Three Sensors Being Tested for Canon Full Frame Mirrorless? [CR1]

[Canon Rumors Guy]

It’s no secret that Canon is hard at work on prosumer mirrorless cameras, including at least one full frame mirrorless camera.</p>
<p>We’re told that three sensors are being tested in various camera body configurations, each with a different pixel count. The source claims that 24mp, 28mp and 36mp sensors are being used.  There is no mention if these are all new sensors or if they are modified versions of current image sensors.</p>
<p>We do find it interesting that these sorts of things are being talked about, but we still don’t have not confirmed what sort of mount solution Canon is going to come up with. As we saw this past week, Canon has <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-wide-angle-zoom-for-full-frame-mirrorless-camera/">patented a dedicated full frame mirrorless optical formula</a>, which tells us we’re getting a new EOS M mount for full frame sensors.</p>
<p><em>More to come….</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[amorse]

The source claims that 24mp, 28mp and 36mp sensors are being used. There is no mention if these are all new sensors or if they are modified versions of current image sensors.

Does Canon currently offer a 36mp sensor with DPAF? I would assume they have to be new sensors wouldn't they? I'm not in the market for a mirrorless camera (yet) but I am so very curious as to how Canon will approach their first offerings considering their acknowledgement that they want to "go on the offensive" in mirrorless.

 

[Architect1776]

The source claims that 24mp, 28mp and 36mp sensors are being used. There is no mention if these are all new sensors or if they are modified versions of current image sensors.

Does Canon currently offer a 36mp sensor with DPAF? I would assume they have to be new sensors wouldn't they? I'm not in the market for a mirrorless camera (yet) but I am so very curious as to how Canon will approach their first offerings considering their acknowledgement that they want to "go on the offensive" in mirrorless.

I would hope that Canon will make the 36 MP sensor the minimum standard for all their cameras going forward. Likely not, but it would be nice for people on a budget to get good quality like in the film days I could shoot the best film available with a Canon TLb and a pro level lens and get the same quality as the F-1. It is a shame that you have to spend big bucks on the camera now to get the better sensor (Film).

 

[ahsanford]

"As we saw this past week, Canon has patented a dedicated full frame mirrorless optical formula, which tells us we’re getting a new EOS M mount for full frame sensors."

No. No it doesn't. A patent is one of many paths forward Canon might take. Are you really calling the mount decision a done deal at this point?

You might consider walking back that statement above... unless you have more details to share with the class?

- A

 

[edoorn]

yeah a patent is only a patent, at this point at least

could be real though, but we won't know for a while. I'd happily take a 36mpix sensor btw

 

[tmc784]

FF-M attached with Tele lenses/mid zoom lenses are still bulky and heavy.

 

[ahsanford]

As for testing multiple resolutions, that wouldn't surprise me at all. Canon wants to spend as a little as possible in production on this, but they recognize the competition could surface with something even higher spec'd than anticipated, and a (relatively) late change to resolution is an easy way to increase the appeal of the camera (as compared to having to implement something that might drive internal geometry changes (e.g. IBIS, cooling for a better spec'd 4K, etc.).

But now that Sony's 'III' line is out of the barn, Canon's biggest missing piece of intel is what price point Nikon is joining the FF mirrorless fray. Again, Canon won't outright match body specs b/c that would be foolish, but it would look really bad if Canon dropped a 6D2-like spec body and Nikon entered the market with a mirrorless D850 variant. (I don't think that will happen -- I think both Canon/Nikon are gunning for enthusiasts first and professionals later, but you never know.)

- A

 

[ahsanford]

FF-M attached with Tele lenses/mid zoom lenses are still bulky and heavy.

Indeed -- you can't hide from the glass.

But that doesn't mean they shouldn't do FF mirrorless. They should just put a big grip on the body to better prepare it for those heavy lenses.

- A

 

[jeffa4444]

What surprises me the most is the back-focus. 10 - 12.5mm is very short given that Sony is 18mm as is the EF-M, It also adds to certain optical challenges.

