# Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Sony's new A9 is killer



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

20 fps with 24MP sensor
blackout-free EVF
fully silent, vibration-free operation
5-axis in-body IS
693 AF points
AF joystick
2.2X bigger battery than A7-series
dual UHS-II SD slots
among other new features

$4500, priced just above the 5D4 and well below the 1DX2


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

Go buy one… I'm sure Canon will survive and has no need to hurry.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> 20 fps with 24MP sensor
> blackout-free EVF
> fully silent, vibration-free operation
> 5-axis in-body IS
> ...



Here in the UK the A9 is priced at £4500 (according to DPR), the 1DxII retails at £4799, so barely any different.

As for the thread title... spec sheet warriors. I doubt the A9 will "kill" anything. Competition is healthy, but I doubt Canon is worried


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 20, 2017)

Let's see how it handles in real-world use, shall we? Does it shoot 20fps in all conditions, or only compressed raw with some lenses (as the footnotes to its release statement suggest)? Its weatherproofing is ridiculously non-existent for a flagship aimed at the pro sports/wildlife. How will it handle the Canon big whites (wildlife photographers will not be happy limited to 400mm zooms?)

Canons 'consumer level ' mirrorless are gaining ground with every iteration to the point where it is almost ergonomics that make the real difference, and while I can see the A9 as a great upgrade for A7 users I am not sure it will tempt many pros to switch from Canon at that level.

Sony is a great test bed and technology leader rather than market leader. But I am sure Canon will keep closing the gap.


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Go buy one… I'm sure Canon will survive and has no need to hurry.



LOL if I was shopping in this price range, I absolutely would order one to try. 

I'm waiting out for the 6D2 but would definitely look at a probably forthcoming Sony A7 III to compare, especially if Canon don't come up with a mirrorless 6D2.



scyrene said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > 20 fps with 24MP sensor
> ...



If Canon came up with something like those specs the Canon faithful would absolutely be drooling and praising them to high heavens.

Yes, competition is healthy, and it would be better, not worse, if the company moved a bit faster. Too slow and it won't be the first industry leader to fall behind because they dragged their feet in adapting to change. Pride comes before a fall and all that.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> If Canon came up with something like those specs the Canon faithful would absolutely be drooling and praising them to high heavens.



If Canon came up with something like Sony's abysmal service and support record, the Canon faithful —particularly the professionals— would have deserted Canon already. But some people like to drool over spec sheets, good for them.




benkam said:


> Yes, competition is healthy, and it would be better, not worse, if the company moved a bit faster. Too slow and it won't be the first industry leader to fall behind because they dragged their feet in adapting to change. Pride comes before a fall and all that.



Yes, we know. Canon is *******. YAPODFC. : : :


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> Yes, competition is healthy, and it would be better, not worse, if the company moved a bit faster. Too slow and it won't be the first industry leader to fall behind because they dragged their feet in adapting to change. Pride comes before a fall and all that.



If Canon move too slowly you may have a point. But is there any evidence they are moving too slowly?


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, competition is healthy, and it would be better, not worse, if the company moved a bit faster. Too slow and it won't be the first industry leader to fall behind because they dragged their feet in adapting to change. Pride comes before a fall and all that.
> ...



The complete lack of any mirrorless FF as of April 2017 and uncertainty if they will even release one this year. Not yet "too" slowly but they sure are moving slowly and they keep at that pace, well.

I, for one, speaking for myself only of course, am eagerly awaiting the 6D2 but really am now more interested in a mirrorless 6D-type. If Sony update their offering at that level around the time the 6D2 comes out, I'd definitely compare both. If Sony trickles down a blackout-free EVF to go with fully silent operation and bigger battery, dual card slots, that sure would be tempting.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > benkam said:
> ...



So what we have is Sony is the undisputed leader in APS-C mirrorless cameras and makes hardly a dent on the market. They come out with a FF mirrorless and because Canon have not announced one the following day, suddenly it is a portent of market failure. 
Why would you expect Canon to be the first to release a FF mirrorless ? 
What evidence is there, that there is an absolute imperative to relase one in the next 12 months?
Are you AvTvM in disguise?





> If Sony trickles down a blackout-free EVF to go with fully silent operation and bigger battery, dual card slots, that sure would be tempting.


If....
Why would it do any more to boost their current models than they can already do? 
The A7RII does 5fps - why is 'black out free' an advantage at those frame rates?
A bigger battery that only does 650 shots? DSLRs still win out there.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> The complete lack of any mirrorless FF as of April 2017 and uncertainty if they will even release one this year. Not yet "too" slowly but they sure are moving slowly and they keep at that pace, well.



Mirrorless is ~27% of the ILC market. APS-C cameras, and in the case of MILCs, m4/3 cameras, vastly outsell FF. So Canon is 'slow' and going to 'fall' because they're not yet going after a tiny segment of a minority of the ILC market...a market which Canon has led for 14 years? I suggest you go look for some reality. Trust me, it's out there...even if you can't perceive it.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Apr 20, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> A bigger battery that only does 650 shots? DSLRs still win out there.



650 shots @ 20 fps = 32.5 seconds = carry plenty batteries


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



Say what? Are you a Canon employee or PR in disguise? I have no stake in Canon. Do you? 

Well, I don't expect Canon to be the first to release a FF mirrorless for the obvious reason they can't be that anymore, right?

I like their cameras, that's it, and I've found myself yearning for an EVF and silent operation and all that so I'd like Canon to continue supplying that camera as I'm aiming to jump to full frame. I'd prefer that but I'm not ideologically attached to the brand.

Mirrorless is the future. *ducks in a predominantly DSLR forum* Canon must move more quickly in this arena and not be complacent. As a user, I'd prefer to have the option of a Canon mirrorless FF in 2017 or early 2018 rather than in 2020 or 2025. I don't get why that idea is supposed to be a bad thing.


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > The complete lack of any mirrorless FF as of April 2017 and uncertainty if they will even release one this year. Not yet "too" slowly but they sure are moving slowly and they keep at that pace, well.
> ...



No question Canon's a leader now and been so in past years. I've been one of its patrons. The question is the future. IBM didn't care for DOS and Windows until it was too late. A company called Novell, for any kids out there, was once invincible in LANs when they were wired. Nokia and Blackberry thought the iPhone was a fad. 

I like the brand's products but not in love with or married to the company. Just an observation here. If Canon are to continue to lead into the future, then lead, as changes are afoot.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 20, 2017)

Sony is Sony. They excell at making products smaller, and have had success doing that. They seem slow to understand the camera market, first, they thought putting floppy disks into huge (relatively) point and shoot cameras would start a revolution, and a lot of them sold to consumers based on the Sony name. There were two big flaws.

1. File compression resulted in poor images
2. The floppy disk drives were horribly failure prone, and usually died in a year or two, Sony wanted $300 to replace one.

Then, they replaced the Floppy Drive with Memory Sticks, even though SD cards were already the standard. I guess they thought buyers would go for that, and die hard Sony fans did.

Now, they use SD cards, and are putting out tiny but very expensive cameras but lenses are still huge, and they have yet to release some super telephotos, their best are very expensive and do not match the competition. Sure enough, they will sell some, but they still see their market as those who buy anything Sony and are willing to pay a 30% premium. The Sage continues.


----------



## H. Jones (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > benkam said:
> ...




In all seriousness, Canon has been around since 1933. They've been here before. When SLR cameras took over, when metering was first included inside a camera, when autofocus was first put into lenses, when the digital revolution took over and killed off film competitors, Canon has seen a lot of changes in its history as a business. 

I hardly think that Canon could have forgotten the lessons learned in only the past 20 years while digital took over the market. When Canon decides to release a full-frame MILC, I have no doubt it'll be an extremely refined product.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> No question Canon's a leader now and been so in past years. I've been one of its patrons. The question is the future. IBM didn't care for DOS and Windows until it was too late. A company called Novell, for any kids out there, was once invincible in LANs when they were wired. Nokia and Blackberry thought the iPhone was a fad.
> 
> I like the brand's products but not in love with or married to the company. Just an observation here. If Canon are to continue to lead into the future, then lead, as changes are afoot.



Canon are leading. In case you missed it, even though Canon has only limited offerings in mirrorless, they are #2 globally in MILC sales, ahead of Olympus and Panasonic (and Fuji isn't even a blip). When they feel the market is ready for a Canon FF MILC, they'll launch one. As I pointed out above, ILC sales are still primarily dSLRs, and despite years of predictions to the contrary, that hasn't changed and shows no signs of doing so any time soon. Perhaps it escaped your attention that Sony tried to compete in the dSLR market...and failed. Utterly. And then in typical Sony fashion, they abandoned the market.

But, Sony is leading, too...in full frame camera sales...based on revenues not units...in the US only...for a two month period. Yay Sony! 

By the way, I'd love to have 'failed' like IBM has.


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

H. Jones said:


> I hardly think that Canon could have forgotten the lessons learned in only the past 20 years while digital took over the market. When Canon decides to release a full-frame MILC, I have no doubt it'll be an extremely refined product.



That is my hope too. I'd also like to think they've taken their sweet time because they're refining their first FF mirrorless but like I said, I prefer to see physical evidence of it this year or early next year, not in 2020 or 2025.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> Say what? Are you a Canon employee or PR in disguise? I have no stake in Canon. Do you?



Classy. Don't actually engage with people, just accuse them of being shills. Maybe the rest of the world doesn't share your opinions?



benkam said:


> Mirrorless is the future. *ducks in a predominantly DSLR forum* Canon must move more quickly in this arena and not be complacent. As a user, I'd prefer to have the option of a Canon mirrorless FF in 2017 or early 2018 rather than in 2020 or 2025. I don't get why that idea is supposed to be a bad thing.



It's a popular and widespread view, but the real question is *when*? People were saying mirrorless was about to overtake DSLRs for several years now, and it hasn't happened. Why is it suddenly urgent now? Why are your predictions (that seem to be based only on your desires and needs) more accurate than all those others'?



benkam said:


> No question Canon's a leader now and been so in past years. I've been one of its patrons. The question is the future. IBM didn't care for DOS and Windows until it was too late. A company called Novell, for any kids out there, was once invincible in LANs when they were wired. Nokia and Blackberry thought the iPhone was a fad.
> 
> I like the brand's products but not in love with or married to the company. Just an observation here. If Canon are to continue to lead into the future, then lead, as changes are afoot.



Yawn. Other companies have failed in the past, so it must be that Canon will? Along with your ad hominem above, you're showing an aptitude for logical fallacies if nothing else. We've been through this so many times on these forums that it's beyond tedious: mirrorless is not a paradigm shift like smartphones or the switch from film to digital, and Canon is much more clued up (from what we can tell) about market positioning than some of those previous examples. Mirrorless is coming, it's here, but Canon isn't losing market share, and not one of these magical Sony cameras has harmed them. So why do you believe they have to release what *you* want right now or they'll fail?


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 20, 2017)

I will say this... I am thinking about the 1dX Mark II, and I'm currently borrowing one from CPS to evaluate. 

These specs are impressive enough for me to think about Sony, despite my personal experience with their terrible service. 

I'd need to see some weather proofing, decent AF on Canon native glass with adapter. But it's now in the consideration envelope. 

I'm not one to root for Canon or any other manufacturer. It would be nice if Canon responded in kind, but if Sony fixes its problems and puts out these specs, it's a win for us too.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 20, 2017)

I feel like Canon is run by ruthless marketeers who have optimized the model a thousand times to best balance the value of the end product, the quality it is made, and the return they'll get on its offerings. They know we'll stick around as customers with innovation at level X, quality at level Y and price at level Z. _They've done the math._

And, in contrast, I feel that Sony is run by coked-up maniacs who only put their chips on the table for innovation and speed to market. I liken it to a teenager being asked to be the CEO of Lamborghini: "It's gotta be faster, it's gotta be cooler, it's gotta have this awesome feature! _*Now!*_"

In fairness, they consistently deliver these spec sheet beasts (albeit with some fine print on RAW compression, AF tracking, etc.). But durability, quality, customer support, and quickly building out the lens portfolio appears to be an afterthought with them.

- A


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

scyrene said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > Say what? Are you a Canon employee or PR in disguise? I have no stake in Canon. Do you?
> ...



Oh please. Classy of you to delete the context of that response. 



Mikehit said:


> Are you AvTvM in disguise?


So he was the first to accuse me of being another poster. 



scyrene said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > Mirrorless is the future. *ducks in a predominantly DSLR forum* Canon must move more quickly in this arena and not be complacent. As a user, I'd prefer to have the option of a Canon mirrorless FF in 2017 or early 2018 rather than in 2020 or 2025. I don't get why that idea is supposed to be a bad thing.
> ...



"Several years" ago mirrorless tech was new and immature. It's been growing up fast. This is like just before Netflix and you're saying, wellll, they've been saying for years interactive TV was going to take over but where is it now...then boom! That's why Canon itself is getting into this also. I only want them to come out faster.



scyrene said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > No question Canon's a leader now and been so in past years. I've been one of its patrons. The question is the future. IBM didn't care for DOS and Windows until it was too late. A company called Novell, for any kids out there, was once invincible in LANs when they were wired. Nokia and Blackberry thought the iPhone was a fad.
> ...


Yawn back. What makes *you* think Canon is immune to this when much bigger companies have succumbed to complacency as well.

Again, I'd like to see more of Canon, not less. When Canon release their FF mirrorless sooner rather than later and show some innovations of their own in this field, this will be a sign they're adapting to the cutting edge of new technology, which they can then trickle down to their other products as is their practice. That happens, it'll be a good thing, not bad.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

scyrene said:


> It's a popular and widespread view, but the real question is *when*? People were saying mirrorless was about to overtake DSLRs for several years now, and it hasn't happened. Why is it suddenly urgent now?



Because the a9. Sure, it didn't happen with the a7. Or the a7R. Or the A7S. Or the a7RII. All of which were much more in line with prosumer FF dSLR pricing. But it's going to happen with the much more expensive a9. Why now? Because benkam says so. You can take that to the benk.

Incidentally, it seems the MacOS spelling autocorrect has the OP's number pretty clearly. ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 20, 2017)

We have to remember that one buys more than a body, they buy a SYSTEM. You need the body, but you also need things like lenses, flashes, and software. The camera's ergonomics have to match your needs. The price has to match your range.

There is no such thing as a "killer" camera, from ANY company!


----------



## bholliman (Apr 20, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> I will say this... I am thinking about the 1dX Mark II, and I'm currently borrowing one from CPS to evaluate.
> 
> These specs are impressive enough for me to think about Sony, despite my personal experience with their terrible service.
> 
> I'd need to see some weather proofing, decent AF on Canon native glass with adapter. But it's now in the consideration envelope.



Just curious, what specs/features would make you consider an a9 over a 1DxII? Both cost more than what I'm willing to spend as an amature/enthusiast, so I'm just an interested observer. But, what would the a9 give you that the 1DxII can't?


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> Say what? Are you a Canon employee or PR in disguise? I have no stake in Canon. Do you?



You are AvTvM in disguise! Any person who disagrees with your outlook must be a Canon employee!



benkam said:


> Well, I don't expect Canon to be the first to release a FF mirrorless for the obvious reason they can't be that anymore, right?
> 
> 
> I like their cameras, that's it, and I've found myself yearning for an EVF and silent operation and all that so I'd like Canon to continue supplying that camera as I'm aiming to jump to full frame. I'd prefer that but I'm not ideologically attached to the brand.
> ...




Mirrorless is the future. No-one denies that. The question is how quickly do other companies need to introduce their technology to avoid the pitfalls you describe. I am not convinced it is as urgent as you (or AvTvM) believe it is. Sony have mirrorless technology but have a poor lens line-up and piss-poor after sales service. 
Canon have strong base, excellent gear line up and great after-sales service. I don't care how good the A9 is - if they cannot back it up with reliable service, professionals as a whole will not adopt the system. 



benkam said:


> Canon must move more quickly in this arena and not be complacent. As a user, I'd prefer to have the option of a Canon mirrorless FF in 2017 or early 2018 rather than in 2020 or 2025. I don't get why that idea is supposed to be a bad thing.



Define 'more quickly'. More quickly than what? 
Their mirrorless sales are doing well, and each model iteration closes the gap with Sony. Why is full-frame mirrorless so important when the majority market (and the money spinner) is covered by the M series?
Where is the market imperative to rush out a FF mirrorless?
AvTvM could not answer that one, and I doubt you can.


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Define 'more quickly'. More quickly than what?
> Their mirrorless sales are doing well, and each model iteration closes the gap with Sony. Why is full-frame mirrorless so important when the majority market (and the money spinner) is covered by the M series?
> Where is the market imperative to rush out a FF mirrorless?
> AvTvM could not answer that one, and I doubt you can.



I'd like Canon to release their first mirrorless FF, probably a 6D-level, as soon as this year or early next year. Because it'll take then time to release their more advanced models will come after that and then those will take even more time. The later they delay they release their FF ML, the more behind they are.

So when do you want Canon to release their first FF mirrorless? 2020? 2025? And why? Answer that.

The market imperative is that as industry leader, they are expected to continue to lead in innovation. Canon release their first FF mirrorless in 2020 or 2025 that'll be too far into the future. Mirrorless is the future so I'd like it to be seriously part of their present sooner rather than the later.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 20, 2017)

bholliman said:


> Just curious, what specs/features would make you consider an a9 over a 1DxII? Both cost more than what I'm willing to spend as an amature/enthusiast, so I'm just an interested observer. But, what would the a9 give you that the 1DxII can't?



It's funny you just asked that as PP just tried to lay out a few arguments for such a move:
https://petapixel.com/2017/04/20/sony-a9-feature-will-make-pros-switch/

My gut is less about any single feature so much as the A9 attempts to -- at a feature spec-sheet level -- to say yes to more 'Can it do that?' questions.

Can it shoot at high FPS with continually tracking AF? Yes.
Can it shoot 4K without major strings attached? Believe so. (I'm sure people want codec X or 60 fps, but no crop is pretty nice)
Does it have a boatload of AF points? Yes
Does it have a tilty-flippy? Yes
Does it have dual cards? Yes
Can I adapt other mounts' glass? Yes
Does it have support for manual focus lenses? Yes
Can it amplify the viewfinder in a dark room? Yes
*
But...*

Does it capture color correctly?
Is the tracking AF always working or does it get locked out sometimes?
Are you always getting 14 bit uncompressed RAW?
Do you really think it could survive rough-handling or a drop like a 1D series (or even 5D series) could?
Do they offer mechanically focusing lenses?
Is there a chunky grip for comfortably holding big lenses?
Is there room for your fingers when you use a big lens?
Have their menus and controls improved?
Do they have 80+ native lenses currently in production like Canon does? 
Do they have great customer service?
Do they have many 3rd party options for lenses, flashes, accessories, etc.?

...so yes, they've jammed a lot into the this new rig, but it appears that they're just overloading the 'horsepower specs' (sensor, MP, fps, AF points, etc.) rather than fleshing out a more robust and comprehensive platform.

They will get some pros with the A9, but I'm not certain those pros will be happy with the system they've migrated to.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> The market imperative is that as industry leader, they are expected to continue to lead in innovation.



So, your business degree is from Bob's Tackle Shop and School for Business and Stuff? You should have checked their accreditation status before matriculating... 

But on the other hand, if you define 'lead in innovation' as making the products that you specifically want, that makes perfect sense.



Mikehit said:


> You are AvTvM in disguise! Any person who disagrees with your outlook must be a Canon employee!



...and unless Canon does what I want, they are *******. Yep, sounds a lot like AvTvM.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> The market imperative is that as industry leader, they are expected to continue to lead in innovation.



Nonsense. Let me get this straight: Canon is supposed to lead in innovation rate because_ 'they are expected to?'_ Proud idiots run businesses that way.

Canon's job is simple: *fulfill the goals of its leadership* -- typically this comes in the form of profitability, market share, sales growth, etc. And that's exactly what they are doing. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 20, 2017)

bholliman said:


> Why no weather sealing?



I thought I saw that the A9 was sealed, but apparently not? This is all I found from the Sony launch website. This would appear that they are in some tap-dancing middle ground between claiming it is weather-sealed vs. not saying anything at all.

Please let me know if I missed something in the announcement about this. 

- A


----------



## midluk (Apr 20, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > Why no weather sealing?
> ...


Canon also does not make any hard claims when it comes to weather sealing and denies any liability.
"It is weather sealed up to the degree it is not. "


----------



## bholliman (Apr 20, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> It's funny you just asked that as PP just tried to lay out a few arguments for such a move:
> https://petapixel.com/2017/04/20/sony-a9-feature-will-make-pros-switch/
> 
> - A



The PP article seems to be pretty pro-Sony, apparently buying into the recent mis-information (selective statistics?) about Sony displacing Nikon at #2 for FF systems. They also imply that many pro photographers have been migrating from Canon/Nikon to Sony and this may escalate the shift.

Personally, I can't imagine that 20 fps vs. 16 is that big a deal, but then I'm not a sports photographer. PP thinks the silent shutter is very significant, and maybe it is for some uses. 1/32,000 max shutter speed, nice, but pretty limited uses.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 20, 2017)

bholliman said:


> [email protected] said:
> 
> 
> > I will say this... I am thinking about the 1dX Mark II, and I'm currently borrowing one from CPS to evaluate.
> ...



One frustration I'm seeing with the 1dx2 that I have right now (must return on Friday) is that it's only 20mp. I think I've been spoiled by the 30mp on my 5d4, coupled with the same on-chip ADC giving me fantastic file flexibility. I'm in Virginia right now shooting eagles and ospreys, and I'm finding that the 50 percent more mp on the 5D4 makes a big difference. Of course, the downside of the 5d4 is the anemic fps. Sony seems to have solved the fps issue better than anyone, and the 24mp would be more adequate.

As an action/wildlife guy, the Canon consistency and sanity of its menu system is important to me, and Sony needs much improvement on that. Will be interesting to see if the a9 makes any progress on that front, as well as whether there is weatherproofing, file compression or various other previous Sony bugaboos. The battery life sounds abysmal. I regularly shoot 2000 frames in a few hours when doing action at high fps. Switching four times would mean I'd likely loose a few series in the scrum of changing batteries. 

I'm not saying I'm going to pre-order, but given my timeframe (within 6-12 months), I'll be watching real-world reviews carefully. If there are lots of people like me, this doesn't doom Canon, but it does potentially chip away at the marketshare in a small way. This is not a bad thing at all. The worst thing for all of us - Canon fanboys included - is that Sony packs up like Samsung and stops acting as a competitive nudge to Canon. 

