# Canon Sends Invitation to Dealers for Major Mirrorless Presentation Next Month



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 19, 2018)

```
We’ve been told that Canon is sending out “very elaborate” invites to select dealers and VIPs for a mirrorless camera announcement next month.</p>
<p>The invitation was described as being very high end, printed on heavy glossy paper and showing a silhouette of a camera shaped like the EOS M6 with a hole cut out where the sensor would be.</p>

<p>Apparently only CEOs and higher-ups are allowed to go to the presentation, no sales people are permitted.</p>
<p>I would say all of this would point to Canon announcing something more than just another entry level APS-C shooter.</p>
<p>If anyone has a picture of the invite, <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/contact-form/">please send it to us</a>.</p>
<p><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">more to come…</span></em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 19, 2018)

Why cut the sensor out of the picture unless there's a surprise awaiting...

Maybe an M6-sized body with the 6D full-frame sensor?

Now *that* I'd buy in an instant (well, assuming there were lenses to go along with it too!)


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 19, 2018)

It's just an illusrative image, isn't it? Surely new FF mirrorless is not going to use m6 body along with its EF-M mount?


----------



## docsmith (Jan 19, 2018)

Ok...this is something. I only recall these types of invites for significant announcements, such as a 1D camera.

But that flies in the face of a bunch of rumors we heard (just now asking pros for features they would want, etc), and the M6 body is odd (I do not see a FF sensor in an M6 body nor would I call that a "Pro" body). So this is either the fabled FF mirrorless announcement (scaled up M6 body?), an annoucement of a new line (Mirrorless Cinema series bodies??), potentially a mirrorless "road map", or Canon just toying with us.....


----------



## schmidtfilme (Jan 19, 2018)

Well - sounds like FF mirrorless. That would be earlier than expected. Great news if true.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 19, 2018)

The exclusive invite does seem to point to something big (aka FF mirrorless). However the M6 body is odd. But then again, it could just be part of the game and we should not read too much into it. Aka, the M6 with the sensor cut out could just simply be read "Mirrorless with New sensor". 

If it is a FF mirrorless, I'm still thinking there is a good chance it is an EF mount with a body more like a traditional DSLR, especially if this is a high end, for "pros" type camera. If it is a smaller body (similar to other mirrorless bodies out today) with a shorter flange distance then I see this as more a consumer, enthusiast market Canon is targeting first.

It will be interesting as more details leak.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 19, 2018)

Luds34 said:


> The exclusive invite does seem to point to something big (aka FF mirrorless). However the M6 body is odd. But then again, it could just be part of the game and we should not read too much into it.


everytime canon's done a silhouette it's turned out to be the real thing. they do it quite rarely, 5D and 1D series are the ones I'm thinking are the last they did.

there's a REAL lack of any patents coming out for full frame mirrorless from canon. you'd think a strong push to an EF-M mount we'd see patents filtering through for specific kit zooms at least.

the only ones that really have come out have been odd defensive or a specific embodiment without much substance.


----------



## Canoneer (Jan 19, 2018)

So... If it's full-frame mirrorless, what are the guesses on their naming convention? The 1M? 5M? 6M? Assuming the product segmentation is the same as the 1D (pro-spec), 5D (semi-pro), and 6D (entry-level), which will they introduce first? Or maybe a model for each at the same time?


----------



## eoren1 (Jan 19, 2018)

Of course Canon does this as soon as I sell my last Canon lens and buy the last Sony one I need to make the transition to the a7rIII...

Curious to see what they come up with and hope I don’t regret the move in a month or so. I’m not one to jump back and forth between systems and had been with Canon for 13 years but finally saw enough significant improvements on the mirrorless side to draw me over there. 

I have to believe the first iteration will have some rough edges. Sony’s A7R series only appealed to me in its third iteration.


----------



## BeenThere (Jan 19, 2018)

M6 like body with a square sensor?


----------



## docsmith (Jan 19, 2018)

eoren1 said:


> Of course Canon does this as soon as I sell my last Canon lens and buy the last Sony one I need to make the transition to the a7rIII...
> 
> Curious to see what they come up with and hope I don’t regret the move in a month or so. I’m not one to jump back and forth between systems and had been with Canon for 13 years but finally saw enough significant improvements on the mirrorless side to draw me over there.
> 
> I have to believe the first iteration will have some rough edges. Sony’s A7R series only appealed to me in its third iteration.



Oh...so you are the proverbial guy that finally gave up so now what you wanted all along can finally be announced.

I guess the rest of us should thank you! 

;D


----------



## eoren1 (Jan 19, 2018)

docsmith said:


> eoren1 said:
> 
> 
> > Of course Canon does this as soon as I sell my last Canon lens and buy the last Sony one I need to make the transition to the a7rIII...
> ...



Yup! Pretty excited - never been ‘that guy’ before.

Seriously interested in Canon’s announcement. Just feeling that post-huge purchase twang now that I’m seeing this...


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 19, 2018)

Luds34 said:


> The exclusive invite does seem to point to something big (aka FF mirrorless). However the M6 body is odd. But then again, it could just be part of the game and we should not read too much into it. Aka, the M6 with the sensor cut out could just simply be read "Mirrorless with New sensor".
> 
> If it is a FF mirrorless, I'm still thinking there is a good chance it is an EF mount with a body more like a traditional DSLR, especially if this is a high end, for "pros" type camera. If it is a smaller body (similar to other mirrorless bodies out today) with a shorter flange distance then I see this as more a consumer, enthusiast market Canon is targeting first.
> 
> It will be interesting as more details leak.



Two points to consider:

1) The current EF-M mount with an EF-M lens can potentially use a full frame sensor. 
2) The current EF-M mount with an EF Adapter can hit at least 90% of a full frame sensor, the camera can just detect when the adapter is mounted and compensate. 

There were a lot of patents in December that looked to be for an aps-c type lens - but could those be for a full frame implementation too? I'm wondering if this article: http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-more-ultra-wide-zoom-lens-patents/ might be assuming this is an APS-C lens based only on the Back Focal length (BF). Could the BF also be the correct distance for a full frame? Obviously an aps-c sensor justt wouldn't capture as mmuch, just like the current aps-c's with full frame lenses mounted. 

However the one thing that really sticks out in my mind is that there have been *a lot* of aps-c lens patents coming through lately.


----------



## Deleted member 374702 (Jan 19, 2018)

Wow! A sensorless camera... who would've thought!


----------



## dude (Jan 19, 2018)

eoren1 said:


> Of course Canon does this as soon as I sell my last Canon lens and buy the last Sony one I need to make the transition to the a7rIII...
> 
> Curious to see what they come up with and hope I don’t regret the move in a month or so. I’m not one to jump back and forth between systems and had been with Canon for 13 years but finally saw enough significant improvements on the mirrorless side to draw me over there.
> 
> I have to believe the first iteration will have some rough edges. Sony’s A7R series only appealed to me in its third iteration.



No reason to look back. Sony sensor tech pushed me away from Canon. Canon just needs to stop the bleeding. So many are tied to a brand (for good reason when you have a lot invested) that just releasing a FF mirrorless in the current M6 body would be good enough to help slow any of us that have purchased other brands.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 19, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> M6 like body with a square sensor?



That would actually be quite interesting. It could have more resolution than a full frame, just slightly narrower than a full frame as the shape would be different....

I don't know enough about lenses to know if existing lenses would work out of the box? Is the last element shaped to throw an oval or a circle to cover the existing wider sensors (or film, if going back enough years)?

That would be somewhat of a unicorn development, but it would certainly differentiate the product from the competitors.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 19, 2018)

eoren1 said:


> Of course Canon does this as soon as I sell my last Canon lens and buy the last Sony one I need to make the transition to the a7rIII...
> 
> Curious to see what they come up with and hope I don’t regret the move in a month or so. I’m not one to jump back and forth between systems and had been with Canon for 13 years but finally saw enough significant improvements on the mirrorless side to draw me over there.
> 
> I have to believe the first iteration will have some rough edges. Sony’s A7R series only appealed to me in its third iteration.



I felt the same way, and it was the A9 that actually convinced me to pick up a Sony body. I then added an A7R2 and a few Sony lenses. I guess the difference with me is that I never sold my Canon glass and have been updating them as I patiently wait for Canon's pro-mirrorless entrant. I've also been using them on other systems. Glass is the real value of any system as bodies come and go all the time. 

Still waiting for Canon's pro-mirrorless offering. I know one day my lenses can come back to old faithful. They've spent too much time on Tinder for the last few years going from manufacturer to manufacturer all over the world..


