# Two Prosumer Mirrorless Camera Bodies in Development [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 17, 2018)

```
<p>We’re told that Canon is actively developing two “prosumer” mirrorless cameras, both of which are full frame.</p>
<p>We’re told that we’ll see the flagship mirrorless camera announced first, and that a lower tier second camera would come 6 to 8 months after the flagship begins shipping.</p>
<p>The same source has also told us that Canon has a “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”, which doesn’t sound like a native EF mount is coming. That said, we’ve heard other people say a similar thing about EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless camera, but no one has come out and confirmed whether or not the body will be EF mount or something else.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## naylor83 (Apr 17, 2018)

The question is: WHEN? When will we know anything about these cameras? When Sigma release their Sony FE Art lenses and Tamron releases their 28-75 f/2.8 I'm not gonna hang around indefinitely to see what Canon may some day, eventually, produce in the full frame mirrorless segment.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 17, 2018)

Oh, Goodie! Another mirrorless thread where we will get 10 to 20 pages of people repeating the same comments they have written a dozen times before! Yay!


----------



## photonius (Apr 17, 2018)

The same source has also told us that Canon has a “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”,


Canon will offer to solder the adapter onto the lens.... :


----------



## BillB (Apr 17, 2018)

naylor83 said:


> The question is: WHEN? When will we know anything about these cameras? When Sigma release their Sony FE Art lenses and Tamron releases their 28-75 f/2.8 I'm not gonna hang around indefinitely to see what Canon may some day, eventually, produce in the full frame mirrorless segment.



Thanks for letting us know.


----------



## BurningPlatform (Apr 17, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>The same source has also told us that Canon has a “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”,</p>


If this is not the usual adapter with only air inside and some wiring on the barrel, there should be patent applications around it, I suppose. I sincerely hope this solution does not contain moving parts or optical elements.


----------



## amorse (Apr 17, 2018)

“a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”

I really struggle to guess what this could be - it certainly seems to imply that it won't be built for only EF lenses, so what's left? A new lens mount with a new adapter? A telescoping lens mount? An lens mount which takes EF and EF(?) where the new lenses have optics which go into the camera past the mount to get the right flange distance? Time for some wild speculation?


----------



## fingerstein (Apr 17, 2018)

OK! I'm selling my 7D mk2. Take my money or forget it, like forever.


----------



## fingerstein (Apr 17, 2018)

The best solution wolul be an adapter like fotodiox fusion nd throttle - but better. With no color cast.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 17, 2018)

amorse said:


> “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”
> 
> I really struggle to guess what this could be - it certainly seems to imply that it won't be built for only EF lenses, so what's left? A new lens mount with a new adapter? A telescoping lens mount? An lens mount which takes EF and EF(?) where the new lenses have optics which go into the camera past the mount to get the right flange distance? Time for some wild speculation?



Ask HarryFilm - he'll know. He has informants everywhere.


----------



## criscokkat (Apr 17, 2018)

amorse said:


> “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”
> 
> I really struggle to guess what this could be - it certainly seems to imply that it won't be built for only EF lenses, so what's left? A new lens mount with a new adapter? A telescoping lens mount? An lens mount which takes EF and EF(?) where the new lenses have optics which go into the camera past the mount to get the right flange distance? Time for some wild speculation?



My money is still on this. The lenses that can take advantage of this will take advantage of it. Wide angle lenses, and consumer lenses with very long zooms. I bet they could have fun with a zoom that moves the inside optics as well as the outside optics to make something very compact. Something with the same mount for the most part. They might even be able to make the protrusion inside collapsible, extended by your hand locking it into place. That twist could cause the protrusion to extend, thereby protecting older cameras from trying to mount something. This also protects the element at the end as when unmounted it's not protruding anymore than any other lens would.


----------



## BeenThere (Apr 17, 2018)

Perhaps the “really nice solution” is an adapter with drop in filter slot. This would allow for a standardized filter size solution for all your EF lenses?


----------



## Canoneer (Apr 17, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> The same source has also told us that Canon has a “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”, which doesn’t sound like a native EF mount is coming.



It would be nice if that "solution" was a smart adapter with an SLT mirror and PDAF unit built in, which would also have a pentaprism OVF attached to the top which could somehow lock into place on the top of the camera body. It could work if Canon design the new mirrorless the same way as the Fuji GFX - use a modular body with a flat top to allow for an attachable EVF, or an OVF if using the EF to EM (or whatever the mount is called) adapter.


----------



## CanoKnight (Apr 17, 2018)

"Solution" implies a problem. The only place this should even be a problem is on a Sony body. Not Canon's own.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 17, 2018)

CanoKnight said:


> "Solution" implies a problem. The only place this should even be a problem is on a Sony body. Not Canon's own.



If the new camera is not a native EF mount then it is a problem for owners of EF lenses. Is it that hard to understand?


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> If the new camera is not a native EF mount then it is a problem for owners of EF lenses. Is it that hard to understand?



what problem? There is absolutely no problem, as long as EF glass can continued to be used on new mirrorless system ... a decent Canon "adapter" is definitely no problem, but a simple, cheap and effective solution to ensuring backwards compatibility for legacy EF glass.


----------



## tron (Apr 17, 2018)

I am not optics expert. I realize though that the only case where a non-EF mount is useful (for size purposes) is when wide angle up to normal fixed lenses are involved. But in these cases a shorter flange distance will make harder to make good lenses on the edges so they will be more expensive. I do not think this as practical considering the majority of all other lenses: Wide angle, normal and tele Zooms, portrait lenses, telephoto lenses, etc. And there are already portable solutions like 6D with a 35mm f/2 or the pancase 40mm or the 24 or 28 IS lenses for example.

Of course Canon would know better. I am just saying why I am not that thrilled about this. Unless the two models mean that one of the two will come with native EF mount


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Apr 17, 2018)

criscokkat said:


> They might even be able to make the protrusion inside collapsible, extended by your hand locking it into place. That twist could cause the protrusion to extend, thereby protecting older cameras from trying to mount something. This also protects the element at the end as when unmounted it's not protruding anymore than any other lens would.


I really don't see anything like this happening. That would be a lot of added engineering and complexity just to protect people from doing stupid things. If you try to mount a lens on an improper camera, or don't properly protect your lenses when they're off of a camera, that's on you. No one is going to add complexity and introduce another possible point of failure just to protect from this.


----------



## overniven (Apr 17, 2018)

What is considered prosumer today? 5D Mark IV? Or something lower in price?


----------



## amorse (Apr 17, 2018)

Canoneer said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > The same source has also told us that Canon has a “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”, which doesn’t sound like a native EF mount is coming.
> ...



It's an interesting idea, but I wonder how that would affect the weather resistance of the body? I fell like that is one place where Canon's offerings still really outshine the mirrorless competition.


----------



## Etienne (Apr 17, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> Perhaps the “really nice solution” is an adapter with drop in filter slot. This would allow for a standardized filter size solution for all your EF lenses?



That wouldn't be "really nice," that would be awesome!


----------



## tron (Apr 17, 2018)

On the other hand my 5D4 in liveview mode is a very nice mirroless camera, only with a ... mirror ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 17, 2018)

BurningPlatform said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > <p>The same source has also told us that Canon has a “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”,</p>
> ...



Patented 2-3 years ago, so long ago that people don't remember it.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 17, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > If the new camera is not a native EF mount then it is a problem for owners of EF lenses. Is it that hard to understand?
> ...



Mounting EF lens to non-EF mount is a problem and the fact you can solve it with a simple adapter is irrelevant. 
You can argue semantics all you want but it won't change the fact. 

PS - will it really be 'cheap'?


----------



## -1 (Apr 17, 2018)

amorse said:


> “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”
> 
> I really struggle to guess what this could be - it certainly seems to imply that it won't be built for only EF lenses, so what's left? A new lens mount with a new adapter? A telescoping lens mount? An lens mount which takes EF and EF(?) where the new lenses have optics which go into the camera past the mount to get the right flange distance? Time for some wild speculation?



Mount adapter with SLT mirror built in...


----------



## hendrik-sg (Apr 17, 2018)

other "nice solution" would be a lens conversion Service for EF Lenses. Technically it should be no problem to screw a adapter on each lens.

then we all can be happy, we have 4 longer lenses in the bag and a shorter camera, and therefor trade in the OVF


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 17, 2018)

Adaptors are never a good solution, period.


----------



## amorse (Apr 17, 2018)

-1 said:


> amorse said:
> 
> 
> > “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”
> ...



Question - would there really be a need for an SLT mount adapter to allow autofocus? I was under the impression that the bulk of Canon's lens offerings could use DPAF and wouldn't require an alternative focus system?


----------



## eosuser1234 (Apr 17, 2018)

I can see this being...Full frame lens can be cropped to APS-C crop in camera, so you can get longer reach with telephoto if you want. 
Wide angle APS-C lenses, can but used even wider than before, but the camera would crop appropriately and automatically to get the most out of every Canon made lens if you want it to. 
EF-M mount, and EF adaptor in the box. Full canon ef, ef-s, ef-m lense support, and better use of them (wider is wider, longer is longer).


----------



## unfocused (Apr 17, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Oh, Goodie! Another mirrorless thread where we will get 10 to 20 pages of people repeating the same comments they have written a dozen times before! Yay!



But this time, we also get to read all sorts of crazy ideas of what a "really nice solution" is.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 17, 2018)

eosuser1234 said:


> I can see this being...Full frame lens can be cropped to APS-C crop in camera, so you can get longer reach with telephoto if you want.