I might see if I can rent the A9 in a few months along with an adapter to test out the Canon big whites, and perhaps a Sigma 500.


----------



## bholliman (Apr 20, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > [email protected] said:
> ...



Some good points! To me until Sony improves their service and support they won't be able to fully complete with the vast majority of sports and wildlife pros, but I'm sure they can pull some consumers away from C/N.

I agree that competition is a very good thing for the consumer.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 20, 2017)

Oh, one more thing I forgot to mention: silence. 

The 1DX2 and the 5D4 "silent" modes are like a Monty Python running gag. I'm trying to take pictures of quail coveys from 15 feet, and this might as well be a 20 gauge shotgun. 

I took a picture of this guy below yesterday evening with the 1DX2 in "silent" mode. Think he stuck around?


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 20, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> Oh, one more thing I forgot to mention: silence.
> 
> The 1DX2 and the 5D4 "silent" modes are like a Monty Python running gag. I'm trying to take pictures of quail coveys from 15 feet, and this might as well be a 20 gauge shotgun.
> 
> I took a picture of this guy below yesterday evening with the 1DX2 in "silent" mode. Think he stuck around?


I agree. 

I took this shot with my iPad and the bunnies did not move.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

You guys just need to find less skittish bunnies (well, not you, Don – you need to eat yours). We frequently have 4-6 of them in our yard, they don't even flinch with my 1D X burst shooting, and they wait until my kids run to within a couple of meters of them before bolting. On the flip side, when the spring bulbs start coming up and are promptly mowed down by a herd of bunnies, tiggy's 20-gauge seems worthy of consideration.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Apr 20, 2017)

I really enjoy how a contentious discussion about Canon's market dominance has devolved into posting bunny photos. :


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > The market imperative is that as industry leader, they are expected to continue to lead in innovation.
> ...



Okey-dokey, thanks for the personal attacks. Whatever makes you feel big in your small mind, mate.

With your kind of attitude and in a sad world you had any influence with an industry leader, you'd be leading it the way of Nokia. Congrats.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 20, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I really enjoy how a contentious discussion about Canon's market dominance has devolved into posting bunny photos. :



And Neuro's bunny was of course shot with an 800 prime from the next house over. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> With your kind of attitude and in a sad world you had any influence with an industry leader, you'd be leading it the way of Nokia. Congrats.



Why don't you throw Kodak or whoever else you want in there? Big companies can fail due to bad decisions, poor vision, lack of innovation, etc. *We get it.*

What we're saying is that it's not that dire a situation at present for Canon. FF mirrorless is...

a) ...not an enormous part of the overall market

b) ...something Canon can reasonably fast-follow in when the market says it's time to do so (people's exhibit A = the EOS M platform)

c) ...not driving many CaNikon's professionals to ditch their SLRs

d) ...not markedly better than an SLR. It has strengths and weaknesses and is not the clearly best rig to buy for all needs.

e) ...only a certain portion of the appeal of an imaging platform. Lenses matter. Service matters. Durability matters. Resale value matters. An A9 being released does very little to help those other items to improve in the near term. 

So, yes, mirrorless FF is the future, but that future is not immiment, and Canon's in no danger of missing out on it.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Kit Lens Jockey said:
> 
> 
> > I really enjoy how a contentious discussion about Canon's market dominance has devolved into posting bunny photos. :
> ...



Lol. That one was with the 70-300L, I was laying down in my yard near the bunny. But..._this_ one is with the 600/4L IS II, the bunny was still in my yard, but I was inside my house shooting out the window.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > benkam said:
> ...



If you're going to make ridiculous statements, being ridiculed is not unlikely. Your prediciton of dire consequences for Canon if they don't release a FF MILC on your personal timetable is ludicrous. As was pointed out previously, the analogies you're using are cases of paradigm shifts, and if you're going to argue that MILCs, particularly FF MILCs, represent a paradigm shift for the ILC market, you'll merely make yourself look even more foolish than you have done so far. But maybe your goal is to look foolish, and in that case, congrats to you.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I really enjoy how a contentious discussion about Canon's market dominance has devolved into posting bunny photos. :



I'm thinking maybe you weren't around when discussions of DxO devolved into Squirrel-Fest 2014. Lots of nuts back then, ask Don... ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 20, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > With your kind of attitude and in a sad world you had any influence with an industry leader, you'd be leading it the way of Nokia. Congrats.
> ...


Not only that, but with the M series Canon is actively engaged in the mirrorless and all the lessons learned with the M and all the experience gathered will help when they eventually do go FF mirrorless.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Not only that, but with the M series Canon is actively engaged in the mirrorless and all the lessons learned with the M and all the experience gathered will help when they eventually do go FF mirrorless.



More than just 'actively engaged'...Canon is selling more MILCs than Olympus or Panasonic. Given their relatively recent and limited (although expanding) efforts in mirrorless, the fact that they're now #2 globally suggests they have a good undestanding of the mirrorless market (and obvoiusly, the ILC market as a whole).


----------



## Ryananthony (Apr 20, 2017)

A large percent of the people I talk too about cameras only know of canon or nikon. I would also guess that 90 percent of people who ask what brand of camera I use ask that question while guessing it's canon. It might be foolish to assume, but I would imagine if any of those people were interested in a camera themselves, canon is where they would start. 

Canon is a household name when it comes to cameras. It will take a long time for someone to knock them off their thrown. 

With that said, this is the first Sony A- series camera that has intrigued me. Im excited to see what tech follows in the a7/r/s line. Having 2 back button focusing options for AF and one for Eye focus would be nice, also, from what I've seen you can connect two completely different exposure settings to each AF button too which could be really neat.


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 20, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Let's see how it handles in real-world use, shall we? Does it shoot 20fps in all conditions, or only compressed raw with some lenses (as the footnotes to its release statement suggest)? Its weatherproofing is ridiculously non-existent for a flagship aimed at the pro sports/wildlife. How will it handle the Canon big whites (wildlife photographers will not be happy limited to 400mm zooms?)
> 
> Canons 'consumer level ' mirrorless are gaining ground with every iteration to the point where it is almost ergonomics that make the real difference, and while I can see the A9 as a great upgrade for A7 users I am not sure it will tempt many pros to switch from Canon at that level.
> 
> Sony is a great test bed and technology leader rather than market leader. But I am sure Canon will keep closing the gap.



---

In terms of performance almost ANY CAMERA will do IF you know what to do with it!

As a technological statement, I can say I've used a lot of different cameras and lenses and while Sony, Canon and Nikon have their place, I will ALSO SAY that my Sony Xperia Z-series smartphone has FANTASTIC 4K footage which I edit down to 2K using a fancy resizer and sharpener for some of our internal videos. The quality is actually QUITE AMAZING if you grade the saturation, contrast and black levels correctly! If you use an external bluetooth microphone the sound is ALSO amazing!

While we also use our internally-owned A7s2, two Canon 5Dmk2's, Four Canon 1Dc's, some Sony HDcam TV News Cameras, Canon C100 mk1/C300 Mk2's and also use the C500 for some higher end stuff and anotehr ridiculously expensive ultra-large specialty sensor camera for our more secretive customer projects. We even use a few GoPros too in certain situations!

Personally, while this statement may be heresy, I just happen to like my Sony xPeria Z-series smartphone the BEST since it is ALWAYS with me! Hence I get photos and video WHEN something good is happening RIGHT NOW! I've even done MULTIPLE off-the-cuff interviews with it! AND THEY LOOKED and SOUNDED GREAT!

The BEST CAMERA is the working one that is in your hands RIGHT NOW!

So Focus Sharp! Crop Hard and Boost your Levels!


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 20, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> We have to remember that one buys more than a body, they buy a SYSTEM. You need the body, but you also need things like lenses, flashes, and software. The camera's ergonomics have to match your needs. The price has to match your range.
> 
> There is no such thing as a "killer" camera, from ANY company!



---

I beg to differ on that!

The Sony F65 I recently rented and the Red Weapon 8k were pretty darn near PERFECT the last time I used them for BOTH Moving Video AND Still Images!

There ARE "Perfect Cameras" out there but you WILL PAY a pretty penny for the privilege! ....BUT...if you want to get close in a REALLY SMALL ALL-IN-ONE PACKAGE at a very decent price, the Sony xPeria Z5 Premium 4K smartphone is really hard to beat in terms of bang-for-the-buck!

I would definitely get a PREMIUM external microphone system with it if you want to match the stills/video quality with really great sound!


----------



## brad-man (Apr 20, 2017)

It's time for a new keyboard Harry. You're CAPSLK button seems to have run amok...


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 20, 2017)

brad-man said:


> It's time for a new keyboard Harry. You're CAPSLK button seems to have run amok...



The more he writes the more I think he is related to mikael, anybody else see the similarities?


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 20, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > It's time for a new keyboard Harry. You're CAPSLK button seems to have run amok...
> ...



---

NO RELATION WHATSOEVER --- I'm in Vancouver, Canada -- he is elsewhere!

and my CAPSLOCK actually IS sticky from waaay too much spilled coffee, too much Tim Hortons Timbit crumbs and the sweat off all my disbelief at WHY everyone takes CanonRumors sooooo SERIOUSLY! It's what the site owner SAYS IT IS --- it's all just rumours (or rumors for you USA-based users!). STOP taking its content as pure gospel as there will ALWAYS be conjecture, extrapolation, intentional leaks and other such minutae...soooo again....take EVERYTHING with more than a few grains of salt and WAIT for the real announcements from the real manufacturers before getting all worked up over nothing at all!


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > With your kind of attitude and in a sad world you had any influence with an industry leader, you'd be leading it the way of Nokia. Congrats.
> ...



I get your points. I agree with some, disagree with others. 

I still think it's important for Canon to live up to being industry leaders by showing us innovation in mirrorless, particularly FF.


----------



## Jopa (Apr 20, 2017)

Ok, let's think for a moment... If any one had experience with the A99 or A7 series cameras, you guys should be aware they all fall back to 12bit when shooting in bursts. Also 20 fps is possible shooting only lossy compressed RAW. It's also possible with electronic shutter only, so no strobes. The readout is fast but it still has rolling shutter (check Max Yuriev's video). It means shooting with the ES only fast moving subjects may look skewed. Of course one can always switch to the mechanical shutter and enjoy blazing fast 5 fps. No S-log even all Sony cameras offer it now. No native "pro" sports/wildlife glass (please don't start a conversation about adapters  ), and the body size/ergonomics wasn't even designed for it. No 4k 60p (but they mentioned 60 fps AF/AE calculations?). It's 2017 kind of... Questionable support. Always questionable weather sealing. And the last question - will it blend overheat? I shoot both Sony (my first system) and Canon, but I really don't understand this move from Sony. I personally was expecting a high res high quality sensor cam, but definitely not this creature.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> I still think it's important for Canon to live up to being industry leaders by showing us innovation in mirrorless, particularly FF.



I would be surprised if Canon's technology pipeline was not close to that of Sony. The difference from what I have seen is that Canon will not release a technology until they are confident it is the best they can do at that time. Sony, however, have a rapid turnover of new models which suggests that they are releasing as soon as they can get a spec sheet out - and comments a couple of years ago when they released 2 models within a year had early adopters complaining that the second model was the camera the first one should have been if they had only waited a few months.

I think what we are now seeing is that mirrorless is offering a break from the 'people buy cameras they see the professionals using'. Canon has massive presence at key events and so people associate Canon with cameras. Mirrorless offers size advantages that overcome that in part - most people buy only the kit lens and a small telephoto zoom (55-250, 70-300) and never buy anything else. The fact that the Sony plus a 24-70f2.8 offers little to no size saving over DSLR is irrelevant because those people will never buy one. So the market is changing....but changing very slowly. I have advised several friends and acquaintances on their first camera; I have shown them the small size and image quality of MFTs...but they still buy a Canon DSLR because that is what they consider a camera to be. Canon knows this which is why (IMO) they are taking their time to introduce mirrrorless - they see the market figures and they see how the subliminal marketing works. They have their mirrorless cameras and those sell well. 
The A9 is aimed at the pros and Sony have too many reputational disadvantages to get a wholesale shift in the pro market. The last Sony camera releases were supposed to be the ones that caused that shift but there were too many operational glitches (including compressed raw images at high frame rates) so the market has been bitten before and I think they will be very cautious and wait to see what the real world reviews are like. Sony cameras may make 'favoured second camera status' for some and that may be their way in but that is a long-term market strategy and I am wondering if Sony has the stomach for that.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 20, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > brad-man said:
> ...



I have relations in Canada, U.K., New Zealand, Caribbean, USA. 

I didn't say I thought you were our old contributor, I said I thought you sounded related, and you really do. Besides shrouding isp's is child's play.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 20, 2017)

Sony may be a "killer" on the spec sheet, but personally I will never go Sony again as long as they continue to use their short flange distance. That is indeed a "killer" for me having been "fooled" twice in getting an A7 and then A7 II thinking those cameras would replace my 6D. I'm not a pro and can't afford their more expensive lenses which, apparently, get around the short flange distance issue by making the end of the lens longer. The kit lenses (which aren't cheap, either) produce pics with awful IQ away from the center. Ming Thein, famous photographer, offers a similar assessment saying that it took him 6 tries to get an acceptable Sony zoom lens. Yeah, the latest tech is great as long as it works. In Sony's case, there seems to be enough evidence that it isn't working all that well. But boy those spec sheets are the best ever!

Sorry, but as the Who said, "I won't be fooled again."


----------



## barton springs (Apr 20, 2017)

benkam said:


> 20 fps with 24MP sensor
> blackout-free EVF
> fully silent, vibration-free operation
> 5-axis in-body IS
> ...


----------



## benkam (Apr 20, 2017)

Jopa said:


> No S-log even all Sony cameras offer it now.



Yeah, strange move for Sony but there's this leading camera company that later offered that missing something through a firmware upgrade. Who knows what happens there too.



Jopa said:


> No native "pro" sports/wildlife glass (please don't start a conversation about adapters  ),



True, but it was always going to be a chicken-or-egg situation for another company that wanted to enter this market. They at least have their 70-200 2.8 and their new 100-400 GM to start with. That of course isn't enough and Sony would of course only be fooling themselves if they don't release other glass. I'm guessing the ubiquitous superteles like the 400 2.8, 300 2.8, 600 f4 would probably have to be among the first native ones they develop and release in the near future. 

Sony had a joke FE lens lineup when they started but let us recall this was only 3 years ago and at this point, while Canon still has the absolute lens count advantage, we have to admit the gap of their available native lens in many of the mainstream focal lengths has considerably narrowed.



Jopa said:


> I really don't understand this move from Sony. I personally was expecting a high res high quality sensor cam, but definitely not this creature.



At the rate they've been releasing new bodies, as Tony Northrup speculated in their vid on the A9 launch, we could probably also expect an A9R with that silly-high MP count. They already have that new body to put it in.

What this all shows is that the competition isn't sleeping for sure.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Apr 20, 2017)

Canon have built their reputation on producing products that work. And work and work. Not on producing products that have a plethora of unnecessary gimicks and additions. Canon will make a FF mirrorless eventually and when they do it will work. It will last and it will be very very tough. They will not release one untill they are sure that is the case unlike Sony who seem happy to release low quality/ feature packed toys that require lots of upgrades before they are good enough to be called pro level. When canon finally release this FF mirrorless there is a high likelyhood that pros will pick it up and when consumers see lots of pros using it they will take to it like a duck to water and sony will not be able to compete.


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 21, 2017)

MikeHit's Quote: "...The A9 is aimed at the pros and Sony have too many reputational disadvantages to get a wholesale shift in the pro market. ..."

---

In Still Photos, ABSOLUTELY YES that Sony is atrocious at customer service!
With our Canon pro services we can get loaners on lenses, cameras and even 
whole systems but of course we've got a ton of Canon gear!

On the Pro Video Side where we are paying $25,000 to $120,000 for Sony Betacam News Cameras and Sony F55/F65 4K/8K's, THEN their customer service experience is UTTERLY SUPERB and I can pretty much get anything I want from Sony Professional Broadcast so while Sony has a LOT of catching up to do when it comes to pro-level stills cameras, their broadcast video systems division is WELL POISED to handle the onslaught of customer service needs. They just need to transfer their video know-how to the still photos division which I think they are STARTING to get a handle on. I would say give it another 2 to 4 years and they will be getting close to Canon CPS levels of help!

I love the look of the A9 so far, so we MIGHT take a closer look at it in a test environment and if it's small size coupled with a good 50 or 95mm Cine Prime lens gives us good video, then we'll add it to our arsenal of stills and video gear. It's a GREAT START but we will do further reviews in June if we can get our hands on one.

---

Again, this is a GREAT SONY camera but will it tackle the wants and needs of pros is yet to be seen....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

benkam said:


> Well, well, personal attacks are weak and stupid.



Ok, let's review my 'personal attacks':



neuroanatomist said:


> I suggest you go look for some reality. Trust me, it's out there...even if you can't perceive it.





neuroanatomist said:


> So, your business degree is from Bob's Tackle Shop and School for Business and Stuff? You should have checked their accreditation status before matriculating...





neuroanatomist said:


> But maybe your goal is to look foolish, and in that case, congrats to you.



Now, let's review yours:



benkam said:


> You're a smug, horrible person...



It's sad that you can't perceive the difference between being called out of touch with reality, looking foolish, and having credentials questioned...and being called a horrible person. But on the positive side, you've effectively supported your statement that personal attacks are weak and stupid. Well done. 




benkam said:


> Your entire defense is based on, well it happened to other companies but it will never happen to my favorite company because they're awesome. That's what you think, end of story.



_Your_ entire offense is based on, well it happened to other companies so it will happen to this company because they're not doing what I think they should be doing. That's what _you_ think, end of story. 

When confronted by mulitple people with the significant difference between your chosen examples and the current situation – the existence of, or in this case absence of, a paradigm shift – you just blithely ignore it. You're also conveniently ignoring the plentiful examples of leading companies that weathered paradigm shifts (and less dramatic market changes) just fine. 

Moreover, my position is supported by recent, directly relevant historical evidence: when mirrorless cameras came along, there were many predictions that they would soon displace (kill, to use your parlance) dSLRs. Essentially every other major camera maker entered the MILC market, eventually even Nikon (albeit with a small sensor offering), while Canon did not. There were a plethora of posts like yours...'mirrorless is the future, _Canon is too late to the mirrorless party, they're being left behind and unless they enter the MILC market in the next year or so, they are *******._' 

But what really happened? Mirrorless has not killed dSLRs, not even close. Canon did eventually enter the mirrorless market...at launch, their first MILC became the #2 best-selling MILC in the largest single geographic market, and now Canon has become #2 in overall global MILC unit sales. 

But here you are, claiming that _Canon is too late to the FF mirrorless party, they're being left behind and unless they enter the FF MILC market in the next year or so, they are *******._ Almost the same story, except yours is far less credible than the one already proven wrong, given that you're talking about FF, which is a much (much!) smaller market than crop-sensor MILCs. 




benkam said:


> Come at me for more personal attacks, fool.



So, in my corner we have logical conjecture supported by documented evidence (and satirical slights), and in your corner we have unsupported opinion (and uncouth insults). I trust you know what they say about having a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent (but that may be expecting too much of you)...


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 21, 2017)

I honestly don't understand this fetish with mirrorless cameras... especially one that screeches about ho Canon must jump on board immediately or die.

I'm extremely happy with my Canon gear, think it the bee's knees, and couldn't give a rat's behind about Sony or it's lineup.

In fact, I am so happy with Canon I just dropped $1,649 on an EF 35mm f/1.4 II USM that delivers tomorrow from Adorama.

Screw the Sony mirrorless fanboys and their insistence that only Sony is doing it right and that Canon is *******. 

Take the adapters you people use so that you can use Canon lenses and stick them where the sun don't shine. Once you do, peep up that big dark pixel.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > If Canon came up with something like those specs the Canon faithful would absolutely be drooling and praising them to high heavens.
> ...



Not to mention the fact that he heaps praise on Sony, but will be buying a Canon 6D. Just another guy that doesn't own the gear he swears Canon has to make. Never touched one. Never used one. :


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 21, 2017)

benkam said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > benkam said:
> ...



I have a stake in Canon. About a $25,000 stake. That's at the least how I trust the brand. What is your stake in Sony? Anything? Buy a lower end FF Sony and get back to us.

Not only that, but you extol the virtues of Sony's FF A9 while clamoring for a 6D... moving from an ASPC body.


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 21, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I honestly don't understand this fetish with mirrorless cameras... especially one that screeches about ho Canon must jump on board immediately or die.
> 
> I'm extremely happy with my Canon gear, think it the bee's knees, and couldn't give a rat's behind about Sony or it's lineup.
> 
> ...



----

Mirrorless is a big deal in the sense that there are less failure-prone mechanical parts, less vibration from the shutter assembly which MAY make for better/sharper photos AND the issue that high speed photography (i.e. higher FPS) is easier to do on Mirrorless camera systems.

I've personally used mirrorless longer than I have use mirrored cameras since my original background starts with the old Betacam SP-style video cameras where you paid a pretty penny for a fully electronic shutter (aka mirrorless). It was ALSO a big deal in that electronic shutters are/were better able to synchronize with the displays on a computer systems which can be 60 fps, 72 fps, 75 fps, 120 fps and even 240 fps which in my day was a major method of transferring digital imagery onto video without spending $25,000 US for a computer screen to NTSC/PAL/SECAM video system scan converter. We simply set the sync speed to the frame rate of the display and shot the screen directly to tape with a black cloth draped over the camera and computer display. I can tell you that more than a few Hollywood TV shows were transferred that way after offline/online non-linear editing to tape for speed-of-time reasons!

In terms of Canon OR Sony satisfying their fan base, BOTH companies seem to be converging on a common consumer bracket. Right now, Canon has the edge in pro stills photography where Sony rules the roost in Smartphone sensors (their biggest market by far!) and broadcast video gear.

I do see though Sony making significant inroads into stills and Mirrorless FF cameras because they are able to leverage the strength of the broadcast video side into a consumer, semi-pro and even pro-level stills camera system. So unless Canon ups their camera by adding MORE video features and better image quality for less end-user effort (i.e. a mirrorless) than they will be quite ground into the dust as Sony has a SIGNIFICANT technological edge because of their vastly larger broadcast video experience where they are in nearly EVERY TV station with their Cameras, switchers, disk servers, video routers, editors, projectors and more!