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 19, 2018)

dude said:


> Canon just needs to stop the bleeding.



Bleeding? Let me guess - you got an abrasion on your head when you fell up against reality, and want to use a Canon camera strap as a bandage. Apparently you don't realize that Canon has been _gaining_ ILC market share. I hear getting smacked with reality can hurt, I recommend knowledge as a prophylactic.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 19, 2018)

criscokkat said:


> BeenThere said:
> 
> 
> > M6 like body with a square sensor?
> ...



The idea has been kicked around a bit, here. It would sort of work 'out of the box' with most lenses, the exception being lenses that have a rectangular baffle at the back (like the 24-105/4L IS, I'm not sure there are any others). An additional problem would be the petal-shaped hoods of many lenses, which are designed for a 3:2 rectangular sensor and would likely cause some vignetting (that could be solved by updated hoods, though). A square sensor inscribed in the FF image circle would be ~30 mm, so at 3:2 format it's a 1.2x crop factor. 

Very unlikely, IMO.


----------



## littleB (Jan 19, 2018)

The mount in the picture looks like crude overlay over M6, not like real product.
BTW, the mount shows white index dot, not the red one.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 19, 2018)

littleB said:


> The mount in the picture looks like crude overlay over M6, not like real product.
> BTW, the mount shows white index dot, not the red one.



It's not a silhouette, either, because it's not the invitation, merely a photoshopped M6.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 19, 2018)

littleB said:


> The mount in the picture looks like crude overlay over M6, not like real product.
> BTW, the mount shows white index dot, not the red one.



It’s just CR guy’s mockup, not a picture of the real invitation.


----------



## Karlbug (Jan 19, 2018)

OMG, I hope if it's FF MILC that it has an EVF... but in such case they would use M5 silhouette, right. :-\

_Canon giveth and Canon taketh away._


----------



## Cochese (Jan 19, 2018)

dude said:


> eoren1 said:
> 
> 
> > Of course Canon does this as soon as I sell my last Canon lens and buy the last Sony one I need to make the transition to the a7rIII...
> ...



Canon isn't bleeding too much. Their profits were up this year, even in the DSLR market and they are somehow on the top for mirrorless cameras. Which seems rather unbelievable, but is true, apparently. If you watch videos on YouTube, last year the trend seemed to be everybody jumping ship from Canon to Sony for video. And for the last couple months, the trend seems to have reversed with a huge portion of them switching back to Canon. Primarily, it seems, the 6D. Reasons being usually less fussing with color correction in post and autofocus/ Dual Pixel AF. The swivel touch screen also gets a nod from all of them. 

They're a small market, but they have a huge reach. Many of them with several million subscribers each. Hell, one of the more annoying, but at least generally honest photography channels (Froknowsphoto) has been using the 6D for most of their video. 
Something I've found interesting is that nearly all of them have quit doing their videos in 4K and went back to 1080. All of them complaining about the increase in power required, longer render times, etc... 

One huge mention by everybody that I've been seeing is also battery life. That seems to be a huge issue that neither Sony nor Panasonic can fix due to the physical size of their cameras. And if you're adding attachments for battery life, it seems to defeat the purpose of the smaller camera. 

tl;dr: Canon is doing just fine. 4K is overhyped for most users, AF is incredibly important, ditto for battery life and color rendering out of camera. Sony will do just fine, but as some are finding out, there is more to a camera than just a sensor.


----------



## ritholtz (Jan 19, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> dude said:
> 
> 
> > Canon just needs to stop the bleeding.
> ...


I guess, it is the case of equating dxo scores and gold awards to sales/market share.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 19, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> It's just an illusrative image, isn't it? Surely new FF mirrorless is not going to use m6 body along with its EF-M mount?



Yes, The actual illustration has not been provided to CR, but the general outline is probably accurate.

While it finally sounds like a high end mirrorless is coming out, its not going to be a pro model. If / when one arrives is still a ways off.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 19, 2018)

Forget square sensors, what you really want is a round sensor to make absolutely best use of the image circle.


Circular raw files? Yes, it could happen


----------



## mb66energy (Jan 19, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Forget square sensors, what you really want is a round sensor to make absolutely best use of the image circle.
> 
> 
> Circular raw files? Yes, it could happen



If you tilt the image to get the horizon horzontal there is no change of image size, just the typical loss during that transformation - a really interesting thouht


----------



## BillB (Jan 19, 2018)

docsmith said:


> Ok...this is something. I only recall these types of invites for significant announcements, such as a 1D camera.
> 
> But that flies in the face of a bunch of rumors we heard (just now asking pros for features they would want, etc), and the M6 body is odd (I do not see a FF sensor in an M6 body nor would I call that a "Pro" body). So this is either the fabled FF mirrorless announcement (scaled up M6 body?), an annoucement of a new line (Mirrorless Cinema series bodies??), potentially a mirrorless "road map", or Canon just toying with us.....



Well, the questionnaire to the pros about mirrorless was a rumor after all. So far as I know, there is absolutely nothing to support the conclusion that this rumored questionnaire was in preparation for the design of Canon's first FF mirrorless, although several posters made that leap. It seems more likely that this questionnaire, if there was one, was for the long term planning for future generations of mirrorless.

Maybe the hole in the middle is to tease us about the size of the sensor, or maybe the mount.


----------



## dude (Jan 19, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> dude said:
> 
> 
> > Canon just needs to stop the bleeding.
> ...



Over-the-top reaction. Increasing market share doesn't always mean Canon has no bleeding to stop. If they lose customers who are buying heavily into a brand, which does happen, then gaining market share for a camera body with kit lens may not mean as much. Financially this isn't good for Canon. 

Yes, Canon must stop the bleeding (they have to have an answer for those leaving the Canon eco system headed off to other systems). How many M lenses are they selling vs FF E mount?


----------



## padam (Jan 19, 2018)

Could begin with a fixed lens compact FF first, ILC system second.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 19, 2018)

dude said:


> Yes, Canon must stop the bleeding (they have to have an answer for those leaving the Canon eco system headed off to other systems). How many M lenses are they selling vs FF E mount?



In the largest market for mirrorless, the home country for both Canon and Sony, Canon MILCs are outselling Sony MILCs. Who's bleeding?


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jan 19, 2018)

mb66energy said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > Forget square sensors, what you really want is a round sensor to make absolutely best use of the image circle.
> ...


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jan 19, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’ve been told that Canon is sending out “very elaborate” invites to select dealers and VIPs for a mirrorless camera announcement next month.</p>
> <p>The invitation was described as being very high end, printed on heavy glossy paper and showing a silhouette of a camera shaped like the EOS M6 with a hole cut out where the sensor would be.</p>
> 
> <p>Apparently only CEOs and higher-ups are allowed to go to the presentation, no sales people are permitted.</p>
> ...



Craig, is this Canon USA that you are referring to as sending out the invites?


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

Sharlin said:


> littleB said:
> 
> 
> > The mount in the picture looks like crude overlay over M6, not like real product.
> ...



+1. We should stop wigging out interpreting things from a CR Guy mockup -- he does not have the legit imagery Canon is using in the invite yet. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

angrykarl said:


> OMG, I hope if it's FF MILC that it has an EVF... but in such case they would use M5 silhouette, right. :-\
> 
> _Canon giveth and Canon taketh away._



Thought that myself, but it could be an RX100-style pop up EVF, who knows?

- A


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 19, 2018)

dude said:


> Yes, Canon must stop the bleeding (they have to have an answer for those leaving the Canon eco system headed off to other systems). How many M lenses are they selling vs FF E mount?



They are _almost certainly_ selling more EF-M lenses than _anybody_ is selling FF lenses.


----------



## SkynetTX (Jan 19, 2018)

In my opinion a square sensor would make sense as we could make both landscape and portrait orientated images by simply cropping the pictures while maintaining the highest 3:2 size available. A 5184 * 5184 pixel image can be cropped to 5184 * 3456 (landscape) and 3456 * 5184 (portrait) pixel. On a Full Frame camera this could be called the Crop Factor. 
On the other hand a circular camera with a circular sensor and the buttons arranged in a circle around the circular screen would also be interesting.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

padam said:


> Could begin with a fixed lens compact FF first, ILC system second.



