's R&D, tooling and ramp-up costs can be kept acceptably low, they might try to float a new product just to see if it'll "catch on". Looking at their current EOS-M strategy, this is where I'm placing my bet.

Lastly, it was only a few short years ago that Canon's marketing was hugely visible. Now? I have to be honest and say I don't see much advertising.

What do I see? I see HUGE ad placements for Apple's iPhone 6 imaging capability. They're not promoting anything but photography. No cell phone capability. No fancy whizzy apps. Nothing. Just pure imaging. And I'm talking poster sized back-lit scrolling ads _and_ poster-sized LCD displays. I know, this is commercial printing on a massive, perhaps low quality (by 'netizen standards) advertising scale. But walk up to one of these huge images and look at the image quality. It's shockingly good. Talk a stroll through the Paris Metro system right now and you'll see what I mean.

If you want to know who your Next Great camera company is, look no further than highly integrated highly networked highly "systems" aware (well beyond simple optics and sensors) electronics companies. If you don't think Apple and Sony are deadly serious about "winning" the imaging markets, you're wrong.

I'm left with the strong impression that even if Canon does introduce a fancy new mirrorless camera that it will be, in the end, a meaningless gesture.

 

[rrcphoto]

We've been hearing about how Canon will introduce competitive mirrorless products for several years. 2015 was supposed to be the year Canon launch a pro-sumer camera and we know how that turned out. Now we have a repeat where 2016 will be the year (with new product available in 2017?).

Looking at this from a market/marketing perspective, Canon may not have any incentive to add new products to their lineup, even if the technologies were well within their reach to develop (which it must be, afterall these are just imaging system, right?).

One answer as to why Canon is not introducing new products at the rate other companies are may be in the sales data - http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

"speedy fisher" over on Mirrorless Rumor's forum had (in part) this to say - "For anyone with the slightest analytical background the raw CIPA data recently is incredibly interesting. As a taste, here's Jan 2015 to Jan 2016 direct comparison figures with a bit more detail:...

DSLRs sales down 12% in volume but a whopping 29% in value. Average camera selling price 50.1k in 2015, 40.4k yen in 2016 (19% drop).

Mirrorless sales are up 22% in volume, and 49%(!!!) in value. Average camera selling price 40.7k in 2015, 49.6k yen in 2016 (22% increase)..."

snip.

I would expect someone from mirrorless rumors to use such a small sample size on shipment data. (it's SHIPMENT, not sales).

so what's really amusing is that he states anyone with the "slightest analytical background" .. and he doesn't even know what the data is that he's looking at.

talk about blowing up the "analytical background".

at the time of January / February CIPA data neither the 80D nor the D500 are shipping. so far as DSLR's are concerning, it's simply keeping up with inventory, or in the case of Nikon and Canon, shipping the lower end units that sell by scale.

also looking at "value" there is a little difficult. as anyone with a "analytical background" should know .. as it's the FOB price of the unit, not really what it sells at.

both nikon and canon main / top units are nearing EOL (5D, 6D, D810 ) are all rumored to be replaced this year or next in their larger lifecycles. the FOB usually would decrease during the end of their lifecycles, so it's very much cyclic.

then we have Sony themselves - as they continue to basically cripple / ignore the SLT side of their camera line, that would also make CIPA data for DSLR's look "worse", and what's amusing is that going by the shifting marketscape, it's hard to suggest that Sony has EVER regained it's full 13% marketshare that it had before going crazy and trying to make spaghetti stick to walls.

 

[jedy]

Saying that though, Canon have some serious catchup to do if we are to favour them over Fujifilm and Sony.

1) Favour them in a head to head context as if you were a consumer who owned no photography gear at the time? Yes. You are 100% right. Their EVFs are better. Their cameras are more responsive. Their sensors are lovely.

2) But we own Canon lenses and enjoy Canon's erognomics/menus/handling, and we appreciate Canon service and quality.

3) We don't like adapting non-native lenses and hoping the AF works.

4) We don't want to buy a boatload of new lenses for another mirrorless mount.

