The State of the Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Development

[Talys]

Since we have raised the issue of flash sync, can somebody quickly comment on the fast flash sync feature? I’ve never used it, and frankly don’t know when I might want to or why. I don’t use flash a lot as it is, but might do more if I knew more what I was doing. How well does the fast sync work and under what circumstances?

I now have a 6D2, and haven’t noticed this feature in instructions for any previous camera of mine.

If you use regular flash sync, as you set your shutter speed goes faster than 1/180 to 1/250 (depending on the camera), an increasingly large portion of the bottom image will be blacked out, because of a "rolling shutter".

Without getting technical, to get around that, a high speed sync (HSS) flash rapidly fires in succession (so fast that it just looks like one flash to the human eye). It works great, with the downside being that it is much less powerful than a single flash. HSS will let you set your shutter all the way to 1/8000, which is faster than your 6DII supports.

Under normal circumstances, especially indoors, if you want to illuminate your subject, you'd never fiire a GN60 flash (like the Canon 600EX-RT) at full power anyways, because you'd just turn everything white. About 1/4 power is as high as you normally need, even when you're bouncing it off of something. Therefore, HSS at 100% power is still usually bright enough.

However, one important use of flash is to balance out the sun, or to illuminate your subject the way you want to despite the brightness of sun. In this case, you need the flash to be very bright, and HSS just gets crushed on a small camera flash. Realistically, on battery powered units, you're looking at 10-pound strobes to really "overpower" the sun, especially if you want to use high speed sync.

In addition, high speed sync uses a ton of battery power, meaning longer refresh between shots, and fewer flashes. Plus, you're running it at 100% most of the time, meaning the flash will work for even fewer shots.

When you look at outdoor fashion and celebrity photography, you'll see big strobes firing off at 10 frames a second as the cameras click-click-click away, because "the shot" can happen in a fraction of a second -- and so your flash/strobe needs to keep up.

With a global shutter, the dream is, even outside, you can use a strobe at 1/3200 or whatever shutter speed you want, and either have a more powerful or longer lasting/faster refreshing strobe. And importantly, it means that photographers will need to lug around less/smaller gear to do on-location shoots. For example, if you're trying to do portraits at beach, you might be carrying stuff in a bag instead of a big case.

 

[stevelee]

If you use regular flash sync, as you set your shutter speed goes faster than 1/180 to 1/250 (depending on the camera), an increasingly large portion of the bottom image will be blacked out, because of a "rolling shutter".

Without getting technical, to get around that, a high speed sync (HSS) flash rapidly fires in succession (so fast that it just looks like one flash to the human eye). It works great, with the downside being that it is much less powerful than a single flash. HSS will let you set your shutter all the way to 1/8000, which is faster than your 6DII supports.

Thanks for your thorough explanation. I'll try it out some time, though I doubt I will have any real-world use for it. If it times the flashes so that you don't get bands of light and dark from overlaps and misses, but gives somewhat even illumination, then it sounds like a technological achievement.

 

[crashpc]

AvTvM Don´t get discouraged. These guy bring nothing useful to the discussion really, and it doesn´t take much for them to ridicule others. It was before even the sensor and DR performance of Canon cameras, and now, when all this is forgotten, we actually see it was important for Canon, and that they needed to act on all those voices. It was just that it happens slowly.

 

[Mikehit]

AvTvM Don´t get discouraged. These guy bring nothing useful to the discussion really, and it doesn´t take much for them to ridicule others. It was before even the sensor and DR performance of Canon cameras, and now, when all this is forgotten, we actually see it was important for Canon, and that they needed to act on all those voices. It was just that it happens slowly.

Oh, believe me. I have nothing against AvTvM's objective observations about where Canon is falling short of the competition, or where Canon will need to catch up (not that it takes a genius to put two and two together). Where he invites ridicule is when he draws the conclusion that Canon are incompetent, don't know the market and are as a result doomed to failure because they do not create the very specific camera that he wants to buy.