 

[amorse]

FF-M attached with Tele lenses/mid zoom lenses are still bulky and heavy.

Indeed -- you can't hide from the glass.

But that doesn't mean they shouldn't do FF mirrorless. They should just put a big grip on the body to better prepare it for those heavy lenses.

- A

But there is always the option of releasing slower lenses to reduce the over all size. I guess my question for people who really need a less conspicuous body is are they willing to give up some aperture in order to shrink the kit? With full frame higher ISO performance I would imagine that a slower lens may not be as much of a barrier as it once was, provided that they do not need a very shallow depth of field. Thinking of the 35mm f/2 here; there are size benefits if the aperture is somewhat restricted on a few prime lenses. I guess the kit would be overall of a similar size as to what you could get with a 5D or a 6D in terms of length from tip of glass to back of Camera, but knowing that there are several variants are in testing I can't help but wonder if there is a size-focused body which gives up some ergonomics to shrink over all weight/size.

 

[melgross]

The source claims that 24mp, 28mp and 36mp sensors are being used. There is no mention if these are all new sensors or if they are modified versions of current image sensors.

Does Canon currently offer a 36mp sensor with DPAF? I would assume they have to be new sensors wouldn't they? I'm not in the market for a mirrorless camera (yet) but I am so very curious as to how Canon will approach their first offerings considering their acknowledgement that they want to "go on the offensive" in mirrorless.

I would hope that Canon will make the 36 MP sensor the minimum standard for all their cameras going forward. Likely not, but it would be nice for people on a budget to get good quality like in the film days I could shoot the best film available with a Canon TLb and a pro level lens and get the same quality as the F-1. It is a shame that you have to spend big bucks on the camera now to get the better sensor (Film).

We don’t need 36MP for film quality. Long ago, Kodak stated that Kodachrome 25 was between 14 and 18MP. People were asserting that it was more like 24MP. I tested it in my lab, and indeed, it was around 18MP.

If you want medium format resolution, be aware that it wasn’t too much higher. The difference was mostly in the grain and microcontrast. Medium format lenses are actually less sharp that their 35mm equivalents. It’s complex, but 24MP sensors are already pretty sharp.

I’m not arguing against higher resolution, but I would like Canon to get their pixel level dynamic range and noise equal to Nikon/sony’s best, and while they’re getting closer, they’re not there yet.

 

[Chaitanya]

A good 24MP sensor would be more than enough for a entry level FF MILC camera. I am far more interested to know what lens mount is Canon going to choose?

 

[melgross]

"As we saw this past week, Canon has patented a dedicated full frame mirrorless optical formula, which tells us we’re getting a new EOS M mount for full frame sensors."

No. No it doesn't. A patent is one of many paths forward Canon might take. Are you really calling the mount decision a done deal at this point?

You might consider walking back that statement above... unless you have more details to share with the class?

- A

I would think that the question of the mount is indeed a “done deal”. But that doesn’t mean that we know what it is, or that the patent is it. If they are releasing a camera late this year, or early next, the camera specs need to have been locked down. While some minor areas may still be up for change, depending on developments, something as basic as the mount needs to one of the first things decided upon, not the last, as everything else depends upon it.

Oh, why does my name have the Powershot under it? I don’t have a Powershot, and I didn’t bother listing my equipment.

 

[ahsanford]

But there is always the option of releasing slower lenses to reduce the over all size. I guess my question for people who really need a less conspicuous body is are they willing to give up some aperture in order to shrink the kit?

For those that want a smaller body, sure.

But the rest of us 100% will be bolting on our standard f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes on these bodies on. day. one.

Canon isn't making mirrorless expressly to make a smaller camera. That's just one of the markets for this camera.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

I would think that the question of the mount is indeed a “done deal”. But that doesn’t mean that we know what it is, or that the patent is it.

