# Nikkei: Canon and Nikon to announce mirrorless pro models



## canonnews (Apr 2, 2018)

```
It was mentioned in the Nikkei, the worlds largest financial newspaper that both Canon and Nikon are moving towards mirrorless “pro models”.</p>
<p>We guess they are talking about full frame models here.  While short on details, it’s another interesting data point about Canon and Nikon’s future plans.</p>
<p>From <a href="https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGKKZO28850970R30C18A3EA4000/">Nikkei</a>, machine translated;</p>
<blockquote><p>Adopt high-class sensors that Canon and Nikon has on digital single lens reflex as mirrorless cameras. I was reluctant to divert a high performance sensor because I felt the opportunity of demand from the strong brand power of the SLR and the profitability, but I could not overlook the spread of the mirrorless market. Sony also pushes the backs of both companies by pushing out mirrorless and enhancing its presence in the professional market.</p></blockquote>
<p>Yeah awkward to say the least.</p>
<p>Essentially a short blurb about the fact that Sony’s mirrorless cameras are seen on the rise, and Canon and Nikon need to accelerate plans for a full frame mirrorless camera.</p>
<p> </p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## fishflavour (Apr 2, 2018)

ahhh, how long is this going to take? I'm really holding off on buying a 5d MkIV.

Any advice: is the 5d4 still a good buy in 2018 or wait to see what the mirrorless will be like?


----------



## BeenThere (Apr 2, 2018)

fishflavour said:


> ahhh, how long is this going to take? I'm really holding off on buying a 5d MkIV.
> 
> Any advice: is the 5d4 still a good buy in 2018 or wait to see what the mirrorless will be like?


Like you, I am waiting on further developments from Canon. In the mean time, my 5D3 still serves me well enough.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 2, 2018)

And the image shows a body that is way to thin to take an EF Mount, yet has an EF lens......Photoshop!


----------



## kaihp (Apr 2, 2018)

canonnews said:


> It was mentioned in the Nikkei, the worlds largest financial newspaper that both Canon and Nikon are moving towards mirrorless “pro models”.
> We guess they are talking about full frame models here. While short on details, it’s another interesting data point about Canon and Nikon’s future plans.
> From <a href="https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGKKZO28850970R30C18A3EA4000/">Nikkei</a>, machine translated;



Y'know, that article was released on 2018/04/01, so I'd lower the [CR] rating a notch just from the date.


----------



## BillB (Apr 2, 2018)

Canon and Nikon will put out fullframe mirrorless cameras sometime in the foreseeable future. We knew that, but let's see how many pages we can get out of this one.


----------



## BillB (Apr 2, 2018)

fishflavour said:


> ahhh, how long is this going to take? I'm really holding off on buying a 5d MkIV.
> 
> Any advice: is the 5d4 still a good buy in 2018 or wait to see what the mirrorless will be like?



Well, what would you like to be able to do will a fullframe mirrorless that you wouldn't be able to do with a 5DIV that you can get right now. The fullframe mirrorless might be a 6D with an electronic viewfinder, or it might be a pro model that costs a lot more than a 5DIV, when it eventually hits the street. Of course, if you are ok with what you have now, you don't have to buy anything.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Apr 2, 2018)

fishflavour said:


> ahhh, how long is this going to take? I'm really holding off on buying a 5d MkIV.
> 
> Any advice: is the 5d4 still a good buy in 2018 or wait to see what the mirrorless will be like?



This is how I always look at it:

Will you regret not having the gear now? In other words, is there something between now and an undefined date you really want to photograph on a new camera for whatever reason (better resolution, higher performing AF, etc)? If so, buy now.

If not and you really just want a new toy, will you be upset if a newer toy comes out later which you want be able to justify buying so soon after another purchase? No? Buy now. Yes? Wait.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 2, 2018)

BillB said:


> Canon and Nikon will put out fullframe mirrorless cameras sometime in the foreseeable future. We knew that, but let's see how many pages we can get out of this one.



I'm guessing 8-10. 

We have to rehash all the arguments about lens mount. There will be people who think the generic picture attached to the post is real. There will be those who try to parse a machine-translated article through the lens of their own cultural and personal biases. There will be others who think "professional" means something more than simply having a full frame sensor. There is already someone asking buying advice from people who have absolutely no information about release timing. 

And, of course, there will be many who insist that if Canon doesn't release exactly the camera they are dreaming of, then Canon is either stupid or ******* or both.


----------



## docsmith (Apr 2, 2018)

fishflavour said:


> ahhh, how long is this going to take? I'm really holding off on buying a 5d MkIV.
> 
> Any advice: is the 5d4 still a good buy in 2018 or wait to see what the mirrorless will be like?



As a 5DIV owner, I didn't and wouldn't recommend waiting. It is a great camera.

As others have said, is there a specific feature that you would get with a FF mirrorless that you really need/want?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 2, 2018)

If Canon doesn’t announce a 1DX-M in the next three months, Sony will eat their lunch and Canon is *******.


----------



## canonnews (Apr 2, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> If Canon doesn’t announce a 1DX-M in the next three months, Sony will eat their lunch and Canon is *******.



Clearly they are ******* already, it's just a matter of time


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 2, 2018)

canonnews said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > If Canon doesn’t announce a 1DX-M in the next three months, Sony will eat their lunch and Canon is *******.
> ...



Everything is a matter of time...


----------



## rsdofny (Apr 2, 2018)

I always have the impression that Canon is behind Sony in the MILC technology. So there is absolutely no reason why Canon will give up the only advantage that it has. A Pro body does not have to be small. In fact, a lot of pros prefer to have slightly larger bodies. So Canon will have the native EF mount on the "pro" MLICs. 

The second question is how long will the EF lens library hold up if the camera companies are pushing the resolution of the camera sensor. The challenge for these camera companies is to capture, process, move and store a large amount of data, and to do it under reasonable cost and physical size constraints. Good news is that even Sony is running close to the limitation by compromising speed with resolution in the A9. Going back to the point that these are camera companies and not semiconductor companies. Will they have the resources to push the technology curve faster than the semiconductor companies? Sony is in better position because its sensors are used in smartphone. So it benefits from both the technology and cost sharing.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 2, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> And the image shows a body that is way to thin to take an EF Mount, yet has an EF lens......Photoshop!



The photo doesn't even have a lens release button... _because it's a Leica Q, dude._

Those are tea leaves you don't really need to read that closely. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 2, 2018)

BillB said:


> Canon and Nikon will put out fullframe mirrorless cameras sometime in the foreseeable future. We knew that, but let's see how many pages we can get out of this one.



But in this case, it's no longer hearsay or rumor that CR has to carefully curate and time out to not rumor-fatigue us. It's real folks talking up FF mirrorless, which makes it _news_. CR will print that all day.

Expect a ton more of this as things accelerate towards release.

- A


----------



## Talys (Apr 2, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> And the image shows a body that is way to thin to take an EF Mount, yet has an EF lens......Photoshop!



