# APS-C DSLR lineup to get a shake up? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 15, 2019)

> Canon’s prosumer APS-C DSLRs the EOS 7D Mark II and the EOS 80D are both quite long in the tooth.  Unfortunately, there has been very little information about their replacements.
> Canon has mentioned that DSLR development will continue for the foreseeable future, which is good news for every Canon shooter that doesn’t have interest in a mirrorless camera at this time. No new EF lenses are coming in 2019, but a few DSLRs definitely are.
> Which new DSLRs are coming?
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## fox40phil (Jan 15, 2019)

Something like the D500 with some improvements! Can't be that hard to build this.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jan 15, 2019)

Sounds like a downgrade is coming and Nikon need not worry about upgrading the D500. So there will be no 300 f/2.8L III or 500 f/4L III this year or at all for EF. Makes little sense to release just the 400 and 600 in EF.


----------



## CHEESE101 (Jan 15, 2019)

I hope there is a replacement for one or the other in the next few months. Looking for my new ESO to replace my 650d for a big trip and one with a high frame rate.


----------



## JonSnow (Jan 15, 2019)

with mirrorless aps-c doing 20-30 fps now and becoming a real competition when it comes to focusing.... why buying a mirrorslapper?

i would love to see a high-end mirrorless aps-c with 20 fps and great focusing for BIF.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Sounds like a downgrade is coming and Nikon need not worry about upgrading the D500. So there will be no 300 f/2.8L III or 500 f/4L III this year or at all for EF. Makes little sense to release just the 400 and 600 in EF.


Who knows what Canon will do? Canon released the 30 f/2 IS, 28 f/2.8 IS and 24 f/2.8 IS, and people were hoping that the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 would get the same treatment... and we got nothing even after all these years.


----------



## jebrady03 (Jan 15, 2019)

It sounds to me like the 7D Mark 3 will have a non-fixed touch screen (Tilt? Articulating?) and that the successor to the 77D will be slightly more upmarket to fill the void of the 80D. 80D folks? They're moving you to RF mount with a heavy reliance on the adapter!
Initially, you'd think they'd move 7D Mark II folks to mirrorless but Canon hasn't yet advanced their AF/FPS and sensor read speed to that level yet. At least, not at the profit margin they'd require so it'll be 4-5 more years of CLACKCLACKCLACKCLACKCLACKCLACKCLACKCLACKCLACKCLACKCLACKCLACK for y'all.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 15, 2019)

I'm fond of my 80D. It's the go-to camera for family walks, to have with me at all times. It's great performance and many types of use make up for its bulk compared to smaller mirrorless cameras. And this might be why it would be the first dSLR to go. It is good enough for many enthusiast photographers, and small enough for casual photographers.

The 7D line, however, is targeted towards action photographers, so I could understand it going one more generation. Maybe we'll see a well-built 7DIII with a better sensor and a flip screen? Improved Live-View, maybe a few ounces lighter, a little bit smaller, and a few hundred less than the initial price of the 7DII. Done.

It might be some time before an EVF is truly as good or better than an OVF for birds in flight and other fast action photography.

Meanwhile, 80D customers will be pushed to entry level FF RF bodies or to M series bodies.


----------



## hendrik-sg (Jan 15, 2019)

If AF Performance is not yet on pro level, it could mean, that the replacements for 1DXii and 7Dii might be DSLR's. But 80D and 5DS have no reason to not be RF mount bodies. For the small cameras, M seems to be the format which allows systems to be small (and cheap). if somebody wants to upgrade to more pro, loosing the M-kit lens is not a big loss in general context and it still can play backup with the older M-Camera.

At the moment APSC DSLR's are cheaper than their equivalent MILC counterparts, which makes no sense, a MILC should be cheaper to be produced. For this reason, it should be no problem to replace them by MILC's except loosing the "coolness surcharge", but this one will get lost anyways, as soon as all cool guys have spend their early adopters fee, or it will go to not loose the market to phones even more fast (as now the cheap DSLR's try)

Actually, a APSC DSLR makes not much sense, if paired with it's slow kit lens only, a G7 can do the same (smaller sensor but brighter lens) and is by far smaller. So this are powerfull small tools, which can be beaten only by big glass,


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 15, 2019)

I can't imagine the 7D Mk III not getting the fold out screen like the 80D and R. If the rumors are true, the a7000 is getting the 925 focusing system. If this is to be the last DSLR aps-c pro like camera I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a 1dx focusing engine in it.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 15, 2019)

hendrik-sg said:


> If AF Performance is not yet on pro level, it could mean, that the replacements for 1DXii and 7Dii might be DSLR's. But 80D and 5DS have no reason to not be RF mount bodies. For the small cameras, M seems to be the format which allows systems to be small (and cheap). if somebody wants to upgrade to more pro, loosing the M-kit lens is not a big loss in general context and it still can play backup with the older M-Camera.
> 
> At the moment APSC DSLR's are cheaper than their equivalent MILC counterparts, which makes no sense, a MILC should be cheaper to be produced. For this reason, it should be no problem to replace them by MILC's except loosing the "coolness surcharge", but this one will get lost anyways, as soon as all cool guys have spend their early adopters fee, or it will go to not loose the market to phones even more fast (as now the cheap DSLR's try)



The cost of a prism (or mirror), a motor to flip it up out of the way, and some glass to show the image in the viewfinder is way less than the cost of the hardware needed to provide a high resolution small screen. The bodies of the smaller cameras need more expensive materials to keep them sturdy, and the cost of the material to actually make the shell of the body is fractions of a penny difference between a top of the line camera and a cheap one. I don't know why this rumor of how mirrorless is cheaper than DSLR's got started, but it's getting old. At some point that may be the case if high pixel count very small displays become a mainstream thing with augmented reality glasses but until that time they are niche.


----------



## Ladislav (Jan 15, 2019)

Just give 7D2 newer sensor with DPAF, 4k video and touch screen and call it 90D


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 15, 2019)

Canon should keep making the 77D or 80D but the 7DIII should be an Eos-R camera. Canon need to start moving customers to mirrorless. An APS-C high frame rate , silent shutter , good focusing system , two cards would help push lens sales. 
Then also have some entry level APS-C mirrorless Cameras and drop the M series which no longer have a real future.


----------



## BeenThere (Jan 15, 2019)

I think it’s likely that Canon is unsure of its near future roadmap because the technology and market is changing so quickly. Plans that have been in place are being scrapped for new strawman plans as the market is evolving. Canon will need to become faster at camera evolutions to keep up with competitors. These confusing and changing rumors are likely a result of some internal turmoil at Canon.


----------



## gdanmitchell (Jan 15, 2019)

"We’ve seen an amalgamation from Canon before, and that was with the release of the EOS-1D X. That camera took the place of the EOS-1Ds Mark III and the APS-S H specced EOS-1D Mark IV."

There is another way to look at that "amalgamation" — and it suggests that it wasn't an amalgamation as much as a reordering.

The 1Ds series was initially the slower-buy-highest-megapixel Canon DSLR series. These were great cameras whose features appealed strongly to photographers such as those doing certain kinds of studio work and to landscape photographers – where absolutely speed as a bit less important than highest possible image quality. The 1Ds provided full frame sensors with then state-of-the-art high MP numbers. All other Canon DSLR cameras at that time used 1.3x or 1.6x cropped sensors

With the advent of the 5D series, which was (and arguably still is in some ways) a lower-level camera system in the Canon line-up, something interesting happened. Many (I don't have numbers, but I'd guess "most") photographers who had used the 1Ds bodies for their higher image quality potential realized that they could get the same image quality from the 5D series at a much lower price, and that for most of them the supposed disadvantages (lesser AF capability, smaller body, etc.) were not worth that added cost of the 1Ds models. 

The 1Ds disappeared not because Canon "merged" it with the faster-and-lower-MP version of the 1-series cameras (though that was Canon's marketing line) but because buyers of the high MP systems mostly didn't see value the the 1Ds series provided over the 5D series cameras. Those users did not (at least not in significant numbers) shift from the 1Ds to the newer "amalgamated" 1Dx — they moved to the 5DII, 5DIII, 5DIV, and — especially — the high MP 5DsR.

What we currently in the Canon line-up, insofar as the cloudy picture begins to clear a bit, is less about downsizing the number of "serious" camera bodies and more about managing a multi-year transition from DSLR models to highly capable mirrorless camera systems. Clearly, Canon cannot instantly delete the entire DSLR line-up and equally quickly boot up a full, viable mirrorless line-up. This is a transitional process that is likely to take a period of years. And during that period we can expect to see a trajectory that diminishes the number of DSLR options as it increases the number of (and capability of) the replacement mirrorless models.

G Dan Mitchell


----------



## nchoh (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Sounds like a downgrade is coming and Nikon need not worry about upgrading the D500. So there will be no 300 f/2.8L III or 500 f/4L III this year or at all for EF. Makes little sense to release just the 400 and 600 in EF.



That would be good news for Nikon as thay are currently only selling one Nikon for every 2 Canon DSLRs.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 15, 2019)

With the 77D series of cameras, it might indeed make sense to end the x0D/7D split and return to a single enthusiast/prosumer APS-C line. Canon bumped the 60D down a bit too much (no AFMA!) and the 70D and the 80D have crept back upward in the lineup. That would, however, mean that there wouldn't be a real response to the D500, which would make some people quite unhappy. The 80D does sit in a fairly awkward position right now, with only some fairly small things (+AFMA) separating it from the 77D.
If the amalgamation happens, I'd expect to see something like:

At least partially mag alloy body (like the 6D)
At least 6D2 level weather sealing
A new AF system, maybe 2nd gen 65pt all-cross-type
A moderate or no bump to resolution from 24Mpix
Roughly 7D2 fps and buffer, or a little less (9fps?)
Tilty-flippy touchscreen (which means more 80D-like ergonomics)
GPS
4K, latest DPAF, etc.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 15, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Canon need to start moving customers to


No, it's not the right way to treat customers.


