# We were wrong, all of your Canon mirrorless dreams are likely coming true soon



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 27, 2018)

> Over the last week or two, I have been saying that all signs point to Canon not announcing a mirrorless camera body ahead of Photokina, which begins late next month.  We mentioned this again yesterday.
> All of our known sources, still maintain that they know of no mirrorless camera coming, even as recently as a few hours ago. Unknown sources have told us that a full frame mirrorless camera was coming, but history has taught us that the known is usually better than the unknown. I may have been wrong this time.
> 
> We’ve known about Canon having an announcement on September 5, 2018 (EST) for quite a while, and that has been confirmed by other sites as well.
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Jim Saunders (Aug 27, 2018)

Nine days of guessing and nine days of getting on with my life are the same, so I'll pay more attention next Wednesday. Don't get me wrong, I'm curious, just not obsessed.

Jim


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 27, 2018)

Jim Saunders said:


> Nine days of guessing and nine days of getting on with my life are the same, so I'll pay more attention next Wednesday. Don't get me wrong, I'm curious, just not obsessed.
> 
> Jim



Very true, I'll likely remain obsessed until then.


----------



## nostrovia (Aug 27, 2018)

28MP, [email protected], [email protected], IBIS. Isn't that awfully similar to the M5 MkII rumors from not too long ago?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 27, 2018)

28x10 would be 33% higher throughput than the 5D4 and 63% higher throughput than the 6D2.

I expect a course correction for Canon on its throughput vs. the competition (they've gone batty there of late with 42x12, 42x10, 45x9, 24x20), but that seems a very high bump for a $1900 camera.

I'm not saying 28x10 will steal 5D4 sales or anything, I'm just saying that I find these specs more Nikon/Sony like and less Canon like.

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Aug 27, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> 28x10 would be 33% higher throughput than the 5D4 and 63% higher throughput than the 6D2.
> 
> I expect a course correction for Canon on its throughput vs. the competition (they've gone batty there of late with 42x12, 42x10, 45x9, 24x20), but that seems a very high bump for a $1900 camera.
> 
> ...



canon currently does 9.2 fps at 24mp on a dinky little mirrorless, so it's not that much of a stretch really.


----------



## sdz (Aug 27, 2018)

Life goes on. Then Canon announces a FF mirrorless camera. Life again goes on.


The camera announcement is less compelling than the mount on that camera. The camera will take pictures sans a mirror. This is not a novelty. Many do. The mount on the camera might change everything, or nothing at all.

I prefer that Canon would keep the EF mount.


----------



## Quackator (Aug 27, 2018)

Canon has always been better than anyone else in getting things ready for key events. For the Brazil Olympic games they told people to fly - their cameras would be on location. And really, the new flagship was delivered to the hotel rooms just in time.

It was very unlikely that they would let Nikon steal all the marketing cream of a Photokina year. I expect this to have EF mount.


----------



## hmatthes (Aug 27, 2018)

*Be still my heart...! * 
If a Canon FF mirrorless is less than $2k I can buy one and keep my current FF DSLRs.
For backup, I placed an order for a Z-6 which I will cancel 9/5 or so.

More than 80% of my last two years' images come from a Leica Q FF mirrorless with fixed 28mm f/1.7 -- using a WSIWYG EVF viewfinder is now all I want and an OVF feels old fashioned.

*Thanks to all the folks bringing a Canon FF mirrorless to this old photographer and his EF collection!*


----------



## Philipp (Aug 27, 2018)

[email protected] would be super weak, there's really no need to throttle performance that badly. Just to keep the 1DX as the best or to make it easier to bring out a more high end mirrorless camera later?
Either way I think that's poor if true.


----------



## kirispupis (Aug 27, 2018)

If true, then my next two questions are:
1) What mount?
2) Anything new for the sensor?

In terms of what this would cause on my part as a buyer, that depends. On the surface, I have little use for this camera. I need a high res companion for my 1Dx2, and this isn't it. However, the big brother to come may be.

If Canon can make strides with their sensor, then this camera will be enough to keep me from pairing an a7r3 with my 1Dx2. I won't buy this one, but I'll be ok with waiting for the higher MP one to be released.

On the other hand, if this is basically a 5d4 sensor, then I'll probably just pick up the a7r3.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 27, 2018)

Well. That is interesting if true. Not bad specs for a sub 2k camera given that it will likely be far better ergonomically than the Sonys(I hope). I am unlikely to consider a mirrorless just yet but will be keen to see if the EVF is up to scratch.


----------



## hmatthes (Aug 27, 2018)

kirispupis said:


> On the surface, I have little use for this camera. I need a high res companion for my 1Dx2, and this isn't it. However, the big brother to come may be.
> .



I love the 5DS for this high res situations. Heaven would be 50mp mirrorless...


----------



## ecpu (Aug 27, 2018)

kirispupis said:


> If true, then my next two questions are:
> 1) What mount?
> 2) Anything new for the sensor?
> 
> ...


If they recycle their current sensor tech (5D4/6D2), I think they will officially make a lot of people make the switch to Sony. I know I will. They need a competitive product and that requires new tech. I'm already not liking the idea that they're thinking of capping 1080p video at 60fps.... like why? The competitors can all do 120fps. I guess if we want 120 we need to buy a 1DX M2? I don't think so... I'll just give my $2000 to Sony for the A7III if that's the case. BUT.. I'm still really hoping it'll turn out to be a good competitive camera. We will see next week.


----------



## docsmith (Aug 27, 2018)

No....that would make too many people happy.

It can't be true.....

In all seriousness, Canon's quality and reliability and that spec list. That is a sweet camera. All for under $2k. Sure it is head to head with the Z6 and a bit lower in price than the A7III. But Canon is usually one to bleed as much revenue as possible. Even pricing themselves well above the competition. Here, they would be the same price as Nikon and lower than Sony??? While I hope it is true, this doesn't feel right. 

Tell me it is $2,499, or $2,999...that would make more sense.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Aug 27, 2018)

dual card slot and eyeAF please.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 27, 2018)

IBIS! How well will it work in combination with OIS? This should be interesting.....

Plus, never having to AFMA a lens again


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 27, 2018)

hmatthes said:


> I love the 5DS for this high res situations. Heaven would be 50mp mirrorless...



If you want high res on the cheap, the only option is last gen stuff: D800/D800E, A7R2, etc. 

Historical price track for 5DS: 





That is rock solid. Few metrics defend price better than being best in class in resolution.

- A


----------



## ecpu (Aug 27, 2018)

I'm thinking this is the crop/M5 Mark 2. I feel like Canon would have hyped up the announcement if it were a game-changing FF mirrorless with potentially a whole new mount. You know what you don't hype up? More of the same. You know what would be more of the same (but in a good way at least)? A crop sensor mirrorless on the existing mirrorless system/mount configuration with the specs listed above.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 27, 2018)

If it's $1900 -- and I'm not saying it is -- the camera would effectively be a 6D2 spec with a slightly newer (on-chip) sensor and some form of 4K.

Any talk of a high res rig at that price is purely dreaming. Not even Sony gives high res away for a song.

- A


----------



## HarryFilm (Aug 27, 2018)

kirispupis said:


> If true, then my next two questions are:
> 1) What mount?
> 2) Anything new for the sensor?
> 
> ...



===

I think I can help you in figuring what is coming down the road REAL SOON NOW from SOMEONE !!! I'm not saying WHOM or WHEN...I'm just saying look at these near-centre-of-photo crops from images taken at 8192 by 6144 pixel AFTER 4:2:2 8-bit normal in-camera-based DCT-based JPEG compression has been applied. (i.e. these are NOT it's much higher visual quality 4:4:4 JPEG-2000 Wavelet photos!) ... I Think I can say on these images, the noise floor and colour-rendition are such that EVEN WITH DCT JPEG IMAGE COMPRESSION that any problems are now an issue with manual operator-focusing and higher end lenses being needed and NOT the camera itself.

So what is coming DOWN the road very very soon now is 60 fps DCI 8k video and 120 fps DCI 4k/5k video using interframe and intraframe codecs at multiple aspect ratios. The photo size is 50 megapixel stills at a burst rate of 25 fps. Sensor sites are 6+ micron for low noise floor. You get FANTASTIC user-selectable DCT JPEG and Wavelet JPEG-2000 8-bit, 10-bit, 12-bit, 14-bit and 16-bit compressed still photos and video at user-selectable bit-rates! FULL RAW and 2:1, 3:1 and 4:1 RAW 4:4:4 and JPEG-2000 4:4:4/4:2:2 colour sampling ...... COMING REAL SOON NOW !!!

Now take it as you see it! These are UNRESAMPLED direct centre-crops (i.e. NOT Bicubic or Lanczos-3 resampled!) taken from an 8k by 6k image at 8-bit DCT JPEG --- I Rest My Case !!! These PNG-format saved images now allow you to PROPERLY see the ORIGINAL 8-bit 4:2:2 JPEG artifacts unheeded by any given image editor representation. This means the noise and compression artificts even at the lower quality settings (saves space) is MUCH REDUCED over almost ANY current camera out there. Colour is very good especially on the flowers. I wish I could show you the full size 8k x 6k pixel 16-bit FULL RAW and JPEG-2000 4:4:4 images ....BUT I CAN'T ....YET!

AND............YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST !!!


----------



## ecpu (Aug 27, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> If it's $1900 -- and I'm not saying it is -- the camera would effectively be a 6D2 spec with a slightly newer (on-chip) sensor and some form of 4K.
> 
> Any talk of a high res rig at that price is purely dreaming. Not even Sony gives high res away for a song.
> 
> - A


Whatever it is, it's 100% not going to be the top end model with high res. Definitely not for $1900. Given Canon's pricing (high prices for low specs compared to the competition), what could really be included with a $1900 camera?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 27, 2018)

ecpu said:


> I'm thinking this is the crop/M5 Mark 2. I feel like Canon would have hyped up the announcement if it were a game-changing FF mirrorless with potentially a whole new mount. You know what you don't hype up? More of the same. You know what would be more of the same (but in a good way at least)? A crop sensor mirrorless on the existing mirrorless system/mount configuration with the specs listed above.




Canon does hype *at* launch, not prior. They don't leak the whole thing in advance like others, they don't tease like Nikon and they don't list out roadmaps and set specific future expectations for its users. All prior run ups for major releases have shown this. Other than the odd spec list leak or idiotic NDA violation by a social medial influencer, Canon is airtight until week of launch. CR Guy frames up the specs, Nokishita captures the legit late leaks of marketing materials, etc. -- that's Canon for you.

Consider the following things we do not know about the new FF mirrorless from Canon:

[ahem]​​1. _Anything about it at all._​​That is all.​​[bow]​
I'm not saying 9/5 is going to be the FF launch because no one knows. But it also wouldn't surprise me. 

- A


----------



## snappy604 (Aug 27, 2018)

I know I'm interested.. sounds like a mirrorless 6d MkII with a tiny bit of extras


----------



## ecpu (Aug 27, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Canon does hype *at* launch, not prior. They don't leak the whole thing in advance like others, they don't tease like Nikon and they don't list out roadmaps and set specific future expectations for its users. All prior run ups for major releases have shown this. Other than the odd spec list leak or idiotic NDA violation by a social medial influencer, Canon is airtight until week of launch. CR Guy frames up the specs, Nokishita captures the legit late leaks of marketing materials, etc. -- that's Canon for you.
> 
> Consider the following things we do not know about the new FF mirrorless from Canon:
> 
> ...


I haven't seen any major Canon product launches because until now I didn't really care. But I guess that's how they do it? Crazy that they can keep info from leaking out for so long.


----------



## rrcphoto (Aug 27, 2018)

nostrovia said:


> 28MP, [email protected], [email protected], IBIS. Isn't that awfully similar to the M5 MkII rumors from not too long ago?


it would but the price is way too high for that camera unless it shot at 20 fps and did [email protected],etc.
the M5 was 979 at release, i doubt canon would DOUBLE the price of the original to go to a Mark II.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> I know I'm interested.. sounds like a mirrorless 6d MkII with a tiny bit of extras



Might not be a bad camera as long as they were able to increase DR and provide a decent bitrate and codec for the video.


----------



## rrcphoto (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Might not be a bad camera as long as they were able to increase DR and provide a decent bitrate and codec for the video.


DIGIC 8 does [email protected] with 133mbps bitrate. better than the Sonys.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

That said, in this very unique instance, Canon _might_ give us a lens roadmap for the new mount (if it is indeed a thin mount).

Why they might do this:

To get folks excited for the new system and buy in.


To confirm certain lenses *aren't* on the docket to get prospective EF lens buyers to buy EF lenses now instead of waiting for that specific lens in EF-X later. If you just see 2-3 years of slower/smaller lens options, you might finally get off your butt and buy that 135L or 16-35 f/2.8L III you've been wanting.
Why they might not do this:

Because it's not their usual MO. Canon releases stuff when it's ready, not when people expect it or because they said it was coming two press conferences ago.


To reassure users that their vision for the new mount is modest and that EF is not going anywhere. Canon doing this...
​​...would rile up a lot of Canon folks. Why are they remaking all the pro zooms? Perhaps there is a problem with EF pro zooms on this new platform. Maybe I shouldn't buy this EF pro zoom. _ Is EF going away? _ [Blacks out from heart attack]​​It might make more sense to put out a 24-something f/4 zoom and a couple small f/2 - f/2.8 primes and not give much of a read to people.​- A


----------



## transpo1 (Aug 28, 2018)

nostrovia said:


> 28MP, [email protected], [email protected], IBIS. Isn't that awfully similar to the M5 MkII rumors from not too long ago?



That’s what I think, too. This sounds like the M5II


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

If it's a crop camera, I will have concerns about the low light performance due to the 28MP's.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

nostrovia said:


> 28MP, [email protected], [email protected], IBIS. Isn't that awfully similar to the M5 MkII rumors from not too long ago?





transpo1 said:


> That’s what I think, too. This sounds like the M5II



Agree, but so many EF-M lenses already have IS. Why add IBIS to that platform now?

Yes, IBIS can work with lens IS -- but is it essential for that market? Will they pay more for it? Isn't Canon cleaning Sony's clock in APS-C right now _without_ IBIS?

A new mount, however, has more incentive to offer this.

- A


----------



## fox40phil (Aug 28, 2018)

If its not for professionals...it wont have 2 card slots...tooo bad :'( :'(.... but lets see....

Better they have also a 2x card slot, pro body in the line!! with Eye AF, Ibis, etc.... high resolution EVF and display! Big battery and grip ...

@*HarryFilm*
what the hell...are you using for an camera? Canon? Or a Red 8k?^^ damn wtf.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Aug 28, 2018)

So an A73 competitor (possibly) with those specs). If it has most of the features of the A73 and Z6 and dual cards, and please eye-AF and the AF performance is 5D4 or better, that's potentially a winner. I doubt they'll use the high res EVF or rear LCD like Z6, more like the A73. 

I think Nikon did a solid but not spectacular job with the Z series, Canon can make a splash if they have the will.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> I haven't seen any major Canon product launches because until now I didn't really care. But I guess that's how they do it? Crazy that they can keep info from leaking out for so long.



They aren't Apple good, but they are quite good for the industry they are in.

But, completely subjectively, I feel the mount decision would appear to be the 2nd biggest secret of Canon's in my 6 years of posting here.

The biggest secret is why a world class imaging company can make stellar optics from UWA to supertele and still not deliver a modern, comprehensive workhorse 50 prime. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

Mr Majestyk said:


> I think Nikon did a solid but not spectacular job with the Z series, Canon can make a splash if they have the will.



I think Nikon did a solid but not spectacular job *with the specs* with the Z series.

Reviews and checking the fine print in the manual will tell us more.

- A


----------



## transpo1 (Aug 28, 2018)

“Canon has truly done a masterful job of keeping this quiet.” And not quiet. And quiet. And not quiet. And leaking. And not leaking. And on. And not on. 

Let’s just say they haven’t kept it quiet, they’ve just done a great job providing conflicting information- which may be even better. I wouldn’t be surprised if known sources are in on a misinformation campaign. 

Or there also may be a debate going on within the company about what to announce/release and when.


----------



## fullstop (Aug 28, 2018)

the rumor does not sound right. 
* if the source/s would truly know these specs, they would for sure also know lens mount and mention it 
* also don't believe, Canon will be coming out with "lower end body" only to launch FF mirrorfree lineup; 
I fully expect either 1 "higher end" [at least Z7 level] or two cameras, 1 higher positioned and 1 lower [like Nikon and Sony]
* M5 II? don't think so either. USD 1900 would be way too much for a [Canon] APS-C/crop camera 

therefore I do not believe this rumor in its current form.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> “Canon has truly done a masterful job of keeping this quiet.” And not quiet. And quiet. And not quiet. And leaking. And not leaking. And on. And not on.
> 
> Let’s just say they haven’t kept it quiet, they’ve just done a great job providing conflicting information- which may be even better. I wouldn’t be surprised if known sources are in on a misinformation campaign.




If everything's made in house, it's so much easier to keep a lid on things.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

fullstop said:


> the rumor does not sound right.
> * if the source/s would truly know these specs, they would for sure also know lens mount and mention it




Agree. This is my #1 beef with these spec reveals. The mount is either a top-line spec list item or... Nope. It _has_ to be, right?



fullstop said:


> * also don't believe, Canon will be coming out with "lower end body" only to launch FF mirrorfree lineup;
> I fully expect either 1 "higher end" [at least Z7 level] or two cameras, 1 higher positioned and 1 lower [like Nikon and Sony]



Canon did this with EOS M. They started at the bottom. Wouldn't surprise me here.

And an EOS M camera had better be 7D3 face melting awesome to command $1900. Agree.

Just not buying this rumor for the same reasons. Something's off.

- A


----------



## NeverPlayMonopoly (Aug 28, 2018)

The title of this post alone...


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 28, 2018)

If its not superior to the sony a7iii then forget it.


----------



## Sv2019 (Aug 28, 2018)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


There is nothing wrong with skepticism. I’ve seen other rumor sites end up with pie in their face saying a specific camera was “almost certainly going to be announced” on this particular date only to have 5 or 6 of those instances come and go with no announcement.


----------



## Sv2019 (Aug 28, 2018)

bergstrom said:


> If its not superior to the sony a7iii then forget it.


 The A7 III has crap image quality so it shouldn’t be too hard to surpass it.


----------



## fullstop (Aug 28, 2018)

EOS M was a "consumer/crop" camera, but not "at the bottom". it was the best possible MILC Canon was able to put together at the time. ;-)

also, MSRP 899 was also very high compared to equivalent crop mirrorslappers, nowhere near "entry level"


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

Sv2019 said:


> The A7 III has crap image quality so it shouldn’t be too hard to surpass it.



Heh, by what standard? The a7iii is fine. I bet if I looked at three prints, one from an A7iii, one from a 5DSR, and one from a D850, I couldn’t pick which is from which, or even discern quality differences not related to the user or lens.


----------



## BillB (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Agree. This is my #1 beef with these spec reveals. The mount is either a top-line spec list item or... Nope. It _has_ to be, right?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It doesn't seem likely that all of the specs are right. Wonder how many will turn out to be right on September 5, or whenever a camera is eventually announced.


----------



## pj1974 (Aug 28, 2018)

I love Canon Rumors - and yes, I have recently been spending plenty of time dreaming about Canon's mirrorless future ... lol ... 

This latest rumor/ news & possible quite different direction has me thinking that the following are possible mirrorless bodies Canon might go with for the next few years:

A $750 M50 (being the 'great value' mirrorless, to entice people to the EOS-M line, also being the new standard for a few more 'Rebel / XXXD' DSLR bodies)
A $1200 M5II - with notably more specs than M5 (so it's close to a true 80D / 90D equivalent); retaining current size (but with fully articulating screen)
A $1900 FF mirrorless (*the specs of this rumour*) - having everything a 6DII has, and a bit more, roughly competing with the Sony A7iii and Nikon Z6
A $3500 FF mirrorless (the 5D4 'equivalent') - that may be Canon's 'top of the line' FF mirrorless for some time - competing with the Nikon Z7

The 'gaps' - that I see from the above line up (that may be filled in future years, rather than in the near future) 

A $1800 '7D' mirrorless equivalent (i.e. APS-C sized sensor with on sensor DAC for superior IQ than the current 7Dii), but a body similar to the size of the new Nikon Z line (i.e. allowing very good balance for larger / adapted lenses too). Will probably herald a significant step forward in autofocus (at least well above the M5)
A $4000 FF high resolution mirrorless, basically the 5DS/R, with similar specs to the $3500 mirrorless I list above, but some key differences too
A $7500 FF high speed 'pro' monster, with stunning AF and durability, larger size again to other FF mirrorless.
It could be that Canon come out with the $1800 "7D" mirrorless before the M5II, AND/OR they will come out with the 5DS/R equivalent before the 5D4 equivalent.
I expect to see there being the use of QPAF (or DPAF with much improved tech) in the relatively near future for Canon mirrorless, i.e. superior low light AF, increased initial acquisition and tracking speed. 

For the FF mirrorless mount, my guess is that Canon will use a mount that is automatically fully compatible with EF lenses; but it may also have the ability to have slightly smaller lenses (particularly for certain wide / fast glass). 

Let's see how we go! It's an exciting time. Thanks, CR Guy and CR Community

PJ


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Agree, but so many EF-M lenses already have IS. Why add IBIS to that platform now?
> 
> Yes, IBIS can work with lens IS -- but is it essential for that market? Will they pay more for it? Isn't Canon cleaning Sony's clock in APS-C right now _without_ IBIS?
> 
> A new mount, however, has more incentive to offer this.


I remain unconvinced we'll see IBIS from Canon, after their 'educational' materials touting the benefits of lens-based IS. Then again, Nikon touted their ED elements vs. fluorite, saying the latter were prone to cracking...until they started using fluorite in their superteles (some 30 years after 'non-innovative' Canon).


----------



## unfocused (Aug 28, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I remain unconvinced we'll see IBIS from Canon, after their 'educational' materials touting the benefits of lens-based IS. Then again, Nikon touted their ED elements vs. fluorite, saying the latter were prone to cracking...until they started using fluorite in their superteles (some 30 years after 'non-innovative' Canon).



I see IBIS as a video feature. For stills, lens-based stabilization is better, but for video it’s better to have the stabilization in the camera. I see this as a sign that Canon and Nikon believe mirrorless represents the future for video.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 28, 2018)

A $3500 FF mirrorless (the 5D4 'equivalent') - that may be Canon's 'top of the line' FF mirrorless for some time - competing with the Nikon Z7 

Pj, if the price is too high, people just might opt fora son a7iii. Price point has to match or even under cut a7iii to try and attract sales.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> If they recycle their current sensor tech (5D4/6D2)



5D4 and 6D2 have drastically different performance, 5D4 isn't too far from Nikon's D810/850 in terms of DR and high ISO (and in some ways is slightly better). 6D2 has an average sensor in terms of DR.


