# The Mess That is the Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Rumor Mill



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 15, 2018)

> It hasn’t been since the release of the EOS 5D Mark III that we have seen this many emails and bits of information flood our inbox, and it’s once again, extremely difficult to figure out what is real.
> We’re going to backtrack/reset what we think is happening, based on information from trusted sources. For the record, we’re backtracking on things we’ve posted in recent weeks. I don’t like it, but it happens.
> We do know that at least one (and likely two) mirrorless cameras have hit certain certification agencies, thanks to Nokishita for always finding those. We do not remember a single time that a certified product didn’t reach market, so rest assured, a full frame mirrorless camera is coming and according to the certification information, it’ll be a full frame 30.4mp camera.
> The elephant in the room is when are these...



Continue reading...


----------



## rjbray01 (Jul 15, 2018)

I wouldn't be at all surprised if they've field tested something like a 5D-iv with an EVF and based on feedback have realised that this is too little too late.

Anyone itching to buy a FF Mirrorless would compare such an offering Sony's range and, pretty much regardless of price or mount, would find it very difficult not to go for the Sony ...

... so have gone back to the drawing board to come up with a camera which is actually competitive on features.

This could be the best piece of news for some time ... we might actually get a decent camera out of Canon yet !


----------



## zim (Jul 15, 2018)

kinda sounds like this is shaping up to a d810 - 5ds scenario


----------



## Orangutan (Jul 15, 2018)

> Anyone itching to buy a FF Mirrorless would compare such an offering Sony's range and, pretty much regardless of price or mount, would find it very difficult not to go for the Sony ...


That's a huge statement you've made with no evidence or plausible argument. 



> a camera which is actually competitive on features.


And what are those?


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 16, 2018)

Lucy did it again.


----------



## sdz (Jul 16, 2018)

FUD, FUD, everywhere I look there is FUD.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 16, 2018)

What's the rush, guys?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 16, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> Lucy did it again.



Charlie Brown: "AAUGH!"

http://peanuts.wikia.com/wiki/Football_gag


----------



## tmroper (Jul 16, 2018)

rjbray01 said:


> I
> 
> Anyone itching to buy a FF Mirrorless would compare such an offering Sony's range and, pretty much regardless of price or mount, would find it very difficult not to go for the Sony ...



I've been watching and waiting for Sony to get modern technology into their Alphas--like touch screens, batteries that last, articulating LCDs, etc--for so long now, that waiting to see what Canon comes up with is no big deal. Canon will have to do something rather soon, but I expect them to at least have all of those things, while Sony may not until yet another rev.


----------



## dak723 (Jul 16, 2018)

rjbray01 said:


> Anyone itching to buy a FF Mirrorless would compare such an offering Sony's range and, pretty much regardless of price or mount, would find it very difficult not to go for the Sony ...



Those interested in Canon or who have Canon lenses will probably not even bother comparing it to Sony. And many of us (myself included) who have tried Sony FF will not bother comparing it to Sony as we have already seen how the Sonys are lacking. Until Sony improves their color and their ergonomics, I wouldn't even consider Sony.



> This could be the best piece of news for some time ... we might actually get a decent camera out of Canon yet !



Canon has made more decent cameras than probably anyone else. So this is Trollspeak. Thanks for revealing yourself!


----------



## noms78 (Jul 16, 2018)

Hmm, I didn't buy the 5d mark IV because of its 30MP and crippled 4k. Was really expecting the FF mirrorless to have 38MP. If the 4k video isn't crippled it could still be a winner, even with 30MP...


----------



## slclick (Jul 16, 2018)

Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past? You cannot seriously tell me it's for printing purposes, we all know the average forumite rarely prints larger than 11 x 14. YMMV of course. (99.9% of your images are for SM)


----------



## tmroper (Jul 16, 2018)

slclick said:


> Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past?



Not everyone's needs are the same. For those doing a lot of retouching, especially skin retouching, the more pixels to work with, the better (everything else being equal). People shooting sports on a 1DX wouldn't care about that one bit, while someone shooting beauty shots would care about that a whole lot.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 16, 2018)

noms78 said:


> Hmm, I didn't buy the 5d mark IV because of its 30MP and crippled 4k. Was really expecting the FF mirrorless to have 38MP. If the 4k video isn't crippled it could still be a winner, even with 30MP...



I _did_ buy the 5D mk IV because of its 30MP sensor (and a few other accoutrements) and have yet to shoot in 4K. It is the compelling reason I don't currently have any interest in a FF MILC. My mirrorless aspirations are limited to the aps-c range, so I'm guardedly optimistic on the evolution of the _M_ line.


----------



## Cryve (Jul 16, 2018)

If we wont be seeing a full frame mirrorless this photokina, then this could open up the stage for a possible 90d or 7d III release?

i mean what else is on the waiting list for release and especialy in this timeframe? I dont think they wont give us any prosumer or pro body for photokina.


----------



## Woody (Jul 16, 2018)

I am only keen on the EF-M 32mm f/1.4 lens. Hope it is available by end Sep 2018. ;D


----------



## Etienne (Jul 16, 2018)

"Development announcement." Yippeeee

I have a "development announcement" of my own: my teleporter / time machine is in development. It should be ready for production about 15 years after Sony has released their Mark IV teleporter. But mine will be more expensive and will only transport half of your body.


----------



## slclick (Jul 16, 2018)

tmroper said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past?
> ...



