Tony Northrup Predicts The Upcoming Full Frame Mirrorless Offerings From Both Canon and Nikon

privatebydesign said:
reef58 said:
Mikehit said:
reef58 said:
privatebydesign said:
KirkD said:
privatebydesign said:
KirkD said:
Canoneer said:
If they released a mirrorless version of the 5D IV (closest a7 III competitor) and priced it at $2000 to compete with the Sony A7 III, then the 5D IV DSLR and 6D II will nosedive in value.

Canon needs to forget about competing with its own cameras and start competing with other camera manufacturers such as Sony in the mirrorless department.

Yes, because they are very unsuccessful at competition ::) ::)
They aren't even in the competition yet when it comes to mirrorless cameras. I'm hoping they get in the game with the rumoured full frame mirrorless ones.

Pull your head out of your ass, sales figures publicly available show Canon outsell Sony on MILC's, indeed in the MILC market Canon are second in volume only to Olympus. Sony are third behind both Canon and Olympus, how is that "They aren't even in the competition yet when it comes to mirrorless cameras"?

You people and your opinions are so disconnected from the real world it is farcical.

I think the point of Tony's video is Canon is not in the game. Unless I am wrong Canon does not have a FF mirrorless camera. I thought his presentation was pretty straightforward and fair. That being said I am not one clamoring for a FF Mirrorless. At this point couldn't care less about mirrorless. I am interested in the 90d and 5dsr2 however.

People see to take the view that 'the game' is selling mirrorless FF cameras. It is not. 'The game' is selling cameras - no more, no less.

Panasonic and Olympus could not compete in the FF market so decided to set up the MFT consortium
Sony could not compete in teh DSLR arean so, seeing what Panasonic were doing, went in tot APS-C and FF mirrorless
Canon are the leaders and concentrated on their core market, taking mirrorless development at a far more casual rate and responding to what was happening in the mirrorless market. It is still early days.
Nikon....I don't think anyone really knows what has gone wrong with Nikon but they have tried to have their fingers in all the pies and ended up creating a winner in the D850.

The video was specifically about Canon and Nikon's entry into full frame mirrorless. That is all. It was not about doom, gloom overall sales or any such thing. It was a prediction of their offerings in FF Frame mirrorless. Did anyone actually watch the video?

I wasn't commenting on the video, I was pointing out the absurdity of the comment I quoted.

Canon absolutely do not have to make a FF MILC, in the same way they don't 'have' to make a MF camera to compete with the Pentax 645Z, or flashes to compete with the Profoto B1Z. If they do make a FF MILC it will be on their terms given that they know how comparatively small that market is.

There are a disproportionately vocal number of blowhards that are completely skewing the apparent size and relevance of a FF MILC market.

Whether Canon needs to make them or not is a business decision by Canon. I am not interested at this point, but I think that would be like saying Ford doesn't need to build SUV's. The reality is Canon probably does for a host of reasons other than the FF mirrorless market by itself.

I think Tony's video was based upon the likely fact Canon will indeed be sending one to market. He pointed out Canon's strengths and weaknesses and how they may impact the camera that is eventually introduced. I actually thought it was a pretty fair analysis although history may show it to be wrong. That is the chance you take when you make predictions.
 
Upvote 0

zim

CR Pro
Oct 18, 2011
2,129
318
melgross said:
First of all, there was absolutely nothing new in this video. He didn’t say a single thing that we haven’t all head, several times, before.

I also disagree with a number of things he said. Sony isn’t doing all that well in their photo business in either DSLR’s, mirrorless or compact cameras. The reason the went to mirrorless so early wasn’t because they wanted to come out it’s something more advanced, but because their DSLR business was in tatters. No matter what they did, they couldn’t raise that 5% marketshare they began with when they purchased Konica/Minolta.

So mirrorless was a way, they thought, to enter a market where they would be early, and capture a large part of it. It didn’t work out the way they thought. It’s interesting to note that Canon, after having being criticized for several years for not entering that mirrorless market, is now one of, or is, the biggest mirrorless maker, with the fastest growth rate.

I also don’t agree that they have the most to lose. I do agree with Thom Hogan, the well known Nikon expert, that it’s Nikon that has the most to worry about, and the most to lose.

