The Mess That is the Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Rumor Mill

[Ian_of_glos]

well, if mirrorless were "just another, small evolutionary step in the drvelopment of imaging gear", then why the heck is it taking Canon and Nikon so long to get rid of mirrorslapping? Especially when "tiny iterative steps" are at the core of their business model?

Maybe it is just your choice of words, but I don't think that either Canon or Nikon are "trying to get rid of DSLRs." It appears to me that both Canon and Nikon are developing mirrorless products alongside their range of DSLRs and I see no evidence that either company is planning to cease DSLR production. This is very heartening because it means that we as consumers have a choice.
Why do you want to deny us that choice and why do you continue to ridicule anyone who dares to have an opinion that differs from yours?

 

[fullstop]

there has been and there still is *lots of choice* for DSLRs and there will be some choice for a few more years.

But there is still *no choice* for FF mirrorless cameras. Only Sony [I don't really include Leica given pricing and positioning of their offerings]. That's what i am criticizing. And some of the folks here who would love this situation to continue indefinitely. Who think it is perfectly fine that Canon customers like myself should be limited to Canon crop sensor mirrorless ... "at best". And I will continue to criticize Canon [and Nikon] for denying me the choice of FF sensor in a [compact, decent, affordable] mirrorless system.

Despite "FF and IQ goodness" I often regret having spent money on Canon 5D 3 and EF-L glass. Too big, too heavy, too clunky, too un-connected, too conspicuous, too noisy for many situations I want to use it for.

Anyways, it is evident that production of DSLRs (Mirrorslappers) is about to cease. Mirrorless cameras will totally replace / supplant DSLRs. As soon ascustomers are given the choice between big mirrorslappers and more compact mirrorless cameras, things will happen very quickly.

Yes, 1-series DSLR will probably be offered for another 10 years (same for Nikon), just as with 1-series film-SLRs. Produce 5 more years, sell them 10 more years, then announce end of it.

 

[Cali Capture]

Fullstop, Yes I'm vested in a lot of EF glass so from my perspective, a smaller Mirrorless would be more of a specialized or travel option add to my kit. I don't think your timeline for the end of DSLR is correct, as Full frame is still alive and well ( and profitable). I'm sure there will be multiple offerings by Canon of EF Mirrorless mount in the same form factor as current DSLR's, but not an end to EF lens line for a very long time.
Oddly, no one is asking about in camera sensor stabilization. Now that would be "evolutionary" for Canon! That would entice me to be an early adopter of a new M system! It would also be a way for them to push out Sigma and Tamron's IS lenses if they don't "talk" well with Canon's ICIS system! It would probably be a defendable proprietary technology restricted to M and EF lenses, Canon's in body stabilization and a very tough workaround for Sigma and Tamron.

 

[Kit.]

But there is still *no choice* for FF mirrorless cameras. Only Sony [I don't really include Leica given pricing and positioning of their offerings]. That's what i am criticizing.

There is also no choice for 1" MILC. Only Nikon used to do them, and not anymore.

 

[fullstop]

But there is still *no choice* for FF mirrorless cameras. Only Sony [I don't really include Leica given pricing and positioning of their offerings]. That's what i am criticizing.

There is also no choice for 1" MILC. Only Nikon used to do them, and not anymore.

correct. But as opposed to FF MILC, nobody was interested in Nikon 1. Said so from the start. Even back then it was absolutely clear, that mFT was the "smallest possible sensor" to consider for an ILC system. Now threshold has moved to APS-C.

 

[Mikehit]

Now threshold has moved to APS-C.

Really? Is that why Olympus is outselling Sony in Asia?

 

[fullstop]

Now threshold has moved to APS-C.

Really? Is that why Olympus is outselling Sony in Asia?

got current numbers? I doubt it. I expect mFT will fairly soon follow Nikon 1 to "dwarf-sensor cemetery".

