# Canon Full Frame Mirrorless to use Dedicated Sensor [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 3, 2017)

```
We’re told that Canon’s first foray into a full frame mirrorless camera will use a dedicated CMOS sensor and won’t be using either the EOS 6D Mark II or EOS 5D Mark IV image sensors. The claim again comes from an internal presentation of Canon’s 2018 roadmap. We’re still being told not to expect an announcement until at least August of 2018 ahead of Photokina in Cologne, Germany.</p>


<p>We’re also told that a higher end APS-C based mirrorless camera above the EOS M5 is not in the cards.</p>
<p>Nikon is expected to announce their first full frame mirrorless camera before Canon in the first half of 2018.</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 3, 2017)

I just hope they don't remove DPAF.


----------



## infared (Oct 3, 2017)

Interesting...but not "on the edge of my seat" interesting. 
I use Canon for FF (5DIV)...and I am waaaay committed to another manufacturer's non-FF, mirrorless system already (5 bodies, 15 lenses)....so unless this is something super special from Canon...which based on the way Canon doles out its cameras...."we are number 1...We do what we feel like and don't engage in a competition with our competitors" attitude....I am not really expecting too much from a Canon FF mirrorless. Still it will be interesting to see if they can get serious about it! 8)


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 3, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> I just hope they don't remove DPAF.



DPAF is going to be part of every DSLR/Mirrorless camera going forward, until they come up with something better.


----------



## Warren21 (Oct 3, 2017)

I think we're all in agreement that it will probably be called the M1, and Canon have been rebranding/positioning their EOS M line to match the 'European' EOS naming conventions... See below:

1D/M1 - Professional 'Halo' Product/Highest Performance
5D/M5 - Professional/High Performance
6D/M6 - Entry level Professional/Enthusiast High Performance

x0D/Mx0 - Enthusiast/Performance (This whole theory hinges on what the M20 will look like...)

x00D/Mx00 - Entry level (Ever wonder why the successor to the M10 was the M100? I think this is why...)

The potential M20 and the existence of the M100 cameras are really what bring this idea to life, but it would be nice to have some congruity between the two product lines. What do you all think?


----------



## funkboy (Oct 3, 2017)

Personally I think that an APS-H size sensor (with e.g 6D-size pixels) would be sufficient for a large-sensor mirrorless camera, & help keep the size & weight down while still being a significant step up from the APS-C crowd.


----------



## andrei1989 (Oct 3, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re also told that a higher end APS-C based mirrorless camera above the EOS M5 is not in the cards.



well that's nice news for me 
means i won't be tempted by a newer crop M


----------



## brad-man (Oct 3, 2017)

_"We’re also told that a higher end APS-C based mirrorless camera above the EOS M5 is not in the cards."_ Why should they? There are few M lenses worthy of the M5/6 as it is. To come up with a new mount only to let it wither and die. I certainly don't understand Canon's strategy. As for FF mirrorless, my standards are much higher than for APS-C since there are no real size benefits. Global electronic shutter and a zippy quick EVF are prerequisite. Someday...


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 3, 2017)

The Nikon bit is juicy, the rest less so.

1) Nikon to come to market with FF mirrorless first = logical given their CX / Nikon 1 exodus, but one wonders if it will be a rushed effort to reassure its users that it is on stable footing and pushing new ideas in this space. I see Canon being late to the FF mirrorless space (i.e. even behind Nikon), but what they offer will work reliably with familiar handling.

2) 'Higher end APS-C' will likely just be the follow-up to the M5/M6 models. I see that being the 80D of mirrorless, and moving up to a 7D2 of mirrorless doesn't really have a big market, does it?.

3) New sensor = yawn. Doubt it will be a curved sensor gamechanger as it will (likely) impact EF lens compatibility, right? I read 'new sensor in FF mirrorless' as simply being better than the 6D2 and _not _ being better than the 5D4, nothing more. It very well could just be a 26 MP sensor with the dynamic range of the 5D4 that was bizarrely left out of the 6D2 sensor.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 3, 2017)

brad-man said:


> _"We’re also told that a higher end APS-C based mirrorless camera above the EOS M5 is not in the cards."_ Why should they? There are few M lenses worthy of the M5/6 as it is. To come up with a new mount only to let it wither and die. I certainly don't understand Canon's strategy. As for FF mirrorless, my standards are much higher than for APS-C since there are no real size benefits. Global electronic shutter and a zippy quick EVF are prerequisite. Someday...



+1. Who needs a 10-12 fps super APS-C rig when the best native mount lens doesn't even have USM focusing?

Talk to me about a 7D2-like mirrorless rig when there's an EF-M 10-22 f/2.8 USM or EF-M 17-55 f/2.8 to use with it. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 3, 2017)

Warren21 said:


> 1D/M1 - Professional 'Halo' Product/Highest Performance
> 5D/M5 - Professional/High Performance
> 6D/M6 - Entry level Professional/Enthusiast High Performance



1) I thought the M5 and M6 differed only in one getting an integral EVF. (Correct/incorrect?)

2) Equating the functionality / IQ / performance of the 5D and the M5 is off-target. The 5D is a professional rig with a professional build and feature set -- it just lack an integral grip and sexiest of the highest end stuff the 1DX platform gets. In contrast, I'd more liken the M5 to the _80D_, not the 5D brand. 

I get your good/better/best approach, but as mirrorless will straddle mount sizes in this approach, I see it more like:

M1 (if that's what it's called) = a 6D2 + EVF - mirror. I just don't see them offering a beastly 5D4 / 5DS / 1DX2 level mirrorless rig to start. Go for well-heeled enthusiasts and folks looking for a solid second body and scoop up all the cash from pent-up demand.

M5/M6 = 80D for those who do/don't want an integral EVF. I think it's perfectly positioned right there -- going upmarket to a 7D2-like 'crop 1DX lite' rig is a leap to me.

- A


----------



## scrup (Oct 3, 2017)

Long time to wait. A7rii are approaching 2k mark on the grey markets.


----------



## Talys (Oct 3, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> M5/M6 = 80D for those who do/don't want an integral EVF. I think it's perfectly positioned right there -- going upmarket to a 7D2-like 'crop 1DX lite' rig is a leap to me.



It makes even less sense when considering that a lot (most?) 7D2 owners buy it for sports/wildlife + extra reach -- and how many of those users have a strong preference for OVF?


----------



## Bennymiata (Oct 3, 2017)

If they make it as much fun to use as the M5, but with a better EVF, I'd definately give it a try.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 3, 2017)

Talys said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > M5/M6 = 80D for those who do/don't want an integral EVF. I think it's perfectly positioned right there -- going upmarket to a 7D2-like 'crop 1DX lite' rig is a leap to me.
> ...



Certainly not 'most'. If every 7D2 owner was shooting wildlife/BiF/sports, it would be a > $2500+ 'crop 1DX' rig built for war, built for superwhites, etc.. It isn't. It's effectively an 80D with a tougher build, slightly higher FPS and better AF, nothing more.

I think a lot of soccer moms and hockey dads get a 7D2 with a kid's odd action need in mind but end up using it at pedestrian standard FLs quite a bit. And when they do, they are forced to choose between slow EF-S STM nonsense, very old and underwhelming EF-S USM lenses, or EF L lenses that straddle common use cases (e.g. an EF 24-70 on crop always had me switching out to my EF-S 10-22mm as the wide end was equivalent 38mm FF or so -- effectively right in the heart of a standard zoom). Crop lacks high end*, first- party, purpose-built standard zooms and ultrawides, unless you consider slapping a 16-35L on one a good substitute.

(*Yes, yes, there are quite sharp and serviceable EF-S lenses, but consider: few are 'last 5 years modern' + USM + faster than f/4.)

And people who want reach also want responsiveness, which means OVF to me. So a high fps EVF-based crop rig just doesn't add up to me.

- A


----------



## mlmcasual (Oct 3, 2017)

Will, if history is any prediction of the future with Canon.. 
It will have poor Dynamic range, no 4K, lag way behind the FujiX T2.. and will cost double what it's worth.


----------



## pwp (Oct 4, 2017)

funkboy said:


> Personally I think that an APS-H size sensor (with e.g 6D-size pixels) would be sufficient for a large-sensor mirrorless camera, & help keep the size & weight down while still being a significant step up from the APS-C crowd.


Nice thought, but the marketing people at Canon wouldn't let this even get past the conversation stage. I have always been a great fan of APS-H, notably the brilliant 1D MkIV, but don't expect for a moment that we'll ever see another APS-H body from Canon.