+1 spot on IMO
 
Upvote 0

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,383
1,064
Davidson, NC
reef58 said:
Whether Canon needs to make them or not is a business decision by Canon. I am not interested at this point, but I think that would be like saying Ford doesn't need to build SUV's. The reality is Canon probably does for a host of reasons other than the FF mirrorless market by itself.

Or saying Canon doesn't need to build SUVs. Ford already does, and it is a significant part of their business. Canon, however, has chosen not to, so far, at least.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 22, 2014
168
126
I think Tony makes a lot of really good points, but I don't understand his notion that people don't understand the viewfinder coming from a cell phone. I don't do it a lot at the moment, but when I'm teaching people the basics of how a DSLR works, the viewfinder is never the issue and they never expect to pinch to zoom a photo. They don't even attempt it. They don't. At all. The last two 18 year old kids that I was teaching the finer points of aperture, exposure, and ISO never once puzzled about the view finder. Maybe it's my sample size (roughly fifteen or so individuals of varying ages, all under 24), but again, the viewfinder was the least of their issues. The biggest issue was teaching them how to process a RAW file.
Seriously, are the people he knows so slow witted they cannot figure out the difference between an optical view finder and an phone screen? It almost feels like that was thrown in as a troll.
 
Upvote 0

Hector1970

CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,554
1,162
Cochese said:
I think Tony makes a lot of really good points, but I don't understand his notion that people don't understand the viewfinder coming from a cell phone. I don't do it a lot at the moment, but when I'm teaching people the basics of how a DSLR works, the viewfinder is never the issue and they never expect to pinch to zoom a photo. They don't even attempt it. They don't. At all. The last two 18 year old kids that I was teaching the finer points of aperture, exposure, and ISO never once puzzled about the view finder. Maybe it's my sample size (roughly fifteen or so individuals of varying ages, all under 24), but again, the viewfinder was the least of their issues. The biggest issue was teaching them how to process a RAW file.
Seriously, are the people he knows so slow witted they cannot figure out the difference between an optical view finder and an phone screen? It almost feels like that was thrown in as a troll.
I think you are correct in general but I have known beginners asking about their cameras and not ever using the viewfinder. They find it a strange thing to use the viewfinder.
 
Upvote 0

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,127
451
Vancouver, BC
Hector1970 said:
Cochese said:
I think Tony makes a lot of really good points, but I don't understand his notion that people don't understand the viewfinder coming from a cell phone. I don't do it a lot at the moment, but when I'm teaching people the basics of how a DSLR works, the viewfinder is never the issue and they never expect to pinch to zoom a photo. They don't even attempt it. They don't. At all. The last two 18 year old kids that I was teaching the finer points of aperture, exposure, and ISO never once puzzled about the view finder. Maybe it's my sample size (roughly fifteen or so individuals of varying ages, all under 24), but again, the viewfinder was the least of their issues. The biggest issue was teaching them how to process a RAW file.
Seriously, are the people he knows so slow witted they cannot figure out the difference between an optical view finder and an phone screen? It almost feels like that was thrown in as a troll.
I think you are correct in general but I have known beginners asking about their cameras and not ever using the viewfinder. They find it a strange thing to use the viewfinder.

Perhaps so. These people should then avoid a full frame mirrorless entirely. They will get just as good results with an APSC, which will cost less, and have significantly cheaper and smaller lenses.

I saw an article somewhere else (maybe DPR?) where someone said the A7M3 was close to being a camera they'd just recommend to someone if they were interested in photography looking for a camera. I would say: why would you make someone who's just curious about photography blow $2,000 + $1,000++ on lenses just to get into the hobby? You can spend a third of that and enjoy the hobby just as well; probably more as you start.
 
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
LDS said:
I don't understand why a fully electronic mirroless camera should have the design of a mechanical film SLR, which was constrained by film storage and transport, mechanical linkages and mirror/pentaprism needs, and with no ergonomics at all. Whenever I'm nostalgic of that design, I get my A-1 - which anyway I find more comfortable with the Motor Drive MA installed.

I hope Canon will surprise us as it did with the T90... with an innovative yet fully comfortable design.

