# What's Next for Canon?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 17, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14558"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14558">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Not even a whisper

</strong>For the moment, there doesn’t seem to be much chatter coming from the Canon camp. We had previously been told that Canon would not be announcing anything else in 2013. Although, we still thought we would see the Canon EOS M2 which has appeared in some DPP software literature.</p>
<p>There still seems to be a lot of EOS M stock out there, as we keep seeing deals for the camera come about. There is a possibility Canon is waiting until stock levels are near depleted before they make an announcement. Christmas season is coming up, and we’re getting a bit late to announce a product for the Christmas season unless it ships right away.</p>
<p>As far as the big EOS stuff, we’re still holding with no DSLR or lenses in 2013, although a development announcement is always possible. I don’t think Canon has ever done a development announcement without announcing an official new product along side it.</p>
<p>I expect 2 camera bodies at the most in Q1 of 2014, one being a new EOS M camera. The other being an entry level type DSLR. I think it’ll be early spring before we see the really exciting stuff from Canon.</p>
<p>I am also told that new Cinema EOS camera(s) are likely to appear before NAB in April 2014. There has been nothing in regards to specs or which bodies would see an update.</p>
<p>More to come….</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Ricku (Oct 17, 2013)

That's a shame. I guess santa will have to bring my christmas presents from elsewhere.

The new full frame A7R is high on my wish-list.  It'll be my first Sony item since the Playstation 2.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Oct 17, 2013)

Canon... :


----------



## Eldar (Oct 17, 2013)

I´ll stay put with my current bodies until either an 800E killer comes along or my patience expiration date is up. I think is says best before 30 June 2014.


----------



## Ricku (Oct 17, 2013)

Eldar said:


> I´ll stay put with my current bodies until either an 800E killer comes along or my *patience expiration date *is up. I think is says best before 30 June 2014.


My patience expiration date is long past. My patience is now a decomposing pile of anger and frustration.

The only reason to why I'm still with Canon is because of my lens-investment.

I'm hoping the A7R + an adapter can save me.


----------



## Bob Howland (Oct 17, 2013)

Why is CR so sure that that Canon is still trying to sell M bodies made before cutting the price and thereby getting people's attention, not stock manufactured after that?


----------



## Albi86 (Oct 17, 2013)

It's impressive what a management change has made for Sigma.

Maybe time for Canon to do the same?


----------



## justsomedude (Oct 17, 2013)

I'd love to see an EOS M2 with dual pixel AF and an EFV. I've stared at the EOS-M deals on Amazon and B&H over the last few months, and was a mouse-click away from pushing that "order" button a half dozen times or so. But I just can't bear the thought of using one without an EFV, and without the AF shown off in the 70D. The Fuji X-E1 kind of owns the mirrorless scene for now, but I wish Canon had a competitor to it.

Tarzan want EOS M2, now!


----------



## Ricku (Oct 17, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> I'd love to see an EOS M2 with dual pixel AF and an EFV. I've stared at the EOS-M deals on Amazon and B&H over the last few months, and was a mouse-click away from pushing that "order" button a half dozen times or so. But I just can't bear the thought of using one without an EFV, and without the AF shown off in the 70D. The Fuji X-E1 kind of owns the mirrorless scene for now, but I wish Canon had a competitor to it.
> 
> Tarzan want EOS M2, now!


Its still 2 - 3 years until Canon even dares to think about competing with Sony or Fuji on the mirrorless market.

Canon could do it right now, but they are terrified that a high end mirrorless (let's say a compact high resolution FF), will seriously hurt their DSLR sales.  That's the only explanation I can think of when it comes to their piss poor EOS M. They are not even trying! .. But if Canon won't do it, others will eat their lunch. Mirrorless cameras are on the uprise, and Canon can't hide from it.

Copying / following other companies is not always a bad thing. This time Canon really should follow Sony's example. Its either that, or they can watch thousands of their EF lenses being adapted to the A7 and A7R.


----------



## fox40phil (Oct 17, 2013)

Canon is still sleeping :-\ 

look at the new Nikon d5300... stereo sound, 60fps 1080p video capture, w-lan, gps...24MP, 39-point-AF-System... and... under < 1000€


----------



## justsomedude (Oct 17, 2013)

Ricku said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > I'd love to see an EOS M2 with dual pixel AF and an EFV. I've stared at the EOS-M deals on Amazon and B&H over the last few months, and was a mouse-click away from pushing that "order" button a half dozen times or so. But I just can't bear the thought of using one without an EFV, and without the AF shown off in the 70D. The Fuji X-E1 kind of owns the mirrorless scene for now, but I wish Canon had a competitor to it.
> ...



You hit the nail on the head. I think I'm going to have to go with Fuji for my travels upcoming in December; the EOS-M is just sad. If Canon can't give me what I need, I'll spend my hard earned money elsewhere.


----------



## lw (Oct 17, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> I'd love to see an EOS M2 with dual pixel AF and an EFV. I've stared at the EOS-M deals on Amazon and B&H over the last few months, and was a mouse-click away from pushing that "order" button a half dozen times or so. But I just can't bear the thought of using one without an EFV, and without the AF shown off in the 70D. The Fuji X-E1 kind of owns the mirrorless scene for now, but I wish Canon had a competitor to it.
> 
> Tarzan want EOS M2, now!



I don't think the M2 (as mentioned in the DPP help file) is anything more than a M refresh.


----------



## Pag (Oct 18, 2013)

Ricku said:


> Its still 2 - 3 years until Canon even dares to think about competing with Sony or Fuji on the mirrorless market.
> 
> Canon could do it right now, but they are terrified that a high end mirrorless (let's say a compact high resolution FF), will seriously hurt their DSLR sales.  That's the only explanation I can think of when it comes to their piss poor EOS M. They are not even trying! .. But if Canon won't do it, others will eat their lunch. Mirrorless cameras are on the uprise, and Canon can't hide from it.
> 
> Copying / following other companies is not always a bad thing. This time Canon really should follow Sony's example. Its either that, or they can watch thousands of their EF lenses being adapted to the A7 and A7R.



It's a great example of the innovator's dilemma. For a huge company like Canon, a new type of products like mirrorless cameras isn't profitable enough. Even though their R&D department probably has everything it needs to create a kick-ass product in that category, they don't want to invest too much because it would cost a lot of money and all of the (comparatively small) profit they would make would be at the expense of their profitable SLR division.

So they wait until the market for mirrorless has matured more. Except, of course, that by the time this happens, their competitors (Olympus, Sony, Fuji, etc.) will be well established with mature products that customers trust. By that time, it may well be too late for Canon to keep its leadership position.

Canon could take the lead in this new market, but to do so they would have to cannibalize their own products, which they won't do. Ironically, by avoiding to sacrifice their own products, they may doom their whole company. The same process has happened to many different industries, for many different types of products.

For extra controversy, here's what I would do if I were CEO of Canon: 

I would embrace change rather than try to stop it by developing a kick-ass line of mirrorless cameras, with 3 models:

An entry-model that's as cheap and light as possible
A middle-end that's good enough for amateurs
A top-end model that's as good as possible. The goal of the team making this would be to make a camera good enough to replace professional SLR cameras.

I would also greatly simplify Canon's line of SLR cameras by removing every APS-C camera. In the future, I expect SLRs will only be used for pro-level photo (kinda like medium format cameras now), so Canon might as well lead the charge. Full-frame cameras would support a "crop mode" that only uses the pixels in the middle of the frame, so photographers who want the additional reach and speed of APS-C can still have it. I would keep only four SLR models:

An entry-model that's comparable to a 6D, perhaps cheaper. The idea is to provide an easy step to "graduate" to full-frame.
A top of the line action camera that makes no compromises for focusing speed and FPS.
A top of the line studio/landscape camera that has super high resolution, awesome dynamic range and amazing low-light sensitivity.
A great video-SLR with every tool needed to make awesome movies straight out of the box.

Fewer products that are better differentiated would allow Canon to focus more resources on each, resulting in better R&D and marketing. It would also makes choices a lot clearer for customers and it would position Canon for future changes in the market. When Steve Jobs returned to Apple, the first thing he did was simplify the products Apple made greatly, and it was a huge success. I believe Canon should do the same.

Oh, and I would change the name of the cameras. Seriously, "5D mark III" sounds like a codename for military hardware, not the brand of a desirable product ;D


----------



## infared (Oct 18, 2013)

lw said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > I'd love to see an EOS M2 with dual pixel AF and an EFV. I've stared at the EOS-M deals on Amazon and B&H over the last few months, and was a mouse-click away from pushing that "order" button a half dozen times or so. But I just can't bear the thought of using one without an EFV, and without the AF shown off in the 70D. The Fuji X-E1 kind of owns the mirrorless scene for now, but I wish Canon had a competitor to it.
> ...



How do you refresh a DEAD MACKEREL?
If the camera was $10 I would not purchase it! ...I have no use for it?
I maintain an extensive 5 DIII system. 
All of my mirrorless money went to Olympus and Panasonic for two MFT bodies and eleven lenses.
Why..because MFT Is light, small, produces incredible results for a very small system and it complements my FF system PERFECTLY! I have lenses from fisheye to tele with SUPER fast AF on great wide aperture primes!
Canon...I have been buying MFT for years...that is YEARS...and your only response AFTER I had assembled an entire kit was the M? The M??????? Does management live with its head buried in the DIRT????
Did ANYONE notice what Fuji, Olympus, Sony, Samsung, & Panasonic have been doing for years???
Canon...doing nothing is doing nothing. How could you have completely missed this boat!!!
Also your recent pricing on products brings nothing but resentment from a lot of loyal customers.
Sony is INNOVATING. that's I-N-N-O-V-A-T-I-N-G...Please look it up...it is a word you are not familiar with any more.
Imagine what a better job you could have done with the A7r with your ability to make lenses. Imagine.

WHATS NEXT for me..The OlyMpus M1. That is as close as I am getting to the letter "M". Who cares what Canon is doing with mirrorless? NOTHING=NOTHING.


----------



## Woody (Oct 18, 2013)

Pag said:


> Canon could take the lead in this new market, but to do so they would have to cannibalize their own products, which they won't do.



Canon has killed their product line once when they changed from FD to EOS mount. If they are certain mirrorless is the way of the future, they will have done the same for their DSLRs. But the truth is that worldwide sales of DSLRs still far outstrip that of mirrorless cameras at a ratio of about 3:1.. Even in places where sales of mirrorless cameras has picked up previously, e.g., Japan, that growth has stagnated in the past year. Just take a look at BCNRanking (Japan).

There is no need to play the role of armchair CEOs here. Canon knows what they are doing, far better than you and I.


----------



## Pag (Oct 18, 2013)

Woody said:


> Pag said:
> 
> 
> > Canon could take the lead in this new market, but to do so they would have to cannibalize their own products, which they won't do.
> ...



Of course SLRs are selling better than mirrorless, that's precisely my point. They are selling much worse now, which is why Canon doesn't care. But if they keep not caring until the mirrorless cameras overtake SLRs' marketshare, it will be too late: their competitors will have taken over the mirrorless market and they'll struggle to keep their leadership position.

Just look at Kodak. They failed to make the switch to digital even though they had the technology because they were too busy defending their leadership position in film. And they went from king of the hill to bankrupt.


----------



## Ruined (Oct 18, 2013)

I personally don't believe mirrorless are the future. I think mirrorless is a transitional technology between the current high end cameraphone (i.e. Lumia 1020) and the cameraphone of the future.

Think about it. Even these Sony cameras, at the top of their game, make major sacrifices for the small body size compared to the best DSLR. So, while fun for travel, wouldn't a pro opt for the best of the best to be at the top of his game? While mirrorless will evolve, so will cameraphones... And while mirrorless cameras are small, the lenses are still huge.

Thus, as cameraphone tech evolves, you could eventually have your phone as a crop replacement that is with you 100% of the time. Not many people are going to carry around both a phone and a camera 100% of the time. The phone will get the shots your camera would miss.

So then, IMO, you will have DSLR or maybe a DSLR hybrid that has some of the benefits of mirrorless builtin but none of the disadvantages for your camera, and your phone for when you don't have your camera on you.

While mirrorless is small, it is still too large/inconvenient to carry everywhere all the time; and, even the best models are still not up to par with the best DSLRs. Thus, I see the pro market keeping DSLR, the consumer market eventually going 100% phone, and enthusiasts having both. I don't think it is a coincidence that as recently phones are coming out with larger sensor 20mp-41mp models, mirrorless has seen its growth stunted. Mirrorless I believe will remain a niche because of these two forces neither of which mirrorless is master of - it is nowhere near as portable as a high MP cameraphone, nor does it have all of what the best DSLRs offer. Jack of all trades but master of none. 