You mean, the image shows a Leica Q, with an EF Mount   



ahsanford said:


> But in this case, it's no longer hearsay or rumor that CR has to carefully curate and time out to not rumor-fatigue us. It's real folks talking up FF mirrorless, which makes it _news_. CR will print that all day.



It wasn't really before, though. The Canon interviewee was pretty clear that they're working on a FF mirrorless. It's always been a question of "when" and whether the models first released will be in line with 6D, 5D or 1D.


----------



## amorse (Apr 2, 2018)

docsmith said:


> fishflavour said:
> 
> 
> > ahhh, how long is this going to take? I'm really holding off on buying a 5d MkIV.
> ...



I'll second this - as a 5D IV owner, I have a lot of praise for the camera. I don't think I've taken one photo that failed to hit the mark due to the camera and not me as the photographer. I wouldn't trade my 5D IV for any camera body on the market right now.


----------



## efmshark (Apr 2, 2018)

What would be the point of a mirrorless with EF mount as a photo camera? It would have to be nearly the same size as a 5D or 6D, and it would be missing many of the features of a DSLR. If the primary focus of such a camera is video, the answer may be different, but Canon already has a dedicated professional product line for that.

If Canon chooses to go with a Sony-like mirrorless (with the EF-M mount), one would need an adapter to use EF lenses. There seems to be an unfounded hatred for adapters on this forum. In reality, an EF-M mount camera with EF adapter installed wouldn't be significantly different (at least from a form factor perspective) than a mirrorless camera with native EF mount. If you are interested in using EF lenses, just keep the adapter on all the time. 

Canon full-frame mirrorless with EF-M mount could also have a 1.6x mode to use existing EF-M lenses.

Over time, Canon can develop a line of full-frame EF-M lenses for such a camera. Canon would also have to develop some type of new full-frame sensor that can manage extremely low angle of incidence near the edges and corners of the image that is a problem with symmetric (e.g. small) wide angle lenses on a short flange distance camera. Leica has finally come up with a decent solution for this, so it's not black magic, but there's probably further room for improvement by reducing the thickness of filter glass and changing the micro-lens structure.

One advantage of using an EF mount (or an EF-M mount with EF adapter) is that the full frame sensors developed for the DSLR line can be used as is.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 2, 2018)

efmshark said:


> What would be the point of a mirrorless with EF mount as a photo camera?



Welcome to the forum. This debate -- what mount on the FF mirrorless -- is now the #1 thing we talk about and disagree on. It used to be to protect/UV filter or not protect/UV filter and crop vs. FF equivalence, but now mirrorless mount fever is king of the hill. It dominates the proceedings here.

There are pros and cons to both thin mount or EF mirrorless. I post this (see below) as a really high-level refresher from time to time, but it really only scratches the surface. 

But I'll state until I'm dead that anyone who claims 'mirrorless is all about being smaller' (not saying this is you) needs to climb out of their worldview and appreciate the needs of others. This is not a clear cut decision at all.

- A


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Apr 2, 2018)

canonnews said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > If Canon doesn’t announce a 1DX-M in the next three months, Sony will eat their lunch and Canon is *******.
> ...



+1

I was going to mark my calendar for a FF mirrorless guess but I don't have a 2019 calendar.


----------



## transpo1 (Apr 2, 2018)

Two quotes that make it plain as day- why mirrorless from Canon/Nikon, and why now:

_Sony also pushes the backs of both companies by pushing out mirrorless and enhancing its presence in the professional market.

Sony’s mirrorless cameras are seen on the rise, and Canon and Nikon need to accelerate plans for a full frame mirrorless camera._

Previous denials from this forum that Sony has anything to do with Canon's plans to announce a mirrorless are astounding.


----------



## fentiger (Apr 2, 2018)

I was going to mark my calendar for a FF mirrorless guess but I don't have a 2019 calendar.
[/quote]

just checked my phone and calendar ends December 2037, hence i will mark my calendar 31/12 2037.
now do you think my 1DX2 will still be working? probably yes.


----------



## mkabi (Apr 2, 2018)

efmshark said:


> What would be the point of a mirrorless with EF mount as a photo camera? It would have to be nearly the same size as a 5D or 6D, and it would be missing many of the features of a DSLR. If the primary focus of such a camera is video, the answer may be different, but Canon already has a dedicated professional product line for that.
> 
> There seems to be an unfounded hatred for adapters on this forum.





ahsanford said:


> But I'll state until I'm dead that anyone who claims 'mirrorless is all about being smaller' (not saying this is you) needs to climb out of their worldview and appreciate the needs of others. This is not a clear cut decision at all.
> 
> - A



These 2 quotes require +>7billion

In all reality, see the weight difference the latest alpha 7s and 5D4.... then tell me that less than 1 lbs of a difference is all the difference in the world to you.... and I will tell you that its time to hit the gym.

The difference in size & weight between a 20lbs ENG camera and a 3.2 lbs DSLR camera (which delivered better IQ) made sense to me. The difference between a 2.3lbs MILC and a 3.2 lbs DSLR is negligible in my opinion.

If anything.... put in a hybrid EVF and call it a day.

Also, that dedicated video line.... biggest mistake by Canon in my opinion. I think Canon would have made a lot more money through upgrades and modular add-ons....

Speaking of that 20lbs ENG camera and people calling a DSLR not the proper form factor... you can always build-up the DSLR with a cage/rig/shoulder-pad, matte box, follow-focus, external monitor, shot-gun mic, gimbal/steadicam, etc. so that it becomes a 20lbs monster, but can you strip down an ENG to be smaller and easier to use?


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 2, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Previous denials from this forum that Sony has anything to do with Canon's plans to announce a mirrorless are astounding.



There are two ways to read that:

1) *Sony is a threat to Canon based on market data* that says that Canon SLR business is losing sales to Sony mirrorless

OR

2) *Sony is simply the company that is establishing FF mirrorless as a legitimately sizeable market*. Before the A7/A9 brand, FF mirrorless was a boutique market owned by Leica. Sony changed that. Now Canon sees an opportunity to snatch up that market with Canon know-how, Canon ergonomics, Canon color, Canon lens design, Canon quality, etc.

In either case, yes, Sony will end up being the catalyst that prods Canon and Nikon to move into FF mirrorless. Few would doubt that. If Sony didn't do what Sony did in starting the A7 line, CaNikon might have put FF mirrorless off for _even more_ years down the road. (In that, I agree with you.)

But (1) above implies Canon is finally acting out of desperation, in a Kodak-like existential crisis, etc., while (2) implies now is Canon's time to pluck low-hanging fruit from the tree after Sony burned through explosive amounts of cash commercializing products like Steve Jobs on cocaine to learn what the market wanted. _Huge_ difference. One says endtimes for Canon, the other shows Canon imperiously looming over Sony and saying "All your base are belong to us" as they do what they did with EOS M: put out something underwhelming on paper that still sells brilliantly.

