Updated Canon 2016 Roadmap

[frankchn]

If the Sony A9 is released with expected specs this year, it might be a camera that beats the whole combination of Canon flagships 5DsR, 1DX2 and 5D4 in one product.

Does Canon really want to start with serious mirrorless offerings in 2017 or 2018, when Sony already has the third or fourth generation of large sensor mirrorless cameras out there?

Even the lens lineup offers only a few lenses that are first choice, like the 11-24/4, 35/1.4 or 100-400 - while the whole obvious trend of stabilized fast primes is not targeted at all yet.

Canon please hurry, nobody wants to wait until 2023 for a complete modern product lineup!

The A9 has been rumored to be in the works for a long time, but I don't think Sony will bother introduce such a camera at a $4k+ price point. Not a lot of amateur hobbyists will spend nearly $5k for a camera.

Meanwhile, photojournalists and other users of 1D/D5-class cameras are not going to switch without access to a complete lens collection (e.g. 200-400/4, 400/2.8, 600/4, fast primes from 24 through to 135+). In fact, Sony hasn't even announced a price or an availability date for the 70-200/2.8 GM lens yet, so Sony should focus on getting those lenses out first.

These users are also big on ergonomics (you are holding 4 or 5 pounds of weight for hours and hours at a time, and a big comfortable grip helps) and user interface (there is a reason why Canon didn't change button layouts from the 1DX to the 1DX2 at all -- so pro users can just pick up the new camera and go) and Sony is still somewhat lacking that.

I suspect most sports/news journalists would also still prefer OVFs for accurate framing and tracking fast action in low light, and they don't need or care for most of the benefits that EVFs provide (e.g. in-EVF histograms, etc...).

Image quality is of course important (and this is where Sony shines) but past a certain point, it isn't a concern any more to those users. I'd argue that basically every DSLR/mirrorless camera on the market right now is past that point for most people.

 

[entlassen]

I thought I read some rumors maybe a year or so ago on this site that a replacement for the "Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS" was somewhere in the not-so-distant future. Did I remember correctly, and is it still on the roadmap for, say 2017?

 

[ahsanford]

I thought I read some rumors maybe a year or so ago on this site that a replacement for the "Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS" was somewhere in the not-so-distant future. Did I remember correctly, and is it still on the roadmap for, say 2017?

EF-M 28mm 1.2:1 macro = 2016
EF 50mm 1:2 macro = 1987
EF-S 60mm 1:1 macro = 2005
MP-E 65mm 5:1 macro = 1999
EF 100mm 1:1 macro = 2000
EF 100L 1:1 macro = 2009
EF 180L 1:1 macro = 1996

Other than the whirring of the IS in the 100L, I have a hard time finding fault with it. In fairness, I'm no professional flora/fauna/product macro person who focus-stacks all day in a studio with it.

My money on a new macro would be (a) an EF-S version of that front element LED EF-M 28mm that just came out for the Rebel crowd or (b) an update to replace the 180L (IS and faster-than-molasses AF would be appreciated, I'm sure).

- A

 

[HaroldC3]

So much for Canon making a splash with the M line in 2016. People got all excited when they released the 28mm macro thinking Canon was going to get serious but it sure doesn't look that way based on the roadmap. My hunch is the M4 will be just an incremental update of the M3.

 

[ahsanford]

So much for Canon making a splash with the M line in 2016. People got all excited when they released the 28mm macro thinking Canon was going to get serious but it sure doesn't look that way based on the roadmap. My hunch is the M4 will be just an incremental update of the M3.

We're on year four of the brand's existence without an integral EVF. Forget 'getting serious' -- I'm still waiting for 'fulfilling basic expectations of a camera'.

Canon continues to market this rig for people other than us, and that very well may be (a) smart to protect SLR sales and (b) make them new money from people other than us. But someday, I'd like to use one of these and not feel like I've not been demoted to a fancy P&S that is disturbingly making congress with L glass.