+1, I've been saying this for some time. Something like the RX1R cameras, the Leica Q, etc. are pricey toys for one percenters who 'need' a camera for their world travels but don't necessarily want the size / complexity of a full-fledged ILC. 

And these FF style-piece rigs hold price like champs. Consider:


The RX1R II has not dropped in MAP price of $3299 (or whatever Sony calls it) since the product was announced over two years ago. 


Everyone remember the overhyped / underspec'd retro bougie cash grab that was the Nikon Df? MAP hasn't budged in 4 years of service. They are still selling a 16 MP SLR _that does not shoot video of any kind_ for the same $2749 it was listed at.


The Leica Q has not changed in price since it was launched 2.5 years ago.

Canon and Nikon would give their left nut for that kind of price retention on a premium rig.

- A


----------



## Navism (Jan 19, 2018)

Canon would be really care Nikon.
They may want to release earlier than Nikon in 2018.
or Canon wants to increase the mirrorless share in 2018.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 19, 2018)

I love this forum. There is a rumor that Canon is inviting a bunch of executives to some mystery reception. CR Guy posts a mockup of the supposed invite. Suddenly everybody goes crazy fantasizing that their dream camera is coming.

We've even revived the crazy "square sensor" crowd. 

Meanwhile, some random Sony person makes a silly comment about Canon "bleeding" and Neuro has to jump in with a dose of reality.

You all might want to take a deep breath and ask yourselves a few questions:

Where is this reception being held? One location in one country? Or multiple locations in multiple countries? 

Who is it that is being invited? Select dealers and VIPs of what companies? 

Has CR Guy confirmed this is an announcement invite? The target audience makes it just as likely to be some sort of appreciation reception or a marketing presentation. Or maybe even (if Canon USA) an announcement of new investment in the U.S. due to tax reforms. 

Depending on who is being invited, ask yourselves why they would be invited or even interested in an announcement of a niche market camera like a full-frame mirrorless. 

As Neuro has reminded everyone countless times – don't confuse what you personally want with what the market cares about.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 19, 2018)

StoicalEtcher said:


> But the next stage then would have to be circular screens, so that my "fit to screen" button would still work - where would it all end? ;D ;D



Another great thing about circular sensors - no need to tilt your camera to switch between portrait or landscape. Just reframe your shot in post.

This thread encouraged me to finish the article I started in 2016 and then forgot about!

http://www.everyothershot.com/whats-better-full-frame-sensor-circular-sensor-course/


----------



## sniper_shooter (Jan 19, 2018)

Let's see how much Canon has capability more than that "5D markiv".

I mean, whether they can release the really awesome game-changing camera, orrr, not that bad camera like 5D4 with freaking motion-JPEG.

Who knows.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

These 'big deal is coming' exclusive invites are generally _not_ for the odd body refresh or new lens, right?

If so, one might argue that this is more likely than not:


A new product line that we may not have been expecting (e.g. SL1, XC10, etc.)
An non-trivial industry first (e.g. wireless flash control onboard, TTL hybrid VF, etc.),
A big first for Canon (4K ILC in crop?)

I'm not trying to make specific predictions with those comments in parens above, but is it safe to say that this won't _just_ be a standard/vanilla M50 + the two EF-M lenses announcement CR Guy has been predicting?

- A


----------



## LensFungus (Jan 19, 2018)

I wouldn't think too much about those invitations being an indicator for a more special camera than previous releases. What I see is something else.

Over the last 3 years I've been very curious about the newest Canon and Sony releases. While having Canon equipment I always looked over to Sony. As soon as the two companies released a new camera I watched an unhealthy amount of videos on Youtube about those new releases. While it is true that Canon has multiple Youtube channels with a lot of videos, they don't get many views. If there is one thing Canon can learn from Sony it is Youtube presence because at some point Sony started to invite Youtube personalities (obviously not only) and let them film their experiences which would result in many clicks on popular Youtube channels. Actually Canon has learned and they kinda did it for the Canon 6D II with Kaiman Wong and Gordon Laing... and we all know how that went... or let's say it wasn't received as groundbreaking. Then there were the just before christmas at almost the same time uploaded videos by Canon-users Jessica Kobeissi and Peter McKinnon (I guess there was even a third one but I forgot who) who talked about the 6D II. Yes, the 6D II release date is long gone, but those big photography youtubers talked about the camera. In my opinion it was a Canon marketing strategy. No, not because of christmas, but more imporantly because they sent out a certain camera to people at the same time.

Therefore my guess is that Canon simply continues their new Youtube game.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 19, 2018)

What was the last product (or last few products or lines) announced this way?


----------



## CanonGuy (Jan 19, 2018)

I am looking to buy a mirrorless FF for video. If it's a FF ML with EF mount, I'll be sold. DSLRs are just too cumbersome for video... IMO


----------



## transpo1 (Jan 19, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> dude said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, Canon must stop the bleeding (they have to have an answer for those leaving the Canon eco system headed off to other systems). How many M lenses are they selling vs FF E mount?
> ...



Cue market reality check from Neuro. Gotta love the consistency!


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 19, 2018)

docsmith said:


> But that flies in the face of a bunch of rumors we heard (just now asking pros for features they would want, etc)



Not really. People assume that Canon asks them for product development purposes, but more often company marketers ask these sorts of questions to better sell products over which they have no control. Odds are that "pro poll" was telling Canon how to sell to them, rather than changing a product.


----------



## domo_p1000 (Jan 19, 2018)

Adelino said:


> What was the last product (or last few products or lines) announced this way?



Use of a silhouette teasers... there have been a few, but I can only really remember those that I have. I can't remember whether it was the original 1D X or the Mark II that was teased in this way (and I'm pretty sure that the EOS 3 was teased in this way as well)!

So... *EOS-1D X Mark II *| *Powershot G3X* | *EOS-5D Mark II* | *T90*

But as for the slick invites etc., not sure!


----------



## slclick (Jan 19, 2018)

It's not for a body, it's the EF-M 15-45 f/3.5-6.3 release party


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

LensFungus said:


> Therefore my guess is that Canon simply continues their new Youtube game.



One interesting riff on this might be that Canon is considering making a dedicated vlogging/youtube-aimed ILC. 

Key parameters would be [Low weight] + [tilty-flippy touch] + [DPAF] + [strong video], which a number of Canon APS-C rigs deliver today. But they are effectively traditional cameras that vloggers/youtubers are _fighting through the realities of using_ in this very specific video application. What if Canon went all-in on a specialty vlogging EF-M platform?

Again, this is pie-in-the-sky brain musings here:


No pop-up flash, instead having a series of interchangeable modules that suit vlogging -- LED lighting panel, high quality directional mic, etc.
No traditional grip for held-to-face viewfinder-base photography; perhaps instead opting for something to fundamentally facilitate selfie-directed camera support -- integral selfie handle, some self-contained tripod legs for support on a table, etc. 
Perhaps the conventional tilty-flippy is abandoned, repositioned or a second one is offered that is right on the front of the camera

In a weird analogy, think Powershot N with the smallest EF-M body you can possibly make and some support/mounting/holding options built-in (or planned for).

- A


----------



## Lurker (Jan 19, 2018)

> ...showing a silhouette of a camera shaped like the EOS M6 with a hole cut out where the sensor would be.
> 
> Apparently only CEOs and higher-ups are allowed to go to the presentation, no sales people are permitted.



I haven't watched this stuff over time so I don't know how Canon operates and they certainly know more about it than I do. It does seem odd that sales people aren't included but maybe that's how Canon does things. For a new product release it just seems like you'd want sales people there with hands on and lots of glitz to get the buzz going. 

This seems like it could be an extension of the rumored survey. Maybe Canon is now going to execs and VIPs to discuss the business aspect of FF MILC and how to make it successful for shops and high profile users. Thus the empty shell of a camera, suggesting they want help building it right the first time, not like Sony taking 3 iterations as was suggested.

Either that or Canon is just admitting they got nothing. They are going to apologize to their business partners and admit they have no game and are going to close up shop and stop pretending. They're just going to rip that Band-Aid off (seppuku?) and get it over with rather than letting their demise drag out over years and watching Sony beat them at every new release.

Maybe I don't know anything at all, just don't get it and should shut up and go away.


----------



## docsmith (Jan 19, 2018)

[email protected] said:


> docsmith said:
> 
> 
> > But that flies in the face of a bunch of rumors we heard (just now asking pros for features they would want, etc)
> ...



I can buy that.