So I actually would say Canon is wise to stick to its guns with DSLR, but it needs to keep pace in releasing new DSLR tech to keep people interested and spending money on DSLR


----------



## Woody (Oct 18, 2013)

Pag said:


> Of course SLRs are selling better than mirrorless, that's precisely my point. They are selling much worse now



That's half the picture. While sales of DSLRs has fallen, the same thing is happening to mirrorless cameras.

From http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/and-april-makes-four.html

"The April shipment numbers are in, and the trend I've been commenting on for some time continues: mirrorless camera sales growth is still not what everyone seems to think it is. For the fourth consecutive month, mirrorless shipments from camera makers in 2013 trailed shipments in 2012...

No, this lowering of production doesn't imply the death of mirrorless cameras, it simply acknowledges what I wrote over a year ago: *mirrorless cameras will not overtake DSLR sales any time in the near future. The initial high growth rate of mirrorless was a false one: the camera makers overzealously produced them when the demand wasn't really there. *

I still predict that the mirrorless/DSLR world will eventually be one and the same. *Once phase detect autofocus is on the imaging sensor with the same level of performance, there's little need for the cost and complexity of the mirror system in DSLRs.* As Canon has shown recently, you can make much smaller DSLRs, even with the old mount depths. Long term, the difference between most mirrorless-derived cameras (m4/3, NEX, etc.) and most DSLRs (EF mount, F mount, Alpha mount) is going to really only be the depth of the camera. The smaller sensor cameras (Nikon 1, m4/3) will have an advantage of smaller lenses, at the disadvantage of lower image sensor performance."


----------



## Eric D (Oct 18, 2013)

I can only speak for myself in that I believe mirrorless is the future of the middle ground for those like me who want the combination of light for travel and good quality photography. Pros and true enthusiasts with big budgets can have their full frame or multiple systems, but I don't plan to buy into more than one camera/lens ecosystem. I nibbled with the M because of the 70D news implication and this summer's sale, but if Canon doesn't make a serious M move soon, it's got to be on to MFT for me.


----------



## Pag (Oct 18, 2013)

Ruined said:


> I think mirrorless is a transitional technology between the current high end cameraphone (i.e. Lumia 1020) and the cameraphone of the future.



Unless there's a revolutionary new technology for lenses (which is unlikely but not impossible), I don't think cameraphones will take over the hobbyist market. No matter how awesome your sensor is, if you have a tiny wide-angle lens you will be severely limited in what you can photograph. Zoom lenses that have any kind of reach are too big to fit on a phone where everything must be as tiny as possible.

I can see cameraphones taking over the entry-level market. But if you're spending thousands of dollars on an oversea trip, you'll want a better camera to take nice pictures. Same if you have a newborn baby, or if you're a hobbyist who wants to do more than take snapshots.

At the same time, there are real benefits to mft cameras. They're much smaller, lighter and cheaper (especially counting the lenses) and they're already good enough for all of the use cases I mentioned. Unless you really care about maximizing image quality and are willing to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars for that (in which case you're either a pro or an advanced amateur), mirrorless cameras are good enough for you.

I see three groups of people here: those who take snapshots with little care for quality (cameraphones), those who care about quality but don't want to pay too much for it or have too big a camera (mirrorless), and those who put image quality above everything else (SLR).


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Oct 18, 2013)

Eh. Canon came out with the 70D. I thought that was really cool. How about the SL1? Again, very cool. Dropping the price on the EOS-M? Price drops are good in my opinion... ;D Oh yeah, the t5i... LOL!

Yes, the Sony A7(R) is pretty awesome. But when was the last time they came out with something this great? No, I don't put the RX1 in that league as it comes with a fixed lens. They got halfway to 'awesome'. Same with Fuji. How often?

Plus, it's this hyper-communication/development cycle that we're getting used to. We want to see something developing all the time. After all, we saw the 1DX and 5D MKIII come out last year. A couple of ultra-fine cameras that will suffice for AT LEAST a couple of years... I know full-time working photography pros whose FF Canon cameras are at least 5 years old... They aren't on forums bitching about new gear...

Me, it will be at least a year before I think about upgrading my mighty-fine 5D Mark II. If Canon's big MP camera doesn't wow me enough, I'll be going medium format. And that's a testament to how good Canon FF cameras are...


----------



## Blackwood (Oct 18, 2013)

Hello all,

I have been a Canon man since 1976 when I purchased my first Canon F-1 with a 50mm 1.2 Aspherical Lens - still have them today. Canon have always been at the fore front of innovation with great camera developments over the decades.
I've owned AE-1s T90s, EOS 1Vs and all the EOS 1Ds models - all superb designs for their times.
I have followed this site for some time now and sadly Canon have fallen way behind. Okay, the 5d series and the 1Dx are superb cameras but unfortunately since then we have only seen a lot of consumer dribble emerge from Canon.
Canon have given us no WOW factor and companies like Fuji, Sony, Olympus and Panasonic and others seem to be leading the way.
The announcement of the new Sony Alpha A7 and A7r cameras amazed me but at the same time angered me.

There may be people out there who do not entirely agree with me but a lot will agree Canon are very lack lustre at the minute.

Come On Canon, Give us some new WOW factor

Regards

Blkackwood


----------



## M.ST (Oct 18, 2013)

I use Canon cameras since 35 years and I am very happy with Canon gear.

But what the hell is Canon doing in the last years?

Only the 1D X from the actual lineup is worth buying it. But I want to see the real replacement for the 1Ds Mark III, the 7D Mark III with CF card slot, a 12-24 2.8 L or 14-24 2.8 L lens, the 24-70 2.8 IS, a 100-400 IS, a lighter 70-200 2.8 II replacement with better IQ on the market.

There are a lot of new products out for testing, but nothing hit the market.

Wake up Canon or you loose.


----------



## Kwanon (Oct 18, 2013)

Canon can take the lead easily when they release the real 1Ds III replacement.

That camera together with the 1D X eats the competition in pro bodies.


----------



## Woody (Oct 18, 2013)

M.ST said:


> There are a lot of new products out for testing, but nothing hit the market.



I am curious too.

My guess is that the poor camera market conditions (ALL camera sales numbers are down) and rapidly changing camera landscape (invasion of camera phones + mirrorless offerings) probably caught Canon unawares.

Nikon is in a similar situation (except their sensors from Sony are much better).

We should expect some good stuff from both companies next year. This is certainly true for Nikon which is 80% dependent on sales of photography gear. If Nikon does not adapt quickly, they will be wiped off the landscape.

Armed with the new sensor PDAF technology, Canon is ready to plunge into the world of mirrorless cameras. But I think further refinement is needed... sensor PDAF needs to be 100% as good as current DSLR PDAF.


----------



## bvukich (Oct 18, 2013)

Maybe I'm weird (Ok, I KNOW I'm weird, but that's beside the point), but I just don't have any serious desire for a mirrorless camera. They're ok for what they are, and I don't begrudge anyone that does want one, I just personally don't find the trade off worth it. If the M2 or whatever it's eventually called has all the 70D goodies like everyone hopes, and falls to the sub-$400 level, I'll probably pick one up for times I REALLY don't want to drag a DSLR along, and as an emergency back-up-to-my-back-up body. And that's due to mirrorlesses current, singular, advantage... size. Unless it's for a use case where size is the absolute top priority, I don't see the draw. But hey, to each his own.

What would it take to change _my _mind?

Full Frame: Currently slim pickings, and very expensive
Good AF: The best mirrorless AF is almost up to yesteryears Rebel, but maybe some day
EVF: No lag, no visible pixels, and galmut as good as the best human eyes (and doesn't need to be calibrated). That one will be a while.
And last but not least...
Antigravity: Because that's the only way you'll be able to handhold all day with a mirrorless, lenses which are quite hand-holdable with a gripped or pro body. Even something relatively dainty like a 100-400 would be unbalanced and awkward on a mirrorless. Unless you think it would be humorous to see people with a 70-200/2.8IS II on a gimbal head shooting a wedding... actually, that probably would be humorous for most of us


----------



## Kwanon (Oct 18, 2013)

For me personally things are going better than i could ever hope for from Canon and all camera makers.

The 1D X is a true wonder and the perfect camera for me now.
We know that canon will release a true 1Ds III high MP 1D body when the time is right.. We know it will be good. Just look at what time did for the 1D X.. We were waiting for that for a long time and when it actually came out it was perfect.

Canon needs to update some of their primes like the 50mm 1.2 and the TS-E45mm but in the meantime i will enjoy the new Zeiss 55mm 1.4 Otus and the other Otus primes that will come out. When the Otus line is out it is the perfect time for the 1Ds III replacement co's we can really get a good use of the resolution with that and the Otus lenses.

Also i like what Leica is doing right now.

The worst thing that can happen is that the focus would come away from the Pro cameras to consumer cameras and we would lose all real progress that benefits all shooters down the line. So i'm glad there are Leicas and Otus lenses and that Canon is waiting and releasing their first megapixel monster in the form of the 1Ds Replacement.

I'm perfectly happy with the situation.


----------



## Lawliet (Oct 18, 2013)

bvukich said:


> And that's due to mirrorlesses current, singular, advantage... size.



They have another one, AF accuracy (and precision). With all the buzz about relative sensor performances people seem to forget that the sensor records only what gets projected onto it. DPreview had an article a few days ago comparing the 70D's different PDAF subsystems - anything approaching MF should better not rely on the old style AF(, although that lessen could be learned from the D800 as well).


----------



## baldaran (Oct 18, 2013)

I think Canon was sleeping for a while now. Canon should get off the ground, otherwise they will possibly end up like nokia, because they miss important new market segments. From Canons side, there was nothing really exciting for the consumer market for a while now 

Sigma is getting a major competitor in the lens segment with a brand new and amazing product line. Some of the announcements such as the 18-35 f1.8 where amazing and most of Sigmas new products are really innovative and of high quality. I think there will come a lot more from sigma in the next year. Unfortunatelly, nothing comparable from canons side. Canon is only updating old lens designs and is selling the new ones really expensive.

Same for the bodies. Sure, canon is leading in DSLR bodies. However, from my point of view, mirrorless is getting more and more competitive and attractive for consumers, because they are not as heavy and bulky as DSLR and the image quality is fine now. Therefore, i think in the next years the DSLR sales will be cannibalized by mirrorless. Canon was the last manufactor that got into the mirrorless segment. Other companies have started years before and solidified and expanded there leading market position in this segment. The lens lineup for EOS-M is still poor. And recently, Sony announced a potential game changer with their full format mirrorless. From my point of view, Canon should hurry to get their foot in the door. If they wait one or two more years, the door will potentially be closed.

Even in the compact segment are other companies more innovative. Just have a look to Sonys lineup. Canon has nothing comparable.

I'm not happy with canons product and pricing strategy for a while now. I hope something will change in the near future.


----------



## Eldar (Oct 18, 2013)

I posted this on another thread, but it is more relevant here.

I don’t believe Canon will lose their sleep over me and if I, as an individual, stay or go. In fact, as individuals none of us scare Canon very much. But if you read more of the posts on this and other threads, you see a growing discontent amongst the CR members, for losing ground to the competition in the areas that are important to us. In general we are happy with the lenses, but we are not happy with the bodies.

I’m not sure we are big enough even as a group, to make much of a difference, but we have impact way beyond the equipment we buy ourselves. Canon should worry about the fact that I, and lots of other CR members, advice lots of people every year, on what to buy. And I would guess that somewhere around 20-30 of those asking me for advice actually buy cameras, lenses and accessories. If I stop recommending Canon and recommend Sony, Nikon or something else instead and a large number of members on this forum are doing the same, it will have an impact they should take very seriously.

So, Canon, I really hope you are paying attention. The road to becoming the Nokia of the photography world is not that long ...


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Oct 18, 2013)

Canon in my eyes for the last few years:
brought us some excellent lenses (24-70 and 70-200, both 2,8, both v2.0; the range of the superteles)
the radio triggered flashes: nice!!!

Bodies: don`t know 1DX, like to have one.
5DIII: goodygood, espacially the new AF. (and please: make the SD- slot faster!! UHS was there long before!!)1D4: solid, fast, reliable. Love it.

What I don`t like so much: the cuts and cripples to make a camera fit in "their" segment.
Example: buffersize, the lame AF of the 5DII.


----------



## xps (Oct 18, 2013)

Eldar said:


> I posted this on another thread, but it is more relevant here.
> 
> I don’t believe Canon will lose their sleep over me and if I, as an individual, stay or go. In fact, as individuals none of us scare Canon very much. But if you read more of the posts on this and other threads, you see a growing discontent amongst the CR members, for losing ground to the competition in the areas that are important to us. In general we are happy with the lenses, but we are not happy with the bodies.
> 
> ...



