The EOS 80D Replacement to be a Big Leap Forward [CR2]

[Generalized Specialist]

I'm quite happy with the 80D to be honest.. it's a really decent camera.

The 80D is actually an excellent all rounder, it really is. The problem is the rest of the manufacturers are moving faster than Canon is willing to so the competition is just more excellent-er in what they are releasing.

AND, this is the important bit, Canon has totally fallen down on APS-C or EF-M lenses. I can buy the argument to using EF lenses on the APS-C DSLR's but not so much on mirrorless. No one wants to use a FF lens + adapter on a little body and this is something Sony and Fuji have done much better than Canon.

 

[Durf]

yes, my 80D is so many years behind all the technology of today's camera's I have to use decades old lenses on it to get any kind of decent images with it.............

 

[fullstop]

The 80D is actually an excellent all rounder, it really is. The problem is the rest of the manufacturers are moving faster than Canon is willing to so the competition is just more excellent-er in what they are releasing.
AND, this is the important bit, Canon has totally fallen down on APS-C or EF-M lenses. I can buy the argument to using EF lenses on the APS-C DSLR's but not so much on mirrorless. No one wants to use a FF lens + adapter on a little body and this is something Sony and Fuji have done much better than Canon.

Agree with your first, general statement.

Don't agree on with you re. Canon EF-S and EF-M lens lineup. Of course these are mostly "consumer-focused" zooms and only a few moderately fast primes. Perfectly targeted to the user group, their wallets and their desire to not lug around big, heavy gear. (Almost) all EF-S and EF-M lenses are at least "optically decent", some are to "outstanding". Especially considering the affordable prices.

Overall, I consider the Canon EF-S lineup clearly better than the Nikon DX lens lineup. A few highlights either side, a few dogs as well.

Overall, I consider Canon EF-M superior to the entire universe of lenses for Sony E-mount. They are many, but only few are as good and/or as affordable as those compact EF-M lenses. Nothing in Sony E-mount land can touch Canon EF-M 22/2. - with or without Zeiss label on it. And this for only 150 Euro!

Canon EF-S and EF-M lineups are almost complete for any lens that can be made more compact than EF lenses thanks to smaller APS-C image circle + shorter FFD for EOS M. Only prime lens "missing" is a compact EF-M portrait tele, e.g. a EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM.

Now, do I sound like a "Canapologist", or what? ;D

PS: EOS 90D? Mainly for the remaining "n00bs" who still believe "only a DSLR takes good images". 7D series is a slightly different story. But Rebels and all xxDs ? Even Canon EOS M50 runs circles around them. Today.

 

[rrcphoto]

this is the important bit, Canon has totally fallen down on APS-C or EF-M lenses.

no they haven't. the vast majority of the world doesn't care about primes.

 

[BillB]

I'm quite happy with the 80D to be honest.. it's a really decent camera.

The 80D is actually an excellent all rounder, it really is. The problem is the rest of the manufacturers are moving faster than Canon is willing to so the competition is just more excellent-er in what they are releasing.

AND, this is the important bit, Canon has totally fallen down on APS-C or EF-M lenses. I can buy the argument to using EF lenses on the APS-C DSLR's but not so much on mirrorless. No one wants to use a FF lens + adapter on a little body and this is something Sony and Fuji have done much better than Canon.

So what M lenses would it take to make you happy?

 

[fullstop]

So what M lenses would it take to make you happy?

that's the right question to ask. Normally I don't hear anything back then. No matter if I ask here or dpreview staffers or Thom Hogan - who all love to say "EF-M lens lineup sucks".

 

[rsdofny]

How about some constant f4 zooms and f1.4 primes? The M5 and M6 are so small that I cannot put a EF or EFS lens on it.

[/quote]
So what M lenses would it take to make you happy?
[/quote]

 

[dak723]

I'm quite happy with the 80D to be honest.. it's a really decent camera.

The 80D is actually an excellent all rounder, it really is. The problem is the rest of the manufacturers are moving faster than Canon is willing to so the competition is just more excellent-er in what they are releasing.

AND, this is the important bit, Canon has totally fallen down on APS-C or EF-M lenses. I can buy the argument to using EF lenses on the APS-C DSLR's but not so much on mirrorless. No one wants to use a FF lens + adapter on a little body and this is something Sony and Fuji have done much better than Canon.

Canon understands the target market for their cameras - something far too many folks on this forum fail to do. Their APS-C cameras are meant for an average camera user who will buy 2 maybe 3 affordable zoom lenses. They could spend a lot of money and time making more primes, but if you were Canon, would you do it if it meant you would probably lose money on lenses that sold only a very minimal number?