> Wide angle APS-C lenses, can but used even wider than before, but the camera would crop appropriately and automatically to get the most out of every Canon made lens if you want it to.
> EF-M mount, and EF adaptor in the box. Full canon ef, ef-s, ef-m lense support, and better use of them (wider is wider, longer is longer).



You don't get longer reach by cropping in camera - you just get a cropped image.

The OP talked about an interesting way to fit EF lenses which suggests a new mount. Are you suggesting a mount that accepts EF-S without an adapter? Or a new mount with adapters for EF-EF-S and EF-M?


----------



## BurningPlatform (Apr 17, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> BurningPlatform said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



Or then this fairly new one: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34242.0 , which is the mirror in the box solution.


----------



## Perio (Apr 17, 2018)

Wouldn't an adapter compromise weather seal properties of a prosumer cameras?


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Apr 17, 2018)

Maybe the solution is that Canon will build two different lens barrels for existing optical designs.
Right now, I can use an adapter on the M5 for my collection of FF lenses. That's not a problem for me and wouldn't be an issue for the new body.
I really hope that Canon builds this on the current flange distance for their FF bodies. I don't want some tiny little thin body, I want beef! Just yank the mirror box out of the 5D Mark IV and call it good!!!


----------



## unfocused (Apr 17, 2018)

Perio said:


> Wouldn't an adapter compromise weather seal properties of a prosumer cameras?



Not sure why an adapter would present any greater problem than a lens or a tele-extender.


----------



## Talys (Apr 17, 2018)

“a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”

To me, this means NO EF TO EF-M STYLE ADAPTER, because that would not really be anything to talk about, and that's really all that I care about. 

It should mean either:

1. A way to mount EF lenses directly onto the mount, or

2. Ability to semi-permanently change the actual mount in a professional, weather-sealed and rugged manner that doesn't involve buttons or switches.

It should NOT mean either an adpater for the body or an adapter for the lens, because none of these would be viewed as a "really nice solution" to a professional.





KeithBreazeal said:


> Maybe the solution is that Canon will build two different lens barrels for existing optical designs.
> Right now, I can use an adapter on the M5 for my collection of FF lenses. That's not a problem for me and wouldn't be an issue for the new body.
> I really hope that Canon builds this on the current flange distance for their FF bodies. I don't want some tiny little thin body, I want beef! Just yank the mirror box out of the 5D Mark IV and call it good!!!



+1000.


----------



## Antono Refa (Apr 17, 2018)

BurningPlatform said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > The same source has also told us that Canon has a “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”
> ...



Leaving throat diameter & flange distance aside, why would Canon consider anything but EF?


----------



## peters (Apr 17, 2018)

fingerstein said:


> The best solution wolul be an adapter like fotodiox fusion nd throttle - but better. With no color cast.


That would be a REALY great use for the empty barrel. A build in ND is absoluetely great for any filmmaker! Options to screw on the lense sucks... slow to put on, bad for the image quality and you need another size for several lenses... brrr


I realy hope its a PROsumer camera, and not another toy that canon appears to like more than the professional sector right now.


----------



## Talys (Apr 17, 2018)

Antono Refa said:


> BurningPlatform said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



Well, we can be assured that there aren't any optical elements, because that would just mess up the.... optics. It could be EF+ of some sort, in the sense that it could be mechanically and optically compatible with EF, but with additional camera-lens communication that isn't compatible with existing cameras.

Maybe, to support T/W controls electronically from the body, for example. The EFS18-135 with the add-on piece lets you control T/W electronically, but it's from the attachment or remote. Just thinking blue sky, it would be cool to set a focus and zoom, zoom out (and optionally defocus), and then have the camera electronically return to that point for video.

Kind of like, with a monopod, when you start focused, move back and defocus, and then reverse the video to make it seem like you're coming into crisp focus.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Apr 17, 2018)

It would be nice to see an adapter with a filter drawer. I could use my existing 300 2.8 filters. 



Drop In Filters © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 17, 2018)

unfocused said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, Goodie! Another mirrorless thread where we will get 10 to 20 pages of people repeating the same comments they have written a dozen times before! Yay!
> ...



true. lol


----------



## Tangent (Apr 17, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> The same source has also told us that Canon has a “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body”



Speculation: an interlocking system in which the EF lens mounts at the correct distance but a FF-EFM lens has a tab that allows the lens to scooch in a little more to mount at the mirrorless distance. No adapters.


----------



## BillB (Apr 17, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > If the new camera is not a native EF mount then it is a problem for owners of EF lenses. Is it that hard to understand?
> ...



We know that you don't have a problem with an adapter to use EF lenses, as you kept reminding us. (Your main problem seems to be that nobody is showing any interest in making the camera and lenses of your dreams.) Not sure that the Canon Marketing people feel the same way or adapters for EF lenses, or Lensrental either, for that matter. Lensrental does not recommend adapters for professional use (where there are real clients who want real deliverables.). I know that you think all problems will go away because this adapter would be a first party adapter completely within the Canon system, rather than a third party adapter a la Sony. Still, Canon will have to convince people that they want to buy into a mirrorless system that requires them to use adapters to use their EF lenses.


----------



## lightthief (Apr 17, 2018)

Could it be a 6D/5D size body with the EF flange distance and a sensor that can be moved/bended inside to reduce the flange distance.
Could it help to develop better/small/lighter lenses when every lens could have it's own flange distance?


----------



## nchoh (Apr 17, 2018)

So pretty much my prediction was correct - a new mount.

I was also predicting a camera somewhere between the 5D and 6D capabilities. Looking at the rumor, a 5D level camera would make sense as the users who use 5D are more likely to but the new camera and lenses. The 2 obvious groups are wedding/portait using the new lenses and sports/wildlife using an adapter with EF lenses.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Apr 17, 2018)

It's kind of like NASA stacking the Saturn V stages. The use of adapters will allow a wider variety of lenses to mount.
Eventually, I know somebody will try using a Sony booster. 



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


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 17, 2018)

nchoh said:


> So pretty much my prediction was correct - a new mount.
> 
> I was also predicting a camera somewhere between the 5D and 6D capabilities. Looking at the rumor, a 5D level camera would make sense as the users who use 5D are more likely to but the new camera and lenses. The 2 obvious groups are wedding/portait using the new lenses and sports/wildlife using an adapter with EF lenses.



not exactly a hard one, you had two choices, a new mount or an existing one.


----------



## jsavage21 (Apr 17, 2018)

If Canon does not release a full frame professional mirrorless on par with their 5DMK4 or 1DXII that will natively mount EF lenses without an adapter, they may continue to slide further into a hole that will be incredibly difficult to pull out of. Many professionals including myself, have switched over to Fujifilm, Sony and Olympus exclusively. This is not a dig on Canon, but the reality of the industry. Professional and non professionals alike are moving towards better and more relevant technology and how well Canon and Nikon can accurately perceive this is anyone's guess. I shot Canon professionally for 20 years and if they would have had a full frame mirrorless, I would have stayed with them.


----------



## nchoh (Apr 17, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> nchoh said:
> 
> 
> > So pretty much my prediction was correct - a new mount.
> ...



Nope, but most of the posters were of the opinion that it made no sense for Canon to go with a new mount!


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 17, 2018)

nchoh said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > nchoh said:
> ...



I am not sure anyone said it would make _no sense_ - the more sane said there were arguments either way and there was probably more in favour of native EF to avoid using an adapter. 
And in “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body” it seems possible that it is not an adapter-driven solution. And I bet you did not predict that.


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> And in “a really nice solution for EF lenses on the full frame mirrorless body” it seems possible that it is not an adapter-driven solution. And I bet you did not predict that.



*Waves hands* 

I predicted this  I said that Canon could do a body using the EF-M mount and then have some kind of grip or other attachment that screws onto the bottom & front securely to convert it to EF mount. 

SO then you have a choice. simple adaptor if you're switching between lens types, or a fully secured (and weather sealed) mount replacement that puts a semi-permanent EF mount on the body (and probably adds a 2nd battery slot as part of the deal)


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 17, 2018)

nchoh said:


> Nope, but most of the posters were of the opinion that it made no sense for Canon to go with a new mount!



Well, what makes sense for Canon is selling you a camera that you need to also buy new lenses for  I think the posters were of the opinion that they don't want a new mount personally because they don't want to buy new lenses.


----------



## nchoh (Apr 17, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> nchoh said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, but most of the posters were of the opinion that it made no sense for Canon to go with a new mount!
> ...





nchoh said:


> Just for the fun of it, this is what I think will happen.
> 
> Canon will release the FF mirrorless with a new mount. Why? Because Canon works on segmentation. This makes sense on many levels;
> 
> ...


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 17, 2018)

nchoh said:


> Nope, but most of the posters were of the opinion that it made no sense for Canon to go with a new mount!



exactly. it was you and me. In this forum. Out in the real world, not inhabited by Canon apologists, it was clear all the way.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 17, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> nchoh said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, but most of the posters were of the opinion that it made no sense for Canon to go with a new mount!
> ...



Pretty accurate. But the strengthening argument is that there are tens of thousands of photographers in the same boat so you would be hacking off a majority of your customers. Not a good move. 
As has been said before they pissed people off moving from FD to EF mounts but people saw the benefits because of a fundamental change in architecture and functionality (principally autofocus). Nikon tried to keep things back-compatible but ended up with a confusing mess of lenses that took them years to get out of and my guess is Canon have heeded that lesson. 