Sony is no small company and is in EVERY major electronic market from Video Game consoles, to smartphones to image sensors to home electronics and much more!
Canon is really just a copy, printer and industrial optics company dabbling in Cameras which are GREAT but not that much of a contributor to the bottom line as their printer/copier/optics divisions. Nikon, being part of the Mitsubishi Group keiretsu, has even BIGGER resources available to it! Nikon (aka part of Mitsubishi), being a 540 BILLION US DOLLAR company, absolutely DWARFS Sony and Canon COMBINED in term of available resources so if they wanted to, Nikon could obliterate Sony AND Canon in sheer research resources, financial and marketing power!

So as of today Canon is still king of the Stills Camera BUT Sony is catching up FAST and Nikon COULD but WON'T do what is necessary to BECOME king of the cameras!


----------



## davidhfe (Apr 21, 2017)

H. Jones said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Interesting comparison, given that Canon essentially defined the consumer DSLR category with the D60/D30/10D/Digital Rebel. All those products appeared in a window of what, 4 years?

It's pretty reasonable to debate if mirrorless is anywhere near as big a deal as film to digital, but evidence doesn't seem to agree they're taking the same approach as they did with previous "big" technology transitions. Maybe this approach is better, and 2018 will be the year of category-defining DPAF mirrorless, global shutter cameras from Canon. /shrug


----------



## EdB (Apr 21, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > 693 AF points
> ...



It's the one in the middle, it always screws things up. Just like a middle child.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> In terms of Canon OR Sony satisfying their fan base, BOTH companies seem to be converging on a common consumer bracket. Right now, Canon has the edge in pro stills photography where Sony rules the roost in Smartphone sensors (their biggest market by far!) and broadcast video gear.



Careful...your bias is showing. Canon 'has the edge' over Sony in pro still photography? Sure, just like China has the edge over Zimbabwe in GDP. :

Sony 'rules the roost' for broadcast video gear? For heads, sure...but last time I checked, it was kinda hard to shoot broadcast footage with just a camera head. Who 'rules the roost' for field lenses? In the last Sony video catalog I looked through, all their cameras were mounted on DIGISUPER lenses, although Sony thoughtfully photoshopped out the Canon logos. 




HarryFilm said:


> Canon is really just a copy, printer and industrial optics company dabbling in Cameras which are GREAT but not that much of a contributor to the bottom line as their printer/copier/optics divisions. Nikon, being part of the Mitsubishi Group keiretsu, has even BIGGER resources available to it! Nikon (aka part of Mitsubishi), being a 540 BILLION US DOLLAR company, absolutely DWARFS Sony and Canon COMBINED in term of available resources so if they wanted to, Nikon could obliterate Sony AND Canon in sheer research resources, financial and marketing power!



Ahhh, yet another armchair business expert. How _do_ Wharton and HBS manage to stay afloat with all of you out there? It seems you don't understand how a keiretsu functions. Suffice it to say that Nikon does *not* have the resources of the Mitsubishi Group at their beck and call.


----------



## Woody (Apr 21, 2017)

Hopefully the Sony A9 does not go down the same path as the Minolta 7D, another camera with high specification (at that point of release), innovative feature set and a very high price tag... before Konica-Minolta exited the camera business and was subsequently acquired by Sony.


----------



## drob (Apr 21, 2017)

I'm still not sure why people are wanting Canon to do a FF mirrorless? You slap a pro lens on a Sony A7 and the size benefit is gone. Same with the new A9...you slap bigger glass on it and the size advantage is no more...so some one please shed some light on why a FF mirrorless is so important?


----------



## Jopa (Apr 21, 2017)

benkam said:


> We could probably also expect an A9R with that silly-high MP count. They already have that new body to put it in.



That would be really interesting. This ^ or a 5dsr successor will be a tough decision


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 21, 2017)

This is an interesting post on the Sony forums from a sports pro photographer (by BTM_pix at 09:21pm) 

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/24242-sony-a9-announcement-live-stream/?page=4#comment-191769

The comments that stuck out for me were:



> There is definitely a market for a mirrorless camera to take over in my field but I still believe it will have a Nikon and/or a Canon badge on it.
> .
> .
> .
> ...


.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 21, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> This is an interesting post on the Sony forums from a sports pro photographer (by BTM_pix at 09:21pm)
> 
> http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/24242-sony-a9-announcement-live-stream/?page=4#comment-191769
> 
> ...




In fact that whole thread is quite eye-opening considering it is the Sony forum. Yet here we have people on a Canon forum saying that Canon have to catch up with that.....green grass syndrome I suspect, based on being able to see a few colourful poppy heads.


----------



## romanr74 (Apr 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> HarryFilm said:
> 
> 
> > In terms of Canon OR Sony satisfying their fan base, BOTH companies seem to be converging on a common consumer bracket. Right now, Canon has the edge in pro stills photography where Sony rules the roost in Smartphone sensors (their biggest market by far!) and broadcast video gear.
> ...



Did you forget to take your pills again this morning? Why don't you stick a post-it on your fridge's door to remind you!

Oh, and why don't you business expert again elaborate on how companies are legally forced to make profit? This was a wonderful laugh...


----------



## Hflm (Apr 21, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > I honestly don't understand this fetish with mirrorless cameras... especially one that screeches about ho Canon must jump on board immediately or die.
> ...


Regarding Nikon and Mitsubishi from someone who knows a lot about Nikon:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/nikon/about-nikon/nikon-faq/is-nikon-a-subsidiary-of.html.
Quote:"But the basic answer is, no, Nikon is an independent company with its shares publicly traded on the Nikkei. "


----------



## benkam (Apr 21, 2017)

What the hell, I just posted a response to neuroanatomist's smugness and it got deleted. Put it back!


----------



## unfocused (Apr 21, 2017)

At $1,000 more than a 5D IV and with Sony lenses generally overpriced in comparison to Canon and Nikon, I'm not seeing this as attracting much of a market outside of early adopting specs geeks.


----------



## benkam (Apr 21, 2017)

Ugh, here's a more succinct version because my earlier longer post was deleted.



neuroanatomist said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > Well, well, personal attacks are weak and stupid.
> ...



LOL Thanks for posting the time-stamp of the comments. It's evident I was merely reacting to your personal attacks. I wouldn't have written that if you hadn't started anything. And here you still reek of smugness and it stinks.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

benkam said:


> Ugh, here's a more succinct version because my earlier longer post was deleted.



Did your more verbose response actually address any of the issues raised that demonstrate the fallacy of your contention that Canon is in dire straits unless they release a FF MILC on your personal timetable? Or was it merely a rehash of your unsuppprted opinion peppered with more crude insults. I suspect the latter, the former is likely beyond your capabilities.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > HarryFilm said:
> ...



Oh, you mean the discussion where you failed to prove anything, then resorted to calling me names, exemplifying behavior typical of a petulant child? That wasn't laughable, just rather sad. :

In this case, your post implies that I'm incorrect – in which case, you appear to agree that Nikon does have access to the full resources of the Mitsubishi Group, and thus, "_..if they wanted to, Nikon could obliterate Sony and Canon in sheer research resources, financial and marketing power._" 

If your intent is for people to find you laughable, you're succeeding. If you have different intentions, you should probably quit while you're behind. Or you could try calling me names again...much like benkam you seem to have an aptitude for that, if little else.


----------



## benkam (Apr 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > Ugh, here's a more succinct version because my earlier longer post was deleted.
> ...



Woooo. You mean your rehashed opinion you're passing off as fact and evidence for your own version of the future. Whatever, Your Smugness, your opinion is of zero value to me.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 21, 2017)

unfocused said:


> At $1,000 more than a 5D IV and with Sony lenses generally overpriced in comparison to Canon and Nikon, I'm not seeing this as attracting much of a market outside of early adopting specs geeks.



And those with an "above average" disposable income.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

benkam said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > benkam said:
> ...



As expected, you can't formulate and express a cogent counterargumenrt, so instead you'll provide another example of petulant, childish behavior by taking your marbles and running home (but not without tossing out another insult). How sad.


----------



## benkam (Apr 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



A "cogent" response to your smugness? You start with the personal attacks, this is exactly what you deserve.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

benkam said:


> A "cogent" response to your smugness? You start with the personal attacks, this is exactly what you deserve.



I don't 'deserve' anything. If you want to post a topic making a claim, and are subsequently unable to defend that claim against logical arguments and evidence, that's your problem (one of many, I'm sure), not mine. 

But since your are evidently unable to do anything but repetitively toss out the same meaningless insult, you've at least made it clear that there's no point in further discussion (not that logic and evidence countered by petulant name calling actually constitutes a discussion). Enjoy your day.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 21, 2017)

unfocused said:


> At $1,000 more than a 5D IV and with Sony lenses generally overpriced in comparison to Canon and Nikon, I'm not seeing this as attracting much of a market outside of early adopting specs geeks.



Agree with you on the value proposition, but the A9's 20 fps, 1/32000 shutter, no EVF blackout, etc. says that that Sony is actually attempting to _undercut the 1DX2/D5 sports/wildlife crowd_ more than it is trying to get higher dollars over the 5D4. Sure, Sony lacks the long glass, a bomb-proof build quality and an integral grip, but hey, reason never stopped them before. 

FWIW, I believe that Sony believes the A7 platform acquits itself quite nicely vs. the 5D line.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > At $1,000 more than a 5D IV and with Sony lenses generally overpriced in comparison to Canon and Nikon, I'm not seeing this as attracting much of a market outside of early adopting specs geeks.
> ...



Agreed – on both counts. 

I wonder what DPR will conclude about the a9's AF tracking compared to Nikon's D5 automagical prognosticating 4D designed-by-God AF tracking system.


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 21, 2017)

benkam said:


> 20 fps with 24MP sensor
> blackout-free EVF
> fully silent, vibration-free operation
> 5-axis in-body IS
> ...



dubious weathersealing. the ports certainly don't appear sealed at all.
dubious support. they will finally have walk in centers. will they have parts?
no telephotos or pro lens over 200mm really unless you think a 100-400 3.5-5.6 is it)
fully electronic shutter for most shooting modes only 5fps if you use an actual mechanical shutter. light fllicker, fast action - who knows what kind of influence that will have.
still a small fiddly ergonomic nightmare. can you see pros with thick heavy gloves at the side of superbowl shooting with this?

ps .. the 1DX Mark II is 16 fps - and is built like a brick and built to survive rough environments. the D5 is a completely awesome machine as well. no one is going to give up those two machines for an A9.

the EVF was very cool though. you really couldn't tell you were shooting unless you looked at the shot counter.

also how well will this perform with long fast lenses in dimmer light? major defocus and low contrast AF has been very hard on the A7 series cameras. anything over 85mm in dim light can be a no-go.

also - if this is entirely with E-shutter, that means you are always shooting stopped down. need more DOF? well, too bad, you'll take an AF hit.

Trusting sony specs always is a losing bet.


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 21, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > At $1,000 more than a 5D IV and with Sony lenses generally overpriced in comparison to Canon and Nikon, I'm not seeing this as attracting much of a market outside of early adopting specs geeks.
> ...



if you go by specs. but then again the lack of true weathersealing aka OM or 1DX / D5,etc will turn off many.

also how well will an electronic shutter do for fast action? or flickering gym lights?


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 21, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> also - if this is entirely with E-shutter, that means you are always shooting stopped down. need more DOF? well, too bad, you'll take an AF hit.



RRC, I've seen most of the critiques / fine print spoken about elsewhere, but I didn't know an electronic shutter stopped down the lens for some reason. Educate me, please -- what's that all about?

#learning

- A


----------



## benkam (Apr 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > A "cogent" response to your smugness? You start with the personal attacks, this is exactly what you deserve.
> ...



Oh yes you do. I'm here for reasoned discussion but when you sneak in personal attacks, I stop hearing you. That's what you deserve. I don't care if you have more posts than photos. With your smugness, your opinion is of no value to me. None.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > also - if this is entirely with E-shutter, that means you are always shooting stopped down. need more DOF? well, too bad, you'll take an AF hit.
> ...



He is referring to the fact that some Sony cameras perform focusing with the lens stopped down. It appears to be dependent upon body, lens (native versus adapted) and shooting mode. 

Of relevance to this discussion is that, for example, the a7RII in AF-C mode (= Canon AI servo) takes the first shot with the lens wide open, but then performs AF tracking with the lens at your selected aperture for shooting. So, if you are at f/5.6 or f/8, that means you're losing accuracy for PDAF, and losing light for CDAF...in other words, AF performance suffers.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



Ah, so it's not actually stopping down the lens further than that which you intend to capture the image -- it's stopping down the lens _narrower than an ideal aperture during servo AF use?_ (Did I get that right?)

If so, thanks and interesting.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Ah, so it's not actually stopping down the lens further than that which you intend to capture the image -- it's stopping down the lens _narrower than an ideal aperture during servo AF use?_ (Did I get that right?)
> 
> If so, thanks and interesting.



That's my understanding. But I also recall having read that with fast primes (f/1.4, etc.), it stops down for AF even with a wide open aperture selected for the shot. I'm not sure if that's true, though.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Ah, so it's not actually stopping down the lens further than that which you intend to capture the image -- it's stopping down the lens _narrower than an ideal aperture during servo AF use?_ (Did I get that right?)
> ...



It's worth a read in their manuals. When it comes to AF and high speed shooting on the A99-II, for instance, there was fine. print. for. days. that you had to cross-reference to back out what the real situation was. Some older lenses had AF locked (forget aperture for AF, I'm talking AF at all) after the first exposure, while screamingly high fps rates were only possible with compressed output.

It's offensive to me as a consumer that they somewhat mislead / cook the books to sell a spec sheet and not a camera. Canon has it's fine print as well, but I tend to see that fine print right on the spec sheet adjacent to the spec in question (e.g. 14 fps max with mirror, 16 fps with MLU), which I find a more honorable / up-front way of doing business.

But I'll give Sony _some_ credit: at least they are making the fine-print available before pre-orders these days. I think the 12 bit RAW revelation on the A7R II had a bit of a backlash they'd like to avoid in the future.

- A


----------



## JPAZ (Apr 21, 2017)

FWIW, I really like FF on my 5Diii. My M3 is of utility because it is smaller (as are the EF-M lenses) but is not my "go to" because the mirror slapper is faster, has (imho) better IQ, and more utility. I have a friend who shoots an A7iiR and I've tried it. It is very nice and (except for the limited and expensive lens selection or the need for an adapter to use my Canon stable and the ergonomics when using big glass) yields better stuff than I can get out of my M3. But, I am not changing to Sony (or Fuji or any other MILC) at this point.

My hope is that the A9 is one more impetus for Canon to continue to develop the mirrorless line. If and when there is a FF mirrorless that is smaller and lighter than than the 5D's, I'll pay attention.


----------



## slclick (Apr 21, 2017)

Here we go, the same old tired song. Canon is *******. Better come out with a competitor this week or bankruptcy. Yeah, let's forget product cycles and all things well, logical and mature. Enjoy your Sony, especially the firmware and service.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 21, 2017)

We must ask ourselves a simple question.... Why would you like to go FF instead of using a crop camera?

The almost universal answer is because we want improved image quality.....

If we want improved image quality, then we also want top quality lenses....

This is the point where the argument for thin mirrorless cameras with shorter flange distances falls apart.

To get a thin mirrorless camera with a short flange distance, you need to re-design the lenses to bend the light more sharply, and when you bend the light more sharply, you end up with more distortion and more problems with chromatic aberration. This causes you to loose image quality, and that violates the reason why you went FF in the first place. The next problem occurs at the sensor. Since the light is now at more of an angle to the sensor, there is more light lost through hitting the sides of the photocells and more light lost through vignetting. Loss of light means loss of image quality and the heavier vignetting adds in more noise when you correct for it in software.

Photography is about the capture of light..... the more the better, so why throw some away? When Canon gives us a FF mirrorless, they will make sure that it is worth buying it, so expect a 5D size body and EF lenses on it.


----------



## Duckman (Apr 21, 2017)

Looks to be an interesting camera. I'm curious what the details are on FPS and all that...
Not a camera I'm looking to purchase (I'm way too invested in Canon) but I do think it's good overall for consumers Sony appears to be trying to push the envelope. 
I am looking forward to when Canon releases a FF mirrorless; I truly hope they do it right out of the gate!
-J


----------



## dak723 (Apr 21, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> We must ask ourselves a simple question.... Why would you like to go FF instead of using a crop camera?
> 
> The almost universal answer is because we want improved image quality.....
> 
> ...



Let us hope you are correct. If Canon listens to photographers, then they will probably get it right. If they listen to the spec lovers who dominate all the forums, they may feel pressured into putting out an inferior product before they are really ready (like Sony does, for example).


----------



## Ryananthony (Apr 21, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> We must ask ourselves a simple question.... Why would you like to go FF instead of using a crop camera?
> 
> The almost universal answer is because we ant improved image quality.....
> 
> ...



I'm rather uneducated on the topic, but would the short flange distance be the reason why sigma hasn't simply made a mount for the Sony, it is more complicated then just changing the mount? 

Edit: the sigma art line up.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 21, 2017)

Ryananthony said:
 

> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > We must ask ourselves a simple question.... Why would you like to go FF instead of using a crop camera?
> ...


Replacing a lens mount is not enough, but all optical design has to be designed for a certain distance between the flange and the image sensor. In the specific case of the Sony A7, the optical design must juggle so that the light reaches the corners of the full frame sensor.


----------



## romanr74 (Apr 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



interesting what you brain makes up for you. again, pills might help...


----------



## scyrene (Apr 21, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > [email protected] said:
> ...



More is better (in most situations), but is 24MP really that much more than 20MP? Someone do the linear maths, please!



[email protected] said:


> Oh, one more thing I forgot to mention: silence.
> 
> The 1DX2 and the 5D4 "silent" modes are like a Monty Python running gag. I'm trying to take pictures of quail coveys from 15 feet, and this might as well be a 20 gauge shotgun.
> 
> I took a picture of this guy below yesterday evening with the 1DX2 in "silent" mode. Think he stuck around?



Interesting. FWIW I've never had a subject flee at the sound of my shutter, although I've only used the 50D, 5D3 and 5Ds. The silent shutter is easily quiet enough in all situations I've encountered, or at least quieter than I am (but maybe there are fewer hunters here, so wildlife is less anxious?).


----------



## scyrene (Apr 21, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> Mirrorless is a big deal in the sense that there are less failure-prone mechanical parts



Although as we've discussed elsewhere on these forums, the contention that 'mechanical parts fail more than electronic ones' is surprisingly lacking in evidence. Or to put it another way, the parts that last longer (in photographic equipment) often seem to be those with the least electronic parts - old manual lenses can be adapted even after decades (/repaired more easily or cheaply/are more forgiving of moisture etc), but processors and memory fail after a few years. I'm not saying the contention is wrong, but it's not proven.


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 21, 2017)

> Regarding Nikon and Mitsubishi from someone who knows a lot about Nikon:
> http://www.dslrbodies.com/nikon/about-nikon/nikon-faq/is-nikon-a-subsidiary-of.html.
> Quote:"But the basic answer is, no, Nikon is an independent company with its shares publicly traded on the Nikkei. "



---

Your statement is true in the sense that Nikon is LEGALLY independent of the Mitsubishi Group who is just a shareholder in it. BUT Japanese Keiretsu TEND to be Family-like in nature where there are actual blood-related family working at the executive levels in each subsidiary company OR that there is a Fraternal Affiliation
(sort of like the University-based Greek House system i.e. Phi Beta Kappa house).

This means that affiliated companies within a Keiretsu ARE allowed to use resources from other companies. Nikon could do this and use the Mitsubisihi financial arm for further funds or use the industrial electronics arm for extra research resources. Nikon could blow Canon or Sony away IF THEY WANTED TO but since Keiretsu are inherently cautious and staid, that just won't happen. To me, Nikon is turning into Blackberry where they make good products for a SMALL specific market BUT they lose the big battle for consumer marketshare.

Canon is Apple iOS and Sony is Google Android and I see a long-term duke-it-out battle where Canon keeps the really high-end customer and the premium prosumer market while Sony wins the low-to-medium range of the market with edgy and technologically advanced products that might have a few flaws in them, but for the most part work WELL ENOUGH for most peoples needs!

I just don't see Nikon being a viable Consumer Camera company by the year 2025!
It will be Blackberry all over again. If Canon actually DOES come out with its purported Medium Format Large Sensor High Speed camera, then they WILL WIN all the pros and and geeky prosumers, and if Sony bring out great mirrorless technology like the A9 into a A6300 price point then they win the midrange market!

Fuji, Pentax, Leica will STAY niche market players and will PROBABLY focus on nostalgia and styling to keep specific alternative-style customers who don't like or buy the big-two player products more for political reasons than product reasons.

Hasselblad and Phase-One WILL be bought out by either Sony OR Canon!
Neither can survive in the coming new camera market of 2025. They don't have the financial or product line to stay independent past the year 2025. Sigma is a dark horse in that its lenses will keep it afloat for a long enough time that Sony will start looking eagerly to get its Foveon Sensors and Sigma Art Lenses into Sony product via a direct buyout. ...BUT... I don't see that happening until at least 2027 when it's lens and sensor patents start running out! Canon won't buy Sigma but Sony WILL sooner or later depending upon how much it offers Sigma in buyout cash! I ALSO THINK that Sony might even take a run at Microsoft in a strategic merger or a REVERSE buyout where Sony stays legally headquartered in JAPAN but run from the USA by Microsoft who will want to merge xBox with Playstation using Windows Embedded/Mobile operating system on Sony 4K BluRay and GPU Hardware and then create a monsterly profitable super-smartphone ecosystem with 8k video and built-in VR/gaming/5G internet abilities tied to massive online gaming products!

In terms of separate audio/video/still photo products I see any potential Sony/Microsoft merger as a total convergence into super-Smartphone like devices that literally CAN do everything that a modern stills/video camera can but at a much smaller size. Sony/Microsoft would still create separate Stills/Video camera for PROS but at high price and high-end feature points and everyone else will be shoved into the gaming-and-VR-capable 8k supersmartphones running Windows Embedded/Mobile and allowing running of Android apps in an Emulator box!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 22, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> > Regarding Nikon and Mitsubishi from someone who knows a lot about Nikon:
> > http://www.dslrbodies.com/nikon/about-nikon/nikon-faq/is-nikon-a-subsidiary-of.html.
> > Quote:"But the basic answer is, no, Nikon is an independent company with its shares publicly traded on the Nikkei. "
> 
> ...