So were fashion shots simply unusable until the newer high MP bodies of the past couple years? I cannot believe that. Or are you saying current fashion and portrait studios hold themselves to different standards? Your response was bordering on the tired premise that you can't do anything good unless you buy _____ product. (Which disregards 100+ years of incredible photography with older gear) I didn't say you said exactly that just that you didn't convince me with your reasoning. Maybe if you just said pixel peepers with money created a market, then I'd say "ok"


----------



## deleteme (Jul 16, 2018)

noms78 said:


> Hmm, I didn't buy the 5d mark IV because of its 30MP and crippled 4k. Was really expecting the FF mirrorless to have 38MP. If the 4k video isn't crippled it could still be a winner, even with 30MP...



I bought the mkIV because I needed a backup for my 5DsR and did not want two high MP bodies.
I now find myself shooting almost exclusively with the mkIV as it is that much more enjoyable to use.

I also found that 30MP is plenty for architecture and the images between the two bodies is not dramatic.
The DR is allegedly much better but IMO I can't see much difference from my mkIIIs but then again I am not dragging shadows 5 stops.

As for "needing" more res I have yet to encounter any job that "needed" more than 20MP. Even high end still life or beauty as these were being done on 16MP cameras to great results for a long time.


----------



## ricardoko (Jul 16, 2018)

Let's say canon came out with FF mirrorless with the same sensor and features as the 5DIV. Would there be any reason to still get DSLRS? assuming same price


----------



## tmroper (Jul 16, 2018)

slclick said:


> tmroper said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...



By the more pixels the better, I meant easier. You just have more to work with, and run into fewer problems when retouching skin. And yes, standards have changed over the years with digital, especially with beauty advertising, which is different from fashion (think make-up vs clothes). But like I said, the main issue is, it's just easier, quicker and therefore cheaper when working with more pixels (assuming hardware capable of it). Personally, I'd be happy still shooting film and doing hardly any retouching. But that's not what most clients want. Things are trending a little more toward natural, un-retouched style ("don't retouch me!"), so we'll see about that in the years to come.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 16, 2018)

rjbray01 said:


> Anyone itching to buy a FF Mirrorless would compare such an offering Sony's range and, pretty much regardless of price or mount, would find it very difficult not to go for the Sony ...



Unless they own EF glass and want it to work natively, reliably, consistently, etc. in which case they'd wait for the Canon product to arrive.

That doesn't seem very difficult to me.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 16, 2018)

slclick said:


> Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past? You cannot seriously tell me it's for printing purposes, we all know the average forumite rarely prints larger than 11 x 14. YMMV of course. (99.9% of your images are for SM)



Agree. But like it or not, it's the easiest way to differentiate your product on the market and to ask for a higher price. 

- A


----------



## cpreston (Jul 16, 2018)

I am an actual videographer who uses the Canon Cinema line of cameras and generally has no interest in high megapixel cameras outside of photos and timelapse. I stick with Canon because I generally don't care about the video features of their photo cameras, but I like their lenses and DPAF. That being said, if they produced a small mirrorless camera that had decent resolution without a crop, I would upgrade from my current EOS-M1's that I use. I don't think any of the video people care whether they reuse the 5D IV sensor, or even the 5D II sensor. They just want some type of decent 4K, with a log profile (unneeded IMHO), in a crop that is at least as large as S35.


----------



## Joatamos (Jul 16, 2018)

Last time I checked, this site is called CanonRUMOURS.com .... not canon.com, nor canonfact.com.

I won't presume to speak for others, but I come here for the rumours, the "we think", "maybe", "looks like" etc. Keep the information flowing please.

Can't wait to hear glorious detail about the FF mirrorless Canon models, but in the meantime, please don't hold back on unsubstantiated mutterings.. 8)


----------



## Uneternal (Jul 16, 2018)

tmroper said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > tmroper said:
> ...



I think there was a dedicated site saying you don't need anything over 12 megapixels, and everything over it actually decreases quality because the sensor pixels get too small. Well that was like 10 years ago and technology got better, we have BSI and other stuff allowing sensors to catch more photons, so manufacturers were able to increase the megapixels without wasting quality. Thats why a Sony a7 III, although having better resolution doesn't give you more grain than a 1DX in high ISO. At the same time you can have cameras like the A7S II which give you those 12 megapixels but look a lot better than what we've been used to in the past.
Personally, as I do a lot of retouching, I must say I can never have enough megapixels. I just love to crop pictures afterwards or those extra megapixels of texture I get out of the 5DIV at work compared to my 6D at home. Of course, for the ordinary shooter, 20 MP should be enough.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 16, 2018)

Still not a word about the G7X III


----------



## stevelee (Jul 16, 2018)

Effective downsampling is an art and a science in itself. Just telling Photoshop to change the resolution in one fell swoop can give you mush.


----------



## photonius (Jul 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> FUD, FUD, everywhere I look there is FUD.



Full frame unsubstantiated disclosures ...


----------



## BillB (Jul 16, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past? You cannot seriously tell me it's for printing purposes, we all know the average forumite rarely prints larger than 11 x 14. YMMV of course. (99.9% of your images are for SM)
> ...


----------



## rjbray01 (Jul 16, 2018)

ricardoko said:


> Let's say canon came out with FF mirrorless with the same sensor and features as the 5DIV. Would there be any reason to still get DSLRS? assuming same price



poor EVF latency and resolution leads to a poor experience


----------



## Kit. (Jul 16, 2018)

noms78 said:


> Was really expecting the FF mirrorless to have 38MP.


Why 38? For quad-pixel 4k cropped from a 3:2 stills frame you need around 45Mpixels.

