What’s next from Canon?

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
That would create a DSLR that performs much better in live view mode than when it is used with the OVF. There is no point in such a camera, if you don't use the OVF any more.
I wonder what Canon thinks about the sales number for the 90D? After all, many folks say it performs much better in LV than with the OVF...
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
It would be really nice to see Canon release an R mount camera aimed at stills photographers.

Right now, if I had to replace my 5D's in a hurry (if they were stolen or dropped of a cliff or something) - the options I have for a new camera are: 5D4 (with 4 year old tech) - or move to Sony with the A7R4 (or R3). Its kind of disappointing that after 4 years and 4 RF bodies, Canon have nothing new to offer 5D users, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline either.
[and no - a £4200 R5 is NOT a replacement for a '5D' camera]

Just to be clear, your argument here is totally based on price? The R5 is not a 5D4 replacement because it's too expensive?
What if Canon knows they would need to price the 5D Mark V at the same level as the R5 to make it financially feasible for them? A lot has changed in the world's economic climate since 2016.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
The R5 appears to be the same price it was back in 2016 once you correct for the fact that the Yen is substantially stronger against the dollar than it was in 2016 (~123:1 then vs 107:1 now).
Maybe to a point.

But Canon's pricing of the 1D X Mark II in 2016 at $5,999, versus $6,499 for the 1D X and 1D X Mark III in 2012 and 2020, respectively, indicates that the price adjustment in 2016 was more of a reaction to perceived competition from the Nikon D5, which for the first time ever had better AF than Canon's current flagship body, than it was a reaction to the value of the yen vs. USD.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
Put a battery grip on the R5 and you have the power.
Not really. The body and the power regulators it uses is still only providing the lens with the reduced power of a system designed for a 7.2V two-cell Li-Ion battery compared to the power of system designed around a 10.8V three-cell Li-Ion battery.
 

bbb34

5D mk V
Jul 24, 2012
146
154
Amsterdam
I wonder what Canon thinks about the sales number for the 90D? After all, many folks say it performs much better in LV than with the OVF...
I don't know what Canon thinks, but

if I was Canon, and I was able to make great profit from a DSLR that everybody mostly uses in live view mode, I would hurrry to shift the business to mirrorless in order to make more profit out of the same market.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
Agree. How ever if I would have to spend 3+K on lens, i'd prefer one with IS and suffer with weight and size. I'd be 12+ year investment, after all.

Why 70-200 with IS came before non-is version. Salesnumbers prediction, i suppose.

However If canon ommits IS then thats fine too. Unique R lens would entice to move to R system.

Not counterparts. I do not understand this 85 mm madness. Are they hoping for lots of "this or that" comparision reviews
Maybe because Canon knows they sell a LOT more 85mm prime lenses than 100mm, 135mm, 180mm, and 200mm primes combined? And that they sell enough of each of the f/1.2, f/1.4, and f/1.8 variations to make them all worth doing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franklyok

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
The 5R launch has been odd in that they haven't allowed any independent reviews. It will be interesting what the neutral reviews are like.
In the past most independent reviewers who had access before the cameras were out in the wild got very limited time with pre-production models at press events hosted by Canon. For the 5D Mark IV (or maybe it was the 1D X Mark II, or both), it was held in Hawaii. For the 90D/6D Mark II, it was held outside of Atlanta at an auto racing road course. Notice that even before the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, Canon was spending less on such events than they had in the past. These events allowed many different invitees to get a chance to look at the new cameras using a relatively few number of bodies, as they were passed from one to the next every couple of hours.

With the current situation dominated by COVID and resulting travel and large meeting restrictions, Canon wasn't able to host any such event(s). Getting bodies from one reviewer to the next via couriers would have taken much longer and allowed the reviewers to have almost a full day to do whatever they wished with the bodies without Canon representatives being present to insure the reviewers followed the agreements they signed in order to be allowed to attend the hosted events. Things such as no saving raw files, etc. would not have been enforceable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene

Franklyok

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 24, 2018
69
25
Maybe because Canon knows they sell a LOT more 85mm prime lenses than 100mm, 135mm, 180mm, and 200mm primes combined? And that they sell enough of each of the f/1.2, f/1.4, and f/1.8 variations to make them all worth doing?
Agree, this must be it. And 70-135 f2 would be one lens to rule them all . I have old ef 85, and could kick it another 5 years. R Body alone and counterpart lens ( RF 85 ) are not compelling enough to update gear.

Hows that ef 200 f2 IS going btw. Nobody complained about size and weight back then.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
I once bought a brand spanking new Sigma 17-55/2.8 OS that could not focus to infinity. I live in a country with no Sigma authorized repair shops, so I had to disassemble the lens myself to remove a shimmy out of the focusing group so that it could do infinity. Then I found out that the lens was not well centered and had low contrast. Once bitten, twice shy. I much prefer original Canon lenses, never had any issues with them, and Canon has a very strong local presence.
Sigma's "Global Vision" lenses (Art, Sports, and Contemporary series) are entirely different animals than their pre-Global Vision offerings. There's still a small gap between them and Canon lenses in terms of AF accuracy and consistency, but almost none in terms of optical image quality.
 
Last edited:

Franklyok

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 24, 2018
69
25

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
I'd like an affordable 85mm 1.4 af lens for dslr.
Any EF mount 85mm f/1.4 lens for anywhere near the same price as the EF 85mm f/1.8 would almost certainly suffer from worse IQ at all common apertures.

Compare the IQ of the first and second generations of the 16-35/2.8 to the 16-35/4. The f/2.8 lenses sold for about 50% more and still couldn't match the IQ of the f/4.

The EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L III is more competitive in terms of IQ with the EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS, especially on the edges of the frame, but doesn't match it at f/4 or f/5.6 in the center except at 28mm, which is both lenses weakest point as tested by DxO Labs. But the 2.8 III also sells for more than twice as much as the f/4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bergstrom

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
I'm not. My EOS-R has been a rock and it goes everywhere.

This reviewer says the R5 is as solid as anything he's ever held in his hand.
That reviewer is also a paid endorser of Canon products.

Though I'd expect that the R5 will be just as rugged as the 5D Mark IV, if not even more rugged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert63

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
Agree, this must be it. And 70-135 f2 would be one lens to rule them all . I have old ef 85, and could kick it another 5 years. R Body alone and counterpart lens ( RF 85 ) are not compelling enough to update gear.

Hows that ef 200 f2 IS going btw. Nobody complained about size and weight back then.
As much as I salivate at the prospect of owning an EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS, I cannot justify paying that price for what it offers over the EF 85mm f/1.8 I bought used for a steal at $150 a few years ago. It's a very good lens!

The 70-135/2 is a unicorn that, as far as I can tell, Canon has never said anything about. It got started here at Canon Rumors when someone added a 70-135mm f/2 to their wish list of possible RF mount lenses.

Plenty of folks complained about the size and weight, not to mention PRICE, of the EF 200mm f/2 L IS! Especially when compared to the size/weight/price of the EF 200mm f/2.8 L II. If only the 200/2.8 had IS!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert63

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
Who really knows? - no-one here I'd imagine - the only certain thing is that there will always be a newer camera 'just around the corner'. Sometimes you just have to pull the trigger, take the shots with what you have, and get the next one once its arrived :)
That was easier for many folks when Canon held the line on price for the full length of most camera's time in the catalog. It meant they could use a camera for a couple of years and sell it when they wanted a newer model without taking a bath. Now that Canon has seemed to have adopted Sony's strategy of lowering the price of older models and leaving them in the catalog longer, that is not so much the case. Try selling a lightly used 5D Mark IV today for anywhere near what it cost you new in 2016-17!
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
I must confess, I'm disappointed about the RF 24mm f/2.8 IS STM Macro rumor. Since wide lenses are where the RF mount is supposed to shine, why is the 24mm only 2.8? Why not 2.0, or at least 2.2? I doubt the RF will be much smaller and lighter than the modestly sized EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM, so I guess it will be quite a bit sharper? Since they're calling it a macro, I suppose the MFD will be less than the 8" of the EF, but I want some speed. 2.8 is quick for a zoom at this focal length, not so much for a prime. It's too early in my RF relationship to become disillusioned...

An EF 28mm lens is required to use a retrofocus design because it is shorter than the EF mount 44mm registration distance.

WIth a 20mm registration distance for the RF mount, a 28mm lens can be a more conventional design.

I'd expect an RF 28mm f/2.8 IS STM to be both smaller and have better overall IQ than the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM.

I'd also be very surprised if Canon does not release an RF 24mm f/1.4 L within the next year or so.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
What would be the cost for this new 5Dv beast? No EVF but prism/ mirror box, AF system from 1DXii (maybe?) will add significant cost even if everything else is the same. Focusing/AF will still be better (coverage/subject tracking) will still be better via live view similar to 1DXiii. It would also mean a fixed screen vs flippy on R5. OLED top screen? It may happen but would people pay USD300-500 more than R5 for it given the lower sales volume now that the R5 has been released and is moving people over to RF (including me)?
Too many folks want them to put Rolex parts inside and still charge a Timex price.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
The Canon rep who showed me the R5/R6 told me point blank it’s the exact same sensor. Just going off of what he said.
Probably it is the same bare sensor. Most definitely it has different microlenses to account for the varying edge angles between a 44mm registration distance and a 20mm registration distance. Thus different filter stack in front of the microlenses, including the low pass filter.
 

yoms

EOS 90D
Jul 4, 2012
105
75
The mirror already is translucent. The AF module sits below the mirror box and there is second mirror behind the main one. Question just is can DPAF work with that amount of light.
As I wrote, Sony had something like this but they completely gave up on the system (A99 series) if that's a clue.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
One of the differences I know about for sure is that the sensor in the 1DX III has a ‘high-detail’ low-pass filter, and the R6 uses a simpler traditional low-pass filter. I'm sure there are others but don't know what they are and I doubt they will impact image quality to any degree.

All I know is 20MP is too small for me. I did 20MP in the 7D2. After 30MP in the 5D4 and R, I'll never go backwards in resolution.
The 20MP sensor of the 7D Mark II has the same pixel density as a 50MP FF sensor, though. That's denser than both the 5D Mark IV and the EOS R.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,937
1,684
Why is the R5 inadequate. If you use mechanical shutter it seems like it would be far more than adequate. The e-shutter will most likely be inadequate due to sensor read speed being at best 1/60s and I see the 20fps headline as a gimmick on a non-stacked or non-global shutter sensor. But 12fps with mechanical shutter is 1DX performance with 45MP. You are too quick to dismiss an unreleased product.

FWIW I see zero need for a 5DV going forward.
How can a sensor that only reads out at 60fps do full sensor width video at 120fps?

Or how can a mechanical shutter with curtain transit times in the neighborhood of 2.5 milliseconds (the 1D X Mark II, 1D X, and 7D Mark II all have curtain transit times of around 2.5-2.7ms) be that much better than a sensor that can read out at, say, 240fps? (1/400 = 2.5ms, 1/240 = 4.17ms)

Yes, there will be more rolling shutter effect at 20fps with the e-shutter. But it will not be anywhere near as bad as a sensor that can only read out 60fps. (1/60 = 16.67ms, 1/120 = 8.33ms)