----------



## ethanz (Aug 28, 2018)

No one has fed the troll, good job guys. It was interesting to see him POST again.


----------



## infared (Aug 28, 2018)

If the camera has the specs listed above, I personally will have absolutely no interest in it.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

I just want a good FF mirrorless with good DR, 4K 10-bit recording at 30p and 1080 at 120p with a bitrate of at least 100mbps (preferably higher though). Resolution between 24-28MP with good high-ISO performance. IBIS would be awesome, but I have trouble believing we'll see that. If Canon can make such a camera, I will gladly pay up to about $2500 for it.


----------



## Cochese (Aug 28, 2018)

Lack of Mirror slap aside, I still don't get why this matters much. At least on a personal level, the size of the 5DmIV bothers me not. Having no mirror would be cool, I guess. But it's not really a deal breaker for me. Slightly lighter is all well and good, but also not a deal breaker for me.


----------



## captainkanji (Aug 28, 2018)

I'm waiting for a high res version. If it has IBIS and a great EVF, I'm in. I have a couple of years before I really need to make a decision though. My empty bank account is patient.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2018)

Why IBIS?

Because IBIS and OIS working together are better than choosing one or the other.....

Panasonic went that way....
Olympus went that way......
It looks like Nikon is going that way....

Why not Canon?


----------



## eosuser1234 (Aug 28, 2018)

Whatever it is, I hope you can press the shutter in dark situations without a 1/2 second delay, unlike the current mirrorless options from Canon.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 28, 2018)

Canon kept the 1Dx announcement buried very well before its release. The expectation of the masses was a 1Ds IV up until a week or so before release.

A year before its release I remember a forum member who claimed to have knowledge of the release. What he claimed would happen did happen. The 1D line was combined and the 5D line went on to be pushed as a studio and high resolution camera. He was ridiculed by many on the forums at the time.

It is not surprising that Canon can keep a secret up until the date gets close.


----------



## HarryFilm (Aug 28, 2018)

pj1974 said:


> I love Canon Rumors - and yes, I have recently been spending plenty of time dreaming about Canon's mirrorless future ... lol ...
> 
> This latest rumor/ news & possible quite different direction has me thinking that the following are possible mirrorless bodies Canon might go with for the next few years:
> 
> ...



====

You've hit the nail on the head more than you might think.........


----------



## HarryFilm (Aug 28, 2018)

"......No one has fed the troll, good job guys. It was interesting to see him POST again. ....."

---

It's been a while....been away on "Important Business".

I actually DO KNOW MUCH MORE what's coming down the pipeline than you do and THAT IS AN ABSOLUTE FACT!

and THAT FACT has been used by me for the last few months now and it is SWEEEEEEEEEEET !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your comments are what they are and only a photo/video of what's sitting on my desk can change that AND you ain't gettin' it,

although, you CAN take a look at SOME of it's output as per the photos in my posting but other than that you'll have to wait.......

AND.....in case you're wonder HOW the photos were made to look that good on DCT JPEG, the key is using smaller block sizes and specially made human eye-centric quantization tables than the normal JPEG quantization tables which does give a slight rise in photo size BUT really makes a visual difference.
AND YES I was the one who designed them! That human-eye-centricity towards compression is also applied to my 16-bits per channel Wavelet/JPEG-2000 frequency-based quantization parameters which is why A BIG GIANT MEDIA COMPANY is gonna finally give you what you want in a large sensor COMBINED stills and video camera!


----------



## RayValdez360 (Aug 28, 2018)

If a $1900 camera isnt for pros who is it for. Rich kids?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 28, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> If a $1900 camera isnt for pros who is it for. Rich kids?


Who is the 6-series for?


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 28, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Who is the 6-series for?



Do all your kids have one yet?


----------



## ethanz (Aug 28, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> If a $1900 camera isnt for pros who is it for. Rich kids?



There are lots and lots of people with enough disposable income to be able to afford a camera that expensive, even if it is only a hobby. At least this is the case in the USA and some of Europe.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Why IBIS? Because IBIS and OIS working together are better than choosing one or the other.....
> 
> Panasonic went that way....
> Olympus went that way......
> ...




The quick comeback is that Canon is sitting at 49% of ILC units without IBIS and tends to know what it is doing. (I don't say that backhandedly, I"m just pointing out the obvious.)

Canon may believe, or possibly even have market data to back up the following:
(these are theories, I don't present them as fact)

IS on lenses is more profitable for Canon
IS on lenses lets them keep body prices (i.e. standard production costs) down
Lens IS is more effective than IBIS, and that Canon can demonstrate that to consumers -- either in number of stops, the convenience of defeating it / tweaking its performance with a switch on the barrel, etc.
That said, they may roll out IBIS on FF mirrorless and say 'the EVF changes what is needed' and sell that story. We'll see. But Neuro may be right that IBIS isn't coming. EOS M still doesn't have mechanical all-purpose IBIS yet -- just the electronic version for video, ya? 

- A


----------



## RGF (Aug 28, 2018)

EF mount? or EF-M mount? If the former, the bottom will be "as thick as a brick", perhaps with dual cards and a reasonable battery


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> If a $1900 camera isnt for pros who is it for. Rich kids?




There are plenty of folks who get cameras at this price point:

Canonites who use high performing SLRs as their daily driver but want a smaller option for travel, walkabout, casual shooting, etc.
Enthusiasts like many here that want a smaller/simpler way to get access to a good FF sensor
Kids to wish to outdo the internet with their life, travels, etc., 'Going to start a social media empire' millennials
People who read Engadget or Wired
Bored dads
People starting their own businesses that require online content and want stuff to look sharp (Etsy folks, pop-up restauranteurs, etc.)
Older folks who gave up bigger SLRs because they were too big/heavy to bring anywhere
Put another way, if the 6D1 / D610 / A7 I and II didn't sell well, this '$2k but not pro' price point would have died off as a failed experiment. The fact that more cameras are being made in this price point imply that units are selling, and selling well.

So why did this enthusiast get a 5D3 in 2012? I wasn't wealthy, but I had money in my pocket that I didn't blow on prestige-y things I didn't need: I drove a paid off Honda, owned a home I could afford and the money was there. A better camera than my T1i made sense because I was constantly bumping into its limits, and at that time, the 5-series was the only FF option under $7k (the 6D1 wasn't out yet). I briefly thought about the 7D1, but I valued IQ and low light over fps. So I got a 5D3 and never looked back.

- A


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> Canon kept the 1Dx announcement buried very well before its release. The expectation of the masses was a 1Ds IV up until a week or so before release.
> 
> A year before its release I remember a forum member who claimed to have knowledge of the release. What he claimed would happen did happen. The 1D line was combined and the 5D line went on to be pushed as a studio and high resolution camera. He was ridiculed by many on the forums at the time.
> 
> It is not surprising that Canon can keep a secret up until the date gets close.



10 bucks says they don’t secretly have a 48X36 8K sensor that will read out 60 times a second, much less a camera system designed around it.

(I know, I’m a big risk taker)


----------



## AJ (Aug 28, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I remain unconvinced we'll see IBIS from Canon, after their 'educational' materials touting the benefits of lens-based IS.


Me too. Have there been any IBIS patents from Canon?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

AJ said:


> Me too. Have there been any IBIS patents from Canon?




But as I've definitively shown, no IBIS = total failuresauce. It's in my chart, so it has to be true.

​
- A


----------



## Silverstream (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> There are plenty of folks who get cameras at this price point:
> 
> Canonites who use high performing SLRs as their daily driver but want a smaller option for travel, walkabout, casual shooting, etc.
> Enthusiasts like many here that want a smaller/simpler way to get access to a good FF sensor
> ...



Everything you list above can easily be done with a crop camera except of course the second item with access to a FF sensor.

Before I got into photography, I thought amateurs were nuts to buy expensive cameras honestly. I am on far more of a tight budget than you and the cost of a new 5DmIII is more than I have spent on a car since the 80's. I'm kind of simple and cheap I guess.

The sales success I see with the 6D series is all those who are pro level but newer to photography or simply have less sales volume. The moms who try to have a side business shooting. Or the new pro who is moving up to FF. Its what I did. I eventually moved up to a 5DmkIII and a MKIV and also replaced that original 6D with the mkII. The 6D mk II is my main backup camera now but it also brings different features to it like the articulating screen which is very helpful for receptions when you hold the camera up high to shoot over and down on people.

Personally, I don't use the dual slot on the mkIII or mkIV for real time backups. It was a habit I got in from the mkIII which doing this on that camera caused a write speed slowdown so the buffer became filled more easily. I am very careful with my cards and have never had an issue with one. I also shoot events generally with two cameras (and second shooters) so worse case scenario, I will still have images from one of them. So one slot does not really bug me as a pro.

But I will ask who buys 6Ds at the camera store next week when I put down my deposit on this new camera.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

AJ said:


> Me too. Have there been any IBIS patents from Canon?


Not that I’ve seen, however that doesn’t preclude an implementation.

Canon has in the past revealed technology after launch, and it also has plenty of money and a willingness to license technology when it makes sense to.


----------



## mppix (Aug 28, 2018)

Imagine this does 10fps with full AF/shutter capabilities (as opposed to shutter locked, with battery grip, and saying a spell).
Imagine a fast and reasonably large EVF and an articulating screen

This may very well be a true fotocamera a la Canon (as opposed to hybrid video something). I believe it in part BECAUSE this seems slightly underwhelming, get the reviewers whining and fill forums just to emerge as the gold standard a year later. IMO, it is also a hit directed where it hurts Sony the most (A7III).

First rumor in a while that gets to my AQS.

Some other notes
- 4k 30fps and 1080p 60fps points to a crop 4k (similar to 5D4)
- A hybrid EF mount is still possible (mounts native EF lenses and new "intruding" lenses)


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

mppix said:


> - A hybrid EF mount is still possible (mounts native EF lenses and new "intruding" lenses)




We've kicked this around on another thread. Have a look?

​
- A


----------



## mppix (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> The quick comeback is that Canon is sitting at 49% of ILC units without IBIS and tends to know what it is doing. (I don't say that backhandedly, I"m just pointing out the obvious.)
> 
> Canon may believe, or possibly even have market data to back up the following:
> (these are theories, I don't present them as fact)
> ...



Agree, it may very well be a video-only software IBIS. Still, I think there are bigger questions about this cam (mount and AF speed/reliability).


----------



## mppix (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> We've kicked this around on another thread. Have a look?
> 
> View attachment 179949​
> - A



Nice graphic! Not sure about the equal size assumption tough.. Short lenses are probably (much) smaller if put closer to the sensor. My guess is a 28 f2.8 could pretty much fit entirely in the body. If only there was an E-mount 28 f2.8
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...cyhRfxSKgiWLozTkOM_FxNXwFhoCFWAQAvD_BwE&smp=y


----------



## Talys (Aug 28, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Who is the 6-series for?



Haven't you seen Crazy Rich Asians?  (I haven't but I've been told it's pretty funny).


----------



## Talys (Aug 28, 2018)

Silverstream said:


> Everything you list above can easily be done with a crop camera except of course the second item with access to a FF sensor.
> 
> Before I got into photography, I thought amateurs were nuts to buy expensive cameras honestly. I am on far more of a tight budget than you and the cost of a new 5DmIII is more than I have spent on a car since the 80's. I'm kind of simple and cheap I guess.
> 
> ...



I bought a 6D on launch day for the articulating screen on a full frame. I'd trade 20 megapixels for the articulating screen any day of the week, twice on weekdays or weekends


----------



## Adelino (Aug 28, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> If a $1900 camera isnt for pros who is it for. Rich kids?


Enthusiast photographers, most high end cameras are not purchased by pros.


----------



## jcfalconer (Aug 28, 2018)

"We were wrong, all of your Canon mirrorless dreams are likely coming true soon"
Oh, so tongue in cheek with this 180. How can I believe you now?


----------



## Respinder (Aug 28, 2018)

I'm getting worried. I really hope Canon delivers something that will blow us away - as I've said before, they are fully capable of doing so - it is simply the question as to whether they want to. When I hear that they will announce something on Sept 5, it sounds more reactive to me (i.e. reacting to Nikon), which in Canon's case, I'm not sure its necessary. Rather than release something in a reactive and rushed manner, I would rather that Canon respond proactively when they are good and ready - that means taking the extra time to deliver something spectacular. Or maybe they were always planning for this Sept 5 date - who knows?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

Respinder said:


> I'm getting worried. I really hope Canon delivers something that will blow us away - as I've said before, they are fully capable of doing so - it is simply the question as to whether they want to. When I hear that they will announce something on Sept 5, it sounds more reactive to me (i.e. reacting to Nikon), which in Canon's case, I'm not sure its necessary. Rather than release something in a reactive and rushed manner, I would rather that Canon respond proactively when they are good and ready - that means taking the extra time to deliver something spectacular. Or maybe they were always planning for this Sept 5 date - who knows?




1) Curious: when is the last time Canon blew you away? This is not what they do. Canon predictably puts one foot in front of the other and delivers -- with quality, with forethought, and with usefulness. I liken them to a rather mundane automobile that never turns heads but also never ever lets you down.

2) When FF mirrorless comes, know it was probably 3-5 years in development. There is zero chance Canon is rushing it. This is just when the release schedules lined up, and we shouldn't be surprised: Photokina is a big deal sort of event to announce things. If anything, Nikon deliberately wanted to be first of the two major SLR companies to grab all the spotlight and media attention. That said, FF mirrorless might be a later event if 9/5 has a reveal, it could be M5 Mk II or some other crop offering.

- A


----------



## RickWagoner (Aug 28, 2018)

The reason why you don't hear anything real solid on a Canon Mirrorless is because Canon don't develop and test the mirrorless stuff in North America unlike their SLR stuff. Most if not all of the work is done in shop at Canon HQ or one of their close offices in Japan for mirrorless, but a majority of the work for SLR's and SLR lenses is done in North America, esp the marketing and testing. The people in North America are usually the early leakers until the camera stores get the info. As the North American market for mirrorless grows (if it does) then you will hear more early leaks but that is no time soon.


----------



## Sidepod (Aug 28, 2018)

IBIS? really? thought Canon has no regarding patents ... does Nikon have any? or can you just buy the IP?


----------



## drob (Aug 28, 2018)

pj1974 said:


> I love Canon Rumors - and yes, I have recently been spending plenty of time dreaming about Canon's mirrorless future ... lol ...
> 
> This latest rumor/ news & possible quite different direction has me thinking that the following are possible mirrorless bodies Canon might go with for the next few years:
> 
> ...


Does anyone have an issue with the fact that you'll continue to have to use an adapter with any higher end APS-C mirrorless camera (such as a 7D-type or 90D type mirrorless)? I don't think I'd want to drop $1800 on a "7D"-equivalent mirrorless and then have to use an adapter to use it with my EF 70-200. It just seems like a bad trade off. At that price point, I'd rather just have a DSLR.


----------



## bitm2007 (Aug 28, 2018)

drob said:


> Does anyone have an issue with the fact that you'll continue to have to use an adapter with any higher end APS-C mirrorless camera (such as a 7D-type or 90D type mirrorless)? I don't think I'd want to drop $1800 on a "7D"-equivalent mirrorless and then have to use an adapter to use it with my EF 70-200. It just seems like a bad trade off. At that price point, I'd rather just have a DSLR.



Yes it's only my existing range of EF lenses that's stopping me switching to Nikon. If an expensive adapter is required to continue using them on FF mirror less it would provide me with an ideal opportunity to switch brands.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

drob said:


> Does anyone have an issue with the fact that you'll continue to have to use an adapter with any higher end APS-C mirrorless camera (such as a 7D-type or 90D type mirrorless)? I don't think I'd want to drop $1800 on a "7D"-equivalent mirrorless and then have to use an adapter to use it with my EF 70-200. It just seems like a bad trade off. At that price point, I'd rather just have a DSLR.



Sure, and that's fair. 

But use an adaptor at all times (just leave it on there) and you get nice things for the trouble:

The elimination of the mirror as a potential bottleneck for framerate. Hello (who knows) 14-16 fps in a 7D price point.
AF across the majority of the frame compared to your OVF setup
Standard mirrorless upsides: no mirror slap, silent shooting, manual focusing assitance, etc.
I"m not saying it's better than an SLR in all use cases (surely it's not), but removing the mirror has more upsides than just being smaller, even for the 7D camp. 

- A


----------



## Sv2019 (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Heh, by what standard? The a7iii is fine. I bet if I looked at three prints, one from an A7iii, one from a 5DSR, and one from a D850, I couldn’t pick which is from which, or even discern quality differences not related to the user or lens.


By any technical standard they are great but in the real world, well, they don’t look very nice. And especially up against the D850.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

bitm2007 said:


> Yes it's only my existing range of EF lenses that's stopping me switching to Nikon. If an expensive adapter is required to continue using them on FF mirror less it would provide me with an ideal opportunity to switch brands.




Nikon's own adaptor for F to Z costs $249. Canon's EF/EF-S to EF-M costs $199. If Canon goes thin (only) instead of Full EF mount mirrorless, expect something similar, say in the $200-300 range. 

The only way you wouldn't have to pay for an EF adaptor is if Canon does indeed offer a full EF mount mirrorless setup. Many believe that's the best option -- and it could happen -- but I still think they'll lead with body like the Z6/Z7/A7/A9 with a thin mount.

I've heard a lot of reasons to sever one's own leg to run faster (i.e. convert all your stuff to a new system): more DR, better video options, 'this company is innovating', etc. But bouncing from Canon over _the cost of an adaptor?_ Really?

- A


----------



## applecider (Aug 28, 2018)

So with the change in the rumor wind we get...drumroll...

No mention of mount type..\drumroll.


----------



## dave61 (Aug 28, 2018)

But the mount! What about the mount?

I want to replace my 7D with a FF sensor, don't mind mirrorless, but it has compatible with my existing lenses.


----------



## Quackator (Aug 28, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Why IBIS?
> (...)
> Why not Canon?



Because they don't like the overheating problems that go along IBIS.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 28, 2018)

AJ said:


> Me too. Have there been any IBIS patents from Canon?



I didn't think Nikon had any IBIS patents...and then they announced the Z6 and Z7.


----------



## fullstop (Aug 28, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I didn't think Nikon had any IBIS patents...and then they announced the Z6 and Z7.



maybe they got it as "package deal" from Sony ... sensor plus sensor IBIS mounting.


----------



## fullstop (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Nikon's own adaptor for F to Z costs $249. Canon's EF/EF-S to EF-M costs $199. If Canon goes thin (only) instead of Full EF mount mirrorless, expect something similar, say in the $200-300 range.



yes. But in real life those mount adapters can typically be had for a lot less. 

Nikon: with purchase of a Z6/Z7 Nikon currently offers 100 USD off adapter price. 
Canon EF/EF-M adapter was included in many EOS M camera kits. So there are lots of new/hardly used adapters for sale ... and price dropped further when low-cost chinese versions became available. ;-) 
Currently Canon EF-/EF-M "like new" is anywhere between 59 - 79 €. New from authorized Canon dealer - without any discounts - it is widely available for 119 Euros retail (inl. 20% VAT tax) even in "high-price Central Europe".


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 28, 2018)

Not surprised that Canon now pushes a FF ML out, because it is all about the old rivalry with Nikon. I think what they really feared were too many users running around with a Nikon Z and Canon glass adapted to it. This wasn't even possible back in the old days of rangefinders, when Nikon's cameras didn't have the Leica M39 thread mount which was the international standard back then. 

Btw I am happy that Canon decided to stick with "only" 28 MP. That's not only enough even for quite big prints, but promises great low light performance. Canon's new ML, if those specs come true, may not make tiny pixel fetishists happy. But I do hope they are going to offer a mature product for real life photography - a camera that simply works well and does not distract from taking images and videos, without a sucking lagging EVF showing settings that are already lost in the past.


----------



## Stuart (Aug 28, 2018)

With all the recent EF lens announcements, i doubt this is the new mount FF I really want. I think its an EF mirrorless 6D style camera to allow Canon enthusiasts to say 'me too'. Meanwhile the lens design team is busy building their own lens roadmap devices for the new mount as Nikon has done. When that model is ready i believe it will be a high MP pro ready device with the niggles ironed out on this model.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 28, 2018)

Quackator said:


> Because they don't like the overheating problems that go along IBIS.


Steve Huff, THE ML guy of the past years, is currently on a Canon revival trip, because an overheating A9 ruined a video shooting he did (check recent posts on http://www.stevehuffphoto.com). He seems to love the bulky 1-DX II, not only for its video output but also for its stills. And what happened? All those haters like those flooding DPR threads now call him a Canon fanboy - only because he wanted a reliable tool for his purposes. That's all what Canon is about, according to my own experience (aside with another brand's gear): Canon gear is just reliably working with out of the box results that don't need permanently heavy-sided post processing. Saves you a lot of lifetime and nerves. Canon is the Toyota of camera industries - and that's great.


----------



## tron (Aug 28, 2018)

This rumor doesn't even mention the mount type. Not interesting...


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> The quick comeback is that Canon is sitting at 49% of ILC units without IBIS and tends to know what it is doing. (I don't say that backhandedly, I"m just pointing out the obvious.)
> 
> Canon may believe, or possibly even have market data to back up the following:
> (these are theories, I don't present them as fact)
> ...


Yet the spec list that this thread is about states that the camera has IBIS......

One can not use the logic that a feature has not shown up before to rule out its presence as a new feature...... that’s the thing about new features..... they are new....

One can still use the IS switch on a lens to turn off OIS and IBIS.....

According to Panasonic, OIS works better on longer focal lengths, IBIS on shorter, and a hybrid better than either alone.... why would Canon not follow that route?


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> Steve Huff, THE ML guy of the past years, is currently on a Canon revival trip, because an overheating A9 ruined a video shooting he did (check recent posts on http://www.stevehuffphoto.com). He seems to love the bulky 1-DX II, not only for its video output but also for its stills. And what happened? All those haters like those flooding DPR threads now call him a Canon fanboy - only because he wanted a reliable tool for his purposes. That's all what Canon is about, according to my own experience (aside with another brand's gear): Canon gear is just reliably working with out of the box results that don't need permanently heavy-sided post processing. Saves you a lot of lifetime and nerves. Canon is the Toyota of camera industries - and that's great.


Perhaps Canon is going with a regular sized body, and thermal management is one of the reasons why.....


----------



## Uneternal (Aug 28, 2018)

Basically what I said before. It is very unlikely that Canon would leave the christmas market cake for Sony and Nikon without a fight, this move would have been very stupid.
I expect the camera that should have been the 6D2 and still have high hopes that this time it's not gonna be crippled in some way, since Canon already mentioned they are willing to even cannibalize their own high end DSLRs.


----------



## MrAndre (Aug 28, 2018)

I am really looking forward to this new camera. I just hope Canon is willing to sacrifice sales on the 5D4, because if they cripple this camera to be worse in some way than the 5D4, I do not see it being competitive (okay, it will probably have only one card slot, but that is ok).