Mirrorless offers no such fundamental change in direction. Distinct advantages, yes, but not much else and those advantages will not be appreciated by everyone. So lots of people will ask why they are being asked to refit their lens collection. So if Canon have genuinely found a modular type of approach it really will be the best of both worlds - but rumours of problems developing EF compatible mirrorless has been going on since late 2015 which suggests it is a really big issue. I just hope the solution does not end up being a clusterf**k of halfway technology.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 17, 2018)

nchoh said:


> Professionals who use the 1DX will be expected to stay there. Those who want to use the new camera, for greater FPS will have to use the adapter.



There it is - you predicted an adapter. Hardly a "really nice solution". 
Are you related to HarryFilm?


----------



## dak723 (Apr 17, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> nchoh said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, but most of the posters were of the opinion that it made no sense for Canon to go with a new mount!
> ...



Only time will tell if going to a new mount will be a successful strategy. There will be *some *photographers who would certainly buy a Canon if they are already invested in EF lenses who will now be less likely to. If someone wants or needs a new mirrorless camera AND new lenses, then they may consider Sony or Nikon if they think those cameras are better. For some, they may decide that they are essentially starting from scratch, so now it is an even playing field. It seems quite likely that many folks (especially the "tech" oriented and those that desire innovation) would prefer a Sony camera. Well, Sony will now have the advantage of not only having popular FF cameras, but will also have a bigger *mirrorless *lens lineup. If I were Sony, and found out that Canon will be going to a new mount, I would be jumping for joy. I would now be in the driver's seat as far as FF mirrorless is concerned. Unless...that new mount will have to have an easy and extremely secure way for users to use their EF lenses. That is my opinion anyway.

If they get a lot of users to buy the new cameras plus new lenses, then the strategy pays off. If a lot of folks decide now is the time to switch, then Canon will regret their decision to go with a new mount provided they don't come up with a great solution for users to use their EF lenses.


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> As has been said before they pissed people off moving from FD to EF mounts but people saw the benefits because of a fundamental change in architecture and functionality (principally autofocus).



But the huge difference is that FD to EF obsoleted the FD lenses because no sensible adaptor could be used to convert FD glass to EF.

That's not the case here. Nothing is going to stop you from using EF lenses as well on this new camera with an adaptor as you would on a native mount. The only issues are strength of mounting for the adaptor and weather sealing, and it sounds from the rumor that these are being addressed.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 17, 2018)

joly, dont even try. many here don't have a clue regarding"adapter" and the difference between going from FD to EF vs. EF to "EF-X". They even don't understand the difference between a tele-converter and an optics-free extension tube mount converter. 

and a few others do understand it but just can't handle the idea that all their beloved EF glass will be "legacy" ... and possibly worth less second hand. 

Even fewer have ever tried the excellent, cheap and simple Canon EF/EF-M adapter and don't know that there is no penalty in IQ or (AF) functionality involved. 

I just call it "adapter-angst". ;D

That's all there is to it.


----------



## nchoh (Apr 17, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> nchoh said:
> 
> 
> > So pretty much my prediction was correct - a new mount.
> ...



Actually, it was not an easy determination. It's not a 50-50 choice. When you factor in all the risk in going to a new mount, it's probably something like 95%-5%.

Going with a new mount that eventually fails means that Canon's reputation would suffer; users might look at Canon as just a money grabber. The development cost of a new mount, the new cameras and lenses that they eventually must walk away. Sony might really gain a lot of new converts at the expense of Canon. The risk of going with a new mount are high. If Canon does not do it for the wrong reason and with the wrong strategy, it could be really bad for Canon.

I've reposted my post with the prediction and rational on this thread.

Cheers.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 17, 2018)

there is no risk for Canon at all. Technically an excellent mount adapter to go from long FFD to a shorter one is no challenge whatsoever. Market wise it is no risk either. Because the old farts with their "adapter angst" want to buy 3 more generations of marginally improved mirrorslappers. And they won't get them from Sony. Everybody else will be happy with a Canon FF mirrorless system ... even if it is only halfway decent. LOL


----------



## Talys (Apr 18, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> there is no risk for Canon at all. Technically an excellent mount adapter...



It's not a mount adapter. There is nothing special or clever about that and it would not be worthy of mention as an EF solution.

My money is on a user-changeable mount. That is, the base camera has no mount at all; you install the mount you want to use, whether it's EF or otherwise. It would let them create a dovetail racetrack design that could be perfectly weather sealed and also appear visually seamless regardless of your mount choice.

Also, perhaps not a rapid-change, pins-and-springs mechanism, because these get loose over time, are less secure (especially with big lenses), and also result in additional tabs and latches that are not appealing. Perhaps one or two hex screws that you can replace with thumbscrews. I mean, how many people with 400mm+ lenses are annoyed that after time, they have play? How annoying would it be if _every_ lens were like that?


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 18, 2018)

it will be a mount adapter. It is the most simple solution. 

ultra-concerned 400mm + lens users shall use a lens ring + tripod foot ... so there is no stress on the mount (or adapter). "Problem" solved. 

My only question right now is: will Canon go for a Sony A7 III or A7 R III or A9 competitor ?


----------



## chik0240 (Apr 18, 2018)

I think of the really nice solution the other way round, why can’t canon just use the EF-m mount, but for some lenses that needs a shorter flange distance, make a simple notch on the mount end as inn the EF-s mount, whenever the new mount lens was screwed in, it just triggers it to protrude the rear lens group into the empty space inside the mount, just like the EF-m 15-46 have a store position and working position, only it was in the back rather on the front extending


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> nchoh said:
> 
> 
> > Professionals who use the 1DX will be expected to stay there. Those who want to use the new camera, for greater FPS will have to use the adapter.
> ...



===

For the prosumer version, I predict an EF-S mount on an M5-like body, slightly thicker than now BUT sold with an accompanying solid metal EF-mount ring adapter that is coupled to a SLIDING SENSOR plate that moves back and forth WITHIN the camera body to allow a MUCH SHALLOWER ring adapter to be used rather than the 20 to 40 mm barrel adapter that would be needed normally! 

This allows for a cheap mount to be put on a slightly thicker M5 camera body and let the SENSOR ITSELF be slid back within the camera body for adapting to full frame EF lenses when the ring-adapter is put on. This could also ALLOW for a VARIABLE crop factor to be entered depending upon a user's needs.

I AM SUGGESTING that a 10mm to 15mm thick RING-ADAPTER will be what will be sold along with the PROSUMER VERSION of the mirrorless camera.

--- AND YES that is what ONE engineering source has suggested to me MIGHT HAPPEN on at least ONE camera from Canon....i.e. A MOVEABLE SENSOR PLATE to allow adapting to changeable mounts like what happens now on PL-mount vs EF mount on the Canon Cinema EOS video cameras!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 18, 2018)

It's a translation thing. The tipster was actually trying to say, "...a really nice solution for mirrorless lenses on the full frame EF mount mirrorless body."


----------



## slclick (Apr 18, 2018)

I only see good things here, however it's a CR2. I understand conjecture but I checked the Time Machine Forum and nothing there is mentioned about cameras.


----------



## nchoh (Apr 18, 2018)

Let's try another prediction.

The new mount will be similar to the EF-S. It will take EF, EF-S and what ever the new lens type will be called.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 18, 2018)

Talys said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > there is no risk for Canon at all. Technically an excellent mount adapter...
> ...



I wonder if they would even go so far as to sell two versions of the same camera - one with a permanent EF mount and the other with a screw on mount as you describe. Based on comments on the many mirrorless threads over the past year - a "normal" adapter would be rejected by many. And yes, the tolerances and play that would occur in an adapter over time could be an issue that the pigheaded and stubborn (or perhaps just stupid) don't quite get. I am not a pro - and don't need that level of precision - but if I were a pro, I would not get a camera where I need an adapter for all my best lenses.


----------



## Etienne (Apr 18, 2018)

HarryFilm said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > nchoh said:
> ...



The rumor clearly says two full-frame cameras. An EF-S mount makes absolutely no sense.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 18, 2018)

Etienne said:


> makes absolutely no sense.



Yes, I agree.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Apr 18, 2018)

'Nice solution' but not an adapter can only be a retracting built-in adapter...


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 18, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> 'Nice solution' but not an adapter can only be a retracting built-in adapter...



I keep getting images flashing though my mind of something cross between Inspector gadget and the docking bay of the ISS - as the lens approaches the mount, the camera detects EF, EF-S or EF-M. An arm appears out of the camera body to take hold of the lens just as a petal-shaped gizmo emerges from the camera mount to grasp and lock on to the lens mount. In a burst of licks and whirrs the arm seats lens into the correct position, the petals morph to form a light tight seal before retracting the lens to the correct flange distance. You have the option of turning off the tehcno commentary of ''EF lens detected, engaging Adapta-Mount, Adapta-amount locked, lens seated, shutter button activated" or have the commentary activated with an option of the lustful voice of Michele Pfieffer giving it an all-too-erotic experience. 
Or AvTvM with a world-weary voice, ending with a bewildered "Stupid Canon. I could have done it better...[sigh]" 





I need a drink....


----------



## HarryFilm (Apr 18, 2018)

Etienne said:


> HarryFilm said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



===

This site's rumour mill SAYS full frame is coming first but in this case MY SOURCES say we are getting a 7D mark2 like sensor in an M5 body FIRST and then the pro-level 1D mirrorless series that is to come early next year. The medium format is supposed to be sometime later 2019/2020 !

Those are what my sources say........


----------



## 3kramd5 (Apr 18, 2018)

HarryFilm said:


> The medium format is supposed to be sometime later 2019/2020 !
> 
> Those are what my sources say........



I bet your sources would be closer if they didn't include the forward slash.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Apr 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Quarkcharmed said:
> 
> 
> > 'Nice solution' but not an adapter can only be a retracting built-in adapter...