----------



## Daner (Jan 15, 2019)

Combine the flippy touch-screen and improved sensor of the 80D with the enhanced autofocus and focus control aspects of the 7D Mark II. Would be nice if they retained the dual card slots, even if they swapped out the CF for a second SD. Would also be nice if they retained 10fps, but as a product manager I would probably choose more capable 4k video over a high frame rate for stills. Either will likely require dual processors (Digic 8?). They could cut costs by providing 80D-level build quality, durability, and 7fps and many potential buyers would not complain.

Of course, I would rather see and use a true 7D Mark III that would go more head-to-head with the D500, but with the impending switch to the RF mount, Canon might feel that they need to go in a different direction.


----------



## NetMage (Jan 15, 2019)

When Canon downgraded after the 50D, I stopped buying xxD line and my next camera was a 7D, but the Mark II was more action focused and didn’t have as good a general purpose sensor as the 80D. If they combine them back, I would hope for a true successor to the 50D and original 7D with their handling features: joystick, full LCD, heavy duty body but with 80D or better DPAF low light capable gp sensor.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jan 15, 2019)

Merge the EOS x0D with 7D like pre 7D days and also merge EOS XX0D with 77D lineup dropping that XX0D line for good.


----------



## docsmith (Jan 15, 2019)

First...there were two....x0D and 7Dx....

Then...there were three...77D, 80D and 7DII.

Now...there will be two again....

This doesn't seem that hard. We will just go back to the original intent of the x0D and 7D "x" bodies....I am sure with a few slight modifications....a solid prosumer camera and the King of the APS-C aimed at sport/action photographers....a mini-1Dx.


----------



## wyotex43n (Jan 15, 2019)

Whatever they do I hope they do it soon. My own fault but my 7Dmk2 was dropped from about 5 feet. Canon was unable to repair it. Fortunately the camera broke the fall of my 100-400mm. My only real issue with the 7dmk2 was noise at ISO above 800-1250 range. As far as a wish list. 1. Lower Noise from the sensor. 2. Even better auto focus.( like the 1dx MK2) 3. Touch screen but not flimsy. Fyi the camera still takes sharp pictures but none of info appears in the display or on the back screen. auto modes for me

I am renting a EOS R for a trip winter trip to Yellowstone in Feb. It will be interesting to see how it performs.


----------



## markjsmccall (Jan 15, 2019)

I think the 77D was the bellwether for this change. It effectively stood in as a stop gap where the 90D should have been released.

I personally think that the 77D successor and the 80D successor will be the same camera. I could see a 4K implementation to try and retain bloggers who have been using the 70D and 80D which i think remains popular. It will be the jack of all trades master of none APSC that has fitted nicely into this market segment since the 60D. 
I'd predict ~24MP at 7fps or thereabouts. 

Personally i think that this will be the value driven EOS R implementation but thats just me. Flippy touchscreen screen and call it a day. No more XXD DSLR lineup.

The lower end DSLR replacements will stay DSLRs for the forseeable future.

The 7D will see a MK III with maybe 14fps, the newer generation of sensor (probably around 24MP). Hopefully a significant bump in buffer depth with the new processor tech and maybe 12fps with metering and autofocus. One can dream right? It will not have great video and will not be mirrorless for this generation. It will still be built like a little tank and have the same ergonomics as now. Like the above poster i really want to see better noise performance from ISO800 up to ISO3200.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 15, 2019)

Right now we have 7 APS-C DSLR bodies , roughly in order of capability and price: 4000D, 2000D, 200D, 800D, 77D, 80D, 7D Mark II.
(Note I'm using the semi-sensible European numbers not the Rebel xTwtf type names used in America)

In the last four years we've seen two lines split into two new lines (the X000D line to the 2000D and 4000D and the X00D line into the 760D/77D line and the 750D/800D line). None of this made much sense.

It reminds me of evolutionary biology of cases you have a massive increase in variation within a group of creatures as it struggles with difficult conditions and tries different permutations to attempt to adapt - often right before an extinction. 

Now that has played out we'll see I'm sure that there will be a 7D II replacement which may be lower priced to tempt 80D owners, there will be a 800D replacement possibly called the 88D and aimed at that market, and the 200D, 2000D, and 4000D will carry on unchanged until the heat death of the universe/Canon no longer make DSLRs, whichever comes first.


----------



## mb66energy (Jan 15, 2019)

What about merging 80D with M50?

An SLR body with switchable EVF-OVF mimics would serve well for those who are willing to lug around an 80D sized body and use OVF for directness and low energy usage but have the EVF option for situations where you want/need DPAF / direct image visualization with color profiles / a video viewfinder etc.? For me the best solution for an alround camera - include the best of both worlds!

If you can produce an APS-C sized OLED display and find a way to view it without too much mechanical efforts while the mirror is up (maybe clear OLED material which sits on / is the matte screen) EVF and OVF are users choice.


----------



## codynpatterson (Jan 15, 2019)

I hope they don't sacrifice the 80D. That's the better of the two cameras for portrait, wedding, and landscape photographers so they'd be losing out on a huge industry. I could care less about shutter speed for photos, I want the best sensor, the most feature full apsc camera, fantastic video capabilities, and a compactish size. Also it better not be made into a eos-m camera, we need an eos-R camera or mirrorless body with ef-s lenses. There's no point in continuing to develop ef-M lenses it's a wasted resource and splits the userbase.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 15, 2019)

jolyonralph said:


> It reminds me of evolutionary biology of cases you have a massive increase in variation within a group of creatures as it struggles with difficult conditions and tries different permutations to attempt to adapt - often right before an extinction.



I wonder if you're looking at that the wrong way. Diversity of life in terms of number of lineages tends to increase over time. You'd naturally see a greater diversity just before a mass extinction than just after, but the trend remains the same in the long term - which is to say, the idea that greater diversity predicts an extinction event is erroneous, imho. As for whether this could be used as a metaphor here, I'm even less convinced.


----------



## codynpatterson (Jan 15, 2019)

jolyonralph said:


> Right now we have 7 APS-C DSLR bodies , roughly in order of capability and price: 4000D, 2000D, 200D, 800D, 77D, 80D, 7D Mark II.
> (Note I'm using the semi-sensible European numbers not the Rebel xTwtf type names used in America)
> 
> In the last four years we've seen two lines split into two new lines (the X000D line to the 2000D and 4000D and the X00D line into the 760D/77D line and the 750D/800D line). None of this made much sense.
> ...



I don't think that 80D users care about price, I chose the 80D over the 7D ii for the better sensor, more features, better videos options, & smaller body. So I could care less about the price I didn't want the 7D ii at all so a lesser price wouldn't have changed that. To me the 80D is the superior camera because of what I shoot.

The 80D and 7Dii are both Canon's top end APSC cameras, they have different purposes and therefor are priced according to the manufacturing process for Canon.

If the new combined camera can do everything I need from my 80D and have features the 7dii users need then sure but they better know that going into it.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 15, 2019)

codynpatterson said:


> Also it better not be made into a eos-m camera, we need an eos-R camera or mirrorless body with ef-s lenses. There's no point in continuing to develop ef-M lenses it's a wasted resource and splits the userbase.



I'm afraid this makes no sense. People have been talking about an APS-C RF body, which may happen though I think that too doesn't make sense, but the idea they will bring out *yet another* line of lenses for it is beyond credulity imho. The M series has a primary purpose: small size for camera+lens giving pretty good IQ and features - and by all accounts it sells well, so dropping it would be bad business. RF is for top image quality and presumably functionality. The primary advantage of EF-S versus EF was that they could make the lenses smaller and cheaper in a limited focal length range because the former could extend further back into the body as the mirror on APS-C bodies was smaller. But that is no longer the case in RF (versus a putative RF-S line), because there is no mirror, and RF lenses are much closer to the sensor. While a modest size saving might be had (again in a limited range of cases) simply by projecting a smaller image circle (I guess?), I don't see that as compelling enough to launch a new line of lenses with limited cross compatibility, potentially confusing customers further.

Oh - on rereading, I see you mentioned an EF-S (I assume native?) MILC. That is absolutely not gonna happen either - though you can of course mount EF-S lenses on the R with an adaptor. While before the announcement of the R, I strongly believed a native EF MILC was a good option (and maybe they'd release one alongside a new mount), it seems from everything Canon are saying that such a premise is now dead and buried.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 15, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> The cost of a prism (or mirror), a motor to flip it up out of the way, and some glass to show the image in the viewfinder is way less than the cost of the hardware needed to provide a high resolution small screen. The bodies of the smaller cameras need more expensive materials to keep them sturdy, and the cost of the material to actually make the shell of the body is fractions of a penny difference between a top of the line camera and a cheap one. I don't know why this rumor of how mirrorless is cheaper than DSLR's got started, but it's getting old. At some point that may be the case if high pixel count very small displays become a mainstream thing with augmented reality glasses but until that time they are niche.


Electronic items are priced based on the count of parts, I've been in that business and its the way the pricing is done, unless there is a particularly expensive piece that distorts the pricing. Eventually, the actual price to produce is determined, but initially, its estimated based on historical costs and piece count. Recovery of R&D is also factored in, and thats high for a new technology.

Mirrorless cameras have far fewer parts, which greatly reduces assembly costs as well as warranty costs. The cost of the parts that go into the camera are just a fraction of the end cost, so a few pennies doesn't make a big difference. A Mirrorless does not need the prism, the exposure sensor in the eyepiece, the transmissive electronic lcd in the eyepiece, the mirror with the half silvered window, the sub mirror, the submirror lens, or the AF sensor. The electronic components supporting those go away as well. The cost of the pieces is likely the same or less. EVF's are mature technology, they have been in cameras for over 30 years, and costs to make them have dropped.


----------



## haggie (Jan 15, 2019)

codynpatterson said:


> I don't think that 80D users care about price, ..........



I am not so sure about that.

But I do know that I (that is me) want a capable 7D Mk III. For me that means (when compared to the 7D Mk II):
(1) a better AF-system (in particulat in lower light and with less contrasty subjects - and also better tracking properties);
(2) a sensor with better DR and less noise.
In short: I want it to be at least (!) as good as the D500 in these areas.

And Canon will only be able to bring such a camera if it will be priced aroud the 2000 euro/dollar. Or perhaps better: Canon will only be willing to bring such a camera at that price. So I hope that if there is some truth in this CR1 rumor, that this camera will be priced around 2000 euro/dollar.
If not, it will very likely not be the camera I am looking for to replace my 7D Mk II.