Of course this is just a preliminary rumor. Hopefully we'll know more with time. The "CEO" aspect is odd. As I recall, the other announcements included photographers, sales people etc, etc. 

Also, this is how the 1DX was announced:
http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-announcement-in-singapore-october-18-2011/

That is multiple events in multiple countries and a newspaper ad. 

So, I am still really intrigued, but this could be road map/business plan/market assessment stuff as easily as it could be a major announcement.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

Lurker said:


> This seems like it could be an extension of the rumored survey. Maybe Canon is now going to execs and VIPs to discuss the business aspect of FF MILC and how to make it successful for shops and high profile users. Thus the empty shell of a camera, suggesting they want help building it right the first time, not like Sony taking 3 iterations as was suggested.



Interesting theory, I suppose, but I'm missing what input Canon would want from the _chiefs_ at B&H, Adorama, DigitalRev, etc. that would warrant this sort of private strategy session. Canon arguably knows the market better than they do, so I fail to see how a discussion of positioning, pricing, target market, etc. would warrant the folks in charge being needed rather than the normal sales and marketing channels they might use.



Lurker said:


> Either that or Canon is just admitting they got nothing. They are going to apologize to their business partners and admit they have no game and are going to close up shop and stop pretending. They're just going to rip that Band-Aid off (seppuku?) and get it over with rather than letting their demise drag out over years and watching Sony beat them at every new release.



There's perception and there's actual sales data. I encourage you to find the latter. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

docsmith said:


> Of course this is just a preliminary rumor. Hopefully we'll know more with time. The "CEO" aspect is odd. As I recall, the other announcements included photographers, sales people etc, etc.



+1. Bringing in the chiefs implies that Canon is gunning to dangle something exclusive that companies will have to bid for, and that's not Canon's MO at all.

That, or perhaps Canon is considering moving to something tectonically different _business_-wise, like a volume-based MAP adjustment policy, new/changed restrictions on violating MAP, etc. and that seems inconsistent with the invite CR Guy described.

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 19, 2018)

one thing that i was wondering about could this be a super-35 version of an M6 tailored to video with h.264 and some form of cini codecs?

There's been a few weird mirrorless zoom patents released that seem to indicate cini.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 19, 2018)

Mystery solved?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34293.msg703450#msg703450

This would be a perfect way to promote this new compact camera to decision makers who will be placing high volume orders for Canon's first affordable 4K camera.


----------



## Yasko (Jan 19, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> StoicalEtcher said:
> 
> 
> > But the next stage then would have to be circular screens, so that my "fit to screen" button would still work - where would it all end? ;D ;D
> ...



Yeah, let's just reframe every post completely instead of some slightly. Let's pay an extra few hundreds for that on top .


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 19, 2018)

Wow. 4 pages and no one has said this so I will say it. This is definitely a MF mirrorless. Canon are gunning for Hassleblad ;D ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 19, 2018)

OMG!

ITS THE 50F1.4 IS!

At last! At long last!

Sony is *******!

They are just saying mirrorless camera announcement because they want everyone to be there and not spoil the big surprise......


----------



## Woody (Jan 19, 2018)

Super excited about this!

I've almost given up on waiting for Canon to release high end mirrorless cameras. 

I'm pretty pleased with my M5, but FF will be super nice.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> OMG!
> 
> ITS THE 50F1.4 IS!
> 
> ...



Too soon, Don. Too soon.

- A


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 19, 2018)

Considering the cost of the printing and targeted guests, I'm leaning on the "go big or go home" side. FF sensor and EF mount for my wishes.
If you stop and think, this forum has had many pages of wish list items for a FF mirrorless. If Canon reads this forum, all the info is here for a design decision.
Upscaling the M5 body to FF would be a start but it better have a proper flippy LCD. 
If the new FF mirrorless was based up the 5D Mark IV body with a flippy LCD, I'm in for another budget meltdown.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 19, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > OMG!
> ...



But I need one for a job tomorrow  I guess I have to borrow the old one again.....


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

KeithBreazeal said:


> Upscaling the M5 body to FF would be a start



I hope they don't do that. That grip, even if upscaled, would not hold fast glass comfortably for very long. 

FF mirrorless needs a chunky grip*, full stop.

_*Provided it will be able to adapt/use EF glass, which it certainly will. A non-EF adapting FF mirrorless body that only offer slower / lighter / shorter lenses could get by with a small grip, but I can't imagine an alternate universe where Canon would think abandoning EF would be a good idea._

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> But I need one for a job tomorrow  I guess I have to borrow the old one again.....



I will say this: however fragmented the 50 prime camp is between the 'magic seekers' and the sharpness obsessives, those wanting an L vs. a non-L replacement, a retrofocus pickle jar vs. a compact double gauss, etc. the release of the 85 f/1.4L IS will have a lot of folks saying "make me that 85 f/1.4L IS in a 50 and you can take all the moneys".

That 85 f/1.4L IS is a peach, just like the 35L II is, and those two lenses should be putting Canonites in a frenzy to make more of them in other FLs. 50 is undoubtedly at the top of the list, but 135 would also be welcomed with applause.

- A


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 19, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> KeithBreazeal said:
> 
> 
> > Upscaling the M5 body to FF would be a start
> ...



Yup, man sized grip. I'm holding out for the planform of the 5D Mark IV. I have the M5 and really enjoy using it. There are a few issues, but it's an overall fun camera.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2018)

KeithBreazeal said:


> Yup, man sized grip. I'm holding out for the planform of the 5D Mark IV. I have the M5 and really enjoy using it. There are a few issues, but it's an overall fun camera.



But if they scale up an M5, a 'fun camera' / travel / vacation rig _is all it ever will be:_ no top LCD, that awkward 'iron claw' A7-like grip technique would be required, and I'd be very leery putting big glass on it. It might be awesome with the 35mm f/2 pancake I hope they'd make for such a camera, but I wouldn't comprehensively use it with all my glass.

That said... scale up an M5 to FF and tuck a fixed 35 f/2 or 28/1.8 into the body and you are in business to gobble up some RX1R and Leica Q business. A scaled up M5 would serve _that_ kind of product brilliantly.

- A


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 20, 2018)

One major issue I see is the tripod mount. Either this new body will require an adapter for it's tripod mount or the body will be sized for direct EF mounting. The current adapter has a small tripod mount and is iffy at best using heavy lenses that don't have their own tripod collars.
The Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 or the Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art are beasts and require a really good heavy tripod to keep vibrations down. No lightweight travel tripod here.



Canon M5 with Tamron 24-70 f2.8 G2 lens © Keith Breazeal-2 by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 20, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I hope they don't do that. That grip, even if upscaled, would not hold fast glass comfortably for very long.



I'm trying to visualise how you hold your camera with a large fast lens attached and failing. Don't you support the lens with your left (if right handed) hand? How would this be different with a smaller body?


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 20, 2018)

KeithBreazeal said:


> One major issue I see is the tripod mount. Either this new body will require an adapter for it's tripod mount or the body will be sized for direct EF mounting.



The whole point of the M series is to primarily use them with M lenses. The EF adaptor is more of a fallback than a system to rely on.

Having said that, I do hope that a more rugged and weather sealed EF-EF-M adaptor becomes available with the FF camera.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 20, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I hope they don't do that. That grip, even if upscaled, would not hold fast glass comfortably for very long.
> ...



Handheld lens support is definitely far forward- like at the focus ring.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 20, 2018)

KeithBreazeal said:


> Handheld lens support is definitely far forward- like at the focus ring.



When I'm using (for example) the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II on the M5 (which I have frequently) my hand is on the zoom not the focus ring (autofocus, see), and it balances fine. Same with the 100-400 IS II.


----------



## timmy_650 (Jan 20, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Lurker said:
> 
> 
> > This seems like it could be an extension of the rumored survey. Maybe Canon is now going to execs and VIPs to discuss the business aspect of FF MILC and how to make it successful for shops and high profile users. Thus the empty shell of a camera, suggesting they want help building it right the first time, not like Sony taking 3 iterations as was suggested.
> ...



I feel like sony is pay a fair bit of money for that perception. When I got Photo Mag, so would put there own few page mag in there too with Sony Pro's are switching to sony.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 20, 2018)

We might be off down the wrong path here. 
I could be the launch of their new sensor technology in a mirrorless body. That would explain the "white hole".
The use of that M body image might not be totally accurate to gauge what's coming.


