The State of the Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Development

[Don Haines]

Re: Mount logic

Canon’s observable behavior in lens development suggests that it is less likely to introduce a new mount system with the full frame mirrorless.

The two key pieces of evidence:
1) Canon’s capacity to develop and release new or redesigned lenses has been wanting, despite the CEO having publicly stated that he wished to increase the velocity of development two years ago. Canon actually did better in the last 12 months versus years past, but it is still not as prolific as a couple of the third party lens manufacturers. This indicates a likely maximum capacity of development of roughly 5-6 major lens releases per year. To produce a set of new lenses of the main three zooms, the main 8 primes, at least a couple of the superteles, that would take 5 years at a minimum while continuing to support the EF mount at half the pace it is now.

2) The M mount has been wielded by Canon in an interesting - perhaps even intelligent - way. Instead of trying to replicate its line-up in with a whole new suit of M lenses, they instead chose to make some lenses that could exploit the APS-C sensor and the new mount to get some very big size reductions. And for everything else, it just relied on the adapter, which - to Canon’s credit - has worked better than any other adapter in adapter history. It’s like it’s not there.

If Canon were to try the same strategy with the new mirrorless, the size advantages for the lenses would be much less due to the full frame sensor, thus there isn’t much of an advantage to a new mount. The obvious evolution would be to have EF be the full frame mount and M be the APS-C version, much like we have EF/EF-S now.

My prediction, for the long term, is that the crop rebel camera will disappear....

I predict that EOS FF cameras will remain more or less as is, except gradually becoming mirrorless...
7D going FF mirrorless as sort of a mini 1DX....
XXD series vanishing, replaced by a mirrorless version of the 6D series....
I can see a FF SL-1 sized camera as the bottom of the EOS series....
For lower end cameras, the rebels, keep a midrange and a low cost mirrorless crop version....
And the M series continues, probably adding is a high-end M....

That said, I have a perfect record for predictions.... Absolutely perfect! Wrong every time

 

[3kramd5]

Take the EOS-M that started as a total failure on most counts.

Well, except that the original EOS M was the #2 best-selling MILC model in Japan (the largest geographical market for MILCs) the year after its launch, beating out all models from Olympus and Panasonic, and bested only by an older (and heavily discounted) Sony NEX model. But yeah, except for being a hugely popular domestic product that started Canon on the path to their current position as #2 in global MILC sales, it was a total failure.

+1 to Neuro.

Some folks see this as Canon's last chance, but I see it as a super profitable land-grab. People's exhibit A is the first EOS M. Lest we forget, EOS M lacked:

• IBIS
  

Courting the vast market of people who don’t want moving parts obviously.

 

[unfocused]

Re: Mount logic

My prediction, for the long term, is that the crop rebel camera will disappear....

I predict that EOS FF cameras will remain more or less as is, except gradually becoming mirrorless...
7D going FF mirrorless as sort of a mini 1DX....
XXD series vanishing, replaced by a mirrorless version of the 6D series....
I can see a FF SL-1 sized camera as the bottom of the EOS series....
For lower end cameras, the rebels, keep a midrange and a low cost mirrorless crop version....
And the M series continues, probably adding is a high-end M....

That said, I have a perfect record for predictions.... Absolutely perfect! Wrong every time

I think you will be keeping your perfect record.

While it is conceivable that APS-C DSLRs could someday disappear, I doubt it will be in my lifetime.

As Neuro is fond of pointing out, mirrorless sales have plateaued. While DSLR sales have been declining, they have a long way to go before mirrorless will overtake them. But, even if mirrorless should eventually overtake DSLRs, that doesn't mean that it will suddenly become unprofitable to manufacture and sell DSLRs.

Remember that the bulk of both DSLR and Mirrorless sales are APS-C and that will continue to be the case even after Canon and Nikon enter the full frame mirrorless market.

Let's suppose for a minute that the relative numbers of mirrorless and DSLR APS-C bodies were reversed. If, based on current sales it makes good business sense for Canon to offer APS-C mirrorless bodies, why would it become unprofitable for Canon to make DSLRs if the numbers were reversed?

I presume that Canon is in the business of making money and as long as there is sufficient demand for DSLRs, there would be no reason for Canon to stop making them.