It's so easy to ask for things or make demands when it's not your money that's involved.

 

[dak723]

How about some constant f4 zooms and f1.4 primes? The M5 and M6 are so small that I cannot put a EF or EFS lens on it.

Because the target market won't buy those. And the size, especially of those f/1.4 primes, will still be an issue on the M size camera.

 

[rsdofny]

The Sigma 16 f1.4 and 30 f1.4 for E-mount are sharp, fast and relatively affordable.

There are many small Sony lens that are very good and small but expensive.



[/quote]

Overall, I consider Canon EF-M superior to the entire universe of lenses for Sony E-mount. They are many, but only few are as good and/or as affordable as those compact EF-M lenses. Nothing in Sony E-mount land can touch Canon EF-M 22/2. - with or without Zeiss label on it. And this for only 150 Euro!

Canon EF-S and EF-M lineups are almost complete for any lens that can be made more compact than EF lenses thanks to smaller APS-C image circle + shorter FFD for EOS M. Only prime lens "missing" is a compact EF-M portrait tele, e.g. a EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM.

Now, do I sound like a "Canapologist", or what? ;D

PS: EOS 90D? Mainly for the remaining "n00bs" who still believe "only a DSLR takes good images". 7D series is a slightly different story. But Rebels and all xxDs ? Even Canon EOS M50 runs circles around them. Today.
[/quote]

 

[rsdofny]

No one would disagree Canon's strategy to maximize its profit and pace its product innovation. A good company should have product designed ready to go to respond to competition when it is called for. Based on the sarcasm on this forum, Canon should realize how upset its customer base is.

I'm quite happy with the 80D to be honest.. it's a really decent camera.

The 80D is actually an excellent all rounder, it really is. The problem is the rest of the manufacturers are moving faster than Canon is willing to so the competition is just more excellent-er in what they are releasing.

AND, this is the important bit, Canon has totally fallen down on APS-C or EF-M lenses. I can buy the argument to using EF lenses on the APS-C DSLR's but not so much on mirrorless. No one wants to use a FF lens + adapter on a little body and this is something Sony and Fuji have done much better than Canon.

 

[fullstop]

why would I buy a 16mm f/1.4 lens? If I were into Astro, I would definitely use a FF camera, not a crop sensor. Plus the lens is big and heavy by EF-M standards.

Sigma 30/1.4 - well, that looks ok size, weight and price-wise. Let's see how the rumored Canon EF-M 32/1.4 compares - if&when it really comes.

How many more decent, compact and affordable lenses for Sony E-mount? Amongst the hundreds out there? Any by Sony themselves or only third-party?

 

[neuroanatomist]

We can all be pretty sure Canon will offer only a few incremental improvements or features making it somewhere between the A6300 and A6500 in performance. Sony will release something that will be another powerhouse of a camera and offer everything they are capable of putting into a body.

We can all be pretty sure Canon will sell more 90D bodies than Sony will sell of whatever 'powerhouse' camera they release. But do enjoy that new Sony that I'm just sure you'll buy.

Why are you here, anyway?

Based on the sarcasm on this forum, Canon should realize how upset its customer base is.

This forum does not represent Canon's customer base, and except for a handful of disgruntled trolls who post here in between sojourns upstairs from the basement when their mom makes them do their chores, most people here are generally satisfied with Canon gear.

Now, if you mean sarcasm directed against the forum trolls, yes there's plenty of that.

 

[fullstop]

This forum does not represent Canon's customer base,

true. About 90% of all Canapologists worldwide are posting here.

 

[Talys]

Sounds fantastic. Since the 80D is my most used, and all-time favorite camera, my expectations are now high

I didn't think I would buy another APSC DSLR for a long time, because the 80D really checks all the boxes for me -- but I guess I'll stay tuned!

 

[Generalized Specialist]

The Sigma 16 f1.4 and 30 f1.4 for E-mount are sharp, fast and relatively affordable.

There are many small Sony lens that are very good and small but expensive.

Bingo. I have the Sigma 16/1.4 and Sigma 60/2.8 for my A6000, love them both! I haven't checked so I could be wrong but am sure the Sigma 16 & 30 isn't available in EF-M, not sure of the Sigma 60? Am going out today to buy the Sigma 30/1.4 in E mount. These are all very good examples of affordable, fast, smallish, lightish, above average lenses not available in EF-M mount. If I'm not wrong and they aren't available in EF-M mount that suggests Sigma doesn't see the business case there.

