*UPDATED* Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

[jeffa4444]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Yes, that pretty much sums me up, the guy who owns approx 50 cameras and 250 lenses including all new Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic etc stuff. Someone who owns and uses that clearly will have far less knowledge than a Canon user who only knows and uses 1 body and 3 lenses. That is pretty logical.

comments like this are funny. if you own 50 cameras, and 250 lenses then I suggest you get out your mom's basement, realize the sky is blue and get off the internet.

You know this site is about the future of Canon equipment and not Breitbart, right? Seems you have hit the wrong bookmark.

you know that idiotic comments will be treated as such as well? Good grief.

if mirrorless was so popular it wouldn't languishing with an increased 5% marketshare penetration over 5+ years with additional companies providing mirrorless in that timespan.

and m43's? really?

Olympus can't even sell 500,000 cameras per year.

and sounds like half of them were sold to you.

In body stabilisation has its merits and that data in 4K video can be used as positioning metadata. Olympus perfected in-body stabilisation and Sony use their system (they own a chuck of Olympus). Personally I would prefer m4/3rd than smart phone cameras and the system is useful for travelling light, its not a full-frame replacement and never will be but horses for courses.

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

In body stabilisation has its merits and that data in 4K video can be used as positioning metadata. Olympus perfected in-body stabilisation and Sony use their system (they own a chuck of Olympus). Personally I would prefer m4/3rd than smart phone cameras and the system is useful for travelling light, its not a full-frame replacement and never will be but horses for courses.

For the FF crowd, IBIS serves one key area: adapting old glass on mirrorless.

We can bellyache all day that IBIS doesn't work well on longer lenses or certain frequencies of vibration, but for an old FD lens, it's better than nothing.

- A

 

[gn100]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

@Canon Rumors
Can you please try to name the bodies (if known) also in their other brand-names like Canon f.e. 760D (european market) or Kiss X5 (asian market). Thanks in advance. It's always quite difficult to coop with the Txi/Txs names if you're not used to.So this will be an 800D + 810D equivalent?

Wld also be nice to have the time of release in a month or quarter, instead of season ..... as far as I'm concerned, it's now summer ...... as it is for half the planet, winter for the other other half

 

[Loswr]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

In body stabilisation has its merits and that data in 4K video can be used as positioning metadata. Olympus perfected in-body stabilisation and Sony use their system (they own a chuck of Olympus). Personally I would prefer m4/3rd than smart phone cameras and the system is useful for travelling light, its not a full-frame replacement and never will be but horses for courses.

For the FF crowd, IBIS serves one key area: adapting old glass on mirrorless.

We can bellyache all day that IBIS doesn't work well on longer lenses or certain frequencies of vibration, but for an old FD lens, it's better than nothing.

What do you think is the market size of those adapting old glass on mirrorless? The real market, I mean, not the few hundred people hanging out on Internet photo forums and happy that mirrorless means they no longer have to buy EdMika adapters for their old FD lenses. Or maybe, those few hundred people hanging out on Internet photo forums discussing old glass is the entire market.

 

[Hector1970]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

In camera stabilisation I assume also means that the lens are cheaper. Olympus make very good prime lens. I like the picture quality from their micro 4/3 sensors. The small size is very handy and as you say much better than a phone. For Olympus I find their menu system a disaster. It's really poorly designed. I can't believe they won't do something with it. It lets down their gear which is really very good.

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

What do you think is the market size of those adapting old glass on mirrorless? The real market, I mean, not the few hundred people hanging out on Internet photo forums and happy that mirrorless means they no longer have to buy EdMika adapters for their old FD lenses. Or maybe, those few hundred people hanging out on Internet photo forums discussing old glass is the entire market.

Small but dedicated number, I'm sure, though many of them flocked to the A7 platform when it came out. It screams the Venn diagram intersection of [Old lens collector or film shooter] + [Enthusiast] + [Tinkerer], so yeah, there aren't that many folks out there who want to do this.

Agree, Canon shouldn't build their mirrorless future around this functionality. If they can offer it, terrific, but I feel it will be the byproduct of a decision made to serve a much higher priority, i.e. bolting on old glass might be secondary benefit to Canon choosing to 'go small' with a skinny new mount rather than full EF, but bolting on old glass won't be the reason they made that decision.

- A

 

[vau]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

I really wish the 6D to be something compact and sexy.

Damn, I wish it were retro as well, but I'm not brave enough to say that out loud.

