We were wrong, all of your Canon mirrorless dreams are likely coming true soon

[hmatthes]

Which is not a mirrorless-exclusive function...

I’m patiently waiting for someone to show me what a mirrorless camera can do that an SLR in lockup fundamentally can not, aside from “be narrower.”

Many of us old photographers insist upon an eyepiece, not composing from the rear LCD (like a cell phone camera) unless it is on a tripod.
WYSIWYG is a huge differentiator especially added to focus points spread all across the sensor and focus peaking. I have a FF mirrorless whose user interface I actually prefer to my Canon EOS "hand memory" -- but I want a Canon with EVF as good as my Leica. and the same user interface as the 5D-IV...
Remember exposing for shadows with negative films and exposing for highlights on positive film (or digital sensors)? With OVF, you are just guessing.

 

[3kramd5]

That right there is the point....if the mirror needs to be in "lockup" to utilize these features, one can't help but wonder why not just remove the mirror.

Because without it being there you can’t benefit from it is other scenarios (such as low-light AF).

 

[leokleemann]

when you think will be the release date?

 

[scyrene]

Plus year end bonuses, a lot of people get overtime late in the year. A lot more money floats around Nov to January.

I'll have to take your word for it All I can repeat is, from what I've observed, people are most cash-strapped around Christmas. But if sales of high-end cameras peak then, I can't argue with the figures.

 

[scyrene]

How old are all you guys so heavily defending the DSLR? Sounds like you're someone that's used the DSLR for ages and are afraid to change.

Mirrorless offers many benefits, period. That is not to say some kind of hybrid could not be made to accomplish similar results. But right now, the industry is moving in the direction of mirrorless. And since mirrorless (as mentioned above) does offer some benefits, I choose to embrace the change and welcome the new technology.

Uh oh. You're allowed a preference, but you've veered away from propounding the advantages of mirrorless to criticising the *people* who aren't yet convinced (who cares how old they are?). Let's try to argue based on the merits of the technology at hand, hmm? PS I don't think people saying 'what can mirrorless really do that a DSLR absolutely couldn't?' are "heavily defending" DSLRs.

 

[ecpu]

Because without it being there you can’t benefit from it is other scenarios (such as low-light AF).

Shooting on my DSLR just feels dated even though it's a new model. I shouldn't have to guess exposure and rely on a mechanical mirror device to bounce light up to my eye. This is not modern technology. There has to be a better way. I personally cannot wait to switch to a mirrorless system. And if the Canon FF mirrorless doesn't turn out to be a good option, I'm gonna grab a A7III. Will probably keep my 6DII but just as a backup. That is until I want a mirrorless as a backup as well lol.

 

[ecpu]

Uh oh. You're allowed a preference, but you've veered away from propounding the advantages of mirrorless to criticising the *people* who aren't yet convinced (who cares how old they are?). Let's try to argue based on the merits of the technology at hand, hmm? PS I don't think people saying 'what can mirrorless really do that a DSLR absolutely couldn't?' are "heavily defending" DSLRs.

Fair enough. Was just merely making a point that it sounds like theres a lot of resistance to change when it comes to DSLR users. Usually people who have become accustomed to something over a long period of time tend to do that.

 

[Uneternal]

People wishing this to be a 5D4 without mirror or having crazy resolution: Sorry to disappoint you.
This camera will mostly be Canon's answer to Nikon Z6 and Sony A7III.
If the rumors are true this camera will have 28 Megapixels. The reason might be, that Canons dynamic range is still not on par with its peers, and Canon's trying to make up for that with megapixels - but we'll see.
Also, there is no point for Canon in sacrificing their flagship 5D4 with a better spec'd camera. The 5D4 is still a better selling camera than Sony's flagship A7RIII.

 

[Kit.]

How old are all you guys so heavily defending the DSLR? Sounds like you're someone that's used the DSLR for ages and are afraid to change.

Are you too young to realize that it is a non-argument?

Mirrorless offers many benefits, period. That is not to say some kind of hybrid could not be made to accomplish similar results. But right now, the industry is moving in the direction of mirrorless.

Not everyone is interested in fashion items.

If a MILC actually makes me a better photographer, I will take one. Or two. Or three.

But if it's only good for not looking "dated", I'll pass. I can afford to look "dated".

 

[ahsanford]

Wow just catching up to some interesting discussion.

I find it fascinating that so many folks have 5D4-level specs in mind and/or are worried about 5D4 cannibalization for what is rumored to be an entry level price point.