Had I been in charge of Oly, i would have buried FT and gone APS-C plus compact (mirrorless) FF instead of mFT. A mirrorless FF "OM v2.0 system": *small size, affordable, fully capable*

 

[Mikehit]

got current numbers? I doubt it. I expect mFT will fairly soon follow Nikon 1 to "dwarf-sensor cemetery".

Had I been in charge of Oly, i would have buried FT and gone APS-C plus compact (mirrorless) FF instead of mFT. A mirrorless FF "OM v2.0 system": *small size, affordable, fully capable*

https://www.dpreview.com/news/0966656912/2018-japan-bcn-camera-rankings-canon-dominates-dslrs-tops-sony-in-mirrorless


https://nikonrumors.com/2017/11/15/the-2017-bcn-camera-rankings-are-out-canon-is-up-nikon-and-sony-are-down.aspx/

Seems like it is a good job you are not in charge of Olympus, doesn't it.

 

[fullstop]

thx. It is "Japan only", not Asia. And not full year 2017. But still.
Will be interesting to see 2018 market shares.

Imagine what Oly's market share would be today with a decent APS-C and FF mirrorless lineup - instead of mFT "OMGs and Pens". ;D

 

[Don Haines]

correct. But as opposed to FF MILC, nobody was interested in Nikon 1. Said so from the start. Even back then it was absolutely clear, that mFT was the "smallest possible sensor" to consider for an ILC system. Now threshold has moved to APS-C.

Perhaps for you, but more consumers have voted Olympus with their wallet than any other mirrorless brand... The cameras are reasonably priced, very compact, and fairly feature rich. This is a hard to beat proposition for a compact camera.

 

[fullstop]

correct. But as opposed to FF MILC, nobody was interested in Nikon 1. Said so from the start. Even back then it was absolutely clear, that mFT was the "smallest possible sensor" to consider for an ILC system. Now threshold has moved to APS-C.

Perhaps for you, but more consumers have voted Olympus with their wallet than any other mirrorless brand... The cameras are reasonably priced, very compact, and fairly feature rich. This is a hard to beat proposition for a compact camera.

only the low-end, poor old sensor Olys are "reasonably priced". the higher end is ridiculously large for the small sensor and ridiculously expensive. 2 grand for the OMG 1 II, give me a break!

 

[Mikehit]

correct. But as opposed to FF MILC, nobody was interested in Nikon 1. Said so from the start. Even back then it was absolutely clear, that mFT was the "smallest possible sensor" to consider for an ILC system. Now threshold has moved to APS-C.

Perhaps for you, but more consumers have voted Olympus with their wallet than any other mirrorless brand... The cameras are reasonably priced, very compact, and fairly feature rich. This is a hard to beat proposition for a compact camera.

only the low-end, poor old sensor Olys are "reasonably priced". the higher end is ridiculously large for the small sensor and ridiculously expensive. 2 grand for the OMG 1 II, give me a break!

But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.
And given your stated desire for inferior lenses to make a package compact ( ), and your opinion of what the masses consider 'good enough' then it is clear the clearly MFT is good enough for an awful lot of people. The number of reports of professionals switching from DSLR to Oly/Pana vastly outweigh those switching from CaNikon to Sony.

It seems you do not understand the market as well as you think.

 

[fullstop]

But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.

easy. just 1 quick example:

roughly equivalent: Oly 45/1.2 - mFT, Sony 85/1.8 - FF

Weight:
Oly OMD1 II + 45/1.2 = 574 + 410 g = 984 grams
Sony A7 III + 85/1.8 = 650 + 371 = 1021 grams

Price [best price where I live / Central Europe]:
Oly: € 2,900
Sony: € 2,865

Same weight, same price, same size. No rational reason whatsoever to eschew FF goodness and even remotely consider mFT. And those Oly cameras that sell in reasonable large numbers in Japan are all cr*ppy little last generation Pens at fire sales prices. But yes, at least they are small and light.

 

[Sporgon]

Anyways, it is evident that production of DSLRs (Mirrorslappers) is about to cease.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, 1-series DSLR will probably be offered for another 10 years

Love your humour

 

[Ozarker]

Oddly, no one is asking about in camera sensor stabilization. Now that would be "evolutionary" for Canon! That would entice me to be an early adopter of a new M system! It would also be a way for them to push out Sigma and Tamron's IS lenses if they don't "talk" well with Canon's ICIS system!