Forgive me -- I meant "done deal" to the point that CR Guy is 100% sure of what it is. My fault for not being clear.

Agree with your statement above. If it's a Q4 '18 / Q1 '19 product, the mount decision (at Canon) is long since done.

- A

 

[melgross]

But there is always the option of releasing slower lenses to reduce the over all size. I guess my question for people who really need a less conspicuous body is are they willing to give up some aperture in order to shrink the kit?

For those that want a smaller body, sure.

But the rest of us 100% will be bolting on our standard f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes on these bodies on. day. one.

Canon isn't making mirrorless expressly to make a smaller camera. That's just one of the markets for this camera.

- A

I hope that Canon’s idea here for full frame includes a full size camera, though I can’t say exactly what that would mean. No reason why mirrorless can’t satisfy both ends of the spectrum.

But the last interview with Canon people I saw months ago had them stating that a top end mirrorless wasn’t in the cards for now. So the question is what this will equal in their DSLR line. We have three models. 6D, the 5D, and the 1.

 

[NeverPlayMonopoly]

Has anyone commented on the possible aesthetics of this new line of FF MILCs from Canon? Obviously, mount is in the forefront of everyones minds, but I still really wish I could get some hints on the design. I feel like popular photography industry commentators were big fans of the Fuji X-T2 simply because of its looks. Now, I'm a function over fashion kinda of person the majority of the time, but I can't help to think if both companies are throwing an enthusiast spec'd body at us, non-pros will be wanting something that looks different than the old Colani style body.

 

[glness]

If your information is true, why does Canon always have to start out behind the competition out of the gate? Sony has a wonderful 42 MP mirrorless sensor. Nikon has 46 MP sensor that will probably end up in at least one version of its mirrorless camera. Worse yet, if Canon starts out behind the competition now, with Canon's four-year new-camera cycle, they will be even further behind the competition in just a few years.

 

[ahsanford]

But the last interview with Canon people I saw months ago had them stating that a top end mirrorless wasn’t in the cards for now. So the question is what this will equal in their DSLR line. We have three models. 6D, the 5D, and the 1.

I would guess Canon will work bottom to top like it did in EOS M: start at the 6D level and climb up over time. My guess is it will be spec'd roughly like a 6D2 + on-chip ADC sensor + some form of 4K (terms and conditions may apply).

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Has anyone commented on the possible aesthetics of this new line of FF MILCs from Canon? Obviously, mount is in the forefront of everyones minds, but I still really wish I could get some hints on the design. I feel like popular photography industry commentators were big fans of the Fuji X-T2 simply because of its looks. Now, I'm a function over fashion kinda of person the majority of the time, but I can't help to think if both companies are throwing an enthusiast spec'd body at us, non-pros will be wanting something that looks different than the old Colani style body.

I think if Canon makes it a fashion piece, folks won't take it seriously -- look at the Nikon Df as a good example. But to guess what styling they will go with, name me the last retro-informed / nostalgic / stylish camera Canon made. It's just not what they do. Their nostalgia is a bit more for continuity of features and ergonomics more than if you find it pretty.

If the camera is full EF mount, one presumes it will look like something they already make today -- it could be as big as a straight 6D clone externally, but as other have said, they could make a small body independently of the mount spacing and offer something like and SL1/SL2 tiny overall body. There's also the Sigma Quattro direction they could take in which the camera has the larger mount 'lens tube' idea but everything else is put on a diet.

If the camera is indeed a thinner mount, your guess is as good as mine. They could go all EOS M (the original) plus a viewfinder and make something very, very small. I don't think this is the way to go as the #1 market for this will be Canon's own people, and they own a lot of glass and will want to use it on day one. That says the camera needs some kind of grip on it.

As I posted earlier, the thickness of the body and the grip size are independent. You could have a chunky grip on a paper thin mount body, you could have a tiny grip on a full EF mount. Either way, heavy glass will be used, so regardless of where the mount decision lands, a chunky 5D grip is a wise move, IMHO.

- A