----------



## codynpatterson (Jan 15, 2019)

scyrene said:


> I'm afraid this makes no sense. People have been talking about an APS-C RF body, which may happen though I think that too doesn't make sense, but the idea they will bring out *yet another* line of lenses for it is beyond credulity imho. The M series has a primary purpose: small size for camera+lens giving pretty good IQ and features - and by all accounts it sells well, so dropping it would be bad business. RF is for top image quality and presumably functionality. The primary advantage of EF-S versus EF was that they could make the lenses smaller and cheaper in a limited focal length range because the former could extend further back into the body as the mirror on APS-C bodies was smaller. But that is no longer the case in RF (versus a putative RF-S line), because there is no mirror, and RF lenses are much closer to the sensor. While a modest size saving might be had (again in a limited range of cases) simply by projecting a smaller image circle (I guess?), I don't see that as compelling enough to launch a new line of lenses with limited cross compatibility, potentially confusing customers further.
> 
> Oh - on rereading, I see you mentioned an EF-S (I assume native?) MILC. That is absolutely not gonna happen either - though you can of course mount EF-S lenses on the R with an adaptor. While before the announcement of the R, I strongly believed a native EF MILC was a good option (and maybe they'd release one alongside a new mount), it seems from everything Canon are saying that such a premise is now dead and buried.



That's all fine with me... I just don't want to see the 80D move to eos-M. Every other manufactures apsc lineup has lenses focused in the apsc bodies, so if we get an RF mount apsc body I'd be stocked! But only if they gave us some lenses that are designed for the apsc body. Make sense? I should have to strap on a full frame 70-200 f2.8 they should be making lesnes that are equivalent in f stop and focal length for apsc. But to have to completely have different lenses (m series) and then also lenses for my full frame R would be super annoying. Right now I do use full frame lenses AND ef-s lenses. So as long as I can use my R lenses on it natively I'd be happy.


----------



## Del Paso (Jan 15, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> I think it’s likely that Canon is unsure of its near future roadmap because the technology and market is changing so quickly. Plans that have been in place are being scrapped for new strawman plans as the market is evolving. Canon will need to become faster at camera evolutions to keep up with competitors. These confusing and changing rumors are likely a result of some internal turmoil at Canon.



These rumors have in no way been generated by Canon!!!!
So, please, do not turn your belief into facts!


----------



## KenRockwell (Jan 15, 2019)

Canon EOS 9D Mk I

The End.


----------



## BeenThere (Jan 15, 2019)

Sony just announced their new APS-C mirrorless a6400. Cost $900, 11 FPS while tracking. Animal eye AF. 4K video with no crop and no pixel binning. Tilt- flip screen.

Is this what the Canon camera of this rumor will compete with? Doubt if Canon will match this price.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 15, 2019)

My guess (and all of us are guessing):

7DIII – Continues the tradition of the top of the line APS-C DSLR (mini 1Dx). New sensor, touchscreen, extreme build, autofocus improvements, high frame rate. Focused on birders and action shooters for distance-limited situations. Some features, such as autofocus, may leapfrog the 1Dx II temporarily (which won't be far behind in release date anyway, if at all.) Sensor will be the best available APS-C sensor on the market. 

78D/77DII/90D – Top-end consumer DSLR. Very capable camera and even better video DSLR (with flip screen), but closer to 77D than 80D. This will be built to a price-point, probably initially around $900, but quickly dropping into 77D territory. 

New top-end "M" camera slotted between the two. 80D buyers that don't want to downgrade to the new DSLR, but don't want a 7DIII can choose the top-end "M," which may well be at or close to the price of the 78D. 

There won't be an EOS-R mount in APS-C.

Keep in mind this rumor is CR-1


----------



## nchoh (Jan 15, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> Sony just announced their new APS-C mirrorless a6400. Cost $900, 11 FPS while tracking. Animal eye AF. 4K video with no crop and no pixel binning. Tilt- flip screen.
> 
> Is this what the Canon camera of this rumor will compete with? Doubt if Canon will match this price.



I am quite sure that Canon will come out with an M that will compete on price and capability.


----------



## ykn123 (Jan 15, 2019)

I really need a small (not my 1DX - to heavy to take with with me on every dog walk) DSLR with fps in the range of 7-9 and very good to great AF Servo tracking capabilities. It could be a R - but not with current Servo AF and fps. Ideally no AA filter. There is none and i really think about a Nikon D7500 :-(. I think about this since months and did not pull the trigger because i don't WANT to invest in another system. So i really hope the 90D would be that camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 15, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> Sony just announced their new APS-C mirrorless a6400. Cost $900, 11 FPS while tracking. Animal eye AF. 4K video with no crop and no pixel binning. Tilt- flip screen.
> 
> Is this what the Canon camera of this rumor will compete with? Doubt if Canon will match this price.


With the ‘amazing MILC spec sheets’, don’t you wonder why consumers buy DSLRs? Yet they do...more frequently than they buy MILCs. So in all likelihood, the rumored Canon will not only ‘compete with’ the new Sony, it will outsell it.


----------



## preppyak (Jan 15, 2019)

JonSnow said:


> with mirrorless aps-c doing 20-30 fps now *and becoming a real competition when it comes to focusing*.... why buying a mirrorslapper?
> 
> i would love to see a high-end mirrorless aps-c with 20 fps and great focusing for BIF.


Because you had to use the word "becoming" and not "equal". When it matters at those frame rates, the mirrorless doesnt keep up.

I used Sony for a year or two, and between the menu system, the auto-focus, the terrible battery life, the mediocre screen, and the overheating, it was a nightmare to work with. They're fixing those issues, for sure, but the XXD line has just worked for the entire time I used it. First as the 60D, now as the 80D. I'd gladly take a 90D that costs a little more but has the 7D weather-sealing, some of the 7DII's auto-focus options, a bump to like 10fps, and having 4k.

And if Canon cant deliver that, I'll do what I've already been leaning towards and just move Panasonic.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 15, 2019)

Wouldn't you just get rid of the 77d section it was nonsensical anyway.


----------



## flip314 (Jan 15, 2019)

I love my 80D, but if it could gain the better focus spread of the 7dII while keeping things like the flippy screen and resolution, I'd be willing to consider a "90d"/"7dIII" hybrid for sure. The extra burst speed is nice too, but that's not usually something I need, and 7fps is already pretty good.

As it is now, the 80D/7dII already have a lot in common.


----------



## espressino (Jan 15, 2019)

Sharlin said:


> With the 77D series of cameras, it might indeed make sense to end the x0D/7D split and return to a single enthusiast/prosumer APS-C line. Canon bumped the 60D down a bit too much (no AFMA!) and the 70D and the 80D have crept back upward in the lineup. That would, however, mean that there wouldn't be a real response to the D500, which would make some people quite unhappy. The 80D does sit in a fairly awkward position right now, with only some fairly small things (+AFMA) separating it from the 77D.
> If the amalgamation happens, I'd expect to see something like:
> 
> At least partially mag alloy body (like the 6D)
> ...



I agree with your reasoning. There were some small things separating the 80D from the 77D (AFMA, in-raw-processing, minimum shutter speed) but the one advantage the 77D has is size: so if their amalgamation of lines meant that they put an updated-80D-capable camera into an 77D body (and, Canon being Canon, keeping one or two pro features from it, as well as one or two features aimed at amateurs (GPS via bluetooth, for example)), they could satisfy the often proclaimed demand for smaller bodies (and that even without everyone having to go mirrorless right. now...); similarly a slightly over-80D-sized body would get the 7D2 features you mention above. Would mean a bump in functionality for users and might even protect their prices.


----------



## FoxbatB (Jan 15, 2019)

NetMage said:


> When Canon downgraded after the 50D, I stopped buying xxD line and my next camera was a 7D, but the Mark II was more action focused and didn’t have as good a general purpose sensor as the 80D. If they combine them back, I would hope for a true successor to the 50D and original 7D with their handling features: joystick, full LCD, heavy duty body but with 80D or better DPAF low light capable gp sensor.


And call it 10DX!


----------



## FoxbatB (Jan 15, 2019)

I hope Canon will keeps some DSLRs models alive, otherwise I will switch to any other company that continues to build DSLRs (Pentax?). Mirrorless is not for me.


----------



## deleteme (Jan 15, 2019)

fox40phil said:


> Something like the D500 with some improvements! Can't be that hard to build this.



Might be hard to sell it though.
Canon really watches the sales data and are very aware of where their sales are coming from. I have no idea what volume a D500 type camera might generate but the fact that they are not moving with alacrity hints to me that they feel it isn't worth the effort.


----------



## Ale_F (Jan 15, 2019)

Canon has taken the way of samsung in DSLR. Too many lines, including 2k and 4k.
I hope in the future to see 3 lines of APS-C DSLR:
Normal user 800D
Enthusiast 80D
Pro 7D


----------



## deleteme (Jan 15, 2019)

FoxbatB said:


> I hope Canon will keeps some DSLRs models alive, otherwise I will switch to any other company that continues to build DSLRs (Pentax?). Mirrorless is not for me.


Most likely that Pentax will be the next company to exit the market.
Nikon would be the other company still making APS-C DSLRs. I hear their gear is OK.


----------



## Lurker (Jan 16, 2019)

Kit. said:


> No, it's not the right way to treat customers.


Unless they want to move us to another brand.

If they move it mirrorless then I probably buy a 7DII on closeout or just live with 1 body. If they bring out a new DSLR then I buy that. I won't go mirrorless until they have a mature product line, in other words many years. For me photography is a money pit, I don't make my living do this. Please understand, I'm only speaking for myself and those that think like me. I'm not telling anyone what they should think or do.


----------



## ShermN8r (Jan 16, 2019)

I have been waiting for a 7D Mark III, if it does not happen, I'll opt for the FujiFilm X-T3. I have a 70D, 7D, 5D Mark III & IV but I do not have 10 fps for sports and BIF. No 7D III, no more Canon camera body purchases.