So evidently Nikon wanted to cancel a previously announced camera line, and they also wanted to voluntary retire 1,000 employees. They didn't have to do those things, because all they would have had to do is use resources from other companies in the group, if they wanted to. But instead, they chose to lose face and chose to put 1,000 hard-working older people out of work, in a culture that reveres hard work and aging. Thanks for your explanation, which makes as much logical sense as most of your other statements.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 22, 2017)

scyrene said:


> HarryFilm said:
> 
> 
> > Mirrorless is a big deal in the sense that there are less failure-prone mechanical parts
> ...



With both electronic assemblies and mechanical assemblies, there is a wide range of quality and longevity. I have 12 sets of Mil-spec HF Radio gear at work that were purchased in 1985, so far, the failure rate is zero... and we have consumer gear that is lucky to last the year.... I have quality tools that will last a lifetime, and I can go buy dollar store hammers that won't survive pounding in a spike....

As far as digital cameras go, I have only had 2 fail on me in 23 years... one was a Olympus that died the day after the warranty expired (they repaired it for free) and the other one was a Canon that died in a fall. (apparently they are not designed to withstand a 120 foot drop onto a concrete pad). I have had lots of TVs die in that time frame, three microwaves, several computers, and countless hard drives. I would have to rate digital cameras as one of the more reliable consumer products out there, and mirrorless or not probably will not make much difference to the reliability.... both will be excellent.


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 22, 2017)

> So evidently Nikon wanted to cancel a previously announced camera line, and they also wanted to voluntary retire 1,000 employees. They didn't have to do those things, because all they would have had to do is use resources from other companies in the group, if they wanted to. But instead, they chose to lose face and chose to put 1,000 hard-working older people out of work, in a culture that reveres hard work and aging. Thanks for your explanation, which makes as much logical sense as most of your other statements.



---

Logic has NOTHING do with my writing, I am merely stating a possibility! Keiretsu are considered Family-like and in such a case, letting Nikon close parts of itself down IS considered a form of saving face within the Japanese culture. I'm no expert on Japan specifically but I have a very good idea of the concept of "Face" within Asian cultures and if necessary cutting off the gangrenous rotting body part is the better part of valor when dealing with heavy financial hits to smaller parts within a larger corporate group. To me, this really is one of Nikon's best available options, since asking for more money is PROBABLY a big no-no and I suspect overtures for research help have been rebuffed or denied.

Korea has the same issues with their Chaebol where a group such as The Hyundai Group which owns shipbuilding, electronics, cars and trucks (Kia and Hyundai), finance, etc WILL NOW ALLOW failure within their group when in past years it would have been considered "Bad Face" to let them fail!

I think those recent failures have been ALLOWED TO HAPPEN because of the infusion of American let-em-fail ideals into Japanese Keiretsu and Korean Chaebol corporate groups bu western educated executives.

That said, I still think Nikon is on the downward spiral looking more and more like Blackberry every day. I still think Canon and Sony will be top dogs in an Apple vs. Android like battle of technology vs experience. AND I still think there is going to be one or more monster mergers by the year 2025. I PERSONALLY OPINE that Sony and Microsoft will team up for Gaming and 8k super-smartphones and that Apple will probably buy Canon in its entirety for the camera and lens tech which will be merged into Apple iPhone/iPad products and various Canon 2D/3D printing technologies which will be incorporated into Apple desktop products. While those extrapolations may SEEM like fantasies, WHO KNEW that Apple would buy a headset manufacturer (Beats by Dr. Dre) and that Microsoft would by a mobile phone maker (Nokia) for billions of dollars OR that Disney would buy Star Wars (Lucasfilm)!

Stranger Things Have Happened Sooner Rather Than Later!

It has happened before and will happen again.....


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 22, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Ah, so it's not actually stopping down the lens further than that which you intend to capture the image -- it's stopping down the lens _narrower than an ideal aperture during servo AF use?_ (Did I get that right?)
> ...



I'm sure someone who knows what is going on can actually chime in with some real specifics, but mirrorless cameras do have differences that create problems to solve that a DSLR does not. I can't tell you want my Fuji camera's are doing, but simply hitting the playback button causes the aperture to change. I'm going to guess that a DSLR is simple in that when you are not exposing for a picture the sensor is (obviously) protected as all the light bounces of the mirror. With a mirrorless camera, I've gotten the impression that the lens (depending on brand and implementation) will stop down the lens out in bright light to reduce the light that is constantly hitting the sensor. As for the aperture sounds when switching to review images on the back LCD??? My guess would be that it closes down the aperture all the way to mostly prevent light from hitting the sensor at all.

Just some random speculation on my part, but it did take some getting use to, to hear the aperture of the lens adjusting while I'm not even shooting a photo... which eventually led me to give it a little thought to why.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 22, 2017)

scyrene said:


> More is better (in most situations), but is 24MP really that much more than 20MP? Someone do the linear maths, please!



I saw that yesterday and was tempted to comment but thought the better of it.

Either way I agree, the difference is negligible. My quick calc put it's at a little under 10% increase in resolution.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 22, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > More is better (in most situations), but is 24MP really that much more than 20MP? Someone do the linear maths, please!
> ...



The difference is not negligable. 24mp gives you 20% more data points than 20mp, this means better color accuracy more detail and better tonality for any given output size.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 22, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



Oh, they are data points now. So we're going to get into statistics?  Because you do understand that once you have well beyond (magnitude levels) a statistically relevant data set, an increase in that set will provide no more information.

Aka, a 24mp image will not provide "better color" nor "better tonality" (both highly subjective terms to begin with) because a 20mp image has enough data to capture both of those. i.e. an 85mm corporate headshot. Are you saying that the skin tones will be theoretically better (look different) in a 24mp sensor than the same tech in a 20 mp sensor??? Of course not.

The only thing a 24mp sensor gets you over a 20mp sensor (assuming all equal tech, blah blah blah) is more resolution. AND, because megapixel numbers are a simple marketing, scalar number to help sell cameras, it's not a linear relationship to resolution. Those pixels need to be pushed out along two dimensions. Hence, why a 4k screen has ~4 times the pixels, but only double the resolution of a 1080p screen.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 22, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> > So evidently Nikon wanted to cancel a previously announced camera line, and they also wanted to voluntary retire 1,000 employees. They didn't have to do those things, because all they would have had to do is use resources from other companies in the group, if they wanted to. But instead, they chose to lose face and chose to put 1,000 hard-working older people out of work, in a culture that reveres hard work and aging. Thanks for your explanation, which makes as much logical sense as most of your other statements.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That is the heart of the matter. Glad you finally admitted it. :


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 22, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Luds34 said:
> ...



Try printing over 20" x 30".

I never said everybody needs or will notice the difference between 20 and 24mp in their normal output, but it is a fact that 24 is 20% more sampling than 20, that gives you better tonality, detail and color. And seeing as how color is entirely the result of sampling algorithms on Bayer array sensors..... oh what's the point? You are right, there is no difference between 20 and 24, nor jpegs and RAW, nor tripods and handheld :


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 22, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Sigh... so you're one of those. You have no real argument so you ignore and deflect?? First the deflect... JPEGs and RAW, tripods and handheld, what does that have to do with our current discussion?

And than the "ignore". I said there was a difference, in RESOLUTION. Although it won't be noticeable in your 20x30 print.

Bottom line, a larger sensor (all things equal) will get you more resolution, this color and tone you speak of is nonsense. That is why one can shoot a 20 (or 24) MP image and then downsize it to web resolution, the 2048 px on the long end, aka ~3 MP image and guess what....? the color and tone still looks the same. Even though all those data points are lost, there are still enough of them to represent the skin tone of the subject, the color of the photo.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 22, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> I said there was a difference, in RESOLUTION. Although it won't be noticeable in your 20x30 .



You are wrong. I print to that size almost daily from a wide variety of cameras.

As for tonality and color, try printing a good test image at a decent size. There is a very good reason the best output of any current Canon camera is all from the 5DSR. Bayer array output quality is entirely based on sampling numbers, 20% more is 20% more, nobody ever made an effective argument about scanning film at lower resolutions.

Now how much of that 20% difference is noticeable at 'average' output sizes is moot, I agree.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 22, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Let's see how it handles in real-world use, shall we? Does it shoot 20fps in all conditions, or only compressed raw with some lenses (as the footnotes to its release statement suggest)? Its weatherproofing is ridiculously non-existent for a flagship aimed at the pro sports/wildlife. How will it handle the Canon big whites (wildlife photographers will not be happy limited to 400mm zooms?)
> 
> Canons 'consumer level ' mirrorless are gaining ground with every iteration to the point where it is almost ergonomics that make the real difference, and while I can see the A9 as a great upgrade for A7 users I am not sure it will tempt many pros to switch from Canon at that level.
> 
> Sony is a great test bed and technology leader rather than market leader. But I am sure Canon will keep closing the gap.



From Roger after a Sony lens repair:

We decided to put the lens back together, bite the bullet and see if the service center could repair it. But being a suspicious person by nature I did some checking first and found out, in typical Sony fashion, this entire assembly was considered a single part. So if we sent it in they would replace this entire assembly at a repair cost of slightly more than half the price of a new lens. Needless to say, we switched into nothing-to-lose mode and went back to looking for a way into this assembly.

I’ll repeat what I say all the time: _Sony is trying a lot of new things; that’s how you advance._ I completely admire the risk taking and efforts to try new things when most manufacturers are just fine-tuning what already is. _Some of these new things turn out to be awesome, some don’t._ It’s just as important to identify which new things are not better, or not even adequate, as it is to identify when the new thing is a dramatic improvement.

He doesn't knock Sony but certainly isn't a great fan.

Jack


----------



## RGF (Apr 22, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> I’ll repeat what I say all the time: _Sony is trying a lot of new things; that’s how you advance._ I completely admire the risk taking and efforts to try new things when most manufacturers are just fine-tuning what already is. _Some of these new things turn out to be awesome, some don’t._ It’s just as important to identify which new things are not better, or not even adequate, as it is to identify when the new thing is a dramatic improvement.



Canon has tried lots of new things - some which were "interesting" and died on the vine (eye control focus) and others which have slowly matured (DO).

Recently I have noticed that can has become more cautious, every since there were problems with the 1D Mark 2 or was it Mark 3. Whether the bad reputation was warranted or not, it seems to me that Canon is making sure new products are more solid than before (and hence fewer experiments).

Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 22, 2017)

RGF said:


> Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.



The core argument you're making is to remind us of the recent tech past -- that technology, and the market demand for technology can evolve rapidly and unpredictably, and that companies that don't foresee this may not be able to recover. This, alone, is a plausible argument, but there are important facts that are frequently ignored by the "Canon must act now" advocates.

First, not every technological advance offers a major marketing advantage. The standard example of this is Betamax vs. VHS, I'll leave it to you to read the history for yourself. We have very good evidence from the last 10 years or so that not all advances in camera tech translate to market advantage. Even the Sony Exmor sensors bought just a slice of extra market share for Nikon, and Canon has had years to creep closer in low-ISO IQ.

Second, the horror stories of large companies fading due to their failure to see the future are not universally true. IBM is still a huge and profitable company, they've merely adjusted their business model without the PC. In those cases where it did occur (e.g. Kodak), there was a persistent disregard of clear trends before the fall, which is not the case with Canon: they've repeatedly said they think mirrorless will be an important part of the market, just not now.

In short: Canon knows FF mirrorless has a future, and are looking for it. You can bet they have prototypes and an action plan lined-up and ready to go. So far other vendors (Samsung? Fuji?) have wasted huge amounts of money to produce nice mirrorless products that flopped. FF mirrorless will come, but we don't know when...we're all still waiting for Godot.


----------



## midluk (Apr 22, 2017)

I guess Canon will release a FF DSLR with a hybrid viewfinder before a true FF mirrorless.
I think size is no good argument for FF mirrorless cameras if you take into account the lenses needed. If you want to go small, go APS-C mirrorless (or m43). All other advantages of mirrorless cameras I can think of can also be had with a mirror.
I wouldn't be surprised if Canon introduced the possibility to attach the external EVFs of the EOS M/M6 to the 6DII.


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 22, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.
> ...



I'm one of those have no time to wait for Canon to bring their FF mirorrless. Until then, my $$$ is not going to Canon camp 

"So far other vendors (Samsung? Fuji?) have wasted huge amounts of money to produce nice mirrorless products that flopped" ==> where did you see Fuji products flopped? I think their mirrorless system is very enjoy and fun to shoot.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 22, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> I'm one of those have no time to wait for Canon to bring their FF mirorrless. Until then, my $$$ is not going to Canon camp


That's fine, you should choose the products that work for you.



> "So far other vendors (Samsung? Fuji?) have wasted huge amounts of money to produce nice mirrorless products that flopped" ==> where did you see Fuji products flopped? I think their mirrorless system is very enjoy and fun to shoot.


Unfortunately, not enough people agreed with you, so their sales have not been great. "Flop" does not mean it's a bad product, it means it has not been as financially successful as Fuji hoped. Looking at Amazon's ranking, it appears the XT-2 is doing OK, so I guess that's one example of a moderately successful enthusiast mirrorless, but it's still behind a bunch of Canon and Nikon reflex offerings.


----------



## Eldar (Apr 22, 2017)

This is not a camera for me. However, that does not mean I think it is a poor camera. I just read a hands on review from a team of (in my view) objective and competent reviewers. They were not allowed to publish any images yet, but they were clearly very impressed. It will be interesting to read the indepth reviews in a couple of weeks time.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 22, 2017)

RGF said:


> Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.



The question is, _when_ will mirrorless will eat the dSLR market for lunch? And regarding FF mirrorless, when —if ever— will it be more than a nibble from the lunch plate?


----------



## arthurbikemad (Apr 22, 2017)

I've never yet seen a EVF that comes close to a DSLR, perhaps I have not tried a "decent" mirror less camera, or perhaps I am stuck in my ways or old fashioned, one thing that is overlooked IMO with say in my case the 1DX2 and 5D3/4/whatever is the wonderful viewfinder, the 1DX2 has the best viewfinder I have ever used. There is a lot to be said for looking through the glass, I can't see myself anytime soon looking thorough ten grands worth of glass via a tiny LCD no mater how many pixels it may have, IMO when you use a DSLR you see the world diferently than a mirror less camera. The new Sony looks amazing and I am sure it will be when it hits the market, call me a Canon fan boy but Sony has failed with me many times re customer support, Canon on the other hand have been amazing, as for CPS, I have to thank them for looking after me for many years and still work on bugs I find this very day.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 22, 2017)

benkam said:


> What the hell, I just posted a response to neuroanatomist's smugness and it got deleted. Put it back!



It amazes me that anyone would want to display this kind of ongoing commentary in public (ah, but it's anonymous, of course ). I'd be embarrassed. At the very least I'd say, "thanks for the alternate viewpoint, that gives me more to think about". So, Neuro may be smug, who cares, but at least he's capable of clear reasoning and presenting solid information.

Jack


----------



## slclick (Apr 22, 2017)

arthurbikemad said:


> I've never yet seen a EVF that comes close to a DSLR, perhaps I have not tried a "decent" mirror less camera, or perhaps I am stuck in my ways or old fashioned, one thing that is overlooked IMO with say in my case the 1DX2 and 5D3/4/whatever is the wonderful viewfinder, the 1DX2 has the best viewfinder I have ever used. There is a lot to be said for looking through the glass, I can't see myself anytime soon looking thorough ten grands worth of glass via a tiny LCD no mater how many pixels it may have, IMO when you use a DSLR you see the world diferently than a mirror less camera. The new Sony looks amazing and I am sure it will be when it hits the market, call me a Canon fan boy but Sony has failed with me many times re customer support, Canon on the other hand have been amazing, as for CPS, I have to thank them for looking after me for many years and still work on bugs I find this very day.



I have to say I am impressed by the EVF in my Pen F. Fast startup, adjusting to changes and true to life. Sure it's not like my 5D3 but fwiw it's nothing to complain about. It sure beats the Fuji I looked at. I'm starting to really like the wysiwyg.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 22, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > Regard a FF mirrorless, someone is going to eat Canon's lunch (DSLR market), so it can does not act it will be Sony. Better Canon act and its own lunch rather than letting Sony eat it.
> ...


I could see the 6D2 being mirrorless.... It is possible, but I doubt it....

As far as "eating Canon's lunch" goes, I agree with you. Crop cameras are by far the bulk of Canon's sales, and whatever happens in FF land is not going to make or break the company. That said, there is most definitely a space for, and a need for, a FF mirrorless camera in Canon's lineup, but until they get the technical details sorted out and get it packaged and priced to sell sufficient quantities to make it worthwhile, we will not see one. After all, just because they can make one is not sufficient reason to do so, it has to be worth while to the company and it's plans for the future to do so...... and that is information that only Canon has, and us users can only speculate about...


----------



## IglooEater (Apr 23, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > At $1,000 more than a 5D IV and with Sony lenses generally overpriced in comparison to Canon and Nikon, I'm not seeing this as attracting much of a market outside of early adopting specs geeks.
> ...



Yea, that's what I thought too. My knee jerk reaction was to find it expensive but then realized in CaNikon land the equivalents (specification-wise) are considerably more expensive.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 23, 2017)

IglooEater said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



But you can get a new 1DX MkII and 100-400 for $6,800, a Sony A9 and 100-400 is going to cost you $7,750 with grip and comparable battery power. By any measure the Sony is overpriced.

That is not to say I don't see a lot of interest in features like silent shooting, no blackout time, shutter speed range, etc etc, but how anybody can start leveling the Sony against the Canon 1DX MkII and Nikon D5 at this time is laughable. Next generation or two if they dig deep and get the lenses, flashes, and service/support, otherwise the idea of making serious inroads into that 1DX MkII/D5 market is simply not happening.


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 23, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm one of those have no time to wait for Canon to bring their FF mirorrless. Until then, my $$$ is not going to Canon camp
> ...



Using Amazon camera ranking is not the way to say Fuji sales are not well. Without looking at amazon data, my guess those rebels are the top choices - not 5d4, 1dx and xt2 etc...

Keep in mind xt2, xpro2 and other Fuji are not designed to compete with Rebels or m5/m6.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 23, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Amazon
> ...



It's also behind D750, 5DMkIII, 80D, 5DMk4, 6D, D810 and 70D.


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 23, 2017)

> "....But you can get a new 1DX MkII and 100-400 for $6,800, a Sony A9 and 100-400 is going to cost you $7,750 with grip and comparable battery power. By any measure the Sony is overpriced.
> 
> That is not to say I don't see a lot of interest in features like silent shooting, no blackout time, shutter speed range, etc etc, but how anybody can start leveling the Sony against the Canon 1DX MkII and Nikon D5 at this time is laughable. Next generation or two if they dig deep and get the lenses, flashes, and service/support, otherwise the idea of making serious inroads into that 1DX MkII/D5 market is simply not happening. ...."



---

In terms of Stills Photography, the A9 even WITH the 20 fps and decent focus, is NOT QUITE UP TO the 1DxMk2 or the D5 where ergonomics and speed-of-end-user-operations is a critical factor. The big two cameras from Canon and Nikon are BUILT from the get go for pro sports, action and wildlife photographers and the A9 simply does not have the base ergonomics for really high end pro stills work.

That said, if you're on the VIDEO SIDE of things then the poorer ergonomics are livable since the final end result (based on demo videos I've seen!) seem to make the A9 the BETTER camera than the 5Dmk4 and 1Dxmk2 and the D5 for video shooters!

The base reason for that, is I can buy extra 3rd party rigging gear which can compensate for the poorer ergonomics and currently worse lens selection. So as a mostly video shooter, the GREAT VIDEO QUALITY on the Sony A9 can be my primary focus and I will CHANGE the rigging to my liking using 3rd party products so that I can live and work with it for professional level video work and the odd time I do a still photos job!

For the high end stills work, I will bring our 5Ds/r cameras or rent a Phase-One because the ONLY REASON I need 50+ megapixels is SOMETIMES I print photos at 48 x 36 inches AND LARGER for wall displays at trade shows.

---

I can definitely say that at least for QUALITY VIDEO WORK, the Sony A9 Definitely BEATS the 5dMk4, matches the 1Dmk2, and eats the D5 for lunch! For Stills, the Canon 1DxMk2 is still Numero Uno for Sports Action/Wildlife because my perceived better Ergonomics versus the close 2nd Nikon D5.

For 50+ megapixels, Numero Uno is Phase One, Hasselblad and then the Canon 5Ds/r. 

For COMPACT pro still photo and video cameras, the Olympus OM-D E-M1 I thought was PERFECT for a GREAT PRICE as an excellent video and stills camera in a RUGGED COMPACT FORM FACTOR!

AND for us old-timers I STILL LIKE my Sinar ultra wide FILM-BACK camera for those extra-special and ultra-wide format landscape photos you can't get using any digital back yet. For those special metallic prints I push out at 96 inches by 24 inches at a 4:1 widescreen aspect ratio!


----------



## Hector1970 (Apr 23, 2017)

This is a dangerous camera for Canon. Canon sells its mid range gear on the perception they are the best. They are the brand that stands out at football and other sporting events. The A9 lacks the glass to go with it. It would be a big decision by Sony to invest in a new line of glass. 20FPS is attractive to sports shooters if the long glass is available. It's not available now so Canon are fine now and have time still to make a good mirror less camera.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 24, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> This is a dangerous camera for Canon. Canon sells its mid range gear on the perception they are the best. They are the brand that stands out at football and other sporting events. The A9 lacks the glass to go with it. It would be a big decision by Sony to invest in a new line of glass. 20FPS is attractive to sports shooters if the long glass is available. It's not available now so Canon are fine now and have time still to make a good mirror less camera.



It might be, and I hope it is -- that would be good for market competition. However, it needs to perform up to the standard of a 1-series, and be as reliable as a 1-series, and be supported like a 1-series. I can imagine serious sport shooters getting one to try, but they'll keep the old reliable handy until it proves itself.


----------



## Roo (Apr 24, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



You may think that the Fuji sales figures aren't great but what do Fuji think of them? If they're hitting their own sales projections then it's not a problem.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 24, 2017)

Roo said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Sure, that's fair. But the originator of this thread was asserting that Canon should feel threatened by the new Sony A9 FF mirrorless. Fuji may be happy with their sales (and that's good for all of us), but the point remains that there is currently no serious market threat to enthusiast/pro digital reflex cameras. If the A9 lives up to its spec hype then things could change in the next year or two, but not yet.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 24, 2017)

*Why A9 is a killer for one part of market, and not for another*

The vast majority of people shooting action/news don't use large aperture big whites. Their newspaper will buy them the 70-200, and maybe they'll have the 100-400 II kicking around. 

People who do pro sports, college sports, high end professional action work will use the big whites, such as the 600 II, 400 2.8 II, etc. 