-pw


----------



## Isaacheus (Oct 4, 2017)

mlmcasual said:


> Will, if history is any prediction of the future with Canon..
> It will have poor Dynamic range, no 4K, lag way behind the FujiX T2.. and will cost double what it's worth.



To be fair, they might put mjpeg 4k in it? 

I think there would be a even bigger complaint cycle if Canon didn't manage to at least improve on the 5d mk4 sensor and capabilities over two years; hopefully this will be a pair to the 5dsr mk2?


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> 1) I thought the M5 and M6 differed only in one getting an integral EVF. (Correct/incorrect?)



The M5 has Touch and Drag Autofocus (where you can control the focus point using the touch screen while viewing through the EVF). This is really useful.

The M6 does not have this feature, *even if you attach the optional electronic viewfinder*.


----------



## vangelismm (Oct 4, 2017)

Without Eye AF track, i will pass.


----------



## bf (Oct 4, 2017)

It has been a long time since we are debating a full frame mirror-less on Canon's line up. When they first came up with EOS M we wanted it to be a full frame. When they left U.S. we wanted them to return with a FF! Still one more year for a rumor that sounds a long time. Looking at Sony's system I'm not that eager about FF mirror-less bodies anymore. Let's see how Nikon does it first!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 4, 2017)

Warren21 said:


> I think we're all in agreement that it will probably be called the M1, and Canon have been rebranding/positioning their EOS M line to match the 'European' EOS naming conventions... See below:
> 
> 1D/M1 - Professional 'Halo' Product/Highest Performance
> 5D/M5 - Professional/High Performance
> ...



Not all of us.

I believe the M series will stay as APS-C. According to your theory, the M6 would be FF, and the m3 would be a high end camera.


I think a new series is needed for a FF mirrorless, the M series consists of entry level or near entry level cameras that are APSC and never intended to be high end.

I could see a FF as a 6DM, I do not think that a 1 series or even a 5 series Mirrorless is yet in the works. It will be entry level FF.


----------



## 1kind (Oct 4, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> I just hope they don't remove DPAF.


Considering DPAF is showing up in newer cameras, I'm guessing its here to stay.


----------



## 1kind (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Warren21 said:
> 
> 
> > 1D/M1 - Professional 'Halo' Product/Highest Performance
> ...


M5 and M6 differed in body style mainly. Specs and internally its all the same. M6 does not have the touch-and-drag focus.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 4, 2017)

bf said:


> Let's see how Nikon does it first!



I'll be (not really) brave here. Nikon FF mirrorless will be:


Skinny new mount (not a full FX mount)
Integral EVF (...only, no OVF / Hybrid setup)
A few lower profile, 'nicer but not best' quality lenses that make the small overall rig size pop the most (35 f/2, 50 f/1.8, etc.) -- native mount lenses might be focus-by-wire only
Adaptor for FX glass
4K: Yes
IBIS: No
Higher fps than you might think for a first go at FF mirrorless (7-8 fps; N1 demonstrated their ability to run high fps, and the D850 shows they can move a ton of data)
They _might_ do something silly and chase a specific standalone mirrorless-only design/control aesthetic and ask for silly money for the privilege, but they ought to mimic their D500/D850 handling and controls if they know what's good for them. They are building a platform that should feel really intuitive to current Nikon users, not chasing some exotic/bougie premium dollar rig with a zany new control scheme.

Only difference from Canon's mirrorless plan? Canon might be practical enough / foolish enough* to release a full EF mount mirrorless setup. I see Nikon playing it safe w.r.t. Sony's established market of 'it's about being smaller, dummy' and going with a thin mount.

_*Depending on where you stand on the FF mirrorless mount debate, which is neverending.
_
- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 4, 2017)

1kind said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > I just hope they don't remove DPAF.
> ...



It's a core, ground floor 100% take-it-to-the-bank-going-to-be-there-on-day-one piece of tech that Canon will build it's FF mirrorless platform around. 

The only way Canon's first FF mirrorless doesn't have DPAF is if some DPAF 2.0 with a different acronym is onboard instead (QPAF for quad-pixel, anyone?). DPAF or something like it is a hammerlock certainty based on the widespread push of that tech across almost the entire platform, especially in how it makes LiveView (aka EVF) focusing truly sing.

- A


----------



## Proscribo (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> 1kind said:
> 
> 
> > -pekr- said:
> ...


Would be sweet, at least in theory.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> 1kind said:
> 
> 
> > -pekr- said:
> ...



Canon has already said that all new sensors will be DPAF, and will also have on sensor A-D conversion. Its a given until something better comes along.

Canon has a recent patent for the problem that affects mirrorless DPAF due to the shallow angle to the outer pixels. This would likely be necessary for a FF Mirrorless that used a short lens-sensor distance, since the angle gets shallower. 

I agree that Manufacturers have a chance to get it right this time, Canon has been edging closer with DPAF, my 5D MK IV and SL2 could pass quite well for a mirrorless camera with a few tweaks, and Canon has now had 3 years to develop them.

If they get it right, it may indeed be true that all future new models will be mirrorless.

As far as FPS, its a combination of sensor readout speed as well as processor power. Sensor readout speed needs something like a multi layer back illuminated sensor to provide a good ground plane so the sensor wells can be emptied very fast. Processor power is linked to the technology used to fab the die and to the size of the battery, heat dissipation is also a issue, and small bodies do not do as well.


----------



## Ryananthony (Oct 4, 2017)

If canon went with a new mount for the FF mirrorless (I hope the dont, and don't think they will) what are the chances AF perormance with EF lenses and an adapter would be better then Sony with a EF adapter? I read that Sony A-mount adapted lenses on E-Mount lose FPS, and don't focus as well as E-mount native. Would it be likely Canon would have better luck?


----------



## bf (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> bf said:
> 
> 
> > Let's see how Nikon does it first!
> ...



I think adaptor defeats the purpose of a mirrorless. In your description Canon will offer a more attractive design. On the other hand, Nikon has been more loyal to its legacy glass.[/list]


----------



## TAF (Oct 4, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > 1kind said:
> ...



Form factor...if they try to squeeze a FF mirrorless into a tiny body, they get the worst of all worlds.

But if they try a totally different form factor, they can overcome all the problems in one quick pass.

Think Hasselblad or Rollei. Something like an SL3003 shape would be ideal. EF mount, plenty of space for heat sinking, batteries, and memory cards, and with the EVF on the top, the ergonomics would be excellent, albeit totally different from what most people are used to.

I would pay good money for that body to use all my nice L glass.


----------



## Isaacheus (Oct 4, 2017)

[quote author=Mt Spokane Photography

Canon has already said that all new sensors will be DPAF, and will also have on sensor A-D conversion. Its a given until something better comes along.

[/quote]

Was this said before or after the 6dmk2 release? As I believe that uses the old off sensor A-D conversion. the promo material also said the sensor was the same tech as the 5dmk4, so it'll be interesting to see what they go with


----------



## tmroper (Oct 4, 2017)

Canon has decades of experience with mirrorless cameras, in the form of camcorders, ENG cameras, and their Cinema cameras. So they're certainly as capable as Sony, who have very similar technical experience with mirrorless, in creating something great. I'm hoping they do.


----------



## dsut4392 (Oct 4, 2017)

TAF said:


> Form factor...if they try to squeeze a FF mirrorless into a tiny body, they get the worst of all worlds.
> 
> But if they try a totally different form factor, they can overcome all the problems in one quick pass.
> 
> ...


 
Because nothing says "ergonomics" like shooting hunched over looking towards the ground? While they are at it, they could charge more if it comes complete with firmware that sets the image to be flipped L-R like a proper waist level finder 
Seriously, if they make this any bigger than it needs to be (determined mostly by flange distance and mount diameter) it's dead in the water. Those that like a bigger grip or more battery life can add an accessory grip, like we used to in the film days. 
As for heat sinking, can we please all stop with the "bigger = better" fallacy? Cameras run into heat issues primarily through poor thermal transfer (i.e. they can't move heat away from the sensor fast enough), not a lack of thermal mass. IBIS would be a particular constraint in this regard, because the sensor module needs to be able to move relative to the rest of the body (which requires a low sensor module mass so the actuators can move it, and an air gap, seriously compromising the thermal path). Increasing the total camera mass will slightly extend the time you can run the camera before it overheats - but if the bottleneck is the thermal path from the sensor, the gain may not be that great. Making a camera more brick shaped is an extremely inefficient way to increase the thermal transfer capacity, because what you need (in the absence of active cooling) is radiant surface area.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 4, 2017)

dsut4392 said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > Form factor...if they try to squeeze a FF mirrorless into a tiny body, they get the worst of all worlds.