+1
To milk the cow until there is no milk anymore (until nearly no one buys the product anymore) is dangerous. Dangerous, because there are a lot of other manufacturers that reasess their products and have an turn over time half of the time Canon has.
Just see the new Fuji X-E2, Nikon 610,5300,... (A lot of new announcements but no one from the brand leader)


----------



## hendrik-sg (Oct 18, 2013)

Whats next: maybe a price increase. A more expensive product is better and more desirable, isnt it?


----------



## Ricku (Oct 18, 2013)

Pag said:


> Of course SLRs are selling better than mirrorless, that's precisely my point. They are selling much worse now, which is why Canon doesn't care. But if they keep not caring until the mirrorless cameras overtake SLRs' marketshare, it will be too late: their competitors will have taken over the mirrorless market and they'll struggle to keep their leadership position.





Ruined said:


> I personally don't believe mirrorless are the future.



From Luminous-Landscape.com:

_The world-wide trend is toward smaller cameras. Maybe it's the aging population, or maybe just a Japanese trend that is slowing spreading around the world. (*Apparently more than 50% of new DSLR style camera sales in Japan are now Compact System Cameras rather than larger cameras with optical finders*)._

And it's not just Japan. 4 of my photographer friends has dumped their Canikon DSLRs and bought mirrorless systems. Honestly, I might follow suit with the A7R.

I think that everyone who isn't a sports photographer will sooner or later switch over to mirrorless.


----------



## Canon 14-24 (Oct 18, 2013)

Medium format is the future!


----------



## Eldar (Oct 18, 2013)

Canon 14-24 said:


> Medium format is the future!


yes, for a tiny, tiny, tiny and very exclusive part of the photography community ...


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 18, 2013)

Ricku said:


> And it's not just Japan. 4 of my photographer friends has dumped their Canikon DSLRs and bought mirrorless systems. Honestly, I might follow suit with the A7R.
> 
> I think that everyone who isn't a sports photographer will sooner or later switch over to mirrorless.



i had an olympus E-PL1... with the kit lens.. and only the kit lens.
then i bought a panasonic GF3 with the kit lens.. and only the kit lens.
now i have a E-PL3 with the kit lens.. and you guess it.. only the kit lens.
and im thinking about selling the E-PL3 and buying a fuji as carry around camera.

from my own experience and observation of my surrounding i have to say.. with mirrorless there is no brand loyalty. 

most mirrorless user i know are not invested in a system. 
they have a camera and only one lens. just like me.

looking at the canon or nikon owner i know.. they are heavily invested in the systems.

another point is... this forum and others like this are not a mirror of the outside world.

and who cares if all the other manufacturer push a few percent market share from left to right?
the day nikon and canon come up with a real mirrorless solution, nobody will care about m43, nex, and co. anymore.
because canikon already have a huge userbase and the best systems.

all that talk about switching is sooooo boring... you can´t read a single thread here without someone thinking loud about switching. i wonder why the forum still has so many canon user.

it´s like a spoiled child that makes empty threats.
switch or switch not... but don´t be so naive to think you can influence canons decisions.


----------



## Ivan Muller (Oct 18, 2013)

As a loyal Canon user since the very beginning and not one that gets overly excited about new products from anyone including Canon I have been patiently waiting for Canon to play catchup with the likes of the nikon D800 sans low pass filter, quite sure that it must come at some stage ...but the latest release from sony has really got me excited..36mp in a compact body with Zess lenses...all at fairly reasonable prices. Makes me wonder when we are going to hear about Canons megapixel offering... I am starting to wonder if they dont have a sensor manufacturing problem...can they actually make a megapixel sensor or have they fallen too far behind, or what? Just wondering...

with an adapter I can surely use my Canon lenses and with software l can get rid of colour casts and vignetting...why should I wait anymore from Canon to eventually bring out something to compete?


----------



## Ruined (Oct 18, 2013)

Pag said:


> Ruined said:
> 
> 
> > I think mirrorless is a transitional technology between the current high end cameraphone (i.e. Lumia 1020) and the cameraphone of the future.
> ...



And what I am saying, is given the shrinking camera market and growing cameraphone market, I don't think there will be room for three in time. So the middleman (Mirrorless) will eventually be (or rather, already is, hence the stunted sales) eclipsed by the highend cameraphones and SLRs. Pros aren't going to give up the best of the best quality, and consumers who want utmost convenience are not going to truck lenses around with them when the cameraphone offers spectacular quality - heck even asking to truck around two devices instead of one device is asking a lot from many people. Either mirrorless will remain a niche or simply have some of its tech integrated into DSLRs.


----------



## Ricku (Oct 18, 2013)

Pag said:


> I see three groups of people here: those who take snapshots with little care for quality (cameraphones), those who care about quality but don't want to pay too much for it or have too big a camera (mirrorless), and those who put image quality above everything else (SLR).


Not really true any longer.

Many of the mirrorless cameras outperforms anything that Canon offers at the moment. Especially the new A7R from Sony, since it will offer a whole lot more DR and resolution than the 5D3/6D/1DX.

DSLRs still have the upper hand when it comes to lenses, but for how much longer? And besides, the DSLR lenses can be used on mirrorless cameras.


----------



## AmbientLight (Oct 18, 2013)

What I would like to read or hear about would be a 1Ds Mark III successor.

Sadly a new M offering is much more likely. I might purchase that, if it offers increased usability or I might also purchase the original M, if the price keeps dropping, but that is not my focus and neither will this bring anything more than marginal revenue for Canon on my part.

Is this important to anyone? Probably not, but it kind of shows the dilemma, which is obvious both for Canon product management and actually in this thread as both suffer from discussing both mirrorless and large MP sensor topics at the same time.

Hopefully Canon will not neglect the high MP DSLR market in favor of a Medium Format offering only. I don't think it would be a good decision for Canon to only go into that tiny niche.


----------



## Pag (Oct 18, 2013)

bvukich said:


> Antigravity: Because that's the only way you'll be able to handhold all day with a mirrorless, lenses which are quite hand-holdable with a gripped or pro body. Even something relatively dainty like a 100-400 would be unbalanced and awkward on a mirrorless. Unless you think it would be humorous to see people with a 70-200/2.8IS II on a gimbal head shooting a wedding... actually, that probably would be humorous for most of us



I checked and my mft Olympus E-P3 with a 14-150mm (equivalent to a 28-300mm on full frame) is actually smaller than my 6D with a Sigma 50mm f/1.4. It's quite easy to hold by hand. That's why I think mirrorless cameras work best with smaller sensors: the lenses can become much smaller too.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 18, 2013)

Off topic:
@Lichtgestalt: you got the kind of answers you provoked in the first place. Deal with it like a man. 

On Topic:
I am convinced Canon and Nikon have missed the boat big time. Both failed to do enough for photo enthusiasts. EOS 7D II and D400 along with some more really good and affordable EF-S/DX lenses should have come 1 to 2 years ago. D600/610 and 6D should not have as marketing-crippled as they are, or much cheaper by now (USD/€ 999). Conon 5D III should be sold at the price of D800. All the Canon focus on video and hi-end cinema products does little to nothing for the market segment of photo enthusiasts and semi-pros. And the true Pro-segment is not growing but shrinking. 

Sony A7/R are are pivot point for the industry. 36 MP FF-sensor, in a camera the size of a mFT mirrorless. Zeiss lenses to go with it and many more lesnes - including more affordable options will follow from all sides. Existing glass useable via adaptors. Imagine, Canon (or Nikon) would have brought or will eventually bring a MIL like the A7 and A7R. What do you guess would or will it cost at launch? Based on recent pricing decisions my guess is: more than USD 4000 for an A7R and around USD € 3500 for an A7. 

Sony goes ahead and offers the A7/R at USD 2299 / 1699. It's almost unbelievable. Yes, I know lenses are needed too, and they don't come for free. Neither do Canon's or Nikon's. 

Canon (and even more so Nikon, since they only got imaging business) are in for really difficult times. Even if they also bring FF MILCs to market, they will be almost 1 year late. And if they now try to charge 4k+ for them, they will be laughed at. I must admit, I really like this situation. Personally, I'm going to hang on to my 7D and Canon glass for some more time, and wait until I either can pick up a Sony A7 in a special 999, - deal or a Sony A9R with 5-axis IBIS and high-performance on-sensor phase-AF at less than 3 grand. Or a fully competitive Canon MILC at one of these price points. Whatever comes first.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 18, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> Off topic:
> @Lichtgestalt: you got the kind of answers you provoked in the first place. Deal with it like a man.



nonsense!

i have insulted nobody in this thread.
the insulting replys where completely uncalled for.


i basically said, we can not decide what he should do.
and i really don´t care if anyone here thinks about switching... most think about it for years and nothing happens... they are still here. 

so you have to ask yourself.. how serious are these people or what is it they want to achieve?




> I am convinced Canon and Nikon have missed the boat big time.



keep hearing that for over 3 years now. people predicting hard times for the next year.
and still canon is doing well.



> Canon (and even more so Nikon, since they only got imaging business) are in for really difficult times.



we will see. 

in 2012 it did not look so bad for canon.... despite all the doomsday preacher.

http://fstoppers.com/examining-fiscal-year-2012-sales-for-olympus-sony-nikon-and-canon

feelings and what people think are one thing... the numbers are what counts.


----------



## bvukich (Oct 18, 2013)

Pag said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > Antigravity: Because that's the only way you'll be able to handhold all day with a mirrorless, lenses which are quite hand-holdable with a gripped or pro body. Even something relatively dainty like a 100-400 would be unbalanced and awkward on a mirrorless. Unless you think it would be humorous to see people with a 70-200/2.8IS II on a gimbal head shooting a wedding... actually, that probably would be humorous for most of us
> ...



I'm sure it is. But that tiny sensor will preclude it from serving many current DSLR rolls.



Pag said:


> That's why I think mirrorless cameras work best with smaller sensors: the lenses can become much smaller too.



With the current state of the rest of the system, I totally agree with that. Unless it has a smaller sensor and corresponding lenses, or larger sensor and nice pancake primes; the size advantage is lost.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 18, 2013)

bvukich said:


> With the current state of the rest of the system, I totally agree with that. Unless it has a smaller sensor and corresponding lenses, or larger sensor and nice pancake primes; the size advantage is lost.



No it's not. With the native Zeiss 35/2.8 the A7/R is already a very small package. And while I personally don't care at all for a 35/2.8 @ 800 Euros I am sure there will soon be AF pancakess like the EF 40/2.8 available. Fully FF-capable, very small, optically decent, acceptable build quality and ... dirt cheap. 

My preferred setup will be a 3 pancake steup with a WA 20mm/4.0 (mainly landscape/cityscapes), a normal-angle 40/2.0 (street, general purpose) and a short tele - 85/2.0 (portraits). Sizewise I would expect them like the Pentax limited pancakes. Pircewise I am hoping for 200 - 500. I´d prefer them as AF-only lenses, no focus ring, no manual focus gear, but fully weathersealed (IP 67).


----------



## Ricku (Oct 18, 2013)

Now would be a good time for Canon to _"leak"_ something about their upcoming high MP_ (and hopefully high DR) _sensor. Sony has just announced the camera that thousands of canonites have been dreaming of.. And it takes EF lenses. :-X

I'm just speculating here, but Canon's silence could mean that their solution is still far far away, and that new sensor will debut in a 7.000 dollar 1D-body.


----------



## baldaran (Oct 18, 2013)

Canon makes round about 2/3 of their money in camera segment with DSLR and about 1/3 with compact cameras. Mirrorless is still a niche product for them. From my point of view, canon has to change that. 

In the next years, compact camera sales will decrease massively due to the pervasiveness of smartphones with integrated cameras. You can see the beginning of this development in the annual reports, where compact camera sales in q2 2013 dropped by 26% (!!!). Maybe, a small segment with large sensor compacts will remain.

From my point of view, many people who are willing to buy a camera want better image quality than current smartphones, but they want also gear that is handy. In the last years, they bought DSLRs, because there was no alternative. Now, with the emerging mirrorless market (and possibly large sensor compacts) there is an alternative to DSLR. Thats why i think, the DSLR market share will decrease in favor of mirrorless cameras (or even large sensor compacts). In future, DSLRs will be bought by semi-pros and enthusiasts, but no longer by the family father who wants to take nice holiday pictures. I think a high percentage of todays DSLR consumers fall in the latter category. If i see people with DSLR, they mostly take pictures in Auto or P mode with a superzoom or kit-lens. These people will no longer buy DSLR in future. They will switch to gear that is more handy but offers nearly similar image quality


----------



## Kwanon (Oct 18, 2013)

Canon has not fallen of any boat.. They are doing well.
If anything Canon has spoiled us with great camera gear.