And unless I'm missing something, there's no data to say that (1) is actually happening -- is there? Isn't Sony principally stealing share from other companies than Canon?

- A


----------



## Sporgon (Apr 2, 2018)

efmshark said:


> What would be the point of a mirrorless with EF mount as a photo camera? It would have to be nearly the same size as a 5D or 6D, and it would be missing many of the features of a DSLR. If the primary focus of such a camera is video, the answer may be different, but Canon already has a dedicated professional product line for that.



+ 1

Also if Canon were to develop a FF mirrorless with the EF flange distance, so quite a ‘fat’ body for mirrorless, why not have the current cameras with an interchangeable head. Exchange the pentaprism module for an EVF, the mirror automatically locks up out of the way and the camera behaves just like an overgrown M5. So you can have your cake and eat it; the video people get a proper working viewfinder and the ‘I-want-mirrorless’ crowd get their EVF, , peaking, WYSIWYG, faster frame rates, focus off the chip etc. Once you’ve realised that all that stuff isn’t quite what it’s cracked up to be you can unplug the EVF and replace it with your prism head. Mirror drops down et voila, you’ve a proper camera again. 

I don’t believe that heavy weight or lack of it has anything to do with it; I think it’s all about the tangibility.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 2, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Two quotes that make it plain as day- why mirrorless from Canon/Nikon, and why now:
> 
> _Sony also pushes the backs of both companies by pushing out mirrorless and *enhancing its presence* in the professional market.
> 
> ...



Personally, I don't find facts astounding...but that's me.

Since Sony didn't have a 1-series competitive model until the a9, that model obviously enhanced their presence in that market. 0 + 1 = 1, even Captain Obvoius can do simple arithmetic.

'Are seen' is _perception_. The perception in certain media outlets is that Sony's FF MILC are on the rise. The market data do not support that perception, but some news/entertainment outlets don't let reality get in the way of publication. Also note that the second bit of your quote is canonnews' _interpretation_ of the Nikkei article, not a quote from the Nikkei news article. Perception again.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 2, 2018)

Sporgon said:


> Also if Canon were to develop a FF mirrorless with the EF flange distance, so quite a ‘fat’ body for mirrorless, why not have the current cameras with an interchangeable head. Exchange the pentaprism module for an EVF, the mirror automatically locks up out of the way and the camera behaves just like an overgrown M5. So you can have your cake and eat it; the video people get a proper working viewfinder and the ‘I-want-mirrorless’ crowd get their EVF, , peaking, WYSIWYG, faster frame rates, focus off the chip etc. Once you’ve realised that all that stuff isn’t quite what it’s cracked up to be you can unplug the EVF and replace it with your prism head. Mirror drops down et voila, you’ve a proper camera again.



I've said the same thing for making the LCD on the back a modular cartridge like attachment, so you can swap out a fixed screen for a tilty-flippy without needing to offer two body SKUs.

There are technical hurdles/challenges/reasons why this (or your idea) is likely never going to happen, but why they don't do stuff like this is pretty simple. I think they'd like to sell us more than one body.

- A


----------



## canonnews (Apr 2, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Two quotes that make it plain as day- why mirrorless from Canon/Nikon, and why now:
> 
> _Sony also pushes the backs of both companies by pushing out mirrorless and enhancing its presence in the professional market.
> 
> ...



I think you're putting words into my mouth here. I didn't state it as definitive fact that Sony is on the rise. They are just perceived as such, which is the narrative in the chatter here in these forums and elsewhere.

and you are also quoting a very weak machine translation as well, one in which i didn't even know if i should post it's so obtuse.

If anything the actual evidence shows that Canon is more on the rise than Sony is, and that the real trajectory will be a bad one for the established mirrorless players if Canon decides to take a real run at this niche.

I'd be happy to detail that evidence if you so wish, but it would derail this thread massively


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 2, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> efmshark said:
> 
> 
> > What would be the point of a mirrorless with EF mount as a photo camera?
> ...



And don't forget ergonomics..... you need somewhere to put knobs and dials.....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 2, 2018)

canonnews said:


> I'd be happy to detail that evidence if you so wish, but it would derail this thread massively



It would fall on blind eyes...


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 2, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> And don't forget ergonomics..... you need somewhere to put knobs and dials.....



Yep. One of these days I'll upgrade this thing to get down in the weeds a bit. 

A full-size body takes so many things they could mess up off the table.

Don't get me wrong, a tiny body would be cool for the 20% of the time I'm okay with some sweet f/2.8 primes between 24 and 40mm : but for the rest of the time I'd like it if I had a full control set and my hand wasn't cramped, tired, and screaming out for more legroom.

- A


----------



## BillB (Apr 2, 2018)

canonnews said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > Two quotes that make it plain as day- why mirrorless from Canon/Nikon, and why now:
> ...



So, how about starting another thread then?


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 2, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Two quotes that make it plain as day- why mirrorless from Canon/Nikon, and why now:
> 
> _Sony also pushes the backs of both companies by pushing out mirrorless and enhancing its presence in the professional market.
> 
> ...



it is you in denial (yet again).

No-one I recall denied the impact of Sony cameras on the market. What was disputed was claims from yourself and others was the imperative thar Canon had to do it NOW (and that was ages ago) or face obliteration -a claim you have been making for ages. But I guess if you say it long enough and Canon does release one you can claim you were right.


----------



## tmroper (Apr 2, 2018)

Maybe like with many cinema cameras (including the C500), there will be a choice of mounts (like EF, and a new one). That wouldn't work out great for a consumer camera, but if it works at the professional cinema level, why not the professional stills/video hybrid level?


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 2, 2018)

tmroper said:


> Maybe like with many cinema cameras (including the C500), there will be a choice of mounts (like EF, and a new one). That wouldn't work out great for a consumer camera, but if it works at the professional cinema level, why not the professional stills/video hybrid level?



This idea has been kicked around as well. 

My take on offering a thin mount _and_ EF mount setup -- it would work fine if: 


Canon announces both models on the same day.
Canon opened with "We aren't going to remake EF in this thinner mount. You'll get a few smaller f/4 zooms and wide f/2.8 primes and that's it. For the rest, use the adaptor." (i.e. you have been warned -- don't put all your eggs in this mirrorless basket.)

Canon reassures EF users that all is well and EF will live on as the Company's flagship lens portfolio.

_That_ could work.

If you don't do the above and release just one model with a thin mount and wait for market pressure to make you put out an EF one, too much damage may be done in the interim. Foolish young/impulsive people will have horrific stories of flipping all their gear too soon, feel buyers' remorse, etc. and existing EF users might panic that EF is to Canon what the A mount is to Sony. 

Canon should make a clear decision on the mount, frame up their future plans and help buyers opt-in with confidence.

But this post won't make sense to some folks who see the new mount as Canon's only future i.e. a thin mount = Canon will rebuild all of EF in this smaller mount, which will take 20 years just to replace what they already have and it won't be fundamentally better or smaller.