If its essentially a 5D4 without a mirror and with the same weather sealing, Canon will get my money.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 28, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Perhaps Canon is going with a regular sized body, and thermal management is one of the reasons why.....


Agree. I can imagine that it is not so easy to cool a sensor efficiently with IBIS, because its hard to realize a strong thermal connection with the body then. Or you would have to cool the sensor actively, with attached Peltier elements, but that's hard to implement with a backlit sensor imo, you'd have to frame the sensor with those elements and hope that heat transport from the sensor's inner areas still works well enough. Plus, active cooling would drain the battery faster. So I think a pro tool for extended 4k+ video shooting will better have a fixed sensor, maybe better not backlit, that is thermally well connected with a not to small camera body (as long as camera makers stick with silicon sensor technology and don't change to a more efficient semiconductor material such as gallium arsenide - and that will not happen in the foreseeable future). 

I think if Canon implements a sort of IBIS in their new ML series, this is a signal that they do not recognize those cameras as a real rugged pro tool. The pricing would fit into the prosumer range anyway, so it would be a camera for enthusiasts and pros not intending to shoot a series very long 4k video takes without letting the camera cool down in-between.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 28, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> If its essentially a 5D4 without a mirror and with the same weather sealing, Canon will get my money.



Would be great but I doubt that if the rumored pricing is correct. A 5D4 still is much more expensive than 2k $. Maybe Canon, like Nikon - and Sony already since many years -, will throw two or more models into the market, with a high-end camera on top at the same price level than a 5D4. Maybe that will happen not immediately, remember how long it took them to find an answer for Nikon's two D800 versions with the D5S(R).

Well, we have to be patient and wait a few days to learn more.


----------



## drob (Aug 28, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> I am really looking forward to this new camera. I just hope Canon is willing to sacrifice sales on the 5D4, because if they cripple this camera to be worse in some way than the 5D4, I do not see it being competitive (okay, it will probably have only one card slot, but that is ok).
> 
> If its essentially a 5D4 without a mirror and with the same weather sealing, Canon will get my money.


I think you're going to be disappointed if you're expecting a 5D4 in this 1st release. This is supposed to be the prosumer model, with a higher megapixel, more pro model to follow (some say in 6 months). I think we'll be lucky to see an improved 6D2 mirrorless model, hopefully with better DR, eye AF, IBIS?, intervalometer, better spread of AF points, 4K video to name a few. But the pro model will be later.


----------



## BillB (Aug 28, 2018)

drob said:


> I think you're going to be disappointed if you're expecting a 5D4 in this 1st release. This is supposed to be the prosumer model, with a higher megapixel, more pro model to follow (some say in 6 months). I think we'll be lucky to see an improved 6D2 mirrorless model, hopefully with better DR, eye AF, IBIS?, intervalometer, better spread of AF points, 4K video to name a few. But the pro model will be later.



With a dual pixel sensor the spread of AF points should be quite a bit better than the 6D2.


----------



## MrAndre (Aug 28, 2018)

drob said:


> I think you're going to be disappointed if you're expecting a 5D4 in this 1st release. This is supposed to be the prosumer model, with a higher megapixel, more pro model to follow (some say in 6 months). I think we'll be lucky to see an improved 6D2 mirrorless model, hopefully with better DR, eye AF, IBIS?, intervalometer, better spread of AF points, 4K video to name a few. But the pro model will be later.



Well if all these things were improved from the 6D2 with an 28 MP sensor, this camera is really close or for some purposes superior to the 5DIV. Of course it is not going to be as reliable as the workhorse 5D4, because it is new tech. Essentially you would have the same features and IQ as the 5D4 delivers. I would be more than happy with that. I could even live without IBIS and eye-AF (if the AF points are selective and small enough).


----------



## fullstop (Aug 28, 2018)

BillB said:


> With a dual pixel sensor the spread of AF points should be quite a bit better than the 6D2.



6D II does have Dual Pixel AF ... [in Live View mode].


----------



## Deleted member 380306 (Aug 28, 2018)

If it happens and that price is somewhere round the £2000 mark I'm in, providing it's gets a better sensor than my 6d2, I tested out the m5 with + 50mm 1.2, I found the size of that set-up very comfortable in my hands, it wasn't much different to the fuji 56mm + xt2 combo I previously owned. Also the m5 was fast enough focusing for my needs! It's like they already have the camera just need to make it a little bigger for that ff sensor add IBIS, tweak it a little etc etc...


----------



## fullstop (Aug 28, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> I think if Canon implements a sort of IBIS in their new ML series, this is a signal that they do not recognize those cameras as a real rugged pro tool.



LOL. Sony A9 is definitely a tool that can be and is actually used also by Pro's. It is reasonably rugged. It does have IBIS. It does have 4k capture. And yet it does not overheat. 

"Innovative Canon" should be able to achieve similar technical feats, no?


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> Steve Huff, THE ML guy of the past years, is currently on a Canon revival trip, because an overheating A9 ruined a video shooting he did (check recent posts on http://www.stevehuffphoto.com).


"PROS for the 6DII for vlogging:
...
9. Great photos as well! I may prefer the photos to the Sony."

Oh, ok...


----------



## PerKr (Aug 28, 2018)

fullstop said:


> LOL. Sony A9 is definitely a tool that can be and is actually used also by Pro's. It is reasonably rugged. It does have IBIS. It does have 4k capture. And yet it does not overheat.
> 
> "Innovative Canon" should be able to achieve similar technical feats, no?



Except apparently it does overheat at times; http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2018/...-it-and-its-just-what-i-needed-by-steve-huff/


----------



## admiralburns (Aug 28, 2018)

Yes, but will it have a HEADPHONE JACK???


----------



## -pekr- (Aug 28, 2018)

Canon should simply call this camera a 6D III. It would calm down all the 6D II bashers including myself and reunite with FF MILC wishers into one prospective future customer pool ....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 28, 2018)

PerKr said:


> Except apparently it does overheat at times


Overheating is not listed on Sony’s spec sheet. Since many on this forum base their perception of a camera entirely on its spec sheet, for them the issue simply doesn’t exist.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2018)

admiralburns said:


> Yes, but will it have a HEADPHONE JACK???



I have a hard time getting past the fact that Canon would put out a camera at that level without a headphone jack, yet has Bluetooth, BUT THE BLUETOOTH DOES NOT SUPPORT BLUETOOTH HEADPHONES!!!!!!!!


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

Uneternal said:


> Basically what I said before. It is very unlikely that Canon would leave the christmas market cake for Sony and Nikon without a fight, this move would have been very stupid.



Genuine question (to everyone): do many people buy ~$2k cameras for Christmas? Surely virtually nobody spends that kind of money on a single gift, and in my experience (and observation of others), Christmas and January is when money is tightest, because you're spending on other people's presents, food, etc. Am I missing something?


----------



## tron (Aug 28, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Yet the spec list that this thread is about states that the camera has IBIS......
> 
> One can not use the logic that a feature has not shown up before to rule out its presence as a new feature...... that’s the thing about new features..... they are new....
> 
> ...


You need two buttons to fully control 2 operations. Or a button with 2^2 = 4 positions. Two buttons (or one button and one menu choice) is simpler though (IBIS OFF, IS OFF) , (IBIS OFF, IS ON), (IBIS ON, IS OFF), (IBIS ON, IS ON) like two bit combinations:

00
01
10
11


----------



## bokehmon22 (Aug 28, 2018)

That title thoug  The rumor originated on Canon Watch. How many other sources are there to confirm it? I would only admit I was wrong if it's CR2/3. You can still be wrong about this


----------



## tron (Aug 28, 2018)

bokehmon22 said:


> That title thoug  The rumor originated on Canon Watch. How many other sources are there to confirm it? I would only admit I was wrong if it's CR2/3. You can still be wrong about this


Which by the way omits the most interesting part: Will it have an EF mount or not?


----------



## Lurker (Aug 28, 2018)

Could there be a regional announcement coming? Maybe Japan/Asia only? I think I remember reading that mirrorless is bigger there. Didn't the M series have a rocky start in the US? Not showing up, showing up late or showing up and fading away? Fire sales on lenses and bodies? I wasn't paying much attention as it wasn't really part of my foreseeable future. It could be now, if not directly then maybe by impacting prices on the camera I do buy.

There was this a while back about Canon and IBIS:
CR on Canon IBIS Patent

Canon had a paper on why IBIS in a SLR camera wasn't workable which is why they went with lens based IS. Now that they have that investment and technology only makes sense that they would continue to leverage that, perhaps in some type of hybrid system.


----------



## ken (Aug 28, 2018)

I think I woke up on the wrong side of bed this morning. All I can see is:

1. Absolutely nothing has changed. Either Canon is going to release a FF mirrorless this year or it isn't. And no one outside of Canon seems to know any detail about it. So reading these rumors is not productive, other than to know "something might be coming. Hold off on major purchase decisions." Meh. I've known that for quite awhile now.

2. Whoever started abbreviating mirrorless as ML... you have done this forum a disservice.

Sorry. Maybe I just need more coffee.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 28, 2018)

Philipp said:


> [email protected] would be super weak, there's really no need to throttle performance that badly. Just to keep the 1DX as the best or to make it easier to bring out a more high end mirrorless camera later?
> Either way I think that's poor if true.


1080p is so 2014! Nobody cares about that any more. Pay attention.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 28, 2018)

Just like the M release, the new FF body will only be released in Asia.
This is why we are hearing very few rumors.


----------



## Lurker (Aug 28, 2018)

> Genuine question (to everyone): do many people buy ~$2k cameras for Christmas? Surely virtually nobody spends that kind of money on a single gift, and in my experience (and observation of others), Christmas and January is when money is tightest, because you're spending on other people's presents, food, etc. Am I missing something?



Black Friday, Christmas sales, New Years sales. A gift to yourself for waiting until the end of year sales instead of buying on GAS impulse during the year.

If someone can buy their significant other a Benz/Audi/Acura/BMW/Cadi or Yugo, then a camera body isn't so unreasonable.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Genuine question (to everyone): do many people buy ~$2k cameras for Christmas?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_salary


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

Lurker said:


> If someone can buy their significant other a Benz/Audi/Acura/BMW/Cadi or Yugo, then a camera body isn't so unreasonable.



Do they?? People must be a lot richer than I realised! (Although I get the impression most brand new cars are bought on credit, rather than paying the full price outright - you can do this with a camera too of course, but I don't know how common it is).

Point taken about sales, although historically (in the UK) January was the best time for them - though we have 'Black Friday' etc now (and sales increasingly throughout the year).



Kit. said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_salary



Fair enough, but again - Christmas is so expensive anyway, isn't that bonus eaten up without leaving much for a massive self-splurge?


----------



## clicstudio (Aug 28, 2018)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Why does everybody want Canon to keep the EF mount? I want a new system with a matching lens for optimal compatibility and newer technology. A 5-10 year old lens is not going to work as well as something totally new made specifically for a new sensor. I think Nikon understood that. Things move forward.
I understand people have invested heavily in their equipment but the 2018 lens lineup is limited to a few models. There will be adapters if necessary but I wouldn't want to use them.
Remember the Nikon Z is new and Canon didn't know about it but Sony A7R III has been around since last year so Canon knows they need something to dethrone Sony. They won't do it without a kick ass machine with 100% new tech. IMHO.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2018)

tron said:


> You need two buttons to fully control 2 operations. Or a button with 2^2 = 4 positions. Two buttons (or one button and one menu choice) is simpler though (IBIS OFF, IS OFF) , (IBIS OFF, IS ON), (IBIS ON, IS OFF), (IBIS ON, IS ON) like two bit combinations:
> 
> 00
> 01
> ...


Or you could use the lens button to turn both off.... or press the button on the camera and scroll through choices displayed on the shoulder display.... or use the touchscreen interface..... There are many ways to do it.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

Sv2019 said:


> By any technical standard they are great but in the real world, well, they don’t look very nice. And especially up against the D850.


So do you think if I showed you two real world prints by the same photographer using the same lens and light, one with each camera, you could tell the difference?



Sidepod said:


> IBIS? really? thought Canon has no regarding patents ... does Nikon have any? or can you just buy the IP?



If someone is selling, you can outright buy or license (which again Canon and other camera makes do where it makes sense to). I bet you can go pick up the closest camera and find 2-4 bits of licensed technology without much effort.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Fair enough, but again - Christmas is so expensive anyway, isn't that bonus eaten up without leaving much for a massive self-splurge?


I don't know; for me, Christmas itself was several thousand dollars expensive only when I used that bonus to buy 7DII + 15-85 + 100-400II as a gift for my wife...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Fair enough, but again - Christmas is so expensive anyway, isn't that bonus eaten up without leaving much for a massive self-splurge?



I would think that where a “bonus” is prescribed by statute or contract (or otherwise guaranteed), people would just treat it like salary, not cordon it off as some windfall. On the other hand if you live paycheck to paycheck, it would have the effect of being “extra” money (although, given the “if,” should you really go and spend it?).


----------



## rrcphoto (Aug 28, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Why does everybody want Canon to keep the EF mount? I want a new system with a matching lens for optimal compatibility and newer technology. A 5-10 year old lens is not going to work as well as something totally new made specifically for a new sensor. I think Nikon understood that. Things move forward.
> I understand people have invested heavily in their equipment but the 2018 lens lineup is limited to a few models. There will be adapters if necessary but I wouldn't want to use them.
> Remember the Nikon Z is new and Canon didn't know about it but Sony A7R III has been around since last year so Canon knows they need something to dethrone Sony. They won't do it without a kick ass machine with 100% new tech. IMHO.


1. EF lenses are highly compatable with DPAF sensor. so not really true.
2. I'm sure Canon knew about the Nikon Z and the Sony A7RIII well before we did


----------



## rsdofny (Aug 28, 2018)

mppix said:


> Agree, it may very well be a video-only software IBIS. Still, I think there are bigger questions about this cam (mount and AF speed/reliability).




I don't think that IBIS is an issue. Canon can just streamline the lens offering to one focal length/aperture and discontinue either the IS or the non-IS version. Over time, it is not going to be an issue. You can just similarly argue that 70-200f2.8 IS will cause problem for IS II or IS III, but it doesn't


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> According to Panasonic, OIS works better on longer focal lengths, IBIS on shorter, and a hybrid better than either alone.... why would Canon not follow that route?



Increases the standard cost of the body
May consume more power (honestly don't know, just riffing here)
Eliminates profitable price points for Canon where they have two lenses -- one with and one without IS

I'm not saying they shouldn't do IBIS -- I'm not opposed to it at all. But IBIS is not an entitlement Canon must give us because others think it's worth pursuing. It has a cost that Canon may not wish to pay.

- A


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 28, 2018)

If it has a BSI or stacked sensor, 27MP ish resolution, and a responsive EVF, then I would be in for this first mirrorless FF Canon offering. I don’t care about video, and would prefer native EF mount (adapter ok). Other features similar to 6D2 would suffice for $2k.


----------



## tron (Aug 28, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Why does everybody want Canon to keep the EF mount? I want a new system with a matching lens for optimal compatibility and newer technology. A 5-10 year old lens is not going to work as well as something totally new made specifically for a new sensor. I think Nikon understood that. Things move forward.
> I understand people have invested heavily in their equipment but the 2018 lens lineup is limited to a few models. There will be adapters if necessary but I wouldn't want to use them.
> Remember the Nikon Z is new and Canon didn't know about it but Sony A7R III has been around since last year so Canon knows they need something to dethrone Sony. They won't do it without a kick ass machine with 100% new tech. IMHO.


Why doesn't everyone want Canon to keep the EF mount? In contrast to Nikon canon made the big change to change the mount earlied in time (from FD to EF) while Nikon stayed with the old mount.
Why everyone thinks the lenses with new mount will be ... better and work with the sensor better. Are they scientists working for a similarly important company or just b(-v)loggers who may even not use one system? Or use one camera with one lens? Just saying do not take it personally...


----------



## rrcphoto (Aug 28, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> If it has a BSI or stacked sensor, 27MP ish resolution, and a responsive EVF, then I would be in for this first mirrorless FF Canon offering. I don’t care about video, and would prefer native EF mount (adapter ok). Other features similar to 6D2 would suffice for $2k.


BSI sensor is less important if it's an EF mount.


----------



## Desiree Vie (Aug 28, 2018)

I have 3 Cameras, one with DPAF, which is nearly all I could could want in a DSLR vs. Video Cam. I have 8 lenses, ALL EF mount, albeit ef or ef-s. I have zero issues with a mirror, nor have I since 1974 when I bought my first Canon camera. I do not see why this whole "rush" to mirrorless even exists. Weight? New Technology?
Competition?
I have made a living using my Canon 35mm, then on to EOS AF Digital. You can create all the newness you want, I am never going to give it all up. I walk around Watkins Glen this summer at the 6 hour endurance race. There were more folks with Canon than all the rest added together. There were as many "big whites" as who knows. Why give up something that works.
Many have said, the best camera is the one in your hands. I see zero reasons, regardless of the technology, competition or future, to empty my backpack of those three cameras and 8 lenses for anything, and spend 10-50k on starting over.
Canon... all I wish for is more lenses that are lighter, and clean HDMI on everything. My only dreams are to able to carry more on my shoulder or in my hands, with attached monopods, and the ability to record video externally on some other devices.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Aug 28, 2018)

ken said:


> I think I woke up on the wrong side of bed this morning. All I can see is:
> 
> 1. Absolutely nothing has changed. Either Canon is going to release a FF mirrorless this year or it isn't. And no one outside of Canon seems to know any detail about it. So reading these rumors is not productive, other than to know "something might be coming. Hold off on major purchase decisions." Meh. I've known that for quite awhile now.
> 
> ...



Not to mention making a bold statement they are wrong this time when "We give no rating to these specifications, it’s just what’s out there. " It is such a click baity title when "all of our known sources, still maintain that they know of no mirrorless camera coming "

I had my coffee but 3 shots isn't strong enough.

"*We were wrong, all of your Canon mirrorless dreams are likely coming true soon"*


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

Desiree Vie said:


> I have 3 Cameras, one with DPAF, which is nearly all I could could want in a DSLR vs. Video Cam. I have 8 lenses, ALL EF mount, albeit ef or ef-s. I have zero issues with a mirror, nor have I since 1974 when I bought my first Canon camera. I do not see why this whole "rush" to mirrorless even exists. Weight? New Technology?
> Competition?
> I have made a living using my Canon 35mm, then on to EOS AF Digital. You can create all the newness you want, I am never going to give it all up. I walk around Watkins Glen this summer at the 6 hour endurance race. There were more folks with Canon than all the rest added together. There were as many "big whites" as who knows. Why give up something that works.
> Many have said, the best camera is the one in your hands. I see zero reasons, regardless of the technology, competition or future, to empty my backpack of those three cameras and 8 lenses for anything, and spend 10-50k on starting over.
> Canon all I wish for is more lenses that are lighter, and clean HDMI on everything.



Mirrorless just offers some new advanced features that DSLR does not. That is not to say there's anything wrong with existing systems, but there's also nothing wrong with moving forward and being excited about newer more advanced technologies.


----------



## Deleted member 381098 (Aug 28, 2018)

Seeing what Canon is going to do next is the only reason I haven't gone over to Fuji yet. I'm highly invested in Canon and my gear will go for a mere song if I trade it in. Also, camera companies keep introducing new cameras and we keep hearing "this is not a professional camera", which I'm not sure I understand. Any camera is a professional camera if a professional is using it. Granted, some are more rugged, have better features, etc. But remember when 9/11 happened? News photographers were out shooting with 30D's. That was professional for it's time. This new mirrorless looks like it will have every feature that I need for the work that I do. Fuji is a crop sensor and it's considered a "professional" camera. I think the term "professional" is thrown around very loosely these days. Mostly from the camera companies trying to make us feel we've got to spend more money to be considered professional. Which camera works best for you? That's the real question. Is it a 5D Mark IV? Great, get it. Is it a T7i? Then get that one. Anyways, I think this is a good move for canon. Since I plan to move to mirrorless I'll be holding out a few more days to see what's on the horizon, then I'll be making a decision on which camera is going to be right for the work that I plan to do.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 28, 2018)

Dear Santa. As my Christmas present, please punish all naughty people at Nikon and Sony and reward good people at Canon. I've been a good boy all year round so please give me a FF mirrorless 36Mpix ILC with IBIS and EF mount, [email protected], EVF and flip screen and 2 bells and 3 whistles. Please make my dream come true, likely and soon.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Mirrorless just offers some new advanced features that DSLR does not. That is not to say there's anything wrong with existing systems, but there's also nothing wrong with moving forward and being excited about newer more advanced technologies.



Why is mirrorless classed as 'moving forward' and 'more advanced technologies'? Sure, mirrorless has advantages but so do DSLR. For me, if Canon put a hybrid VF in a DSLR 'live view style' that would bring DSLR with all the advantages of both systems. There is precious little else that is inherently 'mirrorless' in technology.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Why is mirrorless classed as 'moving forward' and 'more advanced technologies'? Sure, mirrorless has advantages but so do DSLR. For me, if Canon put a hybrid VF in a DSLR 'live view style' that would bring DSLR with all the advantages of both systems. There is precious little else that is inherently 'mirrorless' in technology.


It's a lot more than the VF. One of the main points for me is the better focusing systems like eye AF.


----------



## justawriter (Aug 28, 2018)

jcfalconer said:


> "We were wrong, all of your Canon mirrorless dreams are likely coming true soon"
> Oh, so tongue in cheek with this 180. How can I believe you now?


Either way now, Canon Rumor Guy can say, "See, I was right!" 
BRILLIANT!!!


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

justawriter said:


> Either way now, Canon Rumor Guy can say, "See, I was right!"
> BRILLIANT!!!


lol yep.

I'm still going to be completely blown away if this announcement does in fact happen. I just can't believe that NOTHING has leaked prior. But, ahsanford tells me this has happened before, so I suppose anything's possible.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> It's a lot more than the VF. One of the main points for me is the better focusing systems like eye AF.


Which is not a mirrorless-exclusive function...

I’m patiently waiting for someone to show me what a mirrorless camera can do that an SLR in lockup fundamentally can not, aside from “be narrower.”


----------



## tron (Aug 28, 2018)

justawriter said:


> Either way now, Canon Rumor Guy can say, "See, I was right!"
> BRILLIANT!!!


This reminds me of Tony Northrup: "I made a mistake: 6DII is the best vlogging camera"...


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Which is not a mirrorless-exclusive function...
> 
> I’m patiently waiting for someone to show me what a mirrorless camera can do that an SLR in lockup fundamentally can not, aside from “be narrower.”