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

So much for Canon making a splash with the M line in 2016. People got all excited when they released the 28mm macro thinking Canon was going to get serious but it sure doesn't look that way based on the roadmap. My hunch is the M4 will be just an incremental update of the M3.

We're on year four of the brand's existence without an integral EVF. Forget 'getting serious' -- I'm still waiting for 'fulfilling basic expectations of a camera'.

Canon continues to market this rig for people other than us, and that very well may be (a) smart to protect SLR sales and (b) make them new money from people other than us. But someday, I'd like to use one of these and not feel like I've not been demoted to a fancy P&S that is disturbingly making congress with L glass.

- A

I like the M form factor as is and absolutely do not want a larger body with built in EVF. If I want an EVF I am very happy with the current implementation of clip on, just like most people and grips on DSLR's. I would prefer the clip on EVF to have a hotshoe on top of it though.

 

[jd7]

So much for Canon making a splash with the M line in 2016. People got all excited when they released the 28mm macro thinking Canon was going to get serious but it sure doesn't look that way based on the roadmap. My hunch is the M4 will be just an incremental update of the M3.

We're on year four of the brand's existence without an integral EVF. Forget 'getting serious' -- I'm still waiting for 'fulfilling basic expectations of a camera'.

Canon continues to market this rig for people other than us, and that very well may be (a) smart to protect SLR sales and (b) make them new money from people other than us. But someday, I'd like to use one of these and not feel like I've not been demoted to a fancy P&S that is disturbingly making congress with L glass.

- A

Hi ahansford

I see a lot of comments on the internet along the lines of your speculation that Canon might be protecting DSLR sales, but I have to say I just don't follow the reasoning about that. If a customer buys a Canon camera (or at least an interchange lens one), why would Canon care whether that is a dslr or mirrorless? Assuming Canon is able to charge a similar mark up, canon is making similar money either way. And in fact, if Canon had a mirrorless camera along the lines of what you looking for, surely that is likely to simply increase Canon's sales as people upgrade/side-grade/whatever you want to call it - and if it is to a camera with EF-M mount, is likely to prompt EF-M lens sales too.

Am I missing something?

My guess is Canon simply sees the strength of mirrorless at this point in time as being the ability to make it small and light, and they think it has too many limitations (eg AF, battery life, EVF v OVF) to be a direct competitor to DSLRs (and could manufacturing cost be a factor there too?). I think we will see a Canon mirrorless which is a direct competitor with DSLRs when the technology is there so that the present limitations have been removed or are at least minimal (although we will have to see if the small size is sacrificed at least to some extent at that point, and query what lens mount it will use).

 

[Don Haines]

So much for Canon making a splash with the M line in 2016. People got all excited when they released the 28mm macro thinking Canon was going to get serious but it sure doesn't look that way based on the roadmap. My hunch is the M4 will be just an incremental update of the M3.

We're on year four of the brand's existence without an integral EVF. Forget 'getting serious' -- I'm still waiting for 'fulfilling basic expectations of a camera'.

Canon continues to market this rig for people other than us, and that very well may be (a) smart to protect SLR sales and (b) make them new money from people other than us. But someday, I'd like to use one of these and not feel like I've not been demoted to a fancy P&S that is disturbingly making congress with L glass.

- A

I like the M form factor as is and absolutely do not want a larger body with built in EVF. If I want an EVF I am very happy with the current implementation of clip on, just like most people and grips on DSLR's. I would prefer the clip on EVF to have a hotshoe on top of it though.

I agree!

I think the future is mirrorless, but nothing says that all mirrorless have to be the same size..... There is a place for tiny mirrorless cameras like the "m" and a place for full sized bodies with all the controls we love on our high end cameras. The M is successful because it fills a need.... start adding things on to it and bulking it up and you are looking at a different market.