----------



## Talys (Jan 20, 2018)

It's the new Canon Transparent Sensor(tm) camera! Instead of a LCD panel or OVF you just look straight through the back of the camera, through the sensor to see your inverted image 

Color me excited; I hope to see a leak of the invitation!

Also, on a serious note: perhaps we were thinking about this survey to professionals about what they wanted to see in a mirrorless wrong. Maybe, it was to find out what was important to them, not to change the design, but to know what to emphasize and prioritize in presentations.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 20, 2018)

KeithBreazeal said:


> One major issue I see is the tripod mount. Either this new body will require an adapter for it's tripod mount or the body will be sized for direct EF mounting. The current adapter has a small tripod mount and is iffy at best using heavy lenses that don't have their own tripod collars.
> The Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 or the Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art are beasts and require a really good heavy tripod to keep vibrations down. No lightweight travel tripod here.



Or for the few of us who want to do tripod work with an M5, you could just get an L-Plate, right?

- A


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 20, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’ve been told that Canon is sending out “very elaborate” invites to select dealers and VIPs for a mirrorless camera announcement next month.</p>
> <p>The invitation was described as being very high end, printed on heavy glossy paper and showing a silhouette of a camera shaped like the EOS M6 with a hole cut out where the sensor would be.</p>
> 
> <p>Apparently only CEOs and higher-ups are allowed to go to the presentation, no sales people are permitted.</p>
> ...



Please check to see if the source is the same as G7X mark lll


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 20, 2018)

The launch of a new sensor technology in a small "M styled" mirrorless would be great for capturing more mirrorless buyers, but also a great proving ground to test the new sensor under more varied conditions. Beta testing by a limited number of photographers never yields the full spectrum of issues that can be encountered.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 20, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> I'm trying to visualise how you hold your camera with a large fast lens attached and failing. Don't you support the lens with your left (if right handed) hand? How would this be different with a smaller body?



That's the process of framing and shooting, yes. 

But one also...


...has to draw the camera from a bag and put it away when you are done (or need to move to the next location)
...hold the camera near/around the chest in those in between moments between resting (perhaps on a BR or neck strap) and actually framing and shooting
...reviews / chimps / pixel-peeps their shots

And all three of those circumstances heavily rely on the primary (right) hand to do the heavy lifting.

Again, one can use Keith's setup above with an M5 no sweat -- it's a question of how long you want to shoot with that combo that concerns me. A chunkier grip will absolutely be a more comfortable shooting experience over time.

- A


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 20, 2018)

Just my 2 cents...

There are very slim chances for this to be true. So Please do not get very excited. Be "Canon realistic". There is no mirror less camera registered with any authorities besides M50. The terms like "only CEOs invited" , "very high end", "heavy glossy paper"' "sensor cut out" are signs that this is bogus. So people who switched to other systems don't feel bad. IMO it will be another 2 to 4 years before Canon will (if at all they will) match video specs of today's Sony a7r3 or a9. Regardless I will be happy to see some EF mount (or works seamlessly with EF mount) camera with decent video specs coming out.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 20, 2018)

KeithBreazeal said:


> ...If you stop and think, this forum has had many pages of wish list items for a FF mirrorless. If Canon reads this forum, all the info is here for a design decision...



I don't know which is funnier. The thought of Canon reading this forum or the thought of Canon taking the 5,000 conflicting demands articulated by forum dwellers and coming up with a camera that would please anyone.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 20, 2018)

unfocused said:


> KeithBreazeal said:
> 
> 
> > ...If you stop and think, this forum has had many pages of wish list items for a FF mirrorless. If Canon reads this forum, all the info is here for a design decision...
> ...



And here you go!



Canon&#x27;s new mirrorless MD5 I by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 20, 2018)

KeithBreazeal said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > KeithBreazeal said:
> ...



The Adams mode is defective. It is not an Ansel Adams mode, it is a Grizzly Adams mode.


----------



## eosuser1234 (Jan 20, 2018)

I just pray for that day that CR and that neuro guy on these forums gets these invitations.
That will be the day that Canon will finally recognize who is doing their core consumer marketing.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

eosuser1234 said:


> I just pray for that day that CR and that neuro guy on these forums gets these invitations.
> That will be the day that Canon will finally recognize who is doing their core consumer marketing.



<yodavoice>If believe that you do, a bridge in Brooklyn have I to sell you.</yodavoice>


----------



## brad-man (Jan 20, 2018)

It seems a bit early for a substantive FF mirrorless announcement from Canon. I wonder if the impending Nikon Z-Mount camera rumor lit a fire.

Curiouser and curiouser...


----------



## zim (Jan 20, 2018)

They are putting the mirror back in and have invited bigwigs to apologize to them for getting it all wrong 


I would encourage everyone to go back and read unfocused post on page 3


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 20, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> ...has to draw the camera from a bag and put it away when you are done (or need to move to the next location)
> ...hold the camera near/around the chest in those in between moments between resting (perhaps on a BR or neck strap) and actually framing and shooting
> ...reviews / chimps / pixel-peeps their shots
> 
> ...



It's all down to what you're used to. Yes, the M5 feels different and balances differently and it's off putting initially but you get used to it really quickly and the size is NO drawback.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> It's all down to what you're used to. Yes, the M5 feels different and balances differently and it's off putting initially but you get used to it really quickly and the size is NO drawback.



Sure, once you start using a small camera that's uncomfortable to hold with a heavy lens, your hand shrinks and suddenly it's all better.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 20, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > It's all down to what you're used to. Yes, the M5 feels different and balances differently and it's off putting initially but you get used to it really quickly and the size is NO drawback.
> ...



It's what you're used to. I tried to use a 1DX once, huge brick that wasn't at all comfortable to use. But I'm sure I'd get used to it if I did, as you would if you used the M5 for long enough.

I do agree the original M/M2/M3 had ergonomic issues and were perhaps too small, but the M5 is an entirely different beast.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > jolyonralph said:
> ...



Exactly. Buy gloves that are a couple of sizes too small. Wear them for a while, you'll get used to them. Makes sense. 

To be clear, any of the M bodies are fine with EF-M lenses. But not with a larger lens, e.g. 24-70/2.8 or 70-200/2.8.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


You've repeatedly said that you have no problem with people describing their personal needs and experiences, but are bothered when they extrapolate. jolyonralph described his own experience that he got used to the M5 with larger lenses, and suggested others might also. He made no universal statements. You're in no position to tell him his personal experience is "wrong."


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 20, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> Just my 2 cents...
> 
> There are very slim chances for this to be true. So Please do not get very excited. Be "Canon realistic". There is no mirror less camera registered with any authorities besides M50. The terms like "only CEOs invited" , "very high end", "heavy glossy paper"' "sensor cut out" are signs that this is bogus. So people who switched to other systems don't feel bad. IMO it will be another 2 to 4 years before Canon will (if at all they will) match video specs of today's Sony a7r3 or a9. Regardless I will be happy to see some EF mount (or works seamlessly with EF mount) camera with decent video specs coming out.



The 5DSR surprised people. The 6D surprised everyone as I recall. Canon can play it very close to their chest when they want to...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > jolyonralph said:
> ...



He states 'you' and not 'I', but he's describing his personal experience. And he's in a position to tell me what my personal experience would be? Is that not extrapolation? Thanks for sharing your own personal double standard.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Really??!! He was clearly using the metaphorical "you," as opposed to the overly-formal "one." It's a figure of speech -- have you never heard that expression? And regarding the second, it's another figure of speech: he was (to me) clearly not stating it as an absolute fact, but as an opinion. Would you rather that he said "_*if one were to wear them for a while, I believe one might well get used to them*_?"

There are some people on these forums who do, in fact, extrapolate, and deserve little charity for word choices; I do not believe this is one of those cases.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2018)

@Orangutan - he's so lucky to have a staunch defender like you. There are lots of wrongs on the Internet, I suggest you get busy!


----------



## AlanF (Jan 20, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> Would you rather that he said "_*if one were to wear them for a while, I believe one might well get used to them*_?"
> 
> There are some people on these forums who do, in fact, extrapolate, and deserve little charity for word choices; I do not believe this is one of those cases.



Sorry to come down hard on grammar but I can't resist it in a discussion of precision in use of words: "if one were" = an impossible or unreal event ("were" used as a subjunctive in a conditional clause). It should be "If one was" as one is describing a real event.
Apologies.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> @Orangutan - he's so lucky to have a staunch defender like you.


Not defending him, specifically; I'm reminding you that you don't have to be in "fierce debate mode" all the time. 



> There are lots of wrongs on the Internet, I suggest you get busy!