> ...



Nice and probably very realistic outline, however I believe a simple nano-robot gel would do in this case. It'd take a form of any lens approaching and would grow necessary wiring and contacts in a fraction of a second. 

Need to take care, though, on the well-tested nano-robot software, or a simple malfunction or a virus may turn a very nice nano-lens-mount into a malformed piece of junk resembling a Nikon camera...


----------



## sanj (Apr 18, 2018)

So much panic about lens mount. What will be will be...!!!


----------



## fingerstein (Apr 18, 2018)

If I was Canon... I would start patenting ideas, starting with this thread. 
https://www.dpreview.com/news/6922446402/canon-patents-innovative-lens-adapter-with-built-in-electronic-nd-filter


----------



## Talys (Apr 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I keep getting images flashing though my mind of something cross between Inspector gadget and the docking bay of the ISS - as the lens approaches the mount, the camera detects EF, EF-S or EF-M. An arm appears out of the camera body to take hold of the lens just as a petal-shaped gizmo emerges from the camera mount to grasp and lock on to the lens mount. In a burst of licks and whirrs the arm seats lens into the correct position, the petals morph to form a light tight seal before retracting the lens to the correct flange distance. You have the option of turning off the tehcno commentary of ''EF lens detected, engaging Adapta-Mount, Adapta-amount locked, lens seated, shutter button activated" or have the commentary activated with an option of the lustful voice of Michele Pfieffer giving it an all-too-erotic experience.



It will work like the weapons and helmets from the original Stargate movie (or Iron Man's newer suits in MCU), where metal plates just expand from nothing and connect at the press of a button. 8)




sanj said:


> So much panic about lens mount. What will be will be...!!!



Frankly, some folks care more about the future of Canon's lens mounts than whatever they stuff into an FF MILC, or if one is even made 

Hey, here is a really cool solution:

What if the new lens mount, let's call it EF-X... were _backwards compatible_?

So, EF-X lenses have the same FFD as EF, and will work just like EF lenses on existing Canon bodies. Plug them into an EF-X mount and you get "additional features", whatever those may be.

As a bonus, the extra space that the mirror box used to take up now accepts slide-in filters ;D


----------



## tmroper (Apr 18, 2018)

I've never used an active lens adapter, but I was just watching a review of the Sony A7III, and the vlogger used EF lenses for the whole thing. The thing is, he didn't even talk about that part, he just used the canon glass as if it was a completely normal way to use (and test) a Sony mirrorless. Now, that's just one person, I know. But it does seem like Sony has paved the way for both the adapter technology, and the adapter mindset.


----------



## vjlex (Apr 18, 2018)

I wouldn't mind if this was a regular EF mount with a step-down adapter to attach EF-M lenses. I have way more EF lenses than EF-M (as do probably most Canon owners).


----------



## Talys (Apr 18, 2018)

tmroper said:


> I've never used an active lens adapter, but I was just watching a review of the Sony A7III, and the vlogger used EF lenses for the whole thing. The thing is, he didn't even talk about that part, he just used the canon glass as if it was a completely normal way to use (and test) a Sony mirrorless. Now, that's just one person, I know. But it does seem like Sony has paved the way for both the adapter technology, and the adapter mindset.



But if you actually use it -- as opposed to a scripted scenario where it looks like it works -- it is painful compared to native lens. Half the time those things don't even autofocus; and with almost all lenses you're choosing between missing out half autofocus modes or being forced to use contrast detection autofocus.

Personally, I think it's a scam to get people to buy Sony with the promise of, "hey, all your EF lenses will work!" and then piss them off so bad that they go blow $3k - $10k in FE lenses.

I'd say YMMV, but I won't, because I tried both Metabones V and Sigma MC-11, plus at least 10 lenses from Canon and Sigma, and there wasn't a single one where I went, "wow, that works pretty much like a native lens". Every one was varying degrees of, "wtf, who would put up with that after they blew $3000 on a camera body?"




shunsai said:


> I wouldn't mind if this was a regular EF mount with a step-down adapter to attach EF-M lenses. I have way more EF lenses than EF-M (as do probably most Canon owners).



Won't work, because an EF-M needs to be closer to the sensor plane than an EF allows (shorter flange distance).


----------



## vjlex (Apr 18, 2018)

Talys said:


> shunsai said:
> 
> 
> > I wouldn't mind if this was a regular EF mount with a step-down adapter to attach EF-M lenses. I have way more EF lenses than EF-M (as do probably most Canon owners).
> ...



partially concave adapter maybe?


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Apr 18, 2018)

I envision this solution: a mount with:

1. A normal bayonet mount on the inside diameter of the mount to mount their new line of native mirrorless lenses.

2. A breech lock mount (a la FL/FD mount) on the outside diameter of the mount to strongly, securely and precisely hold the EF adapter. This part of the mount can be deleted in lower priced models.

This solution lets you have the best of both worlds: the ease of use of a bayonet mount for all native lenses, and the strength and precision needed to securely locate an adapter so that it would work as if it were a solid part of the camera .


----------



## Yasko (Apr 18, 2018)

Oh... a really nice solution for ef lenses. May be an adapter? :


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 18, 2018)

Yasko said:


> Oh... a really nice solution for ef lenses. May be an adapter? :



sure. "what else" ?

there may possibly be 2 versions: 
a) "extension tube with wiring" ... simple, compact, reliable, relatively inexpensive, like Canon EF/EF-M adapter 
b) " smoke and mirror" version equivalent to Sony LA-EA4 with semi-translucent fixed mirror and phase-af sensor unit. sold for 499 bucks or more to all folks who don't want to miss AFMA even in the mirrorless world ...
;D


----------



## tmc784 (Apr 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> CanoKnight said:
> 
> 
> > "Solution" implies a problem. The only place this should even be a problem is on a Sony body. Not Canon's own.
> ...



Loud and clear, so I won't buy it.


----------



## maxfactor9933 (Apr 18, 2018)

my solution for EF mount is canon should provide service to convert EF lenses let say FM with let say 100 USD charge. so they kinda open the lens bayonet and mount the spacer sort of permanently.


----------



## ewg963 (Apr 18, 2018)

Time will tell all. :-X :-X :-X


----------



## padam (Apr 18, 2018)

The EF mount is used by their flagship video cameras, so it is here to stay. So no conversion (what's the point of making it less universal anyway, Canon EF-M and adapted EF lens with STM work exactly the same way)
Based on the patents there is a possibility of an added mirror box (modular DSLR design) or with a built-in electronic ND filter for video. These may come later at a high price and a 'normal' adapter will be there surely.
The camera could gain better video features compared to the 5D Mark IV and priced between that and the 1DX II and the lower end one would be over the 6D II and built more like the M5. Of course, there will be a few new, smaller lenses for the new mount, but it will rely heavily on EF lenses.
I reckon Nikon will do pretty much the same as well.

Of course later we may also see a hybrid viewfinder in a 1DX III, keeping the same build.


----------



## Deleted member 380306 (Apr 18, 2018)

Realistically when will this MLFF arrive? As not yet confirmed from Canon could it be out in 2019 or maybe we'll see this in 2018. As many of you seem up to speed on camera development/speculation you thoughts would be helpful...


----------



## padam (Apr 18, 2018)

If prototypes really do exist, it should arrive later this year.

(5D IV prototypes were reported in March 2016, camera was released in the end of August 2016)


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 18, 2018)

nchoh said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > nchoh said:
> ...



Ummm... how can your prediction be correct? There is no spec sheet yet and the camera hasn't been announced.  We don't know what the mount will be.

Besides, if it is a hybrid mount (half EF and half "something else") you'd be only 50% right... which is an easy fail at any school. "F"

At any rate, predictions are like a holes... : Facts are another matter, and we have none.


----------



## Stuart (Apr 18, 2018)

2 Mirrorless bodies - Both Video targeted? I hope not.
Mirrorless means less component cost - cheaper cameras?

Mirrorless should mean faster FPS, full time AF, and true silent operation. - I'm less bothered about the actual mount as long as i can use old EF lenses.

Does Mirrorless also facilitate a shallower DOF, or easier wide angle lenses?


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 18, 2018)

TonyPicture said:


> Realistically when will this MLFF arrive? As not yet confirmed from Canon could it be out in 2019 or maybe we'll see this in 2018. As many of you seem up to speed on camera development/speculation you thoughts would be helpful...



I speculate that a camera will be released sometime in the next 5 years. It will be in one of the four seasons of one of those years.

Just saying this so that I can later say that I was right about something and so that I can let the forum know I was right so the members can bow to me. :

Seriously though, nobody knows so can't be helpful at all.


----------



## Diltiazem (Apr 18, 2018)

I think Canon can and should go with EF mount to start with. At the moment everything is temporary as far as the mirrorless goes. Canon has time to sort out new mount/adapter or other technology in next 5 to 10 years. At the moment it would be foolish to do anything other than simple EF mount.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 18, 2018)

Stuart said:


> Mirrorless means less component cost...



And you know this because? Just because the mirror box isn't there doesn't mean the camera costs less to produce, component wise or otherwise. The price will be whatever the market will bear.


----------



## Chris Jankowski (Apr 18, 2018)

Mirrorless camera should be cheaper to manufacture than DSLR of the same functionality.

The simple reasons for this are that you remove a number of opto-mechanical components that are expensive to manufacture and require precise i.e. costly alignment in the manufacturing process.