So when the A9 comes out along with a 100-400, they're pretty much covered for a very large portion of the market. 

Using Canon glass on the Sony neuters the A9 because the FPS goes from 20 down to 10. That makes it just a nice extra capability in case you need to use a Canon lens briefly. This will not appeal to the high end of the market, but that might be an order of magnitude smaller than the other. 

Whether a person or organization values the 20 fps and a few other new features higher than the ergonomics of the Canon, reliability, pro service, etc., is a matter of personal judgement. Point is that the A9 is going to be a player in those decisions for a goodly portion of the super-fast shutter market. 

The more I look at the stats and the hands-on writings of various bloggers, I don't think I'd consider it myself, but I'm glad it's there keeping the heat on Canon.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 24, 2017)

I feel like there has been too much made of this FPS talk. Disclaimer, frame rate is lost on me a bit as most of the time my style photography doesn't require it (and I very very rarely have done spray and prey). However, with all that said this 20 FPS (with all the asterisks and caveats) seems to be hooking too many on pure specmanship alone.

How many frames per second does one need to accomplish their task? I'd argue that you hit diminishing rates of return very quickly beyond 10. Even in the very demanding sports or wildlife photography, how many here would accept the excuse for a missed (or not hitting the) shot from one who claimed they just didn't have enough fps when they were shooting with a camera capable of 10?

Go from 5 fps to 10 fps and that is a huge difference. But after that it's just icing on the cake. What is the 1D at now? 12 or 14 (depending on shooting config) and if you can't capture your shot is it really the camera at point?

Again, once you hit 10+ fps rates, the important parts become, the focus tracking ability, blackout and ability to follow the subject, etc.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 24, 2017)

Here is what you're missing. Wildlife often moves and acts with extreme speed and one may be quite unaware of what one is missing. There is a lot that goes on in 50 or 20 ms. If you've never seen it then presumably you don't care but it is an eye-opener for me. Here is and example of 14 FPS giving me the tongue lick. What tends to happen is that you see or sense something is about to happen and nail maybe 4 to 6 shots and of course hope.

Jack


----------



## sanj (Apr 24, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> I feel like there has been too much made of this FPS talk. Disclaimer, frame rate is lost on me a bit as most of the time my style photography doesn't require it (and I very very rarely have done spray and prey). However, with all that said this 20 FPS (with all the asterisks and caveats) seems to be hooking too many on pure specmanship alone.
> 
> How many frames per second does one need to accomplish their task? I'd argue that you hit diminishing rates of return very quickly beyond 10. Even in the very demanding sports or wildlife photography, how many here would accept the excuse for a missed (or not hitting the) shot from one who claimed they just didn't have enough fps when they were shooting with a camera capable of 10?
> 
> ...



For sports and wildlife, more the better. Even 2 fps increment helps. 12 to 14 is better in real world. In next version on 1d it may go up to 16 and that will be even better.


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 24, 2017)

sanj said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > I feel like there has been too much made of this FPS talk. Disclaimer, frame rate is lost on me a bit as most of the time my style photography doesn't require it (and I very very rarely have done spray and prey). However, with all that said this 20 FPS (with all the asterisks and caveats) seems to be hooking too many on pure specmanship alone.
> ...



---

I AGREE !!!

Even TWO MORE FRAMES per second is a big deal.
In the image below I took 24 photos in rapid succession but ONLY ONE IMAGE had just the right focus, perfect animal positioning and rushing water look I wanted in this type of Rugged Wild West Coast of British Columbia, Canada imagery.

I wish the weather was better (it's almost ALWAYS stormy and grey!) but this image tells the story of just how rugged the Pacific Northwest Coast of North America can be. Only because of HIGH FRAME SPEED, can I capture this type of image easily!

---

So the more frames per second I have the better!

(p.s. It really did look that weird overall blue tone colour...it was like a blue mist all around me!)


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 24, 2017)

HarryFilm said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > Luds34 said:
> ...


Ok.... but now think about small birds.... they move FAST!!!!!!!!! Even 20 FPS isn't enough for them...

I hope that when Canon comes out with a FF mirrorless it gives us a 60FPS (or faster) mode, even if it means a reduction of resolution.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 24, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> HarryFilm said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...



Of course you're joking, but in 10 years we may all shoot 60fps-120fps "raw" video; you'll touch the spots on one frame that you'd like to have in focus, and the software will use face recognition to select the best 5 frames of the 7,000 you shot of that hummingbird.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 24, 2017)

sanj said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > I feel like there has been too much made of this FPS talk. Disclaimer, frame rate is lost on me a bit as most of the time my style photography doesn't require it (and I very very rarely have done spray and prey). However, with all that said this 20 FPS (with all the asterisks and caveats) seems to be hooking too many on pure specmanship alone.
> ...



More is better, but in most other areas, you get diminishing returns for the same increment. 50mm focal length from 50 to 100mm makes a much greater difference than 450-500mm; 5MP from 10-15MP is a bigger difference than 30-35MP. Is fps different somehow? I'd imagine the step of e.g. 2fps from 2-4fps is bigger than 12-14fps - or is that not so?


----------



## Sabaki (Apr 24, 2017)

Alternatively one can learn their gear, observe animal behaviour and grab excellent images with 7, 8, 10, 14 fps. 

I'm not sure what the masses think but I enjoy the idea that I deliver some skill in getting a good image. Would we want a 100fps to guarantee a shot?


----------



## jayphotoworks (Apr 24, 2017)

Sabaki said:


> Alternatively one can learn their gear, observe animal behaviour and grab excellent images with 7, 8, 10, 14 fps.
> 
> I'm not sure what the masses think but I enjoy the idea that I deliver some skill in getting a good image. Would we want a 100fps to guarantee a shot?



I would say that any real change in the market won't happen for at least 5+ years. Making any system change decisions today based on the multitude of comments and white noise about the DSLR mainstays going away are premature. If you consider the next winter Olympics is in 2018 and the next summer Olympics is in 2020, Sony will probably not have the momentum needed at that point to convert pros en masse. Nikon, a powerhouse in itself wasn't even able to catch Canon over a number of iterative releases and they have a FULL complement of super telephotos and service way beyond what Sony has today. Sony can't simply compete at par, they need at a hole in one to have a chance at convincing people to change. That is assuming that Canon waits until signs of market share erosion to throw their r&d into a response. 

It would be great if Canon could be a one-stop shop for me, but it just isn't in their product dna/roadmap currently. If Canon continued to path started by the 5D2 years ago, and offered a more competitive product in the EOS Cinema lineup vs the competition, I would probably be shooting some mythical mirrorless 8Dc 5K+C450 6K today and not have to learn 3 systems and manage 2 sets of lenses. Would probably be the same amount invested overall. 

But I would have to say in terms of video, unless you are willing to be stuck in the Sony Ecosystem, those FE lenses won't mount anywhere else. The flange distance precludes the design of any adapters which means these lenses have no value when you work in a team that uses different equipment.


----------



## davidhfe (Apr 24, 2017)

Sabaki said:


> Alternatively one can learn their gear, observe animal behaviour and grab excellent images with 7, 8, 10, 14 fps.
> 
> I'm not sure what the masses think but I enjoy the idea that I deliver some skill in getting a good image. Would we want a 100fps to guarantee a shot?



Are you asking if I'd want a camera that can shoot 100fps with full AE/AF at full resolution? Yes. Absolutely.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 24, 2017)

And when it's all said and done, the higher the FPS the more time wasted weeding. I try to restrain my trigger finger. As mentioned the speed of AF just doesn't presently cut it so what good is higher speed if the focus can't adapt when there is serious movement.

Jack


----------



## davidhfe (Apr 24, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> And when it's all said and done, the higher the FPS the more time wasted weeding. I try to restrain my trigger finger. As mentioned the speed of AF just doesn't presently cut it so what good is higher speed if the focus can't adapt when there is serious movement.
> 
> Jack



Storage space aside (since we're doing a bit of handwaving here), weeding wouldn't have to be a huge issue. The iPhone does a great job of stacking bursts; you can easily go in and select which one photo out of the burst is the keeper.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 24, 2017)

davidhfe said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > And when it's all said and done, the higher the FPS the more time wasted weeding. I try to restrain my trigger finger. As mentioned the speed of AF just doesn't presently cut it so what good is higher speed if the focus can't adapt when there is serious movement.
> ...



Any suggestion for my situation?

Jack


----------



## XL+ (Apr 24, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Here is what you're missing. Wildlife often moves and acts with extreme speed and one may be quite unaware of what one is missing. There is a lot that goes on in 50 or 20 ms. If you've never seen it then presumably you don't care but it is an eye-opener for me. Here is and example of 14 FPS giving me the tongue lick. What tends to happen is that you see or sense something is about to happen and nail maybe 4 to 6 shots and of course hope.
> 
> Jack



Not only more fps are needed, but also an faster AF system. I know, everyone will bash me, but the AF accuracy in moving subjects is not top. 
Shooting BIF at an "airshow" where the birds do fly from one stand to another caused a lot of shots that were out of focus with the 5DIV, lesser with my 7DII and also more lesser with the XT-2. Shot with the 100-400 from both companies. The AF system of the XT-2 ist superfast and creats a lot more sharp shots than my Canon gear. MLS cams maybe have an advantage over our SLRs, as there are no moving parts.
So, our favourtite brand would do best, if they react on the coming threats (A99II,7RIII), so the leading position on the market would not be lost.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 24, 2017)

XL+ said:


> Not only more fps are needed, but also an faster AF system. I know, everyone will bash me, but the AF accuracy in moving subjects is not top.
> Shooting BIF at an "airshow" where the birds do fly from one stand to another caused a lot of shots that were out of focus with the 5DIV, lesser with my 7DII and also more lesser with the XT-2. Shot with the 100-400 from both companies. The AF system of the XT-2 ist superfast and creats a lot more sharp shots than my Canon gear. MLS cams maybe have an advantage over our SLRs, as there are no moving parts.



Ah yes, that would explain all the Fuji X rigs being used on the sidelines at sporting events. 

- A


----------



## hmatthes (Apr 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*

I've been shooting Canon EOS almost exclusively since 1988. My 1988 vintage 50/1.8 and 28/2.8 just went to my grandson's kit for a birthday gift. I love using his SL/1 and his images are fantastic.

Let's cut to the chase: *A camera is a recorder of light and IQ is everything.* It exists to use our glass.

*Mirrorless?*
Hell Yes I Want One -- IF: 
It natively uses my EF glass
It has the 5D-4 user interface
the EVF equals (exceeds?) the Leica SL or Q
Exp Comp is instantly reflected on both EVF and Live View

My Leica Q reawakened my art. EVF to my eye, simple, logical controls that are right under my fingers, 
I can see/adjust/compose in real-time and capture exactly what I feel.

Even though Aperature/Shutter/ExpComp/ISO are easy to control, my EOS bodies seem awkward in comparison to the Q. But my glass collection is timeless perfection -- more costly than cameras.

Leave Canon for another system - *Never.*
Use my EF glass on a EOS mirrorless 5D/6D - *Nirvana!*


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



hmatthes said:


> Let's cut to the chase: *A camera is a recorder of light and IQ is everything.*



Respectfully:

1) Go tell a birder (or even a guy chasing his kids in the backyard) that 'IQ is everything' when the camera's AF misses the shot. 

2) Go tell a photojourno that 'IQ is everything' as he fumbles through a camera's awkward controls/interface to get the setting he wants only to end up missing the shot.

3) Go tell a wedding photographer that 'IQ is everything' while his older DSLR shutter sounds like a percussion instrument while the ceremony is happening.

4) Go tell a mother or father shooting their kid's first steps that 'IQ is everything' when their memory card dies and there is no backup due to their camera having a single card slot.

I could do this all day. 

We don't all shoot with NASA toleranced manual glass on a bellows large format rig because -- perhaps -- *there are realities other than IQ* and some folks _really_ care about those realities. 

- A


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



ahsanford said:


> hmatthes said:
> 
> 
> > Let's cut to the chase: *A camera is a recorder of light and IQ is everything.*
> ...



Fair enough but when my resulting IQ is less than my finicky nature tolerates, it's in the bin; meaning I have nothing. I'm sure you agree we need it all.

Jack


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



Jack Douglas said:


> Fair enough but when my resulting IQ is less than my finicky nature tolerates, it's in the bin; meaning I have nothing. I'm sure you agree we need it all.
> 
> Jack



Sure. We each have our own chain of priorities, and they are based on what we think we need to get the output we need. 

But I think very few of us, if any, are truly 'one issue voters' when it comes to buying gear. Everything is a trade off, and we count on many more of a camera's features that we might prioritize in an internet forum. 

- A


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



ahsanford said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Fair enough but when my resulting IQ is less than my finicky nature tolerates, it's in the bin; meaning I have nothing. I'm sure you agree we need it all.
> ...



Of course, and the biggest personal trade off so far in my DSLR existence has been giving up 30 MP to have 1 series 20 MP performance. That stung. Of course, I want just one camera to do as much as possible for portability reasons.

Jack


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



Jack Douglas said:


> Of course, and the biggest personal trade off so far in my DSLR existence has been giving up 30 MP to have 1 series 20 MP performance. That stung. Of course, I want just one camera to do as much as possible for portability reasons.
> 
> Jack



Curious to see if this announcement, presumably to be followed with a slower fps A9R @ 50+ MP (the rumor is 72 MP, I believe) will put any wind in the sails of a 1Ds3 successor, i.e. dropping either the current or next-gen 5DS R sensor into a 1D body.

Presently, the 1Ds3 camp has to choose between the 1-series goodies they love OR a high res sensor. They presently cannot get both in the same rig.

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 24, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



ahsanford said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Fair enough but when my resulting IQ is less than my finicky nature tolerates, it's in the bin; meaning I have nothing. I'm sure you agree we need it all.
> ...


As we move through our day, priorities shift. In the morning it can be low light performance that is all important, in the afternoon it can be ease of use in confined spaces, in the evening it can be AF tracking, and at night it can be all about the system flash.... Personally, I find that lens choice is more important than camera choice, but in the end it all has to work together as a system, and to me, that is the strength of shooting Canon.

As to the earlier 20FPS, I would rarely use it, but when I do, 20 isn't enough and for those times I would gladly accept sorting through way too many frames to find the right one.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 24, 2017)

Won't get arguments from me Don. Glass is #1 and Canon is #1 in quantity and quality combined. The cameras obsolete so quickly. 4K @60 p could be useful except for AF issues in our situations. I have yet to try it.

Jack


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 25, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> And when it's all said and done, the higher the FPS the more time wasted weeding. I try to restrain my trigger finger. As mentioned the speed of AF just doesn't presently cut it so what good is higher speed if the focus can't adapt when there is serious movement.
> 
> Jack



Amen. I use to own a lowly 70D that could only do 7 fps. I recall one morning going out with a wildlife buddy and we shot some deer. It was a lot of fun and even though there was a lot of poor light and color in the middle of winter in the woods I came away with some pretty okay shots. 

However, the pain I had to go through just deleting photos out of light room was tedious. Just far too many of the "same shot" but you have to go through them and find the "best one" and delete the others.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 25, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



ahsanford said:


> hmatthes said:
> 
> 
> > Let's cut to the chase: *A camera is a recorder of light and IQ is everything.*
> ...



Easy there, the point is valid, but the hyperbole is getting strong with this post.


----------



## Larsskv (Apr 25, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> HarryFilm said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...



A little reminder.... The 1DXII lets you do frame grams of the 60 frames/sec 4K video, thus providing 8megapixel jpg in 60 frames/s. 

Edit: this feature is a Sony spec type of feature. Sounds impressive but is sort of naaah in real world use.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Apr 25, 2017)

The A9 looks like a nice new toy, unfortunately there are no lenses available that make it relevant for me.

Sony make some interesting cameras but their lens range is has little to do with my photography so Sony is simply a no go for me.

When they get around to making a system rather than some cameras and a couple of lenses then they will get much more interesting................


----------



## dak723 (Apr 26, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



ahsanford said:


> hmatthes said:
> 
> 
> > Let's cut to the chase: *A camera is a recorder of light and IQ is everything.*
> ...



And you probably won't get 3 photographers to agree on exactly what constitutes high IQ. For some IQ means DR, for others sharpness, for others accurate color, for others it's contrast...or some combination of these or other factors...etc, etc.

I would argue that what makes a good photo is composition, mood, atmosphere, subject. Every camera is capable of taking a good photograph if it has reliable AF, reliable exposure metering, and good lenses. That's why I would never consider Sony at present.


----------



## Cthulhu (Apr 26, 2017)

davidhfe said:


> Sabaki said:
> 
> 
> > Alternatively one can learn their gear, observe animal behaviour and grab excellent images with 7, 8, 10, 14 fps.
> ...



That'd be a nightmare choosing keepers.


----------



## Cthulhu (Apr 26, 2017)

XL+ said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Here is what you're missing. Wildlife often moves and acts with extreme speed and one may be quite unaware of what one is missing. There is a lot that goes on in 50 or 20 ms. If you've never seen it then presumably you don't care but it is an eye-opener for me. Here is and example of 14 FPS giving me the tongue lick. What tends to happen is that you see or sense something is about to happen and nail maybe 4 to 6 shots and of course hope.
> ...



XT-2 is nice, but maybe your 100-400 just isn't. There are more elements involved than just the AF system. Mine works great on my 1dx mk2, but is 50/50 on my 7dmk2


----------



## XL+ (Apr 26, 2017)

Cthulhu said:


> XL+ said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...


Mine 100-400 II is the other way round. On my 7DII superfast and accurate. But on my 5DIV it often slows down. Dont´t know why. But CPs will take a look on it in somw eeks, befor i go on holiday.

I mentioned the 100-400 from Fuji. This lens is not as abd as we think and the body is working quite well too...


----------



## Hflm (Apr 26, 2017)

Interesting comment from T. Northrup: "Re: 20 FPS, that only happens when you're not tracking focus. Like the Canon & Nikon cameras, it slows down when tracking focus, and often dropped to 10-12 FPS (but generally slightly more than the Canon & Nikon got in the same scene)."


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 26, 2017)

Hflm said:


> Interesting comment from T. Northrup: "Re: 20 FPS, that only happens when you're not tracking focus. Like the Canon & Nikon cameras, it slows down when tracking focus, and often dropped to 10-12 FPS (but generally slightly more than the Canon & Nikon got in the same scene)."



Most of us are dazzled by numbers. Like when I saw the shutter speed max but what about the reality of natural lighting, the F stop and ISO needed to use these high speeds. Use flash, ah, but what about recycle times if you want FPS, etc. etc. The caveats matter.

I have verified many times over that my 1DX2 can't AF track small birds as they take off. The focus point will be exactly where it should be but no focus. My camera is a dud - I kind of doubt it - I think my expectations are too high.

Jack


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 26, 2017)

Hflm said:


> Interesting comment from T. Northrup: "Re: 20 FPS, that only happens when you're not tracking focus. Like the Canon & Nikon cameras, it slows down when tracking focus, and often dropped to 10-12 FPS (but generally slightly more than the Canon & Nikon got in the same scene)."



and then on top of that you have the potential for e-shutter distortion. sounds like a winner to me.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 26, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Hflm said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting comment from T. Northrup: "Re: 20 FPS, that only happens when you're not tracking focus. Like the Canon & Nikon cameras, it slows down when tracking focus, and often dropped to 10-12 FPS (but generally slightly more than the Canon & Nikon got in the same scene)."
> ...



Updates AF 60 times per second so now I more fully appreciate the challenges real action presents.

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 26, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Hflm said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting comment from T. Northrup: "Re: 20 FPS, that only happens when you're not tracking focus. Like the Canon & Nikon cameras, it slows down when tracking focus, and often dropped to 10-12 FPS (but generally slightly more than the Canon & Nikon got in the same scene)."
> ...



Your flash at max shutter speed isn't down to recycle time, at those low powers they will easily output 20 flashes a second, but at 1/32000th of a second flash power output is practically zero. Even the PCB Einstein, one of the fastest t.1 time flashes out there, is 1/13,500 sec at 2.5Ws, or 1/256 power! At 1/32000 sec you are relying on constant light sources as even the biggest and best studio flashes are way outside their operational specs. 

So you are back to iso performance (and /or a ton of constant light sources) to get anything meaningful at those shutter speeds. The one area I can hit 1/8,000 and want more is f1.4 or wider portraits in direct sun, two stops (1/32,000) would make that more workable, as would an iso 25 or 12 setting, or a built in ND filter as almost every video camera has.


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 26, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Hflm said:
> ...



60 times a second is good, but at 100mph for instance that's around 2.5 feet of movement.

we have no idea how often canon/ nikon look at the PDAF sensors.


Canon as of the IIN and III 1D cameras suggested they can track a 31MPH target at 26.2 feet away using a 300mm 2.8

that's 4 inches of movement for DOF and the target moving at 45 feet per second. so that has to be around 130 to 260 AF checks per second and that was with the IIN or Mark III cameras.

so while the A9 *sounds* impressive, the top of the line cameras from Nkon and canon probably check AF 4++++ times as much as that nowadays.

There's a reason Canon has a separate DIGIC just for AF/AE.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 26, 2017)

Scot, interesting.

rrcphoto it'd be nice to have some more examples of tracking capability relating to the newer cameras. Shooting an otter running towards a person somehow seems antiquated!  Or a galloping horse. It should be relatively easy for the camera reviewers to set up a servo system that could present controlled targets with different velocities and accelerations. They could even have the camera with controlled panning parameters.

It occurred to me that it is all but certain that Sony has pushed this camera out as fast as possible and as such I wouldn't be surprised if there are some issues, including servicing and all that stuff that has been thrown around in the past. One thing for sure, you can bet your bottom dollar Canon is well aware of everything Sony is doing.

Jack


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 27, 2017)

Cthulhu said:


> davidhfe said:
> 
> 
> > Sabaki said:
> ...



You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set. I think such a technology is possible to implement but I wonder why noone hasn't done it yet.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 27, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > davidhfe said:
> ...



Probably because there are a lot more subjective factors than contrast and sharpness.

Jack


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 27, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set. I think such a technology is possible to implement but I wonder why noone hasn't done it yet.



Because most people care more about whether eyes were open and children were smiling than how sharp it is.

Moments > Sharpness.

- A


----------



## slclick (Apr 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set. I think such a technology is possible to implement but I wonder why noone hasn't done it yet.
> ...



Cue the HBC quotes!


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 27, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set. I think such a technology is possible to implement but I wonder why noone hasn't done it yet.


Because some times, a picture can be so bad that it is art.....