I appreciate Canon will have the lift the bar on what 'entry-level FF' is in light of the Z6, A7 III, etc. but that seems a huge improvement for a $2k Canon camera. I don't care if Sony is selling well and Nikon is following suit spec-per-dollar wise. They are followers in the market and have to resort to these antics to win share. Canon does not.

I'm not saying Canon will arrogantly release a 6D2 without a mirror (as is) and call it good. But an (on-chip ADC) 24-28 MP + 7-8 fps + Modest/limited 4K will sell just fine at $2k. Without IBIS and without (now what everyone is screaming for) Eye AF, it will sell well.

- A

 

[Uneternal]

People wishing this to be a 5D4 without mirror or having crazy resolution: Sorry to disappoint you.
This camera will mostly be Canon's answer to Nikon Z6 and Sony A7III.
If the rumors are true this camera will have 28 Megapixels. This can only have the reason that something with this camera (maybe dynamic range) is still not on par with it's peers, and Canon's trying to make up for that with more megapixels.
There is no point for Canon in sacrificing their Flagship, which is still a better selling camera than Sony's A7RIII.

 

[ecpu]

Wow just catching up to some interesting discussion.

I find it fascinating that so many folks have 5D4-level specs in mind and/or are worried about 5D4 cannibalization for what is rumored to be an entry level price point.

I appreciate Canon will have the lift the bar on what 'entry-level FF' is in light of the Z6, A7 III, etc. but that seems a huge improvement for a $2k Canon camera. I don't care if Sony is selling well and Nikon is following suit spec-per-dollar wise. They are followers in the market and have to resort to these antics to win share. Canon does not.

I'm not saying Canon will arrogantly release a 6D2 without a mirror (as is) and call it good. But an (on-chip ADC) 24-28 MP + 7-8 fps + Modest/limited 4K will sell just fine at $2k. Without IBIS and without (now what everyone is screaming for) Eye AF, it will sell well.

- A

I really hope they lift the bar enough to be at least in the ballpark in terms of specs-per-dollar. I know it's unlikely they will match the competitors in this area, but I would hope they can get it close. I already have a 6DII. I don't need or want another one.

 

[3kramd5]

Shooting on my DSLR just feels dated even though it's a new model. I shouldn't have to guess exposure and rely on a mechanical mirror device to bounce light up to my eye. This is not modern technology. There has to be a better way. I personally cannot wait to switch to a mirrorless system. And if the Canon FF mirrorless doesn't turn out to be a good option, I'm gonna grab a A7III. Will probably keep my 6DII but just as a backup. That is until I want a mirrorless as a backup as well lol.

I think we are in this weird intermediate technology state, where off sensor instruments like PDAF and metering hold some advantages but require a mirror, and image-sensor-based analysis holds some advantages but requires the mirror be out of the path.

One admittedly kludgey solution would be an SLR with an EVF (say at the top left rear of the camera). It could use proximity sensors to automatically lock up the mirror when you put your eye to the EVF, or put it down when you put you eye to the OVF. While it would look weird (not that I particularly care how cameras appear), it would at least give the advantages of both in a single box (less being narrower by the amount of the mirror box) until such a time as some technology overcomes the inherent advantage of “big bright” sensors.

I used a mirrorless camera (a7rii) along side my canons for a couple years. Many of its downsides have been remedied in the iii (which I rented but wasn’t compelled to buy). My experience is largely summed up as such:
*In bright manual focus situations, zoom in the EVF is a significant advantage
*In low light manual focus situations (e.g. studio photography with flash), mirror down SLR is advantageous.
*In automatic focus situations, mirror up has some tracking advantages, but it suffers tremendously in low light and for quick action.

If I bought a iii, I’d still grab an SLR for low light use and action photography.

 

[ahsanford]

Well if all these things were improved from the 6D2 with an 28 MP sensor, this camera is really close or for some purposes superior to the 5DIV. Of course it is not going to be as reliable as the workhorse 5D4, because it is new tech. Essentially you would have the same features and IQ as the 5D4 delivers. I would be more than happy with that. I could even live without IBIS and eye-AF (if the AF points are selective and small enough).

Yeah -- on the blue bit above, there's more meat on the bone there than you'd think.

Horsepower specs do not equal the value of the product.