That right there is the point....if the mirror needs to be in "lockup" to utilize these features, one can't help but wonder why not just remove the mirror.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Aug 28, 2018)

Desiree Vie said:


> I have 3 Cameras, one with DPAF, which is nearly all I could could want in a DSLR vs. Video Cam. I have 8 lenses, ALL EF mount, albeit ef or ef-s. I have zero issues with a mirror, nor have I since 1974 when I bought my first Canon camera. I do not see why this whole "rush" to mirrorless even exists. Weight? New Technology?
> Competition?
> I have made a living using my Canon 35mm, then on to EOS AF Digital. You can create all the newness you want, I am never going to give it all up. I walk around Watkins Glen this summer at the 6 hour endurance race. There were more folks with Canon than all the rest added together. There were as many "big whites" as who knows. Why give up something that works.
> Many have said, the best camera is the one in your hands. I see zero reasons, regardless of the technology, competition or future, to empty my backpack of those three cameras and 8 lenses for anything, and spend 10-50k on starting over.
> Canon... all I wish for is more lenses that are lighter, and clean HDMI on everything. My only dreams are to able to carry more on my shoulder or in my hands, with attached monopods, and the ability to record video externally on some other devices.



I think you fail to appreciate that all change is fairly incremental when it comes to a competitive technological consumer products field, even a change over to mirrorless. The technology is still in its infancy, and so you're right that at this initial stage, it's perfectly viable to stick with a DSLR and get just about as good results. I don't think these early generations of mirrorless pro cameras are that revolutionary compared to what a DSLR can do.

However, having a live feed of what's happening in front of your lens available to the camera to analyze and process at all times will I think lead to some revolutionary changes in the future. I don't think it's too far fetched to imagine a camera a few years away that can instantly recognize a face in almost any condition and any orientation, and reliably lock on and track focus on the eyes. And I don't think it's too far fetched to expect a camera to be able to recognize and track one specific athlete or one specific car in a motorsports race without missing a beat, regardless of what else is in the frame or what gets in the way from time to time. And by that point the camera will probably also be grabbing full resolution frames at 30fps or better, and maybe even rifling through the hundreds of photos afterward and automatically showing you what the camera considers to be the best shots, avoiding the need to spend time looking through mountains of photos to find the best one.

So yes, I agree that right now, in the infancy of mirrorless, it doesn't offer all that much that's exponentially better than a DSLR. Yeah they have a little faster framerates, and once someone perfects a global shutter, then manufacturers can ditch all moving parts which will improve reliability, but that's it right now.

But I can imagine a time not too far in the future where you will begin to look awfully silly carrying around a DSLR and struggling to achieve the same shots that an advanced mirrorless camera that has the capability of actually analyzing what it's looking at will probably be able to do with ease. And if you can't imagine that sort of a future, then I think you're a little too narrow minded and set in your ways regarding what a camera could be and what it could be capable of.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Aug 28, 2018)

I'm glad this is happening, I thought I was going to have to jump ship to Nikon for a decent 4K camera. Hopefully the internal codec is comparable to Nikon and Sony, 10 bit output like the Z6 would be icing on the cake, but not a requirement. I'm also excited to be able to use the FD lenses on a Canon again, I can finally sell my Panasoinc.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> That right there is the point....if the mirror needs to be in "lockup" to utilize these features, one can't help but wonder why not just remove the mirror.


Canon has at least a couple of patents for hybrid VFs - put a focus peaking overlay over a optical VF for example. 
So tell me what could a mirrorless do that a hybrid VF DSLR could not.


----------



## Adelino (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> That right there is the point....if the mirror needs to be in "lockup" to utilize these features, one can't help but wonder why not just remove the mirror.


Because with a mirror you get an OVF. If SLR technology was just invented people would be AMAZED with the not just lifelike but actual real life view through an OVF.


----------



## Adelino (Aug 28, 2018)

Lurker said:


> Black Friday, Christmas sales, New Years sales. A gift to yourself for waiting until the end of year sales instead of buying on GAS impulse during the year.
> 
> If someone can buy their significant other a Benz/Audi/Acura/BMW/Cadi or Yugo, then a camera body isn't so unreasonable.


Plus year end bonuses, a lot of people get overtime late in the year. A lot more money floats around Nov to January.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Why does everybody want Canon to keep the EF mount? I want a new system with a matching lens for optimal compatibility and newer technology. A 5-10 year old lens is not going to work as well as something totally new made specifically for a new sensor. I think Nikon understood that. Things move forward.
> I understand people have invested heavily in their equipment but the 2018 lens lineup is limited to a few models. There will be adapters if necessary but I wouldn't want to use them.
> Remember the Nikon Z is new and Canon didn't know about it but Sony A7R III has been around since last year so Canon knows they need something to dethrone Sony. They won't do it without a kick ass machine with 100% new tech. IMHO.



I'm sure plenty of people will chime in and there are lots of discussions on both sides elsewhere on the forum, but I'll put it simply from my perspective. First, nobody has explained clearly why a new mount is so desirable. There's a lot of talk about 'newer lens designs', 'constraints of existing mounts' but it's mostly hand waving. Aside from a few types of lens - apparently wide angle especially - there is nothing that a new mount can do that can't already be done with EF. You say "something totally new made specifically for a new sensor" but what does that mean? Are lenses designed for specific sensors (in ILCs)? And 5-10 years old is not old in the world of lenses. Good optics have a long lifespan, so why through the baby out with the bathwater?

I'll also repeat: whatever its advantages, a new mount has a major drawback - it is not natively compatible with all those existing EF lenses (unless they come up with some amazing hybrid solution). So as a current EF lens user, why would I want a new mount, which will necessitate either selling my current lenses and buying new ones (with little to no advantage in performance that I can see), or using an adaptor which may affect AF performance and image quality?


----------



## DaveGrice (Aug 28, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Dear Santa. As my Christmas present, please punish all naughty people at Nikon and Sony and reward good people at Canon. I've been a good boy all year round so please give me a FF mirrorless 36Mpix ILC with IBIS and EF mount, [email protected], EVF and flip screen and 2 bells and 3 whistles. Please make my dream come true, likely and soon.




Fully endorsed


----------



## hmatthes (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Which is not a mirrorless-exclusive function...
> 
> I’m patiently waiting for someone to show me what a mirrorless camera can do that an SLR in lockup fundamentally can not, aside from “be narrower.”



Many of us old photographers insist upon an eyepiece, not composing from the rear LCD (like a cell phone camera) unless it is on a tripod.
*WYSIWYG is a huge differentiator* especially added to focus points spread all across the sensor and focus peaking. I have a FF mirrorless whose user interface I actually prefer to my Canon EOS "hand memory" -- but I want a Canon with EVF as good as my Leica. and the same user interface as the 5D-IV...
Remember exposing for shadows with negative films and exposing for highlights on positive film (or digital sensors)? With OVF, you are just guessing.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> That right there is the point....if the mirror needs to be in "lockup" to utilize these features, one can't help but wonder why not just remove the mirror.


Because without it being there you can’t benefit from it is other scenarios (such as low-light AF).


----------



## leokleemann (Aug 28, 2018)

when you think will be the release date?


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

Adelino said:


> Plus year end bonuses, a lot of people get overtime late in the year. A lot more money floats around Nov to January.



I'll have to take your word for it  All I can repeat is, from what I've observed, people are most cash-strapped around Christmas. But if sales of high-end cameras peak then, I can't argue with the figures.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> How old are all you guys so heavily defending the DSLR? Sounds like you're someone that's used the DSLR for ages and are afraid to change.
> 
> Mirrorless offers many benefits, period. That is not to say some kind of hybrid could not be made to accomplish similar results. But right now, the industry is moving in the direction of mirrorless. And since mirrorless (as mentioned above) does offer some benefits, I choose to embrace the change and welcome the new technology.



Uh oh. You're allowed a preference, but you've veered away from propounding the advantages of mirrorless to criticising the *people* who aren't yet convinced (who cares how old they are?). Let's try to argue based on the merits of the technology at hand, hmm? PS I don't think people saying 'what can mirrorless really do that a DSLR absolutely couldn't?' are "heavily defending" DSLRs.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Because without it being there you can’t benefit from it is other scenarios (such as low-light AF).


Shooting on my DSLR just feels dated even though it's a new model. I shouldn't have to guess exposure and rely on a mechanical mirror device to bounce light up to my eye. This is not modern technology. There has to be a better way. I personally cannot wait to switch to a mirrorless system. And if the Canon FF mirrorless doesn't turn out to be a good option, I'm gonna grab a A7III. Will probably keep my 6DII but just as a backup. That is until I want a mirrorless as a backup as well lol.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Uh oh. You're allowed a preference, but you've veered away from propounding the advantages of mirrorless to criticising the *people* who aren't yet convinced (who cares how old they are?). Let's try to argue based on the merits of the technology at hand, hmm? PS I don't think people saying 'what can mirrorless really do that a DSLR absolutely couldn't?' are "heavily defending" DSLRs.


Fair enough. Was just merely making a point that it sounds like theres a lot of resistance to change when it comes to DSLR users. Usually people who have become accustomed to something over a long period of time tend to do that.


----------



## Uneternal (Aug 28, 2018)

People wishing this to be a 5D4 without mirror or having crazy resolution: Sorry to disappoint you.
This camera will mostly be Canon's answer to Nikon Z6 and Sony A7III. 
If the rumors are true this camera will have 28 Megapixels. The reason might be, that Canons dynamic range is still not on par with its peers, and Canon's trying to make up for that with megapixels - but we'll see.
Also, there is no point for Canon in sacrificing their flagship 5D4 with a better spec'd camera. The 5D4 is still a better selling camera than Sony's flagship A7RIII.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> How old are all you guys so heavily defending the DSLR? Sounds like you're someone that's used the DSLR for ages and are afraid to change.


Are you too young to realize that it is a non-argument?



ecpu said:


> Mirrorless offers many benefits, period. That is not to say some kind of hybrid could not be made to accomplish similar results. But right now, the industry is moving in the direction of mirrorless.


Not everyone is interested in _fashion items_.

If a MILC actually makes me a better photographer, I will take one. Or two. Or three.

But if it's only good for not looking "dated", I'll pass. I can afford to look "dated".


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

Wow just catching up to some interesting discussion.

I find it fascinating that so many folks have 5D4-level specs in mind and/or are worried about 5D4 cannibalization for what is rumored to be an entry level price point.

I appreciate Canon will have the lift the bar on what 'entry-level FF' is in light of the Z6, A7 III, etc. but that seems a huge improvement for a $2k Canon camera. I don't care if Sony is selling well and Nikon is following suit spec-per-dollar wise. They are followers in the market and have to resort to these antics to win share. Canon does not.

I'm not saying Canon will arrogantly release a 6D2 without a mirror (as is) and call it good. But an (on-chip ADC) 24-28 MP + 7-8 fps + Modest/limited 4K will sell just fine at $2k. Without IBIS and without (now what everyone is screaming for) Eye AF, it will sell well.

- A


----------



## Uneternal (Aug 28, 2018)

People wishing this to be a 5D4 without mirror or having crazy resolution: Sorry to disappoint you.
This camera will mostly be Canon's answer to Nikon Z6 and Sony A7III.
If the rumors are true this camera will have 28 Megapixels. This can only have the reason that something with this camera (maybe dynamic range) is still not on par with it's peers, and Canon's trying to make up for that with more megapixels.
There is no point for Canon in sacrificing their Flagship, which is still a better selling camera than Sony's A7RIII.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Wow just catching up to some interesting discussion.
> 
> I find it fascinating that so many folks have 5D4-level specs in mind and/or are worried about 5D4 cannibalization for what is rumored to be an entry level price point.
> 
> ...


I really hope they lift the bar enough to be at least in the ballpark in terms of specs-per-dollar. I know it's unlikely they will match the competitors in this area, but I would hope they can get it close. I already have a 6DII. I don't need or want another one.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Shooting on my DSLR just feels dated even though it's a new model. I shouldn't have to guess exposure and rely on a mechanical mirror device to bounce light up to my eye. This is not modern technology. There has to be a better way. I personally cannot wait to switch to a mirrorless system. And if the Canon FF mirrorless doesn't turn out to be a good option, I'm gonna grab a A7III. Will probably keep my 6DII but just as a backup. That is until I want a mirrorless as a backup as well lol.


I think we are in this weird intermediate technology state, where off sensor instruments like PDAF and metering hold some advantages but require a mirror, and image-sensor-based analysis holds some advantages but requires the mirror be out of the path.

One admittedly kludgey solution would be an SLR with an EVF (say at the top left rear of the camera). It could use proximity sensors to automatically lock up the mirror when you put your eye to the EVF, or put it down when you put you eye to the OVF. While it would look weird (not that I particularly care how cameras appear), it would at least give the advantages of both in a single box (less being narrower by the amount of the mirror box) until such a time as some technology overcomes the inherent advantage of “big bright” sensors.

I used a mirrorless camera (a7rii) along side my canons for a couple years. Many of its downsides have been remedied in the iii (which I rented but wasn’t compelled to buy). My experience is largely summed up as such:
*In bright manual focus situations, zoom in the EVF is a significant advantage
*In low light manual focus situations (e.g. studio photography with flash), mirror down SLR is advantageous.
*In automatic focus situations, mirror up has some tracking advantages, but it suffers tremendously in low light and for quick action.

If I bought a iii, I’d still grab an SLR for low light use and action photography.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> Well if all these things were improved from the 6D2 with an 28 MP sensor, this camera is really close or for some purposes superior to the 5DIV. Of course it is not going to be as reliable as the workhorse 5D4, because it is new tech. Essentially you would have the same features and IQ as the 5D4 delivers. I would be more than happy with that. I could even live without IBIS and eye-AF (if the AF points are selective and small enough).



Yeah -- on the blue bit above, there's more meat on the bone there than you'd think.

Horsepower specs do not equal the value of the product.

Consider: Nikon just released a 45 x 9 camera for a D850-ish price, but other than 45 x 9 the camera was _absolutely gutted_ features wise for size/cost/technology reasons:

It's not really a 9 fps camera. It's a 5.5 fps camera if you want the normal AF/AE working in each frame. That's a huge takeaway from the D850 (grip required for 9 fps be damned, _it delivers 9 fps_ without fine print)
Shenanigans with RAW file sizes and burst rate
Buffer is nearly three times smaller than D850
Battery is 1/5th to 1/6th the CIPA shot rating as the D850
One card slot
We're waiting for a manual, but it appears that the AF setup either requires f/2 primes or better to work well, or that lowlight AF sensitivity is potentially conditional on what lenses you are using (more so than just how much light the lens can take in).
So this notion that a 45x9 camera with 4K coming out means that 'Nikon is serious about mirrorless' and 'this will cannibalize the bejesus out of SLRs' are both quick hip shot arguments that might not hold up that well.

- A


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> I think we are in this weird intermediate technology state, where off sensor instruments like PDAF and metering hold some advantages but require a mirror, and image-sensor-based analysis holds some advantages but requires the mirror be out of the path.
> 
> One admittedly kludgey solution would be an SLR with an EVF (say at the top left rear of the camera). It could use proximity sensors to automatically lock up the mirror when you put your eye to the EVF, or put it down when you put you eye to the OVF. While it would look weird (not that I particularly care how cameras appear), it would at least give the advantages of both in a single box (less being narrower by the amount of the mirror box) until such a time as some technology overcomes the inherent advantage of “big bright” sensors.


I think you are right about this being a way to truly combine the best of both worlds... but could you imagine what the camera would look like? lol. I suppose if it were functional and that the two VFs didn't decrease overall ease of use, people just may go for it.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Fair enough. Was just merely making a point that it sounds like theres a lot of resistance to change when it comes to DSLR users. Usually people who have become accustomed to something over a long period of time tend to do that.



Why is it that if someone has a preference for something that just happens to be the status quo, they are 'resistant to change'. Please show me one person who has said that Canon should not be doing this.
I for one have tried the 'new advanced technology' and still prefer elements of the current DSLR. I also prefer elements on mirrorless technology and am not ready to give up on DSLRs.

I would ask why is it you are unable to understand that and unable to understand why someone else has a view different, and equally valid, to yours without looking down on them as 'resistant to change'?


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Remember the Nikon Z is new and Canon didn't know about it .



I remember an article about Security and industrial espionage. They had a quote from someone at Nikon which said that they spy on their competition and the competition spies on them, and how they usually knew about new products several years in advance....

It is a very safe bet that Canon (and Sony) knew that the Nikon Z was coming.....


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> Canon should simply call this camera a 6D III. It would calm down all the 6D II bashers including myself and reunite with FF MILC wishers into one prospective future customer pool ....




And it would imply to every current Canon SLR user that their next product won't have a mirror.

_That_ wouldn't torpedo EF lens sales, cause migrations, a panic, etc. Noooooo, not at all. 

Just being sarcastic, but 10000% likely these FF mirrorless products will not be named as SLRs are. They may be similar -- 6Dm, 5Dx, etc. but the likelihood they supplant a current SLRs naming convention _as a pure sequel_ (in the next few years) is zero. That's a mirror 'end of times' sort of move where long standing SLR lines don't get a mirror with their next update. (<-- That very well may happen, but that is a very, very long time away.)

Until then, Canon wants to sell us both SLRs and mirrorless (to the same people!) and you need differently named products to do that.

- A


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> One admittedly kludgey solution would be an SLR with an EVF (say at the top left rear of the camera).


...or in the flash hot shoe.

Ultimately, the whole pentaprism block may be replaceable, as was typical on the MF flim SLRs.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> I think you are right about this being a way to truly combine the best of both worlds... but could you imagine what the camera would look like? lol. I suppose if it were functional and that the two VFs didn't decrease overall ease of use, people just may go for it.



That’s why I proposed it as I did. Think of the format people often call “mirrorless rangefinder,” such as the Sony a6000. It has an EVF parked at the top left rear, and there is nothing at the top over the lens. Were it slightly wider, you could put a central OVF adjacent the embedded EVF.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Fair enough. Was just merely making a point that it sounds like theres a lot of resistance to change when it comes to DSLR users. Usually people who have become accustomed to something over a long period of time tend to do that.



Some of us "old" people have the added insight of "having seen it all before". Rather than buying into the hype, we may be waiting for the product to deliver. Personally, I will not touch a mirrorless until it is better than what I have AND need one of the advantages that mirrorless provides. Once that happens, I buy.

We call it patience


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

Kit. said:


> ...or in the flash hot shoe.
> 
> Ultimately, the whole pentaprism block may be replaceable, as was typical on the MF flim SLRs.



Good point, if there is enough bandwidth available there to run an EVF (maybe mini HDMI), it could go there. Then you wouldn’t always need one.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Why is it that if someone has a preference for something that just happens to be the status quo, they are 'resistant to change'. Please show me one person who has said that Canon should not be doing this.
> I for one have tried the 'new advanced technology' and still prefer elements of the current DSLR. I also prefer elements on mirrorless technology and am not ready to give up on DSLRs.
> 
> I would ask why is it you are unable to understand that and unable to understand why someone else has a view different, and equally valid, to yours without looking down on them as 'resistant to change'?


I was making a comment based on a matter of my own subjective opinion based on the information I was seeing. I did not intend for the comment to be "looking down" or offensive towards anyone and I will retract the statement if it is going to be interpreted that way.

We're commenting on an online forum about a product that may or may not exist and a new technology platform vs an older one... it's all speculation/opinion/personal preference/subjective ideas. <3


----------



## cnc (Aug 28, 2018)

I like to get mirrorless in DSLR body with EF mounting, don't like a small bodies without grip . Maybe size of SL1 can be ok.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

I


Don Haines said:


> Some of us "old" people have the added insight of "having seen it all before". Rather than buying into the hype, we may be waiting for the product to deliver. Personally, I will not touch a mirrorless until it is better than what I have AND need one of the advantages that mirrorless provides. Once that happens, I buy.
> 
> We call it patience


 lol I think you got me on that one. I can't stand waiting. I want it NOW!!!


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Genuine question (to everyone): do many people buy ~$2k cameras for Christmas? Surely virtually nobody spends that kind of money on a single gift




Surely _literally_ people do spend money like this. I know them.

I am not wealthy and my friends are not wealthy (we all are working 30 to 40 somethings that have day jobs and do well enough) -- we don't live in downtown penthouses or gated communities, we pay bills and make ends meet. But my friends occasionally _do_ blow it out on a big Christmas / b-day / anniversary gift for their family. Now, it's budgeted, it happens once every 5-10 years, and it's never the expectation to get a gift of that scale, but it's also not uncommon to plan to get that item and just use Christmas / b-day / anniversary as the occasion to do it.

So no, people actually do this! Maybe not insane enthusiasts like the folks who buy a new body every 12 months -- this might be a 'forever camera' in that they end up owning it for 10+ years, but they are out there.

- A


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> I was making a comment based on a matter of my own subjective opinion based on the information I was seeing. I did not intend for the comment to be "looking down" or offensive towards anyone and I will retract the statement if it is going to be interpreted that way.



I am pretty sure you did not mean it to be offensive and none was taken. But there are certain phrases that keep cropping up with mirrorless which are really unnecessary 'resistant to change' is one others are 'new technology', 'advances', 'innovative' - in fact Sony has innovated very little and what they have is a superb sensor and piling a smorgasbord of gizmos into one body. I have long maintained that if it were not for their sensor, the Sony's would have an even smaller market share than they have now and it would be little more than an interesting alternative.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I am pretty sure you did not mean it to be offensive and none was taken. But there are certain phrases that keep cropping up with mirrorless which are really unnecessary 'resistant to change' is one others are 'new technology', 'advances', 'innovative' - in fact Sony has innovated very little and what they have is a superb sensor and piling a smorgasbord of gizmos into one body. I have long maintained that if it were not for their sensor, the Sony's would have an even smaller market share than they have now and it would be little more than an interesting alternative.


That is an interesting theory and entirely possible... what I can't understand though is why Sony sensors hit these dizzying heights in terms of performance compared to Canon - the "market leader". Canon should be able to match this performance easily... I would think.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> If you want high res on the cheap, the only option is last gen stuff: D800/D800E, A7R2, etc.
> 
> Historical price track for 5DS:
> 
> ...


Best portrait camera Ive ever owned. When the 5DS / r came out many decried the low light ability but missed the point. This is a great studio camera period. In the wilds of Africa apart from low light the pictures are steller. Not surprised the price has remained steady.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> what I can't understand though is why Sony sensors hit these dizzying heights in terms of performance compared to Canon - the "market leader".


Economies of scale. Sony is a sensor OEM to virtually everyone. Canon's sensors, as far as I know, are only used in-house.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> I
> 
> lol I think you got me on that one. I can't stand waiting. I want it NOW!!!



Yes.... I wanted the 7D2 to have been mirrorless..... I may be patient enough to wait, but it does not mean that I don't like it


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Genuine question (to everyone): do many people buy ~$2k cameras for Christmas? Surely virtually nobody spends that kind of money on a single gift, and in my experience (and observation of others), Christmas and January is when money is tightest, because you're spending on other people's presents, food, etc. Am I missing something?



There are many people who do not find it difficult to spend $2k on someone at Christmas. There are many many more that can not afford to do this.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

Kit. said:


> Economies of scale. Sony is a sensor OEM to virtually everyone. Canon's sensors, as far as I know, are only used in-house.


It's just too bad that we have to choose between solid and proven reliability (Canon) and cutting-edge technology/performance (Sony).