- A


----------



## unfocused (Apr 2, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> My take on offering a thin mount _and_ EF mount setup -- it would work fine if:
> 
> 
> Canon announces both models on the same day.
> ...



I would agree with your first point, but not the second two. 

Canon could offer both choices, as with the 5Ds series, but would have to announce both at the same time.

Making some public announcement limiting future lens development would be a huge mistake. It could negatively impact sales and, if mirrorless takes off to the degree that some on this forum fantasize that it will, then they would certainly offer more lens choices in the future.

Anyone who is in the market for a full frame camera ought to be smart enough to know that lenses are not announced quickly. I do think Canon would have to initially offer a wide to short telephoto zoom (24-70 or 24-105 range.) Maybe one normal prime. And, maybe a moderate telephoto zoom (70-200 f4?) With that, they could be then take their time and see if the market grows and if there is demand.

There is no reason to reassure EF lens owners. Obviously Canon isn't going to be abandoning the EF mount anytime in the foreseeable future. It is not as though the 6D, 5D or 1Dx lines won't continue for at least two or three more generations at a minimum. Again, limiting your options at the outset would be shortsighted because who can predict what the future holds.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 3, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > efmshark said:
> ...



The perception that mirrorless is so much smaller - or should be - comes mainly from the fact that most small mirrorless cameras are APS-C or m4/3rds. When you get to FF, it won't be much smaller. And if you are looking at a pro or high-end camera, I think bigger will be the only popular way to go. Even the high-end m4/3rds Olympus E-M1 is not small and has much more of a DSLR build and size. It seems obvious that once you get into fast lenses or big zooms, you need a fairly large body. I can't see anyone making a FF body that will ignore those consumers that buy those lenses.

I can see, however, two lines of FF Mirrorless cameras - one EF and one ?? 

As to why mirroless rather than DSLR - even at exactly the same size - for me it's all about the WYSIWIG EVF. Once I bought my first mirrorless (Olympus E-M1) I was hooked on the EVF, even if their are shortcomings. If you are shooting action - of course, the OVF is better. I'm not. Nor do I care about the far more AF points and much wider coverage, but some do. I have no need of greater FPS, but some do.


----------



## Bennymiata (Apr 3, 2018)

According to the post on the DPR website, mirrorless sales were down in December/ January and SLR sales were slightly up.

Mirrorless is NOT taking over SLR sales anytime soon, so perhaps Canon and Nikon may be wasting money on a dying horse.

I have a 5d3 and an M5 and while I like my M5, nothing can really substitue for a good DSLR.

I do hope Canon looks at the Hasselblad mirrorless when designing their new FF mirrorless though, as this is about the most comfortable of all the mirrorless cameras that I've tried, and when you are holding a camera in your hand for 8+ hours at a stretch, hand comfort is very important, to me at least.
A thin grip with a heavy lens is the last thing I would want to use.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2018)

dak723 said:


> When you get to FF, it won't be much smaller.



You'd think that, but Sony repeatedly poops on that notion (as well as itself) when it continues to do _this_ with each generation of A7 product (see pic).

And they are not the only ones: compare an EOS M1 (the original M model) vs. an M5. Even with a common mount and sensor size, form factor can vary wildly.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2018)

Bennymiata said:


> According to the post on the DPR website, mirrorless sales were down in December/ January and SLR sales were slightly up.
> 
> Mirrorless is NOT taking over SLR sales anytime soon, so perhaps Canon and Nikon may be wasting money on a dying horse.



Saw this today:

https://photorumors.com/2018/04/02/february-cipa-report-dslr-cameras-production-has-better-numbers-than-mirrorless/

But let's see the trend over time. I still see CaNikon driving an overall SLR-heavy [SLR / Mirrorless] sales ratio until they decide to change that by pulling mirrors from their Rebel level rigs.

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 3, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > When you get to FF, it won't be much smaller.
> ...



Two comments to make......

The first is that you could make a FF DSLR with the EF mount the size of a SL-1 quite easily....

The second comment is about the size of the two pictured mounts here. Note that the Canon mount has space around the sensor, and how the Sony munt is cropping off the corners of the sensor..... and also note that once you have a lens mounted in that hole, that it will crop further. This may not be as big of a problem with wide angle lenses, but as you go longer, the vignetting will get worse and worse. The Canon mount was designed so that a long FF lens would have a clear view of the sensor.... the Sony was not.


----------



## BillB (Apr 3, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> My take on offering a thin mount _and_ EF mount setup -- it would work fine if:
> 
> 
> Canon announces both models on the same day.
> ...



Rather than announcing two mounts on Day 1, it seems to me that Canon could simply roll out its first mirrorless with an EF mount, keeping open the option of a smaller FF mirrorless down the road with another mount, maybe the EF-M or possibly a third mount.


----------



## siegsAR (Apr 3, 2018)

BillB said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > My take on offering a thin mount _and_ EF mount setup -- it would work fine if:
> ...


Or maybe Canon will offer an in lens mount modification service, like what Sigma does.
Adapter but built in. ;D


----------



## gmon750 (Apr 3, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > When you get to FF, it won't be much smaller.
> ...



So what? I have big hands. The Canon wins hands-down in ergonomics and comfort while STILL taking stellar shots. I can understand the smaller=better mentality, but my camera needs to be manipulated a lot with hands and that Sony would cramp mine.

enough with the fixation on small.


----------



## tmroper (Apr 3, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > When you get to FF, it won't be much smaller.
> ...



But Sony doesn't keep making smaller cameras. Just the opposite. Using your A7R example: the rev. 1 came in at 465g, 127 x 94 x 48 mm, while the current A7RIII comes in at 657g, 127 x 96 x 74 mm. Plus, to have a battery life equal to the 5DMIV's, the Sony needs the grip. Meanwhile, the 5D MKIV is slightly smaller and lighter than the 5D MKIII. Now, granted, these aren't huge differences. And the Sony *bodies* are certainly smaller. But even Sony are apparently realizing the benefits of larger bodies--especially the grip (on the body), which was very minimal on rev. 1 for all the Alphas, and has gotten increasingly beefier.


----------



## kphoto99 (Apr 3, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> But this post won't make sense to some folks who see the new mount as Canon's only future i.e. a thin mount = Canon will rebuild all of EF in this smaller mount, which will take 20 years just to replace what they already have and it won't be fundamentally better or smaller.
> 
> - A



Tell me how long does it take to take for example the 100-400 EF lens, add a ~25mm permanent extension on the back and sell it as EF-X lens?
My guess about 6 months maybe.


----------



## BillB (Apr 3, 2018)

kphoto99 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > But this post won't make sense to some folks who see the new mount as Canon's only future i.e. a thin mount = Canon will rebuild all of EF in this smaller mount, which will take 20 years just to replace what they already have and it won't be fundamentally better or smaller.
> ...



Well, if they are going to keep producing EF 100-400 lenses for the DSLR market, why not just sell an EF/EF-X adapter, starting on Day 1?