(2), (3) and (4) utterly obliterate (1) as far as buying priorities go unless you have a ton of money to burn or only want 1-2 lenses to use with mirrorless. And Canon knows this. They can deliver a decent but not mindblowing offering and we will come running to it.

- A

All valid points but you seem to only speak for existing Canon users who have lots of expensive glass. That's why I suggested perhaps a high end mirrorless with EF mount for those customers. For other photographers, you have to agree that smaller mirrorless cameras are more appealing than the lower end aps-c DSLRs. Canon need to invest in a decent, smaller mirrorless, either a much better EOS M and/or a FF. Don't forget, Canon have already changed their lens mount completely (back in the late 80's) and I think there's room for a new mount in addition to the EF mount. Whilst I agree people are reluctant to buy into a new camera system, it's not totally unheard of for people to jump ship. I also stand by my comment that Canon will be playing catchup. Don't just assume if Canon produce an EF mount mirrorless, their first attempt will be at a level good enough for the pros. Whatever state the mirrorless tech is in at the moment, it can only keep on improving and the lens lineup will keep on growing. Canon (and Nikon) by not getting involved in it are really missing out and will have a lot of catching up to do.

Well said!!

BTW the EOS M10 has come down in price significantly and if you use the very sharp 22/2 STM pancake with it you get a nice low profile little general purpose APS-C camera for an affordable price...

Glad you appreciate my $1's worth!

 

[brad-man]

things will be fine
could just stick the same battery in as in the 5D IV - meaning 12+ Whrs, hopefully; that should yield 500+ shots. Canon has the tech savvy and can buy the cells ... no technical problem here

want to explain how you pulled that out of your ass when the 80D only does 300 shots on liveview with a smaller sensor and the same battery?

Good question. Looking forward to the reply.

 

[nads]

things will be fine
could just stick the same battery in as in the 5D IV - meaning 12+ Whrs, hopefully; that should yield 500+ shots. Canon has the tech savvy and can buy the cells ... no technical problem here

want to explain how you pulled that out of your ass when the 80D only does 300 shots on liveview with a smaller sensor and the same battery?

671

That is the number of photos I took on a single LP-E17 battery on the M3 on August 17-18 of 2015 at Disneyland. We left Arizona with my charger and spare battery plugged in over the sink in the hotel room. The single battery without any means of recharging survived 2 days, 671 shots and allowed me time to connect via WIFI on the plane ride home to view and download pictures with the ipad.

Granted, I knew the moment we went into the park that I was up a creek. I powered down quickly between shots. Still, 671 is a good figure for the M3.

Again, forget FF. It isn't happening. Not a single patent for a lens design for FF on short registration distance. No point in a mirrorless body to cut into DSLR FF sales without at least a couple of designs for wide or standard lenses to take advantage of the format.

 

[rrcphoto]

things will be fine
could just stick the same battery in as in the 5D IV - meaning 12+ Whrs, hopefully; that should yield 500+ shots. Canon has the tech savvy and can buy the cells ... no technical problem here

want to explain how you pulled that out of your ass when the 80D only does 300 shots on liveview with a smaller sensor and the same battery?

671

That is the number of photos I took on a single LP-E17 battery on the M3 on August 17-18 of 2015 at Disneyland.

yes, but that's not how CIPA is calculated Sir.

I get alot out of my M3 as well, butgwe're talking CIPA numbers just to keep it on an equal playing field (well, somewhat..)

 

[rrcphoto]

Again, forget FF. It isn't happening. Not a single patent for a lens design for FF on short registration distance. No point in a mirrorless body to cut into DSLR FF sales without at least a couple of designs for wide or standard lenses to take advantage of the format.

what you MEAN to say is forget short EF-M registration distance full frame mirrorless.

EF mount mirrorless can happen easily. heck, turn on liveview.. volia. mirrorless.

 

[j-nord]

If you don't think Apple and Sony are deadly serious about "winning" the imaging markets, you're wrong.