I have an A-1 also. I'd hate to carry something like that around all day. Probably part of the reason straps were invented. One more reason to hope for a comfortable mirrorless camera.
 
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
davidhfe said:
Canoneer said:
… because I don't think Canon or Nikon have a prayer in matching the A7 III price point.

I keep reading this but honestly, I don't understand where it's coming from. What spec is so outrageous that Canon can't offer it?

I'm just praying Canon won't match Sony's lens cost or quality. If it weren't for companies like Metabones, Sony would already be dead.
 
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
KirkD said:
Canoneer said:
If they released a mirrorless version of the 5D IV (closest a7 III competitor) and priced it at $2000 to compete with the Sony A7 III, then the 5D IV DSLR and 6D II will nosedive in value.

Canon needs to forget about competing with its own cameras and start competing with other camera manufacturers such as Sony in the mirrorless department.

Silly. :eek: :eek: :eek:
 
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
nchoh said:
YuengLinger said:
nchoh said:
So to those who don't like Tony Northrop, which YouTuber would you recommend that puts out Camera videos that are from a similar perspective as Tony Northrop? Similar perspective meaning, more tech talk and not just how to photograph pretty girls.

At least meaningless videos with pretty girls have pretty girls. Tony just has meaningless videos.

I guess that you are one of those guys who know everything about photography, huh?

He didn't say that. What he implied (I think) is that pretty girls add more meaning to the meaningless videos than Tony ever could. I agree. I'd have never got a Brazilian waxing if it were not for the meaningless youtube tutorials with pretty girls. Getting waxed is the closest I can get to a hot date. Thank you, YouTube!
 
Upvote 0

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,246
1,939
Canada
CanonFanBoy said:
nchoh said:
...not just how to photograph pretty girls.

Come on, man. Is there really any other reason to have a camera? Puh-leeeeze!!! That's like saying you go to the beach because you like sand. ::)

Cat pictures! The internet needs more cat pictures.....
 
Upvote 0

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,127
451
Vancouver, BC
Don Haines said:
CanonFanBoy said:
nchoh said:
...not just how to photograph pretty girls.

Come on, man. Is there really any other reason to have a camera? Puh-leeeeze!!! That's like saying you go to the beach because you like sand. ::)

Cat pictures! The internet needs more cat pictures.....

Our cat rules our life. 8)
 
Upvote 0
Jan 11, 2013
105
12
I didn't watch the video so I can't comment about what Tony says...but when Canon brings forth their FF mirrorless, will it have a sensor that competes with the likes of Sony and Nikons (D850 sensor)? I mean, really that's what it boils down to, right? Do people really want a full frame mirrorless or do they just want any kind of camera that has improved DR and can compete with the features of the Sony A7 line and the Nikon D850? I honestly don't care whether a camera is mirrorless or a DSLR, I just want to know that my camera isn't 2 years behind the current tech when I buy it (ie the 6D2) or crippled in some way.
 
Upvote 0
Talys said:
Hector1970 said:
Cochese said:
I think Tony makes a lot of really good points, but I don't understand his notion that people don't understand the viewfinder coming from a cell phone. I don't do it a lot at the moment, but when I'm teaching people the basics of how a DSLR works, the viewfinder is never the issue and they never expect to pinch to zoom a photo. They don't even attempt it. They don't. At all. The last two 18 year old kids that I was teaching the finer points of aperture, exposure, and ISO never once puzzled about the view finder. Maybe it's my sample size (roughly fifteen or so individuals of varying ages, all under 24), but again, the viewfinder was the least of their issues. The biggest issue was teaching them how to process a RAW file.
Seriously, are the people he knows so slow witted they cannot figure out the difference between an optical view finder and an phone screen? It almost feels like that was thrown in as a troll.
I think you are correct in general but I have known beginners asking about their cameras and not ever using the viewfinder. They find it a strange thing to use the viewfinder.

Perhaps so. These people should then avoid a full frame mirrorless entirely. They will get just as good results with an APSC, which will cost less, and have significantly cheaper and smaller lenses.