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 3, 2018)

kphoto99 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > But this post won't make sense to some folks who see the new mount as Canon's only future i.e. a thin mount = Canon will rebuild all of EF in this smaller mount, which will take 20 years just to replace what they already have and it won't be fundamentally better or smaller.
> ...



If you were adding an extension on the end of the lens, it would require a complete redesign of the lens and all the optics. The elements all have to work together to give the quality we expect from modern designs. My suspicion is that this might improve some of the wide angle lenses, but that it would hurt the long lenses. Everything is a tradeoff, you can't get something for nothing and gains in one place become losses in another....


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2018)

tmroper said:


> But Sony doesn't keep making smaller cameras. Just the opposite. Using your A7R example: the rev. 1 came in at 465g, 127 x 94 x 48 mm, while the current A7RIII comes in at 657g, 127 x 96 x 74 mm. Plus, to have a battery life equal to the 5DMIV's, the Sony needs the grip. Meanwhile, the 5D MKIV is slightly smaller and lighter than the 5D MKIII. Now, granted, these aren't huge differences. And the Sony *bodies* are certainly smaller. But even Sony are apparently realizing the benefits of larger bodies--especially the grip (on the body), which was very minimal on rev. 1 for all the Alphas, and has gotten increasingly beefier.



A9 and A7R3 got thicker, yes, but few really care about that. The basic front/rear view form factor, grip size, spacing from the grip to the mount, etc. is still a travesty.

The camera is too small for average sized hands wielding a 24-70 2.8. That should _never_ happen. I've eard all sorts of 'well, they scooped out some finger room on this one and the vertical grip really makes it sing', but the grip remains too small and too close to the mount for the faster lenses people surely will put on them.

- A


----------



## jayphotoworks (Apr 3, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > Two quotes that make it plain as day- why mirrorless from Canon/Nikon, and why now:
> ...



Perception is what the media sells. Every media outlet has some form of bias.. Want right-wing? watch Fox News, want left-wing? watch CNN. Media outlets are only interested in trying to get a slice of your attention. For many, why would they post about a company churning out humdrum products when they can comment about the newest underdog with its newest bag of tricks. Do those tricks really work that well? Does it matter? What matters is this type of news sells better than letting everyone know the old stalwart has 50% market share this year.

Most people are simply not going to fact-check absolutely everything, and that works in the media's favor. Trump's been doing it ever since he started his campaign and he eventually got voted in, with the persistent coverage of his campaign. I'm sure some people simply voted for him due to the media presence.

This perception must be as good as fact if Nikon and Canon have been so frantic to push out rumors and interviews about releasing mirror-less products in short order these days. If they simply relied on market data, they probably wouldn't have even bothered!


----------



## Talys (Apr 3, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> A9 and A7R3 got thicker, yes, but few really care about that. The basic front/rear view form factor, grip size, spacing from the grip to the mount, etc. is still a travesty.
> 
> The camera is too small for average sized hands wielding a 24-70 2.8. That should _never_ happen.



There is an easy solution for that. Just use an FE 28-70/3.5-5.6. It solves the whole size problem, and it looks sexy. 10 FPS still sounds the same, and you can still impress yourself with how much your underexposed dog can have his shadows lifted to look like a member of the canine species.

RAWR!

Now, in seriousness, when you read Sony reviews, a HUGE proportion tell you that f/4's are nearly indistinguishable from f/2.8's and that they're good enough for any mortal, plus they're smaller and lighter and all that. Lack of weather sealing rarely gets much play.

I can't believe, for example, the praise that gets heaped on the Sony 24-105/f4. It's terrible at 24mm f/4 with very severe vignetting, that remains even after the lens profile is applied. What do you see in reviews? Shots taken stepped down to f/6.3! I mean, wtf


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2018)

Talys said:


> What do you see in reviews? Shots taken stepped down to f/6.3! I mean, wtf



Presstitutes.


----------



## Hector1970 (Apr 3, 2018)

It is inevitable Canon and Nikon will go mirrorless on full frame and probably this year.
If only to disrupt Sony a bit in that market.
I don't think Canon will risk a mount change. This is tricky for them. Long term they might be more a lens company than a camera company as I feel camera's are coming to a limit in terms of producing discernibly better photographs. Focusing for things like BIF or sport could be more intelligent, low light performance could be better more FPS but there are few major leaps of improvement left in terms of image quality. Incremental improvements yes but nothing amazing. 
You'd want to producing lens that have the widest customer base possible to keeping the EF mount would do that.


----------



## fingerstein (Apr 3, 2018)

I would put things like this:
Is there any competitor for A7, A9? No!
Is there any Canon version of GH5? No!
Does Canon has any alternative for Sony's declicked aperture ring with AF, like Sony? No!
Is there any Canon DSLR/Mirrorless that offer 4k, Clog, different bitrates and fps like Sony, Panasonic? No!
Making ND filter adapter for EF lens to a 4k Canon mirrorless could compete directly with C700!


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2018)

Hector1970 said:


> You'd want to producing lens that have the widest customer base possible to keeping the EF mount would do that.



Which is precisely why Canon wisely took the EOS M platform and gave it the existing EF-S moun--

Oh, wait. 

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Hector1970 said:
> 
> 
> > You'd want to producing lens that have the widest customer base possible to keeping the EF mount would do that.
> ...



Except that the target markers for entry-level Canon APS-C MILCs and any forthcoming Canon FF MILCs are really not very overlapping – the former is mainly those new to ILCs, the latter is mainly those with APS-C dSLRs, and the largest market segment of APS-C dSLR owners will have at least one EF-S lens.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Except that the target markers for entry-level Canon APS-C MILCs and any forthcoming Canon FF MILCs are really not very overlapping – the former is mainly those new to ILCs, the latter is mainly those with APS-C dSLRs, and the largest market segment of APS-C dSLR owners will have at least one EF-S lens.



Fair, sure -- and Hector's point is not incorrect (I agree with him but perhaps not the rationale). EF is a monster to leave. There's no denying that.

But with EOS M, Canon still saw that making things smaller with a new mount was worth the trouble.

...for a very large pool of consumers.

...that are buying their first ILC.

...and "time and trouble" was only to make a handful of regularly bought/sold EF-S lenses (5-7 or so?).

Those ellipses above are fundamentally different for FF. That's why I think it's anyone's guess on the mount. For any good argument you can make about how difficult EF will be to leave and re-engineer in a thinner mount, some of us can us just fold our arms and say '_it really is_ all about the perception of being smaller' and say that Canon will go thin and do the work if they think they must. 

I remain undecided. EF would delight me, but I would not be stunned one bit if Canon went thin.

- A


----------



## Talys (Apr 3, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Except that the target markers for entry-level Canon APS-C MILCs and any forthcoming Canon FF MILCs are really not very overlapping – the former is mainly those new to ILCs, the latter is mainly those with APS-C dSLRs, and the largest market segment of APS-C dSLR owners will have at least one EF-S lens.
> ...