----------



## slclick (Jan 16, 2019)

It's so nice not to have a dog in the crop fight,...enjoy this y'all


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 16, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Canon should keep making the 77D or 80D but the 7DIII should be an Eos-R camera. Canon need to start moving customers to mirrorless. An APS-C high frame rate , silent shutter , good focusing system , two cards would help push lens sales.
> Then also have some entry level APS-C mirrorless Cameras and drop the M series which no longer have a real future.



hehehe. Why does a 7D III need to be an R camera? There is no APS-C R, yet. Probably won't ever be an APS-C R. Why does Canon need to start moving customers to mirrorless? Won't people just keep buying what meets their needs?

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that most DSLR/mirrorless owners don't change cameras very often. I think that is the turf of the type of people who frequent this website (and others). So if I am a regular Joe sitting in the garage with an 80D and a couple of lenses... how is Canon, or any other maker, supposed to convince me to switch when I already don't use what I have?

So what do you mean by saying, "Canon need to start moving customers to mirrorless?" Why?

This customer isn't interested in mirrorless at all.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 16, 2019)

With camera sales going down, and Canon splitting their manufacturing into EOS, EOS-M, and EOS-R, this is the sound of inevitability.

E.g. as model sales go down, keeping maintenance going becomes a relatively bigger expense, even with shared parts between cameras.


----------



## Talys (Jan 16, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> With camera sales going down, and Canon splitting their manufacturing into EOS, EOS-M, and EOS-R, this is the sound of inevitability.
> 
> E.g. as model sales go down, keeping maintenance going becomes a relatively bigger expense, even with shared parts between cameras.


I think it's more that the models are too similar, especially as spec bumps make it so that the differentiators are less meaningful.

In my opinion, with the current high end APSC models being 77D, 80D and 7D2, I think the right move is to consolidate 80D/7D2 into a new "best APSC", and keep 77D.

It's a camera I'd seriously consider buying, only because 80D is still my go-to for a lot of (most?) tasks, even though I have R and 6DII. I really love everything about it.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 16, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> hehehe. Why does a 7D III need to be an R camera? There is no APS-C R, yet. Probably won't ever be an APS-C R. Why does Canon need to start moving customers to mirrorless? Won't people just keep buying what meets their needs?
> 
> I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that most DSLR/mirrorless owners don't change cameras very often. I think that is the turf of the type of people who frequent this website (and others). So if I am a regular Joe sitting in the garage with an 80D and a couple of lenses... how is Canon, or any other maker, supposed to convince me to switch when I already don't use what I have?
> 
> ...


Canon don’t make money from people who stick with gear they have. They need to sell new items to customers. They are the Eos R cameras and accompanying EOS R lens. An EOS-R APS-C would be compatible to the new EOS-R lens natively. 
The M cameras are a dead end with different lens.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 16, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Canon don’t make money from people who stick with gear they have.



This was exactly my point. Most people do stick with the gear they have and then don't use what they have.

You said that Canon needs to move customers to mirrorless. My question to you is why or how? The real money spent on ILC cameras is in the accessories, not the camera body. I have a Canon DSLR, but just one. I also have about 40 lenses. My "L" glass could be used on an R body right now. So why don't I go buy an "R" body? Because the R body isn't going to produce photos that are enough better to justify it. My point is, DSLR or mirrorless, there is no earth shattering difference or reason to switch. Look at Sony: 14% market share and they've been on the mirrorless road for a long time.

Mirrorless is not the industry savior. There really is not anything special about it vs a DSLR. Canon just needs to do whatever Canon does to keep making money. I think (fantasy) that ILC sales will continue to decline. It isn't because of the cameras. It is a pop culture shift in what people value and how that is expressed. People now have their phone, TV, internet, camera and the Library of Congress in their back pocket. They don't want a backpack full of stuff. Photos? All on the phone and they are happy with low res tiny photos.

I've done a couple of recent shoots. Neither client cares about the hi res large file images I can provide. "Instagram and Facebook size is good enough."

Constantly trying to win the mega-pixel war doesn't help either. Why would a person purchase a 100mp camera (non-pro) that isn't going to use the photos for anything other than the web?

I think a large number of people probably see ILC's as too expensive, too bulky, too complicated, and a waste of time and money. Of course, I think the same thing about Bass Boats.

When's the last time anyone has seen an encyclopedia salesman? Extinct, aren't they?


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 16, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> This was exactly my point. Most people do stick with the gear they have and then don't use what they have.
> 
> You said that Canon needs to move customers to mirrorless. My question to you is why or how? The real money spent on ILC cameras is in the accessories, not the camera body. I have a Canon DSLR, but just one. I also have about 40 lenses. My "L" glass could be used on an R body right now. So why don't I go buy an "R" body? Because the R body isn't going to produce photos that are enough better to justify it. My point is, DSLR or mirrorless, there is no earth shattering difference or reason to switch. Look at Sony: 14% market share and they've been on the mirrorless road for a long time.
> 
> ...



For a Canon Fanboy you seem to be very doom and gloom and that Canon will go the way of Encyclopedia Sellers.
Canon try not to be so they bring out new products which they hope their customers will buy.
It’s Canon’s strategy to push MILCs to maintain or increase sales. 2019 appears to be the year of MILC lens development. What they are short is cameras to support them. You may be happy with what you have as so not much further use to them as a customer. They are trying to sell to new customers (who have a range of options open) or existing customers who may want to replace or upgrade.
A 7DIII mirrorless would bring sports and wildlife shooters into their target range.

You may think mirrorless cameras are no better than mirrored cameras but that's in your shoes. Customers in general when they are buying something new are often looking for the latest innovation or future proofing their investment. In five years time do you expect Canon to be still bringing out new EF lens. I don't, I expect the only new lens they will be bringing out by then will be EF-R lens. Do I currently need a 70-200 2.8 lens? No I already have one. 
If I had an EOS-R would I buy a 70-200 2.8 R lens. Well I might because while my old 70-200 is working away well its a little battered looking and I can't screw filters into it. I may buy a new lens for it.
If Canon brought out a new 7DIII would I buy it - no because my 7DII will do until the mirror fails.
If Canon brought out a new 7DR with silent shutter and a faster frame rate yes I might buy one.
This is what Canon needs to do to increase sales. They need to tempt new users and users like me who might upgrade. (They seem unlikely to see future sales from you as to seem to be happy with your lot which is very good for the environment and more of us should be like you).


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 16, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> For a Canon Fanboy you seem to be very doom and gloom and that Canon will go the way of Encyclopedia Sellers.



No gloom or doom in my heart. The reference to encyclopedia salesmen had to do with the way things have shifted in culture, not with Canon. It's about how sometimes a technology(s) comes along and radically changes things. Mirrorless cameras are not on the same level as wireless phones and the internet. In fact, I think the switch from film to digital was an exponentially bigger change than DSLR to mirrorless. There is nothing inherently special about mirrorless cameras.



Hector1970 said:


> A 7DIII mirrorless would bring sports and wildlife shooters into their target range.



?



Hector1970 said:


> You may think mirrorless cameras are no better than mirrored cameras but that's in your shoes. Customers in general when they are buying something new are often looking for the latest innovation or future proofing their investment.



How is mirrorless camera technology "better" than DSLR. Basically the same sensors, still has a shutter, still does it all the same way, but without a mirror... and slower frame rates and less battery life. What is so innovative and future proofing about mirrorless cameras? Nothing.



Hector1970 said:


> In five years time do you expect Canon to be still bringing out new EF lens.



Yes.



Hector1970 said:


> If Canon brought out a new 7DIII would I buy it - no because my 7DII will do until the mirror fails.



Exactly my point.



Hector1970 said:


> If Canon brought out a new 7DR with silent shutter and a faster frame rate yes I might buy one.



"Might" buy one.



Hector1970 said:


> (They seem unlikely to see future sales from you as to seem to be happy with your lot which is very good for the environment and more of us should be like you).



Canon will see future sales from me.

So you seem to be in the same boat as I. There is no wildly compelling reason to run out and buy an R body.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 16, 2019)

> In five years time do you expect Canon to be still bringing out new EF lens. I don't, I expect the only new lens they will be bringing out by then will be EF-R lens.


The ILC market is seeing an increase in the fraction of mirrorless...but it’s a _slow_ increase, and it’s driven by a decline in DSLRs (likely due to market saturation), not an increase in MILCs. Unless that slow pace increases substantially, in 5 years DSLRs will still comprise a large fraction of the ILC market, and if that’s the case, Canon will keep right on launching EF lenses. 

Truthfully, MILCs really aren’t all that different from DSLRs and don’t offer meaningful advantages for most users. People who think that omitting the mirror from an ILC is somehow an industry paradigm shift are fooling themselves. That’s not an ‘in your shoes’ opinion thing, it’s a statement backed up by market data. Film to digital _was_ a bona fide paradigm shift, and in less than 10 years the market shifted from SLRs to DSLRs, and film ILCs were relegated to a niche market with minuscule sales. Today, 10 years after the wide availability of MILC systems, they have less than 40% of the ILC market, and MILC shipments have been essentially flat for the past 6 years.


----------



## tron (Jan 16, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Canon should keep making the 77D or 80D but the 7DIII should be an Eos-R camera. Canon need to start moving customers to mirrorless. An APS-C high frame rate , silent shutter , good focusing system , two cards would help push lens sales.
> Then also have some entry level APS-C mirrorless Cameras and drop the M series which no longer have a real future.


May be you need for some reason you only can know. We do not know what Canon needs! Unless you work for Canon of course) Also an APS-C high frame rate is used for birding mostly and sports (maybe). In these cases EVFs FAIL to perform and spend battery A LOT! So the oposite seems more reasonable: Mirrorless Lower end APS-C cameras not Higher End ones.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 16, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> The ILC market is seeing an increase in the fraction of mirrorless...but it’s a _slow_ increase, and it’s driven by a decline in DSLRs (likely due to market saturation), not an increase in MILCs. Unless that slow pace increases substantially, in 5 years DSLRs will still comprise a large fraction of the ILC market, and if that’s the case, Canon will keep right on launching EF lenses.
> 
> Truthfully, MILCs really aren’t all that different from DSLRs and don’t offer meaningful advantages for most users. People who think that omitting the mirror from an ILC is somehow an industry paradigm shift are fooling themselves. That’s not an ‘in your shoes’ opinion thing, it’s a statement backed up by market data. Film to digital _was_ a bona fide paradigm shift, and in less than 10 years the market shifted from SLRs to DSLRs, and film ILCs were relegated to a niche market with minuscule sales. Today, 10 years after the wide availability of MILC systems, they have less than 40% of the ILC market, and MILC shipments have been essentially flat for the past 6 years.