 

[SkynetTX]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

To make everyone happy:

Lenses:

EF-S 18-55mm f/2.8 II IS USM for still photographers with ring-type USM and real FTM support
EF-V 18-55mm f/2.8 IS STM II for videographes

 

[Loswr]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

To make everyone happy:

Lenses:

EF-S 18-55mm f/2.8 II IS USM for still photographers with ring-type USM and real FTM support
EF-V 18-55mm f/2.8 IS STM II for videographes

Adding >$500 to the cost of a Rebel/xxxD entry-level kit isn't going anyone happy.

 

[unfocused]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Yes, that pretty much sums me up, the guy who owns approx 50 cameras and 250 lenses including all new Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic etc stuff. Someone who owns and uses that clearly will have far less knowledge than a Canon user who only knows and uses 1 body and 3 lenses. That is pretty logical.

Are you serious about 50 cameras and 250 lenses? If you are, I can only conclude one of two things. You own a rental house and keep this stock so others can rent it or you have some serious hoarding issues and need professional help.

I would say that I agree with your point that someone who owns 50 bodies and 250 lenses probably does have far less knowledge than a professional who consistently uses one body and three lenses. The normal arc in most professions, including photography, is for someone to start out with a limited range of equipment, acquire more equipment as they progress and then as they master their craft begin shedding some of that equipment to focus only on the basics so they can get most comfortable and knowledgeable about their equipment.

Most of the really great photographers keep their equipment fairly simple.

 

[Antono Refa]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

In body stabilisation has its merits and that data in 4K video can be used as positioning metadata. Olympus perfected in-body stabilisation and Sony use their system (they own a chuck of Olympus). Personally I would prefer m4/3rd than smart phone cameras and the system is useful for travelling light, its not a full-frame replacement and never will be but horses for courses.

For the FF crowd, IBIS serves one key area: adapting old glass on mirrorless.

We can bellyache all day that IBIS doesn't work well on longer lenses or certain frequencies of vibration, but for an old FD lens, it's better than nothing.

What do you think is the market size of those adapting old glass on mirrorless? The real market, I mean, not the few hundred people hanging out on Internet photo forums and happy that mirrorless means they no longer have to buy EdMika adapters for their old FD lenses. Or maybe, those few hundred people hanging out on Internet photo forums discussing old glass is the entire market.

Or, from Canon's point of view, why sell cameras intended for use with FD lenses? So it could finally sell all those 30 years old FD lenses still in it's inventory?

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Or, from Canon's point of view, why sell cameras intended for use with FD lenses? So it could finally sell all those 30 years old FD lenses still in it's inventory?

Oh ye of little vision. FD is but one example of using old glass.

Want to try out that Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8? Their new 105mm f/1.4? A lot of Canonites sure do.

And Canon corporate would love to see potential pullthrough of Nikon users who don't need to sell all their glass to use a Canon body.

I'm hyping something I'd likely never use myself as all I've ever owned is Canon glass. But a 'thin flanged' FF mirrorless mount unlocks some neat stuff some folks (both photographers and Canon corporate) might find attractive.

- A

 

[Loswr]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Hey douglaurent, a year ago you stated this regarding Canon:

By 2017 Sony will have destroyed their business if they don't wake up and come around with some better specs as well.

So did Canon come around with better specs? Since you have bashed the 1D X II and the 5DIV and only bought one of each instead of the couple of dozen of each you would have bought if they'd have had better specs, I'm assuming your answer to that is 'no'.

That means Sony must be pretty close to destroying Canon's business, since it's almost 2017. Except that so far this year, Canon has gained ILC market share and Sony has lost it.

Welcome to CHWAC (Canon Haters Without a Clue). You should be receiving your welcome packet from the organization's president, AvTvM, in the mail soon, including the Olympus mug and the coveted "I Canon" bumper sticker.

 

[StudentOfLight]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

To make everyone happy:

Lenses:

EF-S 18-55mm f/2.8 II IS USM for still photographers with ring-type USM and real FTM support
EF-V 18-55mm f/2.8 IS STM II for videographes

Perhaps you haven't yet heard of Nano-USM:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=17726


via Imgflip Meme Generator

 

[transpo1]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

And none of these cameras will have 4K Except, of course, for the C100 Mark III one would hope.

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Perhaps you haven't yet heard of Nano-USM:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=17726

The two Nano USM lenses I am aware of are $549 and $599. That's hardly a kit price. That's a midgrade feature on budget lens. I'm just not seeing it. Budget lenses get STM, sorry.

Now a refresh to the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM would be a great candidate for Nano USM, but (a) that'll be a $999 lens and (b) I'm not sure Canon wants an APS-C owner to be tethered to a large EF-S investment ever again, so I doubt they'd ever refresh that lens. They want EF-S to have a hard cap of good but not great to entice APS-C folks to buy EF lenses and think about a move to FF.