> ...



+100 

Instead of boxy and cubic, cameras could also be made neatly ball-shaped :  - so we could throw them up in the air and capture photos while doing so ... without any ergonomic hassles ... https://www.panono.com/en
 ;D  :


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 4, 2017)

dsut4392 said:


> Seriously, if they make this any bigger than it needs to be (determined mostly by flange distance and mount diameter) it's dead in the water. Those that like a bigger grip or more battery life can add an accessory grip, like we used to in the film days.
> As for heat sinking, can we please all stop with the "bigger = better" fallacy? Cameras run into heat issues primarily through poor thermal transfer (i.e. they can't move heat away from the sensor fast enough), not a lack of thermal mass. IBIS would be a particular constraint in this regard, because the sensor module needs to be able to move relative to the rest of the body (which requires a low sensor module mass so the actuators can move it, and an air gap, seriously compromising the thermal path). Increasing the total camera mass will slightly extend the time you can run the camera before it overheats - but if the bottleneck is the thermal path from the sensor, the gain may not be that great. Making a camera more brick shaped is an extremely inefficient way to increase the thermal transfer capacity, because what you need (in the absence of active cooling) is radiant surface area.



Well said!


----------



## littleB (Oct 4, 2017)

dsut4392 said:


> As for heat sinking, can we please all stop with the "bigger = better" fallacy? Cameras run into heat issues primarily through poor thermal transfer (i.e. they can't move heat away from the sensor fast enough), not a lack of thermal mass. IBIS would be a particular constraint in this regard, because the sensor module needs to be able to move relative to the rest of the body (which requires a low sensor module mass so the actuators can move it, and an air gap, seriously compromising the thermal path). Increasing the total camera mass will slightly extend the time you can run the camera before it overheats - but if the bottleneck is the thermal path from the sensor, the gain may not be that great. Making a camera more brick shaped is an extremely inefficient way to increase the thermal transfer capacity, because what you need (in the absence of active cooling) is radiant surface area.


You must be a specialist in heat conduction science to use such kind of wording, like fallacy and such reasoning. 
Please explain me, how smaller sized object of the same shape and same materials would have larger heat radiation.
Block shaped camers have more radiation surface than ball-shaped ones. Bigger cameras have more radiation surface and more heat transfer opportunities inside the body than smaller ones of similar shape. Bigger size, same shape =bigger surface = bigger heat radiation. 
Take litlle heat-efficient camera as is, all technology except heat dissipation, increase its size and make heat dissilation system more efficient. Use liquids, use silver. The result will be less overheating. 

You also arbitrarily mix mass and size. These are not the same.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 4, 2017)

littleB said:


> You must be a specialist in heat conduction science to use such kind of wording, like fallacy and such reasoning.
> Please explain me, how smaller sized object of the same shape and same materials would have larger heat radiation.
> Block shaped camers have more radiation surface than ball-shaped ones. Bigger cameras have more radiation surface and more heat transfer opportunities inside the body than smaller ones of similar shape. Bigger size, same shape =bigger surface = bigger heat radiation.



No, I don't want a big fat camera brick as handwarmer. Big outer shell is meaningless for efficient thermal design of a camera. I want a small camera without any video capture [other than video-feed needed for LCD and EVF]. No 4k, no thermal issues even in a FF camera as small as a Sony RX-1R II.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 4, 2017)

littleB said:


> Please explain me, how smaller sized object of the same shape and same materials would have larger heat radiation.


Ratio of surface area to volume. A principle of physics that a 12-year old would understand.




littleB said:


> Bigger cameras have more radiation surface and more heat transfer opportunities inside the body than smaller ones of similar shape.
> Bigger size, same shape =bigger surface = bigger heat radiation.


It is about ratios. Bigger bodies hold more volume to retain the heat compared to the amount of surface radiating heat. It is why big animals overheat more than little animals - it is why elephants need huge ears to lose heat and mice do not. It is why little mammals need to eat more so they can maintain body temperature because they are losing heat more rapidly.
Basic biology.




littleB said:


> Take litlle heat-efficient camera as is, all technology except heat dissipation, increase its size and make heat dissilation system more efficient. Use liquids, use silver. The result will be less overheating.


But you said that big bodies have more radiating surface so on your theory you would not need a more efficient heat dissipation.
Do you want water slopping around in your camera? I don't. 
Use silver? Why?


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 4, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> I want a small camera without any video capture [other than video-feed needed for LCD and EVF].



Not going to happen. You may not want video, but a significant % of the market do. I use video less than 1% of the time I use my camera, but I wouldn't buy another serious camera that didn't include it.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Oct 4, 2017)

Hilarious to think the 6DII sensor would even be considered. The camera would be DOA if they made that mistake again. Another site has reported sensors between 36 and 48MP are being tested, but they need more than a good sensor for it to succeed. What compelling reason will they give us to use this, especially if it retains EF mount. Will they finally get serious about 4K video, what shooting speed and will the AF be competitive with the best out there like A9, will be feature rich rather than gimped in typical Canon fashion.

The good news Nikon will be first cab off the rank and it will be very interesting to see what their vision is for FF mirrorless, given they were saying they will make best camera in the market.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 4, 2017)

That's exciting. Just hope they will keep the EF mount.


----------



## dolina (Oct 4, 2017)

Unpopular opinion but is diversifying to a lot of camera SKUs really wise in a market environment that has been shrinking for nearly a decade?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 4, 2017)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Hilarious to think the 6DII sensor would even be considered. The camera would be DOA if they made that mistake again. Another site has reported sensors between 36 and 48MP are being tested, but they need more than a good sensor for it to succeed. What compelling reason will they give us to use this, especially if it retains EF mount. Will they finally get serious about 4K video, what shooting speed and will the AF be competitive with the best out there like A9, will be feature rich rather than gimped in typical Canon fashion.



You appear to define success at _being competitively spec'd_. As Canon has repeatedly shown, the best spec'd rig per dollar does not sell the best.

As much as I don't want them to do this, *I have the utmost confidence that dropping the 6D2 sensor into a well designed mirrorless rig would sell just fine*. We might pillory them on a forum for doing it, but it would sell very, very well. Hear me out.

My argument: there is a small but growing highly energized portion of the Canon userbase that very much wants a mirrorless rig beyond what EOS M can do -- be it a higher-end EOS M rig or a FF rig. Tired of waiting for Canon, they have rented (or outright bought) a competitive mirrorless rig, either a Fuji or Sony most likely. For whatever reason, be it the Fuji sensor size or poor Sony ergonomics/controls/lens options, those systems do not completely scratch the itch for them and they have either lived with multiple systems (and pined for one to unite them all) or they simply returned to Canon for its lenses, ergonomics, reliability, etc.

The take-home message here? There are folks who love Canon for everything it offers more than the value proposition / potential return of investment of moving to a new system. Canon owns these people. _Anything basically competent and well-designed that Canon offers will have these folks pre-ordering on day one._

That is why a 6D2 sensor dropped into a mirrorless rig -- be it a nice thin one that someday might adapt Nikkor or Canon FD glass OR a full EF mount design that is a seamless 2nd body for the hordes of current Canon FF shooters -- would sell just fine.

- A


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 4, 2017)

Jopa said:


> That's exciting. Just hope they will keep the EF mount.



I think a new mount is more and more likely.

The majority of buyers won't have an arsenal of old lenses they want to use, and they have to consider how to market a new camera vs competition from Nikon, Sony, etc.

A heavier camera using heavier lenses and, added to this, a bunch of these lenses (with older focusing motors) that really don't perform as well as they should on mirrorless either due to focus speed or due to noise - this will not do well for Canon in the inevitable head-to-head reviews. Sure you'll buy one, but will anyone else?

I'd be twice as likely to buy a camera with a new mount than with EF.


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Mr Majestyk said:
> 
> 
> > Hilarious to think the 6DII sensor would even be considered. The camera would be DOA if they made that mistake again. Another site has reported sensors between 36 and 48MP are being tested, but they need more than a good sensor for it to succeed. What compelling reason will they give us to use this, especially if it retains EF mount. Will they finally get serious about 4K video, what shooting speed and will the AF be competitive with the best out there like A9, will be feature rich rather than gimped in typical Canon fashion.
> ...



Canon would get publicly devastated for putting 6DII sensor into the mirrorless whatever. We can bet on that. Everyone knows they can do better than the 6DII sensor and we are talking a camera at least one year away. I can guarantee you, that FF mirrorless is so important to them, that there is exactly a zero chance for them to do such a marketing mistake again ....