There seem to be a disproportionate number of people on the internet who claim to be in the market for a FF mirrorless (or be very excited about one), yet, based on their portfolio, or just stupid things they say, seem to be unlikely to be good candidates to run out and blow $4,000+ on a few starting basics.

I call it the "jilted camera syndrome" -- someone goes and buys a $500 camera, and doesn't like what they shoot (or it's even worse than what they get out of their smartphone), so they go buy a $1,500 camera, maybe trading their $500 camera for $200 at the camera shop, and then find out that their pictures didn't get any better. But hey, these reviewers tell them the $3,000 camera will take amazing pictures...

...When they should have probably just learned to use their $500 camera  Do they go out and buy the $3,000 camera? Who knows. It's a big commitment. 

Two years later, they are using their smartphone for all their pictures, and saying how their Galaxy or Pixel or iPhone has made them love photography again. And there's a bunch of 500 shutter count cameras for sale


----------



## test123 (Apr 4, 2018)

The rest of the Nikkei article (accessible for registered users) says both Canon and Nikon 
will announce professional full-frame mirrorless cameras in the latter half of 2018, 
speeding up their initial plans of a 2019 introduction. Since Sony sells full-frame mirrorless 
for 20-30 man yen, both companies will presumably follow at a similar price point.

The reason given is that Sony cameras are increasingly being used by professionals,
for example to cover the recent Olympic games.

An unnamed Canon executive is quoted as saying, "The full-frame mirrorless will presumably
eat into some of our DSLR sales, but if we underestimate the mirrorless market now, customers
will leave us in the long run". The article mentions that Canon was late in transitioning from
film to digital, but succeeded in becoming the market leader. Canon and Nikon would like to 
concentrate on the lucrative DSLR business, but the shift to mirrorless is moving ahead regardless.

CIPA statistics indicate that of the 25 million digital cameras sold in 2017, 7.5 million were DSLR's
and 4 million mirrorless. However the mirrorless growth year over year was 30%, whereas the
number of sold DSLR's reduced by 10%. Neither Canon nor Nikon can afford to ignore this fact
any longer (it says).


----------



## BillB (Apr 5, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Except that the target markers for entry-level Canon APS-C MILCs and any forthcoming Canon FF MILCs are really not very overlapping – the former is mainly those new to ILCs, the latter is mainly those with APS-C dSLRs, and the largest market segment of APS-C dSLR owners will have at least one EF-S lens.
> ...



If Canon puts out a fullframe "Super M" with a new EF-X mount, it is going to have to compete with the existing smaller, lighter and cheaper M models that are pretty good cameras, and also with the EF DSLR's. Some people have convinced themselves that there is a huge market for a "Super M" camera with an EF-X mount, but I doubt that the market is robust enough for Canon to go that route for its first fullframe mirrorless camera. An EF-X camera would be need to shoulder its way in between the EF strategy and the EF-M strategy. It would need a new line of EF-X lenses that might well be unadaptable to anything either EF or EF-M cameras.

Maybe down the road Canon might come up with a small "Super M" fullframe camera using the EF-M mount or possibly some new "EF-X" mount, but I don't think that is where they will start.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 5, 2018)

BillB said:


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



In my mind, the biggest drawback from Canon's perspective to having a new mount would be, what keeps a current Canon user with Canon? If you're going to go with a new mount with new lenses, then why not switch to Sony or Nikon? But if I have invested *thousands of dollars *on EF lenses, then I am not going to switch to Sony or Nikon under any circumstances.


----------



## Talys (Apr 5, 2018)

dak723 said:


> In my mind, the biggest drawback from Canon's perspective to having a new mount would be, what keeps a current Canon user with Canon? If you're going to go with a new mount with new lenses, then why not switch to Sony or Nikon? But if I have invested *thousands of dollars *on EF lenses, then I am not going to switch to Sony or Nikon under any circumstances.



Well, if the mount were to change, frankly, I wouldn't go Sony because their bodies and lenses have some shortcomings I can't really live with. I can't say about Nikon either way.

Assuming that adapted Canon lenses work as well as EF on EFM, it would still be much better than the Sony situation on the lens front.

However, to keep my goodwill, since it would be a very expensive undertaking in the long term to switch to all new native glass, Canon would need to provide compelling reasons why they are changing mounts. I would be very unhappy if Canon changed mounts just to make a handful of lenses that weren't particularly large in the first place a little smaller.

On the other hand, if they said, this mount lets us offer you lenses with teleconverters built in more easily, at a smaller size, and more inexpensively -- I'd happily embrace it.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 5, 2018)

dak723 said:


> In my mind, the biggest drawback from Canon's perspective to having a new mount would be, what keeps a current Canon user with Canon? If you're going to go with a new mount with new lenses, then why not switch to Sony or Nikon?



1) A new mount that has new lenses does not mean your EF glass won't work. Your EF glass will work on Day 1 of this product's release. That's a hammerlock take it to the bank CR9 sort of reality. An adaptor may not be ideal but it will still be first party Canon AF with first party Canon glass.

2) Besides all that, there is that little matter of people preferring Canon _for reasons other than EF_. Canon color, quality, ergonomics, interface, etc. Some have acted like if Canon didn't have EF, everyone would just be in heaven with their A7 rigs, and I think that's laughable. Don't get me wrong, EF is a huge part of Canon's imaging dominance, but don't presume that the things Canon does well on the body front is industry standard. It is not. Try drilling through menus, not having all the knobs/switches/wheels/joysticks, not having enough room for your fingers, buttons in inane places, etc.

- A


----------



## kphoto99 (Apr 5, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> kphoto99 said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



How is adding a permanent ~25mm extension tube to the end of the lens changing any optics?
You mount this lens on a camera with a flange distance that is ~25mm shorter than EF flange distance.

The EF mount lenses expect a 44mm distance from mount to the sensor. If you go with a mirrorless camera with a flange distance of 19mm, then all you need is a 25mm extension tube to use an EF lens on the mirrorless camera. No changes to optics are required. No changes to AF, it just works*

*works the same as a DSLR in live view, and as long as the mirrorless camera can provide the same voltage and current to the lens as the DSLR.


----------



## kphoto99 (Apr 5, 2018)

BillB said:


> kphoto99 said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



That was a rhetorical question.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 5, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > In my mind, the biggest drawback from Canon's perspective to having a new mount would be, what keeps a current Canon user with Canon? If you're going to go with a new mount with new lenses, then why not switch to Sony or Nikon?
> ...



1) Yes, of course, your EF lenses will work with the adapter. But, in my experience buying the M5 (realizing the FF camera won't be that small) using the adapter with my one EF lens (an old 28-105mm zoom) and the EF-S 55-250mm was ridiculously uncomfortable. Both lenses and the adapter were sold. If Canon were to go very small, the adapter may be just as useless for many. If the EF lenses are so uncomfortable to use with an adapter, then looking at Sony and Nikon alternatives will become far more likely. 