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Which is not a mirrorless-exclusive function...
> 
> I’m patiently waiting for someone to show me what a mirrorless camera can do that an SLR in lockup fundamentally can not, aside from “be narrower.”




You can run liveview through the viewfinder / held up to your eye (without some stupid loupe, periscope, etc.). This obliterates MLU for stability (lets you shoot with longer shutters handheld than if you are 12" away from your face, which lets you keep ISO down), comfort, intuitive access to controls, and, candidly, eliminates the stigma of looking like that guy who shoots serious iPad photography.

'MLU _is_ mirrorless so why do we even need mirrorless' is a hackneyed and underweight argument*. Not everyone buying mirrorless are small-size-loving sheep that don't get understand how MLU and Liveview works. Some people just see great value in having Liveview up to their eye -- it unlocks a dramatically different user experience, IMHO.

*I mean this with kindness, b/c I really appreciate your posts in general. I just disagree with you here.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

leokleemann said:


> when you think will be the release date?




No one knows. I'd personally guess sometime the first half of next year, solely because there's a weird hole in the projected release timing of other major lines (based on their historical lifecycles):

https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...xt-dslr-replaced-cr1.35073/page-2#post-721136

Canon wants this FF mirrorless launch to blot out the sun -- no other cameras should be launched within 2-3 months of it. That's typically how they do things for the > $1k bodies they sell, but I'd say it's doubly so for such a major first for them.

- A


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> No one knows. I'd personally guess sometime the first half of next year, solely because there's a weird hole in the projected release timing of other major lines (based on their historical lifecycles):
> 
> https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...xt-dslr-replaced-cr1.35073/page-2#post-721136
> 
> ...


I'm in full agreement with this.

I could see an announcement next week, but the actual release and availability of the camera probably won't come until the end of this year at the earliest.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> I think you are right about this being a way to truly combine the best of both worlds... but could you imagine what the camera would look like? lol. I suppose if it were functional and that the two VFs didn't decrease overall ease of use, people just may go for it.



Or you get an X-Pro Fuji camera. 

OVF + EVF. Yahtzee. Enjoy.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> I'll also repeat: whatever its advantages, a new mount has a major drawback - it is not natively compatible with all those existing EF lenses (unless they come up with some amazing hybrid solution). So as a current EF lens user, why would I want a new mount, which will necessitate either selling my current lenses and buying new ones (with little to no advantage in performance that I can see), or using an adaptor which may affect AF performance and image quality?




And I'll repeat my question in return: Why is a lens tube with a passthrough for AF contacts to drive the EF lens (with the same damn DPAF routines it works fine with on a current SLR) not going to work?

I just can't connect the dots between: Same AF routines, Same AF system, same mount now in two pieces, and 'selling my stuff' or performance going to hell.

Educate me, please. I don't say this to win an argument -- I'm honestly asking you why it wouldn't work, and work well. I think it would. Are you worried that the adaptor will not be precisely machined and incorrectly go-on the thin mount in some cock-eyed fashion?

- A


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> And I'll repeat my question in return: Why is a lens tube with a passthrough for AF contacts to drive the EF lens with the same damn DPAF routines it works fine with on a current SLR not going to work?
> 
> I just can't connect the dots between: Same AF routines, Same AF system, same mount now in two pieces, and 'selling my stuff' or performance going to hell.
> 
> ...


There is a stigma associated with adapted glass due to the not-so-stellar performance when adapting EF glass to Sony E-Mount and other systems via third party adapters.

While I fairly recently disliked the idea of an adapter for these same reasons, thinking about it more makes me think a native Canon-made adapter would be fine for the reasons you've pointed out.


----------



## bernie_king (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> If you want high res on the cheap, the only option is last gen stuff: D800/D800E, A7R2, etc.
> 
> Historical price track for 5DS:
> 
> ...


You can usually find gently used (>10k shutter) 5DSR's for $1800-$2000. Not sure why they lose so much value or why so many people dump them early.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> While I fairly recently disliked the idea of an adapter for these same reasons, thinking about it more makes me think a native Canon-made adapter would be fine for the reasons you've pointed out.




But we're entirely in-ecosystem here. No reverse engineering or licensing of AF routines (like Sony, Metabones, Sigma, etc.) at play here. This is Canon hardware talking to Canon hardware.

Haven't we already litigated this with the EF-S/EF adaptor for EF-M on the later bodies with DPAF? Did AF speed or hit rate go to hell through that adaptor?

(Or is that a poor example to use b/c that adaptor came out prior to EF-M getting DPAF?)

- A


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> And I'll repeat my question in return: Why is a lens tube with a passthrough for AF contacts to drive the EF lens (with the same damn DPAF routines it works fine with on a current SLR) not going to work?


At the moment, Canon uses the same EF mount on all its FF products (including mirrorless). Introducing a "diversity" would be a nuisance.

On the other hand, an adapter can have an EF cine lock (so you don't need to rotate the lens to install it).


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

Kit. said:


> At the moment, Canon uses the same EF mount on all its FF products (including mirrorless). Introducing a "diversity" would be a nuisance.
> 
> On the other hand, an adapter can have an EF cine lock (so you don't need to rotate the lens to install it).


Does not having to rotate the lens to install it offer any advantage? I haven't seen that before.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

bernie_king said:


> You can usually find gently used (>10k shutter) 5DSR's for $1800-$2000. Not sure why they lose so much value or why so many people dump them early.




Total speculation, but I think a confluence of factors might be driving it:

Resolutionaholics from Sony and Nikon (at the time) only had 36 MP to call on


Medium format people were intrigued with an sub $4k FF rig -- with a sea of more affordable glass -- that could pull in detail levels that their aging medium format systems could. Replacing those bodies is super pricey, so perhaps some medium format guys slummed it in FF to save a buck instead of getting a needing a loan to get the latest Phase One setup.


Canonites didn't have other options between 22 and 50 MP for a couple years
This uniquely led to a weird collection of folks giving the 5DS a go. But all those camps have more options now and maybe folks have returned to their prior mounts or the 5D4.

- A


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> That is an interesting theory and entirely possible... what I can't understand though is why Sony sensors hit these dizzying heights in terms of performance compared to Canon - the "market leader". Canon should be able to match this performance easily... I would think.




People often forget that in tech development, luck is a large part of it: the right person in the right environment having the right idea at the right time. You can design in 'blue sky research' and 'innovative environment' all you want, and you can have a development route to fulfill what you see as a technological objective, but it still comes down to an element of luck. Don't forget that companies are probably looking at 4 or 5 ways of doing the same thing at any one time and you may end up prioritising an option that is not as good in the long run: think of Canon's risky (in marketing terms) development of the EF mount and leaving behind a successful FD mount whereas Nikon took the much less end-user-friendly mount to maintain back compatibility but relatively quickly showed it was messy and arguably the least best option.

And I think people write of Canon too easily. In DPAF sensors, they imaging is done only by a 'half pixel' and yet Canon has still managed in the 5DIV to get a sensor whose DR and noise is within a stop of Sony's. I wonder what Canon could do if they put all that technological goodness into full-sized non-DPAF pixels? 
This is probably where Canon have been heading for a long time with their sensor in being geared to what they see as the most significant step to developing FF mirrorless.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 28, 2018)

Well here's my question regarding adapters. I've often wondered if the typical movement of the lens once locked in place can affect image quality. I have no doubt that a long lens without adapter will have slightly better performance but maybe it's insignificant??

I've been accused of obsessing about small things and told to just get out and shoot since they are insignificant. I remind myself of that, but CR thrives on making "insignificant" the be all and end all, like DR. Turns out that insignificant is dependent on personal needs and is significant for someone so I won't argue that point.

Jack


----------



## nchoh (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Which is not a mirrorless-exclusive function...
> 
> I’m patiently waiting for someone to show me what a mirrorless camera can do that an SLR in lockup fundamentally can not, aside from “be narrower.”


Eye detect AF requires mirrorless (full time or live view), Eye controlled AF does not.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 28, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> People often forget that in tech development, luck is a large part of it: the right person in the right environment having the right idea at the right time. You can design in 'blue sky research' and 'innovative environment' all you want, and you can have a development route to fulfill what you see as a technological objective, but it still comes down to an element of luck. Don't forget that companies are probably looking at 4 or 5 ways of doing the same thing at any one time and you may end up prioritising an option that is not as good in the long run: think of Canon's risky (in marketing terms) development of the EF mount and leaving behind a successful FD mount whereas Nikon took the much less end-user-friendly mount to maintain back compatibility but relatively quickly showed it was messy and arguably the least best option.
> 
> And I think people write of Canon too easily. In DPAF sensors, they imaging is done only by a 'half pixel' and yet Canon has still managed in the 5DIV to get a sensor whose DR and noise is within a stop of Sony's. I wonder what Canon could do if they put all that technological goodness into full-sized non-DPAF pixels?
> This is probably where Canon have been heading for a long time with their sensor in being geared to what they see as the most significant step to developing FF mirrorless.



Right on, and some would say throw away DPAF because "they" don't need it. And so it goes.

Jack


----------



## RGF (Aug 28, 2018)

My dream would be able to order my 10 Oct


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Does not having to rotate the lens to install it offer any advantage?


For video rigs and maybe macro rails, yes.

On the other hand, it may increase the risks of releasing the lens accidentally.


----------



## BillB (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> And I'll repeat my question in return: Why is a lens tube with a passthrough for AF contacts to drive the EF lens (with the same damn DPAF routines it works fine with on a current SLR) not going to work?
> 
> I just can't connect the dots between: Same AF routines, Same AF system, same mount now in two pieces, and 'selling my stuff' or performance going to hell.
> 
> ...



Surely, it comes down to the tradeoffs involved in introducing a new mount. Where are the benefits from bringing out a new mount and are they worth it? The EF adapter may not be a big deal, but needing to use an adapter could be quite annoying to someone who sees no benefit from the new mount, maybe annoying enough to avoid buying a new camera. From Canon's point of view the question is whether the introduction of a camera with a new mount will bring in more money than a new camera with the EF mount.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Total speculation, but I think a confluence of factors might be driving it:
> 
> Resolutionaholics from Sony and Nikon (at the time) only had 36 MP to call on
> 
> ...


Interesting because the price for new ones really hasn't moved much at all since it's launch years ago.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Surely _literally_ people do spend money like this. I know them.
> 
> I am not wealthy and my friends are not wealthy (we all are working 30 to 40 somethings that have day jobs and do well enough) -- we don't live in downtown penthouses or gated communities, we pay bills and make ends meet. But my friends occasionally _do_ blow it out on a big Christmas / b-day / anniversary gift for their family. Now, it's budgeted, it happens once every 5-10 years, and it's never the expectation to get a gift of that scale, but it's also not uncommon to plan to get that item and just use Christmas / b-day / anniversary as the occasion to do it.
> 
> ...



Ah right, wow! Thanks


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

BillB said:


> Surely, it comes down to the tradeoffs involved in introducing a new mount. Where are the benefits from bringing out a new mount and are they worth it? The EF adapter may not be a big deal, but needing to use an adapter could be quite annoying to someone who sees no benefit from the new mount, maybe annoying enough to avoid buying a new camera. From Canon's point of view the question is whether the introduction of a camera with a new mount will bring in more money than a new camera with the EF mount.




To my knowledge (and there may be odd one-off exceptions), every single digital FF mirrorless ILC on the market does not employ the flange distance necessary to occupy a traditional FF mirror in front of it:

Leica M
Leica SL
Sony A7/A9 
Nikon Z6/Z7
Said another way: *all of them are 'thin' mount *w.r.t. your standard Canon EF / Nikon F sort of distance.

This could be for a host of reasons, but one is that a percentage of the market thinks smaller is better (no need to re-litigate 'but large FF lenses will still be large lenses', I think we all know that here). In other words, it would appear that every manufacturer that has entered this market has surveyed the lay of the land, sussed out the market needs, and pegged that it has to be a thin mount to distinguish it from a full SLR mount.

Did they do this because it went from 'no need for that added space / I smell an opportunity here' (say at A7 I launch timeframe) to 'but everyone is thin it and we have to follow suit now' (say at Z6/Z7 launch timing)? No idea. They may have data saying adapting lenses is a huge hit for all we know.

Does Canon have to follow suit and go thin? I think they ought to or a nontrivial slice of the market (however nutty) will blow the product off entirely. But a full EF option to go alongside the thin option could be end game move to scoop up Nikonians in droves.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Interesting because the price for new [5DS rigs] really hasn't moved much at all since it's launch years ago.




Every time I think this is representative of high demand / ability to defend price, I remind myself that companies can hold a sickeningly high line on product price with official resellers if they want to. Canon could be insisting on maintaining this price despite a diminishing sales demand and we would never know (save for the odd Amazon's sales ranking list, which changes constantly).

Consider: Nikon Df is still in production (5 years out) at full asking price.

Sony RX1R II, Leica Q are similar.

FTR, I often have cited the above that some products magically maintain price brilliantly over time. The truth is the company might refuse to ever sell it for less and we may never know how well it is selling as a result.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

And let's face it, the 'public acceptance optics' of a full EF mirrorless -- _if it was the only FF mirrorless they offered_ -- would be radioactive:

Canon is resting on its laurels
Canon is lazy and cheap
Canon is afraid of change
Canon cares more about existing customers than making new ones
...even if it was 50 MP x 10 fps, had IBIS, eye AF, and killer 4K.

And I'm just not talking fanboys at DPR or PP would go nuts over this. I think the entire industry would. It would be like Canon _sort-of_ launching a new platform. Canon needs to unlock the power of a mirrorless setup (just the main power train of liveview + focusing setup + EVF and all that that would enable), but I think it also needs to speak to folks who want a smaller system and less to lug around.

So I think thin mount offering has to happen... but I hope a full EF mount happens as well. If Canon can have so many FF SLRs, they can have more than one in mirrorless, surely.

- A


----------



## nchoh (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> That is an interesting theory and entirely possible... what I can't understand though is why Sony sensors hit these dizzying heights in terms of performance compared to Canon - the "market leader". Canon should be able to match this performance easily... I would think.


How did you reach the conclusion that Sony sensors have hit dizzying heights?


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> And I'll repeat my question in return: Why is a lens tube with a passthrough for AF contacts to drive the EF lens (with the same damn DPAF routines it works fine with on a current SLR) not going to work?



I'm not an evangelist on this issue, but my understanding is as follows: don't extension tubes impact AF performance? They're just a tube with contacts either side. I've always been led to believe adding an extra layer of contacts makes AF slower? As for image quality, didn't Lensrentals cover that - basically adaptors are always going to introduce slight misalignment which *may* introduce softness in parts of the image. It may be neither of these have enough impact for most people in real shooting situations (maybe including me, I've not enough experience with adaptors to say with any authority), but the issues simply aren't there with a lens mounted directly on the camera. Another minor thing: it also introduces an extra weak point - this may again be irrelevant to most people (and depends on the lens/body combination), but I've had a extension tube shear off - thankfully I was lucky and the lens and body survived.

I'm happy to be corrected with real data - e.g. do EF lenses mounted on the M-series with the Canon adaptor work just as well as on a DSLR? Or is that comparing apples to oranges?


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> That right there is the point....if the mirror needs to be in "lockup" to utilize these features, one can't help but wonder why not just remove the mirror.




Because it takes a lot more power. Same battery in D850, CIPA = 1840. In a Z7, CIPA = 330. Battery life is one reason why I went to a DSLR many years ago...


----------



## peterzuehlke (Aug 28, 2018)

hmatthes said:


> I love the 5DS for this high res situations. Heaven would be 50mp mirrorless...


Hasselblad and Fuji make those. (and larger format might give you something extra too)


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

nchoh said:


> How did you reach the conclusion that Sony sensors have hit dizzying heights?




Yeah. They _did_ hit dizzying heights... like 6 years ago. EXMOR went on-chip before everyone else and pooped on other folks' base ISO DR at that time.

There was at one point (according to DXO, so ) a 2.5 - 3 stop base ISO DR difference between similar market segment cameras between SoNikon rigs and Canon rigs. That is largely over now. Sony still makes a better sensor (someone is going to throw 5D4 + DPRAW at me momentarily) but Canon has largely closed the gap.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

Now the major talking point is throughput. There are now 5 production FF cameras pushing north of 400 MP/s in stills (i.e. MP resolution X top fps), and Canon doesn't sell any of them.

Comparatively, looking at the high-end* FF bodies: D850 and Z7 (45x9), Sony A7R3 (42x10), Sony A99-II (42x12), Sony A9 (24x20)... vs. Canon with either 50x5 or 30x7 (i.e. 50-60% of what the competition does).
_*Everyone segments differently, I am referring to non-integrally gripped $3k-ish cameras here. (Not the gripped sports ones.)_

Throughput has to step up with new Canon offerings. They look terribly antiquated here, and it gets folks blurring market segments and wondering why they should pay more for a 5-series. That needs to go away if Canon wants to protect a $3500 price point for 5-series cameras.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

nchoh said:


> EF-M?




User: I want a FF camera that is not large.

Sony: Here you are.

Nikon: Here you are.

Canon: No. You must choose small OR FF. We believe this is a better option bec---

[User already hitting 'Order' with another company.]

- A


----------



## hmatthes (Aug 28, 2018)

peterzuehlke said:


> Hasselblad and Fuji make those. (and larger format might give you something extra too)


I've used the Fuji GFX and love the image quality. Like their lenses. But find the physical camera hard to use in the real world. The rear dial is blocked by the ungainly grip. On paper it is perfect. We've been begging for exposure tied to focus point for a very long time... GFX has it. One can hope that with QPAF...


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

hmatthes said:


> We've been begging for exposure tied to focus point for a very long time... GFX has it. One can hope that with QPAF...




We don't need $6k medium format rig to do some localized off-center metering.

There is always judgment with a feature when 'maybe Canon is being greedy/protective here' vs. 'No. No. I think they're nerfing hard here.' I love Canon, I do -- I generally stick up for them. But I contend this is one is squarely the latter. They may not be able to nail an off-center AF point spot meter as precisely as a 1-series, but it's possible to deliver in more cameras than Canon allows -- I contend the 5-series at a minimum should get this functionality.

A Nikon D5500 has this. A _cell phone_ has this everytime you touch to focus off-center. Try it!

- A


----------



## lexptr (Aug 28, 2018)

Interesting... I think it is possible, that the announcement date was not final until they saw what Nikon is going to deliver. What it can tell us? Probably the Conon's FF mirorless is Ok for the competition. Otherwise they would hold it more to make it better. Just guessing.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Aug 28, 2018)

Random Orbits said:


> Because it takes a lot more power. Same battery in D850, CIPA = 1840. In a Z7, CIPA = 330. Battery life is one reason why I went to a DSLR many years ago...



The screens eat most of the power. The Nikon Z6 has a one button push to disable one or both(for timelapse or astrophotography) screens and significantly increases the shots. I find with the GH5 that if I film through the view finder instead of the large screen, battery life improves exponentially.


----------



## Sharlin (Aug 28, 2018)

Honestly, I'm still not sure how to interpret this article. Is the title ironic? Was August 27 some sort of an April Fools equivalent day somewhere in the world? Did Maeda-san himself appear to CR guy in a dream and declare that Sep 5 is The Day of Full-frame Mirrorless, contrary to all existing trusted sources of intel? What? Color me confused.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> I'm not an evangelist on this issue, but my understanding is as follows: don't extension tubes impact AF performance? They're just a tube with contacts either side. I've always been led to believe adding an extra layer of contacts makes AF slower? As for image quality, didn't Lensrentals cover that - basically adaptors are always going to introduce slight misalignment which *may* introduce softness in parts of the image.



So the simple answer is that if an EF-M to EF adaptor is built properly then no, it won't impact AF performance.

Electronic signals aren't slowed down by another few cm of copper! - and at the very low data speed rates that lenses communicate with the body the chance of anything getting corrupted by this is as close to zero as you could imagine.

And an adaptor gives no more misalignment than the lens already gets when mounted to the camera body. But even if it did, as long as the mount is a tight fit (and it should be) the misalignment will be totally compensated by the fact that the focusing is done on-sensor so the sensor will focus based on whatever the alignment really is, not what it theoretically should be!

No more microadjustment!


----------



## nchoh (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> And I'm just not talking fanboys at DPR or PP would go nuts over this. I think the entire industry would. It would be like Canon _sort-of_ launching a new platform. Canon needs to unlock the power of a mirrorless setup (just the main power train of liveview + focusing setup + EVF and all that that would enable), *but I think it also needs to speak to folks who want a smaller system and less to lug around.*
> 
> - A



That's what EF-M is for?


----------



## Respinder (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> 1) Curious: when is the last time Canon blew you away? This is not what they do. Canon predictably puts one foot in front of the other and delivers -- with quality, with forethought, and with usefulness. I liken them to a rather mundane automobile that never turns heads but also never ever lets you down.
> 
> 2) When FF mirrorless comes, know it was probably 3-5 years in development. There is zero chance Canon is rushing it. This is just when the release schedules lined up, and we shouldn't be surprised: Photokina is a big deal sort of event to announce things. If anything, Nikon deliberately wanted to be first of the two major SLR companies to grab all the spotlight and media attention. That said, FF mirrorless might be a later event if 9/5 has a reveal, it could be M5 Mk II or some other crop offering.
> 
> - A



Last camera that blew me away: the 5D Mark II, which got me into DSLR photography in the first place. It was the perfect photo and video hybrid solution. Of course, many others recognized this as well, which is why the camera quickly made its way into major Hollywood and television productions. To me, this was the last product they created where they were actually willing to throw everything they've got into a single product. These days, I am finding more and more that camera features are spread out across many cameras, and it is difficult to find a Canon DSLR that offers perfect video/photo. I guess now it is the 1DX Mark II, but why they do not offer C-log on it truly baffles me. I suppose after all the rumors previously reported about Canon doing "more than just a C-Log update" with 5D Mark IV, offering fixes to the crop on video, I had hopes that Canon had finally come to their senses, demonstrated a willingness to listen to feedback, and really shake things up. Since that time and those rumors turned out to be incorrect, I've grown more and more weary and cynical about new Canon releases.

I really hope they prove me wrong this time around and give us the mirrorless 5D Mark II equivelent we've all been waiting for.

One other thing - Canon, as well as Nikon and Sony, need to stop thinking of each other as competitors. Their biggest competitor in fact is Apple, followed by Samsung. It are these cell phones that the vast majority of people are using for "acceptable" photography. If they want to bring fresh blood into mirrorless photography, then it is necessary to really change up the game and introduce something that is a game changer. But at the same time I'm not sure if it will make a difference either - Sony and Nikon seem to be throwing everything they've got, yet when I go on vacation or to any destination I still see the cell phone used as the camera of choice - I rarely saw mirrorless in my recent trip to NYC, which surprised me.

So maybe it is a bigger challenge that we thought. Not sure what to think. But I know that if anyone can truly shock the industry with something incredible, it is Canon, and they last did so with the 5D Mark II.