"Truthfully, MILCs really aren’t all that different from DSLRs and don’t offer meaningful advantages for most users. "
That's to you who knows alot about photography. DSLR's have proven to be a great camera design.
A buyer in the market for a new camera who investigates what to buy is getting MILC pushed in front of their noses as the latest and greatest. It's (relatively compared to DSLR) new and shiny.
An 8K television doesn't offer meaningful advantages for most users but if someone is buying a television today (if they can afford) might be tempted to buy it. If they already have a 4K television it might be only reason they would buy a new TV. Camera makers are running out of advances and MILC is the thing they can best hang their hat on at the moment. That's why they are all pushing MILC. What would help is really good MILC cameras. Most new things have a slow adoption that accelerates over time and replaces the older technology. This year and next year is the main test for MILC as Sony have been joined by Canon and Nikon seriously in that market.
Who knows what the future will bring. Increased populations might keep camera sales up or phones might decrease it to a much smaller market. Canon, Sony and Nikon are under pressure in the camera business. They need new products to sell and new customers to stay in the camera business.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 16, 2019)

tron said:


> May be you need for some reason you only can know. We do not know what Canon needs! Unless you work for Canon of course) Also an APS-C high frame rate is used for birding mostly and sports (maybe). In these cases EVFs FAIL to perform and spend battery A LOT! So the oposite seems more reasonable: Mirrorless Lower end APS-C cameras not Higher End ones.


But if Canon can overcome the problems of EVF (which should be possible) and gain some advantage on battery life (which would appear to be difficult - I don't know why they just don't use Dilithium crystals) this would be a market advantage. Mirrorless has the potential for much higher frame rates. Mirrored is physically limited to how FPS it can be.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 16, 2019)

It'll be interesting to see what happens with the a6400/a7000. The a6400's new focusing speed and effectiveness is purportedly greatly improved, and the a7000 that will be talked about next month will supposedly have a new sensor in it and have the same improved bionz chip. We'll see first hand how well the new tracking software works with firmware updates to the a9/a7III/A7IIIr series about the same time. 

If Sony really has made great leaps in computational algorithms for tracking, it puts even more pressure on Canon. Hopefully this type of upgrade is what is being alluded to in their talks about "Major firmware updates" for the R. I still think we will see a smaller than full frame sensor for the R series at some point, hopefully soon. If Canon can optimize the response time of the R it would even be more capable with a smaller sensor as it has less data to process.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 16, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> ...Who knows what the future will bring. Increased populations might keep camera sales up or phones might decrease it to a much smaller market. Canon, Sony and Nikon are under pressure in the camera business. They need new products to sell and new customers to stay in the camera business.



It's important to remember that the huge spike in sales that camera makers saw as a result of the digital revolution in photography was not normal. Best example I can think of to compare is the surge in popularity that occurred in the late 60s, early 70s with the combination of affordable consumer SLRs, rising income among the middle class and the popularity in the mass media of romanticized versions of photographers. Eventually sales settled back to more sustainable numbers and an industry shakeout occurred that left Canon and Nikon standing, while other brands fell. 

I've long suspected that Nikon and Canon both knew that the digital bubble would eventually burst (although I doubt they realized how devastating the iPhone would be to their point and shoot divisions). My guess is that the contraction in the market is something they've been preparing for for quite some time. If I had to predict, I would say that DSLRs and mirrorless models will coexist for many years and that evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, changes are likely to occur that could eventually lead to a form factor that combines the best of both, but it is likely a decade or more away.


----------



## FoxbatB (Jan 16, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> Most likely that Pentax will be the next company to exit the market.
> Nikon would be the other company still making APS-C DSLRs. I hear their gear is OK.


I have some Nikon film bodies and lenses, if it's Nikon, I'm for Nikon


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 16, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> "Truthfully, MILCs really aren’t all that different from DSLRs and don’t offer meaningful advantages for most users. "
> That's to you who knows alot about photography. DSLR's have proven to be a great camera design.
> A buyer in the market for a new camera who investigates what to buy is getting MILC pushed in front of their noses as the latest and greatest. It's (relatively compared to DSLR) new and shiny.


That’s not ‘to me’, that’s what the market data show. More people are buying DSLRs than MILCs. I’m not sure if you don’t believe the CIPA data, or are just one of those people who refuse to allow facts and data alter their opinion, and prefer instead to live in their own personal reality where their opinion is fact.

Certainly agree that the future is unknown, but if one is going to make predictions about it anyway, it’s better that those predictions are predicated in fact instead of fantasy.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 16, 2019)

A couple observations:
1) Canon's high-end glass releases have slowed over the years. I do think they're putting out the best they've ever put out, but they're not releasing many variations versus 5 years ago. We may find that this was partly due to them holding off on releasing the R lenses until the body was ready, and perhaps they'll make up some ground, but current reports are that they won't release any new EF lenses in this entire year. So if I were to pick up a 7D2 replacement, I'd want it to be in R, as I'll know the new glass investments will matter for the long-term. Meanwhile, I can use my nice glass with the adapter with very little downside, and even some upsides. If they release the 7D2 replacement in EF, I don't anticipate I'll bite. 

2) What seems like Canon's primary tech weakness is throughput and processing speed. If this isn't fixed, it may well mean we'll get another EF-mount 7D. The 7D2 was used as a platform to develop a few new technologies that were later adapted into the 5 and 1 series, but I wouldn't expect that precedent to mean much. Most times Canon when uses one model as a major tech introduction platform, the next revision winds up being more incremental. Think 5D2 or 1DX or 6D. People who thought the 5D2 meant the 5D3 was going to push the video envelope were disappointed, as were people looking for a new record for price/low light performance with the new version of the 6 series. Canon is perfectly capable of putting out a 7D3 in EF with a very slight bump in sensor performance, no increase in FPS and a few new interface features, and calling it a 7D2 successor *particularly* because it is consolidating it with lower-end lines. My hopes are not hight, but as is often the case, I hope to be wrong. 

3) Canon's crop naming schemes seem so irrational as to be the product of individual brand manager's choice, trying to optimize sales for a single camera, rather than creating an orderly set of camera line names. I think you can dismiss names as meaningless for accurate predictions, but it might be safer to guess there will be some consolidation among the crop lines. Since may people have a tough choice between an 80D and a 7D2, it sort of makes sense to combine them. Throwing the 77D (winner for oddest Canon name) in wouldn't put too many people's noses out of joint.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 16, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> Throwing the 77D (winner for oddest Canon name)


Well, maybe the oddest among their DSLRs. In the compact camera realm, there’s the PowerShot S100...both of them, the 2 MP older one and the 12 MP newer one:


----------



## Andreasb (Jan 16, 2019)

I agree with you that a 7DMKII, needs to be a Great Nikon D500 competitor, and the message to Canon after over 4 years of the MKII if the new MKIII isn't what a birder like me wants, I will go to either Nikon or Sony (when they have real telephoto lenses)

Eye tracking on the Sony A9 is hugely impressive, and look at what they just pre announced.



haggie said:


> I am not so sure about that.
> 
> But I do know that I (that is me) want a capable 7D Mk III. For me that means (when compared to the 7D Mk II):
> (1) a better AF-system (in particulat in lower light and with less contrasty subjects - and also better tracking properties);
> ...


----------



## mpmark (Jan 16, 2019)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Sounds like a downgrade is coming and Nikon need not worry about upgrading the D500. So there will be no 300 f/2.8L III or 500 f/4L III this year or at all for EF. Makes little sense to release just the 400 and 600 in EF.




You do realize the above information is "rumor" not "fact" so no need to jump to conclusions on the super teles.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 16, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> 1) Canon's high-end glass releases have slowed over the years. I do think they're putting out the best they've ever put out, but they're not releasing many variations versus 5 years ago. We may find that this was partly due to them holding off on releasing the R lenses until the body was ready, and perhaps they'll make up some ground, but current reports are that they won't release any new EF lenses in this entire year. So if I were to pick up a 7D2 replacement, I'd want it to be in R, as I'll know the new glass investments will matter for the long-term. Meanwhile, I can use my nice glass with the adapter with very little downside, and even some upsides. If they release the 7D2 replacement in EF, I don't anticipate I'll bite...



I don't follow this reasoning. I don't see any evidence that Canon's high-end glass releases have been any slower than in the past. Lenses tend to have a long lifespan and there is always a significant number of years between releases. The EF-L line is a mature product line, so it's not surprising that there are long waits between new releases, especially because the options for change in lens design are pretty limited. Recent releases like the 70-200 f2.8 III demonstrate how little room for improvement there is in lens design. 

I don't know why you would prefer a 7DII replacement be mirrorless without knowing what comprises that might entail. I would expect that the sports/action cameras like the 7D and 1Dx will be among the last to go mirrorless simply because mirrorless technology is not yet capable of competing with DSLRs in the areas where these cameras excel. Why would Canon release a 7DIII and 1Dx III and then suddenly release R lenses that are targeted to the use cases of cameras that couldn't utilize the lenses?


----------



## Adelino (Jan 16, 2019)

I think most watchers of cameras saw this coming.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 17, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> A couple observations:
> 1) Canon's high-end glass releases have slowed over the years. I do think they're putting out the best they've ever put out, but they're not releasing many variations versus 5 years ago. We may find that this was partly due to them holding off on releasing the R lenses until the body was ready, and perhaps they'll make up some ground, but current reports are that they won't release any new EF lenses in this entire year. So if I were to pick up a 7D2 replacement, I'd want it to be in R, as I'll know the new glass investments will matter for the long-term. Meanwhile, I can use my nice glass with the adapter with very little downside, and even some upsides. If they release the 7D2 replacement in EF, I don't anticipate I'll bite.