Only thing that has happened is that all the complaints in this forum has caught on and now every one is a complainer and you want a new 5D every single year (although the pattern has stayed exactly the same with release dates)
And you expect more and more features like you want to travel to space.

There are A TON of great Canon products and they will update every single camera right on time.
Just hold your complaints and get real.

It's not like theres a baboon is in charge of the company scratching its head and making random decisions based on what banana tastes good.

They are a real business in real world and they make the best decisions they can make. And from experience as a small business owner i know that if i was in charge of Canon i would not come to this forum and read constant complaints.
I would make business decisions based what is best for the company and what the share holders think is best.

Have some respect.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 18, 2013)

Kwanon said:


> Canon has not fallen of any boat.. They are doing well.
> If anything Canon has spoiled us with great camera gear.
> Only thing that has happened is that all the complaints in this forum has caught on and now every one is a complainer and you want a new 5D every single year (although the pattern has stayed exactly the same with release dates)
> And you expect more and more features like you want to travel to space.
> ...



LOL. ;D

Travelling to space would be nice. But with Canon as the travel agency, it would probably be a one way ticket to the moon. 

I don't expect Canon to build spaceships. A camera exactly like the Sony A7/R at the same price is all I am asking for.


----------



## Kwanon (Oct 18, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> Kwanon said:
> 
> 
> > Canon has not fallen of any boat.. They are doing well.
> ...



Exactly like the Sony A7/R? Then buy the Sony A7/R. What difference does it make if it says Sony on the front if that is your dream camera, it even eats Canon glass.

But i know you will come back to Canon when they make one that is even better.
Sony just created an affordable market for full frame cameras. You can't expect Canon to release their answer the same day.


----------



## Eldar (Oct 18, 2013)

I just saw the weekend add from the largest photo&video shop in Norway. They had a full pager in the biggest newspaper in Norway. And this page was clinically free of Canon content. Sony A7, A7R and DMC-RX10, Nikon D5300, Fujifilm X-E2 and XQ1, Panasonic GM1 and .... no Canon. This is the first time I seen one of these with NO Canon offer. 

So I repeat; The road to oblivion and to become the Nokia of the photography world is not that long ...


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 18, 2013)

I am happy that higher-end cameras do not get updated every year.... There are not the sales numbers to justify the constant retooling. Rebels, different story...

It is very expensive to redesign a camera.... a lot of the fixed costs will be the same for a 1DX2 or a T6i, but the T6i will have a thousand times the number of bodies sold to spread the cost over.. A new body every year would double the cost of high end cameras, the increased cost would cause sales to drop, causing the next one to be even more expensive.... is that really what people want?

What do you really think is going on at Canon R+D? Do you think they are paying a division billions of dollars to play cards? Do you think they are going to tell the world what is coming in a years time and watch sales tank as people wait?

A good Canon mirrorless is coming... it is just a matter of time... All the pieces of the puzzle are in place in current Canon bodies except for one, the EVF. How many of you saw dual-pixel focus coming????? And you think that a company which can do that can not make/acquire an EVF, particularly when there have been high quality EVF's on the market for at least a year?

The announcement of the 7D2 is long overdue... the 70D is more capable than the 7D in many ways.... the 7D has become obsolete and is being deeply discounted, presumably to get rid of stock. The 7D2, according to Canon, will be "revolutionary".... To me, it seems very probable that the 7D2 will be a mirrorless crop camera that will introduce a new mount, the EFM mount, a full frame sized mirrorless mount that will be able to use all the existing EF and EF-S lenses with an adaptor.


----------



## Kwanon (Oct 18, 2013)

Spend more money on Canon is the only right answer if you want new products.

Try to imagine how much money and talent and time is needed to develop a new 5D or a new 1D?
It's not exactly free.. We don't see it from the consumer side. We just demand and want lower prices.

If it costs lets say 100 million dollars to develop a new 1D camera, we ONLY pay 6000$ for it. It's dirt cheap to actually buy one if you think what goes in to actually making it.. We don't live in a dream world. We gotta pay to get some.

The same thing is happening with the video game industry. Every year it is more and more expensive to make great games and less and less people buy games. For example the PS vita is a great product, but no one buys it so there won't be many games made or a new better PS vita II in the future.
The customers are the only poison to any industry.

To create a situation where the camera business would be perfectly healthy, and a situation where we as customers would get all we want, the manufacturers need customers to buy their products.

In a perfect world all who want a new 5D faster than it is coming you should send 10 000$ to a kickstarter for a new 5D.
That would help some and if all did it it would help a lot.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 18, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> To me, it seems very probable that the 7D2 will be a mirrorless crop camera that will introduce a new mount, the EFM mount, a full frame sized mirrorless mount that will be able to use all the existing EF and EF-S lenses with an adaptor.



Equally probable that pigs will fly.  Also, there's already an EF-M mount - on the EOS M. 



Eldar said:


> I just saw the weekend add from the largest photo&video shop in Norway. They had a full pager in the biggest newspaper in Norway. And this page was clinically free of Canon content. Sony A7, A7R and DMC-RX10, Nikon D5300, Fujifilm X-E2 and XQ1, Panasonic GM1 and .... no Canon. This is the first time I seen one of these with NO Canon offer.



Could that be because everyone else announced new products (all the ones you listed) and Canon didn't? I'd call that an accident of timing, not an indication that Canon = Nokia.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 18, 2013)

Eldar said:


> So I repeat; The road to oblivion and to become the Nokia of the photography world is not that long ...



uhhhooohhh... when does the kodak quotes come?


----------



## Eldar (Oct 18, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> I am happy that higher-end cameras do not get updated every year.... There are not the sales numbers to justify the constant retooling. Rebels, different story...
> 
> It is very expensive to redesign a camera.... a lot of the fixed costs will be the same for a 1DX2 or a T6i, but the T6i will have a thousand times the number of bodies sold to spread the cost over.. A new body every year would double the cost of high end cameras, the increased cost would cause sales to drop, causing the next one to be even more expensive.... is that really what people want?
> 
> ...


I fully agree with you on most points. As far as I know, the Canon R&D has not been reduced to cause concern, but I am concerned with where Canon is directing that investment. The latest innovation we have seen has a clear video twist to it. And I am sure many people would be interested in video, but I am not. I am not even very interested in mirrorless cameras. I want maximum IQ from a stills camera. The 1DX is still the best action, wildlife body available. I am very happy with it and I don´t believe we can or should expect an update for some time yet. Nikon´s alternative is the D4 and the 1DX wins that battle. But an alternative to beat the 800E is missing and it has been missing for some time and Canon is dead quite about when we will get it. 

I was very close to buy a Phase One, but a +40MP body, with improved DR and Zeiss Otus lenses would cover that need, at a much lower cost (even though this forum has gone bananas over the Otus 55/1.4 price). And with such a body I would get full use of the 17 and 24 TS-E lenses ...


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 18, 2013)

Kwanon said:


> ...
> The customers are the only poison to any industry.
> ...



That might very well summarize how Canon sees its customers. ;D


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 18, 2013)

Eldar said:


> I was very close to buy a Phase One, but a +40MP body, with improved DR and Zeiss Otus lenses would cover that need, at a much lower cost (even though this forum has gone bananas over the Otus 55/1.4 price). And with such a body I would get full use of the 17 and 24 TS-E lenses ...



then buy a phase one .. i have one and i love it.
what keeps you from buying what you need?

???


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 18, 2013)

Eldar said:


> As far as I know, the Canon R&D has not been reduced to cause concern, but I am concerned with where Canon is directing that investment. The latest innovation we have seen has a clear video twist to it. And I am sure many people would be interested in video, but I am not. I am not even very interested in mirrorless cameras. I want maximum IQ from a stills camera.



Times are changing, and Canon is skating to where they think the puck will be. Printing used to be the primary output format for photography, but today prints represent a miniscule fraction of how images are presented - the vast majority of still photographs are viewed on a device which can also display video. If a picture is 'worth a thousand words' then a video is worth a million. Used to be you hired a wedding photographer. Then you hired both a photographer and a videographer, in part because the video quality wasn't very good. Now, many brides are hiring only videographers (many of whom take a few stills, but even if they don't a frame from HD video is more than sufficient for Facebook...). 

I'm a photo guy, not a video guy. But in a few years, my kids will be saying, "These silly pictures don't even move, s'up with that?!?"


----------



## Zv (Oct 18, 2013)

Whoever it was that said "no news is good news" was obviously not a Canon fan! 

I'm quite happy with the camera situation at the moment. I don't require 40MP or care about mirrorless all that much. 

I do care about lenses though. It would be nice to hear about a lens release before xmas. Maybe that 50? Hear Nikon have announced a new 58mm 1.4, where's our xmas prezzie? ???


----------



## Pag (Oct 18, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I'm a photo guy, not a video guy. But in a few years, my kids will be saying, "These silly pictures don't even move, s'up with that?!?"



I really have a hard time picturing a future where photographs are also completely replaced with video. Both have their place. Would I really want looping videos on my walls at home rather than static pictures? That would be maddening. I don't want everything everywhere to be in constant movement. Imagine replacing 100 wedding photos with 100 videos -- it would take forever to go through them.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 18, 2013)

Eldar said:


> I just saw the weekend add from the largest photo&video shop in Norway. They had a full pager in the biggest newspaper in Norway. And this page was clinically free of Canon content. Sony A7, A7R and DMC-RX10, Nikon D5300, Fujifilm X-E2 and XQ1, Panasonic GM1 and .... no Canon. This is the first time I seen one of these with NO Canon offer.
> 
> So I repeat; The road to oblivion and to become the Nokia of the photography world is not that long ...



Let me explain something about advertising. The brands that show up in a retailer's ad are not chosen by the retailer based on what is or is not selling. They are selected based on whatever manufacturer has the best advertising promotion going on at the time. 

Retailers get reimbursed for advertising a manufacturer's product. The terms of that reimbursement can vary based on any number of factors. Sometimes the advertising promotion is tied to the retailer stocking a particular package or buying a minimum number of units. 

For the retailer, the primary concern is maximizing their advertising dollars. They build their ads around the brands that are giving them the most money/credit for advertising the product. 

This is a gross oversimplification, but the main thing to understand is that there are way too many other factors to presume that the appearance or non-appearance of a specific brand in one specific ad means anything significant.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 18, 2013)

Pag said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a photo guy, not a video guy. But in a few years, my kids will be saying, "These silly pictures don't even move, s'up with that?!?"
> ...



Yeah. Not gonna happen. Two different mediums. Very different purposes. One is about the narrative. The other is about the moment.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 18, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Pag said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Clearly, you guys haven't seen the photos and newspapers in the Harry Potter movies...


----------



## Eldar (Oct 18, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > I just saw the weekend add from the largest photo&video shop in Norway. They had a full pager in the biggest newspaper in Norway. And this page was clinically free of Canon content. Sony A7, A7R and DMC-RX10, Nikon D5300, Fujifilm X-E2 and XQ1, Panasonic GM1 and .... no Canon. This is the first time I seen one of these with NO Canon offer.
> ...


He he, thanks for the lecture  That was exactly my point. The others have something they want to spend promotion dollars on, Canon apparently hasn´t.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 18, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > To me, it seems very probable that the 7D2 will be a mirrorless crop camera that will introduce a new mount, the EFM mount, a full frame sized mirrorless mount that will be able to use all the existing EF and EF-S lenses with an adaptor.
> ...


When the time comes that Canon goes mirrorless on higher end bodies, they will need a mount that they can put a FF sensor behind.... I thought that the image circle on the EOS-M was not big enough for a FF sensor 



neuroanatomist said:


> Equally probable that pigs will fly



As to a mirrorless 7D2, the only thing really missing is a good EVF... Canon is going to have to come out with a decent mirrorless camera soon, why not the 7D2? Fuji XE-2... Sony A-7... Panasonic GM-1.... Olympus OM-D EM-1... all proof that it can be done.....

How else would Canon differentiate a 7D2 from a 70D in a "revolutionary" manner?


----------



## Halfrack (Oct 18, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > I was very close to buy a Phase One, but a +40MP body, with improved DR and Zeiss Otus lenses would cover that need, at a much lower cost (even though this forum has gone bananas over the Otus 55/1.4 price). And with such a body I would get full use of the 17 and 24 TS-E lenses ...
> ...