----------



## ethanz (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> someone is going to throw 5D4 + DPRAW at me momentarily



Get out of here you heretic, sony fanboy


----------



## nchoh (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> I'm not an evangelist on this issue, but my understanding is as follows: don't extension tubes impact AF performance? They're just a tube with contacts either side. I've always been led to believe adding an extra layer of contacts makes AF slower? As for image quality, didn't Lensrentals cover that - basically adaptors are always going to introduce slight misalignment which *may* introduce softness in parts of the image.



Extension tubes could impact AF performance as the AF algorithm would not match the new lens combination optimally. And yes, adapters will introduce misalignment unless they are perfect.


----------



## nchoh (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> User: I want a FF camera that is not large.
> 
> Sony: Here you are.
> 
> ...



User: I want a FF camera that is not large and has small lenses.

Sony: Urmm.

Nikon: Hmm.

Canon: Well, if you want a small package of camera and lenses you can buy our EF-M system.---

[User already hitting 'Order' with Canon.]


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> So the simple answer is that if an EF-M to EF adaptor is built properly then no, it won't impact AF performance.
> 
> Electronic signals aren't slowed down by another few cm of copper! - and at the very low data speed rates that lenses communicate with the body the chance of anything getting corrupted by this is as close to zero as you could imagine.



Okay - that's great! - but then why is AF performance impacted with extension tubes and extenders? I've only used third party extension tubes, is there no issue with Canon ones? Is it due to light falloff? Is it poorer with extenders because of the narrower maximum aperture?



jolyonralph said:


> And an adaptor gives no more misalignment than the lens already gets when mounted to the camera body. But even if it did, as long as the mount is a tight fit (and it should be) the misalignment will be totally compensated by the fact that the focusing is done on-sensor so the sensor will focus based on whatever the alignment really is, not what it theoretically should be!



I thought the point about misalignment was it caused parts of the image to be out of focus - AFMA can't account for that. In the Lensrentals article, they talk about edge softness. If the centre is unaffected and the edges worse, that might be an acceptable compromise, but the issue is still there. Having on-sensor autofocus doesn't maginally make all parts of the image in focus, does it?


----------



## nchoh (Aug 28, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> So the simple answer is that if an EF-M to EF adaptor is built properly then no, it won't impact AF performance.
> 
> Electronic signals aren't slowed down by another few cm of copper! - and at the very low data speed rates that lenses communicate with the body the chance of anything getting corrupted by this is as close to zero as you could imagine.
> 
> ...



A lens only has one mounting surface, an adapter has 2 mounting surfaces, so unless the 2 planes of the adapter are perfectly parallel and perfectly tight, there will be deterioration to the image. A lens can also be micro-adjusted to account for misalignment of the mount an adapter cannot. If an adapter introduces tilt to a lens, a sensor cannot correct it - the focus will only be correct o the point of focus.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 28, 2018)

fullstop said:


> LOL. Sony A9 is definitely a tool that can be and is actually used also by Pro's. It is reasonably rugged. It does have IBIS. It does have 4k capture. And yet it does not overheat.
> 
> "Innovative Canon" should be able to achieve similar technical feats, no?



Steve Huff got him a 1D-X after a overheated A9 ruined him a video shooting. Well, he lives in Phoenix, Arizona, but a pro tool should withstand even Arizona's climate. In fact, the failure of his Sony moved him to try Canon again, after many years, and he is obviously impressed.

I know a bit about semiconductor technology, and heating definitely is a problem not only with sensors. You know what I mean if you do heavy image or video processing with your Macbook on your lap - the processor has to do a hot job.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 28, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Overheating is not listed on Sony’s spec sheet. Since many on this forum base their perception of a camera entirely on its spec sheet, for them the issue simply doesn’t exist.



Overheating is only listed in Sony's speckled sheets (that are secret)


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> You can run liveview through the viewfinder / held up to your eye (without some stupid loupe, periscope, etc.). This obliterates MLU for stability (lets you shoot with longer shutters handheld than if you are 12" away from your face, which lets you keep ISO down), comfort, intuitive access to controls, and, candidly, eliminates the stigma of looking like that guy who shoots serious iPad photography.
> 
> 'MLU _is_ mirrorless so why do we even need mirrorless' is a hackneyed and underweight argument*. Not everyone buying mirrorless are small-size-loving sheep that don't get understand how MLU and Liveview works. Some people just see great value in having Liveview up to their eye -- it unlocks a dramatically different user experience, IMHO.
> 
> ...


Even in the context of the dual viewfinder configuration I “proposed”

Thanks man, I don’t take any offense to disagreement


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

nchoh said:


> User: I want a FF camera that is not large and has small lenses.



Sony originally launched with a few small lenses. Not pancakes, but small: think EF 28 f/2.8 IS big. I think a mirrorless system built on size will 'pop' the most with such lenses, even if they aren't much smaller than the SLR equivalent:

​​(these are two close to each other FLs @ f/2.8)​
So as much as 'yes, a thinner mount isn't overcoming physics here and making lenses smaller' is entirely true, it's also entirely true that slow wide to standard lenses + a thin mount body will fit in a smaller bag for those that want a small FF rig. So I think a short line of these lenses (24 2.8 / 35 2.8 / 40 pancake or 50 1.8) should absolutely be part of a thin mount setup.

Sony did _some_ of this before rolling out a stampede of GM pickle jars. F/4 zooms and f/2.8 primes are offered.

Nikon is SOL on that front. Their lens pipeline is all f/1.8 primes and a host of staple pro f/2.8 zooms. Small is not in the DNA of the Z6/Z7 once you leave the body (though that 14-30 f/4 might be an intriguing little nugget).

​
But I still contend EOS-M cannot be the sole answer for Canon to people who say 'I want small and best IQ'. FF has to play there, too. Canon's big enough to do it as well as offering a stout ergonomic beast of a professional setup.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Even in the context of the dual viewfinder configuration I “proposed”



Sorry, dude. Missed that.

If hybrid/dual VF could come together and not ridiculously complicated or awkward ergonomically (changing which opening you put your eye to), then sign me up. OVF for demanding AF work or for saving battery power, EVF for the handheld manual focusing, silent shooting, etc.

That'd be great.

- A


----------



## nchoh (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Sony originally launched with a few small lenses. Not pancakes, but small: think EF 28 f/2.8 IS big. I think a mirrorless system built on size will 'pop' the most with such lenses, even if they aren't much smaller than the SLR equivalent:
> 
> View attachment 179954​​(these are two close to each other FLs @ f/2.8)​
> So as much as 'yes, a thinner mount isn't overcoming physics here and making lenses smaller' is entirely true, it's also entirely true that slow wide to standard lenses + a thin mount body will fit in a smaller bag for those that want a small FF rig. So I think a short line of these lenses (24 2.8 / 35 2.8 / 40 pancake or 50 1.8) should absolutely be part of a thin mount setup.
> ...



I do not disagree. 

What I do see is that Canon has specifically targeted the EF-M system to the entry level, hobbyist group who want small portable systems, and a system capable of taking on M43.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 28, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> User: I want a FF camera that is not large.
> Canon:


...6D2.
User: But...
Canon: 6D2.
User: But Sony...
Canon: 6D2.
User: But Nikon...
Canon: 6D2.
User: Ok.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 28, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Okay - that's great! - but then why is AF performance impacted with extension tubes and extenders?
> I thought the point about misalignment was it caused parts of the image to be out of focus



Extension tubes are designed to deliberately offset the plane of focus of the lens to achieve macro effect with associated reduction of AF performance (to be honest I only ever use extension tubes in manual focus anyway). 

Similar issue with parts of the image being out of focus.


With an adaptor for EF glass to an EF-M body for example you are doing the opposite, you're adjusting the lens so that the correct focus plane of the lens is on the sensor.


So, assuming the adaptor is built properly there should be NO difference in performance in any way between the EF lens on the adaptor and if that camera had a native EF mount!


----------



## dak723 (Aug 28, 2018)

I have not read through all the comments, so someone may have already suggested this, but I do not believe this rumor, either. I believe it is a Sony plant - the specs too good and the price too low. When the actual specs come out and the real price will be much higher, people who believe this rumor will be even more upset than usual. Then the Sony trolls and plants will be able to really rip into Canon for disappointing people when they don't get the specs that they have assumed to be correct.


----------



## Frederik_Bo (Aug 28, 2018)

I know people in here are mostly interested in specks so this might not be of very high significance to the CR community, but I really hope canon makes a camera that looks good while also taking high quality images. 
I don’t understand why canon cameras has to share the esthetics of early 90s tube style TVs. As a photographer I appreciate esthetics, and I think a camera should make me want to pick it up and use it, just by the way it looks and feels.
It is not like I want canon to sacrifice ergonomics for esthetics, but the look of there DSLRs basically hasn’t changed since the late 80s early 90s. I think the introduction of mirroles is a opportune moment for canon to update their design language a bit.


----------



## ecpu (Aug 28, 2018)

Whatever it is and whenever it is released, it better have a joystick control for the focus points!


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 28, 2018)

sdz said:


> I prefer that Canon would keep the EF mount.



This would be Canon's smartest move by far.

Hell...those specs, that price, *and* EF mount with no stupid adapter...I might pick one up as a backup body + decent 4k system.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Extension tubes are designed to deliberately offset the plane of focus of the lens to achieve macro effect with associated reduction of AF performance (to be honest I only ever use extension tubes in manual focus anyway).
> 
> Similar issue with parts of the image being out of focus.
> 
> ...



Thanks. I wanted to use my 500L with extension tubes as a sort-of hybrid long semi-macro lens for butterflies etc. (i.e. bringing the minimum focus distance down a bit), and handholding that whilst focusing manually is very hard, so the AF impact left a strong impression. I used the 100L on the original EOS-M with the Canon EF-EFM adaptor and it was poor, but that was most likely the EOS-M's stodgy AF performance rather than specifically an adaptor issue.


----------



## SaP34US (Aug 28, 2018)

I think that the camera(s) will be close to the 6DMII and possibly the 5DMIV or 5DSR but improved (on chip) and full 4K. I also think that the M5II should come in Black/w black or dark grey, Brown/w silver or grey, White/w grey or khaki, and Gun metal blue/w grey or khaki.


----------



## Juangrande (Aug 28, 2018)

Frederik_Bo said:


> I know people in here are mostly interested in specks so this might not be of very high significance to the CR community, but I really hope canon makes a camera that looks good while also taking high quality images.
> I don’t understand why canon cameras has to share the esthetics of early 90s tube style TVs. As a photographer I appreciate esthetics, and I think a camera should make me want to pick it up and use it, just by the way it looks and feels.
> It is not like I want canon to sacrifice ergonomics for esthetics, but the look of there DSLRs basically hasn’t changed since the late 80s early 90s. I think the introduction of mirroles is a opportune moment for canon to update their design language a bit.


I personally like the look and feel of my 5D4, the ergonomics are great. I dislike the clunky look of Nikon DSLR’s and the Sony is unattractive looking and very uncomfortable in the hands, especially larger hands. And the hard edges don’t fit your hands. So I hope Canon sticks to the great ergonomics they always have.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 28, 2018)

Frederik_Bo said:


> As a photographer I appreciate esthetics, and I think a camera should make me want to pick it up and use it, just by the way it looks and feels.
> *It is not like I want canon to sacrifice ergonomics for esthetics,* but the look of there DSLRs basically hasn’t changed since the late 80s early 90s. I think the introduction of mirroles is a opportune moment for canon to update their design language a bit.



What if DSLRs had already honed their ergonomics and couldn't easily be improved in that regard? It's up for debate, but surely a compelling reason the look of these cameras has barely changed in decades is because it works ergonomically, not as an aesthetic choice? In which case, you are indeed asking for that sacrifice to be made.


----------



## Durf (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Whatever it is and whenever it is released, it better have a joystick control for the focus points!



They need to start including Netflix capability with these miraculous, sensational, and spectacular mirror-less cameras so people can watch movies through the viewfinder when they're not taking pictures.....


----------



## zim (Aug 28, 2018)

Durf said:


> They need to start including Netflix capability with these miraculous, sensational, and spectacular mirror-less cameras so people can watch movies through the viewfinder when they're not taking pictures.....



Ah now it makes sense, always connected EVF.... porn


----------



## Jim Saunders (Aug 28, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Whatever it is and whenever it is released, it better have a joystick control for the focus points!


 
That or a trackball where the center-push action can be used for the shutter release. Why not?

Jim


----------



## Frederik_Bo (Aug 29, 2018)

scyrene said:


> What if DSLRs had already honed their ergonomics and couldn't easily be improved in that regard? It's up for debate, but surely a compelling reason the look of these cameras has barely changed in decades is because it works ergonomically, not as an aesthetic choice? In which case, you are indeed asking for that sacrifice to be made.



I don’t agree. I think the ergonomics is mostly about the grip and button layout. There is a lot more to a cameras design then those 2 features. 
I am not only thinking of canons DSLRs here. I can’t come up with a single modern canon that I would call good looking. At best they are anonymous looking. 

I think Nikon does a slightly better job then canon. At least you can still see the heritage of Marcello Gandini in their design, however deluded it may have become.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 29, 2018)

Something doesn't quite add up here. If the EF-M 32mm 1.4 lens is also being announced it would make a LOT more sense for that to be announced at the same time as the M5 Mark II - which specification wise would be pretty much identical to the specs leaked EXCEPT for the full-frame and the price.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

dak723 said:


> I have not read through all the comments, so someone may have already suggested this, but I do not believe this rumor, either. I believe it is a Sony plant - the specs too good and the price too low. When the actual specs come out and the real price will be much higher, people who believe this rumor will be even more upset than usual. Then the Sony trolls and plants will be able to really rip into Canon for disappointing people when they don't get the specs that they have assumed to be correct.



(a) Not a terrible misinformation idea, but it would need to be a detailed spec list that everyone on the internet started circulating, buying into, etc. However, with this, we haven't had any rumors of any significant lifespan with this new platform. This thing is a ghost -- _we still don't even know the mount decision._

(b) You may be giving Sony too much credit. (The Borg didn't scheme. It just moved ahead with its plan.)

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 29, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Well here's my question regarding adapters. I've often wondered if the typical movement of the lens once locked in place can affect image quality. I have no doubt that a long lens without adapter will have slightly better performance but maybe it's insignificant??
> 
> I've been accused of obsessing about small things and told to just get out and shoot since they are insignificant. I remind myself of that, but CR thrives on making "insignificant" the be all and end all, like DR. Turns out that insignificant is dependent on personal needs and is significant for someone so I won't argue that point.
> 
> Jack


The addition of any mechanical adapter will cause alignment problems. Period!

That said, is the problem significant? A well engineered mount will still degrade the alignment, but not enough to be noticed by the user.... use precise enough test equipment and you will be able to see it, but in the real world it becomes so small as to be invisible.....

A good analogy is the precision metal ruler here on my desk. As the room gets warmer or colder, the metal expands and contracts..... but 50mm still looks like 50mm to me, I can’t detect that change of a hundred thousandth by eye.....


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

Sony's marketing plan for 2019 has been leaked.

Wow. _*I knew it! *_

- A


----------



## scyrene (Aug 29, 2018)

Frederik_Bo said:


> I don’t agree. I think the ergonomics is mostly about the grip and button layout. There is a lot more to a cameras design then those 2 features.
> I am not only thinking of canons DSLRs here. I can’t come up with a single modern canon that I would call good looking. At best they are anonymous looking.
> 
> I think Nikon does a slightly better job then canon. At least you can still see the heritage of Marcello Gandini in their design, however deluded it may have become.



Well "good looking" is an entirely subjective, personal opinion, and therefore can't really be debated. "Anonymous" is maybe because the ergonomics dictate the shape and size? Maybe I'm a philistine; I can appreciate the look of a device, but for me function is paramount. Incidentally, I don't see much difference between Canon and Nikon DSLRs apart from the shape of the eyepiece and the location of certain buttons - hardly earth-shattering.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 29, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> (a) Not a terrible misinformation idea, but it would need to be a detailed spec list that everyone on the internet started circulating, buying into, etc. However, with this, we haven't had any rumors of any significant lifespan with this new platform. This thing is a ghost -- _we still don't even know the mount decision._
> 
> (b) You may be giving Sony too much credit. (The Borg didn't scheme. It just moved ahead with its plan.)
> 
> - A



Is the Borg an 'it' or a 'they'? Now *there's* a ten-page thread!


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

scyrene said:


> What if DSLRs had already honed their ergonomics and couldn't easily be improved in that regard? It's up for debate, but surely a compelling reason the look of these cameras has barely changed in decades is because it works ergonomically, not as an aesthetic choice? In which case, you are indeed asking for that sacrifice to be made.




This. All day. I appreciate there is a market for something cool/interesting/pretty looking, but:

Canon doesn't want to take anything away from the current form factors they offer because they work so damn well. They fit the hand, they have buttons in great locations, and user experience is delightful. To add some 'form pizazz' to the design will interrupt or diminish that.


To introduced multiple colors to the design (don't think crazy stuff, think Fuji -- gun metal and black, black and chrome, etc.) means different materials and seams between them. That _could_ undermine durability depending on how they do it.


*We can not all agree on what is attractive in camera.* Some love retro, some love concept car, some love quiet and unassuming. So getting brave with design could be applauded or it could be a Hasselblad Lunar.  Canon doesn't take subjective fickle-market-reception sort of risks like that.
Put this all together and the best we can hope for is an altogether new color body (an interesting dark gray?) or possibly some interesting accent colors on the metal hardware (eyelets, hotshoe, etc.). And coloring metal (esp. steel) can look nice on day one and look horrible on day 100, introduce durability challenges, etc.

I'm down with it looking better. I really am. But Canon's design language is overwhelmingly clear: ergonomics/performance/intuitiveness first, how it looks is a distant second. They might do something unique and interesting with the product line badging or put a cool [insert stylistic element here], but by and large it will look like it is related to the other Canon bodies we use today.

- A


----------



## herion (Aug 29, 2018)

BillB said:


> Surely, it comes down to the tradeoffs involved in introducing a new mount. Where are the benefits from bringing out a new mount and are they worth it? The EF adapter may not be a big deal, but needing to use an adapter could be quite annoying to someone who sees no benefit from the new mount, maybe annoying enough to avoid buying a new camera. From Canon's point of view the question is whether the introduction of a camera with a new mount will bring in more money than a new camera with the EF mount.



Potentially - and I am the first one to admit I do not have a Karnak turban and crystal ball - but Canon makes extension tubes, correct? Which are *exactly* the same as the EF/EF-M adapter except it's the same mount on both sides. 

BOOM. Problem solved. No need to manufacture a new adapter since it's out there already. 

New lenses that can benefit from a thin mount (and no dixie cup endcaps) go directly onto the camera. Not every lens benefits, so not every lens gets a thin mount.

How's that for a "sexy solution" ???


----------



## Quackator (Aug 29, 2018)

herion said:


> How's that for a "sexy solution" ???



As sexy as canned horse manure, because it makes 
the same mistake Sony made, which gives them so 
much flack for their ergonomics.

They should know better, though. Their FS700 is basically 
an empty cube that needs to be there to fit all the knobs 
and buttons. A tool, no toy.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 29, 2018)

In Canon land, ergonomics ranges from the M to the 1DX2.... if that does not convince you that there are different opinions, nothing will.....


----------



## transpo1 (Aug 29, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> I am really looking forward to this new camera. I just hope Canon is willing to sacrifice sales on the 5D4, because if they cripple this camera to be worse in some way than the 5D4, I do not see it being competitive (okay, it will probably have only one card slot, but that is ok).
> 
> If its essentially a 5D4 without a mirror and with the same weather sealing, Canon will get my money.



Without weather sealing, it will be DOA for many professionals. That would be a huge mistake.


----------



## transpo1 (Aug 29, 2018)

ken said:


> I think I woke up on the wrong side of bed this morning. All I can see is:
> 
> 1. Absolutely nothing has changed. Either Canon is going to release a FF mirrorless this year or it isn't. And no one outside of Canon seems to know any detail about it. So reading these rumors is not productive, other than to know "something might be coming. Hold off on major purchase decisions." Meh. I've known that for quite awhile now.
> 
> ...



Yes, it's laughable how many times and "on again / off again" posts this story has had. Makes me think there is purposeful misinformation by Canon out there *and / or internal *Canon debates have only recently been concluded in order to respond to Nikon's announcement and products.


----------



## Lurker (Aug 29, 2018)

> Lurker said:
> 
> 
> If someone can buy their significant other a Benz/Audi/Acura/BMW/Cadi or Yugo, then a camera body isn't so unreasonable.
> ...



According to all the TV commercials at Christmas time they do.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 29, 2018)

herion said:


> Potentially - and I am the first one to admit I do not have a Karnak turban and crystal ball - but Canon makes extension tubes, correct? Which are *exactly* the same as the EF/EF-M adapter except it's the same mount on both sides.
> 
> BOOM. Problem solved. No need to manufacture a new adapter since it's out there already.
> 
> ...


As sexy as the Grinch in a bathing suit next to ET after he got burned by acid or something. 

If an EF 12/25 tube can mount on the MILC body, so can any EF lens. But they couldn't focus an image on the sensor. Same goes for the short flange lenses on any DSLR. Your basic recipe for a sh!tstorm of confusion.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 29, 2018)

Lurker said:


> According to all the TV commercials at Christmas time they do.


And home appliances..... a lot of guys give their wives vacuum cleaners and kitchen appliances for Christmas.... usually just before the divorce


----------



## ethanz (Aug 29, 2018)

zim said:


> Ah now it makes sense, always connected EVF.... porn



Is that a lens in your pocket or are you just excited to be photographing?


----------



## transpo1 (Aug 29, 2018)

And then this-

https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/confirmed-canon-will-soon-announce-the-new-ef-m32-mm-f1-4-stm/


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 29, 2018)

Kit. said:


> ...6D2.
> User: But...
> Canon: 6D2.
> User: But Sony...
> ...



I get that you're saying the 6d is fairly small, but it's still quite a bit bigger than the mirrorless competition (whether that is a good or bad thing to you is another matter) 

And given the reception the camera got, telling people to lump or leave it isn't going to win Canon any favour. I don't think they'd be that stubborn


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 29, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> And home appliances..... a lot of guys give their wives vacuum cleaners and kitchen appliances for Christmas.... usually just before the divorce



A good marriage will have communication and can survive such gifts. The wife will explain why you do not buy her these kind of things.
Not necessarily politely though.


----------



## ptogel (Aug 29, 2018)

I just hope Canon learns from Sony and Nikon. We would love to stay a Canon Shooter Studio. We do weddings, so we need quality, a good lens selection and a great battery.


----------



## Frederik_Bo (Aug 29, 2018)

Juangrande said:


> I personally like the look and feel of my 5D4, the ergonomics are great. I dislike the clunky look of Nikon DSLR’s and the Sony is unattractive looking and very uncomfortable in the hands, especially larger hands. And the hard edges don’t fit your hands. So I hope Canon sticks to the great ergonomics they always have.