----------



## davidhfe (Apr 27, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > Cthulhu said:
> ...



You don't need AI based micro-anything to solve the core problem here.

I see two things needed. First, a burst id written when the picture is taken. Whereas the file name increments with every frame, burst id would increment only when the shutter is pressed for the first time. Single shot? Burst of 1. Hold down the shutter for 2 seconds on a 10fps camera, then again for 1 second? 30 shots, 2 bursts. To be honest, I'm kind of surprised this isn't already on some cameras (I checked my 7D2 files, but didn't see 'em).

Second, when you load up in your processing tool, it could stack/group by burst instead of frame. When selecting keepers, if you hit a stack you scrub through frames until you hit the peak of action—the moment a baseball is compressed on a bat, the moment before a diving bird hits the water—and flag that as the keeper. Processing tool would automatically reject all others in the burst and they get removed next cleanup.

I get it, the very concept of spray and pray is anathema to pro photographers, and I shoot sports like 3 times a year on a rented 7D2. The point though is that I don't think fairly mundane stuff like "hard to select keepers" should stop camera manufactures from pushing the envelope. These are easily solvable problems (and honestly I would love to have a feature like this at even at 7fps)


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 27, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Probably because there are a lot more subjective factors than contrast and sharpness.
> 
> Jack



What subjective factors do you mean?


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 27, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Probably because there are a lot more subjective factors than contrast and sharpness.
> ...



Not everyone is cherry-picking their sharpest shot. Some folks want to capture a critical moment, others want to ensure everyone in the family has their eyes open at the same time, etc.

- A


----------



## aero1126 (Apr 27, 2017)

benkam said:


> 20 fps with 24MP sensor
> blackout-free EVF
> fully silent, vibration-free operation
> 5-axis in-body IS
> ...



Why does Canon need to hurry? Sony doesn't have the lenses that the people who would buy this camera actually need. 

Even if the a9 turns out as amazing as its specs would imply, the lens problem is a very BIG problem.

It's a cool camera, but honestly, Sony should have focused on their a7 series, until they actually had the required lenses available. This would also allow the technology to mature even more for their a9 series.

That's not to say that I don't want Canon to accelerate their camera development, I absolutely would, I'm simply saying that it isn't nearly as dire as some make it out to be.


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...



Yes. But I mainly do landscape/travel photography. Very often I have bursts of 20 images of the same subject. But they all have a very long shutter speed because I wanted to lower the ISO to get less noise. Now there might be 2-3 sharp images out of the 20. So I always have to pick the sharpest manually. 

And if you do that very often, you end up with lots and lots of photos to weed throgh later. Here I'd love to have an automated process which marks the sharpest photos of a burst if you so desire. So that you have less time consuming cherry-picking later on when you fine tune everything in LR. 

Of course you could argue I should use a tripod instead, but then I could say that I don't always have it with me because it is additional weight and bulk.


----------



## Sporgon (Apr 27, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set. I think such a technology is possible to implement but I wonder why noone hasn't done it yet.
> ...



Beautiful Don ! You are quite right.


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 27, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set.



This is so wrong that it hurts.

No. No. and NO again.

This is NOT what you should do in a camera. This is a perfect tool that could be added into Lightroom (or whatever your favourite post-production/workflow management tool is) but anyone who tries to do this sort of thing on a camera deserves to be slapped around the face.

Don't even try to identify which images are the better ones on your camera. You can't do it, not with the crappy screens you have on the camera and certainly don't think of relying on in-camera algorithms to help you.

Put in a big card, take lots of photos, and don't delete ANYTHING until you get home. Then, on a big screen, you can do this job properly.

Rather than messing around in the field trying to do this in the camera simply use the time to TAKE MORE PHOTOS. 


Honestly, some people...


----------



## Antono Refa (Apr 27, 2017)

aero1126 said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > 20 fps with 24MP sensor
> ...



There are two EF to Sony E adapters, one by metabones, which makes it the big problem a wee smaller.



aero1126 said:


> That's not to say that I don't want Canon to accelerate their camera development, I absolutely would, I'm simply saying that it isn't nearly as dire as some make it out to be.



My impression is Canon could have been a step or two further along the way.

With Delkin making a UHS-II v90 card, and other companies making UHS-II cards with writing speeds up to 260MB/s (and higher), I think it was conservative of Canon to release the 5DmkIV with a UHS-I slot, rather than UHS-II.

I can see why video people say the same about the 5DmkIV not having 4K HDMI out.


----------



## sanj (Apr 27, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set.
> ...



"Slapped around the face!!!" Extreme!!! What you having a bad day? Get this: It is possible to judge and delete photos on the small screen of the camera in emergency if you know what you looking for in the photo. But I would never let camera judge what is a good photo. A good photo is a combination of technology and art. Camera can't judge art. What if the shot is blur but the photographer wants it that way, the camera can never know.


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 27, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set.
> ...



It's ok if you and some others don't like it. Everyone is doing it differently. The end result is what really counts. And what counts much more, is respectful choice of words. Think about that next time.

Your attitude is mostly fitting into this forum (sadly). Sometimes I question myself, why I am contributing to CR anymore.


----------



## entoman (Apr 27, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set.
> ...



I agree completely with your comments about in-camera processing and judging images on screen. It's impossible to judge an image properly on a small screen in variable ambient lighting. At home you have a good monitor, better post-processing software, and equally importantly, a stable lighting level in which to judge images on the computer (if you do your image-editing in the evenings by room lighting, as I do).

What I absolutely do NOT agree with is your "face-slapping" comment. Internet forums are full of unnecessarily offensive and provocative comments like that, and all they do is to make the person who issued the comments look rude and immature.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 27, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > You could implement an in-camera process which - on demand - automatically looks through a selected set of images and highlights only those pictures with the highest achieved micro-contrast/sharpness compared to all the other images in this set.
> ...



You're absolutely right, in the same way that anyone who shoots jpg instead of RAW should be slapped in the face. Use a proper, powerful RAW converter on a computer, rather than messing around relying on the camera algorithms. I mean, it's not like it's anyone needs to select and deliver images in near-real-time...modern wedding photographers —slap—...professional sports photographers —slap— (stupid Canon, why _do_ they put LAN ports on 1-series cameras, anyway?).

Oh, and while we're at it, here's a —slap— for you. Maybe it will wake you up to the reality that not everyone's needs are the same as yours.


----------



## slclick (Apr 27, 2017)

*Burst shooting for landscape...umm*

Spray and pray in landscape/static shots? Help me out with that one.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 27, 2017)

*Re: Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Regardless of Sony's new A9*



ahsanford said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Fair enough but when my resulting IQ is less than my finicky nature tolerates, it's in the bin; meaning I have nothing. I'm sure you agree we need it all.
> ...



This is dangerously reasonable for these forums!


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 27, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> You're absolutely right, in the same way that anyone who shoots jpg instead of RAW should be slapped in the face. Use a proper, powerful RAW converter on a computer, rather than messing around relying on the camera algorithms. I mean, it's not like it's anyone needs to select and deliver images in near-real-time...modern wedding photographers —slap—...professional sports photographers —slap— (stupid Canon, why _do_ they put LAN ports on 1-series cameras, anyway?).



Come on Neuro.... get real! If that was important to people, they would start putting WiFi interfaces on cameras....


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 27, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



slclick said:


> Spray and pray in landscape/static shots? Help me out with that one.



Plate tectonics! The continents are moving.......


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 27, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



slclick said:


> Spray and pray in landscape/static shots? Help me out with that one.



It's funny, people come out with these seemingly 'silly' notions, then a few people come up with actual good reasons for doing it.

Anyway, I shoot a lot of real estate, I shoot 7 and 9 bracket shots all set up on a tripod, leveled, remote release etc etc. You'd think there was no need for speed right? Well I shot a model home the other day and I can't use a lot of the sequences because the weather was strong sun, it was windy with plenty of thick clouds, if I timed the burst wrong the ambient light levels changed enough to screw up my bracket, and I shoot in burst mode but only 5 fps.

A second reason, I shoot environmental portraits often in low light with long shutter speeds, if I do a burst mode I find some shots much sharper than others even at crazy low shutter speeds. This applies to places where tripods are not allowed and don't move, things like anywhere near the Taj Mahal (or anything interesting in India), inside most temples, museums, etc etc.

One thing I have learnt in my nearly 40 year photography path, as new features allow for different approaches people come up with different ways to use their cameras and do get shots we had never thought of before. I have subscribed to National Geographic since I don't know when, if you look back through them you will see that even though we marveled at the photography from 15 and 20 years years ago it is vastly outclassed by the more modern images. Wildlife images, low light images, high speed images, flash images, AF, frame rate et al have all taken quantum leaps in the last 10 or so years. Olympic quality photographs from the 80's and 90's can be achieved by parents with a modicum of time and modest gear at junior school events. College sports photographer output now is easily on a par with Super Bowl photography back then.

Do I like the idea of 100mp images at 100fps? No! But I'm sure it will happen and those that apply that technology well will get images that we dream of now on a regular basis. It doesn't mean those that get to nicer places, have better lighting more interesting subjects and are 'better' photographers won't make more compelling images with that tech, it just means the bar will be raised higher still.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 27, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



privatebydesign said:


> It's funny, people come out with these seemingly 'silly' notions, then a few people come up with actual good reasons for doing it.



Spray and Pray for a landscape shot? No way! Never! What a useless feature..... until you find a good use for it.... like the spray from breaking waves.....


----------



## midluk (Apr 27, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



Don Haines said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny, people come out with these seemingly 'silly' notions, then a few people come up with actual good reasons for doing it.
> ...


But wouldn't that be "Pray for Spray"? Or with the right animals it might even become "Spray and Prey".


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 27, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



midluk said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Or if taking pictures of a skunk, pray for no spray.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 27, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Probably because there are a lot more subjective factors than contrast and sharpness.
> ...



Others are chiming in but I posted a woodpecker shot where he opened his mouth and used his very unique tongue to clean his upper mandible. The other shots were in focus and differ only slightly except for the tongue. 

Another sequence has birds fighting in the air. Now if they are out of focus badly an algorithm could could certainly dispense with those but the poses that are sharp all have different more/less desirable visual characteristics - lighting, angle, pose etc.

Jack


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 27, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...



Your description of the woodpecker...Ok, this is a family forum.

I have to chuckle every time I read the OP's title for this thread. Funniest of 2017 so far.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 27, 2017)

I can understand getting caught up in the hype. There are some very compelling advantages to a camera like this, when it is perfected. Two I particularly like are the full AF point spread and the quietness.

I wouldn't say thank you for the small size when using big lenses.

Jack


----------



## slclick (Apr 27, 2017)

Yep, I sure walked right into that one. Thinking in my little box I guess. Thanks for the chuckle everyone.


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 28, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



slclick said:


> Spray and pray in landscape/static shots? Help me out with that one.



If you are referring to my posting... then you might have misunderstood it. This is not a "spray n pray" (which is something completely different). I'm doing bursts of images in landscape photography for the sake of image stacking to lower the noise when needed (and especially when I don't have a tripod with me). 

And about the Sony A9... I really appreciate it, because something like that might push competition a bit further and that's always a good thing for all of us. Looking forward to Canon's first FF MILC though (as Sony is no option for me b/c of poor lens selection - which might change sooner or later). I wonder if it really happens sometime in 2018/19, or if Canon will stay in the APS-C field with their M series... What do you guys think?


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 28, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



privatebydesign said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Spray and pray in landscape/static shots? Help me out with that one.
> ...



Well put. Now imagine a camera like that doing a *burst of 200 images in 2 seconds at 100 megapixels and combining it into one picture*. When finished, it will delete the 200 image-files and only save the stacked one at full resolution. By doing so, you wouldn't even have a problem with space on your memory card! Even if you'd shoot at ISO 102400, there would be almost zero noise left while details stay perfectly, except for eventual banding. Though I wonder when there will be a camera which does image stacking (on demand) in-camera - AND all the aligning work. Of course this is only applicable for mostly static shots. It should be possible today, but I think only cameras with processing power like the 1DX(2) might be able to do that in a reasonable amount of time - but I guess even that camera would still need a minute or two for proper aligning and stacking only a few images.

Heck, even a smartphone could do that stuff internally (which would basically eradicate almost all of the noise without loosing ANY details). I think it's just a matter of time until we see that tech properly implemented and functioning at good speed, easily usable for everyone.

btw; I think the EOS M10 for example does this in a limited fashion, when shooting in nightscape burst mode (3 shots combined into one picture). Very handy feature. 

The EOS 6D also has a feature called multi-shot NR, but it does only stack the images, not align them. So it's use is very limited when you don't have a tripod with you.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 28, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



Crosswind said:


> Heck, even a smartphone could do that stuff internally (which would basically eradicate almost all of the noise without loosing ANY details). I think it's just a matter of time until we see that tech properly implemented and functioning at good speed, easily usable for everyone.



Phones will never overcome the physics of small sensors, principally a lack of wide apertures.


----------



## Hflm (Apr 28, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> I can understand getting caught up in the hype. There are some very compelling advantages to a camera like this, when it is perfected. Two I particularly like are the full AF point spread and the quietness.
> 
> I wouldn't say thank you for the small size when using big lenses.
> 
> Jack


They still state that banding under fluorescent light is possible with silent shutter (Max Yuryev and Sony rep, discussion on sonyalpharumors). I had this issue with the A7rii in most churches, the only place I needed it during weddings. If this turns still out to be a problem, then the whole camera is much less interesting to me, as I don't see many advantages over our A7riis and 5divs.


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 28, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Phones will never overcome the physics of small sensors, principally a lack of wide apertures.



That's true! I just wish they would have an option to completely disable the ugly internal sharpening... for post-processing.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Apr 30, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Another sequence has birds fighting in the air. Now if they are out of focus badly an algorithm could could certainly dispense with those but the poses that are sharp all have different more/less desirable visual characteristics - lighting, angle, pose etc.



Yep. This one was an example of "spray and have your prayers answered", but on IQ grounds alone it would have been a reject. Some might say it still is ;-)







I also have a ton of shots like the coastal landscape one posted by Don Haines further above - pray for spray?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 30, 2017)

Steve, I would have post traumatic stress disorder after that one! However, in my few years at this revived hobby I'm finding that the unusual/unbelievable happens more often than one might think, so maybe there is hope for a repeat. 

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 30, 2017)

Regarding the OP it's like they say, the fine print is going to be where the problems reside. 

Every time I look closely at photos of this "tiny" camera I think of gripping it and trying not to threaten it with destruction while using my 400 DO. That's close to how I now feel about the 6D where for me one finger really has nothing to grip. Many true fans/ potential customers are are expressing similar in their comments and it brings back memories of the CR debates regarding the wonderful small size.

Maybe the added grip will alleviate this.

Jack


----------



## LonelyBoy (Apr 30, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



neuroanatomist said:


> Or if taking pictures of a skunk, pray for no spray.



Once, when I was young and dumb(er), we tried to coax a skunk into the physics building at school. We didn't quite succeed, but didn't get sprayed. Amazingly.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 30, 2017)

*Re: Burst shooting for landscape...umm*



LonelyBoy said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Or if taking pictures of a skunk, pray for no spray.
> ...


Older, but not wiser.....


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 30, 2017)

Sony A9 a skunk? 

When I was 16 out hunting in the bush in late fall upon return to the station wagon and not far down the road was a road-kill skunk. Into taxidermy at that time, I wanted to skin that guy but the smell was .... I held my breath and heaved him into the open back and drove home with the windows down and the heater fan on full. Now ... when I got home and proceeded to find a place for him in the garage ... let's just say two parents were much displeased.

Never the less, the skunk got skinned and tanned! 

Jack


----------



## Rockskipper (May 13, 2017)

I have a fantastic photo of a skunk spraying inside the house just as I opened the door to take a photo of it. The photo actually shows the spray arcing out of its tailend into the house. It missed me, but the house stank for weeks. Nothing takes skunk smell out of tile grouting, I found out. I thought it was turned the other way, but found out different.

Sorry for the derail. It was taken with a ff Canon, not a ML Sony. There, we're back on track.


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 13, 2017)

Where's the photo?!

Jack


----------



## canon1dxman (May 13, 2017)

On a business trip in Canada, we were being taken to a fancy restaurant in the middle of nowhere. Host slammed on the brakes and swerved violently. "What was that?" 
She replied...."Skunk. NEVER run over one or you won't want to drive the car for weeks!" 

I had a play with the A9 a couple of weeks back at a Park Cameras wildlife event in UK. Loved the silent shutter, hated the ergonomics but I can see the appeal to those with smaller hands. Beautifully built and the rep claimed (and seemed genuine!!) that real world battery life was way better than published. We shall see.


----------



## YuengLinger (May 13, 2017)

Yes, just like Sony's TV's were such "killers" that they couldn't compete against Samsung.

And these innovators never saw digital replacing cassettes for personal listening devices.

Great laptops, VAIO's, but, of course, who could foresee Apple's revival or PC's becoming commodities?

Don't bring up anything as ancient as the Betamax vs VHS debacle. 

Or Blu-ray? Right, they "won" over HD DVD, but ten years on, people still prefer DVD. No money there for Sony.

Nobody fumbles with good products like Sony.

Anybody who wants to gamble thousands of dollars on Sony gear is welcome to get on the bus with 'em.


----------



## Rockskipper (May 14, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Where's the photo?!
> 
> Jack



I've tried to upload photos a couple of times, but I think I may be too new, as the forum won't let me.


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 14, 2017)

Rockskipper said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Where's the photo?!
> ...



You may be right. Make sure you stick with us cause I want to see that photo. 

Jack


----------



## lion rock (May 14, 2017)

Rockskipper,
You should be able to upload even if it was your first post, ever.
Your file size must be kept low; I've mostly posted photos that are 2048 px at the widest just to ensure file size is not over the limit set by CR.
There should be a guide line you can find on CR for restrictions.
Keep trying.
-r


----------



## roast_pigeon (May 14, 2017)

Hi All,
I used to be a Nikon man back in the 80’s. Due to some strange course of events, I got some reimbursement money from my insurance company which I used to buy a T6/1200D with kit lenses 35-55mm USM and 70-300mm USM. It was a good camera, although not on professional level. I thoroughly enjoyed it and it reignited my interest in taking photos. After a year, I bought an 80D when it was released here in Oceania/Asia. The 80D is a great camera. I took it travelling and going to family events. Truly, it is fantastic camera. I have so much joy using and learning about its capabilities, although it does no 4K videos. It got me to acquire the Plastic Fantastic 50mm f1.8 STM and a 50-250mm IS STM.
Right now I am thinking of expanding my lenses collection. I have come across the Sigma and Tamron new releases. They are impressive. They can be used in APS-C cameras with great results, but as they are built for full frame DSLRs, getting a full frame seems a good way to unlock the best these lenses can offer. I have been thinking of the possibility of a 90D or a 6D Mark II. But now Sony A9 seems to have stir the pot that I am wondering if DSLRs, though not going to disappear immediately, are going to gradually fade away. Wouldn’t it be better to wait and see if Canon’s answer to Sony A9 challenge will cause Canon to produce new lenses in EF-M mount only? Although adapters are available, but is Canon going to walk away from the EF mount legacy? What about the EF-S mount cameras? Ok, who says EF-M is Canon’s only future?
I would like your opinions. Just one last thing, yes, the technology can shift to mirrorless completely, but it is not going to chip off the joy one can have from DLSRs for amateurs like me.


----------



## Sporgon (May 14, 2017)

roast_pigeon said:


> I have been thinking of the possibility of a 90D or a 6D Mark II. But now Sony A9 seems to have stir the pot



Quite some difference in price ........


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 14, 2017)

YuengLinger said:


> Yes, just like Sony's TV's were such "killers" that they couldn't compete against Samsung.
> 
> And these innovators never saw digital replacing cassettes for personal listening devices.
> 
> ...



I still have top of the line Sony stereo equipment from the 80's. If I could afford it back then, it would be Sony. I must say I don't feel that way at all today. I wouldn't risk a marriage to Sony photographic equipment involving many thousands of dollars. Never.

Jack


----------



## Rockskipper (May 14, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Rockskipper said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...



I'll try again.

As for not buying a DSLR because someday mirrorless is going to take over, all I can say is it's going to be awhile. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a DSLR and good glass now. Until the focus, battery, and blackout problems can be fixed, I'm sticking with a DSLR as my main camera, and I do own a M5. You can buy an adapter for EF lenses. And in my book nothing matches an optical viewfinder. An EVF just isn't close.

I was going to buy a GoPro a few years ago and after tons of research ended up buying the equiv in the Sony brand, which ended up being a lot better camera. We all know GoPro's starting to tank, but I don't think it's from competition with Sony.


----------



## roast_pigeon (May 15, 2017)

Sporgon said:


> roast_pigeon said:
> 
> 
> > I have been thinking of the possibility of a 90D or a 6D Mark II. But now Sony A9 seems to have stir the pot
> ...



True, at least $1,000 difference. Assuming 90D will have 4K video (better codec than in 5D-IV) and upgrades from 80D, to me it would still not be a good level-up for my purposes. I would spend an extra $1,000 to go full-frame by getting the entry-level 6D-II. Make sense?

My biggest concern is if Canon goes full-frame mirror-less, will the current EF/EF-S lenses and APS-C cameras become "things-of-2010's"?

Cheers


----------



## deleteme (May 17, 2017)

At the end of the day the Canon (and Nikon) competitors are the more mature products. 
Sony has improved dramatically in a short time but still lags in a few areas.

At the moment, as much as I love ML, I find that they just cannot focus well in low light. As that is so much of my work they are a no-go for me.


----------



## hmatthes (May 19, 2017)

*My biggest concern is if Canon goes full-frame mirror-less, will the current EF/EF-S lenses and APS-C cameras become "things-of-2010's"?*
The reason FF cameras do not support EF-S lenses is that their mirror is longer than the APSc's counterpart... 
Mirrorless cameras often support other lenses with deeper rear elements. Smart ones sense the lens type and will crop accordingly.
What a great idea! The Canon FF mirrorless with EF mount will support all our L glass and could very well support the EF-S lenses as well.
Personally, I sold all my EF-S to financially help my migration back to full frame glass.


----------



## pokerz (May 20, 2017)

hmatthes said:


> *My biggest concern is if Canon goes full-frame mirror-less, will the current EF/EF-S lenses and APS-C cameras become "things-of-2010's"?*
> The reason FF cameras do not support EF-S lenses is that their mirror is longer than the APSc's counterpart...
> Mirrorless cameras often support other lenses with deeper rear elements. Smart ones sense the lens type and will crop accordingly.
> What a great idea! The Canon FF mirrorless with EF mount will support all our L glass and could very well support the EF-S lenses as well.
> Personally, I sold all my EF-S to financially help my migration back to full frame glass.