38 just make no difference. Could as well be 30.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 16, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past? You cannot seriously tell me it's for printing purposes, we all know the average forumite rarely prints larger than 11 x 14. YMMV of course. (99.9% of your images are for SM)
> ...



If you are not resolution limited then you don't need more Mpx. If you just use the whole of the frame and do not crop, then maybe you don't need high MPx. If you are not interested in fine detail, then maybe the same. But, if you are resolution limited, then more MP are important. Like many wildlife and bird photographers, I find that high MPx FF sensors with the same pixel density as APS-C extremely useful. Personally, I don't want more than 50 Mpx full frame as f/5.6 is on the borderline of being diffraction limited for the small pixels,


----------



## Canoneer (Jul 16, 2018)

Etienne said:


> "Development announcement." Yippeeee
> 
> I have a "development announcement" of my own: my teleporter / time machine is in development. It should be ready for production about 15 years after Sony has released their Mark IV teleporter.



I would be satisfied with just a Mark III teleporter from Sony.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 16, 2018)

photonius said:


> sdz said:
> 
> 
> > FUD, FUD, everywhere I look there is FUD.
> ...



even worse! Full Frame Unsubstantiated Development announcements ...  ;D


----------



## jeffpoker (Jul 16, 2018)

As sad as it makes to me say, Canon can still afford to wait a year or two (maybe even three?).
They hold current Canon users by the balls with their lenses and they still sell tons of Rebels to newbies who don't know what a mirrorless is and who want a big "DSLR" camera to take good photos. Because we all know that the bigger the camera, the better the photos right?

I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't hear anything from Canon until at least May 2019, maybe even Photokina 2019.


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 16, 2018)

“Fine readers of this site?” Now *that* rumor is definitely not true. Most of us are bitter and angry, flame-war prone people


----------



## Orangutan (Jul 16, 2018)

ricardoko said:


> Let's say canon came out with FF mirrorless with the same sensor and features as the 5DIV. Would there be any reason to still get DSLRS? assuming same price



It depends on what you mean by "same features" -- different people have different needs. Some features that are important to some, but irrelevant to others are:

* EVF low-light performance
* Rapid subject tracking (e.g. birds in flight)
* Battery life


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Jul 16, 2018)

Antono Refa said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past? You cannot seriously tell me it's for printing purposes, we all know the average forumite rarely prints larger than 11 x 14. YMMV of course. (99.9% of your images are for SM)
> ...



It is understandable that he feels embarrassed about spending more on the lens that he needed to and probably did not appreciate having his mistake pointed out on a forum. If it is of any consolation to him, I went to the trouble and expense of upgrading my 24-105 F4L to the 24-105 F4L ii when the new lens was announced even though I was unable to see any significant improvement in the images I was able to produce. However, I justified the purchase by telling myself that the old lens had been heavily used, it has been taken around the world with me several times and it would have fallen apart quite soon had I not replaced it when I did.
On the point about wanting the latest version of a product - well I that is something that most of us do. I know many people who change their phone or their car every 2 years, even though the old one still works perfectly.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 16, 2018)

slclick said:


> Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past? You cannot seriously tell me it's for printing purposes, we all know the average forumite rarely prints larger than 11 x 14. YMMV of course. (99.9% of your images are for SM)



Virtually all the images that I have shot for work have gone into reports (with most of them printed at 4 or 5 inches across), or are viewed on computer monitors. Very few of them require more than a 8Mpixel camera.....


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 16, 2018)

The jitters are mostly caused by lens-mount, not megapixels. Lens purchases on hold until the mount issue is "resolved."


----------



## Etienne (Jul 16, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Help me out. Why is the MP war back on...after all, all the talking heads here have argued that MP desires above the high teens are irrelevant and the 1DX was always proof of their argument. Are folks now buying bodies to support lenses as opposed to the other way around as in years past? You cannot seriously tell me it's for printing purposes, we all know the average forumite rarely prints larger than 11 x 14. YMMV of course. (99.9% of your images are for SM)
> ...



High megapixels has great benefits: more room to crop, reduced noise by downsizing, larger prints, reduced moire and aliasing issues. But this requires faster processors in both camera body and computer, and more storage space. These disadvantages shrink every year as tech improves, so high megapixels will deliver better results as the years roll by. Bring it on


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 16, 2018)

After using both 200D and M50 during a trip to the netherlands I must say that I couldn't
decide which one is better.

Both cameras have similar price, weight and size.

The EVF of the M50 is very fast and therefore mostly a joy to use but: In very bright environments
the OVF of the 200D is much much better. And the OVF shows more detail.
Flying seagulls ware easier to capture with the 200D but maybe I do not know well enough to configure
the M50 correctly. But capturing flying birds (30 km/h or so) which fly in my direction and then overhead
isn't that easy.

On the other hand I made some movie clips for use in teaching: Breaking waves and flying birds @ 100 fps
in HD (1.3k) resolution (with EF f/4.0 70-200 IS USM mark i @200mm): Very usable and possible only with M50
because the EVF was very helpful: Seeing what you record + stabilizing the camera with a third point!
Another good feature is the use of the EVF to do settings while looking through the camera like AF field position and sometimes other params via the menu.
At the end he M50 is a well designed camera to take photographs with a well implemented touch screen driven interface - and if I want very good ergonomics for manual jobs I use adapted FD lenses where you have very very good focusing and a ring for f-stop settings.