You remove pentaprism and other optical parts of the viewfinder including diopter adjuster, slapping mirror with another mirror section for PDAF, and PDAF sensor itself, 

For example, only the costly EOS 5D and EOS 1D give you precise 100% viewfinder coverage in FF Canon DSLRs. On a mirrorless this is easy and essentially comes free. 

You need to add EVF, but this is an electronic component with a simple diopter adjustmant.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 18, 2018)

Stuart said:


> Mirrorless means less component cost - cheaper cameras?



Why would they pass those savings along to customers? Mirrorless means 'hot new tech' which means premium pricing. Premium price plus lower production cost means even more profit.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 18, 2018)

Chris Jankowski said:


> Mirrorless camera should be cheaper to manufacture than DSLR of the same functionality.
> 
> The simple reasons for this are that you remove a number of opto-mechanical components that are expensive to manufacture and require precise i.e. costly alignment in the manufacturing process.
> 
> ...



So why are Sony cameras not significantly lower cost than Canon cameras?


----------



## crashpc (Apr 18, 2018)

There are many aspects going along, or against each other in terms of final price.

Easier assembly, less testing
Less components
Hot new tech sold for premium
Economies of scale
Demand
Input variables price changes
Exchange rates

One time, we had really cheap M50 kit in the Europe. Like at the day it hit the shops, it sold for $770 with 15-45mm lens. Not a bad price for new product release. Canon EOS M6 + 15-45 was for $850-950 that day.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> So why are Sony cameras not significantly lower cost than Canon cameras?



Good one. Price of bodies and even more so of FE lenses ... that's where Sony is incredibly stupid. While they rejoice over their extra high margins they are failing to grab enough market share quickly enough to really build critical mass ... 1st gen A7 bodies have shown, at what (comparatively low) prices FF MILCs can be sold [presumably still with profit and not at or below cost]. Had they followed it up with a slightly nerfed "entry level" A7 II model at USD/ € 999,- ... it would have done the same in the market what Canon's EOS 300D and 350D did back in the day ["first DSLR for less than a grand"] ... Sony "A7 IIX" could have been made "first FF camera body under a grand" ... it would have laid waste to Canon's market share and profitability. And given the Sony system the needed boost to quickly establish themselves in the market ... and rapidly pass Nikon. Mirrorslapping Nikon would have been hit even harder than Canon. 

yes i know, easy to say in retrospect. 

But looking at Sony FE lens lineup and their incredibly high prices ... the main reason why many folks who are playing with the thought of switching are not acting on it.


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Apr 18, 2018)

I broke down and bought an M50. I really needed a smaller solution than my 1DX2 for certain situations. My new job involves producing videos for social media (by myself with no assistant) so I really needed a flippy screen. I really wanted an a7III but since it didn't have a flippy screen I decided against it. GH5 fit the bill but the video AF sucks

Certainly will be watching what happens in the FF department and will most likely pick one up when they are released.


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Apr 18, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Stuart said:
> 
> 
> > Mirrorless means less component cost - cheaper cameras?
> ...



I think initially no, since they need to recoup R&D costs. But I think that once it rolls through the lifecycle, discounts will come quick and probably significant. 

Just look at Apple, they just roll down their flagship down the line every year for two years. You can get what was once a flagship phone from 2 years ago at half the price.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Chris Jankowski said:
> 
> 
> > Mirrorless camera should be cheaper to manufacture than DSLR of the same functionality.
> ...



Maybe EVF is simpler than OVF + PDAF but it is a newly developed component especially the OLED ones and it needs some processing power + sensors to gain very high refresh rates and negligible lag. And optical components like small lenses despite multicoated cannot be very expensive because they are found in lots of kit lenses and they make e.g. 2 EUR production cost while the large front element costs maybe 5...10 EUR. Body components are real mass products, a lot of lenses not that much!

So I am not convinced that mirror-less is really cheaper because they left numerous things and added a few ones instead. Especially OLED _color_ displays with _long term stability_ are - if they really are available - a very new product line!


----------



## jeanluc (Apr 18, 2018)

> On the other hand my 5D4 in liveview mode is a very nice mirroless camera, only with a ... mirror ;D ;D ;D
> 
> 
> « Last Edit: April 17, 2018, 11:02:30 AM by tron »
> ...


----------



## Deleted member 380306 (Apr 18, 2018)

kaptainkatsu said:


> I broke down and bought an M50. I really needed a smaller solution than my 1DX2 for certain situations. My new job involves producing videos for social media (by myself with no assistant) so I really needed a flippy screen. I really wanted an a7III but since it didn't have a flippy screen I decided against it. GH5 fit the bill but the video AF sucks
> 
> Certainly will be watching what happens in the FF department and will most likely pick one up when they are released.



How do you find the IQ of this little camera to that of the 1DX2? I've seen many a nice image from the Canon's 450d to the 80d, I would think when the ISO gets high and light drops things will change a lot. But so tempted to have one of these with the adapter to compliment my 6d2


----------



## rsdofny (Apr 18, 2018)

I think that this is a chicken and egg problem. When A7 was introduced, the lens library was far from complete. I think that Sony thinks that its lens library together with those from 3rd parties is enough to make a difference and pushes the A73 price to sub$2000 level. The availability of the Sigma MC-11 adapter just adds fuel to the fire. Based on the flood of news from Canon, I think that Canon wants to stem its customer base from deflecting to Sony. But until there is spec coming out, who really knows when the Canon camera will come? 




AvTvM said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > So why are Sony cameras not significantly lower cost than Canon cameras?
> ...


----------



## nchoh (Apr 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Chris Jankowski said:
> 
> 
> > Mirrorless camera should be cheaper to manufacture than DSLR of the same functionality.
> ...



We don't know the cost of Sony and Canon cameras, we only know the price the companies choose to sell them at. Besides, the costs are incredibly hard to calculate. There's the direct cost of manufacture of each unit and then there is the development cost that has to be amortized across all the sales.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 18, 2018)

nchoh said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Chris Jankowski said:
> ...



Well, everyone who has replied to my comment has proved one thing: mirrorless will not be cheaper as a result of removing the mirrorbox assembly because there are far more important things, and more significant things, to consider.


----------



## Etienne (Apr 18, 2018)

kaptainkatsu said:


> I broke down and bought an M50. I really needed a smaller solution than my 1DX2 for certain situations. My new job involves producing videos for social media (by myself with no assistant) so I really needed a flippy screen. I really wanted an a7III but since it didn't have a flippy screen I decided against it. GH5 fit the bill but the video AF sucks
> 
> Certainly will be watching what happens in the FF department and will most likely pick one up when they are released.



Every review of Canon's DPAF, including the M50, reports that AF in video is excellent. I have three Canon bodies with DPAF - the T7i, 77D, and M6 - and AF works flawlessly in all of them. The video quality is hohum, but AF is spot on.
Maybe you are doing something wrong.


----------



## Talys (Apr 18, 2018)

Etienne said:


> kaptainkatsu said:
> 
> 
> > I broke down and bought an M50. I really needed a smaller solution than my 1DX2 for certain situations. My new job involves producing videos for social media (by myself with no assistant) so I really needed a flippy screen. I really wanted an a7III but since it didn't have a flippy screen I decided against it. GH5 fit the bill but the video AF sucks
> ...



I believe kaptainkatsu said the Panasonic GH5 video sucks, not the M50. M50 is still preorder (not shipping yet) isn't it?

An M5 with a fully articulating screen would be kind of cool, with Eye autofocus too, that hopefully that also works in continuous AF.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 18, 2018)

to robo-manufatcure a fully electronic, solid-state camera is definitely a simple matter compared to assemble, adjust, align, quality control cameras with fine-mechanical moving parts which need to work to a precision of 1/100mm .... that alone will make mass-production of mirrorless, mechanics-free cameras significantly less costly.

Mirrorslapper: 
* mirror + submirror assembly [perfect alignment absolutely critical, 1/100mm, to be maintained even also at full fps speed and for 100-300k actuations] 
* separate Phase-AF sensor and unit [perfect alignment absolutely critical, see need for "AFMA"] 
* shutter unit [perfect alignment absolutely critical, at all time values and for 100-300k actuations]
* Viewfinder prism [not cheap glass brick, decent alignment required]

Mirrorless
* sensor plane to be perfectly perpendicular to optical axis ... 
that's all in terms of mechanical/physical alignment 

which one would you rather manufacture?


----------



## Talys (Apr 18, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> which one would you rather manufacture?



Whatever people want to buy.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 18, 2018)

yep. That's why I would love to see 2 versions of a same-sensor, same IQ, same performance, same price camera: 1 as mirrorslapper, 1 as mirrorless ... first one big, clunky, heavy, noisy ... second one compact, nimble, silent.  

Both with a set of 3 matching zooms, same focal length range: 16-35/4, 24-70/4, 50-150/4


----------



## Etienne (Apr 18, 2018)

Talys said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > kaptainkatsu said:
> ...



Right you are. My mistake


----------



## criscokkat (Apr 18, 2018)

Talys said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > kaptainkatsu said:
> ...



It's hit the streets. I popped into Best Buy last weekend to get something and saw the display with it. 

I went over and played with it as much as you can without a card in it...


----------



## Talys (Apr 18, 2018)

criscokkat said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



Sweet!  I will have to head to the camera shop to try it out. >> rubs hands together <<


----------



## Chris Jankowski (Apr 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> So why are Sony cameras not significantly lower cost than Canon cameras?



Because Sony has no competition at the moment. No other vendor offers FF mirrorless. They also have reasonably good and quickly improving assortment of native FF lenses - the FE lenses. They also made the details of the interface to their lenses available to third party lens manufacturers. Sigma native FE lenses have just started coming.