2) Yes, for me personally, Canon will be my no. 1 choice for many of these other factors. But as we have seen here, many folks don't even realize or see a difference in the Canon colors compared to other brands! As for the ergonomics and other differences, don't forget that Nikon will be coming out with their FF, too. I don't expect Nikon to screw up as many things as Sony has. For pro photographers and not gear-heads, it is Nikon and Canon that will be fighting it out unless Sony stops selling models that are basically beta testers.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 5, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Yes, of course, your EF lenses will work with the adapter. But, in my experience buying the M5 (realizing the FF camera won't be that small) using the adapter with my one EF lens (an old 28-105mm zoom) and the EF-S 55-250mm was ridiculously uncomfortable. Both lenses and the adapter were sold. If Canon were to go very small, the adapter may be just as useless for many.



You do realize that neither the thin mount nor the adaptor had much to do with the discomfort, right? _A thin mount camera can have a huge chunky grip._

The *mount thinness/thickness* and the *grip size* and the *grip spacing from the mount* and the *overall width/height of the body* are independent of one another. They are decisions a company can make as they please.

We're just hard-coded to think [EF + chunky grip = comfy but huge] or [skinny mount + tiny grip = tiny but uncomfortable] when I think it's a lot more nuanced than that.

- A


----------



## BillB (Apr 5, 2018)

kphoto99 said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > kphoto99 said:
> ...



They both were


----------



## Rocky (Apr 6, 2018)

dak723 said:


> 1) Yes, of course, your EF lenses will work with the adapter. But, in my experience buying the M5 (realizing the FF camera won't be that small) using the adapter with my one EF lens (an old 28-105mm zoom) and the EF-S 55-250mm was ridiculously uncomfortable. Both lenses and the adapter were sold. If Canon were to go very small, the adapter may be just as useless for many. If the EF lenses are so uncomfortable to use with an adapter, then looking at Sony and Niko



I was using 35-135 EF with adapter on my M for a 11 days land tour. I feel comfortable. It is almost as comfortable as the 28-135 EF on the 40D. The adapter should not make the set up uncomfortable. even with the EF mount on the new FF mirrorless, the total distance from the front of the lens to the back of the camera will still be the same. The weight of the set up and how you handle the set up plays a major part.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 6, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > In my mind, the biggest drawback from Canon's perspective to having a new mount would be, what keeps a current Canon user with Canon? If you're going to go with a new mount with new lenses, then why not switch to Sony or Nikon?
> ...



Even if Canon switches to a new mount (I don't think Canon will) the question is still; Why switch to Sony or Nikon?


----------



## Isaacheus (Apr 6, 2018)

CanonFanBoy said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > dak723 said:
> ...



I don't want to imply that the ef lenses are all Canon have, but wouldn't a new mount give people a reason for people to look elsewhere, if they're going to have to change all their lenses, or use adapters?

It just seems like a risk that could cost people who are a bit on the fence


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 6, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> I don't want to imply that the ef lenses are all Canon have, but wouldn't a new mount give people a reason for people to look elsewhere, if they're going to have to change all their lenses, or use adapters?
> 
> It just seems like a risk that could cost people who are a bit on the fence



If it's a new mount that is not compatible with EF, then yes -- that's tantamount to Canon severing its own leg because they've always dreamed of learning to walk again. But that clearly won't happen. 

There are only two possible outcomes with this that make any sense at all for a market leader with a massive installed base of lenses:


A thin mount (and all the cool things that come with that) that can use EF with an adaptor, or


A full EF mount

There really is no third option for Canon. In either case above, your EF glass is good to go on day one. 

- A


----------



## dak723 (Apr 6, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Yes, this is the point I was trying to make.

If the new mount means smaller camera, less room between grip and lens, too much imbalance between camera and larger lenses, then for some it may be unacceptable and they may look elsewhere.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 6, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, of course, your EF lenses will work with the adapter. But, in my experience buying the M5 (realizing the FF camera won't be that small) using the adapter with my one EF lens (an old 28-105mm zoom) and the EF-S 55-250mm was ridiculously uncomfortable. Both lenses and the adapter were sold. If Canon were to go very small, the adapter may be just as useless for many.
> ...



Yes, I do realize that a thin mount by itself means nothing. But if thin mount means small camera, means not enough space between grip and mount and/or small grip, then the ergonomics may be very poor. The real question is, if you want to keep adequate grip size and adequate grip to mount distance, then why even consider changing the mount as the camera will not be much if any smaller. I can't see a thin mount being considered unless the objective is to go as small as possible. Just my opinion.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 6, 2018)

dak723 said:


> I can't see a thin mount being considered unless the objective is to go as small as possible.



Oh. _Now_ I get you.

Agree for the most part -- a decision for a thin mount likely means a push towards a smaller aggregate size -- but I also think adapting glass is a nontrivial interest for tinkerers, enthusiasts and possibly some folks living with other mount SLR lenses today. I don't know about you, but shooting a Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8, 28mm f/1.4, or 105mm f/1.4 might be pretty cool. 

- A


----------



## kphoto99 (Apr 6, 2018)

dak723 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > dak723 said:
> ...



For the same reason that the EF mount is used on a 1D and SL1 camera. Same mount different set of ergonomics. Stop fixating on just a small camera, the same thin mount can give you a small camera that some people like, but it can also go on a giant camera that a different set of people like. the smallest you can do with the current EF mount is the SL1 camera.


----------



## Zen (Apr 7, 2018)

unfocused said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > Canon and Nikon will put out fullframe mirrorless cameras sometime in the foreseeable future. We knew that, but let's see how many pages we can get out of this one.
> ...



ad infinitum; and *then* some!

How tiring it all is, this re-hashing all the same stories. Why not just go out and make great images?


----------



## Talys (Apr 7, 2018)

kphoto99 said:


> For the same reason that the EF mount is used on a 1D and SL1 camera. Same mount different set of ergonomics. Stop fixating on just a small camera, the same thin mount can give you a small camera that some people like, but it can also go on a giant camera that a different set of people like. the smallest you can do with the current EF mount is the SL1 camera.



You cannot reconcile this with the crowd that thinks that the SL1 is huge, bulbous, and ugly, as is any camera with a viewfinder bump and a grip. In the go-small-or-go-home crowd, the a7r3 is the limit of acceptable size, the a6500 is with a kit lens is better; and the best camera form factor is something like a smartphone with a collapsible pancake. The only reason some people want a full frame for is low light shooting, and probably a good chunk of them, becuse they don't know how to properly use a flash. Which is probably way too huge, heavy, and ugly anyways.

Regardless of my own preferences and the obvious ridicule I have for it, this is probably a market segment, and camera manufacturers should make someone who wants a $4,000 kit for shooting family photos in low light their dream kit.

And, the mount for it doesn't ever need things like a 70-200/2.8 or a 400/4. Well, unless you can fit that into your shirt pocket.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Apr 7, 2018)

Talys said:


> The only reason some people want a full frame for is low light shooting, and probably a good chunk of them, becuse they don't know how to properly use a flash.