Get an Alpa FPS and a Phase One back and use your Canon 17mm and 24mm TS lenses - the output is amazing. The trade off is huge, but what it can do is amazing. Yes, it's more money, but you're going to a chip 2x the size, CCD instead of CMOS, and the ability to do up to 80mp images.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 18, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Pag said:
> ...


You don't need Harry Potter newspapers... Look at online news.... note the number of stories that include video clips.... The articles are a combination of text, static images, and video. Each has it's place and serves a different purpose. Like it or not, video is here to stay.


----------



## Ruined (Oct 18, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



7D2 IMO will be focused on taking great videos and will have a more sturdy body. The 70D has no headphone jack, which makes it pretty much dead in the water for serious video making.  

Instead of making 7D2 mirrorless, which I feel is a mistake due to the disadvantages of mirrorless cameras, I would love to see a hybrid model. Same size as a DSLR, but having some of the perks of an EVF as an OPTIONAL mode. This can be done by having the standard DSLR mirror for normal usage but also a mode where the mirror flips up (similar to live view) and a mini projector embedded in the viewfinder path activates (of course would have to be done meticulously to avoid light leakage). This would allow some of the advantages/options of EVF while also offering advantages of DSLR. Only disadvantage would be no size reduction, but if you are buying a 7D2 I doubt that would be a massive priority.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 18, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



I think we have to agree to agree.  

Seriously, I'd certainly agree that video is already ubiquitous and will only become more so (is that even possible). I'm also all too aware of the shrinking market for stills photography, especially in journalism (That's one reason why I left photojournalism. It was dying even back in the 70s).

I'm not one of those anti-video guys who thinks Canon should rebate him $1.50 on a 5DIII because he never uses the video. 

It's just more of an observation: Video and still pictures are two different mediums. Purely as a means of expression, neither one can do what the other one does. 

Now, is there a viable market for what stills do so well? That I'm not so sure about. And, I'm a little saddened by that.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 18, 2013)

Eldar said:


> On the other hand, I just came in from shooting some autumn images, shot with the 5DIII and the 16-35 f2.8L II, which I rarely use, and results weren´t that bad. So, have a good Friday night everyone, I´m off to shoot some more, with my old fashioned and crappy Canon bodies



i doubt canon is to blame for the piece of sky and blue colors of the surrounding leaves.
that´s sure an editing mistake?

honestly with that quality your 16-35mm really sucks, i have to agree.
but more MP will not solve that problem.

ps: exif says 1D X.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 18, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Yes, the EF-M image circle is sized for APS-C. Yes, if Canon releases a FF mirrorless, they'll need a new mount for that. My point was that you named the new mount 'the EFM mount' and that name is already taken. 



Don Haines said:


> As to a mirrorless 7D2, the only thing really missing is a good EVF... Canon is going to have to come out with a decent mirrorless camera soon, why not the 7D2? Fuji XE-2... Sony A-7... Panasonic GM-1.... Olympus OM-D EM-1... all proof that it can be done.....
> 
> How else would Canon differentiate a 7D2 from a 70D in a "revolutionary" manner?



The 7D Mark II will be an updated 7D. It won't be APS-H, it won't be mirrorless - either of those would be new camera lines with different designations. 

Will the 7DII be 'revolutionary'? What Maeda sais was, "_We will not be putting out a product with merely better specs, but one that has evolved into new territory._" Evolution ≠ *r*evolutionary. Also, that interview predates the 70D, and one could argue that at least part of the 7D's 'new territory' will be a dual-pixel AF sensor. 



Don Haines said:


> You don't need Harry Potter newspapers... Look at online news.... note the number of stories that include video clips.... The articles are a combination of text, static images, and video. Each has it's place and serves a different purpose. Like it or not, video is here to stay.



Of course video is here to stay. My point is, are still photos here to stay? Well, yes, they probably are...but you don't need a still camera to take still photos. Remember Canon's concept camera - it shot video and the intent was to excerpt still frames as needed.


----------



## Eldar (Oct 18, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > On the other hand, I just came in from shooting some autumn images, shot with the 5DIII and the 16-35 f2.8L II, which I rarely use, and results weren´t that bad. So, have a good Friday night everyone, I´m off to shoot some more, with my old fashioned and crappy Canon bodies
> ...


he he, Thanks for spotting that. I was curious to see if anyone would care to check and make a comment about that and the inability to hold it steady at 1/15s


----------



## Ruined (Oct 18, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 7D Mark II will be an updated 7D. It won't be APS-H, it won't be mirrorless - either of those would be new camera lines with different designations.
> 
> Will the 7DII be 'revolutionary'? What Maeda sais was, "_We will not be putting out a product with merely better specs, but one that has evolved into new territory._" Evolution ≠ *r*evolutionary. Also, that interview predates the 70D, and one could argue that at least part of the 7D's 'new territory' will be a dual-pixel AF sensor.



Because of Maeda's statements, recent DPAF, STM lenses, etc - it only makes sense to me that the 7D2 will be like a better built 70D with more features. I believe it will be weather sealed yet also with flipout screen for video, as well as headphone jack and other features missing in 70D. The new territory the 7D will have evolved into then, is video. Makes sense as nearly every piece of gear released this year was video-related - DPAF/70D, STM lenses, and wideangle USM lenses with IS. All would point to a 7D2 that is awesome at video - in addition to birding, sports, etc.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 18, 2013)

Eldar said:


> Lichtgestalt said:
> 
> 
> > Eldar said:
> ...



exif say 1/30s and 1DX by the way.

see a 36 MP body would have helped you nothing in this case.
i dare to say it would have looked worse.

to really see the difference of 14 or 18 MP more you need a flawless technique.
means carrying a tripod too.

no offense but the image looks, from the quality, like a P&S not like a 1D X.
the borders are really awfull. 

im happy with 22MP on the current 5D MK3.
what i really want is a mindblowing 12-24mm that doesnt cripple the sensor performance.


----------



## ashmadux (Oct 18, 2013)

I can understand the M hate.

That said, I LOVE mine. Its a great purchase, primarily for its 22/f2 that has no full frame equivalent. No adapter (thought about it). A 55-250 on this thing would kill. On several occasions i carry it alongside a g12, fitting perfectly with space to spare inside a lowepro dslr shoulder bag.

Sensor wise- its a strange beast. Great color range, but lacking in pixel level sharpness compared to my t2i. Almost 7d-like noise levels at anything after iso 100. Night shots are fantastic (well, so is on my g12). Ive been shooting long exposure iso 100 shots at night this past week, and the results are just awesome. 

On the cons side

• Ive had a beeyach of a time creating baseline LR recipes for several shot types. The files colors and DR are just very weird to me, especially for daytime shots.
• No IS on the prime means a LOT of oof shots. That's a damn shame
• Action? Forgedduboutit.
• Screen is easily scratched- weird- not one of my regular dslrs ever managed to get a scratched screen. Must be a cheaper coating.
• Handling is goofy. Feels fragile. Hard to not put fingers on the lens front/filter.
• Needs another knob or two.

Eventually i will get the adapter, but for now the 22mm is gold, imho.


My 2c


----------



## Etienne (Oct 18, 2013)

ashmadux said:


> I can understand the M hate.
> 
> That said, I LOVE mine. Its a great purchase, primarily for its 22/f2 that has no full frame equivalent.



Yes there is a FF equivalent ... the 35 f/2 IS ... on a 5DIII it is far superior to the EOS-M 22 f/2 combo (I have both). Not only does the 35 f/2 have IS, it generates a much shallower DOF on FF, and the 5DIII has similar IQ at ISO 6400 that the EOS-M has at ISO 800.


----------



## ashmadux (Oct 18, 2013)

Etienne said:


> ashmadux said:
> 
> 
> > I can understand the M hate.
> ...



I misspoke- no aspc equivalent - the 35 wouldnt be wide enough, but that IS would save the day. I didnt mention that i recent rented the 24 1.4 to emulate what i can achieve with the m. Pot even close, due to horrible misfocusing of that lens. Reminded me of the craptastic 50 1.4


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 18, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > How else would Canon differentiate a 7D2 from a 70D in a "revolutionary" manner?
> ...


My mistake... call it faulty memory... I thought he said revolutionary...

If it is evolutionary and not revolutionary, an improved and sealed 70D is a better bet... but I do hope that Canon gets to the point where we can leave mechanical shutters and mirrors behind.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 18, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > You don't need Harry Potter newspapers... Look at online news.... note the number of stories that include video clips.... The articles are a combination of text, static images, and video. Each has it's place and serves a different purpose. Like it or not, video is here to stay.
> ...



I think we are saying the same thing....Video is here to stay, stills are here to stay.....

For web purposes, you can extract a pretty decent image from video... not anything good enough to print a poster with, but if all you want is a facebook post, it will do. Most astro-photographers shoot video, extract stills, and image stack them to get a "still picture". For birds and wildlife (and that includes brides), if you really want that high quality image, nothing comes close to a quality still image.

BTW, have you played with 4K video? Even from a GoPro you get a surprisingly good image... eventually 4K video will trickle up to "real cameras" and then one will be able to extract an even better image from video.

Also, a number of point/shoot cameras now have a mode where when you take a picture you also get a 5 second video clip.... the lines are getting blurred further...


----------



## infared (Oct 19, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Pag said:
> ...


----------



## Albi86 (Oct 19, 2013)

Ricku said:


> I think that everyone who isn't a sports photographer will sooner or later switch over to mirrorless.



+1

If most of your shots are <150mm mirrorless is a no-brainer. 

BTW, I don't know why some people are assuming that a mirrorless offers less IQ than a DSLR, thus being a sort of surrogate.


----------



## George D. (Oct 19, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...




For sports shooting if you think about it 12fps drive (1DX) is half the speed of 25fps movie mode. Why the fuss with fps, you just shoot movie and extract every other frame. That's what Canon will be soon giving us, single frame + movie mode albeit high speed movie mode for slow motion ability.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 19, 2013)

George D. said:


> For sports shooting if you think about it 12fps drive (1DX) is half the speed of 25fps movie mode. Why the fuss with fps, you just shoot movie and extract every other frame. That's what Canon will be soon giving us, single frame + movie mode albeit high speed movie mode for slow motion ability.



If a camera can shoot video at 60 frames per second then it is capable of 60 frames per second of still images... the problem becomes storing them... I have a p/s camera that will operate 60fps with 3M images, 12fps with 16M images, and will shoot 120 and 240fps video. One would hope that a DSLR would be able to stream more data to a memory card or have a bigger buffer....

One of the things to expect with mirrorless cameras is much higher frame rates for stills....


----------



## Ruined (Oct 19, 2013)

Yeah stills extracted from a movie will always be lower quality than traditional stills due to the large amount of compression that would be needed to fit the movie on an SD card.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 20, 2013)

Pag said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a photo guy, not a video guy. But in a few years, my kids will be saying, "These silly pictures don't even move, s'up with that?!?"
> ...



+1

(and I say that as someone who does love video in DSLRs)


----------



## BJDrew (Oct 20, 2013)

*I'm a little bummed with Canon too.*

Here's a little satire you might enjoy:
Canon Responds to Revolutionary Sony Mirrorless Full Frame with Even More Revolutionary APS-C DSLR

http://www.leica-boss.com/2013/10/canon-responds-to-revolutionary-sony-mirrorless-full-frame-with-even-more-revolutionary-aps-c-dslr/


----------



## OldSalt (Oct 20, 2013)

Canon is going to regret their hesitation and lack of action embracing the mirrorless niche. This may sound a bit bold but this is the exactly the type of thing that puts good companies in jeopardy. It is a short trip from comfortably profitable to desparately broke. With the rapid advancement of the mirroless format including some awesome full frame sensor options I can't see it slowing down and it will eventually overtake the more familiar traditional DSLR format. Cheaper to manufacture (offering greater profit margins to boot) and image quality nearly on par and soon to be equal in all respects am I the only one who can see that the SLR format is terminally ill? Oh sure there will always be the holdouts and denials just as today you have the few who would not break from film SLRs but they will be relagated to a small niche. 
Let me just add that regardless of what many may want or think these companies are in business for only one reason; _TO MAKE A PROFIT_, this will and already is driving companies into this format. And is the ONLY reason Canon hasn't jumped ship yet because today they are _MAKING MONEY_.

I for one am going to offload all my Canon gear in the not so distant future, as I am excited by the progress and simplicity of the mirrorless format and definitely wont miss the extra weight and bulk if my old gear.

Lastly if Canon would invest now and produce a sensor that was at least on par with the new Sony and Fuji sensors put it in a body that offered manual and automatic controls and features (like the X-PRO-1 only better) I would buy it without hesitation but I lament because they won't. So I will move on having enjoyed Canon products when they were cutting edge and moving on the the "new" cutting edge where ever that leads
me Fuji/Olympus/Sony who knows  it's a brave new world!