However, Sony knows that the competition is coming. They even pre-empted the future competition by pricing the new Alpha 7 III relatively low <$2,000. This camera on specs beats the comparable Canon offering 6D II in every department and by wide margins. 

But Sony, set up another pricing trap for the users - the high price of their new lenses. The premium GM line of FE lenses are typically more expensive (often 50% more) than comparable Canon EF L offerings. Then there are rather few lower priced Sony FE lenses. I calculated that changeover to Sony would for me be prohibitively expensive due to the costs of the lenses.

By pricing the Alpha 7 III low Sony will make life for Canon difficult. Canon will have to price their mid-range FF mirrorless low or suffer poor market acceptance. Moreover, to make things more difficult for Canon, I believe that chances are that the first Canon offering will not even be close on-spec to Sony, as Canon has a huge software development gap to close. Mirrorless cameras require a lot of new software to be developed. It is enough to compare the differences between e.g. Sony A7 and A7 III features to gauge the scale of the software development effort required. It also takes time. No matter how much resources one can throw at it, it takes approximately two years to get from one generation of a mirrorless camera to another. Sony is now about 6 years and 3 generations ahead of their competitors.

For these reasons, I personally believe that Canon will not have a competitive general purpose FF mirrorless camera before 2024. This does not mean that their first offering may not be useful for some people. For example an FF mirrorless, delivering 16 frames per seconds without freezing the EVF and with continuous AF with object tracking over the whole sensor will be a godsend to sports photographers.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 18, 2018)

"For these reasons, I personally believe that Canon will not have a competitive general purpose FF mirrorless camera before 2024." I love predictions. Hope I'm around in 2024 to evaluate. 

Jack


----------



## dak723 (Apr 18, 2018)

Chris Jankowski said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > So why are Sony cameras not significantly lower cost than Canon cameras?
> ...



If you judge the camera by specs, then it may take a while for Canon to "catch up", but hopefully educated camera buyers won't be suckered by specs - because, as we've seen, there is a lot of fine print with Sony specs and a lot of innovations that don't work very well in practice. The tech and internet crowd will complain and talk about how far behind Canon is the moment the camera is announced, or even before (you've already started!). For folks who are more interested in the basics - color, AF, exposure accuracy, ergonomics - Canon won't be behind the moment their mirrorless arrives. I've owned the Sony A7 and A7 II and currently own the Canon M5. The only one I kept was the Canon, so I'm not worried about what Canon will offer in mirrorless.


----------



## Talys (Apr 18, 2018)

Chris Jankowski said:


> Because Sony has no competition at the moment. No other vendor offers FF mirrorless. They also have reasonably good and quickly improving assortment of native FF lenses - the FE lenses. They also made the details of the interface to their lenses available to third party lens manufacturers. Sigma native FE lenses have just started coming.
> 
> However, Sony knows that the competition is coming. They even pre-empted the future competition by pricing the new Alpha 7 III relatively low <$2,000. This camera on specs beats the comparable Canon offering 6D II in every department and by wide margins.



Except autofocus speed, autofocus sensitivity in low light, battery life, and ergonomics with any lens in the 1kg+ size, weather sealing especially when carried inverted, autofocus performance in AF-S vs One-Shot, touch screen functionality, reversible/fully articulating screen, weather sealed remote trigger connector, durability and weather sensitivity of flash connector...



Chris Jankowski said:


> Sony is now about 6 years and 3 generations ahead of their competitors.



Which is why Canon outsells Sony in the APSC mirrorless market, and did so very shortly after entering that market, despite Sony's early presence, I guess.



Chris Jankowski said:


> For these reasons, I personally believe that Canon will not have a competitive general purpose FF mirrorless camera before 2024.



That's as likely as POTUS45 winning the US Presidential election in 2024. Or the French one.

But nice try! I hope you like your Sony camera


----------



## bhf3737 (Apr 19, 2018)

Chris Jankowski said:


> I believe that chances are that the first Canon offering will not even be close on-spec to Sony, as Canon has a huge software development gap to close. Mirrorless cameras require a lot of new software to be developed. It is enough to compare the differences between e.g. Sony A7 and A7 III features to gauge the scale of the software development effort required. It also takes time. No matter how much resources one can throw at it, it takes approximately two years to get from one generation of a mirrorless camera to another. Sony is now about 6 years and 3 generations ahead of their competitors.


Lots of software is needed if starting from scratch. But Canon has almost all pieces of mirrorless functionalities (e.g. zebras, peaking, histogram, AF, etc.) in their video products arsenal and some features like DPAF are even generations ahead of the competitors. Therefore assembling a suite of those features shouldn't take six more years, Unless you are Harry! ;D


----------



## Tugela (Apr 19, 2018)

bhf3737 said:


> Chris Jankowski said:
> 
> 
> > I believe that chances are that the first Canon offering will not even be close on-spec to Sony, as Canon has a huge software development gap to close. Mirrorless cameras require a lot of new software to be developed. It is enough to compare the differences between e.g. Sony A7 and A7 III features to gauge the scale of the software development effort required. It also takes time. No matter how much resources one can throw at it, it takes approximately two years to get from one generation of a mirrorless camera to another. Sony is now about 6 years and 3 generations ahead of their competitors.
> ...



DPAF is not that far ahead. That is a huge myth perpetuated by marketing. The current Sony focussing system is allmost as fast as DPAF in terms of reaction time (0.05 seconds as opposed to 0.03 seconds, at those speeds there is no way a human could tell them apart), both systems are fast enough that the rate limiting factor is the lens response time rather than the camera's focusing system itself.


----------



## Talys (Apr 19, 2018)

Tugela said:


> bhf3737 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris Jankowski said:
> ...



What on Earth are you babbling about?

DPAF is a generational improvement over Sony's Hybrid OSPDAF+Contrast Detect AF.

1. OSPDAF only covers about 75% of the screen. Go one pixel further than. The last PDAF column and it switches to CD, which is horribly slow. DPAF basically gives you the whole screen. 

2. DPAF doesn't hunt. OSPDAF may do so, and CDAF always does. Don't believe me? Record a video on a Sony where you repeatedly change focus from near to infinity and then do it on a Canon. 

3. DPAF performs much better in lower light, like a room illuminated by a fireplace or a 60W bulb - or modeling lamp. Turn off all the lights and try to focus just with an AF illuminator on a Sony at 10 feet. Good luck with that. Now do it with a Canon. 

4. DPAF doesn't leave vertical stripes on all the AF pixel rows when there is flare. 

5. Show me a Sony lens, any lens on any body, that is as fast AF as a Canon 18-135 USM on an 80D in live view. 

It isn't even close. There are many things you can complain about Canon, but to cite DPAF as no big deal is hilariously ridiculous.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 19, 2018)

Tugela said:


> DPAF is not that far ahead. That is a huge myth perpetuated by marketing. The current Sony focussing system is allmost as fast as DPAF in terms of reaction time (0.05 seconds as opposed to 0.03 seconds, at those speeds there is no way a human could tell them apart), both systems are fast enough that the rate limiting factor is the lens response time rather than the camera's focusing system itself.



Any bona fide source for those numbers? I ask because you have a history of spouting bullish!t. 

If (and it's a BIG IF) your numbers are correct, you're saying that Sony's AF is 66% slower than Canon's DPAF. 'Not that far ahead,' see what I mean about spouting BS? Has it occurred to you that some subjects move, both for stills and video, and that an AF that's 66% slower will have a much harder time keeping up? Obviously not (but it should have, since you're the self-proclaimed expurt on the 4K capabilities of Digic processors).


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Apr 19, 2018)

TonyPicture said:


> kaptainkatsu said:
> 
> 
> > I broke down and bought an M50. I really needed a smaller solution than my 1DX2 for certain situations. My new job involves producing videos for social media (by myself with no assistant) so I really needed a flippy screen. I really wanted an a7III but since it didn't have a flippy screen I decided against it. GH5 fit the bill but the video AF sucks
> ...



I just got it today so I haven’t gotte. To play with it yet. Will report soon


----------



## Talys (Apr 19, 2018)

I'm sorry, I must make a correction on what I earlier wrote.

Sony On-Sensor Phase Detect Autofocus covers only about *40%* on full frame. Here is the AF diagram of Sony PDAF on A7R3, CDAF on A7R3, and Canon DPAF on all DSLRs and MILCs that have it.

Canon DPAF covers *80%* of the frame.

If you're wondering what it feels like CDAF on a Sony, it is pretty much the same speed as Live View on a T2i, or Live View on pretty much any Nikon DSLR. However, on the Sony, it is still useful for subject tracking of humans, who aren't moving very quickly, because theoretically, you'll PDAF them in the sweet spot and then the camera can follow them around after, making only small adjustments to AF.


----------



## tapanit (Apr 19, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> You don't get longer reach by cropping in camera - you just get a cropped image.



You do get larger image in the viewfinder, however, and that can help focusing significantly.

With an SLR that can't be easily changed, with an EVF it would be trivial.

My guess would be EF-M mount with an adapter and automatic crop mode for lenses that don't cover full-frame image circle.


----------



## Isaacheus (Apr 19, 2018)

Talys said:


> I'm sorry, I must make a correction on what I earlier wrote.
> 
> Sony On-Sensor Phase Detect Autofocus covers only about *40%* on full frame. Here is the AF diagram of Sony PDAF on A7R3, CDAF on A7R3, and Canon DPAF on all DSLRs and MILCs that have it.
> 
> ...



My understanding is that the a7r3 has the coverage shown here, while the a73 and a9 have close to 90% each.