I didnt know anyone was arguing about smart phone cameras dominating the imaging market.... In volume of cameras sold and volume of images taken they far surpassed the dslr/mirrorless market a long time ago. Whats your point?

In the world of prosumer/professional dslr/mirrorless will be around for quite a while.

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

Keeping it short and sweet, I fail to find a compelling reason for Canon to introduce a mirrorless camera.

Here's why - https://photographylife.com/a-few-thoughts-about-the-camera-market

Can anyone give me a reason that makes sense, given current market conditions?

We've been hearing about how Canon will introduce competitive mirrorless products for several years...

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

My point is: There is no compelling marketing reason for Canon to introduce a serious "professional" mirrorless system.

My second point is well made by many other people: We've heard "mirrorless" rumors for years and have seen little to nothing out of Canon.

My third point is: Canon is not an electronics company and may struggle to keep it's place as imaging leader.

Any other questions? Thank you.

If you don't think Apple and Sony are deadly serious about "winning" the imaging markets, you're wrong.

I didnt know anyone was arguing about smart phone cameras dominating the imaging market.... In volume of cameras sold and volume of images taken they far surpassed the dslr/mirrorless market a long time ago. Whats your point?

In the world of prosumer/professional dslr/mirrorless will be around for quite a while.

 

[nads]

Again, forget FF. It isn't happening. Not a single patent for a lens design for FF on short registration distance. No point in a mirrorless body to cut into DSLR FF sales without at least a couple of designs for wide or standard lenses to take advantage of the format.

what you MEAN to say is forget short EF-M registration distance full frame mirrorless.

EF mount mirrorless can happen easily. heck, turn on liveview.. volia. mirrorless.

40mm + registration distance of EF mounted optics is not short.

 

[brad-man]

My point is: There is no compelling marketing reason for Canon to introduce a serious "professional" mirrorless system.

Most are not asking for a "professional" mirrorless, merely one that is a solid overall performer. I think most people would be satisfied with performance somewhere between xxxD and xxD with DPAF.

My second point is well made by many other people: We've heard "mirrorless" rumors for years and have seen little to nothing out of Canon.

This is not a point. Just an opinion of an observation (one I happen to agree with).

My third point is: Canon is not an electronics company and may struggle to keep it's place as imaging leader.

...said the CEO of Kodak. When film was replaced by a sensor and the camera was controlled by firmware/software, Canon necessarily became an electronics company.

Any other questions? Thank you.

If you don't think Apple and Sony are deadly serious about "winning" the imaging markets, you're wrong.

I didnt know anyone was arguing about smart phone cameras dominating the imaging market.... In volume of cameras sold and volume of images taken they far surpassed the dslr/mirrorless market a long time ago. Whats your point?

In the world of prosumer/professional dslr/mirrorless will be around for quite a while.

 

[Don Haines]

My point is: There is no compelling marketing reason for Canon to introduce a serious "professional" mirrorless system.

My second point is well made by many other people: We've heard "mirrorless" rumors for years and have seen little to nothing out of Canon.

My third point is: Canon is not an electronics company and may struggle to keep it's place as imaging leader.

Any other questions? Thank you.

Point 1 - Market share.... and before someone jumps on me about the market share of mirrorless cameras, I think that we all can agree that the market share of mirrorless cameras is bigger than the market share of the 1DX2, yet Canon still produces it... If they make a mirrorless FF or even a mirrorless Rebel (I think that's the first step) it should sell sufficient quantities to be profitable, and for a business, that's what it is all about.

Point 2 - Mirrorless rumours. You certainly got that one right.... but remember, Canon has no incentive to market a miorrorless DSLR until they become superior to the optical ones..... That day is getting close. All the parts are starting to fall into place and I believe that it will be soon.

Point 3 - Not an electronics company? Seriously? Designing VLSI chips... semiconductor research... several fabrication lines.... circuit boards... processors.... A/D circuitry..... programmers..... and one heck of a pile of patents from the R+D labs to prove that what they do is breaking new ground..... ??? What do they have to do to be an electronics company?