Consider: Nikon just released a 45 x 9 camera for a D850-ish price, but other than 45 x 9 the camera was absolutely gutted features wise for size/cost/technology reasons:

• It's not really a 9 fps camera. It's a 5.5 fps camera if you want the normal AF/AE working in each frame. That's a huge takeaway from the D850 (grip required for 9 fps be damned, it delivers 9 fps without fine print)
• Shenanigans with RAW file sizes and burst rate
• Buffer is nearly three times smaller than D850
• Battery is 1/5th to 1/6th the CIPA shot rating as the D850
• One card slot
• We're waiting for a manual, but it appears that the AF setup either requires f/2 primes or better to work well, or that lowlight AF sensitivity is potentially conditional on what lenses you are using (more so than just how much light the lens can take in).

So this notion that a 45x9 camera with 4K coming out means that 'Nikon is serious about mirrorless' and 'this will cannibalize the bejesus out of SLRs' are both quick hip shot arguments that might not hold up that well.

- A

 

[ecpu]

I think we are in this weird intermediate technology state, where off sensor instruments like PDAF and metering hold some advantages but require a mirror, and image-sensor-based analysis holds some advantages but requires the mirror be out of the path.

One admittedly kludgey solution would be an SLR with an EVF (say at the top left rear of the camera). It could use proximity sensors to automatically lock up the mirror when you put your eye to the EVF, or put it down when you put you eye to the OVF. While it would look weird (not that I particularly care how cameras appear), it would at least give the advantages of both in a single box (less being narrower by the amount of the mirror box) until such a time as some technology overcomes the inherent advantage of “big bright” sensors.

I think you are right about this being a way to truly combine the best of both worlds... but could you imagine what the camera would look like? lol. I suppose if it were functional and that the two VFs didn't decrease overall ease of use, people just may go for it.

 

[Mikehit]

Fair enough. Was just merely making a point that it sounds like theres a lot of resistance to change when it comes to DSLR users. Usually people who have become accustomed to something over a long period of time tend to do that.

Why is it that if someone has a preference for something that just happens to be the status quo, they are 'resistant to change'. Please show me one person who has said that Canon should not be doing this.
I for one have tried the 'new advanced technology' and still prefer elements of the current DSLR. I also prefer elements on mirrorless technology and am not ready to give up on DSLRs.

I would ask why is it you are unable to understand that and unable to understand why someone else has a view different, and equally valid, to yours without looking down on them as 'resistant to change'?

 

[Don Haines]

Remember the Nikon Z is new and Canon didn't know about it .

I remember an article about Security and industrial espionage. They had a quote from someone at Nikon which said that they spy on their competition and the competition spies on them, and how they usually knew about new products several years in advance....

It is a very safe bet that Canon (and Sony) knew that the Nikon Z was coming.....

 

[ahsanford]

Canon should simply call this camera a 6D III. It would calm down all the 6D II bashers including myself and reunite with FF MILC wishers into one prospective future customer pool ....

And it would imply to every current Canon SLR user that their next product won't have a mirror.

That wouldn't torpedo EF lens sales, cause migrations, a panic, etc. Noooooo, not at all.

Just being sarcastic, but 10000% likely these FF mirrorless products will not be named as SLRs are. They may be similar -- 6Dm, 5Dx, etc. but the likelihood they supplant a current SLRs naming convention as a pure sequel (in the next few years) is zero. That's a mirror 'end of times' sort of move where long standing SLR lines don't get a mirror with their next update. (<-- That very well may happen, but that is a very, very long time away.)

Until then, Canon wants to sell us both SLRs and mirrorless (to the same people!) and you need differently named products to do that.

- A

 

[Kit.]

One admittedly kludgey solution would be an SLR with an EVF (say at the top left rear of the camera).

...or in the flash hot shoe.

Ultimately, the whole pentaprism block may be replaceable, as was typical on the MF flim SLRs.

 

[3kramd5]

I think you are right about this being a way to truly combine the best of both worlds... but could you imagine what the camera would look like? lol. I suppose if it were functional and that the two VFs didn't decrease overall ease of use, people just may go for it.

That’s why I proposed it as I did. Think of the format people often call “mirrorless rangefinder,” such as the Sony a6000. It has an EVF parked at the top left rear, and there is nothing at the top over the lens. Were it slightly wider, you could put a central OVF adjacent the embedded EVF.

 

[Don Haines]

Fair enough. Was just merely making a point that it sounds like theres a lot of resistance to change when it comes to DSLR users. Usually people who have become accustomed to something over a long period of time tend to do that.

Some of us "old" people have the added insight of "having seen it all before". Rather than buying into the hype, we may be waiting for the product to deliver. Personally, I will not touch a mirrorless until it is better than what I have AND need one of the advantages that mirrorless provides. Once that happens, I buy.

We call it patience