I think it's more of a limitation of time vs staffing for their development teams. They've been focused on the R for the past year, and before that they were focused on building out the M line with a few EF redesigns in the mix. We'll know more in about 6 months after the next few cameras are either announced or leaked.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 17, 2019)

Love it when people post about manufacturing staffing, production lines, constraints, etc... and it becomes completely obvious the person never designed, prototyped, and then produced a product in a factory. I think most people would be shocked at how long a new product (done right) is actually in design and development before it is manufactured for the public. "XYZ camera company just released camera "JHG" with an awesome spec sheet. Canon must be scrambling fast to tweek the specs for the new "KYH" it will be releasing next week."

I started working for P&G way back in 1984. The plant in Jackson, Tennessee (where I worked) manufactured Pringles. That product began development in 1956. Pringles did not reach store shelves until 1967. By 1984 the brand still had not made a profit and P&G withdrew all advertising dollars. Finally, by fy 1986 a profit of around $6,000 was made. The brand grew from there and is now manufactured by Kellogg's, still in Jackson.

My point is that all you guys running around with hair on fire thinking these things are done overnight are plain nutty. Think the R and the RF lenses suddenly sprang into existence in the last year or two? Think IBIS is a snap just because another company does it? Think Canon can just tear apart a competitor's camera and reverse engineer the design and throw it onto the market?


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jan 17, 2019)

JonSnow said:


> with mirrorless aps-c doing 20-30 fps now and becoming a real competition when it comes to focusing.... why buying a mirrorslapper?
> 
> i would love to see a high-end mirrorless aps-c with 20 fps and great focusing for BIF.



For wildlife photography, a main market for a 7D like camera, a mirror slapper still makes sense. Wildlife means that you sit in your camouflage tent and peer for hours at your motif, and nothing happens - and then, suddenly, comes the moment you've been waiting for (or never). With a ML camera you pay for every look through the EVF with a sip of electrical energy. So you have to carry much more replacement batteries with you than with an OVF camera. I know, wildlife photography is a bit crazy, but people like me love it, and IMO ML technology isn't yet mature enough for this application.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jan 17, 2019)

Daner said:


> Combine the flippy touch-screen and improved sensor of the 80D with the enhanced autofocus and focus control aspects of the 7D Mark II.



I agree but I'd like to add that Canon would need to improve the 7DII's underwhelming phase detection AF performance substantially. When I added the 7DII as crop camera to my 5DIII I was really shocked because I hoped that the 7DII would nail e.g. BIF just like the 5DIII (e.g. with an EF 500mm lens). It does not, and I tried nearly every AF settings available. I get much more in-focus images with the 5DIII when I shoot action, despite its much slower burst rate.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 17, 2019)

The 7D has been called mini 1DX, high fps sports camera with extra reach due to higher pixel density.

I would expect a MILC version of the 7D, for the same reasons people expect EOS-R version of the 1DX, once the technology matures, e.g. higher fps & the screen no blacking out during exposure.

Looking at the EOS-M line of lenses, it seems to be Canon doesn't plan to make a pro line out of it, so I expect a crop EOS-R to come up at some point.

On the other hand, I can see the EOS 7D hanging around, e.g. for birding, where one doesn't want to burn battery while looking through view finder.


----------



## Talys (Jan 17, 2019)

mpmark said:


> You do realize the above information is "rumor" not "fact" so no need to jump to conclusions on the super teles.


That's because rumor logic is really awesome. Rumor: <any rumor> [CR0-CR3]…. Conclusion: Canon isn't going to make EF stuff anymore!


----------



## BurningPlatform (Jan 17, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> Sony just announced their new APS-C mirrorless a6400. Cost $900, 11 FPS while tracking. Animal eye AF. 4K video with no crop and no pixel binning. Tilt- flip screen.
> 
> Is this what the Canon camera of this rumor will compete with? Doubt if Canon will match this price.



I find it really strange that Sony decided to release a camera between α6300 and α6500, which already were quite close to each other. (I also wonder why no native English speaking web site - or forum dweller - seems to be able to find the α character in their machines. Well. here it is: α. Sony marketing people must be thrilled when nobody can spell their product names correctly.)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 17, 2019)

BurningPlatform said:


> I also wonder why no native English speaking web site - or forum dweller - seems to be able to find the α character in their machines.


Oh, we all know how to type an alpha. We’re all just such Canon fanbois —even the Sony lovers and trolls here are closet Canon fanbois— that we use an ‘a’ instead just to thumb our noses at Sony.


----------



## DT3019 (Jan 17, 2019)

Horses for courses... My understanding is that in Japan DSLRs reign supreme. They are considered “macho”, “manly”... “size makes you a better photographer”. DSLRs continue to sell very well in Japan. 

The Japanese are also the biggest consumers of cameras in the world. I remember reading a statistic on a forum (Yes, I know, this isn’t exactly a hard fact!) which suggested that the the Japanese buy about 70% of all DSLRs sold annually in the world.

In many worldwide markets DSLRs are “DEAD”! Only the middle-aged, like me, still buy them! Yes, I want a 7D3, but I have to resign myself to reality - Canon might not give me one.

Speaking as a resident of Australia I can say that DSLRs are definitely dead here! Only professionals still use them. Australia is predominantly Canon - more professionals use it as opposed to Nikon. Sales here are now all mirrorless, mirrorless, mirrorless...plus the Fujifilm GFX which sells much better than any traditional DSLR. 

Worldwide, Canon has made the right decision in going “R”. As a dinosaur who loves DSLRs I am not coping very well


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 17, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> For wildlife photography, a main market for a 7D like camera, a mirror slapper still makes sense. Wildlife means that you sit in your camouflage tent and peer for hours at your motif, and nothing happens - and then, suddenly, comes the moment you've been waiting for (or never). With a ML camera you pay for every look through the EVF with a sip of electrical energy. So you have to carry much more replacement batteries with you than with an OVF camera. I know, wildlife photography is a bit crazy, but people like me love it, and IMO ML technology isn't yet mature enough for this application.



Total nonsense. I own both and if I take a crop body to the blind it will be the M5 not the 7D II. As you say you spend your time waiting, that translates in to very few shots and battery life is inconsequential. Case in point I set in the blind this last weekend, in four hours had shot a total of 8 frames. Personally I like the EVF and the tilt screen, it allows you to take pictures without your face against the camera which in turn helps reduces your profile by keeping more of you hid when the animal is close.

If you want to make a BIF argument then you have some legitimacy.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 17, 2019)

DT3019 said:


> Horses for courses... My understanding is that in Japan DSLRs reign supreme. They are considered “macho”, “manly”... “size makes you a better photographer”. DSLRs continue to sell very well in Japan.
> 
> The Japanese are also the biggest consumers of cameras in the world. I remember reading a statistic on a forum (Yes, I know, this isn’t exactly a hard fact!) which suggested that the the Japanese buy about 70% of all DSLRs sold annually in the world.
> 
> In many worldwide markets DSLRs are “DEAD”! Only the middle-aged, like me, still buy them! Yes, I want a 7D3, but I have to resign myself to reality - Canon might not give me one.


Ummmm....no. Just....no.

About 45% of the interchangeable lens cameras (ILCs) shipped to Japan are DSLRs, and 55% are MILCs – in most other geographies more DSLRs are sold than MILCs (globally, 62% of ILCs are DSLRs). So DSLRs certainly don’t ‘reign supreme’ in Japan, in fact the opposite is true. Also, about *7%* of DSLRs go to Japan, not 70%.

Those _are_ hard facts, based on the CIPA data for Jan-Nov 2018.



DT3019 said:


> Speaking as a resident of Australia I can say that DSLRs are definitely dead here! Only professionals still use them. Australia is predominantly Canon - more professionals use it as opposed to Nikon. Sales here are now all mirrorless, mirrorless, mirrorless...plus the Fujifilm GFX which sells much better than any traditional DSLR.


Your statements above were blatantly false, and this is more BS. In every geography outside of Japan, DSLRs are more popular than MILCs, so your suggestion that sales in AUS are all mirrorless is clearly false. Globally, sales of Fuji ILCs aren’t sufficient to make more than a blip in market share, so your statement that the GFX outsells the ~60% of ILCs that are DSLRs is almost certainly another falsehood.



DT3019 said:


> Worldwide, Canon has made the right decision in going “R”. As a dinosaur who loves DSLRs I am not coping very well


To be clear, Canon’s decision was to start selling a FF MILC line. Nothing else. THey certainly haven’t said they’re stopping DLSR development, in fact they’ve said (publicly) the exact opposite.

So to sum up for the TL;DR folks, your whole post is fallacious fantasy, except perhaps the very last bit about you having trouble coping.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 17, 2019)

BurningPlatform said:


> Well. here it is: α. Sony marketing people must be thrilled when nobody can spell their product names correctly.)


They really should have renamed it when they got it from Minolta.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 17, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Canon don’t make money from people who stick with gear they have. They need to sell new items to customers. They are the Eos R cameras and accompanying EOS R lens.


No. They are the Canon authorized services, Canon system and Canon brand. People buy Canon's MFUs because Canon's cameras earned their trust. Or at least I do.



Hector1970 said:


> An EOS-R APS-C would be compatible to the new EOS-R lens natively.


Ther is no RF lens that people buying a mirrorless APS-C camera would buy. It's a dead market, and will remain dead for quite a while.


----------



## ykn123 (Jan 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> With the ‘amazing MILC spec sheets’, don’t you wonder why consumers buy DSLRs? Yet they do...more frequently than they buy MILCs. So in all likelihood, the rumored Canon will not only ‘compete with’ the new Sony, it will outsell it.


The AI Eye AF (with tracking i Servoe Mode ) looks very interesting from their youtube videos, but i don't like the a6xxx sytöe bodies at all. And yes, the price sounds interesting as well. Still would like to see those features in a different body.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 17, 2019)

Kit. said:


> No. They are the Canon authorized services, Canon system and Canon brand. People buy Canon's MFUs because Canon's cameras earned their trust. Or at least I do.
> 
> 
> Ther is no RF lens that people buying a mirrorless APS-C camera would buy. It's a dead market, and will remain dead for quite a while.


