What’s next from Canon?

[usern4cr]

No risk. CPW doesn't sell anything. He acts as a middleman for Canon dealers who are willing to offer discounted prices.

Canon requires all dealers to follow MAP pricing (Not MSRP). MAP means Minimum Advertised Price. Under MAP dealers cannot advertise a price below MSRP, but there is no restriction on them accepting a lower price. When you contact CPW to express an interest in buying a product at the discounted street price, you will receive a response from Gordon at CPW that has the contact information for dealers willing to sell at the street price (often he has several dealers with different deals). You then contact the dealer and they send you an invoice at the street price.

Essentially, it's an internet equivalent of walking into a dealership and asking the dealer if they can "do better" than the MSRP. Canon does not prohibit dealers from accepting less than MSRP, they just don't want dealers advertising a product for less than MSRP.

Thank you privatebydesign and unfocused for posting this. Now I understand what's going on. I will proceed to contact Gordon at CPW and see what happens.

 

[Twinix]

Then buy CN-E lenses.

Yea, the 18-80 is just a little bit expensive as of now..

 

[Ozarker]

Getting back to the original subject "What's Next from Canon."

2021 will be the year of the DSLR.

5DV:
Same sensor as R5;
Smart Controller from 1DX III
Same card configuration as R5
First ever IBIS in a Canon DSLR
12 fps mechanical shutter
Autofocus with animal eye detect
Flip Screen

7DIII
Canon shocks everyone by offering a new 7D model
90 D sensor but with improved low pass filter similar to the 1DxIII
Smart Controller
Same card configuration as R5
IBIS
14 fps mechanical shutter
Autofocus with animal eye detect
Flip Screen
Uncertain at this time if the 7DIII will be have an integrated grip and use the 1DxIII battery.

New EF-CR lenses
Canon introduces the following as the first three in their new series of EF-CR lens series:
24-105 F4 IS;
24-70 F2.8;
70-200 F2.8 IS

Lenses are basically identical to existing EF lenses with the addition of a programmable control ring that offers the same customization options as the RF lens series. The 5DV and 7DIII come from the factory with the ability to use the new Control Ring lenses. The 1DX III is updated via a firmware upgrade. Canon announces they will be offering new Control Ring versions of many of their EF lenses over the next few years.

Fun to dream. Nothing here would be impossible or even difficult for Canon to do. But, it would cause many heads to explode.

While I love the control ring, I don't think I'd rebuy an EF lens just for that reason. However, it would be nice for new buyers. It's a cool feature, but I just don't know that it would be compelling enough for the price difference. Who knows? IS on an EF 135mm f/2L and other non-image stabilized EF lenses (24-70) would be more compelling for me. Maybe IS and a control ring? I just think it would bump those lenses up closer to the RF lens price. By then it becomes almost moot.

 

[scyrene]

Being able to focus at narrower apertures in bright light does nothing for reducing subject motion in dimmer light, which is where much of sports is shot. You need dramatically better high ISO performance,on the order of the number of stops between f/2.8 and f/11, for that.


One reason the 7D and 7D Mark II, even with all of their shortcomings, were so popular is that they allowed one to shoot many field sports under lights at night or indoors in gyms with a $2,000 70-200/2.8 instead of requiring a $5,000 300/2.8 to get the same reach with a FF camera.

Circa 2016:

1D X Mark II + EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS II = $12,100 USD and one still needs another body + 70-200 for when the action gets closer.

7D Mark II + EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II = $4,000 USD

Fair enough. I didn't have sport in mind, I've never shot it. There's no ideal replacement for the 7D, but wishful thinking on the part of those who'd like an upgrade doesn't make it any more likely.

 

[scyrene]

IBIS is less effective as the field of view narrows. The sensor must move twice as far to compensate for the same amount of angular movement with a lens that has twice the focal length as another lens. The maximum allowable amount of sensor movement is limited by the size of the image circle, so...

I've been wondering, and I may as well voice it here, about the IBIS thing. The presss releases said something like, we can do 8 stops because the lens's IS unit is constantly communicating back and forth with the body, but then some non-IS RF lenses can do it too, and it's something to do with a larger projected image circle. Does this imply that EF lenses with larger image circles will have the same outcome? Or do the RF lenses have gyroscopes even without an IS unit, to make it more accurate?

 

[koenkooi]

I've been wondering, and I may as well voice it here, about the IBIS thing. The presss releases said something like, we can do 8 stops because the lens's IS unit is constantly communicating back and forth with the body, but then some non-IS RF lenses can do it too, and it's something to do with a larger projected image circle. Does this imply that EF lenses with larger image circles will have the same outcome? Or do the RF lenses have gyroscopes even without an IS unit, to make it more accurate?