 

[ahsanford]

Hi ahansford

I see a lot of comments on the internet along the lines of your speculation that Canon might be protecting DSLR sales, but I have to say I just don't follow the reasoning about that.
[truncated]

Am I missing something?

My guess is Canon simply sees the strength of mirrorless at this point in time as being the ability to make it small and light, and they think it has too many limitations (eg AF, battery life, EVF v OVF) to be a direct competitor to DSLRs (and could manufacturing cost be a factor there too?).

jd7, I argue that technology exists today:

* DPAF + Canon's history with LiveView implies they have the AF and realtime EVF content they need today
* They have EVFs galore on other products that they could leverage
* A high-ish burst rate (say 6-8 fps) should be easier to accomplish than without a mirrorbox to consider -- it might appear that Canon has nerfed EOS-M to not be too sexy.

So -- for some reason -- Canon is offering a finely built system that is underwhelming spec-sheet wise and lacks basic SLR-level functionality. It absolutely has the tech to make a much better system, yet they choose not to.

I argue that reason is that SLRs -- particularly the consumer-level ones you see in Best Buy and Target -- are Canon's bread and butter volume- and margins-wise. A better mirrorless rig would split Canon's single huge Rebel market / production base / inventory into two different camps, two different assembly lines, etc. and their profits would suffer.

So for now, Canon's printing money with SLRs and will do so as long as they can before caving to the inevitable mirrorless future.

- A

 

[IglooEater]

jesus christ who's leg do we need to hump to get a new freaking decent 50mm around here?

Using the Lord's name in vain won't expedite. [Confirmed]

Amen Preach it brother.

 

[brad-man]

So much for Canon making a splash with the M line in 2016. People got all excited when they released the 28mm macro thinking Canon was going to get serious but it sure doesn't look that way based on the roadmap. My hunch is the M4 will be just an incremental update of the M3.

We're on year four of the brand's existence without an integral EVF. Forget 'getting serious' -- I'm still waiting for 'fulfilling basic expectations of a camera'.

Canon continues to market this rig for people other than us, and that very well may be (a) smart to protect SLR sales and (b) make them new money from people other than us. But someday, I'd like to use one of these and not feel like I've not been demoted to a fancy P&S that is disturbingly making congress with L glass.

- A

I like the M form factor as is and absolutely do not want a larger body with built in EVF. If I want an EVF I am very happy with the current implementation of clip on, just like most people and grips on DSLR's. I would prefer the clip on EVF to have a hotshoe on top of it though.

+1, although I would prefer a second hot shoe for flash as I like the articulating feature of the EVF-DC1. Larger more full featured versions will inevitably come along either way, so keep one model as small as possible.

 

[Chaitanya]

Still waiting for replacement of EF 50mm Compact macro.

 

[Bennymiata]

I'm still waiting for the 1 -1000mm F1.0 lens.

 

[Gorm]

i really wonder what 5D Mk3 user want from the 5D Mk4.

what can canon do to make the 5D MK4 worthwhile for the majority of current 5D MK3 owners?

4k video is maybe nice for some but i doubt many will cash out 3500$ just for 4K.

it seems that MP wise the 5D Mk4 will not compete with nikon or sony.

i find the AF of the 5D MK3 so good, i really don´t need a better AF for my kind of photography. i also know many 5D MK3 user who are just overwhelmed by the AF functions. they barely make use of 50% of it´s potential.

as a landscaper i envy the sony sensors. the 5DS is a nice camera but it doesn´t have the latest sensor technology from canon. i want the analog digital converter on the sensor.
for 3500 euro it feels like buying an already outdated camera.

so my wish would be that the 5D MK4 gets more in the nikon 810 direction.
~30+ MP and main focus on sensor technology/image quality.
when they also put 4K in and the 1DX II AF i could see the 5D Mk4 becoming a real success like the 5D MK2.


the 5D MK3 is such a great camera. i don´t see me updating for just 4K and some improvements i barely notice in every day situations.

to make me spend 3500 euro on the 5D Mk4 canon has to really excite me this time.

or maybe i should spend the money on a nice drone?