According to Canon Rumors
*Photokina – Cologne, Germany // May 8, 2019 – May 11, 2019*
This is the first spring Photokina show, as they are moving to a yearly cycle in the spring going forward. We’re not sure how companies are going to react to this new way of doing things, and if there will be any attempt to get products announced for the show in May.
We think this would be the latest that Canon announces a new EOS R body and the new “holy trinity” of RF lenses, the RF 16-35mm f/2.8L, RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS and RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS.
Very common lens APS-C camera owners upgrade to. All they are short is a 100-400


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 17, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> According to Canon Rumors
> *Photokina – Cologne, Germany // May 8, 2019 – May 11, 2019*
> This is the first spring Photokina show, as they are moving to a yearly cycle in the spring going forward. We’re not sure how companies are going to react to this new way of doing things, and if there will be any attempt to get products announced for the show in May.
> We think this would be the latest that Canon announces a new EOS R body and the new “holy trinity” of RF lenses, the RF 16-35mm f/2.8L, RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS and RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS.
> Very common lens APS-C camera owners upgrade to. All they are short is a 100-400


Agree with the sentiment. While most APS-C owners never buy lens(es) beyond what came with their camera (or buy only the nifty fifty because of the low cost), those that do are quite likely to buy L-series lenses, particularly at longer focal lengths. Still, I suspect the actual number of people who do so is rather small relative to the market as a whole. Canon has those data, and chose to not provide an upgrade path whereby owners of their M line could purchase lenses for their full frame mirrorless line to use on the M.


----------



## mpb001 (Jan 18, 2019)

I am a 5DIV shooter, but I think that it would make sense to fold a potential 90D/7DIII into one advanced pro-grade crop sensor body. I know that Canon says that they will continue to make DSLRs, but my hunch is that over time (years), they will be phased out once they really get the mirrorless thing down. I have heard that a future 5DSR was shelved because Canon is considering making it a mirrorless body. As for the rest of the crop sensor line, I would not be surprised to see the Rebel line vanish or be folded into some amalgamation of an M series body. Just my thoughts.


----------



## AprilForever (Jan 18, 2019)

If Canon nerfs the 7d mk III, I WILL SCREAM. I love the APS-C pro-ish camera, I want tgere to keep being an actually almost pro apsc camera, it would be a marketing move stupid beyond belief for Canon to ruin the lineup.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 18, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> According to Canon Rumors
> *Photokina – Cologne, Germany // May 8, 2019 – May 11, 2019*
> This is the first spring Photokina show, as they are moving to a yearly cycle in the spring going forward. We’re not sure how companies are going to react to this new way of doing things, and if there will be any attempt to get products announced for the show in May.
> We think this would be the latest that Canon announces a new EOS R body and the new “holy trinity” of RF lenses, the RF 16-35mm f/2.8L, RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS and RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS.
> Very common lens APS-C camera owners upgrade to. All they are short is a 100-400


They aren't. They have EF100-400. My wife has, for example.

So, the question is:
If they do have these lenses in EF, why would they buy them in RF?
If they don't have these lenses in EF, why would they buy them in RF, but would not buy in EF?


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Oh, we all know how to type an alpha. We’re all just such Canon fanbois —even the Sony lovers and trolls here are closet Canon fanbois— that we use an ‘a’ instead just to thumb our noses at Sony.


Sony_α _


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 18, 2019)

BurningPlatform said:


> I also wonder why no native English speaking web site - or forum dweller - seems to be able to find the α character in their machines.


Cαnon


----------



## unfocused (Jan 18, 2019)

AprilForever said:


> If Canon nerfs the 7d mk III, I WILL SCREAM. I love the APS-C pro-ish camera, I want tgere to keep being an actually almost pro apsc camera, it would be a marketing move stupid beyond belief for Canon to ruin the lineup.



I don't think you will have to scream. Canon set the standard in this segment with the original 7D. Nikon tried to abandon this segment and then after a long absence they got back in it with the excellent D500. There is a demand for these 1DX/D5 comparable crop frame bodies. Both manufacturers wait a long time between models in order to build up demand, but they won't abandon the segment -- these are targeted to a very desirable audience with lots of disposable income.


----------



## ShermN8r (Jan 19, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> For a Canon Fanboy you seem to be very doom and gloom and that Canon will go the way of Encyclopedia Sellers.
> Canon try not to be so they bring out new products which they hope their customers will buy.
> It’s Canon’s strategy to push MILCs to maintain or increase sales. 2019 appears to be the year of MILC lens development. What they are short is cameras to support them. You may be happy with what you have as so not much further use to them as a customer. They are trying to sell to new customers (who have a range of options open) or existing customers who may want to replace or upgrade.
> A 7DIII mirrorless would bring sports and wildlife shooters into their target range.
> ...



If the 7D III becomes the next mirrorless offer from Canon, I'll stick with my Fujifilm X-T20 and possibly the X-T3 as well as the current Canon gear I already have...By that, I won't spend another dime on Canon!


----------



## slclick (Jan 19, 2019)

Pass the popcorn, the exodus is starting!


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 19, 2019)

NetMage said:


> When Canon downgraded after the 50D, I stopped buying xxD line and my next camera was a 7D, but the Mark II was more action focused and didn’t have as good a general purpose sensor as the 80D. If they combine them back, I would hope for a true successor to the 50D and original 7D with their handling features: joystick, full LCD, heavy duty body but with 80D or better DPAF low light capable gp sensor.



Well, except that above ISO 800, the 7D Mark II already has higher DR and S/N ratio than the 80D. The only place the 80D's sensor is qualitatively better than the 7D Mark II's sensor is at ISO 100 and ISO 200.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 19, 2019)

codynpatterson said:


> I hope they don't sacrifice the 80D. That's the better of the two cameras for portrait, wedding, and landscape photographers so they'd be losing out on a huge industry. I could care less about shutter speed for photos, I want the best sensor, the most feature full apsc camera, fantastic video capabilities, and a compactish size. Also it better not be made into a eos-m camera, we need an eos-R camera or mirrorless body with ef-s lenses. There's no point in continuing to develop ef-M lenses it's a wasted resource and splits the userbase.



What few serious portrait, wedding, and landscape photographers that were left still shooting with APS-C moved to full frame with the introduction of the 6D/6DII at roughly the same price point as the 7D/7DII/80D.

I doubt Canon sees a large enough market left for APS-C cameras among portrait/wedding/landscape photographers to justify the space in the product line.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 19, 2019)

codynpatterson said:


> I don't think that 80D users care about price, I chose the 80D over the 7D ii for the better sensor, more features, better videos options, & smaller body. So I could care less about the price I didn't want the 7D ii at all so a lesser price wouldn't have changed that. To me the 80D is the superior camera because of what I shoot.
> 
> The 80D and 7Dii are both Canon's top end APSC cameras, they have different purposes and therefor are priced according to the manufacturing process for Canon.
> 
> If the new combined camera can do everything I need from my 80D and have features the 7dii users need then sure but they better know that going into it.



If you don't care about price, why aren't you shooting with a 6D Mark II? It's cheaper than a 7D II and wipes the floor with the 80D for wedding, portrait, and landscape work.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 19, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> But if Canon can overcome the problems of EVF (which should be possible) and gain some advantage on battery life (which would appear to be difficult - I don't know why they just don't use Dilithium crystals) this would be a market advantage. Mirrorless has the potential for much higher frame rates. Mirrored is physically limited to how FPS it can be.



For most high frame rate shooters, fps is useless unless the AF tracking can keep up. So far mirrorless can't track a moving subject at 10-14 fps nearly as well as DSLRs can. Before sports/action shooters will switch from DSLRs to mirrorless, that has to change.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 19, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> I agree but I'd like to add that Canon would need to improve the 7DII's underwhelming phase detection AF performance substantially. When I added the 7DII as crop camera to my 5DIII I was really shocked because I hoped that the 7DII would nail e.g. BIF just like the 5DIII (e.g. with an EF 500mm lens). It does not, and I tried nearly every AF settings available. I get much more in-focus images with the 5DIII when I shoot action, despite its much slower burst rate.



Anyone who expects an APS-C camera to PDAF as well as a full frame camera does not understand the physics of PDAF. The width of the baseline between light from one side of the lens to the other is necessarily narrower in an APS-C camera than a FF camera because the mirror, and the semi-translucent portion of it, is narrower.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 19, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Well, except that above ISO 800, the 7D Mark II already has higher DR and S/N ratio than the 80D. The only place the 80D's sensor is *qualitatively* better than the 7D Mark II's sensor is at ISO 100 and ISO 200.
> 
> View attachment 182700


I think you mean _quantitatively_ better. I doubt that a stop of DR at base ISO makes a qualitative difference in most shooting situations.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 20, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> I think you mean _quantitatively_ better. I doubt that a stop of DR at base ISO makes a qualitative difference in most shooting situations.



No, I meant _qualitatively_ better_. _The 1.22 stop difference (which is a _quantitative _measurement) at ISO 100 is _qualitatively _more significant, that is, it is more perceivable when looking at photos taken at ISO 100 under certain conditions that tax a camera's dynamic range, than the _quantitative _ 0.02 Ev difference at ISO 800 that can be measured in a laboratory but not seen in actual images.

Nor did I say anything about "most shooting" situations.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> No, I meant _qualitatively_ better_. _The 1.22 stop difference (which is a _quantitative _measurement) at ISO 100 is _qualitatively _more significant, that is, it is more perceivable when looking at photos taken at ISO 100 under certain conditions that tax a camera's dynamic range, than the _quantitative _ 0.02 Ev difference at ISO 800 that can be measured in a laboratory but not seen in actual images.
> 
> Nor did I say anything about "most shooting" situations.


Situations that ‘tax a camera’s dynamic range’ are not uncommon. The subset of those situations where one stop more DR makes a meaningful difference in the output are very rare. I think something that makes a difference in ~1% of shooting situations is insignificant, both quantitatively and qualitatively.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 20, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Situations that ‘tax a camera’s dynamic range’ are not uncommon. The subset of those situations where one stop more DR makes a meaningful difference in the output are very rare. I think something that makes a difference in ~1% of shooting situations is insignificant, both quantitatively and qualitatively.