I have a full team working on it right now!


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Would you rather that he said "_*if one were to wear them for a while, I believe one might well get used to them*_?"
> ...



Thank you, I'm always willing to accept constructive commentary. In this case I beg to differ:

_Subunctive forms of verbs are typically used to express various states of unreality such as wish, emotion, *possibility*, judgment, opinion, obligation, *or action that have not yet occurred*_ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive)


----------



## AlanF (Jan 20, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



Here are some simple descriptions of when to use if were vs if was:
https://commonenglisherrors.com/if-i-was-vs-if-i-were/
https://www.proofreadnow.com/blog/bid/101485/If-I-Were-or-If-I-Was-Which-is-Correct
https://writingexplained.org/was-vs-were-difference


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



These pages seem to support my use of the subjunctive. In particular, the page at the last link says:

_The subjunctive mood is a verb form that is used for unreal or hypothetical statements_

I believe my use was the hypothetical, though I'd appreciate a reference to a rule that contradicts this.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 20, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



The nuance of the use of the subjunctive "were" in a conditional clause is that the proposed situation is hypothetical to the extent that it would not happen in practice. Just read the examples of correct and incorrect examples and you will see that.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > These pages seem to support my use of the subjunctive. In particular, the page at the last link says:
> ...



Again, I'm afraid I disagree. See this example:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/when-to-use-the-subjunctive

_Were I to get drunk, it would help me drown my anguish. _

There is nothing in this example to indicate or suggest that it would not happen in practice. 


Also, see:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/moods

_The subjunctive mood is used to express a wish or possibility_

These, presumably authoritative, pages give no suggestion at all that the subjunctive mood requires an unreal, impossible, implausible or unlikely situation. Those are certainly valid uses of the subjunctive; however, purely hypothetical, wishful or possible uses are also entirely valid.

One more example, a translation of Dante: (https://scientificgems.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/science-in-dantes-paradiso/)

“Yet an experiment, were you to try it,
could free you from your cavil – and the source
of your arts’ course springs from experiment
Taking three mirrors, place a pair of them
at equal distance from you; set the third
midway between those two, but farther back.
Then, turning toward them, at your back have placed
a light that kindles those three mirrors and
returns to you, reflected by them all.
Although the image in the farthest glass
will be of lesser size, there you will see
that it must match the brightness of the rest.” — _Paradiso_, II, 94–105, tr. Mandelbaum

Assuming the translator and editor were doing their jobs, this is a case where the subjunctive is used not merely to express a wish or hypothetical, but to propose an actual experiment.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 20, 2018)

On the grip side of things, I'll just share my personal experience: a 24-70 f/2.8L I on my old T1i was a chore to use for extended periods of shooting.

My EF-S glass was both for a smaller sensor (smaller outer barrel) and generally was made of plastic. So my 18-55 and even the nicer EF-S 10-22 were simple carry propositions. But my first two EF lenses were the 24-70 f/2.8L (I) and then a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II -- the former was a chore to a use in comparison to the EF-S glass, and the 70-200 was so downright uncomfortable I'd actually monopod it for extended shooting applications.

And then I got my 5D3 in 2012 and it changed everything. I've posted about it before.

So I look at an A7R3, compare it to a T2i here (no T1i here, but it can't be that far off):

http://camerasize.com/compact/#219.289,724.515,ha,t

...and since I've been down that road before, I say no thank you. No chunky grip in an FF ILC is no sale for me as it means I have to leave most of my best lenses on the shelf. And the proposition of owning one with only new pricey small primes or adapted smaller EF lenses is too limited a use-case for me. 

- A


----------



## cpsico (Jan 20, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Why cut the sensor out of the picture unless there's a surprise awaiting...
> 
> Maybe an M6-sized body with the 6D full-frame sensor?
> 
> Now *that* I'd buy in an instant (well, assuming there were lenses to go along with it too!)


That would be very tempting!


----------



## AlanF (Jan 20, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



You are confusing different types of clauses. Your sentence highlighted in red used "were" after "If" in a conditional clause. The example you quoted from Oxford Dictionary is their No. 5, "Were at the head of a clause".

I am not writing any further but will just give one final pointer towards another link:

"If I Were or If I Was: Which is Correct? - ProofreadNOW.com
https://www.proofreadnow.com/blog/bid/.../If-I-Were-or-If-I-Was-Which-is-Correct

15 Oct 2013 - Guideline: Use were (instead of was) in statements that are contrary to fact. ... If this were [not was] a real Florida tourist attraction, that waterskier would have made it over the jump! (The subjunctive ... (The verb here is not in the subjunctive mood because the idea following "if" is not contrary to fact. The job ..."

Your original sentence starts with the explicit meaning that one would never wear them for a while.

No more from me.


----------



## IglooEater (Jan 20, 2018)

Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2018)

IglooEater said:


> Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :



If you look carefully, you will find that you have made an error in punctuation. In case it is not jumping out at you, you have ended your sentence with neither a period nor an ellipsis, but with something in between. 

;D


----------



## slclick (Jan 20, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :
> ...



That's it, I'm jumping ship to Esperanto!


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

AlanF said:


> No more from me.



Thanks for the pleasant disagreement, though we still disagree.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 20, 2018)

Spock said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Yet an experiment, were you to try it,
> ...



I'm afraid the Klingons took it from the ancient Tholian, but I don't have a link to the original.


----------



## BillB (Jan 20, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...


----------



## justawriter (Jan 20, 2018)

So eight pages in and we still don't know if this is a real invitation?


----------



## IglooEater (Jan 20, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :
> ...



You’re right of course, and thank you.  Also, I’d like to thank the gentlemen discussing grammar for remaining well, gentlemen. I dare say that if one w**(*) to scrutinize my own writing in as much detail, it would be found far more wanting than that of either of them. ;D


----------



## slclick (Jan 20, 2018)

Those crazy Tholians, they knew how to party.


----------



## Talys (Jan 20, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



M bodies are great with lenses that are designed for a 17mm flange focal distance and a 47mm throat diameter -- dimensions that are virtually identical to Sony E mount.

And just like Sony, Canon won't be able to defy the laws of physics, so as you get to pro-type lenses for full frame cameras that are large aperture and/or telephoto every single lens ends up getting longer by an inch to increase that flange focal range back to where it was. And worse, every lens will need to have larger glass elements, so just like Sony, you have pro lenses that are much wider diameter than the sleek and svelte consumer lenses, _and that's what unbalances the camera_. 

You'll never get out of the wide diameter glass that tapers to a small diameter mount and there will always be challenges building ultrawides. The body/grip size will never be balanced with mount/lens diameter for full frame lenses. And all for what? So that a total carry weight of 2-3kg+ can be reduced by less than 5-10%, and virtually no savings in length? 

In terms of the total package, the only thing that's really smaller is the width of the body and the depth of the grip. Sure, I wouldn't mind a _little_ smaller than a 5D, but I'd never buy something anywhere near the size of an A7RIII to attach to lenses the size of 70-200/2.8 or 100-400LII, and as Sony has proven, those lenses don't get any smaller or narrower in diameter just because you don't need a mirror anymore. 

When Canon makes a 100-400LIII for a full frame sensor that takes a uses a 58mm filter and that's 60% the length of the LII, _then_ the 17mm flange focal distance and the 47mm throat diameter suddenly become pretty awesome. Until then, the small mirrorless has essentially the same role as my S110... a little extra camera with small-but-inferior optics that fills in some focal length that I don't want to lug a pro grade lens around for.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 20, 2018)

IglooEater said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > IglooEater said:
> ...



A define "was" since one Neuro has scrutinised your writing.........


----------



## dak723 (Jan 20, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > ...has to draw the camera from a bag and put it away when you are done (or need to move to the next location)
> ...



I am glad you feel that the size of the M5 is no drawback, but that is not a statement of fact as you seem to make it. When I bought my M5, I certainly expected to use my EF-S 55-250mm and an older 28-105mm EF lens on it, but found the ergonomics pretty much unusable. Ultimately sold the adapter and the EF-S lens. For me - and apparently others on this forum - the M5 is only comfortable to use with M series lenses and perhaps really small EF lenses. So, apparently - for some of us - the size is a DEFINITE drawback unless using M lenses.