After all my dream cam would have a switchable EVF / OVF system to combine the best of both worlds
and I hope that there will be at last one camera from Canon which provides that. Maybe not now but
perhaps in 5 years ... ? Maybe Canon is still thinking what to present to the (really?) frustrated Canon & mirrorless loving community.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 16, 2018)

Etienne said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...




At home, and particularly with bird photography, more megapixels is a great thing. In good light, it is amazing what you can get away with! I find it interesting how at work I have zero need for anything bigger than 8, yet for recreation, I always seem to need more...

Similarly, at work I have zero need/desire for a mirrorless camera, yet for home, I am very interested...

And this is why there are different bodies with different capacities


----------



## bgoyette (Jul 16, 2018)

slclick said:


> tmroper said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...



Well he was talking about beauty shots, not fashion shots...but seeing as you asked. Those of us who shoot fashion professionally see our images used on the web, in full page fashion ads, large format retail graphics, and billboards. Most of us, until recently, shot with medium format high MP camera's because, frankly, the clients really like seeing the weave of the expensive fabric they are using, something that lower MP cameras, with AA filters cannot show in a full body photograph. So...yeah..given that..lower MP, AA challenged, fashion photos from 5-10 years ago "were" unusable. Today, we have FF DSLR's capable of shooting at detail levels largely equal to the MF cameras available (my 5dsr beats my Hasselblad h5d in this respect), but can also do it at higher ISO's and much faster frame rates, things also important in fashion photography. 

You may find for your needs that 12 or 18mp is terrif. For my needs today...around 50mp is just fine. Others may need or just want more. How bout we leave it at that.


----------



## nchoh (Jul 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> FUD, FUD, everywhere I look there is FUD.



Totally, Trolls everywhere sowing Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) on Canon products!!!


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 16, 2018)

nchoh said:


> sdz said:
> 
> 
> > FUD, FUD, everywhere I look there is FUD.
> ...



But lens mounts are uncertain--that isn't fake news!


----------



## Cali Capture (Jul 17, 2018)

It's been very interesting seeing the amount of responses to the Mirrorless rumor trail. It turely amazes me the amount of energy put into what I feel (and many others have stated) is an insignificant product evolution. Beyond a silent shot/ shutterless capture, I just don't see what all the fuss is about. Smaller form factor? Have you seen the reviews of the new Sony 400mm 2.8? It's literally comical IMHO to see those guys with a huge lense and that tiny body! Pehaps because I'm a larger person that it just doesn't make sense to think you can effectively work with a square little box and Good Canon glass. The trend is NOT smaller glass. All this fuss reminds me of the pre 5d mark IV rumors, the forum created so much chaos, that nothing would have been good enough. Yet the Mark 4 is a great camera, that any EF lens professional or prosumer would want. I'm 100 times more curious as to what the new glass announcements are than what the next box is going toe, sepecially if it comes in to small of a form factor for my hands or lens balance.


----------



## Otara (Jul 17, 2018)

I agree its a small increase in many ways.

For me though, I have seen enough of the EVF features on the M5, that Id like a better version of that. Touch screen for af movement, preview of exposure I like a lot. Light amplification for darker scenes is nice too as my nightsight isnt great. Great for scuba diving too, a bit niche yes, but a DSLR underwater is uh, interesting, had to buy a $1000 viewfinder to make it workable. For nature silent is very nice, my 7D2 on hispeed is very noisy.

None of this I 'need' but I do look forward to them when I decide its time for a new toy. But for birds in flight, theres still a way to go, so Ill probably end up using two cameras for a bit, unless a real surprise is coming with AF acquisition.


----------



## bdbender4 (Jul 17, 2018)

I am mostly curious about the mount. Don't want EF. I see no point in getting into Canon full frame mirrorless if it is saddled with 44mm of pointless EF backspace. We don't need everything to be huge distagon lenses like, say, some of the Sigma Arts or Zeiss Milvuses. Without that backspace more options open up at some focal lengths.

I sold almost all my (large, heavy) EF stuff and am happily using an M5, getting by with the available EF-M lenses, plus an EF adapter and a couple of remaining small EF lenses. (In this context the "small" EF 70-200 f/4 isn't small - just compare it with the EF-M 55-200.) 

But I am not a pro, just take images for the fun of it, to please myself. I just wasn't using my (large, heavy) full frame DSLR any more, after having an APS-C Fuji setup for a while and then back to Canon EOS-M. So I am actually hoping more for the rumored 32mm f/1.4 EF-M and updated M5 than anything full frame.

And I guess I would offer this thought for those who just don't see the point of mirrorless: IMHO the mirror box is already an expensive anachronism, and it's going away. Why focus someplace else besides on the sensor? I would guess that complex DSLR mechanisms with mirrors and prisms and mechanical shutters and fiddly plus/minus focus adjustments on individual lenses and so forth will go away surprisingly quickly, too. Expensive top-end DSLRs, for telephoto sports and wildlife, will be the about the only holdouts.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 17, 2018)

Cali Capture said:


> It's been very interesting seeing the amount of responses to the Mirrorless rumor trail. It turely amazes me the amount of energy put into what I feel (and many others have stated) is an insignificant product evolution. Beyond a silent shot/ shutterless capture, I just don't see what all the fuss is about. Smaller form factor? Have you seen the reviews of the new Sony 400mm 2.8? It's literally comical IMHO to see those guys with a huge lense and that tiny body! Pehaps because I'm a larger person that it just doesn't make sense to think you can effectively work with a square little box and Good Canon glass. The trend is NOT smaller glass. All this fuss reminds me of the pre 5d mark IV rumors, the forum created so much chaos, that nothing would have been good enough. Yet the Mark 4 is a great camera, that any EF lens professional or prosumer would want. I'm 100 times more curious as to what the new glass announcements are than what the next box is going toe, sepecially if it comes in to small of a form factor for my hands or lens balance.