I saw an article somewhere else (maybe DPR?) where someone said the A7M3 was close to being a camera they'd just recommend to someone if they were interested in photography looking for a camera. I would say: why would you make someone who's just curious about photography blow $2,000 + $1,000++ on lenses just to get into the hobby? You can spend a third of that and enjoy the hobby just as well; probably more as you start.

It really depends on the crowd you are in. If you are hang out with a bunch of friends driving new Merceds/Audis/Porche/etc then suggesting something that cost 3000 as a starter is not a big deal. Like most of us I'm down in the real world and have to think long and hard about just a lens in the 1k price range, especially since it's just a hobby for me.

This same crowd will blow 20k or more for a small camper that's used 3-4 times tops, or the same crowd that will not think anything about spending 10k for a overseas trip or a week at disney. This same crowd is the reason why the local camera stores that still exist are still in business, and why the only malls that are not dead and dying is "that one mall with all of the high end expensive stores".

For the rest of us there's the SL2 and excellent kit lens with the option to upgrade to better stuff if you like it.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 29, 2011
10,675
6,121
drob said:
I didn't watch the video so I can't comment about what Tony says...but when Canon brings forth their FF mirrorless, will it have a sensor that competes with the likes of Sony and Nikons (D850 sensor)? I mean, really that's what it boils down to, right? Do people really want a full frame mirrorless or do they just want any kind of camera that has improved DR and can compete with the features of the Sony A7 line and the Nikon D850? I honestly don't care whether a camera is mirrorless or a DSLR, I just want to know that my camera isn't 2 years behind the current tech when I buy it (ie the 6D2) or crippled in some way.

No, and you have obviously drunk too much of the DXO/DPReview Kool-Aid. At 100iso there is .25 stop difference in DR between the 5D MkIV and the D850. If you use dual pixel development techniques the 5D MkIV has 0.22 stops more DR than the maximum possible from the D850.

How, exactly, is that "uncompetitive?"
 
Upvote 0

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,127
451
Vancouver, BC
privatebydesign said:
drob said:
I didn't watch the video so I can't comment about what Tony says...but when Canon brings forth their FF mirrorless, will it have a sensor that competes with the likes of Sony and Nikons (D850 sensor)? I mean, really that's what it boils down to, right? Do people really want a full frame mirrorless or do they just want any kind of camera that has improved DR and can compete with the features of the Sony A7 line and the Nikon D850? I honestly don't care whether a camera is mirrorless or a DSLR, I just want to know that my camera isn't 2 years behind the current tech when I buy it (ie the 6D2) or crippled in some way.

No, and you have obviously drunk too much of the DXO/DPReview Kool-Aid. At 100iso there is .25 stop difference in DR between the 5D MkIV and the D850. If you use dual pixel development techniques the 5D MkIV has 0.22 stops more DR than the maximum possible from the D850.

How, exactly, is that "uncompetitive?"

Keep in mind that the ONLY thing that matters is the DXOMark sensor score if the main goal of purchasing a camera is to own the highest ranked DXOMark sensor. I mean, why on Earth would buy a Sony A7M3/A7R3 and the matching 28-70 f3.5-5.6 kit lens, otherwise?

Photography: the art of spending money on camera bodies. 8)

The funniest thing that I see on the Kool-Aid reviews is when they take a perfectly exposed studio picture, add ND filters and go, "See, this looks great even at -3EV with exposure compensation in post!!!" But THIS NEVER HAPPENS. When do you ever have perfectly balanced light sources, but just not enough of it? Some poor sap ends up blowing $4,000 then goes into post and cranks the lightroom sliders, and wonders why they can't get a portrait that looks like it came out of a professional's studio.
 
Upvote 0

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,127
451
Vancouver, BC
JRPhotos said:
My concerns:

I won't be able to use my existing EOS lenses
The body will be too small for my hands
No view finder..... I need a view finder and not that digital junk

I just don't have much of an interest in mirrorless.

I would bet anything in the world that any EF lens will work on Canon's full frame mirrorless. The body might even be to your liking.

But... it's gonna have a digital viewfinder :D

Come to think of it, it would be awesome (though physics defying with today's technology) to have a mirrorless OVF camera :D. All we need is a transparent sensor that doesn't require a shutter!
 
Upvote 0