Yes the Canon 22 is good, the 11-22 UWA zoom is good, but then what else is there ??? Much of the aftermarket is passing the EF-M mount by, even for manual focus glass but they can't seem to get onboard with E mount fast enough.

Sony also has their decent 18-135, the 16-105/4.0 zoom is decent and unique being a constant f4, the 35 and 50 1.8's are good and have OSS, the Sony 85/1.8 is fantastic and not too overpriced, the 55-210 is more or less similar to the equivalent Canon zoom, but the Sony 10-18 is overpriced, the FF Sony 28/2.0 is a lens I'd like to have but am choosing the Sigma 30 over it for cost and aperture reasons.

So with E mount I have ready access to a handful of quite nice primes for reasonable money, some zoom's that are respectable with one even offering a constant f/4.0 with the only 'penalty' being the UWA which is priced double what it should be. No adapters needed.

As a bonus what I like about Sony is when I do go FF I can use my crop lenses on the FF body, something you can't do (at least at this point) with Canon, maybe the upcoming FF mirrorless will allow it but again, this is Canon we're talking about, they'll find a way to make it impossible just to force you to upgrade.

 

[BillB]

This forum does not represent Canon's customer base,

true. About 90% of all Canapologists worldwide are posting here.

Definitely an imaginary number! But hopefully not intended to be taken literally. Of course the "about" can be stretched a bit if the need arises.

 

[stevelee]

It also offered lower dynamic range and no ALL-I video.

As for the dynamic range, I rarely shoot at ISO 100, so according to tests, that's beside the point for me. But I did ask here how I can demonstrate that DR problem using my own 6D2, and was told not to waste my time trying to duplicate the situation.

But I do have a question about ALL-I video. Is there any advantage to using it other than to speed up editing on slow computers? My understanding is that it creates larger file sizes by duplicating the unchanging parts of the picture on each frame, IOW, each frame is a key frame. For IPB the computer is reconstructing some frames by looking backward and forward at the unchanged parts of the picture and taking the supplied changed parts. I can see how that could be less than optimal with a very smoky atmosphere and the like. But in the video I have shot with the 6D2, I can't see that I have lost anything.

My computer is a 3 1/2-year-old iMac with a 4GHz i7 processor. It handles 1080p and 4K video in FCP X with no problems. So I have not experienced any slowdowns from IPB files. By the time I have edited a 15- or 20-minute video, FCP has temporarily eaten up about 300 GB of space on my SSD with its work files, however, so I know some of the illusion of speed comes from that.

From my limited experience I have no reason to doubt Canon's conclusion that ALL-I was not used that much on enthusiast-level cameras, and don't see much point in the expectation of its inclusion in that line of cameras except to look good on stat sheets.

 

[fullstop]

Sigma 16/1.4
Sigma 60/2.8
Sony also has their decent 18-135,
the 16-105/4.0 zoom is decent and unique being a constant f4,
the 35 and
50 1.8's are good and have OSS,
the Sony 85/1.8 is fantastic and not too overpriced,
the 55-210 is more or less similar to the equivalent Canon zoom,
but the Sony 10-18 is overpriced,
the FF Sony 28/2.0 is a lens I'd like to have but am choosing the Sigma 30 over it for cost and aperture reasons.

Thanks for the list! Good to know.

 

[stevelee]

I also shoot both the 80D and 6D2 and using these two cameras together is amazing and they pair so nicely and are so fun to use I personally have no desire what so ever to replace either one, not even with a better camera such as a 5D4.

The image quality I get out of these two cameras is extremely nice and I have no complaints.

All this negative internet crap about either one of these cameras is like blah blah blah and listening to fingernails running across a chalkboard.....

I have had a couple of Rebels, using most recently the T3i. A couple years ago, so it seems, I decided to upgrade to an 80D and started reading up on it. I think I would have been really pleased with it, but I started seeing rumors that a 6D2 was in the works, and decided that as long as I was upgrading my camera body, I would go FF. The wait turned out a lot longer than I expected, but I have been pleased with the results. If for some reason I still wanted another body of that sensor size, based on its similarities to the 6D2, I would not hesitate to get an 80D or its successor.

I had not always considered that I would eventually go FF, but it never made sense to me to buy an EF-S prime or a zoom longer than the kit lens. I got a 75-300mm EF zoom thrown in for $100 when I bought my first Rebel, so that has been my telephoto until my recent purchase of the 100-400mm. (I was never that happy with the former lens, but didn't regret the $100. And it did make surprisingly good pictures of the total eclipse.) So I never felt slighted at the lack of EF-S lenses when there were so many EF lenses available that would fit my Rebels. Of course I did go with EF-S when I needed super wide angle.