----------



## slclick (Jan 20, 2018)

dak723 said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



After getting used to using the 18-150 lens, the adapted 50 STM, 85 1.8 and 40 pancake are all second nature on the M5. I have also used with good results the 100L Macro. Albeit a front heavy combo it is a very good pairing optically and from a macro user standpoint what with the fantastic MF abilities of the M5. I would assume the 100 f/2 and anything shorter in build length would be a nice fit as well.


----------



## 3dit0r (Jan 20, 2018)

Hm, well as others have said, my instinct because of specifically the sensor being cut out is that this camera won’t be an APS-C mirrorless. So I guess it could be the first Full Frame mirrorless.

Only the M6 body seems weird, again as others have said. My only thought is that’s just a level of disguising what’s to come - if it were an M5, it would kinda give the game away already what’s in store, right? As it is, we’re all still guessing!

I personally hope it’s a FF mirrorless at least as full featured as the 5D series, but superior in other areas (mostly video). With IBIS


----------



## IglooEater (Jan 20, 2018)

AlanF said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Thank you, but I’ll never again be able to write the phrase without a certain amount of trepidation. I should have finished high school apparently. :'(


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 20, 2018)

slclick said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > jolyonralph said:
> ...



I found it fun and interesting to experiment with the M5 and lens combos. Photography is supposed to fun and "going outside the box" is part of it.



Canon EOS M5 Canon 300L f2.8 Canon 2X Converter © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr


----------



## Talys (Jan 20, 2018)

dak723 said:


> I am glad you feel that the size of the M5 is no drawback, but that is not a statement of fact as you seem to make it. When I bought my M5, I certainly expected to use my EF-S 55-250mm and an older 28-105mm EF lens on it, but found the ergonomics pretty much unusable. Ultimately sold the adapter and the EF-S lens. For me - and apparently others on this forum - the M5 is only comfortable to use with M series lenses and perhaps really small EF lenses. So, apparently - for some of us - the size is a DEFINITE drawback unless using M lenses.



I don't see how anyone can say that adapted lenses feel "great" on an M5. At best, they're usable, but unnatural. 

The native M lenses feel wonderful, but there aren't any fixed 2.8 or 4.0 zooms (many of them top out at f/6.3), and there are only a couple of wideish primes. Since they only need to be APSC, if Canon made them, they'd be a lot smaller than Sony G-Master lenses, but I think they'd still be unnaturally large for the camera.

Put a EFS 17-55/2.8 onto a M5, and you'll see what I mean. It's just awkward, and if canon were to make a EFM 17-55/2.8 the dimensions don't get to be a whole lot different. The only two ways to shrink the lenses is by having smaller (like f/6.3) apertures on the tele end, or by also shrinking the sensor, like MFT.

But as it stands, nobody has figured out how to shrink the lens sizes of many popular zooms and primes while maintaining their apertures and the sensor sizes that they are meant for.


----------



## peters (Jan 21, 2018)

Pleeeease don't suck, pleeease Canon, please! 

For real; I realy hope its an high end professional camera and not something like a 6dish Sensor with no video features pressed into an unfinished mirrorless body like the m5....

I realy hope for (in this order):
- EF-Mount!!! (total deal-breaker if ot does not have that.)
- 4k FULL frame (not with useless crop like on the 5d)
- a VERY good, big, sharp, fast EV (I personaly think the Sony a7rII EV wasnt that great and for my taste to slow)
- Swivel Screen(!) with Touch and DPAF
- At least 30mp
- At least 9fps
- 4k 60fps
- An AF System that is as capable as the 1dxII / 5dIV
- Uncompressed 4k HDMI Out (why the hell didn't they put that on the 1dxII? And why does my 1D freeze frequently when I use the HDMI out?)
- LP-E6 battery
- decent battery life
- USB C Port with charging capability.
- of course Wlan and Intervalometer (why would they leave that out on the 1dxII ???)
- of course Mic input and headphone jack
- of course weather sealing (I don't understan why Sony is so far behind on that topic, its not that big of a deal to seal some buttons, is it?)

If it got that and would cost as much as an 1dxII I wouldn't care... I would order one the second its available.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 21, 2018)

I think Canon will start at the low end of the market and move up. I think first FF mirrorless Canon will be an upgrade from the 6DII, better DR, focusing and 4K. Meeting basic 2018 specs future cameras moving up from there.


----------



## Fleetie (Jan 21, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Would you rather that he said "_*if one were to wear them for a while, I believe one might well get used to them*_?"
> ...


Rubbish. There is nothing about the subjunctive that suggests impossibility.
If you were to go to a book shop tomorrow, you could buy a book on grammar.


And "if one was" just grates.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 21, 2018)

Fleetie said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...




If you wish to butt in on a polite exchange between Orangutan and me, I suggest you might take note of Iglooeater's comment:



IglooEater said:


> Also, I’d like to thank the gentlemen discussing grammar for remaining well, gentlemen.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 21, 2018)

Talys said:


> When Canon makes a 100-400LIII for a full frame sensor that takes a uses a 58mm filter and that's 60% the length of the LII, _then_ the 17mm flange focal distance and the 47mm throat diameter suddenly become pretty awesome.



A 58mm filter means that the f-number has to be greater than 6.9, and presumably f/8. Do you want a lens that slow and probably with slow AF as well?


----------



## dak723 (Jan 21, 2018)

Talys said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > I am glad you feel that the size of the M5 is no drawback, but that is not a statement of fact as you seem to make it. When I bought my M5, I certainly expected to use my EF-S 55-250mm and an older 28-105mm EF lens on it, but found the ergonomics pretty much unusable. Ultimately sold the adapter and the EF-S lens. For me - and apparently others on this forum - the M5 is only comfortable to use with M series lenses and perhaps really small EF lenses. So, apparently - for some of us - the size is a DEFINITE drawback unless using M lenses.
> ...



I think, as so often happens on this and other forums, the participants have no clue as to what the target consumer is for a particular camera. For a tiny camera such as the M5, they are clearly targeting this camera for general use - for the hobbyist. Something that is easy to take on vacation or to family events - or just for general use. For that type of photography, you don't need (or want) a small DOF. You don't need massive zooms. You want something you can throw in a small bag and take with you wherever you go. I think Canon assumes that for those wanting a very small DOF, those folks will go for a FF camera system - or for birders, the pro level 7D series. It seems like many forum folks want to duplicate systems - they have slow primes for their FF camera, so they want the same lenses for their second or backup camera. I think Canon understands that the number of these folks is minuscule, and for those that do want a second or backup camera, most cannot afford - nor would think it is a good idea - to spend thousands of dollars to duplicate a system they already have.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 21, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > When Canon makes a 100-400LIII for a full frame sensor that takes a uses a 58mm filter and that's 60% the length of the LII, _then_ the 17mm flange focal distance and the 47mm throat diameter suddenly become pretty awesome.
> ...



I believe you missed the [sarcasm] tag.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 21, 2018)

unfocused said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



No. It's just rather a surprising suggestion to have such a narrow aperture, and I am wondering if there is anything behind it.


----------



## Talys (Jan 21, 2018)

unfocused said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



Right  

@AlanF, in the paragraphs preceding, I had said exactly that -- you can't make the lens significantly shorter and smaller (radius) while keeping the aperture and sensor sizes the same. I'm on your side.

But let me rephrase it in a non-facetious way: when a camera manufacturer conquers our current limitations grounded in our understanding of physics to make smaller lens packages _without any other compromises_, I'll be jumping right in on bodies that are ideal for those smaller packages. 

I'm not married to a large body/large lens, and who doesn't like lighter. But if I'm going to be holding it for a long period of time, I want the most common combinations of things that I hold for a long period of a time to be comfortable.

In the meantime, I think that the more likely scenario is for sensor tech to get better, such that slightly smaller sensors like APSC and MFT can have today's FF performance. That would allow for APSC EF-M lenses to at least be smaller than today's EF lenses, and be more viable where ISOs need to be higher. But I also get it, FF will probably likewise improve, and a lot of us will probably still choose the larger camera to get even better high ISO performance.



AlanF said:


> No. It's just rather a surprising suggestion to have such a narrow aperture, and I am wondering if there is anything behind it.



AlanF, I was referring to some new, as-yet uninvented unicorn that would give us a 100-400 f/4-5.6 for a full frame sensor that was pocket sized. It was just a facetious/sarcastic way of saying that I don't want to sacrifice aperture or full frame sensor compatibility for lens size; therefore, _for me_ I'm going to be stuck with a big lens/little body any time I want full frame telephoto (or even many wide aperture pro zooms) on a M5/A7RIII type body.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 21, 2018)

Talys said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > I am glad you feel that the size of the M5 is no drawback, but that is not a statement of fact as you seem to make it. ...