- A

 

[scyrene]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Still no replacement to prehistoric 50mm Compact macro or update to ancient 180mm usm macro. Also how about Rt(slave mode only) upgrade to speedlight 320ex? That would be useful for a people wanting RT flashes on budget.

What would you like to improve on the 180L? Just improving for it's own sake to rise the prices? The lens is perfect as is... still one of the sharpest ever made, after 2 decades.

I went with the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 OS, rather than the Canon 180L, because the former had a half stop extra aperture wide open, and ~4 stop IS. Those made it better for my purposes. A Canon lens with those features would be an improvement, even if the optical performance was kept the same.

 

[dsut4392]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Or, from Canon's point of view, why sell cameras intended for use with FD lenses? So it could finally sell all those 30 years old FD lenses still in it's inventory?

Oh ye of little vision. FD is but one example of using old glass.

Want to try out that Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8? Their new 105mm f/1.4? A lot of Canonites sure do.

And Canon corporate would love to see potential pullthrough of Nikon users who don't need to sell all their glass to use a Canon body.

I'm hyping something I'd likely never use myself as all I've ever owned is Canon glass. But a 'thin flanged' FF mirrorless mount unlocks some neat stuff some folks (both photographers and Canon corporate) might find attractive.

- A

The way I look at your scenario above is that just as much as it allows a Nikon user to try a Canon body without abandoning their Nikon lenses, it allows a Canon user to dabble in some interesting Nikon lenses instead of remaining faithful. In Sony's case, doing this was a great move as they had a very limited range of native lenses when the A7 launched, but for Canon there is more risk than benefit. The 14-24 argument is now moot since the release of the 11-24 f4/L, but why would Canon want you to buy the Nikon 105/1.4 which could well take you out of the market for the new 85/1.4 L IS when it arrives? As much as many Canon shooters would like to try the 105/1.4, how many of us would actually switch to Nikon to do so?
FWIW, I initially bought into Canon DSLR 10 years ago (having previously shot film only) largely because the shorter flange distance (vs Nikon) allowed me to keep using some nice Olympus Zuiko glass with an adaptor, so I obviously agree there some upside. And yes, there is also the argument (as put by Steve Jobs) that "if you don't cannibalize yourself, someone else will". I just don't think that (short of a major breakthrough in sensor or AF technology, which seems unlikely at this point) there are that many Nikon users who want to try a Canon body that the pullthrough you mention would be a net positive after you discount the lens sales lost to the other brand. Sony has been offering all this for years, yet despite some great sensor tech and IBIS really hasn't made much of a dent in market share. Unless Canon had the tech to offer advantages over Sony, why would we assume they would do better in the market?

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

The way I look at your scenario above is that just as much as it allows a Nikon user to try a Canon body without abandoning their Nikon lenses, it allows a Canon user to dabble in some interesting Nikon lenses instead of remaining faithful. In Sony's case, doing this was a great move as they had a very limited range of native lenses when the A7 launched, but for Canon there is more risk than benefit.

[truncated]

Good points, but I see it a little differently. I see dabbling with camera bodies being a better chance to steal some business than dabbling with lenses. If you could use the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8 on a future Canon FF mirrorless rig, I doubt a Canon user would say "Ooh that lens feels nice.... I think I'll try a completely different ergonomic setup and menu system based on how this lens performs."

But I think the converse could actually happen. A longtime Nikon user, looking to build a small kit for travel, a simple landscape setup, etc. may opt for the Canon setup (if first to market) and use their Nikkor glass. Then there is a chance to impress and potentially steal some business.

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

The way I look at your scenario above is that just as much as it allows a Nikon user to try a Canon body without abandoning their Nikon lenses, it allows a Canon user to dabble in some interesting Nikon lenses instead of remaining faithful. In Sony's case, doing this was a great move as they had a very limited range of native lenses when the A7 launched, but for Canon there is more risk than benefit.

[truncated]

Good points, but I see it a little differently. I see dabbling with camera bodies being a better chance to steal some business than dabbling with lenses. If you could use the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8 on a future Canon FF mirrorless rig, I doubt a Canon user would say "Ooh that lens feels nice.... I think I'll try a completely different ergonomic setup and menu system based on how this lens performs."

But I think the converse could actually happen. A longtime Nikon user, looking to build a small kit for travel, a simple landscape setup, etc. may opt for the Canon setup (if first to market) and use their Nikkor glass. Then there is a chance to impress and potentially steal some business.

- A

Why would a Canon shooter lust after a Nikon 14-24? Compared to the Canon 12-24 it is a very poor performer, sure the Nikon was better than any UWA zoom from Canon some time ago, now, not so much.