In one of the store Q&A panels Rudy Winston mentioned that a lens like the EF200mm/2.8 would see an "improvement" with IBIS, which gives me some more confidence in for other EF lenses.
Looking at the EF-RF adapters on my desk, the baffles in those are pretty big, so I fear those will cut off large parts of the image circle. As for builtin sensors, it wouldn't surprise me if Canon would add a combined gyro+accel sensor to all lenses, the impact on cost would be minimal if the same chip is used in all future lenses.

 

[scyrene]

In one of the store Q&A panels Rudy Winston mentioned that a lens like the EF200mm/2.8 would see an "improvement" with IBIS, which gives me some more confidence in for other EF lenses.
Looking at the EF-RF adapters on my desk, the baffles in those are pretty big, so I fear those will cut off large parts of the image circle. As for builtin sensors, it wouldn't surprise me if Canon would add a combined gyro+accel sensor to all lenses, the impact on cost would be minimal if the same chip is used in all future lenses.

Intriguing! Hopefully more information will be released at some point.

 

[unfocused]

While I love the control ring, I don't think I'd rebuy an EF lens just for that reason. However, it would be nice for new buyers. It's a cool feature, but I just don't know that it would be compelling enough for the price difference. Who knows? IS on an EF 135mm f/2L and other non-image stabilized EF lenses (24-70) would be more compelling for me. Maybe IS and a control ring? I just think it would bump those lenses up closer to the RF lens price. By then it becomes almost moot.

Agree. That alone isn't going to cause people to upgrade their lenses. I was just thinking of features that Canon might carry over from one format to the other and the control ring is something they could easily carry over to the EF system at little cost.

This goes to my core principle that Canon wants to compete with itself by using the R and DSLR systems to cross fertilize one another. They have said they don't have separate DSLR and R development teams, but use the same team for both formats.

I think Canon wants camera buyers to go shopping thinking: "Do I want to buy into the Canon R system or the Canon DSLR system?" rather than have them thinking: "Do I want to buy a Canon or a Nikon or a Sony?"

They've come out with an R5 that has a lot of people thinking about buying into the R system. Six months from now, they'll come out with a 5DV that will have R buyers thinking maybe they want to have the the 5D too.

 

[bbasiaga]

I've been wondering, and I may as well voice it here, about the IBIS thing. The presss releases said something like, we can do 8 stops because the lens's IS unit is constantly communicating back and forth with the body, but then some non-IS RF lenses can do it too, and it's something to do with a larger projected image circle. Does this imply that EF lenses with larger image circles will have the same outcome? Or do the RF lenses have gyroscopes even without an IS unit, to make it more accurate?

I believe any lens benefits from IBIS. The lens is projecting a circle of light (image circle) that is big enough to cover the whole sensor. Some lenses it is just barely big enough, others it extends farther (a good conceptual go-by is lenses that vignette don't have a very large image circle, and those that are full brightness to the corners probably have a larger image circle).

So the larger the circle, the more you can wiggle the sensor around and stay within it, and there fore the more stops of IS you get. I'm sure someone could go dig through patents and figure out which lenses have what size image circles and make predictions on which end of the spectrum of IBIS stops they will get. But that guy won't be me.

A lens with IS has to be able to communicate with the IBIS system, in order to make sure the moves they make are complimentary. This communication may not be as sophisticated between EF lenses and R bodies as it is between RF lenses and R bodies, i'm guessing simply on account of this feature wasn't available in EF and the R system might have some stuff specifically programmed for it. But it works and adds something to all lenses.

-Brian

 

[scyrene]

I believe any lens benefits from IBIS. The lens is projecting a circle of light (image circle) that is big enough to cover the whole sensor. Some lenses it is just barely big enough, others it extends farther (a good conceptual go-by is lenses that vignette don't have a very large image circle, and those that are full brightness to the corners probably have a larger image circle).

So the larger the circle, the more you can wiggle the sensor around and stay within it, and there fore the more stops of IS you get. I'm sure someone could go dig through patents and figure out which lenses have what size image circles and make predictions on which end of the spectrum of IBIS stops they will get. But that guy won't be me.

A lens with IS has to be able to communicate with the IBIS system, in order to make sure the moves they make are complimentary. This communication may not be as sophisticated between EF lenses and R bodies as it is between RF lenses and R bodies, i'm guessing simply on account of this feature wasn't available in EF and the R system might have some stuff specifically programmed for it. But it works and adds something to all lenses.

-Brian

Thanks. It would be great if at some point (eventually) a table could be drawn up with the rough possibilities for each lens/focal length. I also wonder how EF IS lenses would cope - whether one would be obliged to turn off either ILIS or IBIS in order to prevent them fighting each other.

I had been hoping to get a 90D but the prices have remained static, and although the extra resolution still tempts me (for birds), I'm also drawn in the opposite direction with a 1-series equivalent sensor and this extra stabilisation (for macro and miscellaneous photography). The R6 is a good entry point for the R system for me, but there's no rush given there's no stock until August, according to the retailer I'd go with.