 

[AvTvM]

AvTvM Don´t get discouraged. These guy bring nothing useful to the discussion really, and it doesn´t take much for them to ridicule others. It was before even the sensor and DR performance of Canon cameras, and now, when all this is forgotten, we actually see it was important for Canon, and that they needed to act on all those voices. It was just that it happens slowly.

Oh, believe me. I have nothing against AvTvM's objective observations about where Canon is falling short of the competition, or where Canon will need to catch up (not that it takes a genius to put two and two together). Where he invites ridicule is when he draws the conclusion that Canon are incompetent, don't know the market and are as a result doomed to failure because they do not create the very specific camera that he wants to buy.

nope. thats the constant spin you and Neuro want to put on things. it just does not work. LOL
A small, but powerful FF MILC system is NOT something (only) I want .. it is an absolute necessity for Canon .. or they will lose market leadership.

Canon has been and acting rather stupidly in many ways as far as their (stills) imaging product portfolio and strategy. Fuji and Sony would be NOWHERE today had Canon cut them short from the start with a decent mirrorless camera offering (APS-C and FF).

 

[Mikehit]

nope. thats the constant spin you and Neuro want to put on things. it just does not work. LOL
A small, but powerful FF MILC system is NOT something (only) I want .. it is an absolute necessity for Canon .. or they will lose market leadership.

Canon has been and acting rather stupidly in many ways as far as their (stills) imaging product portfolio and strategy. Fuji and Sony would be NOWHERE today had Canon cut them short from the start with a decent mirrorless camera offering (APS-C and FF).

Yes, it is a necessity for Canon - no-one has ever denied that. Please show me where I did (hint: you won't be able to).

"Fuji and Sony would be NOWHERE today had Canon cut them short " - impossible to say because Sony's superior sensor would have given them a foothold anyway irrespective of what Canon did.

"Canon...Acting rather stupidly"...You just did it again. LOL.

 

[AvTvM]

yes. it is really stupid if you dont hinder/squash your competitors while they are still in their nascent stage. Adobe is a lot smarter in that respect than stupid Canon.

 

[BillB]

yes. it is really stupid if you dont hinder/squash your competitors while they are still in their nascent stage. Adobe is a lot smarter in that respect than stupid Canon.

Sony and Fuji are hardly startup companies. We have no idea whether or not they are making money on mirrorless camera manufacturing if their front end costs are included. Hard to squash established companies when you are new to the sector (mirrorless) yourself. You call Canon stupid, but the game is a long way from over.

 

[AvTvM]

yes. it is really stupid if you dont hinder/squash your competitors while they are still in their nascent stage. Adobe is a lot smarter in that respect than stupid Canon.

Sony and Fuji are hardly startup companies. We have no idea whether or not they are making money on mirrorless camera manufacturing if their front end costs are included. Hard to squash established companies when you are new to the sector (mirrorless) yourself. You call Canon stupid, but the game is a long way from over.

had Canon launched a direct competitor vs. Sony A7 (1st gen) when it was launched as well as offering a more decent APS-C offering [instead of anemic EOS M, M2, M10, etc. ] against Sony A6000/6300 and all the Fuji crop stuff ... Fuji and Sony would be absolutely nowhere in stills imaging today. And Nikon quite possibly bankrupt.

 

[Mikehit]

yes. it is really stupid if you dont hinder/squash your competitors while they are still in their nascent stage. Adobe is a lot smarter in that respect than stupid Canon.

Sony and Fuji are hardly startup companies. We have no idea whether or not they are making money on mirrorless camera manufacturing if their front end costs are included. Hard to squash established companies when you are new to the sector (mirrorless) yourself. You call Canon stupid, but the game is a long way from over.

had Canon launched a direct competitor vs. Sony A7 (1st gen) when it was launched as well as offering a more decent APS-C offering [instead of anemic EOS M, M2, M10, etc. ] against Sony A6000/6300 and all the Fuji crop stuff ... Fuji and Sony would be absolutely nowhere in stills imaging today. And Nikon quite possibly bankrupt.