----------



## Etienne (Oct 4, 2017)

Exciting, sure. But it's probably two years before you can get your hands on this camera.
Sony might have all my mirrorless money before this camera hits the shelves.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 4, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> I think a new mount is more and more likely.
> 
> The majority of buyers won't have an arsenal of old lenses they want to use
> 
> ...



(truncated your quote above)

Speaking to those bits, I fully get why some want a new mount. I still can't tell what Canon will do -- there are upsides and downsides to either a skinny or full mount depending on how/what you shoot.

But I'm sure you get that newer FF lenses will be just as big and as heavy as they are for FF SLRs, minus perhaps a 5-10% weight savings with better engineering plastics substituting for some historically metal parts. But physics is physics: a mirrorless version of (say) a 35mm f/1.4 or 24-70 2.8 will probably be just as big and heavy as the EF variant unless Canon wants to throw IQ out the window and dramatically simplify the design for size and weight reasons. 

Much more likely -- if Canon goes with a new mount -- f/2 IS will replace f/1.4 primes and f/4 IS will replace f/2.8 zooms in the new system to much more directly manage size and weight. I'd be stunned if Canon jumped right into a new mount with max aperture glass similar to the priciest L lenses. They will keep it small and allow folks to adapt their pricey L glass if so desired.

And when you say arsenal of older lenses, sure, the FD adapting crowd will be a tiny userbase. But folks who want to use their older EF glass will be legion as Canon will simply not offer certain things in the new mount. People will slap their trusty old 24-70 f/2.8L I, 180mm Macro, 5x Macro, T/S, etc. lenses on their from day one of this system's release. 

- A


----------



## funkboy (Oct 4, 2017)

pwp said:


> funkboy said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I think that an APS-H size sensor (with e.g 6D-size pixels) would be sufficient for a large-sensor mirrorless camera, & help keep the size & weight down while still being a significant step up from the APS-C crowd.
> ...



I agree they'd shoot down APS-H if it's an interchangeable lens camera, but if it's a super-powershot (for which they've done custom oddball-sized sensors before)...

16ish really good APS-H MP with a 24-100 f/2.8-4.5ish (equiv.) lens in a compact integrated powershot body would be pretty fantastic. 135mm would be even better on the long end but I'd consider 100mm the minimum telephoto equivalent for such a camera.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 4, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> Canon would get publicly devastated in camera forums and enthusiast photography websites for putting 6DII sensor into the mirrorless whatever. We can bet on that. Everyone knows they can do better than the 6DII sensor and we are talking a camera at least one year away. I can guarantee you, that FF mirrorless is so important to them, that there is exactly a zero chance for them to do such a marketing design decision mistake again ....



Amended that for you. 

I'd like to ask the forum a question: can anyone connect positive sensor scores with higher sales (or lower sensor scores with lower sales) for me?

With some variability, Leica continues to offer relatively ordinary / mundane FF sensors yet they are not being consumed by the better tech below. Luxe branding and apple-like commodity fetishism aren't the sole reason why they sell at the prices they do. Their cameras are really well made, have a unique (rangefinder) userbase almost cornered, and and offer some wonderful optics for those that don't mind fighting through MF lens use.

Canon has been behind EXMOR and the various licensed incarnations of it (specifically on the low ISO end that gets them punished in DXO-like scoring) for years yet it continues to the lead the market in sales.

I contend that folks on camera forums care about sensors -- specifically base ISO DR -- so much more than just about every camera market level's actual userbase does. It matters, don't get me wrong, but I think it matters far far less than the bigger picture of ecosystem, lenses, ergonomics, reliability, service, etc.

In full disclosure, I continue to shake my head that the on-chip ADC hotness worthy of an 80D appears to have been left out of the 6D2 sensor. I believe it was a poor decision for that market segment. But I have yet to see any negative sales numbers from Canon or big price reduction that would imply the sensor inside is hurting its sales.

- A


----------



## unfocused (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > I think a new mount is more and more likely.
> ...



Agreed. Not sure why anyone would think that buyers would be completely new to the Canon system and not already have a significant investment in lenses. Any full frame camera is targeted to people who are already Canon customers. 

I have to wonder if a better and more likely alternative for those who want the smallest lenses possible, might be an expanded range of pancake primes.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > Canon would get publicly devastated in camera forums and enthusiast photography websites for putting 6DII sensor into the mirrorless whatever. We can bet on that. Everyone knows they can do better than the 6DII sensor and we are talking a camera at least one year away. I can guarantee you, that FF mirrorless is so important to them, that there is exactly a zero chance for them to do such a marketing design decision mistake again ....
> ...



Agree also with this. On the other hand, I expect that when the mythical full-frame unicorn mirrorless finally arrives, it will not be an under $2,000 item, but closer in price the 5DIV. So, while I don't believe Canon made a "mistake" in using the sensor it did for its entry-level full-frame DSLR, I do believe that they will not put a bargain sensor in a high-end mirrorless.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 4, 2017)

unfocused said:


> Agree also with this. On the other hand, I expect that when the mythical full-frame unicorn mirrorless finally arrives, it will not be an under $2,000 item, but closer in price the 5DIV. So, while I don't believe Canon made a "mistake" in using the sensor it did for its entry-level full-frame DSLR, I do believe that they will not put a bargain sensor in a high-end mirrorless.



Entirely possible.

I still think they will start modestly and climb up from a 6D2-like feature set over time, but it is entirely possible they chase margins with something pricey. They could go after either higher-end 5D/5DS-level users or (gulp) put out a prestige-y showpiece to one percenters for huge dollars (think Leica Q, Nikon Df, Sony RX1R, etc. possibly a fixed lens, etc.). 

Whichever way they go, I expect the mirrorless variant of whatever they release to cost more than the SLR variant it was based on for a host of reason (newness/firstness, lower volumes will need a higher sales price for margins, etc.).

- A


----------



## infared (Oct 4, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Majestyk said:
> ...



um...you may underestimate Canon's arrogance. Anything is possible. 
For instance:
Canon could clearly have offered the 5DIV in AA and non-AA filter versions just to satisfy all of us committed lens holders. They did not. 
There are many many more examples of simple accommodations on their very expensive cameras over the years, that competitors have had (like image bracketing abilities on the 5DII, etc.) that clearly should have been included on the camera. I am not talking huge new sensors...etc..
Every body I have bought I have said...I can't believe I paid $3500 for this body that some feature is limited or does not have a feature that is on entry level cameras. 
It cannot be oversight. I chalk it up to arrogance and increasing their profit margin. I am sure that everyone here knows the kinds of omissions I am talking about. I am not saying why didn't the 5DIV have a sensor comparable to the Sony...I am saying ..... why did they not offer the existing sensor with and without AA Filter. I LOT of people would have bought the latter.
There is no excuse for that in 2017. 
...but as the man said above... I still bought the camera. ... I just do not like the Canon corporation and a lot of their decisions.
I own Olympus cameras, too....And they always give more than I expect. Not less.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 4, 2017)

dolina said:


> Unpopular opinion but is diversifying to a lot of camera SKUs really wise in a market environment that has been shrinking for nearly a decade?



I think Canon is willing to have more than the optimal number of bodies in production now as the price of transitioning to mirrorless only, say within less than a decade.

Which is why I'm very much hoping the lens mount on any new FF mirrorless remains EF. 

As for the sensor, maybe asked and answered, but doesn't the FF form factor need a sensor with curved edges in order to utilize the EF mount without needing a short "chimney" to space the rear element away from the sensor?


----------



## FramerMCB (Oct 4, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Warren21 said:
> 
> 
> > I think we're all in agreement that it will probably be called the M1, and Canon have been rebranding/positioning their EOS M line to match the 'European' EOS naming conventions... See below:
> ...



I agree. I believe a FF Mirrorless rig from Canon will necessitate a brand new line for marketing/differentiation and clearer/cleaner branding. I would be somewhat shocked if Canon branded this new FF mirrorless rig in their "M" line up. I have no idea about what the new naming convention might be other than to be similar to their DSLR branding: 1DX - FF/top-of-the-line/best; 5Dxx - FF/pro/loaded; 6Dxx - FF/entry level; xxD - pro-sumer/upmarket amateurs/great feature set. And the question on everyone's mind, and one that several have suggested an answer to already, is where in the line-up will their first FF mirrorless model fall? I think it will be somewhere between the 5D IV and the 6D II as far as build and feature set. I say this as I don't expect them, at least for the first few years, to have more than 2-3 models. So the first here, with plans for a professional grade introduced about 1 year later.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 4, 2017)

YuengLinger said:


> As for the sensor, maybe asked and answered, but doesn't the FF form factor need a sensor with curved edges in order to utilize the EF mount without needing a short "chimney" to space the rear element away from the sensor?