Of course, the single lens reflex form factor could possibly fall out of favor. But, it's been the most popular form factor for sixty years or so, when it supplanted mirrorless film cameras and I'm not ready to declare that a largely untested and currently imperfect alternative is going to take over the market.

Lets unpack your specific predictions:

7D going FF mirrorless as sort of a mini 1DX....

The 7D II already is a mini-1Dx. As long as the 1DX remains an SLR why would Canon drop that form factor for its APS-C alternative? Until a mirrorless camera has the viewfinder, focusing, battery life and other advantages of the 1Dx, there is no reason to change the 7D series.

XXD series vanishing, replaced by a mirrorless version of the 6D series....

Why? Again, if you pair the 6D and XXD series, why would Canon unpair them by giving one a different form factor than the other?

I can see a FF SL-1 sized camera as the bottom of the EOS series...

It would be a pretty amazing feat for Canon to produce a full frame mirrorless camera at the same price point as the SL2. I doubt if the economics are there. Or perhaps you are just suggesting that Canon may eventually make a bargain full frame mirrorless camera. That is possible, but it's more like to correspond to the 6D in cost and features. It could be an added option or it could, I suppose, replace the 6D, but I don't see it having any impact at all on the SL series.

For lower end cameras, the rebels, keep a midrange and a low cost mirrorless crop version....

Don't we already have that with the M series. If Canon sees profitability in both the M and Rebel series today, what is going to change in the future. Sure, as I've said, the relative market position of the two may reverse, but I suspect there will still be plenty of people who view a DSLR as a "real" camera and prefer that form factor to mirrorless.

Maybe it won't be the majority of customers in the future, but I would be very surprised if the demand disappears. Especially since one of the main selling schemes of Canon Rebels is to kit them with telephotos so vacationers and soccer parents can have the option of a 50-250 mm or a 70-300 mm lens. Might Canon kit mirrorless in the same way. Sure, but unless the ergonomics of mirrorless are as convenient as DSLRs (which means a quality viewfinder) I expect that many people will continue to prefer DSLRs.

And the M series continues, probably adding in a high-end M....

This one I agree with. But, isn't a $900 M6 already high end for most people? I could see a niche version to compete with the Fuji X-Pro series, if Canon determine the demand is there.

I'm not trying to pick on you Don. You are a reasonable and rational fellow. I'm just trying to point out that there seems to be as assumption among many that there is a evolutionary continuum that requires that mirrorless supplant DSLRs. I think there is more evidence that they will coexist for many years to come. I'm not ruling out the possibility that mirrorless may eventually replace DSLRs, but I think it is many years in the future and will only happen when mirrorless can deliver everything DSLRs deliver and do it at a better price point. When that does happen, I expect that the form factor will look much like today's DSLRs.

 

[dak723]

Re: Mount logic

Canon’s observable behavior in lens development suggests that it is less likely to introduce a new mount system with the full frame mirrorless.

The two key pieces of evidence:
1) Canon’s capacity to develop and release new or redesigned lenses has been wanting, despite the CEO having publicly stated that he wished to increase the velocity of development two years ago. Canon actually did better in the last 12 months versus years past, but it is still not as prolific as a couple of the third party lens manufacturers. This indicates a likely maximum capacity of development of roughly 5-6 major lens releases per year. To produce a set of new lenses of the main three zooms, the main 8 primes, at least a couple of the superteles, that would take 5 years at a minimum while continuing to support the EF mount at half the pace it is now.

2) The M mount has been wielded by Canon in an interesting - perhaps even intelligent - way. Instead of trying to replicate its line-up in with a whole new suit of M lenses, they instead chose to make some lenses that could exploit the APS-C sensor and the new mount to get some very big size reductions. And for everything else, it just relied on the adapter, which - to Canon’s credit - has worked better than any other adapter in adapter history. It’s like it’s not there.

If Canon were to try the same strategy with the new mirrorless, the size advantages for the lenses would be much less due to the full frame sensor, thus there isn’t much of an advantage to a new mount. The obvious evolution would be to have EF be the full frame mount and M be the APS-C version, much like we have EF/EF-S now.

This is way too intelligent a post to be allowed here!

People keep saying that Canon is way behind Sony. If they go with a new mount, they will be way behind as it will take years to introduce enough lenses to make the new system popular.

If they go with the EF mount, they will automatically be WAY ahead of Sony. Which would you choose?