People want full frame cameras because they don’t know how to use flashes? Heh from whence did you come up with that statistic ;D


----------



## Talys (Apr 7, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > The only reason some people want a full frame for is low light shooting, and probably a good chunk of them, becuse they don't know how to properly use a flash.
> ...



Sadly, I have a friend who is one  *cries*

He absolutely refuses to use a flash, lol. Would rather shoot it ISO 25,000, because he is convinced that camera flashes ruin photographs, despite my every effort to explain the contrary. He's bought a couple of Canon full frame DSLRs now, so at least he helps keep local camera stores in business.

On the bright side, I shouldn't complain too much. He sold me my Canon 600EX-RT for $200, because he's convinced that it's junk -- just like a 430EX2 he gave me for free a few years before that  

To be honest, he'd probably love a Sony A7iii. What he really wants is a point and shoot with awesome low light that he can take on vacations and to family get togethers.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Apr 7, 2018)

Talys said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



Hah wow.

I mean, they *can* ruin photos I suppose. But what the heck? Has he never seen a great portrait? Or fashion / fine art tableu? How does he think those are made?


----------



## Talys (Apr 7, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Hah wow.
> 
> I mean, they *can* ruin photos I suppose. But what the heck? Has he never seen a great portrait? Or fashion / fine art tableu? How does he think those are made?



Presumably, he's _actually_ figured it out, since he's actually a very bright fellow and I've walked him through the whole bounce thing, shown him what gels can do and explained why pointing a flash straight at someone's face is like stepping in poo. And we've taken plenty of great photos of his kids in a studio setting with proper modifiers.

At the end of the day, he's a guy who likes toplay with cameras and just wants an ETTL that magically looks good. Since that doesn't exist, he's settled for full frame cameras in auto mode. Maybe that new auto-bounce flash will be easy enough for him to use. If not, I'll net me a cheap/free one of those! hahaha ;D


----------



## BillB (Apr 7, 2018)

Talys said:


> kphoto99 said:
> 
> 
> > For the same reason that the EF mount is used on a 1D and SL1 camera. Same mount different set of ergonomics. Stop fixating on just a small camera, the same thin mount can give you a small camera that some people like, but it can also go on a giant camera that a different set of people like. the smallest you can do with the current EF mount is the SL1 camera.
> ...



Then there are the people who want a very small fullframe camera (low cost, with interchangeable lens) mostly because it doesn't exist. Any camera that hits the market will cost too much, be too big, lack the right lenses, and have various other fatal flaws which they will recognize as soon as the camera is announced, followed quickly by forums posts to tell about their acute disappointment, especially is Canon is the manufacturer.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 7, 2018)

BillB said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > kphoto99 said:
> ...



I suppose being number one (as Canon is) makes them an easy target. The anti-Canon bias on the internet review sites and forums is almost beyond belief. Saw an in-depth review of the Sony A7III - which was mainly positive, but pointed out that many of the features don't work as well as the spec sheet would make one believe - and the Sony fanboys were out in force! Similar comments on this forum and other places that criticize Sony for putting out cameras that are in many ways beta-testers, seem to be ignored or downplayed to the extreme. Even Nikon - whose executives in an interview gave basically the same type of comment as Canon execs - were not vilified as Canon execs are. Those Nikon execs basically said that their major concern was putting out a product that was high quality, with reliable working features, rather than putting in a lot of more gimmicky features that look good on the spec sheet. When Canon says that - they are killed!

I seriously wonder how many of the great spec features are actually used and tested in the internet reviews. Very few, I would imagine, as time constraints probably cause the reviewers to just test the basics and then just repeat verbatim from the promotional material the spec features that they don't get to test. And one should not forget that these reviews are not done by journalists pledged to be fair and honest. Many if not most - are basically advertisements.

My personal experience with a recent purchase of an Olympus E-M1 II only reinforces my belief that Canon's approach is far better than putting "innovations" into a camera just because it looks good on the spec sheet, impresses reviewers and makes the next generation of camera seem like a bigger upgrade. Two features that I was looking forward to with the new Olympus - their new touch/drag focus point selection and their new High-resolution mode. Compared to Canon's M5, their touch/drag AF point selection is very poor. Canon's works great, Olympus's jumps around and is barely usable. I haven't tried the high-res mode, but just got off an Olympus user forum where many users commented. While a great feature on the spec sheet, it is pretty much useless in practice according to users. The camera must be completely still for it to work. A tripod many not be stable enough. Any sort of breeze makes it unusable. Users using an 8 second delay found that the camera was probably still vibrating ever so slightly after 8 seconds. A remote shutter release is needed. If you aren't using their Pro lenses, you might not see a difference between hi-res and a regular shot, etc. etc.

Based on user comments here, many of the great Sony specs are also not working particularly well in practice. yet, Sony gets nothing but internet love! And Canon nothing but internet hate.


----------



## Talys (Apr 7, 2018)

@dak723 -

My top Sony beta/misleading features list for the A7R3:

- 10fps: But VF doesn't refresh in real time. Solution: set to 8fps.
- Silent Shutter: But there's massive distortion with movement. Solution: turn it off.
- Weather resistant: except the hotshoe, if uncovered, and the bottom of the camera.
- Fast Hybrid Autofocus: But it only works in Continuous AF; otherwise, it's Contrast Detect.
- AF points across the whole frame: Except only the 70% covered by Phase Detect is fast AF; the rest hunts like a Nikon in live view.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 7, 2018)

Don't you love it when even the fine print has fine print?


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 9, 2018)

An announcement just before Photokina, Koln, Germany in September. This is the last bi-annual and in September Photokina. Next year it moves to May and becomes annual.


----------



## Isaacheus (Apr 10, 2018)

Talys said:


> @dak723 -
> 
> My top Sony beta/misleading features list for the A7R3:
> 
> ...



On the flipside, I think Canon should be trying to push the boundaries more than they are, a lot of the positive press sony get is from trying to add useful features, rather than omitting them completely. 

Silent shooting and 10 fps are two great examples of this: not ideal for all situations due to the limitations, but far more useful being there for the times you want /need them, than not having them at all.

Canon also has a trend of releasing special sheet additions that are limited in real use.
The 4k conditions on the 5dmk4 and M50, dual pixel raw seems to be a bit limiting in real use, the eye af only being available in some shooting modes etc. 

I like that Canon are adding extras, and still think that it should be counted as a positive that those are added even with the fine print, it just means we can't knock on Sony for having the same situation


----------



## kphoto99 (Apr 10, 2018)

I had an idea for a mount, the mount could "zoom" between 44mm for the standard EF flange distance and retract for a 18mm flange distance. This way you could use regular EF lenses and also use small EF-X lenses.

No way of forgetting an adapter. Small camera with short FL lenses, yet still uses all EF lenses.


----------



## Jeffrey (Apr 10, 2018)

What, me worry?

If new gear comes out and the image quality is superior to the gear I have, then I move forward in purchasing the new gear. 

Speculation is just that; somewhat entertaining, but nothing to be concerned with until we see images from the new camera.


----------