EF lens compatibility with a future FF mirrorless mount is 99% likely to be:


*A full EF mount with a flat (traditional) sensor* -- the full flange distance we see on our FF SLRs. This will be done with either a full-blown FF SLR style body (perhaps for handling familiarity to existing users who want a seamless transition between the primary SLR and backup mirrorless body) or possibly a thinner smaller body with a built-in 'chimney'/protrusion in just the lens mount area to maintain the proper spacing (the recent Sigma APS-H Quatro platform does this).


*A thinner than EF mount with flat (traditional) sensor* -- this will be like the A7/A9 platform and require an adaptor to 'get back' the full flange distance of the EF mount.

Notice that list does not include a curved sensor. There's a huge opportunity to reduce lens size, weight and complexity with a curved sensor, but one would think it would _dramatically _complicate EF lens compatibility. If I understand the curved sensor sales pitch, it would only work in the 2nd (thin body) option above and the corresponding adaptor would have to invert/account for the flat plane of the EF image circle to have it work well on the curved sensor behind it. For that reason, I don't think any platform that must work with a large number of existing lenses (i.e. Canon or Nikon's new mirrorless platforms) will opt for a curved sensor. 

Curved sensors will happen someday, but surely it will be in a fixed lens setup at first or standalone ILC system before someone embarks on an ambitious new FF system with it. 

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> If I understand the curved sensor sales pitch, it would only work in the 2nd (thin body) option above and the corresponding adaptor would have to invert/account for the flat plane of the EF image circle to have it work well on the curved sensor behind it.



Recall that Canon filed a patent for a sensor with variable curvature which could be altered 'on the fly', because different focal lengths would optimally need different sensor curvatures. One end of the range of possible curvatures in the patent was zero, i.e. flat. So, a sensor that could be varied from flat to curved would be directly compatible with EF lenses and newly-designed lenses for a curved sensor.


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> a skinny or full mount depending on how/what you shoot.
> 
> Much more likely -- if Canon goes with a new mount -- f/2 IS will replace f/1.4 primes and f/4 IS will replace f/2.8 zooms in the new system to much more directly manage size and weight. I'd be stunned if Canon jumped right into a new mount with max aperture glass similar to the priciest L lenses. They will keep it small and allow folks to adapt their pricey L glass if so desired.
> 
> ...



You're right. Smaller, slower, lighter lenses will be the default options for this form factor. And that's just fine for most people. My primary lens on the A7RII is the Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 - because it's a stunning performer optically. 

Of course, I could carry a 35mm f/1.4L II on my 5DSR around my neck all day, but would I use it as much as I do the lighter combo? No. Would I enjoy using it as much? probably not.

Photography is about taking photos, and different kit is appropriate for different people. I have no doubt that a large full-frame EF-mount mirrorless would be popular with many people, but it's not my preferred choice.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 4, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > If I understand the curved sensor sales pitch, it would only work in the 2nd (thin body) option above and the corresponding adaptor would have to invert/account for the flat plane of the EF image circle to have it work well on the curved sensor behind it.
> ...



A+, yes, variable curvature sensor would solve this EF compatibility zanyness.

But goodness, do you see a company jumping from [rigid / flat] all the way to [flexible / variably curved] on a first foray into curved sensors? Wouldn't a layup of a curved sensor fixed lens rig be a logical place to tinker with a curved sensor before swinging for the fences?

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



I don't think we'll see curved sensors in production models for quite some time, not in MILCs or fixed-lens models.


----------



## Machaon (Oct 4, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re still being told not to expect an announcement until at least August of 2018 ahead of Photokina in Cologne, Germany.


Way too late to the FF mirrorless game.
My money has already gone into another system. While I still have a Canon DSLR, I can’t see myself buying another or Canon selling me any more camera systems in the future.
After 15 years in the EOS system, it is a shame that they were so reluctant to offer FF mirrorless.
Best of luck to them, though.


----------



## dak723 (Oct 4, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> I contend that folks on camera forums care about sensors -- specifically base ISO DR -- so much more than just about every camera market level's actual userbase does. It matters, don't get me wrong, but I think it matters far far less than the bigger picture of ecosystem, lenses, ergonomics, reliability, service, etc.
> 
> In full disclosure, I continue to shake my head that the on-chip ADC hotness worthy of an 80D appears to have been left out of the 6D2 sensor. I believe it was a poor decision for that market segment. But I have yet to see any negative sales numbers from Canon or big price reduction that would imply the sensor inside is hurting its sales.
> 
> - A



I believe you are correct - that non-forum photographers would say that the IQ of every ILC camera is virtually identical, so why care about the sensor. On a more personal note, when I started coming onto the forum here all I heard about was how much better the Sony sensors were compared to Canon's. Having just bought a 6D, I was somewhat upset. after a while, when the Sony A7 II came out, I decided to get one to replace my obviously inferior 6D. What I found out was that there was absolutely not one thing the Sony did better and there was no difference in the side-by-side photos I took with the two cameras. So there is very good reason that non-forum folks shouldn't care about the sensors. 

The above also answers why the 6D II will almost certainly be a success. Because unless you are obsessed with things that really don't matter much (DR and noise) you will find that the pics form the 6D II are fantastic - just as the pics from the 6d are. It's funny, I see lot of folks making DR comparisons and automatically assuming that more DR makes for a better photograph. And yet when you see photos with a lot of DR (including but not only HDR shots) they are flat, washed out and not nearly as good a shot (in my opinion, obviously) as photos with more contrast and less DR. Unfortunately, on forums such as this one, people are far more interested in test numbers and noise comparisons than on how good the photos actually look.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 4, 2017)

dak723 said:


> It's funny, I see lot of folks making DR comparisons and automatically assuming that more DR makes for a better photograph. And yet when you see photos with a lot of DR (including but not only HDR shots) they are flat, washed out and not nearly as good a shot (in my opinion, obviously) as photos with more contrast and less DR. Unfortunately, on forums such as this one, people are far more interested in test numbers and noise comparisons than on how good the photos actually look.



First, you should understand what more DR in a sensor really is. 

It is a sensor with less low ISO noise. That's all. It has nothing to do with those weird (some love them) HDR images.

The advantage from such a sensor comes when you need to boost shadow areas in post processing. You will see less noise when you do this. It can be useful for cases where a bride is wearing a white dress and a groom is dressed in black. If the image is exposed perfectly on the white dress, the black suit might benefit from lifting the dark areas. Thats the practical usage and real benefit.


----------



## danski0224 (Oct 4, 2017)

scrup said:


> Long time to wait. A7rii are approaching 2k mark on the grey markets.



Yup.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Oct 5, 2017)

Machaon said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > We’re still being told not to expect an announcement until at least August of 2018 ahead of Photokina in Cologne, Germany.
> ...



I shoot mostly wedding and I know alot of wedding photographers who haven't made the switch to Sony yet because we value reliability, dual SD, and ergonomic. Other haven't switch because of glasses. Sony lens are expensive especially if you buy Canon L used/refurbish. A9 was an viable alternative but only recently, but it is still expensive, and AF performance with adapter lens or buy expensive native lens. Maybe the A7III or future Sony camera may address these concerns.

If Canon come out with a 5D Mark IV mirror less version with full EF lens compatibility while offering incremental increases in performance with good battery life, ergonomic, dual SD, I'm sure alot of people would upgrade. Otherwise, my 5D Mark IV get the job done until Sony/Canon have offering FF mirrorless that appeal to me.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 5, 2017)

bokehmon22 said:


> I shoot mostly wedding and I know alot of wedding photographers who haven't made the switch to Sony yet because we value reliability, dual SD, and ergonomic. Other haven't switch because of glasses. Sony lens are expensive especially if you buy Canon L used/refurbish. A9 was an viable alternative but only recently, but it is still expensive, and AF performance with adapter lens or buy expensive native lens. Maybe the A7III or future Sony camera may address these concerns.



I see Sony as the Borg from Star Trek on their mirrorless ambitions. They are not nuanced and they are not crafty, but they systematically try to eliminate the reasons why you wouldn't try the A7 platform:

(move from A7 I bodies to A7 II bodies) You want better AF? Here's four jillion AF points.

(at first) Want more lenses right now? We'll work with the adaptor folks and drive EF lenses' AF.

(later) Want more pro speed zooms and primes? Here you are. (At staple/modest FLs, of course, this is clearly a long climb to EF/FX parity.)