Eosm works best with STM motors, get prepared to upgrade all EF lens to STM version


----------



## SteveM (May 20, 2017)

Check out the eye AF on the Sony A9 in this video I found on slr lounge:

https://www.slrlounge.com/sony-a9-eye-af-tracks-like-a-predator-see-it-in-action/

Don't know the value of this in 'the field' for sport or bif but it is nevertheless seriously impressive


----------



## BillB (May 20, 2017)

Eosm works best with STM motors, get prepared to upgrade all EF lens to STM version
[/quote]


STM may be good for video because it is quiet. Why would USM be a problem with mirrorless? My USM lenses seem to work fine with Live View autofocus.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 20, 2017)

BillB said:


> Eosm works best with STM motors, get prepared to upgrade all EF lens to STM version




STM may be good for video because it is quiet. Why would USM be a problem with mirrorless? My USM lenses seem to work fine with Live View autofocus.
[/quote]

Yeah, I think people went from "STM is good for video because of being quiet and smooth, and DPAF is good for video because of quick LV AF" to "STM and DPAF only work best together, and shouldn't be mixed with PDAF and USM". I swear I got to watch it unfolding over the past few years.


----------



## rrcphoto (May 22, 2017)

pokerz said:


> hmatthes said:
> 
> 
> > *My biggest concern is if Canon goes full-frame mirror-less, will the current EF/EF-S lenses and APS-C cameras become "things-of-2010's"?*
> ...



not really true with the M5/M6.


----------



## barton springs (May 22, 2017)

benkam said:


> 20 fps with 24MP sensor
> blackout-free EVF
> fully silent, vibration-free operation
> 5-axis in-body IS
> ...



For a fair comparison to 1DXM2 add a grip, more batteries. A9 on B/H $5,158 vs 1DXM2 $5,999 also B/H

Rick
Austin, TX
Pro Action Photographer since 2002


----------



## privatebydesign (May 22, 2017)

barton springs said:


> benkam said:
> 
> 
> > 20 fps with 24MP sensor
> ...



http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=32421.msg661247#msg661247



"But you can get a new 1DX MkII and 100-400 for $6,800, a Sony A9 and 100-400 is going to cost you $7,750 with grip and comparable battery power. By any measure the Sony is overpriced.

That is not to say I don't see a lot of interest in features like silent shooting, no blackout time, shutter speed range, etc etc, but how anybody can start leveling the Sony against the Canon 1DX MkII and Nikon D5 at this time is laughable. Next generation or two if they dig deep and get the lenses, flashes, and service/support, otherwise the idea of making serious inroads into that 1DX MkII/D5 market is simply not happening."

Further, despite several years of debunking any Canon release because of 'unusable DR' if early test results hold up it appears that the 1DX MkII has the best DR of the three blue ribbon action cameras.


----------



## Mikehit (May 22, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Further, despite several years of debunking any Canon release because of 'unusable DR' if early test results hold up it appears that the 1DX MkII has the best DR of the three blue ribbon action cameras.



Yup. Ask douglaurent. He agrees.


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 24, 2017)

Compromises are inevitable and now the reviews are beginning to come. DSLR killer? We will now get to see the fine print. I watched the "love-in" by B&H last night and one thing stuck out, namely how a female hand was practically wrapped around the camera. That I would not want with a long lens.

http://blog.planet5d.com/2017/05/sony-a9-hands-on-review-and-problems-with-dynamic-range-so-it-isnt-the-perfect-camera-after-all/

Jack


----------



## Sporgon (May 24, 2017)

I had a good laugh at this given how the Sony sensors had been the Holy Grail of low ISO DR, and how incredibly important to _everyone_ this was. And if you didn't know how important this was to you then you were clearly in need of enlightenment, and of course there were quite a few Evangelists out there who were prepared to do that for you. 

So it's adding a fair amount of read noise eh ? Maybe we have a Sony with good highlight headroom then !


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 24, 2017)

Sporgon said:


> I had a good laugh at this given how the Sony sensors had been the Holy Grail of low ISO DR, and how incredibly important to _everyone_ this was. And if you didn't know how important this was to you then you were clearly in need of enlightenment, and of course there were quite a few Evangelists out there who were prepared to do that for you.



12 stops of low ISO DR for the a9, 13.5 stops for the 1D X II. I wonder why Rishi isn't comparing the a9 to it's "_best_-performing peers" (which is how he referred to the a7RII in the 1D X II testing)? :


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 24, 2017)

Here we go! 

When will Rishi appear? 

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 24, 2017)

Sporgon said:


> I had a good laugh at this given how the Sony sensors had been the Holy Grail of low ISO DR, and how incredibly important to _everyone_ this was. And if you didn't know how important this was to you then you were clearly in need of enlightenment, and of course there were quite a few Evangelists out there who were prepared to do that for you.
> 
> So it's adding a fair amount of read noise eh ? Maybe we have a Sony with good highlight headroom then !



It's hard to believe how certain personalities actually can't perceive this even though it's so blatantly obvious. This shifting of perspective back and forth depending on the manufacturer is close to an art form.

Jack


----------



## Sporgon (May 24, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> 12 stops of low ISO DR for the a9,



12 stops ?! Phaa, you'll never produce a useable image larger than 10x8 :-X


----------



## Sporgon (May 24, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > I had a good laugh at this given how the Sony sensors had been the Holy Grail of low ISO DR, and how incredibly important to _everyone_ this was. And if you didn't know how important this was to you then you were clearly in need of enlightenment, and of course there were quite a few Evangelists out there who were prepared to do that for you.
> ...



I used to love a good DR scrap Jack, it's such a shame that Canon have spoilt all the fun by going to on-chip ADC. To be fair to them they did keep the DR under the Sony level so we could still have a good fight about it but no one seems that bothered now. 

You are quite right, the lengths that some went to in producing connived situations in order to demonstrate the important of that extra stop of shadow lift ( often at the expense of highlight head room but we won't go into that) was indeed an art form, and I really miss it :'(


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 25, 2017)

And maybe, just maybe, people will stop declaring Canon "*******" because of comparing a currently-available camera to the hopes and dreams of a spec sheet? No, that would be too sensible.


----------



## Jaysheldon (May 26, 2017)

To add to this debate, I note this article on DPReview on the potential problems Canon (and Nikon) face when considering going to mirrorless -- lens compatibility. The article argues that current DSLR lenses are great for phase detection AF systems, but are not for made for the contrast detection systems used in mirrorless cameras. 
"It's noticeable, for instance, that Sony makes very little use of ring-type focus motors in the lenses its developing for the E-mount, despite having experience of using them for its DSLR A-mount," the author says.
I have no idea whether this is true or not, but it may explain in part why Canon and Nikon aren't rushing to mirrorless FF cameras, yet. Do you want Canon to have another line of lenses -- or have to buy EF-M lenses for best performance -- or do you want your current lenses to be fully compatible with a Canon FF mirrorless camera?

https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/5187078750/maintaining-a-legacy-or-building-for-mirrorless-who-benefits


----------



## privatebydesign (May 26, 2017)

Sporgon said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



Yes making Rishi jump through hoops to try to defend the indefensible lies he peddled was fun for a while. Amazing how many he jumped through to avoid posting the one image he knew was a complete misrepresentation, kinda miss him along with dilbert and a few others, some interesting and some not so much....


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 26, 2017)

Interesting, thanks.

Jack


----------



## Hillsilly (May 26, 2017)

If Sony sensors have such great DR, how come they can't be used successfully for astrophotography? (And to say it is not the sensor, but the software, kind of misses the point.)


----------



## dak723 (May 26, 2017)

Jaysheldon said:


> To add to this debate, I note this article on DPReview on the potential problems Canon (and Nikon) face when considering going to mirrorless -- lens compatibility. The article argues that current DSLR lenses are great for phase detection AF systems, but are not for made for the contrast detection systems used in mirrorless cameras.
> "It's noticeable, for instance, that Sony makes very little use of ring-type focus motors in the lenses its developing for the E-mount, despite having experience of using them for its DSLR A-mount," the author says.
> I have no idea whether this is true or not, but it may explain in part why Canon and Nikon aren't rushing to mirrorless FF cameras, yet. Do you want Canon to have another line of lenses -- or have to buy EF-M lenses for best performance -- or do you want your current lenses to be fully compatible with a Canon FF mirrorless camera?
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/5187078750/maintaining-a-legacy-or-building-for-mirrorless-who-benefits



Agree. The same article is linked in the Eos-M sub-forum. What I said there was:

The article brings up some good points regarding using EF lenses on mirrorless. It also may explain why Canon (and Nikon) have not jumped into the FF mirrorless arena yet. Rather than being too conservative, or too slow, or whatever term the usual critics like to use, Canon has a problem that Sony did not have; how to create a FF mirrorless camera that maintains a high level of AF for its existing EF lenses. Sony did not have an existing lens lineup anything like Canon does nor as many users that would be upset at the slower AF speeds when using legacy glass on their new mirrorless offerings. Olympus, while not FF, had many upset users who couldn't use their 4/3rds glass on their new Micro 4/3rds due to slow AF. They tried - somewhat successfully - to allow users to still use their 4/3rds glass on the new E-M1, but it was still slower in the AF department than native lenses. Canon, I would think, wants a seamless transition to mirrorless for those using EF lenses (whether they keep the existing mount or will supply an adapter), so they wait until they can get it right without losing AF speed.


----------



## rrcphoto (May 26, 2017)

Jaysheldon said:


> To add to this debate, I note this article on DPReview on the potential problems Canon (and Nikon) face when considering going to mirrorless -- lens compatibility. The article argues that current DSLR lenses are great for phase detection AF systems, but are not for made for the contrast detection systems used in mirrorless cameras.
> "It's noticeable, for instance, that Sony makes very little use of ring-type focus motors in the lenses its developing for the E-mount, despite having experience of using them for its DSLR A-mount," the author says.
> I have no idea whether this is true or not, but it may explain in part why Canon and Nikon aren't rushing to mirrorless FF cameras, yet. Do you want Canon to have another line of lenses -- or have to buy EF-M lenses for best performance -- or do you want your current lenses to be fully compatible with a Canon FF mirrorless camera?
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/5187078750/maintaining-a-legacy-or-building-for-mirrorless-who-benefits



it was full of crap fearmongering especially when it comes to canon's lenses and their DPAF sensors.


----------



## Aussie shooter (May 29, 2017)

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned this but some reviews coming out about the A9 overheating quickly and shutting down. Theres a surprise. Canon is definitely ******* if it keeps producing reliable cameras.


----------



## Darkly (May 29, 2017)

Many arguments here are missing a major point, and that is Sony's proven ability to enter a given field and dominate it before the well-established players can play catchup. Look at the PlayStation. Sony wanted a slice of the videogame market that was pretty much owned by Sega and Nintendo, and after a failed partnership with Nintendo they entered the market alone with a piece of hardware that was significantly more powerful than competitors' offerings, bolstered by some very savvy marketing.

The important thing is the established players didn't take Sony seriously. After dominating the market for a number of years between them, Nintendo were sidelined (and largely kept afloat by their GameBoy offerings) while Sega pretty much threw in the towel.

Now, while mirrorless may represent a small proportion of camera sales _right now_, this will change as Sony get their act together with user interface design and handling. The A7R II already has a serious reputation for both image quality and AF accuracy, and I know several people who've ditched their Canon dSLRs to go down the Sony/Metabones route. The A7R's failings essentially come down to ergonomics but the fundamental imaging technology is already in place, and the A7R's word-of-mouth reputation is a powerful thing.

Most folks here are obviously Canon users, many with a system of lenses and accessories that will keep them tied to the brand. However, if you're new to photography what reasons are there for choosing Canon? Or Nikon? Or Sony? They all have merits but Sony's reputation is in the ascendant, particularly with relation to imaging sensor technologies. Nikon made a very smart move by partnering with Sony, leveraging Sony's R&D and their quick turnaround on silicon fabrication. Canon need to up their game significantly before they lose their reputation as one of the big two go-to, no-brainer camera manufacturers. Anyone citing figures showing mirrorless sytems as having a small market share, let alone Sony's modest market share would do well to look at other incumbent giants who lost their way through complacency. Remember Nokia? They could do no wrong until a lean and hungry Samsung came along and innovated their way to the top (even if the they were blatantly taking design cues from Jony Ives). 

So, I think Canon either need to follow the same technological direction as Sony/Nikon to achieve similar noise and dynamic range figures, or (possibly controversial but still interesting) attempt to differentiate themselves by buying or licensing technology from Foveon. Sigma made a dog's dinner of the technology with poor camera design but the end results were undeniably good, potentially miles ahead of conventional sensors equipped with Bayer filters. Just imagine Canon optics and ergonomics mated with a Bayer-free sensor, a sensor where every photosite captures full RGB information. That could be something special indeed. Foveon sensor tech offers a greater technological step forward than on-die A/D convertors and buffer memory etc. that are giving Sony the current edge.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (May 29, 2017)

> Canon need to up their game significantly before they lose their reputation as one of the big two go-to, no-brainer camera manufacturers.



Been hearing the same thing for_ years_, Darkly - when does this happen?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (May 29, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> Either way I agree, the difference is negligible.



Yep:


----------



## BillB (May 29, 2017)

Darkly said:


> Many arguments here are missing a major point, and that is Sony's proven ability to enter a given field and dominate it before the well-established players can play catchup. Look at the PlayStation. Sony wanted a slice of the videogame market that was pretty much owned by Sega and Nintendo, and after a failed partnership with Nintendo they entered the market alone with a piece of hardware that was significantly more powerful than competitors' offerings, bolstered by some very savvy marketing.
> 
> The important thing is the established players didn't take Sony seriously. After dominating the market for a number of years between them, Nintendo were sidelined (and largely kept afloat by their GameBoy offerings) while Sega pretty much threw in the towel.
> 
> ...



There are a lot of pieces to this puzzle. Sony also has a history of throwing in the towel on new technologies, along with all the companies you mentioned. One of the big unknowns is what kind of money Sony is making in the photography business. Do they have a workable strategy for making some money, or are they just pumping stuff out and hoping something good will happen? How big will Sony be willing to play in this game?

Another piece of the puzzle is what kind of an edge Sony has in sensor technology at this point. Canon is switching to dual pixel technology with ADC on board the sensor which gets them closer to Sony sensor IQ standards, maybe close enough to be good enough. Dual pixel technology gives Canon interesting autofocus capabilities as well, which may give them some strength in the video end of things.

Then there is the APS-C interchangeable lens camera market, where commitments to camera systems start to get serious. Canon clearly has a serious commitment in this market, and how is Sony going to play in this game?

Another piece


----------



## Mikehit (May 29, 2017)

Darkly said:


> Many arguments here are missing a major point, and that is Sony's proven ability to enter a given field and dominate it before the well-established players can play catchup. Look at the PlayStation. Sony wanted a slice of the videogame market that was pretty much owned by Sega and Nintendo, and after a failed partnership with Nintendo they entered the market alone with a piece of hardware that was significantly more powerful than competitors' offerings, bolstered by some very savvy marketing.



Betamax, memory stick micro card, DAT, minidisc...



Darkly said:


> Nikon made a very smart move by partnering with Sony, leveraging Sony's R&D and their quick turnaround on silicon fabrication.


So why did Nikon stop using Sony sensors?



Darkly said:


> The A7R's failings essentially come down to ergonomics but the fundamental imaging technology is already in place, and the A7R's word-of-mouth reputation is a powerful thing.


And part of the reputation is that Sony is poor when it comes to ergonomics. And that is why a significant number of Sony converts end up gong back to Canon/Nikon, or at the very least own both for different uses.
Doesn't it concern you that even after all this time Sony are STILL getting the ergonomics wrong? People don't buy a sensor, they buy a functional camera that makes taking pictures easy, in a body that they enjoy using. So many Canon-is-******* merchants fail miserably to understand that (including yourself it seems). 
To be blunt, any Canon/Nikon/Sony camera will give images that will satisfy a vast majority of users for all they photos. The difference is then down to reputation and how they enjoy using the camera - and that is where Sony often falls down. 




Darkly said:


> So, I think Canon either need to follow the same technological direction as Sony/Nikon to achieve similar noise and dynamic range figures,



They're pretty close. 
You are making the classic error of saying Canon have to do it NOW. Fact is, Sony are ahead of the market. By the time the market really starts moving, Canon will be equal on technology, probably delivering what the market wants. 



Darkly said:


> a (possibly controversial but still interesting) attempt to differentiate themselves by buying or licensing technology from Foveon. Sigma made a dog's dinner of the technology with poor camera design but the end results were undeniably good, potentially miles ahead of conventional sensors equipped with Bayer filters. Just imagine Canon optics and ergonomics mated with a Bayer-free sensor, a sensor where every photosite captures full RGB information. That could be something special indeed. Foveon sensor tech offers a greater technological step forward than on-die A/D convertors and buffer memory etc. that are giving Sony the current edge.


Sigma has issues beyond camera technology - the Foveon sensors as they stand have limitations in general compared to Bayer technology. 


The title of this thread is how canon 'must hurry up'. You, and almost everyone else who holds this view, have failed completely to explain why they must hurry up. Canon has closed the gap significantly in the last 2 years, and it seems with every new generation Canon get closer but Sony are making incremental changes. 
Unless there is a significant leap in sensor technology I can't see how Sony can make a jump that will widen the gap again. And if it needs a leap in technology I bet Canon is as well placed as Sony is to develop it. 

Yes, Canon need to develop more but the absolute need to catch up with Sony in the next year (or even three years) is vastly overplayed.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (May 29, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Canon has closed the gap significantly in the last 2 years



And - let's be clear - it's only a "gap" (if you wish to acknowledge it as such - some of us don't, as it impinges on our photography in no meaningful way) of a very specific nature; and Real-World relevant only to a relatively small subset of the photographic community...


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 29, 2017)

Darkly said:


> Many arguments here are missing a major point, and that is Sony's proven ability to enter a given field and dominate it before the well-established players can play catchup. Look at the PlayStation.



Look at Vaio. How'd that work out for Sony?




Darkly said:


> Now, while mirrorless may represent a small proportion of camera sales _right now_, this will change as Sony get their act together with user interface design and handling.



Will it? With no evidence to back up such a claim, it's merely an opinion. 




Darkly said:


> However, if you're new to photography what reasons are there for choosing Canon? Or Nikon? Or Sony? They all have merits but Sony's reputation is in the ascendant, particularly with relation to imaging sensor technologies.



Yet, in spite of that 'ascendent' reputation, Canon continues to gain market share while Sony loses it. 




Darkly said:


> Canon need to up their game significantly before they lose their reputation as one of the big two go-to, no-brainer camera manufacturers. Anyone citing figures showing mirrorless sytems as having a small market share, let alone Sony's modest market share would do well to look at other incumbent giants who lost their way through complacency. Remember Nokia? They could do no wrong until a lean and hungry Samsung came along and innovated their way to the top (even if the they were blatantly taking design cues from Jony Ives).



Anyone citing Nokia would do well to look at the many examples of incumbent giants who remain the leaders of their markets. Nokia is an example of what _can_ happen, not a typical example of what usually does happen. In particular, Nokia is an example of a company failing to anticipate and react to a paradigm shift. The important difference in the situation under discussion here is that no paradigm shift is occurring for the ILC market. Film to digital was a paradigm shift. How did Canon handle that one?




Darkly said:


> So, I think Canon either need to follow the same technological direction as Sony/Nikon to achieve similar noise and dynamic range figures



So, Canon should follow the same technological direction as Sony'a a9 and Nikon's D5, both of which have more low ISO noise and thus less DR than their predecessor? The a9 is billed as a 'pro' camera and yet it has over a stop less low ISO DR than the 1D X II. Why, exactly, should Canon follow suit?


TLR — YAPODFC.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (May 29, 2017)

Darkly said:


> Nikon made a very smart move by partnering with Sony, leveraging Sony's R&D and their quick turnaround on silicon fabrication.


Primarily because Nikon's own sensors (and I'm speaking as someone whose ownership of more than one Nikon D200 is why I'm a Canon shooter) were utter, _utter_ crap...


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 29, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Darkly said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon made a very smart move by partnering with Sony, leveraging Sony's R&D and their quick turnaround on silicon fabrication.
> ...



??

They didn't. Sony may not be the exclusive supplier of sensors for Nikon SLRs (Toshiba for example supplied them for the D7100 and D7200, but of course Sony owns Toshiba's sensor business now), but they remain a (the?) primary one.


----------



## K (Jun 1, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Darkly said:
> 
> 
> > Many arguments here are missing a major point, and that is Sony's proven ability to enter a given field and dominate it before the well-established players can play catchup. Look at the PlayStation.
> ...




I can't speak for this user, but the way I read that says it is very possible Sony can take over this market and become the leader, not that it is guaranteed to. I didn't see an argument that Sony is unstoppable. So not sure why you pointed out a failure, when all companies have failures at times. 



> Darkly said:
> 
> 
> > Now, while mirrorless may represent a small proportion of camera sales _right now_, this will change as Sony get their act together with user interface design and handling.
> ...




Why are you expecting conclusive evidence to prove a prediction? You're very oppositional I think for the sake of just arguing with people.

Perhaps one can look at a trend and speculate. Sony is looking to make money. They keep building better and better mirrorless bodies and introducing more lenses in the FF realm. They are obviously trying to move into this market. If they are trying to do that, it isn't unreasonable to predict that they'll make improvements to appeal to more users and gain more market share.






Darkly said:


> However, if you're new to photography what reasons are there for choosing Canon? Or Nikon? Or Sony? They all have merits but Sony's reputation is in the ascendant, particularly with relation to imaging sensor technologies.



New or not, there's more to photography than a sensor. Sony can have the greatest sensor on Earth, the camera handles like a piece of crap. It literally has no grip. You are holding on to the end of a minimalist body. 

Yes, there will be many thousands of pros who will skip a superior sensor that offers them no practical advantage, for a camera that actually has handling that allows them to get work done. 

Grip > Sensor.

As I've written about in the past, try holding and wielding a camera for 8 hours or more in a day - active shooting. Being able to comfortably wrap your hand around a grip is of big value. And given that Canon and Nikon offer up plenty of IQ for what many need, the priority then shifts to other factors.

For mirrorless to really move into DSLR, I said in another post that there will need to be mirrorless bodies the size of 5D4 w/ battery grip, or 1DX2 sized. 