WOW! Have you sent your CV to Canon, Nikon, Google, and every other tech company because you clearly have unparallelled understanding and foresight in the technological arena. Awesome!



After all, Canon might still be #1 five years after the A7 was introduced.....oh, wait....

 

[Loswr]

All of AvTvM's arguments are logical and all his facts are true...inside his own personal reality. But out here in the real world, his arguments are fallacies and his facts are lies.

His persistent belief in his own delusional world view reminds me of a Kansas schoolmarm droning on about the earth being 7000 years old and dinosaur fossils being animals that perished because Noah ran out of room on his ark.

 

[BillB]

yes. it is really stupid if you dont hinder/squash your competitors while they are still in their nascent stage. Adobe is a lot smarter in that respect than stupid Canon.

Sony and Fuji are hardly startup companies. We have no idea whether or not they are making money on mirrorless camera manufacturing if their front end costs are included. Hard to squash established companies when you are new to the sector (mirrorless) yourself. You call Canon stupid, but the game is a long way from over.

had Canon launched a direct competitor vs. Sony A7 (1st gen) when it was launched as well as offering a more decent APS-C offering [instead of anemic EOS M, M2, M10, etc. ] against Sony A6000/6300 and all the Fuji crop stuff ... Fuji and Sony would be absolutely nowhere in stills imaging today. And Nikon quite possibly bankrupt.

Speculation about what might have happened is even more fun than speculation about what will happen. Time will never prove your wrong. I'm not sure how far Sony and Fuji are from nowhere in stills photography now. It may come down to whether they can end up in the black in their camera business with the models they already have on the market. This is likely even more true for Nikon. "Innovation" generates internet buzz, but it costs money and we don't really know how many cameras it has sold.

 

[crashpc]

Well, me, and some of my friends jumped elsewhere for a reason. So I conclude AVs vievpoint to be valid, and the data might have some truth in it. But now I see how he goes overboard. It takes a lot to make all this happen. Resources, time, and so on. If Canon could do this by fingers snap, they would sure do it. Didn´t happen for reasons....
There are some hipsters out there, being happy to buy newer tech in the camera, not caring about the whole system, and there are people, for which Sony cameras can do more. But they´re still minority, so Canon is not even in a danger. They know what to do when trouble is near, and I´m sure they will. It´s just annoying that current users are milked and acted on only in a case the majority would be about to levave. In my estimation (and experience) this is not gonna happen with A7III. They still don´t deliver in size matters, lens selection matters, support and service. Vital things. I´ll look into Sony again after five years. Until then, Baaad baaad stupid Canon.

 

[AvTvM]

as written before .. stupid Canon has the good luck that all its (main) competitors are equally stupid.

Sony: wrong lens mount choice. APS-C E-mount pressed into FF service = lenses too big, too complex and way too expensive.

Nikon: even more conservative and backwards mirrorslapper-minded. And when they tried mirrorless they chose a dwarf-sensor (Nikon 1). DOA.

Fuji: APS-C and "Pseudo-MF" plus retro-UI plus weirdo sensors plus high-price lenses only. Instead of APS-C plus FF mirrorless and regular sensors. Minority program, will never get beyond single digit market share.

That's what saved Canon ... for now.

 

[crashpc]

"as written before .. stupid Canon has the good luck that all its (main) competitors are equally stupid."

That´s exactly what I feel really happens, although they have very different angle of view:
Marketing statistics, managements, business, share holders. It is very close to not being about cameras anymore. That´s what troubles me mostly. But Canon seems to be least affected side now.

For the lenses: I have no idea. It seems to me that M mount is very good for anything between 0-50mm. Then things start to turn, but everything is supposed to be big and heavy on any mount, so it´s not a great problem either. Sony has poor lens choice for me, and is expensive. That´s one third of my problem with them. The other third is reliability issues, and the last one is for their support and attitude, as they don´t mind to throw loyal customer base over, in no time, for little stoopid things. They simply don´t care.