Best post I've read in awhile. Some of these guys could fall into a $10,000,000 pile of money and then would complain about the paper cut.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Jul 17, 2018)

Cali Capture said:


> It's been very interesting seeing the amount of responses to the Mirrorless rumor trail. It turely amazes me the amount of energy put into what I feel (and many others have stated) is an insignificant product evolution. Beyond a silent shot/ shutterless capture, I just don't see what all the fuss is about. Smaller form factor? Have you seen the reviews of the new Sony 400mm 2.8? It's literally comical IMHO to see those guys with a huge lense and that tiny body! Pehaps because I'm a larger person that it just doesn't make sense to think you can effectively work with a square little box and Good Canon glass. The trend is NOT smaller glass. All this fuss reminds me of the pre 5d mark IV rumors, the forum created so much chaos, that nothing would have been good enough. Yet the Mark 4 is a great camera, that any EF lens professional or prosumer would want. I'm 100 times more curious as to what the new glass announcements are than what the next box is going toe, sepecially if it comes in to small of a form factor for my hands or lens balance.


Yes I agree, but that Sony 400mm F2.8 would look great on my 5D mk4. It is smaller and lighter than the Canon equivalent and it has lots of interesting features. 
There are plenty of adapters allowing you to mount Canon glass on a Sony body, but is it possible to mount a Sony lens on a Canon EF full frame body?


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

well, if mirrorless were "just another, small evolutionary step in the drvelopment of imaging gear", then why the heck is it taking Canon and Nikon so long to get rid of mirrorslapping? Especially when "tiny iterative steps" are at the core of their business model?  ;D



bdbender4 said:


> I am mostly curious about the mount. Don't want EF. I see no point in getting into Canon full frame mirrorless if it is saddled with 44mm of pointless EF backspace. We don't need everything to be huge distagon lenses like, say, some of the Sigma Arts or Zeiss Milvuses. Without that backspace more options open up at some focal lengths.
> ...
> And I guess I would offer this thought for those who just don't see the point of mirrorless: IMHO the mirror box is already an expensive anachronism, and it's going away. Why focus someplace else besides on the sensor? I would guess that complex DSLR mechanisms with mirrors and prisms and mechanical shutters and fiddly plus/minus focus adjustments on individual lenses and so forth will go away surprisingly quickly, too. Expensive top-end DSLRs, for telephoto sports and wildlife, will be the about the only holdouts.



exactly! 

it is just this forum which has some "over-reprentation" of folks with big lenses and/or big hands, who have a very hard time accepting this reality. mainly because they are concerned about the (economic) value of their big lenses they spent big bucks on, once these are relegated to "legacy shard status". 

they are also unable or unwilling to accept the fact that overwhelming majority of all images are made using focal lengths that will greatly benefit from the removal of mirror boxes from the lightpath. 

that's why they constantly try to obfuscate, downplay or ridicule the very real and significant benefits of mirrorless camera systems and are happy with the mirrorslapping status quo and "conservative Canon" dragging their feet.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 17, 2018)

bdbender4 said:


> I am mostly curious about the mount. Don't want EF. I see no point in getting into Canon full frame mirrorless if it is saddled with 44mm of pointless EF backspace.



Well I believe most Canon users actually don't care about these technicalities. This forum is full of photo-geeks (which I like) but even I care more about my $$$ EF lenses than 44mm of the flange distance. If Canon abandons EF one way or another, I'll be very angry.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 17, 2018)

bdbender4 said:


> I am mostly curious about the mount. Don't want EF. I see no point in getting into Canon full frame mirrorless if it is saddled with 44mm of pointless EF backspace.


Not a problem. If you are not buying big whites, Canon will be happy if you stay with EOS M.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 17, 2018)

Cali Capture said:


> It's been very interesting seeing the amount of responses to the Mirrorless rumor trail. It turely amazes me the amount of energy put into what I feel (and many others have stated) is an insignificant product evolution. Beyond a silent shot/ shutterless capture, I just don't see what all the fuss is about. Smaller form factor? Have you seen the reviews of the new Sony 400mm 2.8? It's literally comical IMHO to see those guys with a huge lense and that tiny body! Pehaps because I'm a larger person that it just doesn't make sense to think you can effectively work with a square little box and Good Canon glass. The trend is NOT smaller glass. All this fuss reminds me of the pre 5d mark IV rumors, the forum created so much chaos, that nothing would have been good enough. Yet the Mark 4 is a great camera, that any EF lens professional or prosumer would want. I'm 100 times more curious as to what the new glass announcements are than what the next box is going toe, sepecially if it comes in to small of a form factor for my hands or lens balance.


Everyone has a different perspective on this topic depending on how long you are in photography and how much gear your have acquired so far. If you have a XXD or XD camera you are probably less interested in the new mirrorless camera. You would also be less interested if you are not pushing gear to its absolute maximum. For ordinary run of the mill shooting the existing gear is just fine. A EOS M series camera may be all you need. There are others who have the best equipement already. The members here would be (compared to the average Canon user) pretty well equipped with high end gear. If you have a 1DX II or a 5DIV and you are hitting limitations then of course you are very interested in what Canon are going to do with Mirrorless because this will be the next technological advance. There isn't much left for Canon to do on mirrored cameras. If you want more FPS and EVF and truely silent shooting you want a good mirrorless camera from Canon. The mount matters alot to people heavily invested in Canon glass. If you only have one or two lens a new mount would be a great thing. If you have lots of glass a new mount would be an inconvenience as adapters are usually not as good as native EF. On camera size If you have small slow lens a smaller body would be ideal. If you have fast heavy glass you need at least a 5D IV body to comfortably grip it or your'll have wrist issues.