 

[3kramd5]

Re: Mount logic

If they go with the EF mount, they will automatically be WAY ahead of Sony. Which would you choose?

Depends on many factors, including whether I expect to make more sales with a new mount (will I get people to refresh?)

 

[Talys]

Re: Mount logic

If they go with the EF mount, they will automatically be WAY ahead of Sony. Which would you choose?

Depends on many factors, including whether I expect to make more sales with a new mount (will I get people to refresh?)

They don't really need that to get people to refresh. Just look at 85/1.4

1) Canon’s capacity to develop and release new or redesigned lenses has been wanting, despite the CEO having publicly stated that he wished to increase the velocity of development two years ago. Canon actually did better in the last 12 months versus years past, but it is still not as prolific as a couple of the third party lens manufacturers. This indicates a likely maximum capacity of development of roughly 5-6 major lens releases per year. To produce a set of new lenses of the main three zooms, the main 8 primes, at least a couple of the superteles, that would take 5 years at a minimum while continuing to support the EF mount at half the pace it is now.

I think it's actually capacity to meet customer demand. I thought they didn't want to launch 24-70/2.8IS until 85L 1.4 had met demand, or some such.

If Canon came out of the gate with 4 new mount high end lenses (say 3 zooms and a prime), they couldn't make them fast enough to keep up with sales.

 

[Antono Refa]

Why is it people think a mirrorless FF camera would have a new mount?

I've read reasonable explanation about why it might have a shorter flange distance, which would allow using EF lenses with an extension tube, but not an explanation of EF shortcomings that would call for a new mount for mirrorless.

 

[ritholtz]

I think there are a few models out there.

A pro APS-C with EF-M to EF adapter.
A pro APS-C with EF mount.
A pro full-frame with EF-M to EF adapter.
A pro full-frame with EF mount.

I am hoping for Canon to give us Rebel sized FF similar to SL series. Cheap and small FF offering for less than $1000 with EF mount.

Eventually probably, the question is, which order will they come out, and with what specs. Eventually we'll probably see something like this:

6D-M: emphasis on small size and cost
5D-M: larger than 6D-M, all-rounder with dual-card slots
1D-M: largest body, emphasis on performance
5DS-M: emphasis on resolution

I think the consensus is that we'll see a 6D-M-like body first.

6D is going for $899 on refurb store. They can just shrink it and give us for same price. How big are 6d bodies compared to xxd ones.

 

[stevelee]

I'm looking forward to the predicted models in which the mirror gradually disappears. Reminds me of the Cheshire cat, other than the smile.

 

[ahsanford]

Why is it people think a mirrorless FF camera would have a new mount?

I've read reasonable explanation about why it might have a shorter flange distance, which would allow using EF lenses with an extension tube, but not an explanation of EF shortcomings that would call for a new mount for mirrorless.

The new mount vs. staying with EF decision is not about EF shortcomings at all, IMHO. It's about doing the same job in a smaller overall body + lens footprint (with new lenses for that new mount), the opportunity to adapt other/competitive lenses, etc.

I'd prefer a full EF mount myself, and I fully recognize the opportunity to be smaller overall is highly limited to a handful of slow/wide lenses. But that does not mean a thin mount is completely without merit -- it's just wildly impractical for Canonites given how vast the existing EF portfolio is.

- A

 

[scottkinfw]

I think there are a few models out there.

A pro APS-C with EF-M to EF adapter.
A pro APS-C with EF mount.
A pro full-frame with EF-M to EF adapter.
A pro full-frame with EF mount.

I am hoping for Canon to give us Rebel sized FF similar to SL series. Cheap and small FF offering for less than $1000 with EF mount.

With high confidence verging on certainty, Canon won't start their FF mirrorless experience with such a product (unless it's an unexpected fixed lens setup a la RX1R II or Leica Q, but I don't think that's what you were asking for).

We could totally see that kind of product someday -- an FF mirrorless + SL1/2-ish form factor -- but the importance of this first Canon FF mirrorless (ILC) offering cannot be overstated. IMHO, it needs to be/have:

• Appealing to a broad swath of FF shooters
• A clear ergonomic lineage to Canon bodies currently sold today (to draw in existing Canon users)
• Work really well with Canon EF lenses, speedlites, etc.
• Be a plausibly familiar/consistent user experience for folks with a Canon SLR on one shoulder and this new rig on the other
• Specs at least on par with a 6D2 -- it doesn't need to match Sony or line up favorably to an A7 III, but it can't be behind the lowest price point FF SLR or folks will indict Canon for not taking FF mirrorless seriously

And I just don't see a rig built around simplicity and a really small size ticking all those boxes.