I would tend to agree. When I have needed more DR, I have needed a LOT! more DR. That said, a stop more, or even a half stop more would be welcome.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jan 22, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Anyone who expects an APS-C camera to PDAF as well as a full frame camera does not understand the physics of PDAF. The width of the baseline between light from one side of the lens to the other is necessarily narrower in an APS-C camera than a FF camera because the mirror, and the semi-translucent portion of it, is narrower.


Well, as a physicist I know a bit about optics and triangulation (astronomy) - and basically you are right. But that's only one aspect. Another aspect is AF sensor technology. Today it could be made so light sensitive that it could detect much more subtle shifts between the two overlapping split images, I am pretty sure. Such a sensor would be a bit more expensive to be made, of course. The 7DII's phase detection AF performance improves substantially in bright sunshine, so obviously the shorter baseline isn't the limit, the technical limit is the light sensitivity of its AF sensor. To be more precise: I mean the average sensitivity of all of its AF points, not only the central one (which is in fact more light sensitive that the 5D3's central AF point).


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jan 22, 2019)

BurningPlatform said:


> (I also wonder why no native English speaking web site - or forum dweller - seems to be able to find the α character in their machines. Well. here it is: α. Sony marketing people must be thrilled when nobody can spell their product names correctly.)


Product names quite often have a strange and sometimes funny afterlife that marketing people never intended. Canon is such an example: many people think that it comes from a fat weapon, only a few know that it goes back to a buddhist bodhisattva with the Japanese name "Kannon". Another famous and funny example was the Mitsubishi Pajero SUV, and you can google by yourself what "pajero" in Spanish language means, if you don't know.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jan 22, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> If you want to make a BIF argument then you have some legitimacy.


I have this legitimacy...


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 22, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> Well, as a physicist I know a bit about optics and triangulation (astronomy) - and basically you are right. But that's only one aspect. Another aspect is AF sensor technology. Today it could be made so light sensitive that it could detect much more subtle shifts between the two overlapping split images, I am pretty sure. Such a sensor would be a bit more expensive to be made, of course. The 7DII's phase detection AF performance improves substantially in bright sunshine, so obviously the shorter baseline isn't the limit, the technical limit is the light sensitivity of its AF sensor. To be more precise: I mean the average sensitivity of all of its AF points, not only the central one (which is in fact more light sensitive that the 5D3's central AF point).



Any "new" technology that can be put into an APS-C sized PDAF sensor can also be applied to a larger FF sized PDAF sensor, just as any "new" technology that can be applied to an APS-C main imaging sensor to improve its S/N ratio can also be applied to a FF sensor. When the new tech is applied to both, the wider baseline or the larger imaging sensor will still have the same advantage over the narrower baseline or smaller imaging sensor.

The 7D Mark II's AF is, at least in my experience, considerably more accurate and consistent from frame to frame than the 7D was, though not as good as the 5D Mark III. I've shot close to 100,000K frames, most of them sports/action, with the 7D II, about 80K with the 5D3 (mostly other than sports/action or wider angle sports/action where focus accuracy is not quite so critical), and put about 70K, mostly sports/action, on my old 7D.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 22, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Situations that ‘tax a camera’s dynamic range’ are not uncommon. The subset of those situations where one stop more DR makes a meaningful difference in the output are very rare. I think something that makes a difference in ~1% of shooting situations is insignificant, both quantitatively and qualitatively.



For the times when I'm shooting at ISO 100, which admittedly isn't a significant percentage of my total output that is dominated by shooting sports/action under lights, I could use an extra stop of DR considerably more than 1% of the time. Probably more like 15-20%. YMMV.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jan 22, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Any "new" technology that can be put into an APS-C sized PDAF sensor can also be applied to a larger FF sized PDAF sensor, just as any "new" technology that can be applied to an APS-C main imaging sensor to improve its S/N ratio can also be applied to a FF sensor. When the new tech is applied to both, the wider baseline or the larger imaging sensor will still have the same advantage over the narrower baseline or smaller imaging sensor.


I simply stated that I am not satisfied with the phase detection AF of the 7D2, and of course a FF camera will always profit from new sensor tech and then be superior to a crop camera again. But that's not what I originally intended to say. I just wanted a 7D like camera with a substantially improved AF performance (on a 5D3's level) for wildlife shooting in real life. That's simply it. If Canon would achieve this with an active IR laser or radar system (caution: irony!), I wouldn't mind if it worked. So let's stop this discussion (in fact, I do that). Have always good light!


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 22, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> Total nonsense. I own both and if I take a crop body to the blind it will be the M5 not the 7D II. As you say you spend your time waiting, that translates in to very few shots and battery life is inconsequential. Case in point I set in the blind this last weekend, in four hours had shot a total of 8 frames. Personally I like the EVF and the tilt screen, it allows you to take pictures without your face against the camera which in turn helps reduces your profile by keeping more of you hid when the animal is close.
> 
> If you want to make a BIF argument then you have some legitimacy.



I sat in a bird blind last weekend for about two hours, trying to get pictures of chickadees in flight. I went through about 500 frames. Those little suckers move FAST and because of the small size and erratic flight patterns, they are hard to track. In my case, it didn't matter what the battery life was because I have 3 spares. 

Anyone who gets a mirrorless camera should realize that they will take a battery life hit, but in the bigger picture, so what? buy a spare (or enough to do you) and it isn't a problem.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 22, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> I sat in a bird blind last weekend for about two hours, trying to get pictures of chickadees in flight. I went through about 500 frames. Those little suckers move FAST and because of the small size and erratic flight patterns, they are hard to track. In my case, it didn't matter what the battery life was because I have 3 spares.
> 
> Anyone who gets a mirrorless camera should realize that they will take a battery life hit, but in the bigger picture, so what? buy a spare (or enough to do you) and it isn't a problem.



But if you buy extra batteries, then you have nothing to COMPLAIN about!!


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 22, 2019)

dak723 said:


> But if you buy extra batteries, then you have nothing to COMPLAIN about!!


Exactly!

The math is simple, no matter which camera you have. How many photos you expect to take, divided by the expected capacity of the battery for the type of shooting you do, is the MINIMUM number of batteries you need. And then add in an extra battery or two......


----------



## Valvebounce (Jan 25, 2019)

Hi Folks. 
Just looking at all these comments on battery life of a mirrorless whilst sitting in a hide or other wildlife shooting examples, my thoughts are that the IS and AF motors are probably the largest drain on a battery? Yes I know the EVF will be an additional unavoidable drain. I think the best plan is for all photographers to have spare batteries and memory cards available at all times! 
Having played with the R for 20-30 mins during a hands on day (thanks LCE) using a variety of lenses including my own 100-400 L II and including going out of the store and trying it on seagulls and lamp posts I just didn’t like the EVF (it seems better than the Sony that I used for a couple of hours (thanks LCE)) though I can foresee a point when it will be good enough to make the advantages* that EVF does have over OVF enough to convince me to change. 
For now I hope that if my 7DII dies I can get a 7DIII that is not knobled down to XXD ergonomics, leave me a joystick and a rear wheel not the thumb disc thingy! 

*What you see is what you get, far more customisable information, MF assistance and more

Cheers, Graham.


----------



## Chuckmet (Feb 19, 2019)

nchoh said:


> I am quite sure that Canon will come out with an M that will compete on price and capability.


Except for 4K capability, there will be a crop.


----------



## Chuckmet (Feb 19, 2019)

Andreasb said:


> I agree with you that a 7DMKII, needs to be a Great Nikon D500 competitor, and the message to Canon after over 4 years of the MKII if the new MKIII isn't what a birder like me wants, I will go to either Nikon or Sony (when they have real telephoto lenses)
> 
> Eye tracking on the Sony A9 is hugely impressive, and look at what they just pre announced.


If Canon chooses not to release a 7D3 I may have my Sigma 150-600 & 100-400 refitted with a Nikon mount and purchase a D500. That's sad as I have been a loyal Canon shooter since 1975.


----------



## Chuckmet (Feb 19, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> I sat in a bird blind last weekend for about two hours, trying to get pictures of chickadees in flight. I went through about 500 frames. Those little suckers move FAST and because of the small size and erratic flight patterns, they are hard to track. In my case, it didn't matter what the battery life was because I have 3 spares.
> 
> Anyone who gets a mirrorless camera should realize that they will take a battery life hit, but in the bigger picture, so what? buy a spare (or enough to do you) and it isn't a problem.


Doesn't matter unless your in the middle of changing batteries when a great oportunity presents itself then it's gone!


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 19, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Any "new" technology that can be put into an APS-C sized PDAF sensor can also be applied to a larger FF sized PDAF sensor, just as any "new" technology that can be applied to an APS-C main imaging sensor to improve its S/N ratio can also be applied to a FF sensor. When the new tech is applied to both, the wider baseline or the larger imaging sensor will still have the same advantage over the narrower baseline or smaller imaging sensor.
> 
> The 7D Mark II's AF is, at least in my experience, considerably more accurate and consistent from frame to frame than the 7D was, though not as good as the 5D Mark III. I've shot close to 100,000K frames, most of them sports/action, with the 7D II, about 80K with the 5D3 (mostly other than sports/action or wider angle sports/action where focus accuracy is not quite so critical), and put about 70K, mostly sports/action, on my old 7D.


My comparisons are with the 5D2, 6D2, and 7D2.

I find the 7D2 AF system beats the 5D2 in every way. I find that the 7D2 beats the 6D2, except in live view, where the 6D2 beats the 7D2.

I assume that any replacement to the 7D2 will put it back on top for both.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 19, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> My comparisons are with the 5D2, 6D2, and 7D2.
> 
> I find the 7D2 AF system beats the 5D2 in every way. I find that the 7D2 beats the 6D2, except in live view, where the 6D2 beats the 7D2.
> 
> I assume that any replacement to the 7D2 will put it back on top for both.



Any of the current three digit Rebels (Txi/xx0D) beat the AF of the 5D Mark II. It's the weakest thing about the 5DII.

The 5D Mark III has a 1D X level AF system that is noticeably better than the 7D Mark II, both in terms of accuracy and consistency from shot-to-shot.

The 6D Mark II has a PDAF system very close to the 80D PDAF system, but is is a step below the 7D Mark II for sure.


----------