I've all the Canon glass I need. I think Canon is running out of road there too. The new 70-200mm III is an example. Canon couldn't upgrade it much. The big whites are so good only making them lighter would be an improvement. Sigma are now a very substantial competitor in glass. Before they were a cheaper less quality brand but they are very good now. That's why the mirrorless is so important at this moment in time. Its the most significant improvement Canon can make and it indicates their ability or not to make a relevant mirrorless full frame camera.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 17, 2018)

Hector1970 said:


> If you have a 1DX II or a 5DIV and you are hitting limitations then of course you are very interested in what Canon are going to do with Mirrorless because this will be the next technological advance. There isn't much left for Canon to do on mirrored cameras. If you want more FPS and EVF and truely silent shooting you want a good mirrorless camera from Canon.


It's not true. There is not much to do in "mirrorless" that couldn't be done in "mirror-up". Of course, that may require a hybrid viewfinder.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 17, 2018)

If you need to do it mirror up why have a mirror


----------



## Kit. (Jul 17, 2018)

Hector1970 said:


> If you need to do it mirror up why have a mirror


Because having a separate body for when you need to do it mirror down is inconvenient and more expensive.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

Hector1970 said:


> I've all the Canon glass I need. I think Canon is running out of road there too. The new 70-200mm III is an example. Canon couldn't upgrade it much. The big whites are so good only making them lighter would be an improvement. Sigma are now a very substantial competitor in glass. Before they were a cheaper less quality brand but they are very good now. That's why the mirrorless is so important at this moment in time. Its the most significant improvement Canon can make and it indicates their ability or not to make a relevant mirrorless full frame camera.



very good point. Mirrorless systems with both - APS-C and FF sensor size - are indeed the most significant improvement Canon can make to stills imaging gear today.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> well, if mirrorless were "just another, small evolutionary step in the drvelopment of imaging gear", then why the heck is it taking Canon and Nikon so long to get rid of mirrorslapping? Especially when "tiny iterative steps" are at the core of their business model?



Maybe it is just your choice of words, but I don't think that either Canon or Nikon are "trying to get rid of DSLRs." It appears to me that both Canon and Nikon are developing mirrorless products alongside their range of DSLRs and I see no evidence that either company is planning to cease DSLR production. This is very heartening because it means that we as consumers have a choice. 
Why do you want to deny us that choice and why do you continue to ridicule anyone who dares to have an opinion that differs from yours?


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

there has been and there still is *lots of choice* for DSLRs and there will be some choice for a few more years. 

But there is still *no choice* for FF mirrorless cameras. Only Sony [I don't really include Leica given pricing and positioning of their offerings]. That's what i am criticizing. And some of the folks here who would love this situation to continue indefinitely. Who think it is perfectly fine that Canon customers like myself should be limited to Canon crop sensor mirrorless ... "at best". And I will continue to criticize Canon [and Nikon] for denying me the choice of FF sensor in a [compact, decent, affordable] mirrorless system. 

Despite "FF and IQ goodness" I often regret having spent money on Canon 5D 3 and EF-L glass. Too big, too heavy, too clunky, too un-connected, too conspicuous, too noisy for many situations I want to use it for. 

Anyways, it is evident that production of DSLRs (Mirrorslappers) is about to cease. Mirrorless cameras will totally replace / supplant DSLRs. As soon ascustomers are given the choice between big mirrorslappers and more compact mirrorless cameras, things will happen very quickly. 

Yes, 1-series DSLR will probably be offered for another 10 years (same for Nikon), just as with 1-series film-SLRs. Produce 5 more years, sell them 10 more years, then announce end of it.


----------



## Cali Capture (Jul 17, 2018)

Fullstop, Yes I'm vested in a lot of EF glass so from my perspective, a smaller Mirrorless would be more of a specialized or travel option add to my kit. I don't think your timeline for the end of DSLR is correct, as Full frame is still alive and well ( and profitable). I'm sure there will be multiple offerings by Canon of EF Mirrorless mount in the same form factor as current DSLR's, but not an end to EF lens line for a very long time. 
Oddly, no one is asking about in camera sensor stabilization. Now that would be "evolutionary" for Canon! That would entice me to be an early adopter of a new M system! It would also be a way for them to push out Sigma and Tamron's IS lenses if they don't "talk" well with Canon's ICIS system! It would probably be a defendable proprietary technology restricted to M and EF lenses, Canon's in body stabilization and a very tough workaround for Sigma and Tamron.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> But there is still *no choice* for FF mirrorless cameras. Only Sony [I don't really include Leica given pricing and positioning of their offerings]. That's what i am criticizing.


There is also no choice for 1" MILC. Only Nikon used to do them, and not anymore.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

Kit. said:


> fullstop said:
> 
> 
> > But there is still *no choice* for FF mirrorless cameras. Only Sony [I don't really include Leica given pricing and positioning of their offerings]. That's what i am criticizing.
> ...



correct. But as opposed to FF MILC, nobody was interested in Nikon 1. Said so from the start. Even back then it was absolutely clear, that mFT was the "smallest possible sensor" to consider for an ILC system. Now threshold has moved to APS-C.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Now threshold has moved to APS-C.