 

[racebit]

Exceptions are the RX series, they have their own glass, darn good at that. RX100IV and RX10III are solid bets as they have good glass and sensor/body, and you can't swap the glass of course. Color rendition still stinks, and no touchscreen, but they're monsters otherwise. Those I could solidly recommend.

Sony RX = poor AF
Only acceptable alternatives today to Phase Detect are Canon Dual Pixel and Panasonic Depth From Defocus.
That is why until Canon brings Dual pixel to non-DSLRs, I only consider Panasonic for non-DSLR cameras.

 

[nightscape123]

I'm just waiting for the 6D II myself. Though the updated 24-105 is intriguing. The sooner the 5D IV comes out the sooner we can start hearing about the 6D II, so bring it on.

 

[ahsanford]

i really wonder what 5D Mk3 user want from the 5D Mk4.

... truncated ...

You sound like a number of folks here (you are not the only one at all) that wants 'one FF sensor to rule them all' -- great for everything: high resolution, huge base ISO DR for exposure / post-processing lattitude, low high ISO noise, etc. In the SLR world, there's only one sensor that does that: the D810 (or the two D800s that immediately preceded the D810).

But Canon doesn't have a good/better/best segmentation like Nikon does with the D610/D750/D810. Canon would rather beat the D810 in resolution (5DS) or beat it in frame rate / high ISO / video (5D3 --> 5D4).

Which leaves some Canon folks in a bit of a pickle:

• 5D4 will have better AF, burst, video, high ISO than the 5DS --> that speaks to general handheld field work: reportage, events, street, documentary work, astro (not handheld but certainly high ISO), candids, and wildlife (if 6-8 fps will do it for you)
  
  
• 5DS will have the best detail --> that speaks to tripod / studio folks shooting landscapes, architecture, portraiture, product/food photography, macro, etc.
  

But it's not a clear cut split -- the 5DS still has the 5D3/1DX AF system so it will capture moving subjects well (with limited fps). The 5DS can also probably come close noise-wise with the 5D4 if you downsample to the 5D4's resolution.

On the other hand, the 5D4 will certainly be able to work the tripod well and take landscapes/studio work well (with limited detail).

- A

 

[dak723]

i really wonder what 5D Mk3 user want from the 5D Mk4.

what can canon do to make the 5D MK4 worthwhile for the majority of current 5D MK3 owners?

4k video is maybe nice for some but i doubt many will cash out 3500$ just for 4K.

it seems that MP wise the 5D Mk4 will not compete with nikon or sony.

i find the AF of the 5D MK3 so good, i really don´t need a better AF for my kind of photography. i also know many 5D MK3 user who are just overwhelmed by the AF functions. they barely make use of 50% of it´s potential.

as a landscaper i envy the sony sensors. the 5DS is a nice camera but it doesn´t have the latest sensor technology from canon. i want the analog digital converter on the sensor.
for 3500 euro it feels like buying an already outdated camera.

so my wish would be that the 5D MK4 gets more in the nikon 810 direction.
~30+ MP and main focus on sensor technology/image quality.
when they also put 4K in and the 1DX II AF i could see the 5D Mk4 becoming a real success like the 5D MK2.


the 5D MK3 is such a great camera. i don´t see me updating for just 4K and some improvements i barely notice in every day situations.

to make me spend 3500 euro on the 5D Mk4 canon has to really excite me this time.

or maybe i should spend the money on a nice drone?

Just guessing and trying to think from the point of view of a professional photographer rather than a gear-head...

My guess is Canon's main objective when they release a new camera is not that they expect owners of the previous version to upgrade - because all upgrades in every camera line have been minor. They expect 5D mk II users to get this camera, as well as 6D owners who want to step up, as well as 7D or 70D owners who want to go FF. 5D mk3 owners who have been happy and have put in so many shutter actuations that they are ready to get a new camera will do so - not because of the new features, but because of the same old reliability and quality.

