What’s next from Canon?

Eclipsed

EOS R5, "Hefty Fifty" and more.
Apr 30, 2020
143
147
You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.
That’s why use overhead projectors and transparencies and not electronic
Way to just make stuff up.

DSLRs still constitute a huge share of the market.There will not be a 100% migration to mirrorless in a single generation, if ever.

Canon will not abandon half or more of the full frame market, especially in these highly competitive times when every manufacturer is fighting to hold on to market share.
1. There is never a 100% of anything anywhere, ever, so your bold statement has zero meaning. There has not been a 100% migration away from autofocus, or from film, or from view cameras, or from wet glass plates. Which is irrelevant to the question at hand.
2. A "single generation" in the digital camera world is a couple years, in which case I agree with even the implication that flippy mirrors won't be obsolete or entirely out of production in a few years. Or did you mean a 20-year human generation?
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
506
547
Why is the Adorama ad link overflown to article links? Or example i click the comments link on this article and goes to the Adorama post.
It happens randomly and even after page is fully loaded. I am not sure if its deliberate to make people click by "accident" but very annoying.
 

twoheadedboy

EOS R5
CR Pro
Jan 3, 2018
178
247
Kenosha, WI
You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.
Completely wrong. OVF doesn't show you the image you will ultimately get in any situation. I doesn't show you DOF for big apertures. It's too dim at small apertures. The only advantage it has over a properly implemented EVF is the battery savings, lack of delay, and other "experiential" elements of analog vs. digital. But for the act of composing a photograph, EVF is far better.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,375
1,244
Completely wrong. OVF doesn't show you the image you will ultimately get in any situation. I doesn't show you DOF for big apertures. It's too dim at small apertures. The only advantage it has over a properly implemented EVF is the battery savings, lack of delay, and other "experiential" elements of analog vs. digital. But for the act of composing a photograph, EVF is far better.
That’s three advantages you mentioned not the only one :)
 

amorse

EOS RP
Jan 26, 2017
711
905
www.instagram.com
What is it exactly that you see in a A7R4 that you don't see in an existing Canon body? And does the price differentiator make sense when you factor in new batteries, lenses, etc? Honestly curious. Because I cannot for the life of me see any logic to what you posted.
I agree with your statement, but I'll use it as a jump off point - one really noticeable difference between my 5DIV and a friends a7R3 was the low light exposure simulation. I'm almost always using the back screen anyway and on a tripod, and I will say that my friend's a7R3, in very low light, could see a heck of a lot more in exposure simulation than my 5DIV could see. It was enough that the camera's exposure simulation would see more than my eye could see - made composing in the dark a fair bit easier. That was really the only thing I found myself wishing I had. Definitely not a deal breaker, but it would be nice to have in the R5!
 

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
1,198
1,061
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
What I see in the OVF is shown in gamma 1.0 by definition, as well as the rest of the world (shown though passive optical paths, if we disregard the effects of flare).

The DR compression ("gamma") in the EVF can be applied, but then one would lose the EVF's pseudo-WYSIWYG functionality.
I think the sensor 'sees' in gamma 1.0, that is linear perception, and the human eyes are non-linear (gamma 1/2.2 or around).
 
Last edited:

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,808
949
UK
www.flickr.com
The Sony experts whom I respect rave about the 24 Mpx FF A9II for its spectacular AF for birds in flight, but moan about its lack of reach compared with the A7RIII/IV series. Unless the R6 has the AF capabilities of a Sony A9, it will be of limited use for BIF with much narrower and longer lenses because you need fast shutter speeds and, in my case but not for the more agile, a reasonable field of view to keep faster flying birds in frame. An R5 in crop mode will be a very expensive replacement for the 7DII, but not the R6 as a cheaper one, fine FF camera that it is.
I didn't realise you were talking specifically about birds in flight. I would have thought "reach" was less of an issue in that subgenre (too narrow a field of view being more of a challenge in tracking as you say).
 

Twinix

C100 III + R6?
May 6, 2020
90
54
Norway
There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.

I don't understand this obsession with making everything into a video camera.
B and C-camera, and nice to have one camera for two tasks.
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,011
1,355
I think the sensor 'sees' in gamma 1.0, that is linear perception, and the human eyes are non-linear (gamma 1/2.2 or around).
The brightness perception of humans in the normal light range is logarithmic (Weber's law), which means it preserves the apparent contrast of diffuse surfaces no matter what the intensity of the illumination is.

It's somewhat different in very low light due to quantum effects.

Still, I don't see what it have to do with OVF vs. EVF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,011
1,355
It was about your statement that EVF would show what the sensor sees if EVF had the same DR.
And...?

How does it relate to that? The image on the OVF's ground glass has the "gamma" of 1.0. As well as the rest of world seen without the use of intermediate capture devices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,100
281
The sales of interchangeable lens cameras are still higher than historical norms.

View attachment 191328

This first chart only goes to 2014 because it is from a 2015 article but nicely illustrates the historical market.

This second link gives later figures and more breakdown.

That's in units sold, and ignoring smartphones, levels have returned to those of the mid-nineties, the market is shrinking, and that's in face of population growth. I don't envy camera manufacturers' position.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,375
1,244
I'm grouping them into the same bucket of "it's not electronic". They have no benefits for photo composition, which is the point of a viewfinder.
An excessive latency of EVF does affect composition I mean, you literary miss shots shooting fast action due to slow EVF. Example : Canon R. Not to kick start an argument, of course. Just pointing out that there are other benefits: when shooting with strobes for example.
 

CanonFanBoy

Real men single speed.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,167
3,339
Irving, Texas
There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.
It isn’t film makers making the cameras. On top of that, people can’t all afford a Cine camera. Canon is supplying two markets with one machine. Very cost effective for all.