Think of it this way, you could build a Honda Civic into the greatest car in the World - it won't matter, as there will always be a market for a larger, more comfortable vehicle even though it might be inferior in features.

Battery is another factor. Before mirrorless can do anything serious - they have to get the battery life issue under control. Right now, their battery life even at the best of the best is pathetic compared to DSLR.




Darkly said:


> Canon need to up their game significantly before they lose their reputation as one of the big two go-to, no-brainer camera manufacturers. Anyone citing figures showing mirrorless sytems as having a small market share, let alone Sony's modest market share would do well to look at other incumbent giants who lost their way through complacency. Remember Nokia? They could do no wrong until a lean and hungry Samsung came along and innovated their way to the top (even if the they were blatantly taking design cues from Jony Ives).



Reputation. 

Canon's reputation among pros is still the best. Canon's reputation among hobbyists and amateurs is fading. One group does work with cameras. The other doesn't mind the various shortcomings of Sony, and values all-out sensor performance.




> Darkly said:
> 
> 
> > So, I think Canon either need to follow the same technological direction as Sony/Nikon to achieve similar noise and dynamic range figures
> ...




Nikon took a step back on DR for sure. They realized, and rightly so, that high ISO performance is of more value in the these bodies than the silliness of maxing out the DR at ISO 100.

Speaking of which. I remember countless, endless threads where people told us that DR doesn't come at the expense of ISO. Oh really? What are the SoNikonian pseudo-electrical engineers saying now about the D5? Shouldn't the D5 be a high ISO beast and still crank out the big DR? 

Obviously, sensor design can be TUNED for an expected result.

Looking at the various tests and charts, the D5 gives up low ISO performance, to gain it at high ISO's. It follow more of a Canon style approach of having a flatter graph to give the best results across a wide spectrum of ISO.

The mighty D810 is a turd at high ISO. But all we see and hear about from the Sony crew is how amazing underexposing a shot at ISO 64 by 5 stops allows excellent recovery. 

New school of photography. The ISO 64 underexpose by 5 stops method and recover in post. Look ma! I saved the highlights!

Even though my photos look flat, have no punch, with weaker colors and have an HDR'ish character to them.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 1, 2017)

The numbers don't really align with your theories, but what's new?

The loss of DR in the Nikon is much higher than the gain in ISO performance, the Sony A9 beats the 'tuned' D5 everywhere, the 1DX MkII does most places on the DR and ISO range too.

The simple fact is the 'tuning' went arwy and the D5 sensor is worse than the D4 sensor pretty much everywhere but for a 1/2 a stop at unusable ISO IQ ranges. I don't know anybody, even for newsprint, who is shooting regularly above 25,600 ISO for publication and actual image sales, that a camera has an advantage over that number that still isn't usable is pretty much irrelevant.

Besides, I don't believe it is the high ISO that creates the noise, I believe it is the fast frame readout that is the wall the high ISO and frame rate cameras are hitting.

Personally, as a primarily 100-1,600 ISO shooter, I am pretty happy that the Canon DR is the best of the bunch in that range, but ithe 1DX MkII, D5 and A9 are all within a stop of each other so nothing to get bent out of shape over nor to swap systems over.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 1, 2017)

The Bible foresaw the mirrorless-mirror debate and has the answer to darkly most specifically:

Corinthians 13:12 King James Version (KJV)

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2017)

AlanF said:


> The Bible foresaw the mirrorless-mirror debate and has the answer to darkly most specifically:
> 
> Corinthians 13:12 King James Version (KJV)
> 
> For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.



Sounds like a scathing smite of Sony's SLT cameras and Canon's Pellix series. 8)


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 1, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > The Bible foresaw the mirrorless-mirror debate and has the answer to darkly most specifically:
> ...



Oh, bible pellicle snap. Nice.

- A


----------



## K (Jun 1, 2017)

Sony A9 is not ready for prime time.

It's a very positive step forward for mirrorless, but mirrorless is still in its infancy.

Sony A9 is no threat to the 1DX2 because of -

Ergonomics, grip, controls
Canon's vast array of great white lenses.
Superior battery life
Ruggedness and surviveability in the environments where such pros actually operate
Extensive Canon network support of Pros

All this doesn't even begin to touch any matters of IQ, metering and how photos are taken. Nor any of the other pro features built into the 1DX2.

The Sony A9 though will be popular for those needing a completely silent shutter. I can see it being a good side camera for a wedding pro. Might be OK for some indoor sports where noise matters and distances are close. Maybe like billiards or something LOL.

High volume, all day shooters will not appreciate the lack of a grip and the awful battery life. Basically, serious pros.

Most of the people praising the Sony A9, have never held a 1DX2 in their hands. Let alone used one. And certainly have never been in a scenario where they can appreciate/need it.

This is why they spew the nonsense that the A9 is a 1DX2 competitor. It's laughable to say the least.


----------



## sanj (Jun 1, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> The numbers don't really align with your theories, but what's new?
> 
> The loss of DR in the Nikon is much higher than the gain in ISO performance, the Sony A9 beats the 'tuned' D5 everywhere, the 1DX MkII does most places on the DR and ISO range too.
> 
> ...



Can you explain pls. I want to learn this.


----------



## Jopa (Jun 4, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> The numbers don't really align with your theories, but what's new?
> 
> The loss of DR in the Nikon is much higher than the gain in ISO performance, the Sony A9 beats the 'tuned' D5 everywhere, the 1DX MkII does most places on the DR and ISO range too.
> 
> ...



I thought the A9 is a stop worse than the d5 in terms of DR?
I had no intention to buy an a9, but I was very curious to check out at least its AF. After reading the overheating reports, I'm not sure now if it's even worth trying? I'm in Texas, and 110F ambient in summer is nothing extraordinary here. I doubt the camera will survive it... The jello effect is a very minor concern, I'm not using panning often.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 4, 2017)

Jopa said:


> I thought the A9 is a stop worse than the d5 in terms of DR?



It "holds its own" (which for the Sony fanboys will be damning with faint praise):

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/29/sony-a9-versus-nikon-d5-canon-1d-x-ii-dynamic-range-tests/

As an aside, I'm enjoying the fact that at low ISO, the _80D_ bests the D5 for DR!


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Jun 6, 2017)

K said:


> Grip > Sensor.



Or in longhand: a comfortable, effective grip is more important than the last few percent of sensor performance - yes, yes, and yes again.



K said:


> As I've written about in the past, try holding and wielding a camera for 8 hours or more in a day - active shooting. Being able to comfortably wrap your hand around a grip is of big value. And given that Canon and Nikon offer up plenty of IQ for what many need, the priority then shifts to other factors.
> 
> For mirrorless to really move into DSLR, I said in another post that there will need to be mirrorless bodies the size of 5D4 w/ battery grip, or 1DX2 sized.



Film DSLRs had _slimmer, lighter _bodies, and I'd be very pleased to see a return to that, but there is more need than ever for the body to be large enough in the other dimensions.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 6, 2017)

Steve Balcombe said:


> Film DSLRs had _slimmer, lighter _bodies, and I'd be very pleased to see a return to that, but there is more need than ever for the body to be large enough in the other dimensions.



A _film DSLR?_ Surely you typed that in haste.

In defense of the weight, film cameras didn't exactly have to have a Fotomat booth on-board. : But I hear you, any reduction in weight should be welcomed. And Canon is doing that. Latest gen L lenses are lighter than the prior revisions, the 5D4 shed 150g from the weight of the 5D3, etc. 

But I don't think we'll ever see a 'Canon 5D Air' for a host of reasons:


Pros like the weight as a counterbalance to the big pro glass, which cannot reasonably get that much lighter given how much glass is required to support wide aperture use.


Such a product (an ultralight FF DSLR) would require a top to bottom redesign -- it's more than just swapping out steel/magnesium for carbon fiber outer components. That's a huge delta to their manufacturing processes, tooling, assembly, etc., let alone a huge step away from the reliability of how the cameras are currently being put together today.


I'm sure they've run the numbers on this, and either the amount of extra money / new customers they'd get for offering this would pale in comparison to the cost it would take to deliver. 

So I could see a one-foot-in-front-of-the-other approach to weight in which they shave 10% or so each generation. Maybe we'll see a carbon fiber body someday, but not a magically paper-weight sort of rig.

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 6, 2017)

Steve Balcombe said:


> Film DSLRs had _slimmer, lighter _bodies, and I'd be very pleased to see a return to that, but there is more need than ever for the body to be large enough in the other dimensions.


no they didn't. film cameras with AF/AE. modern ergonomics and built to support larger f2.8 glass weren't small.
the EOS-3 is bigger than the 5D Mark IV

EOS-3: 161 x 119.2 x 70.8mm
5D IV: 150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9 mm

if you remove the top plate LCD, touch buttons,etc,etc and turn the camera into the ergonomic nightmare of a rebel T6, then sure, you got a smaller film (or even digital camera) but seriously who the hell wants that anyways?


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 6, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Steve Balcombe said:
> 
> 
> > Film DSLRs had _slimmer, lighter _bodies, and I'd be very pleased to see a return to that, but there is more need than ever for the body to be large enough in the other dimensions.
> ...



One of the problems with going to lighter composite materials is heat dissipation.... With high burst rates and particularly with video, we have a "killer ap"


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Jun 7, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Steve Balcombe said:
> 
> 
> > Film DSLRs had _slimmer, lighter _bodies, and I'd be very pleased to see a return to that, but there is more need than ever for the body to be large enough in the other dimensions.
> ...



Yes 



ahsanford said:


> In defense of the weight, film cameras didn't exactly have to have a Fotomat booth on-board. : But I hear you, any reduction in weight should be welcomed. And Canon is doing that. Latest gen L lenses are lighter than the prior revisions, the 5D4 shed 150g from the weight of the 5D3, etc.
> 
> But I don't think we'll ever see a 'Canon 5D Air' for a host of reasons:
> 
> ...



Not sure about term "big pro glass" - two of my most frequently used lenses are a 500/4L IS II and a 100-400L II, which has nothing to do with being professional. The lenses I use for my professional work are a fraction of the size.



ahsanford said:


> Such a product (an ultralight FF DSLR) would require a top to bottom redesign -- it's more than just swapping out steel/magnesium for carbon fiber outer components. That's a huge delta to their manufacturing processes, tooling, assembly, etc., let alone a huge step away from the reliability of how the cameras are currently being put together today.



I think you've lost the context here - we're talking about a FF mirrorless to replace a DSLR, which would obviously be a new design from the ground up. Perhaps you wrote in haste? ;-)


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 9, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Sony is Sony. They excell at making products smaller, and have had success doing that. They seem slow to understand the camera market, first, they thought putting floppy disks into huge (relatively) point and shoot cameras would start a revolution, and a lot of them sold to consumers based on the Sony name. There were two big flaws.
> 
> 1. File compression resulted in poor images
> 2. The floppy disk drives were horribly failure prone, and usually died in a year or two, Sony wanted $300 to replace one.
> ...


You may want to test the G Master lenses. They are expensive but the are also very good. I'm just saying that because as renters we have to provide what the client wants and in motion picture the Sony A7S II is widely used in specialist situations.


----------



## rishi_sanyal (Sep 22, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > I had a good laugh at this given how the Sony sensors had been the Holy Grail of low ISO DR, and how incredibly important to _everyone_ this was. And if you didn't know how important this was to you then you were clearly in need of enlightenment, and of course there were quite a few Evangelists out there who were prepared to do that for you.
> ...



I did, 6 days before your post in fact: 

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7266455439/sony-a9-real-world-iso-invariance-and-dynamic-range

But I'm sure you'll find some way to suggest this piece was actually an ode to Sony in disguise. I look forward to seeing the convoluted logic you'll use to pull that one off.

Also, I see you've cleverly / deceivingly compared my _pixel-level_ DR estimate (24 MP) of the a9 to the _print normalized_ DR (8 MP) of the 1D X II. You wouldn't be trying to mislead our own friends here, would you?

You really think that's fair? Back when I published papers in scientific journals, I didn't plot comparisons on vastly differently scaled axes on the same graph without indicating the different scales, but maybe that's something your lab is used to? Does it help you get funding by faking your data? I'm genuinely curious.

The theoretical max pixel-level DR of a 12-bit ADC (what I suspected the a9 is run at, much to Sony's chagrin btw) is 12.5 EV, which normalized to 8MP is 13.3 EV... which, incidentally, is precisely what DXO measured. 

So that's actually only 0.2 EV behind the 1D X II. Though in our review of the a9 we mentioned we preferred the look of the 1D X II's deep shadows b/c the a9 shows some pattern noise.

In other words, my estimate was correct all along, and I even compared the a9 to the a7R II from the beginning. Your implication I didn't in a public post can be classified as fake news, but that could be said about so many of your posts, like your misleading comparison of pixel vs. print DR. 

Frankly, I have no idea what you're actually complaining about, other than simply trying to mount another unprovoked, specious, unfounded personal attack.

-Rishi


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 22, 2017)

rishi_sanyal said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



Ahh The lightning rod ;D I find it amusing to see arguments starting over arcane details when two products both do a supurb job, so much so, that the photographer's skill is by far the biggest factor.


----------



## RGF (Sep 22, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Go buy one… I'm sure Canon will survive and has no need to hurry.



Agree. just because a single buyer is frustrated, it will not cause problem for Canon unless that buyer will buy 10,000s units (or more).


----------



## rishi_sanyal (Sep 22, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> rishi_sanyal said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



I agree with you.

But what's not amusing to me is a user who is on a dedicated campaign via tens (hundreds?) of posts to prove that I am pro-Sony? pro-Nikon? oh-I-don't-know-but-def-anti-Canon. With poor/no/mis-extrapolated data.

For example, his accusation that I was working on a Nikon advertorial whilst writing the 5D IV first impressions. What? We have more Canon advertorial videos than any other brand. Our editorial team has no knowledge of who paid for what; we're just told: 'make a video on the 1D X II' or 'make a video on the D5'.

That's it.

I wrote the 5D IV first impressions b/c I've owned and professionally shot every single iteration of that series (over Nikon, yup). Whoa, I bet that blew some people's minds here.

And yet a whole thread was started here stating 'Rishi finally admits DPR is owned by Nikon' b/c of one video sponsored by Nikon, while we have_* more videos *_sponsored by *Canon*.

People promulgating ridiculous assertions that are untrue prompt me to respond. My apologies if that offends anyone. 

Feel free to read our FAQ on sponsored content, and also consider that photography gear review outlets are dropping like flies, so the fact that we're looking to innovate in terms of our content strategy should be seen as an intense desire for us to survive so we can continue to provide quality content for you, our readers.

Heck, I'm trying to find hundreds of thousands of $$ to actually develop proper lens tests with Roger Cicala. But you think we're on an anti-Canon campaign?

The disconnect between what some people here on CR think and _reality_ is so vast I often find it difficult not to chime in.

-Rishi


----------



## Jopa (Sep 22, 2017)

rishi_sanyal said:


> Heck, I'm trying to find hundreds of thousands of $$ to actually develop proper lens tests with Roger Cicala.



Interesting... more details please


----------



## rishi_sanyal (Sep 22, 2017)

Jopa said:


> rishi_sanyal said:
> 
> 
> > Heck, I'm trying to find hundreds of thousands of $$ to actually develop proper lens tests with Roger Cicala.
> ...



Thanks for the inquiry. We're trying to get lens reviews back off the ground but in a totally different manner: in a way that actually shows photographers the differences between lenses they may be considering to purchase for their body.

It's a very difficult problem, but one that Roger and I want to solve in a practical manner, using authoritative tests. 

I can't say more right now because I don't wish to over promise. Roger is already doing the best lens testing in the world. Bar none. We want to find a way to make his data more widely available and combine it with our own measurements to corroborate, but also to visualize show the implications of his data.

It's a difficult problem but one that must be solved to help our audience and you. Take for example the fact that current flat field MTF data has little to no bearing on a lens that is used to shoot an off-center subject using an actual focus point there, off-center, because of field curvature. 

No one addresses this and yet MTF test data on review sites are widely accepted. Why? They're only relevant for a brick wall.

I don't know about you but I don't shoot brick walls.

Lots of work to be done  We are researching intensively. I wish I could spend more time just sharing our thoughts and what we're trying to do... Might keep humanize us a bit!

In the end we're here to try and serve the photographer better. We have a ways to go.


----------



## Jopa (Sep 22, 2017)

rishi_sanyal said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > rishi_sanyal said:
> ...



Thank you Rishi. Very looking forward to see this ^
I know Bryan / TDP is using Roger's charts for a while, but it seems like you guys want to bring this to a whole new level, hope it will work out well for you.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 22, 2017)

I think this desire to be relevant is commendable and I look forward to the outcome.

Rishi, I for one have never considered you "anti-canon". I did however perceive, as others did also, that there were subtle biases evident in the odd statement that you made. 

Obviously, you did not agree and you stated that, which could have been the end of it. However, no one likes to see themselves as a victim of what they perceive as false statements and there is a tendency to engage when the opposite choice would likely be better.

The longer the engagement the more likely it is that either party will make some poorly thought out/emotional statement with bystanders only to accommodating to join the "fun". It's a waste of everyone's time and even the fun factor wears thin.

There is only one solution. Having summarized your position, refrain from further responses/rebuttals. Your talents are far to great to be wasting time on this topic.

Jack


----------



## unfocused (Sep 22, 2017)

rishi_sanyal said:


> ...But what's not amusing to me is a user who is on a dedicated campaign via tens (hundreds?) of posts to prove that I am pro-Sony? pro-Nikon? oh-I-don't-know-but-def-anti-Canon. With poor/no/mis-extrapolated data...
> 
> ...People promulgating ridiculous assertions that are untrue prompt me to respond. My apologies if that offends anyone...
> 
> ...The disconnect between what some people here on CR think and _reality_ is so vast I often find it difficult not to chime in...



I agree. Personally, I have found the feud/vendetta against DPR that was largely started by one individual and taken up by others to be an embarrassment to this entire site. 

My own oft-stated opinion has not changed and will not change. Review sites exist to offer readers the opinions of the reviewers. Absolute impartiality is neither possible nor desirable. The purpose of a review is to learn what a reviewer thinks of a product. Readers should then judge for themselves whether or not the reviewer's assessment is accurate or not. And, if it is relevant to their use. 

In my case, I have found DPR's critiques of Canon products to be generally accurate and fair. Fawning reviews are worthless and the ridiculous parsing of the language of DPR reviews that occurs on this site (They described Canon this way! They Described Nikon this way! Therefore they hate Canon and love Nikon!!!) can be just plain silly.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 22, 2017)

I find it embarrassing too. How anybody who purports to offer unbiased controlled and semi controlled testing can claim personal reasons as a legitimate excuse for hiding their data is scandalous and strikes to the very heart of their honesty openness and transparency.


----------



## rishi_sanyal (Sep 23, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> I find it embarrassing too. How anybody who purports to offer unbiased controlled and semi controlled testing can claim personal reasons as a legitimate excuse for hiding their data is scandalous and strikes to the very heart of their honesty openness and transparency.



Choosing not to respond to threats by acquiescing to them is not a 'personal reason'. It's a policy that avoids bullying.

I have personally made tens to hundreds of Raw files publicly available showing the same exact thing on DPReview.com, and the fact that you won't rest till you see this one file points to a personal vendetta on your part, not 'personal reasons' on mine.

I agree with others here though, particularly Jack, so I will respectfully bow out now.


----------



## john kriegsmann (Oct 6, 2017)

Canon will never catch up to Sony in the mirrorless area. its too late for them, they got such a late start. I love Canon and have bought their cameras for over 20 years. They make great bodies, and super lenses. Their bodies have simple and intuitive controls. What they lack and have lacked for the past decade is cutting edge sensor technology. 
I do not like Sony bodies, they are more computers than cameras with extremely deep and multi layered menus for even basic camera functions. What they do have is cutting edge sensors and good form factors for their lenses and mirrorless bodies. Fuji is another innovative camera company that has come from know where to lead the cropped sensor mirrorless market with innovative bodies and small, high quality lenses. Canon's M5- meh!


----------



## dak723 (Oct 6, 2017)

john kriegsmann said:


> Canon will never catch up to Sony in the mirrorless area. its too late for them, they got such a late start. I love Canon and have bought their cameras for over 20 years. They make great bodies, and super lenses. Their bodies have simple and intuitive controls. What they lack and have lacked for the past decade is cutting edge sensor technology.
> I do not like Sony bodies, they are more computers than cameras with extremely deep and multi layered menus for even basic camera functions. What they do have is cutting edge sensors and good form factors for their lenses and mirrorless bodies. Fuji is another innovative camera company that has come from know where to lead the cropped sensor mirrorless market with innovative bodies and small, high quality lenses. Canon's M5- meh!



Funny, I bought Sony mirrorless and thought it was the worst camera I ever bought. And then a couple years later I bought the Canon M5...and I love it! Small, light, the lenses are excellent and it takes great photos. 

Sony may innovate, but all those bells and whistles don't mean much when their color is sub-par. Until Sony can produce beautiful color, their cameras will always be sub-par. And their lenses aren't anywhere near the quality of Canon either. But I guess all those "innovations" make up for that.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 6, 2017)

For me, if I don't like using something, like I get irritated by the way it works or lack of features, it spoils my fun factor. Since I'm not earning money with my camera, what is there if there if it isn't fun. Of course viewing a lovely shot with great IQ is also part of the fun. 

No camera is perfect so it comes down to what is disappointing vs. what is irritating and annoying. When I read: 

"I do not like Sony bodies, they are more computers than cameras with extremely deep and multi layered menus for even basic camera functions.",

that's enough for me, especially when virtually all higher quality cameras are producing very decent photos. Endless debate. 

Jack


----------



## Jopa (Oct 6, 2017)

john kriegsmann said:


> Canon will never catch up to Sony in the mirrorless area. its too late for them, they got such a late start. I love Canon and have bought their cameras for over 20 years. They make great bodies, and super lenses. Their bodies have simple and intuitive controls. What they lack and have lacked for the past decade is cutting edge sensor technology.
> I do not like Sony bodies, they are more computers than cameras with extremely deep and multi layered menus for even basic camera functions. What they do have is cutting edge sensors and good form factors for their lenses and mirrorless bodies. Fuji is another innovative camera company that has come from know where to lead the cropped sensor mirrorless market with innovative bodies and small, high quality lenses. Canon's M5- meh!



Nikon now offers the best sensors, take a look at DxO. And it's not even made by Sony. Time do jump ship from Sony to Nikon! If you jump ship every year or even sooner, you'll be chosen as a best customer of all camera manufactures


----------