 

[koenkooi]

[..]I also wonder how EF IS lenses would cope - whether one would be obliged to turn off either ILIS or IBIS in order to prevent them fighting each other.[..]

I've been trying to piece together that info using all the Q&A panels and announcements, and I this is my current understanding:

• If an IS lens is detected, the IBIS toggle in the menu disappears
• For an EF IS lens IBIS will do rotational corrections
• For an EF IS lens IBIS will do "low frequency" shift corrections, e.g. breathing, docked boat motion, etc.
• For an EF IS lens IBIS will not do "high frequency" aka 'shake' corrections

I would love to see the Canon white paper on this, the patents that Canonnews has looked at cover way too many options

 

[mb66energy]

The size of the front element of wide angle lenses is driven more by how much vignetting can be tolerated, rather than by the effective aperture (entrance pupil) size.

There's a much greater difference between how much of the entrance pupil can be seen by all of the points in the field of view compared to how much of the entrance pupil can only be seen by some points within the field of view with wide angle lenses than with longer focal length lenses. It's also why the front elements of a wide angle APS-C only lens can be smaller than the front element of a FF lens with the same focal length and maximum aperture and not vignette more.

In many cases, the curvature of the front element of a very wide angle lens blocks light from one side of the field of view from falling on the opposite side of the front of the lens.

You are right about that - but I hope they find a formula where the effective aperture position is closer to the front lens in the wide position which would allow a smaller diameter. If I look into my 70-200 f/4 lens I "see" the aperture blades closer to the front element in the 70mm setting compared to 200mm.

 

[Ozarker]

The R6 and R5 sound like fantastic cameras. I would like to see an R with IBIS. The R5 is too much for my use. The R6 isn't enough megapixels for me. That said, Maybe there will be an Rs with the rumored high megapixel sensor. Not an R5s, but an Rs, with IBIS. I can get by just fine with my R, but I would like an R with IBIS.

 

[scyrene]

A 5D Mark III purchased in 2012 is still a relatively good stills camera

Can confirm!

 

[BeenThere]

My 5D4 is cherry. I mean, really. I baby my gear as it is but I’m not exaggerating when I say there isn’t a mark on it. Anywhere. Shutter actuations are low because I have a truckload of cameras bodies and they all get used.

When I began R5 and possible 100-500L shopping I thought of selling my 7D2, 5D4, and maybe even my EOS-R to offset the hit. I don’t need to, I will just have to get a bigger shelf. But in the process of feeling it out I discovered there is no real market for these bodies unless you want to give them away. I think Adorama wanted to give $1000 for a ‘best case’ EOS-R.

No thanks. I’ll keep all my bodies and use them for decoration before I let them go for that kind of money. That’s why I still have every body I’ve ever bought. Every lens too - even the really horrible ones hahaha...

I mean, what kind of idiot owns a 70-300 AND a 75-300 hmmm? It gets worse, oh yes.

I have to say that I recycle the stuff that is no longer used, even if the price is terrible. If it’s not used and just taking up space in the closet, what’s the point? Waiting for the antique market to recognize value is not going to work with mass produced camera equipment. Give it away (somebody can probably use it) to possibly a student or sell it for current market. Your spouse will appreciate your selfless actions and give some leeway when acquiring the next toy.

 

[CaMeRa QuEsT]

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.

I keep reading mentions of similar QC issues with the newer "Global Vision" lines everywhere. also, the 56mm is $400+, that's too much to pay for a 3rd party APS-C short tele that uses aspherics and yet has very heavy distortion levels. I believe that Canon can do much better for the same price.

 

[BeenThere]

Can confirm!

+1

 

[degos]

I keep reading mentions of similar QC issues with the newer "Global Vision" lines everywhere

Global Vision encompasses the whole equivalent range of Canon lenses , from junk like the 50mm 1.8 right up to the L series. So compare like for like.

 

[degos]

Yes, there will be more rolling shutter effect at 20fps with the e-shutter.

It's not rolling shutter if it's electronically read...

The effect might be similar but it's a different phenomenon

 

[Bert63]

I have to say that I recycle the stuff that is no longer used, even if the price is terrible. If it’s not used and just taking up space in the closet, what’s the point? Waiting for the antique market to recognize value is not going to work with mass produced camera equipment. Give it away (somebody can probably use it) to possibly a student or sell it for current market. Your spouse will appreciate your selfless actions and give some leeway when acquiring the next toy.

I like my old stuff.. We have space and my wife also understands the value of a dollar. If I’m shooting some ridiculous time lapse and pull out the 40D or 70D and leave it clicking away somewhere I’m less worried than if I leave my 5D4 or EOS-R in the same situation.

My only point was that I’m not willing to give my items away for a pittance just so that entity (be it Adorama or whoever) can then turn it for a profit.