I know there really is no way of arguing taste. Personally I think I like Nikons design language is slightly better than canons though I will grant you that their DSLR’s can be a little clunky looking. I think the z6 and 7 are pretty decent looking. 

The Sony’s look really good to me, though people say the ergonomics aren’t great. I have never used one so I will have to take peoples word on that. From what people say, it does seem they have prioritized more in the direction of looks or perhaps size, rather than ergonomics. Maybe if you are a woman, it fits better in your hand.


----------



## Frederik_Bo (Aug 29, 2018)

> scyrene said:
> What if DSLRs had already honed their ergonomics and couldn't easily be improved in that regard? It's up for debate, but surely a compelling reason the look of these cameras has barely changed in decades is because it works ergonomically, not as an aesthetic choice? In which case, you are indeed asking for that sacrifice to be made.





ahsanford said:


> This. All day. I appreciate there is a market for something cool/interesting/pretty looking, but:
> 
> Canon doesn't want to take anything away from the current form factors they offer because they work so damn well. They fit the hand, they have buttons in great locations, and user experience is delightful. To add some 'form pizazz' to the design will interrupt or diminish that.
> 
> ...



Well I wasn’t really arguing for a change in the ergonomics of canons cameras. I was arguing for a change in design esthetics. I really do think this can be done without sacrificing ergonomics and usability. 

It is not like I am getting my hopes up though. I sadly think it will be the same boring canon look, only smaller and flatter. Something like A M5 on steroids...

That lunar camera really was an abomination of a camera


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

Oh snap, CR Guy is getting tapped by other sites to comment on 9/5:

https://petapixel.com/2018/08/28/canon-full-frame-mirrorless-unveil-is-likely-september-5th/

No pressure, dude.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> And then this-
> 
> https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/confirmed-canon-will-soon-announce-the-new-ef-m32-mm-f1-4-stm/




Which, as others have said on this very thread, implies that 9/5 is the M5 II or other higher end crop mirrorless.

Or [wince] someone says that [double wince] _the future FF mirrorless mount is EF-M_, and that this is one of the lenses Canon is launching the new FF system with. 

I kid. 32mm is not a FL prime Canon would make these days. This is surely shaping up to be a crop lens to generate 50 prime FF FOV. 

And as we all know, if it actually is an FF lens and they gave it STM, we must kill it with a hammer.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> And then this-
> 
> https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/confirmed-canon-will-soon-announce-the-new-ef-m32-mm-f1-4-stm/




CR Forums had a hot scoop that Mirrorlessrumors posted a screen cap from Nokishita's Twitter feed*.

That's like when my Mom saw a great recipe online, printed it out and mailed it to me. 

- A

*P.S. I totally do this all the time, I am making fun of the times we live in and not your post.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 29, 2018)

ptogel said:


> I just hope Canon learns from Sony and Nikon. We would love to stay a Canon Shooter Studio. We do weddings, so we need quality, a good lens selection and a great battery.


Yeah, that's what Sony is known for...a great lens selection and stellar battery life.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

ptogel said:


> I just hope Canon learns from Sony and Nikon. We would love to stay a Canon Shooter Studio. We do weddings, so we need quality, a good lens selection and a great battery.





neuroanatomist said:


> Yeah, that's what Sony is known for...a great lens selection and stellar battery life.




Right. Because all EF lenses will turn to dust when a thin mount + adaptor is released. Poof. 

If Canon leads with thin, and I think they will, they need to put out a proper public service announcement sort of video showing how EF lenses will perform as they did before (under DPAF).

- A


----------



## sdz (Aug 29, 2018)

Frederik_Bo said:


> I know people in here are mostly interested in specks so this might not be of very high significance to the CR community, but I really hope canon makes a camera that looks good while also taking high quality images.
> I don’t understand why canon cameras has to share the esthetics of early 90s tube style TVs. As a photographer I appreciate esthetics, and I think a camera should make me want to pick it up and use it, just by the way it looks and feels.
> It is not like I want canon to sacrifice ergonomics for esthetics, but the look of there DSLRs basically hasn’t changed since the late 80s early 90s. I think the introduction of mirroles is a opportune moment for canon to update their design language a bit.



Canon has designed cameras that were aesthetically pleasing:







This one was ergonomically displeasing.


----------



## mb66energy (Aug 29, 2018)

ptogel said:


> I just hope Canon learns from Sony and Nikon. We would love to stay a Canon Shooter Studio. We do weddings, so we need quality, a good lens selection and a great battery.



If I look at the pricing I am not shure Canon should learn everything from Sony / Nikon - I am glad that the M50 was just above 500 EUR/$.
If you turn in ECO mode it is good for 300 shots over one week with some deleting / fiddling in the menu before the battery shows 50% (which maybe is 30%) so maybe comparable with Sony battery stamina.
With the lens selection you are right: Native EF-M primes are only available in homeopathic doses and around a - for me - not so pleasing focal length range (22-28-32) but ... with the EF2EF-M adapter I have access to all the lenses I bought in the last 13 years and they work without any flaws (especially EF-S 60 macro, EF 40, EF 70-200 4.0 L IS, EF 400 5.6, EF-S 10-22).
The Canon ecosystem is great in terms of compatibility and reliability and this comes from a very critical user!


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

mb66energy said:


> with the EF2EF-M adapter I have access to all the lenses I bought in the last 13 years and they work without any flaws (especially EF-S 60 macro, EF 40, EF 70-200 4.0 L IS, EF 400 5.6, EF-S 10-22).



Thank you for sharing. There seems to be only a limited amount of adaptor performance reviews out there.

Occasionally you see videos like this:






But that's not that much to go on. "It looks good. Cool."

Will someone please investigate and write up the following comparison?

M5 / M6 vs. a relatively similarly sensored EF-S camera that has DPAF
Pick a few EF or EF-S lenses: mix up STM vs. USM, short vs. long FLs, etc.
Compare AF hit rate, consistency and speed between the EF-S camera (in liveview) and the EF-M + adaptor
Compare output IQ between the two
Settle the question: Did Canon get the adaptor right with EF-M? Is there any evidence to suggest that our EF glass will not perform on a similar FF adaptor in the future?

- A


----------



## mrproxy (Aug 29, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Thank you for sharing. There seems to be only a limited amount of adaptor performance reviews out there.
> 
> Occasionally you see videos like this:
> 
> ...


The adapter ring with EF-M works just fine. I have M50 for last 4-month together with adapter. I use camera for parties, walk arounds, trips etc. 
I use with following lenses canon: 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1,2&1.8, 135/2 and it just works. I have not experienced any difference in performance against 5Dm3. 
It is reliable.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 29, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Sony's marketing plan for 2019 has been leaked.
> 
> Wow. _*I knew it! *_
> 
> - A



I can't remember where I saw it, but on commentator said that the reason there has not been a groundswell against Sony is that by the time the bugs have been seen, they are releasing a new body so people get distracted. Seems to be working


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Aug 29, 2018)

A new mount with a very large diameter plus an adapter for EF would be a good solution for me. The adapter should be included for free though. Later you could buy new lenses for the new large mount which could really make use of it and have a very low vignetting or even an aperture of f/1. With a large diameter you could even use medium format lenses and the 35mm sensor would only use the center of the medium format frame, where the image quality is the best.

However for me a camera still needs a real optical viewfinder, which rules out mirrorless cameras. 

Video is something I do not need in a camera at all.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 29, 2018)

Nikon have had the option to completely redesign their new mirrorless mount for the best series of compromises. And from a clean sheet of paper they have ended up with a mount that is just 1mm different from the Canon EF mount. 
So what exactly are people expecting from the 'new mount'? Why would Canon's mount be larger if Nikon have decided on the size they have?


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 29, 2018)

ptogel said:


> I just hope Canon learns from Sony and Nikon. We would love to stay a Canon Shooter Studio. We do weddings, so we need quality, a good lens selection and a great battery.



I would say 'lets hope canon learns from Sony's mistakes. Don't screw up the ergonomics. Don't screw up the heat dissipation. Don't screw up the weather sealing and Durability. Don't screw up the menus. Don't screw up the button layout(as a separate issue to ergonomics). Give us a camera that is reliable and does a good job all the time as opposed to a great job some of the time. If that can be done without compromising specs that would be great but if you need to drop the throughput or have a slightly lower spec video option that's fine. Just make sure it is reliable.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 29, 2018)

I never think of the future - it comes soon enough. Albert Einstein


----------



## .jan (Aug 29, 2018)

Aussie shooter said:


> I would say 'lets hope canon learns from Sony's mistakes. Don't screw up the ergonomics. Don't screw up the heat dissipation. Don't screw up the weather sealing and Durability. Don't screw up the menus. Don't screw up the button layout(as a separate issue to ergonomics). Give us a camera that is reliable and does a good job all the time as opposed to a great job some of the time. If that can be done without compromising specs that would be great but if you need to drop the throughput or have a slightly lower spec video option that's fine. Just make sure it is reliable.


True, in terms of ergonomics, usability and durability Canon has always been hard to beat. I've never come across a camera or menu system as intuitive as Canon's are. And this isn't based on one camera, it's 13+ years DSLR shooting.

Also, unrelated, EF mount please. There's been this neat little patent on a mount with adjustable flange distance. That sounds like something worth investing in when it ships in a camera.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Aug 29, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Yeah. They _did_ hit dizzying heights... like 6 years ago. EXMOR went on-chip before everyone else and pooped on other folks' base ISO DR at that time.



You say that, but this is a 100% crop of a _70D _file (off the net, way back when it had first been released) pushed umpteen stops (from this) - OK, it's 160 ISO, not exactly base ISO, but it's noise free in the shadows. How much shadow recovery latitude anyone _really_ need? 

More than this? I sincerely doubt it. And more to the point - I could pass these off as Sony files with no problem. In fact, I often have.

The secret? _Don't convert in LightRoom/ACR..!_

That one was DPP. This is Capture One Pro, which arguably makes the point ever more effectively...


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Aug 29, 2018)

ecpu said:


> It's just too bad that we have to choose between solid and proven reliability (Canon) and cutting-edge technology/performance (Sony).


"Cutting edge" technology (whatever that means) does not equal "performance".

Nor does it automatically make for a better photographer, or better photographs...


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Aug 29, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Fair enough. Was just merely making a point that it sounds like theres a lot of resistance to change when it comes to DSLR users. Usually people who have become accustomed to something over a long period of time tend to do that.


There's a _world _of difference between not mindlessly rushing towards change for change's sake, and being "resistant" to change.

In other words - we'll change when it's time. But not before. 

For many of us, right now, mirrorless brings precisely _nothing _to the table. 

So why _would_ we change?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Aug 29, 2018)

ecpu said:


> one can't help but wonder why not just remove the mirror.


Because the sound of a mirror slapping at 10+ fps makes me feel _manly..._

__


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 29, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> So why _would_ we change?


Because otherwise your clients will look at you and laugh derisively at your outmoded, antiquated gear?


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 29, 2018)

bergstrom said:


> If its not superior to the sony a7iii then forget it.



Let's see, DPAF blows Sony away every time, Sony (Nikon) is really struggling in this area and continues to do so, look at what Canon has done with DPAF in the 700 series cinema cameras (They also smoke Sony (Nikon) in DR with these sensors, Color and overall quality of image by Canon always beats Sony and ease of use, critical when getting that fleeting moment is a real downfall of Sony. 1 stop at most in DR at the lowest ISO is no big deal as Canon consistently beats Sony (Nikon) in DR in most products when the going gets tough like higher than base ISOs. So Canon should have no problem seeing as they are already ahead.


----------



## zim (Aug 29, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Is the Borg an 'it' or a 'they'? Now *there's* a ten-page thread!



*They* are a collective

Yes I know I'm sad


----------



## ecpu (Aug 29, 2018)

Regarding the mount/adaptor argument...

I feel there can be no way Canon will simply change the mount and include a basic EF adapter because they had no problem telling the world they had a "sexy solution" for EF glass on mirrorless.

You dont tell everyone you have a "sexy solution" if all you have is the exact same basic solution that already exists.

Canon developed something new and I bet it's either an EF mount with variable flange distance (moving sensor maybe?) OR it will be the EF mount with new lenses that allow the rear element to extend into the camera body and effectively reduce the flange distance at the same time as making the overall lens extension from the camera shorter.

I expect some recognition from this group when Canon reveals that the solution is one of these two options. =p


----------



## Durf (Aug 29, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> There's a _world _of difference between not mindlessly rushing towards change for change's sake, and being "resistant" to change.
> 
> In other words - we'll change when it's time. But not before.
> 
> ...



What's a matter Keith, this won't work for you?????


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 29, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Sony originally launched with a few small lenses. Not pancakes, but small: think EF 28 f/2.8 IS big. I think a mirrorless system built on size will 'pop' the most with such lenses, even if they aren't much smaller than the SLR equivalent:
> 
> View attachment 179954​​(these are two close to each other FLs @ f/2.8)​
> So as much as 'yes, a thinner mount isn't overcoming physics here and making lenses smaller' is entirely true, it's also entirely true that slow wide to standard lenses + a thin mount body will fit in a smaller bag for those that want a small FF rig. So I think a short line of these lenses (24 2.8 / 35 2.8 / 40 pancake or 50 1.8) should absolutely be part of a thin mount setup.
> ...



In the picture above, if canon made a new version of this lens that extended inward the outside portion of the lens could essentially be a pancake. The Sony lens mount is 46.1mm, the canon is 54mm. The diameter of the the collar itself is around 6mm. The canon would be bigger, but not nearly as much. And there are whole classes of long lenses that could get the same treatment making for a much more balanced setup. 

Although to be honest I'd like to see the solution of the moving sensor. There could be some very interesting compact zooms that could be produced if the flange focusing distance was variable. That could be a game changer.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 29, 2018)

criscokkat said:


> Although to be honest I'd like to see the solution of the moving sensor. There could be some very interesting compact zooms that could be produced if the flange focusing distance was variable. That could be a game changer.


Actually, you don't need a variable flange distance if you can extend your zoom into the body. Might work for, say, 17-70/4 IS on a mount backward compatible with EF.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 29, 2018)

criscokkat said:


> In the picture above, if canon made a new version of this lens that extended inward the outside portion of the lens could essentially be a pancake. The Sony lens mount is 46.1mm, the canon is 54mm. The diameter of the the collar itself is around 6mm. The canon would be bigger, but not nearly as much. And there are whole classes of long lenses that could get the same treatment making for a much more balanced setup.
> 
> Although to be honest I'd like to see the solution of the moving sensor. There could be some very interesting compact zooms that could be produced if the flange focusing distance was variable. That could be a game changer.



And the same technology could be used for IBIS as well?


----------



## jayphotoworks (Aug 29, 2018)

ecpu said:


> Regarding the mount/adaptor argument...
> 
> I feel there can be no way Canon will simply change the mount and include a basic EF adapter because they had no problem telling the world they had a "sexy solution" for EF glass on mirrorless.
> 
> ...



I'd like to think that Canon will very likely go the route as mentioned by ecpu. Just about every manufacturer has gone the adapter route including Canon on its own EF-M line-up. Quite frankly, adapters are simply cumbersome to use regardless of its performance, even assuming it has 100% native performance with EF glass. In addition, Canon uses the EF mount on just about everything including its CN-E lenses for filmmaking. The 5D4 was even updated recently to support its newest CN-E servo zooms. It has also slowly implemented tech like nano-USM and STM on its newer consumer grade lenses meaning that we may very well see this on its upcoming EF lenses for its FF mirrorless offering.

Currently, you can mount your EF glass on everything from a Rebel to a 5D4 and up to a C700. You also retain full DPAF functionality. Canon had a large influence on the market both from the 5D2 era and its market penetration, and as a result a ton of 3rd party manufacturers also support the EF mount including the Blackmagic and RED system I have. I would be quite disappointed to see its new FF MILC with an entirely new mount and lenses.


----------



## .jan (Aug 29, 2018)

jayphotoworks said:


> I'd like to think that Canon will very likely go the route as mentioned by ecpu. Just about every manufacturer has gone the adapter route including Canon on its own EF-M line-up. Quite frankly, adapters are simply cumbersome to use regardless of its performance, even assuming it has 100% native performance with EF glass. In addition, Canon uses the EF mount on just about everything including its CN-E lenses for filmmaking. The 5D4 was even updated recently to support its newest CN-E servo zooms. It has also slowly implemented tech like nano-USM and STM on its newer consumer grade lenses meaning that we may very well see this on its upcoming EF lenses for its FF mirrorless offering.
> 
> Currently, you can mount your EF glass on everything from a Rebel to a 5D4 and up to a C700. You also retain full DPAF functionality. Canon had a large influence on the market both from the 5D2 era and its market penetration, and as a result a ton of 3rd party manufacturers also support the EF mount including the Blackmagic and RED system I have. I would be quite disappointed to see its new FF MILC with an entirely new mount and lenses.


I agree. The EF mount has become kind of an industry wide used standard and you find EF lenses (both Canon and 3rd party) directly or via an adapter mounted to all sorts of cameras. I don't see Canon just abandoning it, at all.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 29, 2018)

Kit. said:


> Actually, you don't need a variable flange distance if you can extend your zoom into the body. Might work for, say, 17-70/4 IS on a mount backward compatible with EF.



That true, and it would work the same way and be the same physical size as it is now more or less, just partially inside the body. But if the focal flange distance was variable you can potentially remove a few pieces of glass elements making it smaller and lighter.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 29, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> And the same technology could be used for IBIS as well?



A bit, but for IBIS you need to move the chip in 3 dimensions, not just forward and back. And IBIS changes would be extremely small, measured in hundredths of MM, not the 20 or so MM of travel distance between flange distances.


----------



## HankMD (Aug 29, 2018)

NeverPlayMonopoly said:


> The title of this post alone...


"We were wrong, all your Mirrorless are belong to us [Canon]"?


----------



## NicoN (Aug 29, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> And the same technology could be used for IBIS as well?


Not really. Its a different movement range. For Ibis you need 5 Axis movement with ultra high accelerations but short distance. This is done with magnets which levitate the sensor. This principle does not work for long distances.


----------



## NicoN (Aug 29, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Okay - that's great! - but then why is AF performance impacted with extension tubes and extenders? I've only used third party extension tubes, is there no issue with Canon ones? Is it due to light falloff? Is it poorer with extenders because of the narrower maximum aperture?


It is due to the different light Path. With an extension tube you are moving the lens further away from the sensor (like an ef to efm mount thats correct) but the new position is not the position is for what the af algorithm for this specific lens camera combination was designed for. So basically the camera fights against this error (since it does not know about the extension tube and how to compensate) when focusing which slows the process down/makes it impossible. 

The ef-efm adapter places the lens in the distance where it was designed to operate and the af algoirthm knows that an ef lens on an ef-m Body is in that distance since it can't be mounted without the adapter.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

jayphotoworks said:


> I'd like to think that Canon will very likely go the route as mentioned by ecpu. Just about every manufacturer has gone the adapter route including Canon on its own EF-M line-up. Quite frankly, adapters are simply cumbersome to use regardless of its performance, even assuming it has 100% native performance with EF glass. In addition, Canon uses the EF mount on just about everything including its CN-E lenses for filmmaking. The 5D4 was even updated recently to support its newest CN-E servo zooms. It has also slowly implemented tech like nano-USM and STM on its newer consumer grade lenses meaning that we may very well see this on its upcoming EF lenses for its FF mirrorless offering.
> 
> Currently, you can mount your EF glass on everything from a Rebel to a 5D4 and up to a C700. You also retain full DPAF functionality. Canon had a large influence on the market both from the 5D2 era and its market penetration, and as a result a ton of 3rd party manufacturers also support the EF mount including the Blackmagic and RED system I have. I would be quite disappointed to see its new FF MILC with an entirely new mount and lenses.




I'd like a Full EF mount option to go alongside a thin mount. Canon is easily big enough to do both, and once both exist, there will be no need to rebuild any more than 4-6 lenses for the new mount. EF lives on forever.

But if the full EF option doesn't happen, why not just leave the adaptor on the body all the time? Never buy a new thin mount lens. We continue to have people here say they can't tell the difference between the EOS M + adaptor of EF glass and native EF mount use.

Presuming they are designed correctly (and the EF to EF-M sure seems fine to me on a DPAF body), adaptors are only a pain in the butt if you are constantly changing them out, and doing that is a choice, right? Just leave the adaptor on there and presto, it's an EF camera.

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Aug 29, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I'd like a Full EF mount option to go alongside a thin mount. Canon is easily big enough to do both, and once both exist, there will be no need to rebuild any more than 4-6 lenses for the new mount. EF lives on forever.
> 
> But if the full EF option doesn't happen, why not just leave the adaptor on the body all the time? Never buy a new thin mount lens. We continue to have people here say they can't tell the difference between the EOS M + adaptor of EF glass and native EF mount use.
> 
> ...



but it's not really. the sensor isn't aligned to the EF mount that way, not to the precision of a distinct EF camera body.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 29, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> but it's not really. the sensor isn't aligned to the EF mount that way, not to the precision of a distinct EF camera body.


An elegant solution would be to actuate a sensor in order to align it based on some targets on the inside of the adapter’s lens mount. Mount an adapter and the sensor comes into alignment. Take off the adapter and the sensor re-aligns to the camera mount. 

If you could instrument a sensor in such a way to optically measure three points, you could in effect take out all tolerances except the parallelism across that front most flange.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 29, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Thanks. I wanted to use my 500L with extension tubes as a sort-of hybrid long semi-macro lens for butterflies etc. (i.e. bringing the minimum focus distance down a bit), and handholding that whilst focusing manually is very hard, so the AF impact left a strong impression. I used the 100L on the original EOS-M with the Canon EF-EFM adaptor and it was poor, but that was most likely the EOS-M's stodgy AF performance rather than specifically an adaptor issue.



I use the 100L on the EOS M3 and M5 with the Canon adaptor, and it works absolutely great!


----------



## ksgal (Aug 29, 2018)

HarryFilm said:


> "......No one has fed the troll, good job guys. It was interesting to see him POST again. ....."
> 
> ---
> 
> ...




What I want is a global shutter, and make my flash more powerful.. and I need it to not be above $3,000 - Any hints to that?


----------



## knight427 (Aug 29, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I'd like a Full EF mount option to go alongside a thin mount. Canon is easily big enough to do both, and once both exist, there will be no need to rebuild any more than 4-6 lenses for the new mount. EF lives on forever.
> 
> But if the full EF option doesn't happen, why not just leave the adaptor on the body all the time? Never buy a new thin mount lens. We continue to have people here say they can't tell the difference between the EOS M + adaptor of EF glass and native EF mount use.
> 
> ...



This is why I'm guessing the "sexy solution" is an adapter that can optionally be screwed down and will look like it's part of the camera body. I don't think that's terribly innovative, it's just my best guess given nothing but rumors and dreams to go from.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> but it's not really. the sensor isn't aligned to the EF mount that way, not to the precision of a distinct EF camera body.