Not disagreeing with the points of dpaf, from what I've used and seen, it seems to be extremely effective and accurate, and I'll be very interested to see what other manufacturers do in comparison in future mirrorless (stay with pd pixels or implement a dual pixel design etc)


----------



## Talys (Apr 19, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry, I must make a correction on what I earlier wrote.
> ...




I think the a7iii has a larger PDAF coverage than a9, and yes, they are both much better than a7riii. But the a9 is a $5,000 camera, and the a7iii has a much lower resolution EVF (I think a third less pixels?), enough that it's the first thing I noticed when I picked one up. And, obviously, the resolution of both are significantly lower. 

I don't think that we all need 40 megapixel cameras, but the lower resolution is more of problem in the Sony system than Canon, because telephoto life ends at 280 f/4 or 400/5.6 (and 560/8, if you want to go there), meaning that you're much more likely to need to crop, as compared to 1DXII lens options, which allow it to be an effective 20 megapixel camera.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 19, 2018)

Talys said:


> I don't think that we all need 40 megapixel cameras, but the lower resolution is more of problem in the Sony system than Canon, because telephoto life ends at 280 f/4 or 400/5.6 (and 560/8, if you want to go there), meaning that you're much more likely to need to crop, as compared to 1DXII lens options, which allow it to be an effective 20 megapixel camera.



yes, but .. in reality tele > 200mm is only used often/frequently by a very small minority of camera owners. Even FF camera owners. 

Personally i currently own no lens longer than 200mm and only occasionally rent one.


----------



## Talys (Apr 19, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think that we all need 40 megapixel cameras, but the lower resolution is more of problem in the Sony system than Canon, because telephoto life ends at 280 f/4 or 400/5.6 (and 560/8, if you want to go there), meaning that you're much more likely to need to crop, as compared to 1DXII lens options, which allow it to be an effective 20 megapixel camera.
> ...



Good for you. 

Many people have a tendency to underestimate markets that they're not personally interested in. This is one of those cases. The popularity of full frame 70-300mm zooms for both full frame and APSC would indicate that you are, simply, wrong.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 19, 2018)

Talys said:


> Many people have a tendency to underestimating markets that they're not personally interested in. This is one of those cases. The popularity of full frame 70-300mm zooms for both full frame and APSC would indicate that you are, simply, wrong.



Oh, AvTvM is the king of underestimate markets that he's not personally interested in, and he's the supreme emperor of overestimating to the nth degree the market's desire for the niche products he wants. 

He's also a member of royalty when it comes to being wrong.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Apr 19, 2018)

There, I've had my morning chuckle. It's mind boggling, guess it's called a "one track mind". I have run into it in everyday life before.  

I'm a weirdo for sure. 90% or my shooting is over ISO 1000 and ranges from 400 - 800mm but that's dependent on many factors and could change. However, is it reasonable to assume that I'd be happy with a dinky camera and nothing over 200mm - ouch. 

Jack


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 19, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> There, I've had my morning chuckle. It's mind boggling, guess it's called a "one track mind". I have run into it in everyday life before.
> 
> I'm a weirdo for sure. 90% or my shooting is over ISO 1000 and ranges from 400 - 800mm but that's dependent on many factors and could change. However, is it reasonable to assume that I'd be happy with a dinky camera and nothing over 200mm - ouch.
> 
> Jack



i don't assume anything. And certainly not what focal lengths you are using. But ... I am of the opinion that tele users are strongly over-represented in this forum compared to total Canon system owners.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 19, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> But ... I am of the opinion that tele users are strongly over-represented in this forum compared to total Canon system owners.



Tele users are clearly a minority, although it may be a reasonably large minority. That's evident from the fact that Canon sells lenses and ILCs in an ~1.4:1 ratio, and most of the bodies sold are APS-C and include an 18-55mm kit lens. But I'd also bet that a good chunk of the 0.4 additional lenses per body are 55-250mm and 75-300mm lenses sold in APS-C 2-lens kits, and that puts those users in the tele camp.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 19, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > There, I've had my morning chuckle. It's mind boggling, guess it's called a "one track mind". I have run into it in everyday life before.
> ...



Unfortunately for you marketing, product placement and profits are not a democracy.
Sony has really developed its high profile on video and how the beat Canon. Canon has built its reputation over 20 years on sports and wildlife which are largely telephoto. Can you imagine the outburst if Canon said "here is a new flasghip camera. Sorry you sports/wildlife guys but we are compromising the things you like us for. But don; worry because it is mirrorless and we all know how important it is that we take out the mirror"

You only need look at the 6D2, which was and is a fine camera in its own right, how internet chatter and trolls are driving perception - the impact of that scenario on Canon would catastrophic. 

The golden rule of marketing (of which I am sure you are totally ignorant) is that you ignore your core market at your peril. And your approach is probably the most basic example of that as you can imagine.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Apr 19, 2018)

Talys said:


> Chris Jankowski said:
> 
> 
> > Because Sony has no competition at the moment. No other vendor offers FF mirrorless. They also have reasonably good and quickly improving assortment of native FF lenses - the FE lenses. They also made the details of the interface to their lenses available to third party lens manufacturers. Sigma native FE lenses have just started coming.
> ...



We should give Sony some credit though. They went from creating awkward Cybershots (F707) using equally awkward memory sticks to being a competitive camera brand today that is exclusively compared against its more established peers at every corner. This isn't a company that got lazy and decided to ride out their brand name because they didn't really have one. Sony was once losing money in every segment other than their Sony Pictures and Playstation brands. In addition, I still remember a few years back a press release stated that Sony wanted to eventually be one of the top sensor manufacturers in the world. I'm sure they've achieved a large part of that today. That same tech is now making its way into their best cameras and is why you are seeing bodies like the A9. 10 years ago, would you even expect Sony to actually be competitive with today's Nikon and Canon much less potentially be slightly ahead of them from a innovation and tech perspective?

Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 19, 2018)

jayphotoworks said:


> We should give Sony some credit though. They went from creating awkward Cybershots (F707) using equally awkward memory sticks to being a competitive camera brand today that is exclusively compared against its more established peers at every corner. This isn't a company that got lazy and decided to ride out their brand name because they didn't really have one. Sony was once losing money in every segment other than their Sony Pictures and Playstation brands. In addition, I still remember a few years back a press release stated that Sony wanted to eventually be one of the top sensor manufacturers in the world. I'm sure they've achieved a large part of that today. That same tech is now making its way into their best cameras and is why you are seeing bodies like the A9. 10 years ago, would you even expect Sony to actually be competitive with today's Nikon and Canon much less potentially be slightly ahead of them from a innovation and tech perspective?
> 
> Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.



I agree. 
Sony moved into mirrorless as a pretty much last ditch attempt to stay in the market - they knew they had these great sensors and the decision to move into mirrorless was the only real segment left to them and Panasonic showed how it could be done. Once the 7 series took off they took it from there and have done a decent job. 
I have only used MFT, not Sony, but from reviews by even avid Sony users, I think saying "shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR" is still pushing it. The issue is not so much 'shooting mirrorless' as 'shooting Sony' in that Sony ergonomics still have some way to go to match the experience CaNikon have in understanding what makes a tool enjoyable to use.


----------



## vscd (Apr 19, 2018)

Sony not even has a lossless RAW or the possibilty to shoot RAW together with very fine JPG. No useable weathersealing. No ergonomics. Expensive lenses. What exactly was the good thing? A good sensor... admittedly. But that's all.


----------



## bhf3737 (Apr 19, 2018)

jayphotoworks said:


> Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.


I guess "more or less equal" does not mean "equal". That is why in math and statistics we have "equal" and "significantly different" and nothing in between. 
Precisely speaking, at the end of the day, we would like to conclude that there is no "significant difference" between a Sony body and a high end DSLR in terms features such as technology, build, user experience, price and end product they produce (i.e. pictures). But even if we get there, we will have yet another body capable of doing things alongside the others that are doing it for 20-30 years!! 
On the contrary, bloggers and marketing guys want to promote mirrorless as a significantly different technology, user experience, etc., which is currently groundless and is not based on any valid evidence.


----------



## Talys (Apr 20, 2018)

jayphotoworks said:


> We should give Sony some credit though. They went from creating awkward Cybershots (F707) using equally awkward memory sticks to being a competitive camera brand today that is exclusively compared against its more established peers at every corner. This isn't a company that got lazy and decided to ride out their brand name because they didn't really have one. Sony was once losing money in every segment other than their Sony Pictures and Playstation brands.



Well, they also did that through the purchase of Konica Minolta, in 2006. But I give them lots of credit for pioneering the full frame mirrorless market. I think the A7R3, A73, and A9 are all pretty nice cameras. I would be happy to own one.

However, I wouldn't want to replace my Canon DSLR with one, because really, the only thing I think they do better for me is manual focus magnification in the EVF and crop mode in EVF. Those things, for me, are huge, actually. But either don't care or dislike most of the other features that set mirrorless apart, and I find that I still vastly prefer an optical viewfinder in most cases, and the autofocus and ergonomic shortcomings still put DSLRs (significantly) ahead for me.



jayphotoworks said:


> Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.



It's a little less than more, though, for me.

There are many, many things I prefer about a DSLR, not the least of which is an optical viewfinder that always accurately reflects what's in front of me and consumes (nearly) no power even when you stare down it for hours. Also, Sony mirrorless cameras (and Canon EFM) are all focus-by-wire, which I still find vastly inferior to top-end L's for manual focus.

However, I am very envious of the manual focus magnification primarily because it ensures that the right part of a photo is in focus, even when the depth of field is extremely shallow. 

Specifically with Sony, I find the price of their good GM lenses very high, and the quality of their lower end lenses a little lacking. For example, I was able to spend some time with the 24-105/4, which seems like a great lens, but had an absurd amount of vingetting when quite wide. I'd be ok with that on a $600 lens, but it's a $1,300 lens.