> ...



I realize you were speaking of your personal experiences, but bear in mind that humans are remarkably good at figuring out how to adapt to their tools (in addition to adapting tools to themselves). Think about smartphones: to me, they're much too thin and hard to hold; nevertheless, most people like them that way, and I've learned to deal with it. There are cases, adapters and grips to make them easier to hold. The manufacturers have decided to make them to the size they thought the majority would want, so that's what we have.

Also think about flash brackets: weren't original flash/lighting units either on separate stands or held by an assistant? I'm pretty sure I've seen old photos of photographers holding the camera in one hand, and a lighting unit in the other. This was an ergonomic problem that was solved by a third-party accessory.

With mirrorless cameras the same will happen: at each price/feature point, the camera's ergonomics will fit what the manufacturer believes will sell. Just as there are cheaper third-party grips for bodies below the 1-series, there may be grips/adapters, etc for mirrorless. So it doesn't really matter what I want, or what you want, it matters what sells. After that, we hope for third-party accessories and deal with it.


----------



## zim (Jan 21, 2018)

Fleetie said:


> If you were was to go to a book shop tomorrow, you could buy a book on grammar.



Sorted that for you Fleetie, well for around there parts anyways 

Don't get all bent out of shape like the new sensor announcement next month ;D


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 21, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> So it doesn't really matter what I want, or what you want, it matters what sells. After that, we hope for third-party accessories and deal with it.



Finally, some common sense here


----------



## The Fat Fish (Jan 21, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Why cut the sensor out of the picture unless there's a surprise awaiting...
> 
> Maybe an M6-sized body with the 6D full-frame sensor?
> 
> Now *that* I'd buy in an instant (well, assuming there were lenses to go along with it too!)



Using the 6DII sensor would be the worse possible thing they could do. I am looking forward to the Canon FF mirrorless but using the sensor from the most criticised camera of the last decade would be a huge mistake. They need their first FF mirrorless release to be a strong one. They need to say "stick with us" to all those jumping ship because of the latest underwhelming and some outright disappointing releases.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 22, 2018)

KeithBreazeal said:


> I found it fun and interesting to experiment with the M5 and lens combos. Photography is supposed to fun and "going outside the box" is part of it.



I agree! some things work better when you are "outside the box".....

P.S. I saw someone with an Olympus AIR through an adaptor, to a 600F4 lens..... now that just looked WEIRD!


----------



## Talys (Jan 22, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > dak723 said:
> ...



Absolutely. So, Canon will decide what they think will sell better: a me-too Canon A7RIII, a mirrorless 5DMkIV, or something in between. 

I think it's worth noting that whenever you look at sidelines at professional sporting events, the number of little camera bodies is zero (and obviously, the number of little camera lenses is zero). Even at a football game, when you see press photographers reaching out over the crowd to snap some pictures, those second bodies with wider lenses are full sized DSLRs with full sized hotshoe flashes attached. At major political events, same thing. I think this is a pretty important demographic for Canon.

Now, I have no idea which way Canon will go; I hope it's ultimately _both_, though with native EF on both.

Speaking for only myself, if it's not EF native mount, there's no way I'll buy one for at least 5 years -- mostly because of battery life, ergonomics, my dislike of adapters, and the pain of buying new lenses. So, a camera would have to be way, way better than A7RIII for still image photography to compel me to abandon EF, and at some point, that will happen, I suspect, not so soon. If it's not large telephoto friendly, as in, if it isn't comfortable to use with 2kg+ lenses, it's highly unlikely that I buy one until those large telephoto lenses shrink.


----------



## Yasko (Jan 22, 2018)

Although new discoveries may happen anytime, the physics of bright lenses is pretty much restrictive.
You need a lot of optical surfaces to reduce optical aberrations for large diameter apertures...
The way to go here might be the introduction of multiple free form surfaces that may be very difficult to be found.
For example in Jena, Germany, at the Beutenberg Campus they are forging a whole optics research branch around the development of free form surfaces for technological purposes (so not really with the common photographer in mind, at least not now). A lot of mathematical research is implied as there is no "do this and then that"-way or straight forward approach to find solutions to free form problems. 

There is a way, however, to reduce the length (not the diameter...) of lenses in general while maintaining the f number of a lens, and that is by using microlens arrays. Still there are major technical challenges to it as it's basically a surface technology and implementing surfaces that reduce aberrations is not trivial. Those lens arrays are made with little droplets of synthetic material and their form, as of now, is governed by cohesion forces during melting.
The disadvantage is, that the brightness of the image is maintained by superimposing multiple images (100% overlay) or having a part overlay (>100% overlay).
So you basically trade superior length (less weight and smaller in one dimension) of the optics into largely increased demands on the sensor, as it will have to have an insane pixel density to keep the resolution on par with a standard design. And this will have implications when it comes to Noise. Also at some point the optical performance of these arrays is exhausted.

Else the optical performance is mediocre but as the microlenses have sub mm diameters optical aberrations are reduced pretty much... thats why they still work so well.
A technical advantage is the very high depth of focus... art-wise that is not so welcome I guess. So I dont see a bypass of large and heavy lenses anytime soon. As of now big cameras with good handling and big grips are a future concept.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 22, 2018)

Talys said:


> I think it's worth noting that whenever you look at sidelines at professional sporting events, the number of little camera bodies is zero (and obviously, the number of little camera lenses is zero). Even at a football game, when you see press photographers reaching out over the crowd to snap some pictures, those second bodies with wider lenses are full sized DSLRs with full sized hotshoe flashes attached. At major political events, same thing. I think this is a pretty important demographic for Canon.



Agree 100% on sports, but I actually have seen the reportage photogs supporting political figures starting to dabble with Sony rigs. Can't tell which one they are using, of course :, but I have to believe that a truly silent shutter (in committee meetings, especially) and a next to zero need for big superwhites has something to do with it. In theory, in _this_ arena of photography, Sony is far less behind than they are in sports.

(Checks to see what the award winning photo of the assassination of the Russian ambassador in Turkey was taken on... and it was a 5D3. Just curious.)

- A


----------



## xps (Jan 22, 2018)

Nice computermodel of "coming/rumored" FF MLS...

https://photorumors.com/2018/01/20/major-canon-mirrorless-camera-announcement-coming-soon/#more-94151

Maybe a part of this rumors come true. I hope so.

The pics were taken from this older site: https://photorumors.com/2012/03/21/canon-mirrorless-camera-concept/
I would like to see an articulated viewfinder or an bigger display  and 1/8000 and and and....


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 22, 2018)

xps said:


> Nice computermodel of "coming/rumored" FF MLS...
> 
> https://photorumors.com/2018/01/20/major-canon-mirrorless-camera-announcement-coming-soon/#more-94151
> 
> ...



OMG...I hope so. I don't know why but it makes me think of my old Pentax ME Super crossed with a Leica.


----------



## Talys (Jan 22, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's worth noting that whenever you look at sidelines at professional sporting events, the number of little camera bodies is zero (and obviously, the number of little camera lenses is zero). Even at a football game, when you see press photographers reaching out over the crowd to snap some pictures, those second bodies with wider lenses are full sized DSLRs with full sized hotshoe flashes attached. At major political events, same thing. I think this is a pretty important demographic for Canon.
> ...



Just goes to show you the 5D3 is still a great camera 

This photo is actually good enough to see what kind of cameras the photographers are using, in a Me_Me_Me-era photo (eg within the last year) (UPDATE... ROFL... president orange's name was replaced with Me_Me_Me by the forum... I LOVE IT). You're right, there's one at the bottom with a Sony! Nearly all of the cameras that are being used are Canons, with interesting choices for second cameras they have on their neck.






http://www.trbimg.com/img-59441760/turbine/la-butow-on-senate-hearings-20170616-004/1200

Another thing that you can see is that with professional press photographers/videographers, size and weight are just not at the priority when it comes to what they use, even when the subject is as close as they could possibly be:





http://www.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000zlvM.z6J6uc/s/950/632/201311060024.jpg


----------



## Isaacheus (Jan 22, 2018)

Talys said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



As a bit of an aside, the guy at the front of the first photo is pretty much why I wish Canon would put a flip screen on the 5d line, even a tilting.


----------



## bwud (Jan 23, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



But really, what a silly thing. Nobody needs that many photos of a press conference, much less someone putting a nameplate down.


----------