----------



## Frage (Oct 20, 2013)

I´ve got this one day ago in Istanbul. I am very sorry for the quality.

Have fun.




IMG_0138 por Basta!!!, en Flickr



IMG_0137 por Basta!!!, en Flickr



IMG_0136 por Basta!!!, en Flickr



IMG_0139 por Basta!!!, en Flickr


----------



## Click (Oct 20, 2013)

Sorry Frage, can't see your pictures.


----------



## Frage (Oct 20, 2013)

Now you can, I hope


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 21, 2013)

Frage said:


> Now you can, I hope



So you're saying Canon is diversifying, and launching a gaffer tape division??


----------



## Bob Howland (Oct 21, 2013)

Frage, why are these pictures significant? (That's a serious question.)


----------



## Grumbaki (Oct 21, 2013)

Just one piece of food for thoughts in the whole "canon is so passive with mirrorless".

While I agree on the analysis of the current market, you can't say that canon already lost the segment like I see some say here already.
From a business point of view, there is no or little point being the first or dominating the early adopter market. With a strong brand name, you just need to drop the killer product with good timing: at general adoption. If smartphone and tablets markets taught us one thing, this should be it.


----------



## Eldar (Oct 21, 2013)

To me it looks like a 5DIII body with a 50/1.2L, after a tape orgy. Maybe a 3D prototype ... Let's hope.


----------



## Ricku (Oct 21, 2013)

But seriously, why would someone cover their camera in tape like that? I can only think of one explanation, and that it that they have something to hide.

He even covered the Canon logo on the lens cap.

Could this be the unicorn we've been waiting for?


----------



## AmbientLight (Oct 21, 2013)

Ricku said:


> But seriously, why would someone cover their camera in tape like that? I can only think of one explanation, and that it that they have something to hide.
> 
> He even covered the Canon logo on the lens cap.
> 
> Could this be the unicorn we've been waiting for?



It appears to be merely a tourist fearing that someone may steal his camera during vacation. Probably it was an American, because in earlier discussions regarding the excessive use of gaffer tape on camera equipment only U.S. citizens appeared to have serious concerns regarding theft. As a European I have never covered up my equipment.


----------



## Ricku (Oct 21, 2013)

AmbientLight said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > But seriously, why would someone cover their camera in tape like that? I can only think of one explanation, and that it that they have something to hide.
> ...


You are probably right.

But he even covered the jog dial, the side of the camera, and the area around the hot shoe.. Doesn't make any sense! Unless he's trying to add some extra weather protection. lol


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 21, 2013)

Limited Edition Special Edition Gaffer Taped L Cam.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 21, 2013)

this camera even has the hot shoe covered.... wtf?

no sane person would cover a camera like that, only for "theft angst".

this is either a prank... make people think it is a prototype.. or it is indeed a prototype.


----------



## LeifHurst (Oct 21, 2013)

I'm pretty disappointed in Canon. Nothing has really been released that has me reaching for my wallet. No Fuji fighter mirrorless and no D800E killer (the only thing that might keep me in the brand).

Meanwhile "the other guys" look like they're dropping a Vintage looking body with a D4 sensor in it.

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/10/20/update-the-new-full-frame-retro-nikon-camera-will-have-f-mount-and-pentaprism.aspx/

This is the first time where I'm start to feel like I'm on the wrong boat.


----------



## Zv (Oct 21, 2013)

LeifHurst said:


> I'm pretty disappointed in Canon. Nothing has really been released that has me reaching for my wallet. No Fuji fighter mirrorless and no D800E killer (the only thing that might keep me in the brand).
> 
> Meanwhile "the other guys" look like they're dropping a Vintage looking body with a D4 sensor in it.
> 
> ...



Tell me, why do you feel the need for a "vintage body" all of a sudden? What is this fascination? Frankly, I' glad Canon aren't just jumping on the retro bandwagon to make a few bucks (with my luck they'll announce a retro body tomorrow and I'll be eating my words!!). 

Here's an idea - don't complain that you can't spend your money fast enough. Give it to me if it bothers you!

;D


----------



## MarkII (Oct 21, 2013)

AmbientLight said:


> It appears to be merely a tourist fearing that someone may steal his camera during vacation. Probably it was an American, because in earlier discussions regarding the excessive use of gaffer tape on camera equipment only U.S. citizens appeared to have serious concerns regarding theft. As a European I have never covered up my equipment.



I'm a European who tapes up their camera (though perhaps not quite so extremely).

It is not about theft - that will happen anyway. However, it does make a difference to perception. A lot of wealthy tourists show up around here waving giant cameras and L-series zooms as status symbols. I saw one Russian family of four where every person was prominently wearing large Canon cameras and L-series lenses (though I didn't seem them take a single photo!).

Act like that and you are going to be pestered like mad by every street-trader, down-and-out, and drunk that decides they want something from you...


----------



## LeifHurst (Oct 21, 2013)

Zv said:


> LeifHurst said:
> 
> 
> > I'm pretty disappointed in Canon. Nothing has really been released that has me reaching for my wallet. No Fuji fighter mirrorless and no D800E killer (the only thing that might keep me in the brand).
> ...



I don't want a vintage body... honestly, I could care less about how a camera looks as long as it feels right and the resulting images are amazing. I was simply noting that the other brand is releasing high end sensors in a smaller body which is the appeal of some of these Fuji and now Sony kits with a Full Frame. I think a lot of folks are jumping the gun with the Sony camera as the thing hasn't even been tested yet, but that's the internet for you.

I've been with Canon since '97 and so it's with great apprehension that I would even consider jumping ship. I'm hanging tight until "the next big thing" as I really only upgrade bodies every other generation.

Thanks for the warm welcome?


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 21, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> this camera even has the hot shoe covered.... wtf?
> 
> no sane person would cover a camera like that, only for "theft angst".
> 
> this is either a prank... make people think it is a prototype.. or it is indeed a prototype.



Sometimes the best place to hide things is in plain sight....

If I were sending out a secret prototype to be used in public, I'd make it look as much as possible as an existing body.


----------



## SiliconVoid (Oct 21, 2013)

Why does there need to be anything 'next' from Canon, or Nikon, or Sony....
Have all you people actually outgrown your existing equipment???
Your skill in photography demands more camera than you have now???
Your creativity is being suppressed by the outdated equipment you have now???

Or is it really a situation where you do not wish to learn photography and are always vigilant for something that might do everything for you....?

Personally I would prefer the manufacturers stop worrying about MP and turn all that R&D towards a digital sensor that can produce 6400+ ISO as clean as 100 ISO.. Until that has been accomplished everything else is a waste of time and money.


----------



## Ricku (Oct 21, 2013)

SiliconVoid said:


> Personally I would prefer the manufacturers stop worrying about MP and turn all that R&D towards *a digital sensor that can produce 6400+ ISO as clean as 100 ISO*.. Until that has been accomplished everything else is a waste of time and money.


And I think Canon should turn their R&D towards a digital sensor that can produce clean ISO 100!


----------



## dude (Oct 21, 2013)

I was reading your post reading my response when you mentioned my response. I want to shoot at 8000 ISO and not tell the difference between it and 100. That is because I have been spending a lot of time doing football this year. 




SiliconVoid said:


> Personally I would prefer the manufacturers stop worrying about MP and turn all that R&D towards a digital sensor that can produce 6400+ ISO as clean as 100 ISO.. Until that has been accomplished everything else is a waste of time and money.


----------



## brad-man (Oct 21, 2013)

SiliconVoid said:


> Why does there need to be anything 'next' from Canon, or Nikon, or Sony....
> Have all you people actually outgrown your existing equipment???
> Your skill in photography demands more camera than you have now???
> Your creativity is being suppressed by the outdated equipment you have now???
> ...



You are aware that the name of this forum is Canon_RUMORS_, right? Speculation (bitching) about the latest and the greatest from Canon is pretty relevant here.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 21, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Lichtgestalt said:
> 
> 
> > this camera even has the hot shoe covered.... wtf?
> ...



yes use a existing body to test prototype electronics.
makes sense as long as you don´t want to test new ergonomics.

but don´t cover it in tape like christo on steroids.


----------



## Zv (Oct 22, 2013)

LeifHurst said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > LeifHurst said:
> ...



Sorry I wasn't trying to be mean. It's just, after a while you read the complaints on here about Canon not doing this or not making that and it just gets old. It can drive you nuts sometimes thinking of gear when we should (me included) be out taking amazing pictures with our existing equipment (which isn't too shabby!). 

My 550D still takes pretty decent pictures, as long as there's good light. 

This retro thing and smaller body is just a marketing thing. It's created a need that wasn't there before. Think about it, how did we get by before with all our gigantic cameras? Just fine. Making it smaller has no clear advantage for me since my lenses are all quite large anyway (and I have big hands that don't grip small cameras too good!). And I have no interest in buying a whole new system of lenses (even if they were Canon). Hey but that's just me. 

I'm satisfied but also curious enough to see what Canon has in store, as it will be the tech that I'll likely be using in a couple of years time. I think what they've done so far with the 6D and cleaner high ISO is encouraging. I'm a big fan of high ISO usability. Also a fan of built in radio on speedlites (another Canon first). Dual pixel AF is also a welcome innovation, but one I don't personally use (wouldn't say no to it!). 

So, recap. Glad the R&D dollars (yen?) aren't going into making mirrorless retro fashion statements and are (probably) going into something that improves IQ.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 22, 2013)

What's Next for Canon?

Ask these guys, they will tell you ;D


----------



## Grumbaki (Oct 22, 2013)

Retro is useless but can't be worse than TRONesque designs like the A7R. All in all, retro design can be the gaffer tape of mirrorless.

As to your point of size being a marketing ploy: if you think of interchangeable lens system and carrying a kit, I'd say you think like the new version of the newbie prosummer who is the target of those systems. Some of us here want a mirrorless where size is actually the main factor, fixed lens being totally fine. One focal to rule them all (they can probably have a 3 camera lineup, trinity wielding), daily camera for the photog man purse.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 22, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> As to your point of size being a marketing ploy: if you think of interchangeable lens system and carrying a kit, I'd say you think like the new version of the newbie prosummer who is the target of those systems. Some of us here want a mirrorless where size is actually the main factor, fixed lens being totally fine. One focal to rule them all (they can probably have a 3 camera lineup, trinity wielding), daily camera for the photog man purse.




No. I want one, only one camera system at a time. And I want the body to be as small as possible without having to "sacrifice" anything in image quality and ergonomic control. That way I can go "small and light" if I use a small lens, with focal length of my choosing. Only when required, I'll use the small camera with a larger lens (tele) - and even then the system will still be lighter and less unwieldy than with a larger body. 

Therefore I have never and will never consider a camera with a bolted-on fixed focal lens. No way. And the mere thought of having to buy, own and carry three stupid fixed-lens cameras [Sigma DP-this-and that, Sony RX-1, yikes!] to cover shooting situations that could be easily covered with one small camera body plus 3 small lenses or even easier with one smallish zoom lens ... sounds even more stupid to me.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 22, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> Retro is useless but can't be worse than TRONesque designs like the A7R. All in all, retro design can be the gaffer tape of mirrorless.
> 
> As to your point of size being a marketing ploy: if you think of interchangeable lens system and carrying a kit, I'd say you think like the new version of the newbie prosummer who is the target of those systems. Some of us here want a mirrorless where size is actually the main factor, fixed lens being totally fine. One focal to rule them all (they can probably have a 3 camera lineup, trinity wielding), daily camera for the photog man purse.



Wow...you took that like a man Grumbaki. I guess you didn't see my ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Feel better after getting that frustration off your chest?


----------



## Zv (Oct 23, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> Retro is useless but can't be worse than TRONesque designs like the A7R. All in all, retro design can be the gaffer tape of mirrorless.
> 
> As to your point of size being a marketing ploy: if you think of interchangeable lens system and carrying a kit, I'd say you think like the new version of the newbie prosummer who is the target of those systems. Some of us here want a mirrorless where size is actually the main factor, fixed lens being totally fine. One focal to rule them all (they can probably have a 3 camera lineup, trinity wielding), daily camera for the photog man purse.



Carrying 3 cameras with fixed lenses?? That don't make no sense, aint nobody got time for that!


----------



## Ivan Muller (Oct 23, 2013)

Zv said:


> Grumbaki said:
> 
> 
> > Retro is useless but can't be worse than TRONesque designs like the A7R. All in all, retro design can be the gaffer tape of mirrorless.
> ...