Again, you present a theoretical boogeyman here. Your argument is plausible, I admit -- stuff could be misaligned. So:
​For IQ: Is it really an IQ problem with optics-free 'mount spacers' like extension tubes and the EF-M adaptor? Have people documented this?​​For AF: Are people complaining about the EF-M adaptor with EF glass on an M5/M6 right now? Does the AF let them down, slow down vs. a DPAF SLR in liveview shooting, etc.?​
If there's a legit problem with a first party made adaptor, please show us. I want to learn here. But until evidence is presented, I'll trust all the folks that say that the EF-M adaptor works great on the M5/M6.

- A


----------



## herion (Aug 29, 2018)

HankMD said:


> "We were wrong, all your Mirrorless are belong to us [Canon]"?


----------



## NicoN (Aug 29, 2018)

I wonder if there is any possibility to stop spreading the rumor that an potential adapter would impact af performance.
It's a fact that if Canon chose to use an adapter for the upcoming mirrorless it won't be any different from the af performance to a native ef mount. There is no speculation about this. It will work like 5d mark iv/80d(in live view) and probably much better due to better/optimized dual pixel af algorithms.
people have to stop thinking that it will impact the performance! 

The canon adapter is and will be just an extension to put the lens in the distance (ef mount flange distance) where it was designed to operate. There is nothing in there. Its just plastic with straight cables. The camera talks directly to the lens and knows what lens is connected and can optimize its af to a given lens.

Its not like sony with the metabones adapter. The sony adapters talks to the camera emulates a lens und than fakes a camera for the lens. So its a man in the middle who translates between to different languages and methods (for example you could tell a lens go to 2 meters distance in 2 seconds or you could tell the lens move and stop when you reached 2 meters). This is not always compatible or possible. The biggest problem is that the camera does note know what lens is connected because it was not designed to work that way with adapted lenses. In consequence it can't optimize its af for a given lens

Just go to a camera store, take an m50 plug any lens with the adapter in front and you will see what a (trimmed down) sub 600 dollar camera could do with adapter and dual pixel af and imagine what a non trimmed down camera would be capable of.
Just to repeat if Canon will use an adapter it won't impact performance of EF lenses. Any other speculation going around is just pure nonsense (to say it directly)


----------



## hmatthes (Aug 29, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Sorry, dude. Missed that.
> 
> If hybrid/dual VF could come together and not ridiculously complicated or awkward ergonomically (changing which opening you put your eye to), then sign me up. OVF for demanding AF work or for saving battery power, EVF for the handheld manual focusing, silent shooting, etc.
> 
> ...


how do you have OVF without a mirror, pellicle or flipping...?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 29, 2018)

hmatthes said:


> how do you have OVF without a mirror, pellicle or flipping...?



One idea: The OVF doesn't have to be in the light path:

(See how that works here (jump to 0:40))​​​​Second idea: It's an SLR but with the flip of a switch, the mirror locks up and the EVF (or even a side by side EVF/OVF, if you like) kicks in, effectively pumping Liveview to the viewfinder.

- A


----------



## mppix (Aug 30, 2018)

Desiree Vie said:


> I have 3 Cameras, one with DPAF, which is nearly all I could could want in a DSLR vs. Video Cam. I have 8 lenses, ALL EF mount, albeit ef or ef-s. I have zero issues with a mirror, nor have I since 1974 when I bought my first Canon camera. I do not see why this whole "rush" to mirrorless even exists. Weight? New Technology?
> Competition?
> I have made a living using my Canon 35mm, then on to EOS AF Digital. You can create all the newness you want, I am never going to give it all up. I walk around Watkins Glen this summer at the 6 hour endurance race. There were more folks with Canon than all the rest added together. There were as many "big whites" as who knows. Why give up something that works.
> Many have said, the best camera is the one in your hands. I see zero reasons, regardless of the technology, competition or future, to empty my backpack of those three cameras and 8 lenses for anything, and spend 10-50k on starting over.
> Canon... all I wish for is more lenses that are lighter, and clean HDMI on everything. My only dreams are to able to carry more on my shoulder or in my hands, with attached monopods, and the ability to record video externally on some other devices.



Fully agree. Still, there are some things where mirrorless and EVF can help: 
- very low light "easy" framing
- wider AF spread
- higher framerates
- smaller/lighter/cheaper short lenses
- no AFMA (my favorite)

This comes at a cost (battery is one) so I don't think we are replacing the DSLRs anytime soon but one of my cams can be a mirrorless..


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 30, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> One idea: The OVF doesn't have to be in the light path:
> 
> ​Second idea: It's an SLR but with the flip of a switch, the mirror locks up and the EVF (or even a side by side EVF/OVF, if you like) kicks in, effectively pumping Liveview to the viewfinder.
> 
> - A



Or the old-school way!


----------



## mppix (Aug 30, 2018)

criscokkat said:


> In the picture above, if canon made a new version of this lens that extended inward the outside portion of the lens could essentially be a pancake. The Sony lens mount is 46.1mm, the canon is 54mm. The diameter of the the collar itself is around 6mm. The canon would be bigger, but not nearly as much. And there are whole classes of long lenses that could get the same treatment making for a much more balanced setup.



Short lenses yea, but can you explain the classes of long lenses? Most long lenses have already a lot of air behind the rear cap...



criscokkat said:


> Although to be honest I'd like to see the solution of the moving sensor. There could be some very interesting compact zooms that could be produced if the flange focusing distance was variable. That could be a game changer.



Mechanically this is nontrivial to solve but harder things have been done. The problem that I see is while you can fully utilize the space in the front of the sensor ("sans mirror"), you cant use it behind it..


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Aug 30, 2018)

Honestly, it seems like a lot of you may benefit from just logging out for a few days and taking a breather until the camera is announced and we know for sure.

If you step back from this crazy echo chamber of outlandish rumors, it's only logical to assume that we're going to get a pretty vanilla, if solid, mirrorless camera out of Canon.

This is the camera that they're going to stake their future on, at least the first generation of it. There's not going to be some crazy hybrid OVF/EVF (even though I'd like that.) There's not going to be a wild telescoping EF mount or moving sensor that will automatically adapt to whatever lens you use.

It's just gonna be a mirrorless camera. It's gonna have a full frame sensor. It's gonna have pretty good specs. It's gonna be a worthy competitor to Nikon and Sony. YouTube reviewers will breathlessly obsess over the most minute difference in specs to attempt to determine which is the best camera, even though they're all pretty good.

There's gonna be an adapter to fit EF lenses onto whatever the new mount is, because Canon probably knew about Nikon's strategy months ago, and were not going to be caught flat footed without their own adapter to use old lenses. (They will not want to abandon all of the great EF lenses they've recently developed and released either.) The adapter is gonna work pretty well because the lens, adapter, and camera will all be made by the same manufacturer, so they'll all communicate well together.

If you think about Canon's track record for new products, it's laughable to think that we're going to see any sort of wild new technology out of this camera. That just isn't how Canon does things.

It's just gonna be a mirrorless camera. It's gonna be pretty good, and it's gonna have rock solid reliability because it's going to use a bunch of tried and true technology, and we'll all buy it because of that.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 30, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> There's gonna be an adapter to fit EF lenses onto whatever the new mount is, because Canon probably knew about Nikon's strategy months ago,



I expect they would have offered an adapter to a new mount, if forthcoming, even if nikon decided to close up shop.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Aug 30, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> I expect they would have offered an adapter to a new mount, if forthcoming, even if nikon decided to close up shop.


Yeah, I would hope so too. But I don't think there's even a question now that Nikon has done it. There's no way that Canon would allow Nikon to exclusively have that feature.

I don't see it being some crazy telescoping mount or moving sensor though. That's just more moving parts, more complexity that could easily just be handled with an adapter. Canon does not rock the boat like that. I think it's just going to be a simple adapter.


----------



## Durf (Aug 30, 2018)

Well, it is very hard for me to believe Canon will do worse than what Nikon just released as their 1st two FF Mirror-Less cameras. Those Z 6's and 7's in my opinion are over priced and you also need to then purchase a $230.00 card to use the darn thing! I surely would never buy one even if I was a Nikon shooter; what a joke!

As I've said before on this forum, Canon doesn't need to do much to hit a home run with their 1st edition FF Mirrorless camera's.....


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 30, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Yeah, I would hope so too. But I don't think there's even a question now that Nikon has done it. There's no way that Canon would allow Nikon to exclusively have that feature.
> 
> I don't see it being some crazy telescoping mount or moving sensor though. That's just more moving parts, more complexity that could easily just be handled with an adapter. Canon does not rock the boat like that. I think it's just going to be a simple adapter.




This and your prior post are correct -- I largely agree. But riffing on what they _might_ do is kinda fun.

- A


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Aug 30, 2018)

Yeah I know, and the site is Canon Rumors, so I guess what else can I really expect. I do genuinely hope for a hybrid OVF/EVF. Somebody let me try a Fuji with that, and I was blown away... All the precision and realness of an OVF, with all the enhancements of an EVF... Really cool.

But seriously, for all of our frantic hypotheses about what this camera might be, you guys know it's just going to be a standard, run of the mill, albeit good mirrorless camera, right?

I mean, you guys remember how they just announced new lenses and one of the selling features they listed was that they were a new shade of white, right? 

Canon makes great reliable products, but rapid innovators and risk takers they are not.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 30, 2018)

I agree they won’t likely have a telescoping. Maybe a semi-permanent mount adapter with a way to align it. 



Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Yeah I know, and the site is Canon Rumors, so I guess what else can I really expect. I do genuinely hope for a hybrid OVF/EVF. Somebody let me try a Fuji with that, and I was blown away... All the precision and realness of an OVF, with all the enhancements of an EVF... Really cool.



I found seeing the lens distracting, but it’s a neat idea.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 30, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Yeah I know, and the site is Canon Rumors, so I guess what else can I really expect. I do genuinely hope for a hybrid OVF/EVF. Somebody let me try a Fuji with that, and I was blown away... All the precision and realness of an OVF, with all the enhancements of an EVF... Really cool.




Agree, I've been intrigued with the concept, but I love true OVF framing _without_ a lens in the frame, and rangefinder VFs can't do that unless you dig pancakes. 

I have long been interested in a fixed lens camera (X100, RX1R, Leica Q, etc.) as I'd love a smaller rig and I also happen to love the 28-35mm lenses that these things tend to have. One of these days I'll just snap one up.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 30, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> I agree they won’t likely have a telescoping. Maybe a semi-permanent mount adapter with a way to align it.




We've heard it all here for bridging the thin vs. Full EF divide -- CR folks are a clever bunch:

Thin mount + adaptor (only)
Thin mount + adaptor AND Full EF mount (this is the go for the throat move)
Full EF mount (only) -- no need for a bridge if the other side doesn't exist...
Thin mount + adaptor + the option to permanently/securely bolt the adaptor to the body.
Moving sensor (doesn't really buy you much)
Telescoping mount from Full EF to thin mount
EF-X concept with dixie cup sized lens caps
It will be one of the first three, surely, but the discussion of all these options has been a lot of fun.

- A


----------



## hmatthes (Aug 30, 2018)

If the new mount natively accepts both traditional EF lenses as well as new "RF?" lenses, I will be a first day buyer.

There are plenty of complaints and complainers but let's compare the two offerings at $2k.
*Nikon: * I have a Z6 on order (soon to be cancelled, it was contingency if Canon blew it) -- Kit Z6 with 24~79 f/4, 2nd battery, XQD card, and XQD reader is $3,170 at B&H. *No way to use my EF lenses.
Canon: * If the Canon is $2,000, let's say the 24~70 f/2.0 is $1,500, then I'm in for $3,500 with a much faster prime zoom. I already have lots of batteries, SD cards, and SD readers. -- optical physics suggest that f2.0 is far better for many subjects than f/4.0. *And all my EF glass works as intended!*

Not a tough decision any all!


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 30, 2018)

mppix said:


> Short lenses yea, but can you explain the classes of long lenses? Most long lenses have already a lot of air behind the rear cap...


I guess I didn't mean 'Long' lenses, just more typical ones. I'm thinking of something like the 28-135. Right now that is a little under 100mm long when it is full retracted. There might be ways to make that same lens an extra 28mm smaller by recessing it. On long lenses like the 70-200 2.8 this wouldn't really make much of a difference, but a lens that recessed into the camera slightly would change the balance of that lens since it's not pivoted all the way out at the end.

As for possibilities if there was a variable flange distance, I'm thinking more of a DO style zoom. By knowing the sensor could move to anywhere between 16mm and 44mm away from the rear element, the glass element wouldn't always have to focus down to one spot, it would just need to make sure at any given zoom/focal point the focused image presented to the sensor would need to be between those ranges.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 30, 2018)

hmatthes said:


> If the new mount natively accepts both traditional EF lenses as well as new "RF?" lenses, I will be a first day buyer.
> 
> There are plenty of complaints and complainers but let's compare the two offerings at $2k.
> *Nikon: * I have a Z6 on order (soon to be cancelled, it was contingency if Canon blew it) -- Kit Z6 with 24~79 f/4, 2nd battery, XQD card, and XQD reader is $3,170 at B&H. *No way to use my EF lenses.
> ...




Love the course correction from you hmatthes, I do. But if a world's first 24-70 f/2 lens (surely L level quality, perhaps not called L if it's a new line of lenses) will cost a slight bit over $1500.  

For perspective: the 24-70 f/2.8L II debuted at $2299, and that was six years ago. If it's real -- a constant f/2 max aperture standard zoom -- it is probably a $3k lens, but Canon might surprise us.

- A


----------



## hmatthes (Aug 30, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> But if a world's first 24-70 f/2 lens (surely L level quality, perhaps not called L if it's a new line of lenses) will cost a slight bit over $1500.
> For perspective: the 24-70 f/2.8L II debuted at $2299, and that was six years ago. If it's real -- a constant f/2 max aperture standard zoom -- it is probably a $3k lens, but Canon might surprise us.
> - A


Or they might release the "kit" lens as a variable aperture, perhaps 2.0~4.5, and only charge $1,000. 
I have the 24~70 f2.8L II and it is my lens choice for more than ½ my images.
If the new lens is equally big and too expensive, I'll save money by using the one I already use. 
I could buy the body only for $2,000 and avoid "discussions" with my wife!


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Aug 30, 2018)

Durf said:


> What's a matter Keith, this won't work for you?????
> View attachment 179958



Have you got a picture of it with a Canon 500mm f/4 Mk II and 2x TC hanging off it?

Just so I can get a proper sense of it _for me_, y'understan'...


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Aug 30, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Because otherwise your clients will look at you and laugh derisively at your outmoded, antiquated gear?


Aye, that must be it.

Lucky that they only get to see the _pictures_ then, I suppose - then they don't have so much to grouse about...


----------



## RGF (Sep 3, 2018)

Dreams - perhaps a dream caused by indigestion. 

Canon's ML is a real yawner. Nothing to reco it - 5 FPS w/ AF, SD card slot only, ...

Canon could have taken a clear lead of Nikon if they had built a 5D M4 as a ML. But I think Canon is afraid to introduce a strong ML camera today because it would hamper plans to the next few models.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 6, 2018)

RGF said:


> Dreams - perhaps a dream caused by indigestion.
> 
> Canon's ML is a real yawner. Nothing to reco it - 5 FPS w/ AF, SD card slot only, ...
> 
> Canon could have taken a clear lead of Nikon if they had built a 5D M4 as a ML. But I think Canon is afraid to introduce a strong ML camera today because it would hamper plans to the next few models.



And they could be working on new batteries and associated tech. Right now, with the bare minimum features included, battery life is just over a 1/3 of still shots we'd get from a 5D IV.


----------



## RGF (Sep 6, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> And they could be working on new batteries and associated tech. Right now, with the bare minimum features included, battery life is just over a 1/3 of still shots we'd get from a 5D IV.



Yes they could have done a lot more with this camera. But in typical Canon fashion, they did not want to put too many goodies in this camera so the next camera could have them.

Interesting to look at both Canon and Nikon - Nikon went all out on the D850 and then seems to have held back on the Z7. Perhaps both Canon and Nikon are testing the ML waters??


----------



## Random Orbits (Sep 6, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> And they could be working on new batteries and associated tech. Right now, with the bare minimum features included, battery life is just over a 1/3 of still shots we'd get from a 5D IV.


Better than Nikon then. Same battery as the D850 with over 1800 shots becomes about 300 with the Z7, so that is 1/6th. Mirrorless needs bigger batteries. Wish they had introduced a higher capacity one with the R.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Sep 7, 2018)

Just wanted to bump this for reminder how wrong the rumors are


28MP full frame sensor
Dual Pixel Auto Focus
IBIS (In Body Image Stabilisation)
10fps shooting
[email protected]
[email protected]
Priced $1,900


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 7, 2018)

bokehmon22 said:


> Just wanted to bump this for reminder how wrong the rumors are
> 
> 
> 28MP full frame sensor
> ...


30 is as close to 28 as makes no difference.
DPAF, CHECK
Nobody seriously thought Canon would give us IBIS for the same reasons they have given since lens IS was introduced.
8 fps, though it takes the new 'industry standard' without AF.
[email protected], CHECK
[email protected], CHECK
Price, well after the early adopter tax it will probably ease to $1999 by the time I'd be happy buying into it.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 8, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> 30 is as close to 28 as makes no difference.
> DPAF, CHECK
> Nobody seriously thought Canon would give us IBIS for the same reasons they have given since lens IS was introduced.
> 8 fps, though it takes the new 'industry standard' without AF.
> ...



Regarding IBIS, eventually they will yield to demand. Eventually.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2018)

If you consider that they already do image stabilization on the sensor for video and the new camera can make old and new optical stabilization better, I don’t see why they would abandon what they do. Canon are very good at optical IS and can put it in very affordable lenses as well as very high IQ ones.


----------



## dtaylor (Sep 8, 2018)

RGF said:


> Canon could have taken a clear lead of Nikon if they had built a 5D M4 as a ML. But I think Canon is afraid to introduce a strong ML camera today because it would hamper plans to the next few models.



From early reviews the Nikon MILCs have their own issues. Just listen to Tony and Chelsea talk about the AF.

The R is fundamentally solid on stills, thanks in no small part to DPAF, but missing some key specs. This is because Canon feels very little competitive pressure. Despite all the Sony/Fuji/mirrorless hype DSLR sales are strong, EF lens sales are strong, and they remain the market leader. By the numbers Sony has taken Nikon sales, not so much Canon. Even the M series sells well. Given the market Canon will of course skip some features to position the R below the 5D IV.

On video I don't know if they are really protecting their cinema line or if there's simply a fab issue. I never thought DR was that big of an issue, but Canon lagged on DR for a long time simply due to fab limitations. Maybe we're in the same spot with sensor readout speed and TDP.

If so I hope they resolve it fast because they can't sit on cropped underperforming video as long as they sat on DR.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 8, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> If you consider that they already do image stabilization on the sensor for video and the new camera can make old and new optical stabilization better, I don’t see why they would abandon what they do. Canon are very good at optical IS and can put it in very affordable lenses as well as very high IQ ones.



They're good at making video cameras, yet put video in their stills cameras.
They're good at making DSLRs, yet are producing mirrorless ILCs.

*If *they see the market as demanding sensor wobbling IS, they'll do it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 9, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> They're good at making video cameras, yet put video in their stills cameras.
> They're good at making DSLRs, yet are producing mirrorless ILCs.
> 
> *If *they see the market as demanding sensor wobbling IS, they'll do it.


If they believe in lens IS is a better technical solution and they can sell more lenses then they won't. If, as a business, they can make more money from not doing it even if that costs them some sales, they won't.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 9, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> If they believe in lens IS is a better technical solution and they can sell more lenses then they won't. If, as a business, they can make more money from not doing it even if that costs them some sales, they won't.



Agreed, there is a business case. I was using "demand" in a significant sense, as in their profits would suffer if they didn't offer it.

I'm not claiming that will be the reality, by any means; only stating that canon will react to its market research.


----------



## Durf (Sep 9, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Agreed, there is a business case. I was using "demand" in a significant sense, as in their profits would suffer if they didn't offer it.
> 
> I'm not claiming that will be the reality, by any means; only stating that canon will react to its market research.



I wrote them and told them to put IBIS in their next version R camera and I'd buy one to shoot my vintage lens collection with.....they'll do it now, I can't wait!


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 9, 2018)

Who wouldn't love the new rf 28-70mm f/2L on a body with IBIS?


----------



## Durf (Sep 9, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> Who wouldn't love the new rf 28-70mm f/2L on a body with IBIS?



Yes, IMO it's pretty ridiculous to charge 3 grand for this particular lens and it not being stabilized! LOL, I don't care how sharp it is, there's no way I could justify paying that much for that lens when there's so many other great alternatives like even the Tamron 24-70 VC....sheesh! Canon's targeting some folks with lots of Ben Franklins!


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 9, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> Who wouldn't love the new rf 28-70mm f/2L on a body with IBIS?


I agree, it would be a wedding reception dream combo. But I'll get by with a 1DX MkII and 35 f2 IS...


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 9, 2018)

Durf said:


> Yes, IMO it's pretty ridiculous to charge 3 grand for this particular lens and it not being stabilized! LOL, I don't care how sharp it is, there's no way I could justify paying that much for that lens when there's so many other great alternatives like even the Tamron 24-70 VC....sheesh! Canon's targeting some folks with lots of Ben Franklins!


Right! The lens looks so big and heavy for what photographers would love to have on their cameras for hours, whether for wedding and receptions, long daytime events going in and out of buildings/tents, etc. I don't know how much bigger it would be with lens-based IS, but IBIS...Sigh.


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 9, 2018)

Random Orbits said:


> Better than Nikon then. Same battery as the D850 with over 1800 shots becomes about 300 with the Z7, so that is 1/6th. Mirrorless needs bigger batteries. Wish they had introduced a higher capacity one with the R.




They specifically wanted to use accessories that existing customers already have. Lenses, speedlites, batteries. I for one am thrilled they kept the same battery.


----------



## RGF (Sep 10, 2018)

dtaylor said:


> From early reviews the Nikon MILCs have their own issues. Just listen to Tony and Chelsea talk about the AF.
> 
> The R is fundamentally solid on stills, thanks in no small part to DPAF, but missing some key specs. This is because Canon feels very little competitive pressure. Despite all the Sony/Fuji/mirrorless hype DSLR sales are strong, EF lens sales are strong, and they remain the market leader. By the numbers Sony has taken Nikon sales, not so much Canon. Even the M series sells well. Given the market Canon will of course skip some features to position the R below the 5D IV.
> 
> ...



Canon could reinvent the DSLR into the DML. Think of the sales they could create if they had parallel systems (5DM5 and ML 5D M5, 1Dx M3 and the ML 1Dx M3, 7D M3, ML 7D M3). Yes everyone could use the EOS L lens on the ML but if the new RF lenses are lighter and sharper, then over time there would be a lot of replacement glass purchased.

Well that is my thought on this might play out.


----------