So you lens adapting folks and videographers want IBIS? Here you go.

Oh, you want a camera with _everything_? Meet the A7R II.

Want a pro body with two cards? Here's the A9.

However, nowhere in there are they applying any wisdom or accumulated experience of working photographers. I expect the A7 III platform to have another round of Borg-like feature-based reasons why people don't use the system -- better performance with glasses, more lenses, more tech/MP/fps/video features, etc. But I still think they'll drive past things that matter useability / ergonomics-wise to Canon and Nikon folks. So I believe the A7 III platform will be droolworthy hardware with frustrating inherited DNA (focus by wire pro glass) and inexplicable design decisions (grip, finger spacing, interface, etc.), but I could be wrong.

- A


----------



## lucuias (Oct 5, 2017)

Hope this have either similar performance with 5Dmark IV sensor or better.6DMk2 sensor is just a joke as of 2017


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 5, 2017)

lucuias said:


> Hope this have either similar performance with 5Dmark IV sensor or better.6DMk2 sensor is just a joke as of 2017



exactly. 

Actually even 5D IV sensor would be the bare minimum for a 2018 Canon FF mirrorless camera ... which for sure will not be sold cheap. I actually expect it to be priced even higher than 5D IV.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 5, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> However, nowhere in there are they applying any wisdom or accumulated experience of working photographers.



I have seen a couple of reviews of the A9 saying that it seems Sony is listening to comments from photographers regards interface and functionality - but, boy, has it taken them time to do so. About the major criticism of the Sony NEX range, and one reason I and many others did not buy it, was the bloody awful interface; if people criticise Canon for not listening then IMO Sony make them look like Dr Phil.

So if Sony do genuinely go that down the line and they start breaking that haptics barrier it will put that little bit more pressure on Canon.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 5, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > However, nowhere in there are they applying any wisdom or accumulated experience of working photographers.
> ...



I see that a bit more differentiated ... and would state it "the other way round": one of the few things Canon currently does really well in comparison to Sony is the user interface ... but only for "full EOS interface" = rear thumbwheel and AF point selector joystick/nipple = 7D, 5D, 1D series. 

Rebel class, xxD and 6D II are already much weaker and the UI presented by "Powershot" firmware is flawed in many ways, only menu structure and touch LCD functionality (when present) is very good. And Canon EOS M5 flip-down LCD is a total fail in terms of usability and ergonomics.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 5, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> why you wouldn't try the A7 platform



Why would you try the A7 platform if your existing platform ain't broken?


----------



## noncho (Oct 5, 2017)

M5 would be the highest crop class -> I'm so happy that I sold M system then.


----------



## BillB (Oct 5, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> bokehmon22 said:
> 
> 
> > I shoot mostly wedding and I know alot of wedding photographers who haven't made the switch to Sony yet because we value reliability, dual SD, and ergonomic. Other haven't switch because of glasses. Sony lens are expensive especially if you buy Canon L used/refurbish. A9 was an viable alternative but only recently, but it is still expensive, and AF performance with adapter lens or buy expensive native lens. Maybe the A7III or future Sony camera may address these concerns.
> ...



One thing that doesn't seem to change much (with the exception of the A9) is the asking price of around $3000. Sony seems determined to come up with a mirrorless fullframe camera that will sell well for that price by raising the specs with each model. Not sure that strategy is working that all that well for them. Also not sure that copying Sony's strategy will be all that appealing to Canon or Nikon.


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 5, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > Canon would get publicly devastated in camera forums and enthusiast photography websites for putting 6DII sensor into the mirrorless whatever. We can bet on that. Everyone knows they can do better than the 6DII sensor and we are talking a camera at least one year away. I can guarantee you, that FF mirrorless is so important to them, that there is exactly a zero chance for them to do such a marketing design decision mistake again ....
> ...



Thank you for amending my main point! 

As for the rest - we might not see any negative sales numbers, but that does not mean it went unnoticed. IIRC it was Marco Nero on DPR, who talked to some Canon rep, stating, that they "did not expect the sh*tload they received". 

And that says it rather well imo. One could call Canon being just arrogant thinking that users are stupid, but I actually think, that it is even worse - Canon are just dinosaurs. They thought that it is OK to go into a basemend, dig-up the old sensor tech, usb 2.0 micro connector, etc., just to clear-up some old stock left.

When was it for the last time the world was excited for Canon actually innovating, not playing just a catch up game? 300D, 5D2, 7D2, 70D (first DPAF) ... anything else? I don't mind Canon being conservative and not living on the bleeding edge, but the 6DII was just too much to swallow. 

With the FF mirrorless, they can't do such a compromise as on the 6DII. It would be a fiasco.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> When was it for the last time the world was excited for Canon actually innovating, not playing just a catch up game?



You're right...everyone and their brother makes tilt-shift-macro lenses. There are lots of rectilinear FF lenses that 'go to 11' (mm), and fisheye zooms are a dime-a-dozen. Meanwhile, all those companies to which you think Canon must play a catch up game, are losing ILC market share...to Canon. Fiasco, indeed.


----------



## BillB (Oct 5, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > When was it for the last time the world was excited for Canon actually innovating, not playing just a catch up game?
> ...



Not to mention touch screen focussing based on dual pixel technology, but that is a much bigger deal for some people than it is for others. Nobody else is even on the playing field in that game, speaking of mirrorless/Liveview technologies.


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 5, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > When was it for the last time the world was excited for Canon actually innovating, not playing just a catch up game?
> ...



It's just a question of perception. You most probably belong to the apologist gang 

While I say - no way Canon gets my money for the 6DII just for what they did to its sensor (as we all know, thay can do better), your reply is - wake me up, once competing brands have tilt-shift lenses and even the 6DII is selling like a hotcake so what. I don't care for ppl buying whatever Canon throws at them, as far as it does not fit my bill. 

OTOH I am a lazy dog to switch brands, so we decided so safe a bit and go with the 5DIV, thinking of getting M6 for an amusement and wishing Canon not screwing FF MILC, so that I can have another gadget to dream of


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> It's just a question of perception. You most probably belong to the apologist gang



Indeed, it is a question of perception. There are those who perceive 'innovation' to be only that which delivers something they personally want...and you most probably belong to that gang. Others, myself included, are able to view innovation in the broader context. Personally, I have no use or desire for a fisheye lens, but I can recognize innovation even when it doesn't personally benefit me. I'm also an optimist...I believe that people who have a narrow-minded viewpoint can someday learn to perceive with a more open mind.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 5, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> As for the rest - we might not see any negative sales numbers, but that does not mean it went unnoticed. IIRC it was Marco Nero on DPR, who talked to some Canon rep, stating, that they "did not expect the sh*tload they received".
> 
> And that says it rather well imo. One could call Canon being just arrogant thinking that users are stupid, but I actually think, that it is even worse - Canon are just dinosaurs. They thought that it is OK to go into a basemend, dig-up the old sensor tech, usb 2.0 micro connector, etc., just to clear-up some old stock left.
> 
> ...



I don't think it is Canon being dinosaurs. If you think about it the 6D2 is really the only mistake they have made in many years. People have criticised Canon for 6+ years for not 'innovating' by which they mean 'a sensor with the DR of a Sony camera' but they keep on selling by making significant, if less flashy, developments elsewhere. Even all this clamour about 4k is merely fluff in the context of the market as a whole and even then only in the last 12 months. But what the 6D2 did do was lend a whole can of gasoline to the fire that is the myth that Canon do not innovate - and it is a myth. 'But you are the market leader and by definition you have to include in your camera everything...absolutely everything...that all the competition does. It is our right a customers that you give it to us' 

I think when Canon started developing the sensor on the 6D2 had a very specific idea in how they wanted it to improve on the 6D, but in the time it takes to develop a camera the market took a sharp turn and merely being a '6D that is better' (which is what 6D users actually wanted) is not enough. Add to this the way that social media has become a hunting ground in so many social areas (not just cameras) for the baying mobs who think anyone who does not agree with them is destined to burn in hell or go into bankruptcy for daring to ignore them and Canon have suffered trial by internet. 

I don't think they will make that mistake again and their response will be very interesting. If they do not respond positively then I think the 'dinosaurs' comment will start to be relevant.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Oct 5, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > When was it for the last time the world was excited for Canon actually innovating, not playing just a catch up game?
> ...


Well to be fair, those are all niche products that would probably only be of interest to photographers specialising in that area. I think the point of the remark was that Canon often appear to be catching up with the competition. If you take mirrorless cameras for example, where it has taken Canon a long time to come up with some credible products, or video where Panasonic and Sony seem to be quite a long way ahead.