With in camera IBIS the communication between the body and lens for stabilization purposes isn't important. Just switch VC (IS) off on the Tamron. The camera takes care of it. One thing that would be nice in this scenario would be if the Tamron (example) would at least communicate focal length to the camera.

I use legacy glass that has no electronics. When I use it on my Olympus mirrorless the stabilization works very well. The problem is that each time I change lenses I have to tell the camera the focal length. As long as the Canon mirrorless can get that (and aperture) from a Tamron or Sigma, I don't see a problem.

 

[Mikehit]

But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.

easy. just 1 quick example:

roughly equivalent: Oly 45/1.2 - mFT, Sony 85/1.8 - FF

Weight:
Oly OMD1 II + 45/1.2 = 574 + 410 g = 984 grams
Sony A7 III + 85/1.8 = 650 + 371 = 1021 grams

Price [best price where I live / Central Europe]:
Oly: € 2,900
Sony: € 2,865

Same weight, same price, same size. No rational reason whatsoever to eschew FF goodness and even remotely consider mFT. And those Oly cameras that sell in reasonable large numbers in Japan are all cr*ppy little last generation Pens at fire sales prices. But yes, at least they are small and light.

So you are comparing a consumer level 85mm f1.8 with a top of the range 45mm f1.2? According to you, you and most people don't care about ultra-shallow DOF, so why not compare with a Oly 45mm f.18 at a fraction of the price?

 

[Ozarker]

But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.

easy. just 1 quick example:

roughly equivalent: Oly 45/1.2 - mFT, Sony 85/1.8 - FF

Weight:
Oly OMD1 II + 45/1.2 = 574 + 410 g = 984 grams
Sony A7 III + 85/1.8 = 650 + 371 = 1021 grams

Price [best price where I live / Central Europe]:
Oly: € 2,900
Sony: € 2,865

Same weight, same price, same size. No rational reason whatsoever to eschew FF goodness and even remotely consider mFT. And those Oly cameras that sell in reasonable large numbers in Japan are all cr*ppy little last generation Pens at fire sales prices. But yes, at least they are small and light.

And the OLY is a pain in the hands to hold. I can't see the Sony being any better. I have an OLY. Takes good photos for M43. Terrible ergonomics.Terrible. Everything is jammed together and it is not comfortable at all. BUt, I have yuge hands. Yours might be small enough, but that's mighty small. They don't call it Micro 4/3 for nothing.

 

[Don Haines]

But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.

The big seller for Olympus is the E-M10 II (390g) and the 14-42F6.3 lens (91g) for about $500 US.
So.... what would the comparable Sony be? A6000 (343g) and 16-50 lens (116g) and about $650 US?

So yeah, comparing crop to crop, there really isn't much physical difference... but then again, comparing crop to FF is a different story, and the A7 and 24-70 weigh in at 945g and $2100US.

If your major criterias are physical size, weight, or cost, you are going to go for a crop camera, be it Oly, Sony, an M, or whatever.... No FF camera can compete...

 

[Don Haines]

And the OLY is a pain in the hands to hold. I can't see the Sony being any better. I have an OLY. Takes good photos for M43. Terrible ergonomics.Terrible. Everything is jammed together and it is not comfortable at all. BUt, I have yuge hands. Yours might be small enough, but that's mighty small. They don't call it Micro 4/3 for nothing.

Got one too.... The ergonomics SUCKS!!!!!!!!! but after a while you get used to the menu system... The main reason I like the big cameras 5 series, 7 series, etc, is the well thought out and properly spaced controls that there is just no room for on tiny bodies.

(BTW, the 6D2 touchscreen interface is wonderful)

 

[slclick]

Ugh, Oly ergonomics are awful and NO, I never got used to the menu system, sure I could have embraced it but I was much happier just selling it.