Really? Is that why Olympus is outselling Sony in Asia?


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> fullstop said:
> 
> 
> > Now threshold has moved to APS-C.
> ...



got current numbers? I doubt it. I expect mFT will fairly soon follow Nikon 1 to "dwarf-sensor cemetery". 

Had I been in charge of Oly, i would have buried FT and gone APS-C plus compact (mirrorless) FF instead of mFT. A mirrorless FF "OM v2.0 system": *small size, affordable, fully capable*


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> got current numbers? I doubt it. I expect mFT will fairly soon follow Nikon 1 to "dwarf-sensor cemetery".
> 
> Had I been in charge of Oly, i would have buried FT and gone APS-C plus compact (mirrorless) FF instead of mFT. A mirrorless FF "OM v2.0 system": *small size, affordable, fully capable*



https://www.dpreview.com/news/0966656912/2018-japan-bcn-camera-rankings-canon-dominates-dslrs-tops-sony-in-mirrorless


https://nikonrumors.com/2017/11/15/the-2017-bcn-camera-rankings-are-out-canon-is-up-nikon-and-sony-are-down.aspx/

Seems like it is a good job you are not in charge of Olympus, doesn't it.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

thx. It is "Japan only", not Asia. And not full year 2017. But still.  
Will be interesting to see 2018 market shares. 

Imagine what Oly's market share would be today with a decent APS-C and FF mirrorless lineup - instead of mFT "OMGs and Pens". ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> correct. But as opposed to FF MILC, nobody was interested in Nikon 1. Said so from the start. Even back then it was absolutely clear, that mFT was the "smallest possible sensor" to consider for an ILC system. Now threshold has moved to APS-C.




Perhaps for you, but more consumers have voted Olympus with their wallet than any other mirrorless brand... The cameras are reasonably priced, very compact, and fairly feature rich. This is a hard to beat proposition for a compact camera.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> fullstop said:
> 
> 
> > correct. But as opposed to FF MILC, nobody was interested in Nikon 1. Said so from the start. Even back then it was absolutely clear, that mFT was the "smallest possible sensor" to consider for an ILC system. Now threshold has moved to APS-C.
> ...



only the low-end, poor old sensor Olys are "reasonably priced". the higher end is ridiculously large for the small sensor and ridiculously expensive. 2 grand for the OMG 1 II, give me a break!


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > fullstop said:
> ...



But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.
And given your stated desire for inferior lenses to make a package compact (  ), and your opinion of what the masses consider 'good enough' then it is clear the clearly MFT is good enough for an awful lot of people. The number of reports of professionals switching from DSLR to Oly/Pana vastly outweigh those switching from CaNikon to Sony. 

It seems you do not understand the market as well as you think.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.



easy. just 1 quick example:







roughly equivalent: Oly 45/1.2 - mFT, Sony 85/1.8 - FF

Weight:
Oly OMD1 II + 45/1.2 = 574 + 410 g = 984 grams
Sony A7 III + 85/1.8 = 650 + 371 = 1021 grams

Price [best price where I live / Central Europe]:
Oly: € 2,900
Sony: € 2,865

Same weight, same price, same size. No rational reason whatsoever to eschew FF goodness and even remotely consider mFT. And those Oly cameras that sell in reasonable large numbers in Japan are all cr*ppy little last generation Pens at fire sales prices. But yes, at least they are small and light.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Anyways, it is evident that production of DSLRs (Mirrorslappers) is about to cease.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Yes, 1-series DSLR will probably be offered for another 10 years



Love your humour


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 17, 2018)

Cali Capture said:


> Oddly, no one is asking about in camera sensor stabilization. Now that would be "evolutionary" for Canon! That would entice me to be an early adopter of a new M system! It would also be a way for them to push out Sigma and Tamron's IS lenses if they don't "talk" well with Canon's ICIS system!



With in camera IBIS the communication between the body and lens for stabilization purposes isn't important. Just switch VC (IS) off on the Tamron. The camera takes care of it. One thing that would be nice in this scenario would be if the Tamron (example) would at least communicate focal length to the camera.

I use legacy glass that has no electronics. When I use it on my Olympus mirrorless the stabilization works very well. The problem is that each time I change lenses I have to tell the camera the focal length. As long as the Canon mirrorless can get that (and aperture) from a Tamron or Sigma, I don't see a problem.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.
> ...



So you are comparing a consumer level 85mm f1.8 with a top of the range 45mm f1.2? According to you, you and most people don't care about ultra-shallow DOF, so why not compare with a Oly 45mm f.18 at a fraction of the price?


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.
> ...



And the OLY is a pain in the hands to hold. I can't see the Sony being any better. I have an OLY. Takes good photos for M43. Terrible ergonomics.Terrible. Everything is jammed together and it is not comfortable at all. BUt, I have yuge hands. Yours might be small enough, but that's mighty small. They don't call it Micro 4/3 for nothing.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.



The big seller for Olympus is the E-M10 II (390g) and the 14-42F6.3 lens (91g) for about $500 US.
So.... what would the comparable Sony be? A6000 (343g) and 16-50 lens (116g) and about $650 US?

So yeah, comparing crop to crop, there really isn't much physical difference... but then again, comparing crop to FF is a different story, and the A7 and 24-70 weigh in at 945g and $2100US.

If your major criterias are physical size, weight, or cost, you are going to go for a crop camera, be it Oly, Sony, an M, or whatever.... No FF camera can compete...