For stills photography - fine I think Canon has an excellent choice of products, but these days consumers expect something more than that.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 5, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > -pekr- said:
> ...



With the 6D2 they gave people almost everything that had been asked for as an improvement on the 6D (flexible screen, more AF points, more resolution, higher fps, etc - even a lower price!). I think you're missing the wood for the low ISO DR tree.



-pekr- said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > -pekr- said:
> ...



And you clearly belong to the exaggeration gang.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 5, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > -pekr- said:
> ...



Market leaders don't need to innovate as much, that's just how it is. But as others have said, they do innovate, just not in the way you or some other vocal critics want. No company can be all things to all people


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 5, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> Well to be fair, those are all niche products



You mean like 4K video and 13-stop DR sensors? Nice if you have them....but need them? That is niche. 
Pekr is right - it is perception. But perception has become increasingly important. Can you imagine the reaction if Canon released a 'pro grade' camera body for the die hard wildlife photographer and said 'by the way, guys, it is not very well weather sealed and we don't have any lenses you need so you will have to use someone else's. But you can take great video'.
Sony has been into making cameras for over a decade. They bought Minolta who have been in the industry for nigh on a century - and they still don't know how to build a camera system? Yet somehow Sony get a free pass.


----------



## BillB (Oct 5, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Ian_of_glos said:
> 
> 
> > Well to be fair, those are all niche products
> ...



Free pass from some of the internet crowd, not all of whom put their money where their mouth is.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Oct 5, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> bokehmon22 said:
> 
> 
> > I shoot mostly wedding and I know alot of wedding photographers who haven't made the switch to Sony yet because we value reliability, dual SD, and ergonomic. Other haven't switch because of glasses. Sony lens are expensive especially if you buy Canon L used/refurbish. A9 was an viable alternative but only recently, but it is still expensive, and AF performance with adapter lens or buy expensive native lens. Maybe the A7III or future Sony camera may address these concerns.
> ...



I have no idea what is taking Sony so long to deliver the death blow to Canon if they address things that's important to working professional such as ergonomic, reliability, dual SD, and increase AF performance with adapter lens. A9 showed they listened but it's too expensive. They need a camera around 5D Mark IV price point to address all these problem instead of $4500 camera. 

If the Sony A7III series can deliver most of these points at $3000 price point, alot of people like myself would switch and put pressure on Canon.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 5, 2017)

scyrene said:


> ...Market leaders don't need to innovate as much, that's just how it is. But as others have said, they do innovate, just not in the way you or some other vocal critics want. No company can be all things to all people



This is a very valid point, but can be easily distorted. Market leaders do innovate. In fact, they are often the most innovative in their field. But, at the same time, new innovations tend to build on past innovations and have a cumulative effect. So, each successive generation of innovation may slip under the radar screen. 

Companies that are struggling to gain market share need to focus on attention-grabbing innovations, even at the risk of releasing products that are not quite ready for prime time.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 5, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > -pekr- said:
> ...



ILCs now became niche products. Smartphones are the cameras for the masses


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2017)

bokehmon22 said:


> I have no idea what is taking Sony so long to deliver the death blow to Canon...



It may take Sony quite a long time to deliver that death blow, given their 'weapons'...


----------



## Jopa (Oct 5, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > When was it for the last time the world was excited for Canon actually innovating, not playing just a catch up game?
> ...



You forgot DPAF - there is no better AF solution for video, stellar lightweight DO optics, highest resolution FF sensor on the market. It's all BS, hard to call it _innovation_


----------



## Jopa (Oct 5, 2017)

bokehmon22 said:


> I have no idea what is taking Sony so long to deliver the death blow to Canon if they address things that's important to working professional such as ergonomic, reliability, dual SD, and increase AF performance with adapter lens. A9 showed they listened but it's too expensive. They need a camera around 5D Mark IV price point to address all these problem instead of $4500 camera.
> 
> If the Sony A7III series can deliver most of these points at $3000 price point, alot of people like myself would switch and put pressure on Canon.



The A9 doesn't even support a flicker detection, how can it be a pro camera?

Can someone please explain me what's the benefit of switching one brand FF camera to another brand one besides losing money spent on lenses and repurchasing another set of lenses?


----------



## dak723 (Oct 5, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Ian_of_glos said:
> 
> 
> > Well to be fair, those are all niche products
> ...



Sony gets a free pass from the those interested primarily in tech - because they include all the tech bells and whistles.

As a photographer that is not interested in tech, but rather interested mainly in what my photos look like, I am most interested in the quality of the color. Since this is subjective, it can't be debated with numbers and there can't be a "winner." Having winning numbers, whether it is DR, or MPs is important to techies.

As a photographer that is not interested in tech, but rather interested mainly in what my photos look like, I am most interested in the tonal curves and contrast. Since techies love to do lots of post production, this doesn't matter to them. For those that don't want to do any or much PP, it is important what a companies tonal algorithms are.

As a photographer that is not interested in tech, I want good, solid, lenses that are sharp (not necessarily the sharpest, but good overall sharpness) and offer really good color and contrast. Not sure what the techies are looking for here as lenses haven't changed that much in decades.

As a photographer that is not interested in tech, I want a camera that is easy to use and easy to hold, has a good viewfinder that is not too cluttered. Apparently techies don't notice such things.

All of the above reasons are why I would never choose Sony (having bought and returned both the A7 And A7 II). Canon beats them (in my opinion) in color, tonal curves, ergonomics, viewfinder and lenses - in some cases it is not even close.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 6, 2017)

dak723 said:


> As a photographer that is not interested in tech, I want good, solid, lenses that are sharp (not necessarily the sharpest, but good overall sharpness) and offer really good color and contrast. Not sure what the techies are looking for here *as lenses haven't changed that much in decades*.



: ;D ;D ;D

Lenses have changed A LOT over the last years. Anything from Zeiss Otuss, f/2.8 Mk. II zooms, 11-24 zooms, fisheye zooms, macro T/S lenses, Sigma ART series, down to "kit lenses" like an EF-S 55-250 or a pancake Canon EF-M 22/2.0 would have been "impossible" only 10 years ago. 

None of the old shards can hold a candle to current version of the respective lenses. None.


----------



## ChristopherMarkPerez (Oct 6, 2017)

*snark*

I can see it now. A beautiful plaque will be engraved on each FF Canon Mirrorless that _*dedicates *_their wonderful new device to the many years it took to design, fabricate and bring to market after the mirrorless market segment was first opened. 

Perhaps something like "Artisanal Hand-crafted" and "Assembled by..."

Heck, it might even take a decent picture. Only time will tell.

*snark off*




Canon Rumors said:


> ...Canon’s first foray into a full frame mirrorless camera will use a _*dedicated *_CMOS sensor...


----------



## TAF (Oct 8, 2017)

dsut4392 said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > Form factor...if they try to squeeze a FF mirrorless into a tiny body, they get the worst of all worlds.
> ...




And all of those issues with heat transfer get easier to deal with when you have more space to work within.

So yes, bigger does indeed equal better cooling, given equivalently competent engineers.

(I can honestly say I have never had a designer tell me that he wished he had less volume to work with)

And as for ergonomics, yes, a TLR form factor would perhaps not be ideal for some people (although as someone who still uses one, they can indeed be much stabler than holding something to your face - try it some time). Which is why I mentioned the SL 3003.

You might want to actually take a look at that model...it can be used from above, or from the back with a more typical viewfinder. Your choice.


----------



## dak723 (Oct 8, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > As a photographer that is not interested in tech, I want good, solid, lenses that are sharp (not necessarily the sharpest, but good overall sharpness) and offer really good color and contrast. Not sure what the techies are looking for here *as lenses haven't changed that much in decades*.
> ...



Believe what you will. Lots of folks using old lenses with excellent results.


----------



## Busted Knuckles (Oct 8, 2017)

dak723 said:


> As a photographer that is not interested in tech, I want a camera that is easy to use and easy to hold, has a good viewfinder that is not too cluttered. Apparently techies don't notice such things.



I get it, ummm no I don't. It is only through all that tech that you have a digital file to then apply all kinds of algorithms to create an analog image. Not being interested in the tech side is the equivalent of not being interested in the ISO of the film, the temp of the developer, the contrast of the paper, and other "analog" events from the old film days that you had to know in order to have predictable results.