MP wise, more MPs is not the desire for most photographers, if I had to guess. So 24 or 28 MPs is an advantage over Sony and Nikon, unless you need to print billboard size.

As a landscaper, if you shoot primarily in daylight situations, I doubt you will find much difference with the Sony sensors. Their advantage seems to be in low-light, indoor shots, where noise is much more noticeable. Having bought the Sony A7, I found its pics virtually identical to those taken with my 6D. So no reason to envy the Sony sensor.

These are just my opinions and guesses.

 

[et31]

I am really looking forward for my new Nikon D5 to arrive in the mail! :
Folks, lighten up! Great engineering takes time to create for optics and camera bodies, especially when you own and develop the majority of patents that define your company. The 5D Mark IV will be a great tool with many improvements over the 5D Mark III; nevertheless, it will not make people better photographers - it just provides those with features that allows them to be creative faster and more efficiently. The element of taking a professional photograph has to come from the individual first; technique, rules, lighting, and creativity to say the least! Millions of beautiful award winning photos were taken with the previous generation(s) of cameras and lenses by Canon all around the world.

Now, if you really want to complain and follow suit on this forum's tradition, then why is Canon not releasing a 7D Mark III to improve the lack luster sensor of the Mark II that fails on DR with only a max of ISO 16,000, when Nikon recently released the D500 that has a native ISO of up to 51,000? If you are shooting with plenty of light, then there is no problem with the MII; however, do anything without the available light and boost ISO past 1,600, then you are suffering on IQ and noise. I'm not buying a Canon 1Dx MII for $6K when I still need my APS-C to do the work I need to do with max resolution and focal range. Do I really have to wait several more years before Canon says "ok, the Mark III's new ISO range is 100-51,000", when Nikon will release the D510 with ISO 32-210,000 and 200 points of AF w/ 99 cross-type points and no low-pass filter? ;D

Come on Canon! Get back ahead of the game!
The "bubo virginianuseses" 1/4 mile away at 4pm during the winter months with a
(400mm f/2.8 + 2x MIII extender) x (1.6 crop) = 1,280mm @ f/5.6 deserve better!

 

[ahsanford]

To be perhaps more clear on this, I've never seen a professional at a sports event using something other than a "big body" DSLR. Rinse and repeat for events. CR took the 1DXII to Rwanda.

Agree on wildlife and sports, but what the 1D rigs 'are designed for' and what they are used for tend to be two different things. I think many people have learned to drop a 5D3 in the place of a 1DX unless it's absolutely necessary for framerate or survivability in terrible (arctic / desert / rainforest) sort of conditions. I see documentarians, independent filmmakers, and especially weddings/social events/concert folks get by with an overwhelmingly larger number of 5D3's than 1DX's out here in Southern California.

(Granted, SoCal ain't Rwanda. Pick the right tool for the job.)

However I agree that Canon's camera lineup (6D, 5D, 5Ds) doesn't really compare the same as Nikon's (D610, D750, D810), especially when it comes to the feature culling that Canon does.

Correction: I said Canon doesn't have the same market segmentation, not that they don't compare or compete. And you continue to conflate better sensors with better cameras, which I strongly disagree with. If better sensors made better cameras, we'd all own A7R II's and shoot Canon glass on it. The fact that isn't happening in large numbers today is testament to the notion that cameras have value propositions, and Canon's overall vale proposition is pretty damn great.

The D610 / D750 / D810 have lovely sensors, but they lack so many great pieces of tech: LiveView for Canon is far better, and Canon has DPAF, anti-flicker, better ergonomics/controls/menus, etc.

The only thing I truly covet from Nikon is spot metering at any AF point being deemed a $500 price point camera feature, while we have to give Canon $6k for it.

- A