Hey when I go photographing I carry a medium format with shift lens, tripod, small camera like a eos m and a 5d2 with some sort of a lens...photography is hard work but its a hell of a lot easier than the old days of schlepping a 4x5 with all the stuff and 10 darkslides for half a day...


----------



## Zv (Oct 23, 2013)

Ivan Muller said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > Grumbaki said:
> ...



Well at least they are 3 different kinds of cameras for different purposes and have interchangeable lenses. I was referring to three with fixed lenses to do one job. So in that setup if he needed a fourth field of view he would buy another camera?


----------



## Grumbaki (Oct 24, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Grumbaki said:
> 
> 
> > Retro is useless but can't be worse than TRONesque designs like the A7R. All in all, retro design can be the gaffer tape of mirrorless.
> ...



I don't get it. Maybe my post sounds harsher that what i meant. No issues, really.

As to the fixed lens mirrrorless, I wasn't advocating for buying several cams with those. Just saying that there's a market for DLSR owners who want to have a high IQ every minute with them and that are ok to sacrifice the lens. At least I believe so. and then the size aregument is even better...
Don't you go out sometimes with just one prime? 
Next question: with equal speed and reach, how much do you really save with those ecosystems? couple hundred grams on a 2kg kit? 1 kilo out of a 10 kg kit? doesn't worth it IHMO.
But having a very high IQ 50 or whatever in you actual pocket, that's a kick.


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 24, 2013)

I believe that Canon has too much invested in their current technology and is thus unwilling to discard that investment, even though much of it has been made defunct.

For example their IS system. Lens-based IS was the only option in the days of film cameras. Canon invested heavily in research and then digital arrived. IMHO, sensor-based stabilisation is much better, especially for video as proven by Olympus's IBIS. Yet for Canon their research must have a return on investment (RoI), so they now bring basically every lens out with IS, irrespective of whether it needs it or not, e.g. the new 24mm, 28mm and 35mm lenses.

The same can be said of their focus-system (the one in the base of the camera, not the on-chip implementation). A relic from heavy investment during the film days, which Canon will continue using (with the required mirror) until such time as the research has paid for itself.

It took guts in 1987 to drop the FD system in favour of the unproven EF system and it was a make-or-break decision. Canon, IMHO, must now again make such a decision and take the loss on all that "old" technology that is basically keeping them back. Mirrorless is, with regards to the entry- and mid-level segment, the future.

But the joke is that Canon need not change the EOS/EF/EF-S system in any way. Nothing in the laws of physics dictate that mirrorless must be small and with a miniscule flange distance. Keep the size of the cameras, keep the current flange distance ... just make the dang things mirrorless.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 24, 2013)

Sella174 said:


> But the joke is that Canon need not change the EOS/EF/EF-S system in any way. Nothing in the laws of physics dictate that mirrorless must be small and with a miniscule flange distance. Keep the size of the cameras, keep the current flange distance ... just make the dang things mirrorless.



I agree on most of your post. And yes, mirrorless cameras could also be built with the current EF/EF-S system's flange distance. 

BUT ... I want to get the entire "digital dividend" = 100% electronic cameras with capabilitis that exceed anything possible with a mirror-slapping DSLR. PLUS smaller body AND lower price. Why should electronic devices be any larger than they absolutely need to be? Smartphones do not contain large pockets of thin air either. 

Canon may not have to go all the way down to only 18mm flange distance like Sony did with its E-mount ... but something around 21mm [=approx. half of FF diagonal] might be the ideal choice. Less restrictions in designing lenses [telecentricity, corner IQ], but still very slim camera bodies. 

Also, Canon sholud take the plunge and move to a new lens mount soon, as they did in 1987. This time the pain will be far less, sicne flange distance will be shorter and all EF-lenses will remain usable via simple optics-free adapters. And over time - and spurred along by decent marketing and discounting - the entire user-base will purchase a new set of lenses (again), in addition to buying new mirrorless camera bodies - sooner than they might have replaced their existing DSLRs with yet another uninspiring, only marginally better iteration of DSLR. 

Now, what's not to like in this scenario - from Canon' s business perspective? Plus: invested customers could not "escape" by switching to another brand either, because that would require at least the same investment.


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 24, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> ... all EF-lenses will remain usable via simple optics-free adapters.



Yes, and Canon should sell those adapters for $20 even if it cost them $200 to manufacture.


----------



## Lawliet (Oct 24, 2013)

Sella174 said:


> For example their IS system. Lens-based IS was the only option in the days of film cameras. Canon invested heavily in research and then digital arrived. IMHO, sensor-based stabilisation is much better, especially for video as proven by Olympus's IBIS.



Yet Sony is going back to optical stabilizers. Canon just didn't take the detour.
Also for AF - you need sensor cells that deliver a good signal at short exposure times. A dedicated module has a massive headstart here.


----------



## AmbientLight (Oct 26, 2013)

Lawliet said:


> Sella174 said:
> 
> 
> > For example their IS system. Lens-based IS was the only option in the days of film cameras. Canon invested heavily in research and then digital arrived. IMHO, sensor-based stabilisation is much better, especially for video as proven by Olympus's IBIS.
> ...



You are certainly correct regarding optical stabilizers. Having a stabilizer in the camera body will obviously lead to at least some optimization limitations as the vendor cannot fully optimize for specialized lenses (for example for big whites) and in addition it kills off any opportunity to come out with something like the 100mm L macro's IS system.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 26, 2013)

AmbientLight said:


> g
> You are certainly correct regarding optical stabilizers. Having a stabilizer in the camera body will obviously lead to at least some optimization limitations as the vendor cannot fully optimize for specialized lenses (for example for big whites) and in addition it kills off any opportunity to come out with something like the 100mm L macro's IS system.



Hahaha .. Really funny! Canon is 2 axes and hybrid af in 100mm L IS macro stabilizes movement in 4 axes. Olympus IBIS is 5 axes. ;-)

I am looking forward to a mirrorless FF-body - maybe sony a9r - with 5 axes in-body is, so i dint't have to buy in-lens is in a 24/2.8 or 28/2.8. and when a big white with in-lens is is attached, the ibis will automatically be switched off. In one word: Best of all worlds.


----------



## AmbientLight (Oct 26, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> AmbientLight said:
> 
> 
> > g
> ...



I don't see axis counting as any feasible way of comparison here. ??? It must be obvious that from a development standpoint a vendor will run into limitations trying to cater to a broad selection of lens usage scenarios or do you really believe that at Olympus they work miracles instead of engineering?


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 27, 2013)

AmbientLight said:


> I don't see axis counting as any feasible way of comparison here. ??? It must be obvious that from a development standpoint a vendor will run into limitations trying to cater to a broad selection of lens usage scenarios or do you really believe that at Olympus they work miracles instead of engineering?



I think in-Body stabilization is preferrable for any lens up to 100mm focal length. Beyond that, in-lens-IS is preferable in DSLRs with OVFs as the viewfinder image is also stabilized. As mirrorless cams with EVF will replace DSLRs, sensor-stabilization will be the way to go, since it makes lenses somewhat sharper, lighter, more robust and less expensive and the viewfinder image will also be stabilized then. 

In-body sensor stabilization for 6 "axes" - or rather "lateral shift along" plus "rotation around" all 3 axes (x, y, z) - will probably come soon - i.e. including back/forward movement of sensor, which is currently still missing in any manufacturers implementation. Compared to that, Canon's 2-axis "angle-movement" IS looks rather "last century". 

Heck, along with 6-axes Sensor-IS we may even get user-controllable, ultra-high-precision sensor shift and rotation in all 3 axes = tilt/shift with any lens. At least to some degree. ;-)

And yes, Olympus and to a lesser extent also Sony engineers do have a headstart over Canon (and Nikon) when it comes to in-body sensor-shift IS.


----------



## Ruined (Oct 27, 2013)

Interesting how people continue to say mirrorless will replace DSLR, while sales trends indicate that statement is the opposite of reality.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 27, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> In-body sensor stabilization for 6 "axes" - or rather "lateral shift along" plus "rotation around" all 3 axes (x, y, z) - will probably come soon - i.e. including back/forward movement of sensor, which is currently still missing in any manufacturers implementation. Compared to that, Canon's 2-axis "angle-movement" IS looks rather "last century".



More like building a better mousetrap, when the traditional design works just fine. At non-macro distances, the effects of translational shift (in the plane of the sensor) are essentially irrelevant. I'm not sure how much roll matters, either...but I'd guess not much at all (what _would_ be nice is automatic leveling, but gyroscopes for stabilization aren't able to provide absolute accuracy, only detect and allow compensation for relative motion). So Canon's 'last century' system compensates for the types of motion that account for the vast majority of 'shake' except at macro distances, and for the latter scenario, they have the 'this century' Hybrid IS than compensates for translational motion in addition to angular.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> So Canon's 'last century' system compensates for the types of motion that account for the vast majority of 'shake' except at macro distances, and for the latter scenario, they have the 'this century' Hybrid IS than compensates for translational motion in addition to angular.



yes. As I said. Canon has "2-axis" stabilizer (angular moves) and "4-axis" stabilizer in 100mm Macro. Oly has 5-axis stabilizer (but only) in their latest camera bodies (OMD5 and 1). I'd imaginge that (micro-) camera shake can really occur in any of the 6 possible axes. Translational along the z-axis (optical axis of the system) is probably really only relevant in very shallow DOF situations and macro.

Short overview of the 5-axis in Oly IBIS: OLYMPUS OM-D E-M1 - 5-AXIS IMAGE STABILIZATION VIDEO (English)

Especially in mirrorless ILCs with short-flange distance, in-body IS is a major asset, since it will also work with any non-IS lens mounted via adapter. Unfortunately Sony has not built their IBIS ("2-axis") into the A7/R - where it would matter most [exacting 36 MP sensor and so far only the 2 native zooms [28-70, 24-70) will have in-lens OSS, but not the 800 Euro 35/2.8 nor the 1000 USD 55/1.8, not to mention any of the other Sony A and E lenses. This is one of the reasons, why I'll probably pass on the A7/R.


----------



## AmbientLight (Oct 27, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > So Canon's 'last century' system compensates for the types of motion that account for the vast majority of 'shake' except at macro distances, and for the latter scenario, they have the 'this century' Hybrid IS than compensates for translational motion in addition to angular.
> ...



Strange how Sony contradicts the assumptions that in-body IS is preferable by providing the A7/R without that. Wouldn't they jump on the opportunity to use their existing technology, if it were as preferable? It is really essential to understand that axis-counting is no good as a way to determine effectiveness of an IS system. I believe that the A7/R coming without in-body IS just demonstrates that Sony has proceeded through the learning curve far enough to realize that they can achieve better results with in-lens IS, simply because this is optimized for each lens.

Addressing multiple axis for image stabilization does complicate the overall design, so in contrast to what many might expect a vendor keeping their design as simple and as effective as possible will likely end up with the best product. This is not to say that further development will not include additional axis. This trend will likely remain, but we must not overestimate products by simply counting axis. Olympus is not currently selling a product from the year 2200, even if their product requirement specifications do allow for additional functionality.


----------



## Sporgon (Oct 27, 2013)

Have any of you guys banging the drum for sensor based stabilisation actually used it in a dslr ? From my experiences with it it is not as effective as a lens based system, even with shorter focal lengths.


----------



## Ruined (Oct 27, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Have any of you guys banging the drum for sensor based stabilisation actually used it in a dslr ? From my experiences with it it is not as effective as a lens based system, even with shorter focal lengths.



A lot of time people let marketing specs overwhelm them regardless of performance. I saw people going nuts on the HD forum about some 32" 4K resolution noname TVs available for under $1000. Then they wondered after buying it why it looked worse than their 720P TV. Specs don't tell the whole story and can be easily manipulated to make a product sound better than it actually is.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 27, 2013)

AmbientLight said:


> ... It is really essential to understand that axis-counting is no good as a way to determine effectiveness of an IS system.



con we agree that in practice camera shake can and will occur "in any direction, sideways and rotational - in all three axes of our three-dimensional world (x, y, z) and even in any combination therof? 

Yes, number of axes stabilized does not tell us anything about an IS system's effectiveness (how well it stabilizes ... 0, 1,2,3,4,+ stops - and under what conditions?). But offering stabilization in more/all directions is essential to build a dramatically better IS system than one working "in 2 directions (x,y - angular) only.

And as for in-lens IS "being specialized for each lens" this really is a marketing joke. Of course it has to be "specialized" and "built to order" for each lens, because of the differences in optical design. After all in-lens IS introduces an additional, moveable lens element/group in the light-path, which would otherwise not necessarily be needed to yield the desired imaging capabilities. 