- A

This is my opinion. I would only (at least at this point) think about purchasing one if it handled my L glass. It's been a couple of years since I purchased a camera and I'm very happy so it would have to be something really compelling to make me want to take on a new camera with its learning curve. Also, I don't want to carry two types of lenses.

scott

 

[scottkinfw]

I'm going to go out on a limb and forecast two body types- one with a form factor of the M5, the second one will be a whole different and new body style with a rotating grip and viewfinder. A viewfinder that could be adjusted for those awkward low shots would be a godsend. A new body design would solve the problem of trying to pack more features into the current body designs and increase cooling. This would benefit the video side.

So an XC10 with an FF ILC mount... that will take really heavy lenses. Will that work?

I'm all for some ergonomic bravery where needs aren't being well met, but that seems a wild leap best left for a dedicated video rig -- which this first offering most certainly will not be.

- A

That may be, but as conservative as Canon is, I can't see them taking a risk with a likely a brand new sensor new camera technology, and a new-fangled and edgy body design. I may be wrong, but it seems like too many risks all at once.

Scott

 

[scottkinfw]

I just want to know if it's the EF mount or not. Because as soon as they announce EF is dead, it'll be the Canopolypse. Can you imagine the value of everyone's gear dropping overnight?

So you're saying that announcing a new mount for a FF MILC camera is synonymous with announcing the end of EF lens production? There are some effective antipsychotic pharmaceutical agents available, perhaps you should consult a physician.

But they make people so stiff and shake. Not to mention the telltale "Thorazine Shuffle".

 

[scottkinfw]

I just want to know if it's the EF mount or not. Because as soon as they announce EF is dead, it'll be the Canopolypse. Can you imagine the value of everyone's gear dropping overnight?

So, what lenses do you think people will be using on the 1Dx III and 5D V?

Easy- the ones they already own and paid for. Plus, whatever they think they need/want.

Scott

 

[arthurbikemad]

I hope Canon do read forums, I'm sure they do, not that it matters to them what a few forum goers think of development and Canon in general, however I am starting to believe, believe in a wave sweeping the net, that wave seems to be Sony! Even me, I never thought I'd say it but... The Canon mirrorless wants to be good, very good, it wants to have this funky eye AF and fast pro frame rates, not that the a9 quite matches up with the 1DX2 in some specs, such as startup and delay times, the minor things that truly can get you the shot when time matters, however as I am going to say, if the Canon mirrorless does not stack up to Sony then I think I am going to buy one and check it out, that would be the first new brand of Camera for me in over twenty five years. So come on Canon, show your cards, cut the crap, open up the possibilities of current pro bodies via firmware and let's see this mirrorless.

 

[Talys]

I hope Canon do read forums, I'm sure they do, not that it matters to them what a few forum goers think of development and Canon in general, however I am starting to believe, believe in a wave sweeping the net, that wave seems to be Sony! Even me, I never thought I'd say it but... The Canon mirrorless wants to be good, very good, it wants to have this funky eye AF and fast pro frame rates, not that the a9 quite matches up with the 1DX2 in some specs, such as startup and delay times, the minor things that truly can get you the shot when time matters, however as I am going to say, if the Canon mirrorless does not stack up to Sony then I think I am going to buy one and check it out, that would be the first new brand of Camera for me in over twenty five years. So come on Canon, show your cards, cut the crap, open up the possibilities of current pro bodies via firmware and let's see this mirrorless.

Well, the M50 will have Eye AF, so we'll see how that works out. I'm pretty confident frame rate won't be an issue, since M50 is already 10fps. The first reviews of CR3 is very promising -- better than Sony's Compressed RAW in terms of what's lost as compared to uncompressed; we need to see it in the field with FF cameras to know how that works out.

There will be some "devil in the details". I hope Canon really perfects focus magnification, with an implementation better than Sony; and I hope they copy crop mode from Sony, which is perfect, IMO. There are many other potential Sony "desirable features" for some shooters, like the subject/face recognition/tracking. Not really my thing, but maybe for others. We'll need to see what the uncompressed buffer is, too; Sony's is really quite impressive. And will Canon finally support UHS-II? Not a huge deal for me, but for some it seems to be.