I am an OLD dog, and new tricks come hard to me. I have own tons of Canon gear, rented Sony gear, "back in the day" when I worked for a high end camera store that had view cameras, Leica, Rollei, Blad all in stock (and had the borrow it for free, buy it if you scratch it hands on learning policy - we had to know the camera to sell it...) 

I have fantastic images from every camera/lens combo I have ever used. I have plenty of crap too. Quality seems highly correlated to the effort I put into the capture.

I vote for the largest image capture envelope I can get, its like an airplane - the only altitude you can't use is that which is above you.


----------



## KevinP (Oct 15, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>We’re also told that a higher end APS-C based mirrorless camera above the EOS M5 is not in the cards.</p>



That's disappointing. I'm not really hoping for something fancier, but I'd love an SL2 sized version of the M5 with the EF-S mount. Bonus if they used the extra space for a bigger battery. I already have five lenses in EF-S and EF, and the adapter seems like an irritation. I'm not sure a smaller system would entice me to carry it out the door more often, and I like the idea of a fast standard zoom next to replace the kit lens, which isn't a thing in EF-M.


----------



## bf (Oct 19, 2017)

KevinP said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > <p>We’re also told that a higher end APS-C based mirrorless camera above the EOS M5 is not in the cards.</p>
> ...



Your comment made me thinking if they offer a battery grip for this family. 

I'd like a high speed mirror-less body with EF mount equipped towards action and wildlife. I prefer the full-frame version rather than APS-C. The fact is Canon has not offered any glass other than in EF mount for this application.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 19, 2017)

bf said:


> I'd like a high speed mirror-less body with EF mount equipped towards action and wildlife. I prefer the full-frame version rather than APS-C. *The fact is Canon has not offered any glass other than in EF mount for this application*.



so .. what about all that FD glass - including long and fast tele lenses - sold until 1987  
And of course Canon has not launched a new lens mount for FF mirrorless since they have not launched any FF MILC yet either.


----------



## Ryananthony (Oct 19, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> bf said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like a high speed mirror-less body with EF mount equipped towards action and wildlife. I prefer the full-frame version rather than APS-C. *The fact is Canon has not offered any glass other than in EF mount for this application*.
> ...



The EF line up is twice the size of the FD line up. I don't think they are dropping EF any time soon. The more I think of it though, as unhappy as I would be, I think FF mirror less will be a new mount. I just hope the use of adapters for EF lenses work better then how the EF to E-mount adapters work, and really even the A-mount to E-mount.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 19, 2017)

Ryananthony said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > bf said:
> ...



of course Canon-Canon adaptors will work better than some 3rdparty Canon-Sony cr*p. 

Obviously a good deal of "adapter angst" is coming from (poor) experiences with metabones etc. stuff. But don't worry, Canon to Canon adaptor work seamlessly. Exactly like the Canon EF/EF-M adaptor. Works like a charm. EF lenses are fully functional on Canon mirrorless cameras, with AF performance as good as in Live View mode on any Canon EOS DSLR.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 19, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> Exactly like the Canon EF/EF-M adaptor. Works like a charm. EF lenses are fully functional on Canon mirrorless cameras, with AF performance as good as in Live View mode on any Canon EOS DSLR.



While that's true for _current_ Canon mirrorless cameras, like my new M6, it's not true for older versions (M, M2, M3). With those older models, if the camera is set to Servo continuous AF, the lens will focus for the first shot in a sequence, and AF is locked at that position. In other words, Servo AF isn't 'fully functional', and for it's intended use, not really functional at all. That's not true for EF-M lenses on those bodies, only for adapted EF/EF-S lenses. 

If (a big IF, there) Canon does go with an thin mount + adapter for the FF MILC, hopefully they won't fcuk up the adapter AF implementation like they did with the EF-M.


----------



## Halfrack (Oct 19, 2017)

'New Sensor' as in Microlenses or really thick sensor glass to compensate for the flange focal distance on EF lenses?


----------



## bf (Oct 19, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> bf said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like a high speed mirror-less body with EF mount equipped towards action and wildlife. I prefer the full-frame version rather than APS-C. *The fact is Canon has not offered any glass other than in EF mount for this application*.
> ...



How long did it take for Canon to develop the existing EF collection from FD? How they treated their newer EFS and EFM mounts?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 19, 2017)

Silversurfer2018 said:


> i wonder why this ret* ard mountmongospokane admin is trying to ban people ?
> 
> ...
> 
> i already have 10 other accounts mongo admin.. you can not ban me.



Good question. Here's my take:

1) First time poster, eh? Welcome!

2) You are answering your own question above just fine. Retrace your steps, sound it out, use your words -- you'll get there.

3) Talk me through your writing process. Tell me, do you proof your work? 

4) If you have to cultivate _ten identities_ to participate in _discussion on the internet_, you might want to reflect on why that is necessary. I'm guessing the admin is not the problem here. While we're at it, if you have to keep changing your name, who will appreciate the legacy of great posts you've brought to the forum? 

- A


----------



## Takingshots (Dec 22, 2017)

*Canon Mirrorless FF 2018 or 2019*

https://petapixel.com/2017/10/05/canons-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-may-arrive-2018-sensor/
If only Canon can output similar or better specs sooner like Sony's mirrorless camera A7riii... I am sure this would make alot of Canon fans happy....
Any input as to what you would like to see other on this smaller FF body....


----------



## unfocused (Dec 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon Mirrorless FF 2018 or 2019*

Do we really need a new thread to talk about an article that is simply a re-post of a CR rumor?


----------



## Ryananthony (Dec 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon Mirrorless FF 2018 or 2019*



unfocused said:


> Do we really need a new thread to talk about an article that is simply a re-post of a CR rumor?



And already discussed in depth when it was posted and 10 times since then.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 22, 2017)

*Re: Canon Mirrorless FF 2018 or 2019*



Takingshots said:


> https://petapixel.com/2017/10/05/canons-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-may-arrive-2018-sensor/
> If only Canon can output similar or better specs sooner like Sony's mirrorless camera A7riii... I am sure this would make alot of Canon fans happy....
> Any input as to what you would like to see other on this smaller FF body....



1) Who said it was going to be smaller? There's a nontrivial chance we get a full EF mount with an FF rig. My chips are still on a thin mount + adapter as Canon's more likely move, but there's no certainty there. One could easily build a rationale around a full EF mount rig. See graphic.

2) 2018 vs. 2019 depends on what else is being announced that year. This is a big enough deal that it might get a full 6-12 months of the dedicated marketing spotlight from Canon, so don't expect it the same year as other FF releases, one would think. So either next year we get an accelerated 5DS/R 2 (i.e. slightly faster than planned, for a host of reasons) _*or*_ we get a FF mirrorless platform -- I don't think it will be both.

- A


----------



## john kriegsmann (Dec 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon Mirrorless FF 2018 or 2019*

The only camera manufacturer that has matched a great selection of high quality small factor prime and zoom lenses for its Mirrorless systems is Fuji. Sony has great sensors and almost unmatched image quality but their lenses for the most part are too large for their camera bodies. Sony cameras also lack easy to use manual controls and depend on complex multi layer menus to get to basic camera functions. Canon finally has a competent mirrorless body in the M5 they have not created a high quality native lens selection to support it. Canon DSLR lenses, except pancake lenses are way too big for the M5 system. If Canon wishes to be a player in this growing market they really need to up their game.


----------



## bwud (Dec 29, 2017)

*Re: Canon Mirrorless FF 2018 or 2019*



john kriegsmann said:


> Sony cameras also lack easy to use manual controls and depend on complex multi layer menus to get to basic camera functions



That may have been true in the past, but it’s certainly untrue with its latest entries. 

The A7Rii for example has a significant number of functions mappable to buttons, and custom menu accessible from the Fn button. A7riii doubles down. If there is a function you can not map I haven’t found it and probably wouldn’t want to*. I for example have the EyeAF function mapped to a back button, and AFon mapped to the center press (i.e. what sets the AF point back to center on canon bodies) of the joystick, so I need not toggle anything, and if I’m not using EyeAF I need not lift my thumb after selecting a point. I have a dedicated control for each exposure component, including exposure comp (which I don’t use). I have a toggle to change drive mode, a toggle to change metering mode, a toggle for silent shutter, a toggle for exposure preview, etc. They also added a custom menu (like canon’s) to dump other commands to. 

The ergo could be better (taller grip, more spacing to lens mount), but controls aren’t so much a weakness as they are a selling point. In my experience it is unmatched, but I’ve not used a canon newer than my 5d3.

*I wish I could put ISO in the rear dial, but it’s doable on the rear wheel.


----------