I think that Sony's will get better. I think Canon M-series APSC's are actually a more usable camera, though primarily, for me, that is because of DPAF. I look forward to Canon's FF mirrorless, and will _probably_ buy one, though frankly, it will just be GAS.


----------



## slclick (Apr 20, 2018)

The manual focus magnification is a great things, love it in my M5. It makes using specialty lenses I have left to the wayside such as Lensbabys fun again for worsening eyes.


----------



## Chris Jankowski (Apr 20, 2018)

vscd said:


> Sony not even has a lossless RAW or the possibilty to shoot RAW together with very fine JPG. No useable weathersealing. No ergonomics. Expensive lenses. What exactly was the good thing? A good sensor... admittedly. But that's all.


Sony does offer completely lossless RAW. They introduced it about a year ago, as the customers asked for it. However, most users found out that they have not been losing anything noticeable with the compressed RAW and the size of files is much smaller. Lossless RAW is just another tick off point.


----------



## tron (Apr 20, 2018)

Chris Jankowski said:


> vscd said:
> 
> 
> > Sony not even has a lossless RAW or the possibilty to shoot RAW together with very fine JPG. No useable weathersealing. No ergonomics. Expensive lenses. What exactly was the good thing? A good sensor... admittedly. But that's all.
> ...


They don't offer the obvious Canon does: Lossless compressed RAW!


----------



## scyrene (Apr 20, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> I'm a weirdo for sure. 90% or my shooting is over ISO 1000 and ranges from 400 - 800mm but that's dependent on many factors and could change.



You are not alone!


----------



## jayphotoworks (Apr 20, 2018)

bhf3737 said:


> jayphotoworks said:
> 
> 
> > Today, shooting the newest Sony bodies feels more or less equal to shooting with a high end DSLR. There is also more or less the same type of glass that most people would want including the standard 2.8 zoom trifecta set and a few fast primes. I definitely would not feel that way just 1 or 2 generations back shooting with an A7/A7II.
> ...



I have to agree that the more or less equal really depends on what you shoot. For myself, the major compromise I had to live with shooting on Canon was the video feature-set or lack thereof. For most still shooters, I can fully understand why they would view Canon as the best solution. For hybrid or video work, I'm not so sure. Sony's feature set and ergonomics for video acquisition far outpace any of Canon's non-cinema line offerings. I mentioned all of these before, but the latest A7R3 and A7III have separate button configuration for stills vs video. Sony understands that many of the people buying their videos have specific video requirements and has catered the camera ergonomically to be dual-purpose, not just a stills camera with some video sprinkled on top. This extends to the intelligent hotshoe that has pins for various audio inputs like the XLR kit, etc. without separate cables. At the same time, they also understand the "people that need serious video buy a real video camera" mantra, by not throwing in a high bit-rate codec that burns through memory cards and requires transcoding to edit. 

My hope is that the upcoming mirrorless bodies from Canon address some of these things. The fact the M50 has DPAF and 4K, although not together, is a good sign for things to come from an upcoming flagship from Canon. In addition, Nikon and Canon are both jumping into mirrorless this year, either as a reaction from Sony's push into this space or simply because they see the evolution of cameras being mirrorless rather than DSLRs. Once all of the manufacturers are more or less on the same playing field within mirrorless and we actually start to see the decline of traditional DSLRs, I feel the real innovation can start. Then it is simply a matter of what they put into the silicon whether that be AI, machine learning or computational photography.


----------



## Talys (Apr 20, 2018)

jayphotoworks said:


> bhf3737 said:
> 
> 
> > jayphotoworks said:
> ...



That's a pretty good point. As a person who has shot less than 9 videos since DSLRs could record videos, I could care less if they removed video from my cameras entirely, but even being uninterested in those features, I can see how the Sony appears to have many more video-centric features. And anyways, a viewfinder may be a better way to shoot, and you can't do that with an OVF while recording video, obviously.

All that said, I really dislike the look of cheaply made Sony home videos (by other people) that have autofocus hunting where they haven't edited it out.


----------



## Chris Jankowski (Apr 23, 2018)

The DPReview has just published comprehensive and detailed review of Sony a7 III:

*https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7-iii-review*

This is well worth reading to know what is the current state of the aart in prosumer FF mirrorless.

It was surprising to me to find how far Sony has moved in the 5 years since the release of their first FF mirrorless - a7.

If Canon can deliver an FF mirror less body with:

- at least 80% of the Sony a7 III features 
- at a comparable price
- with good provisions for reliable use of EF lenses
- no major screw ups or artificially removed functionality
- and till the end of 2019

then I'll buy such body to supplement my DSLR.


----------



## hmatthes (Apr 23, 2018)

Chris Jankowski said:


> The DPReview has just published comprehensive and detailed review of Sony a7 III:
> 
> *https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7-iii-review*
> 
> ...



Very good review, factual and mostly unbiased. The A7-III may be tempting but needing a Metabones Model V to support my glass is rather off-putting. My friends tell me that using an adapter is far from optimal and I agree in principle. But selling their "L" lenses, they moan about the over-priced equivalent(?) Sony lenses!

CPS loaned me a EOS M5 with Canon's EF adapter and I found absolutely no problems with compatibility, focus, usage, and EXIF using my "L" glass. *This is because the same manufacturer engineered the body, the adapter and the lens.*

So I shall wait, impatiently, for Canon's FF Mirrorless -- hopefully aimed at the 5D-xx crowd. 

I'm still shooting the original 6D and using a 5D-IV whenever possible. Oh, and a Leica Q which shows me how amazing 24mp is on full frame when the same manufacturer builds both body and lens!

Come on Canon, my savings are ready for depletion!


----------



## Talys (Apr 23, 2018)

hmatthes said:


> Chris Jankowski said:
> 
> 
> > The DPReview has just published comprehensive and detailed review of Sony a7 III:
> ...



The adapters are a nightmare, because they seem good until you miss a whole bunch of shots because of slow AF, AF hunting, strange voodoo or outright crash.  Don't use one except for lenses that you use only very infrequently, in my opinion.

The review has a lot of pros/cons that are fact-based, and remarkably, actually looks like someone tried to use the camera. The list of what they didn't like for sports/wildlife photography is actually pretty close to what I don't like -- and those are kind of a deal-killer for me. 

It does mention that AF in continuous is at the aperture you set, not the widest aperture; it doesn't mention that AF is always slower than a modern PDAF DSLR that's same-priced or higher, and it also doesn't mention that AF in single-shot is contract detect and annoyingly hunts even when you have tons of light.

I too look forward to a Canon mirrorless, as the M5 simply feels like a better photography experience than the A7/A9 series. If they can carry that over to the full frame offering, I'll be pretty happy. Oh, as long as there is a flippy screen, too!


----------



## cellomaster27 (Apr 24, 2018)

Talys said:


> hmatthes said:
> 
> 
> > Chris Jankowski said:
> ...



If this rumored camera comes out by September, I'll buy pre-order it before my trip to Asia. I love my 5D3 but it's big and I'll be backpacking to 6-7 countries. I figure the lighter and smaller, the better. I do want the full frame sensor rather than the aps-c mirrorless offerings. I never pre-ordered anything but this may be it. Please don't disappoint me Canon!! You've been soooooo good at that! ;D :'(


----------



## Antono Refa (May 1, 2018)

hmatthes said:


> CPS loaned me a EOS M5 with Canon's EF adapter and I found absolutely no problems with compatibility, focus, usage, and EXIF using my "L" glass. *This is because the same manufacturer engineered the body, the adapter and the lens.*



This is because the manufacturer engineered the body so as to make the adapter trivial. If Canon chooses a whole new mount for FF MILC, it might be unable to produce an adapter that would make the whole system work.


----------



## Deleted member 380306 (May 1, 2018)

We've not had too much talk of the CFFM camera in a few weeks, I was looking forward to hearing or seeing something more concrete on this front, after coming from a Sony A7ii to a Canon 6d2 I'd be willing to jump right in and buy one, I doubt we'll see a release this year and it will be interesting to see the actually specs, cost and the way the reviewers react when Canon show up with the long awaited FFM and if the M50 is anything to go by it will be a cracking camera but I think with a high price tag so as to protect the flag ship style DSLR cameras... Just my thoughts!


----------



## Phil Indeblanc (May 4, 2018)

It has to be the same EF mount or it will be a few and hard road. Besides, as crappy as the Sony electronics are, I am using the EF with Metabones and I deal with it just fine in studio. It just has bad response times in the field and hunting, etc...besides the electronic glitches it sometimes has...

I would be SUPER HAPPY to have a adapter solution. THIS IS the right way to go. I sure am not buying a new set of lenses. If I was I would have gotten the Sony's already. But the Sony is not a camera first. It is a Electronic device and the camera plays catchup. Not so on the Canons. The Canon mirrorless will have to be at least 40+ mpixels for me to change, as my 5D3/4 are doing fine along the A7RII/III. I use all 4 and the Sony is great in studio while it fails on the field. Sony viewfinder is a joke next to Canon. Also the electronics is just not reliable. Canon is OK in studio, but the Sony is more practical with live view. 
Size is not an issue for either system. This is the lamest argument when you get into the lenses. With the Canon a batt grip is not needed, now same for the A7rIII, a bit smaller. Big deal. Its actually horrible ergo to hold. Maybe all Canon needs is a Live View addition to the existing system. I think some hybrid transparent mirror was something Nikon had in the works.


----------



## greger (May 4, 2018)

The lens mount of the Mirrorless Cameras will be the same as my Apsc Cameras. A white dot for Apsc and a red dot for full frame lenses. Mirrorless means no mirror slap when you mount an apsc lens. It should also allow faster frame rates.


----------