Should you decide to go the Sony route, I would highly encourage you to buy or rent a Sony A9/A7 before buying one. There is no doubt that they have many desirable features, but there are caveats to a lot of them, and I find that the lenses are still pretty lackluster, not to mention horrendously expensive. They generally have amazing resolving power (sharpness), but fall short on things that matter to me in expensive lenses, like chromatic aberration and quality of bokeh away from the center. There are also some really annoying bugs or strange design choices, too.

I was fortunate to have been able to borrow one, and after quite a lot of time with it, my conclusion is that I like it a whole lot better than A7R2 (which I also borrowed for about a week), and I probably wouldn't mind owning one, but I don't like it nearly as much as a Canon DSLR for most tasks.

However, I think it all depends on what you shoot and how you like to shoot, and of course, what the Canon FF MILC looks like when it comes out!

 

[jolyonralph]

and I fully recognize the opportunity to be smaller overall is highly limited to a handful of slow/wide lenses.

Not true.

The Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f/1.8 is neither slow nor wide and it's a compact, lightweight, and an absolutely optically superb quality lens, sharp and beautiful bokeh.

Now, of course, I'm sure Canon could produce a stellar quality 50mm-ish lens if they wanted to

Jolyon

 

[jolyonralph]

Anyone who is concerned about the future of EF lenses once a new mount is announced should look at what Sony have done with their A mount lenses, which of course they are still selling.

Oh, that's right. They haven't launched any new A mount lenses since 2015.



SELL SELL SELL!!!!

 

[ahsanford]

Not true.

The Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f/1.8 is neither slow nor wide and it's a compact, lightweight, and an absolutely optically superb quality lens, sharp and beautiful bokeh.

Sure, but just for one exception at one focal length. 50 primes famously can be fast and small, I agree.

In the broad strokes, you'll only have a smaller overall footprint with a limited number of lenses. Ladies I gentlemen, I present to you the possibly smaller platform of the future:

Mirrorless body
24 f/2.8
35 f/2.8 (maybe f/2)
50 f/1.8

[crickets]

I'd argue that list above is not enough to warrant a new mount that Canon will build their business around for the next 30 years. Once you go faster than f/2 and longer 50mm, stuff gets 'EF big' because physics. As Sony has shown, the rest of the lenses will be just about like for like size/lengthwise with their current EF counterparts.

So thin mount may totally happen, but I'm not remotely convinced that thin mount happening spells either the end of EF or that this new mount will get more than (guess) 5 lenses in the first 5 years.

- A

 

[hendrik-sg]

I just want to know if it's the EF mount or not. Because as soon as they announce EF is dead, it'll be the Canopolypse. Can you imagine the value of everyone's gear dropping overnight?

So you're saying that announcing a new mount for a FF MILC camera is synonymous with announcing the end of EF lens production? There are some effective antipsychotic pharmaceutical agents available, perhaps you should consult a physician.

You are right, there is no prove that with the announcement of a new mirrorless mount the EF mount is dead. BUT, if they "move" to mirrorless, or give any hint, that mirrorless should be the future (mirrorless would move up the lineup), the math is not very complicated. In this case, they would concentrate on bulidung a lineup of new mount lenses. If course, some lens designs could be used for both mounts (be elongating the mirroorless lens backwards) others not. But even then i must decide in which mount i buy a lens, and may decide to not buy it at all, because uncertainity doesnt make the shopping experience great). Sure, it's not rational to buy lenses, which i do not need the next day, but well, having 100 pairs of shoes isn't either.

Not to forget, they already obsoleted the FD lenses, but then the new EF system gave a huge benefit. The benefit of mirrorless vs DSLR isn't that big (if at all) so even the risk or feel of getting my lenses obsoletet can prevent me from investing in the system or hobby at all..

generally, with maturing technics, the rational motivation for investment is reduced, so i would assume the hobby market which to some point buys emotionally is more important.

Telling people, to search a medical solution for there problem doesn't help that much, it will be canon's task to keep their customers fascinated and loyal. It can be both, any change can be great, give new fascination, keep the hobby alive. Some people are buying a new car every 2 years, even if this is a big waste of money. some people do this, others not, and the latter dont want to be forced to.