At the sensor level however, shake is shake. It has direction/s, frequency and amplitude. Amplitude will be larger, the narrower the FOV of the mounted lens, that's all. For teh system to work well, it does not have to be tailored to each lens. It just has to be effective in quickly moving the sensor exactly in the right direction/s by the required amount of travel. Irrespectively of whether a lens with 10mm lens or 800mm focal length is mounted, and what optical lyout is used in that lens. 

The best in-sensor IS systems today are every bit as effective as in-lens IS ... at a fraction pof the cost. Since it is needed only once per body, not once in every single lens. The only inherent advantage of in-lens IS systems is the ability to stabilize the viewfinder image in a DSLR. In mirrorless cameras with EVF, this is not needed, since the viewfinder image comes directly from the sensor and will automatically be stabilized. No matter what lens, as long as the amplitude of the camera shake is within working limits of the IS system.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 27, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> con we agree that in practice camera shake can and will occur "in any direction, sideways and rotational - in all three axes of our three-dimensional world (x, y, z) and even in any combination therof?
> 
> Yes, number of axes stabilized does not tell us anything about an IS system's effectiveness (how well it stabilizes ... 0, 1,2,3,4,+ stops - and under what conditions?). But offering stabilization in more/all directions is essential to build a dramatically better IS system than one working "in 2 directions (x,y - angular) only.
> 
> The best in-sensor IS systems today are every bit as effective as in-lens IS ...



We can agree that shake can occur in any direction, as long as we also understand that the detrimental effect of shake is not of the same magnitude for all of those directions. Thus, better correction of the more impactful types of motion may yield a better overall result than mediocre correction of all of them. 

Your assertion about 6-axes being 'essential to build a dramatically better IS system' is nice in theory, but from a practical standpoint, your later statement is the relevant one: 'the best' recent in-body IS has finally caught up with the effectiveness of in-lens IS. Of course, you conveniently omitted an important caveat: _for smaller sensors_. I'm sure there's a very good reason that Sony didn't include in-body IS on their new full frame cameras...because it wasn't effective enough.


----------



## J.R. (Oct 27, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> AmbientLight said:
> 
> 
> > ... It is really essential to understand that axis-counting is no good as a way to determine effectiveness of an IS system.
> ...



IS in the camera itself is a great concept but suffer from inherent limitations as well. The lenses need to have a bigger imaging circle which can take into account the sensor movement range. With telephoto lenses, the sensor needs more room to move - now think in terms of super-tele focal lengths ... improbable at 800mm. Ever wondered why the new mirrorless EVFs don't have IS built into the camera? The small form factor will be thrown out of the window.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 27, 2013)

> The best in-sensor IS systems today are every bit as effective as in-lens IS ... at a fraction pof the cost. Since it is needed only once per body, not once in every single lens. The only inherent advantage of in-lens IS systems is the ability to stabilize the viewfinder image in a DSLR. In mirrorless cameras with EVF, this is not needed, since the viewfinder image comes directly from the sensor and will automatically be stabilized. No matter what lens, as long as the amplitude of the camera shake is within working limits of the IS system.



im pretty happy with my IS lenses.. but i read many complains about the different in body stabilizations from panasonic and olympus. and those are m43 sensor cameras. on a FF sensor i guess IBIS would be somewhat more dificult.

and as long am my canon DSLR´s don´t have a EVF... i want IS in my lenses.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 27, 2013)

J.R. said:


> IS in the camera itself is a great concept but suffer from inherent limitations as well. The lenses need to have a bigger imaging circle which can take into account the sensor movement range. With telephoto lenses, the sensor needs more room to move - now think in terms of super-tele focal lengths ... improbable at 800mm. Ever wondered why the new mirrorless EVFs don't have IS built into the camera? The small form factor will be thrown out of the window.



Of course there are limits to evrything. 

No problem to continue use of in-lens IS on long (Super)tele lenses. IBIS-Camera either switches to lens-IS when detected or camera makers eventually get both IS implementations to work in tandem for even greater effectiveness. After all, its just just a matter of the right sensors, algorithms, and processing power.


----------



## Ruined (Oct 27, 2013)

In 2014, Canon needs to do three things and they will be just fine:

#1 Release the darn 7D2, and make sure it is a masterpiece since it took so long. 5D3 autofocus, articulating touchscreen, headphone jack, DPAF, etc.

#2 Surprise everyone with a 6D2 which is a very similar refresh of the 6D, only difference being addition of touchscreen and 7D1-class autofocus; maybe add a popup flash too for triggering and portable situations. This would differentiate it enough from the 5D3 as the autofocus still won't be as good and it will be missing other features, but it would make the 6D2 attractive enough for enthusiasts to pull the trigger. Right now the autofocus is too weak, and the touchscreen might entice people who are used to touchscreens on cameraphones.

#3 Release some of the more requested lenses, i.e. 50mm non-L IS, 135mm non-L IS, 100-400L refresh, 24-70L IS, 14-24L. I think those would satisfy most and continue to make Canon the obvious choice.

Personally I think the 5DIII does not require update as it is so strong. Canon's main weaknesses are the 6D, 7D, and some of the older lenses. It remains odd to me that the 5DIII and 70D are so attractive in their pricerange, yet everything between those two appears unattractive. Likewise, I find it odd that crop users have effective 24-70 f/2.8 range with IS for some time, yet Canon is still stringing along full frame users with non-IS lenses in this focal length for no obvious reason except marketing.

To summarize this post, Canon needs to gimp their cameras and especially lenses less. Yes, they should still offer differentiating features, but not so much as to make the product unattractive for many.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 27, 2013)

well i have a 6D and for 1570 euro it´s hard to find something better.

yes stay away if you are a sports shooter. 
but for most prosumer the AF will be just fine.
in fact a lot of 5D MK3 user are only confused by the AF.

it´s only one of my backup cameras but i have no problems to use my 6D for portraits, landscapes, travel and shooting kids. i use the middle AF point in such cases 99% of the time.

only when i shot BIF or sports i need my 5D MK3 and the superior AF.


----------



## Niki (Oct 27, 2013)

I just started shooting on FILM...with a really cheap camera from Canon...where have they been hiding these things...the image is GREAT!


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 27, 2013)

Niki said:


> I just started shooting on FILM...with a really cheap camera from Canon...where have they been hiding these things...the image is GREAT!



a great deal of them are in my office. 

film was nice and still has some attraction.
but today working with film is slow (and expensive when you shoot like you shoot digital). 
i could not imagine working with film these days.

i edit my work in PS, i have to upload it to stock agencies.
film is too slow for that.

but it´s fine for hobby shooter who are not on a deadline.
or when you are a pro who is going artsy.
but then i would shoot MF film.


----------



## Ruined (Oct 27, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> well i have a 6D and for 1570 euro it´s hard to find something better.
> 
> yes stay away if you are a sports shooter.
> but for most prosumer the AF will be just fine.
> ...



I am not saying to refresh the 6D with 5DMK3 autofocus, but something along the lines of the 7d/70d's autofocus would make sense. For me, it is difficult to spend $1800 on a 6D when a $600 650D has 9x the amount of cross-type AF points. Do you need that many cross points? Maybe not, but then again you could argue you don't "need" full frame, either. The point is the 6D's autofocus system appears too dated compared to its peers for its price point. If it worked really well then I would not mention this, but I see tons of complaints from 6D owners about the AF.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 27, 2013)

Ruined said:


> If it worked really well then I would not mention this, but I see tons of complaints from 6D owners about the AF.



shooting what?
BIF, motocross?

then they bought the wrong camera.

i see your point and i agree from a customers point of view.
how could i not.. the more i get for my money the better.

a 7D like AF would be nice to have in the 6D, no question.

but from canons point of view it makes absolut sense.
i had not bought a second 5D MK3 as backup body if the 6D had a 7D like AF.

is the D600 AF performance much better? from all i have seen, not really.


----------



## dude (Oct 28, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> Ruined said:
> 
> 
> > If it worked really well then I would not mention this, but I see tons of complaints from 6D owners about the AF.
> ...



I've not used a 6D but own a 5Diii and have owned a 7D. Just to be clear, we are not calling the 7D AF system good, are we?


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 28, 2013)

dude said:


> Lichtgestalt said:
> 
> 
> > Ruined said:
> ...



???

well the 7D AF is pretty good. and that seems to be the common opinion:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8576.0

what are you shooting and what are your complains exactly?

of course the 5D MK3 AF is better but then... the camera cost twice as much.
and if you need the best low light AF performance the 5D MK3 or 1D X is sure the way to go.

but does that make the 7D AF bad? i don´t think so.

and a great deal of 5D MK3 customers, who are not professionals, are totally confused by the 5D MK3 AF. so i bet they use only 25% of it´s potential. 

you would call the 7D AF bad?


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 28, 2013)

AmbientLight said:


> *Strange how Sony contradicts the assumptions that in-body IS is preferable by providing the A7/R without that.* Wouldn't they jump on the opportunity to use their existing technology, if it were as preferable? It is really essential to understand that axis-counting is no good as a way to determine effectiveness of an IS system. I believe that the A7/R coming without in-body IS just demonstrates that Sony has proceeded through the learning curve far enough to realize that they can achieve better results with in-lens IS, simply because this is optimized for each lens.



I believe Sony left IBIS out of the A7 and A7r in order to keep the unit cost down, so that these cameras can compete with the FF offerings from Nikon and Canon (especially the EOS 6D). And possibly it was part of the deal with Olympus that they may not use it in a FF camera (meaning Sony bought it for the NEX series).


----------



## Lawliet (Oct 31, 2013)

Sella174 said:


> I believe Sony left IBIS out of the A7 and A7r in order to keep the unit cost down, so that these cameras can compete with the FF offerings from Nikon and Canon (especially the EOS 6D).


The sensor already sits on piezoactuators - the big difference between anti-dust and sensor based stabilzation is the control software.


----------



## Zv (Oct 31, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> dude said:
> 
> 
> > Lichtgestalt said:
> ...



+1 the AF on the 7D totally rocks. I read some stuff about how to tune the AF Servo using C-fn etc to get more out of it. Also, combined with bbf it can be very effective. One thing I will say is the hit rate could be better, but thats what 8fps is for! 

For most people 19 cross point AF is enough and for smaller subjects the smaller spot AF mode works well. 

Even my 5D2 with its lame AF does OK. Then again I don't shoot BIF or super shallow dof stuff so I guess it depends.


----------



## Valvebounce (Oct 31, 2013)

Hi Folks
I do try to photograph BIF with my 7D, I say try as I don't go and sit and wait so my technique is already flawed! What I do is stop and take pics when I see birds of prey, my favoured targets. 

What I will do though is go to the local seafront regularly and practice, I have hundreds of clicks accounted for by pics of seagulls! 
I also attend the Goodwood Revival and first thing I do on arrival is practice on a race I'm not too worried about until my "rusty from last year" technique is refreshed. By doing this I find I get what to me is an acceptable keeper rate. 

I think the 7D AF rocks too, I am prepared to admit that the missed and crap shots are me not the camera! ;D ;D ;D

Cheers Graham. 



Zv said:


> +1 the AF on the 7D totally rocks. I read some stuff about how to tune the AF Servo using C-fn etc to get more out of it. Also, combined with bbf it can be very effective. One thing I will say is the hit rate could be better, but thats what 8fps is for!
> 
> For most people 19 cross point AF is enough and for smaller subjects the smaller spot AF mode works well.
> 
> Even my 5D2 with its lame AF does OK. Then again I don't shoot BIF or super shallow dof stuff so I guess it depends.


----------



## dude (Oct 31, 2013)

Compared to my 5Diii, my in focus shots of action (SEC college football specifically) are far less than my 5Diii with same lens setup. That is the day issue. At night I won't even start a comparison because the 7D is at a distinct disadvantage. 

I do like the 7D for many reasons, FPS is one biggie, and the latest rumors of the 7Dii sound awesome (hoping for full sensor), but I find the AF on the 7D lacking for my purposes.





Lichtgestalt said:


> dude said:
> 
> 
> > Lichtgestalt said:
> ...


----------



## J.R. (Oct 31, 2013)

dude said:


> Compared to my 5Diii, my in focus shots of action (SEC college football specifically) are far less than my 5Diii with same lens setup. That is the day issue. At night I won't even start a comparison because the 7D is at a distinct disadvantage.
> 
> I do like the 7D for many reasons, FPS is one biggie, and the latest rumors of the 7Dii sound awesome (hoping for full sensor), but I find the AF on the 7D lacking for my purposes.



The AF of the 7D is pretty good ... but once you are spoil yourself with the AF of the 5D3 / 1DX, all of a sudden the AF of the 7D doesn't seem good enough


----------