Nikon 1 was a joke from get go. Not that it is bad, but it was obvious it won´t be competitive.
Fuji is nice ecosystem, but they try to differentiate so much, that it´s not even funny. And it is in the prices of FF gear, so here I do agree.

The issue is, that Canon doesn´t do their stuff stupidly. They do it so because they can. They can milk us, they can not to go full blast. That makes their engineering and technology cost go down.
I think they mean it like that, strategically. Then they have smaller sensors, and so on.
One small piece to the other one, and next one, and you have 20% more money on hand. That´s what they do.

 

[Mikehit]

as written before .. stupid Canon has the good luck that all its (main) competitors are equally stupid.

Sony: wrong lens mount choice. APS-C E-mount pressed into FF service = lenses too big, too complex and way too expensive.

Nikon: even more conservative and backwards mirrorslapper-minded. And when they tried mirrorless they chose a dwarf-sensor (Nikon 1). DOA.

Fuji: APS-C and "Pseudo-MF" plus retro-UI plus weirdo sensors plus high-price lenses only. Instead of APS-C plus FF mirrorless and regular sensors. Minority program, will never get beyond single digit market share.

That's what saved Canon ... for now.

You clearly have no idea about business management do you.
Part of success is about making fewer errors than the competition - and it seems Canon makes fewer than the others. Smart Canon.

Sony lenses too big? Which ones? The f2.8 pro-grade zoom lenses? Tell me how you can make them significantly smaller for a FF camera. Any idea what the f value means and how it is calculated?

 

[scyrene]

What's that old adage about playing chess with a pigeon? I honestly don't know why you guys are wasting your time with this guy.

 

[BillB]

yes. it is really stupid if you dont hinder/squash your competitors while they are still in their nascent stage. Adobe is a lot smarter in that respect than stupid Canon.

Sony and Fuji are hardly startup companies. We have no idea whether or not they are making money on mirrorless camera manufacturing if their front end costs are included. Hard to squash established companies when you are new to the sector (mirrorless) yourself. You call Canon stupid, but the game is a long way from over.

had Canon launched a direct competitor vs. Sony A7 (1st gen) when it was launched as well as offering a more decent APS-C offering [instead of anemic EOS M, M2, M10, etc. ] against Sony A6000/6300 and all the Fuji crop stuff ... Fuji and Sony would be absolutely nowhere in stills imaging today. And Nikon quite possibly bankrupt.

In some circles, this is rather grandiously known as counterfactual history. Some think of it as fantasy.

 

[BillB]

as written before .. stupid Canon has the good luck that all its (main) competitors are equally stupid.

That's what saved Canon ... for now.

Capablanca, a great chess player of the past, was called lucky, because he often seemed to win because of his opponents blunders. His response was that the good players are always lucky.

Spassky, another great player, from a somewhat later era, said that if your opponent makes a mistake, often it is best to give him the chance to make another one.

It has often been said that people who don't understand often think that things happen because of luck.

 

[AvTvM]

Sony lenses too big? Which ones? The f2.8 pro-grade zoom lenses? Tell me how you can make them significantly smaller for a FF camera. Any idea what the f value means and how it is calculated?

*All* Sony FE lenses are too big ... as a direct consequence of Sony's (wrong) choice of lens mount ... E-mount parameters are fine for APS-C sensors, but less than optimal for FF. Throat width a bit too narrow, FFD a bit too short [same would apply to Canon EF-M mount if used for FF sensor image circle]. This is why all Sony FE lenses are too long ... with a lot of air-filled tube towards mount ... in order to "artificially lengthen" FFD. And more complex optical formula are needed. And all FE glass is too expensive. Sony lens prices generally significantly higher than corresponding Canon (L ) glass, but not better IQ.