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 17, 2018)

CanonFanBoy said:


> And the OLY is a pain in the hands to hold. I can't see the Sony being any better. I have an OLY. Takes good photos for M43. Terrible ergonomics.Terrible. Everything is jammed together and it is not comfortable at all. BUt, I have yuge hands. Yours might be small enough, but that's mighty small. They don't call it Micro 4/3 for nothing.



Got one too.... The ergonomics SUCKS!!!!!!!!! but after a while you get used to the menu system... The main reason I like the big cameras 5 series, 7 series, etc, is the well thought out and properly spaced controls that there is just no room for on tiny bodies.

(BTW, the 6D2 touchscreen interface is wonderful)


----------



## slclick (Jul 17, 2018)

Ugh, Oly ergonomics are awful and NO, I never got used to the menu system, sure I could have embraced it but I was much happier just selling it.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 17, 2018)

slclick said:


> Ugh, Oly ergonomics are awful and NO, I never got used to the menu system, sure I could have embraced it but I was much happier just selling it.



Yes.... it's funny..... When they first came out with their 4/3 cameras ( not the micro 4/3) they had better ergonomics and menus than the comparable Canons, and since then Canon got much better and Olympus got much worse....


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.



My FF walkabout two lens kit, and my Oly walkabout two lens kit....

The difference in size is phenomenal, and a smaller body on the FF kit would be negligible compared to the lens weight/bulk.

( picture taken with old phone and not a $5000 DSLR..... please don’t banish me for such an evil transgression )


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 18, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> It hasn’t been since the release of the EOS 5D Mark III that we have seen this many emails and bits of information flood our inbox, and it’s once again, extremely difficult to figure out what is real.</p>
> <p>We’re going to backtrack/reset what we think is happening, based on information from trusted sources. For the record, we’re backtracking on things we’ve posted in recent weeks. I don’t like it, but it happens.</p>
> <p>We do know that at least one (and likely two) <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/the-full-list-of-unreleased-canon-camera-ids/">mirrorless cameras have hit certain certification agencies</a>, thanks to <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/the-full-list-of-unreleased-canon-camera-ids/">Nokishita</a> for always finding those. We do not remember a single time that a certified product didn’t reach market, so rest assured, a full frame mirrorless camera is coming and according to the certification information, it’ll be a full frame 30.4mp camera.</p>
> <p>The elephant in the room is when are these cameras coming? We were told by a good source that we’d see an announcement in 2018 and <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-will-announce-their-first-full-frame-mirrorless-in-2018-cr3/">even gave it a [CR3] rating</a>. A couple of other sources I’d consider better have both cautioned me that they don’t think an official announcement for a full frame mirrorless camera coming in 2018 at the time of writing this. Which would be bad news to say the least.</p>
> ...



Sounds like Nikon and Canon are playing head games with each other on when to announce. Old rivalries die hard.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 18, 2018)

re IBIS: 

Really waiting for Nikon official announcement. If current strong rumor is confirmed ... "2 compact mirrorless FF cameras with in-body stabilization (!) and new, short flange focal distance Z-mount" and decent ergonomics ... then imagine a few days/weeks later Canon execs at press conference ... announcing (only) big fat, EF-nozzled FF MILCs without IBIS ... total loss if face, possibly seppuku ... or jump from the rooftop of their tokyo office building. since we do not want this to happen, lets hope for a "fully competitive" Canon announcement. 

i would expect Nikon to have IBIS that works in tandem with legacy and new VR lenses (IBIS + in-lens IS for max. stabilization effect), so lens mount communication/protocol will be crucial. 

@Don: Canon MILCs with new short FFD EF-X mount could be made any body size between XS and XXL. 
LP-E6N (-sized) power packs definitely no problem from size "M" upwards. even LP-E19 battery size would be possible in XXL body. independent of lens mount decision. EF mount would severly limit possible range to only "L to XXL" cameras. why would Canon take a decision that prevents (possible) smaller FF cameras? when full backwards compatibility with legacy EF glass is no problem via a simple little extension tube. to me that qualifies as much more "elegant solution" rather than limiting future product universe to size "L, XL and XXL". no fashion/garment manufacturer would do that as long as there are customers in sizes "XS, S and M" as well.  
Canon will not do it either.


----------



## bdbender4 (Jul 18, 2018)

fullstop said:


> "...Canon MILCs with new short FFD EF-X mount could be made any body size between XS and XXL.
> LP-E6N (-sized) power packs definitely no problem from size "M" upwards. even LP-E19 battery size would be possible in XXL body. independent of lens mount decision. EF mount would severly limit possible range to only "L to XXL" cameras. why would Canon take a decision that prevents (possible) smaller FF cameras? when full backwards compatibility with legacy EF glass is no problem via a simple little extension tube... "



Amen. Thom Hogan recently had an interesting piece on the "prisoners dilemma" that Nikon and Canon face regarding new mounts vs. huge numbers of lenses already out there. His site is nominally a Nikon one, and I gave up on Nikon years ago, but he has good insight into the overall market.

And good to be back on topic. Why in the world are we arguing about Olympus vs. Sony? I don't see any applicable lessons for Canon or the thread topic there, myself.


----------



## Durf (Jul 18, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > But according to you size is a major feature for mirrorless. Show me a comparable body+lens combo in Sony approaching the combo from Olympus.
> ...



One kit you carry with a small camera bag and the other you push around in a wheel barrel! LOL

I'm a wheel barrel type of guy!


----------



## fullstop (Jul 18, 2018)

bdbender4 said:


> Why in the world are we arguing about Olympus vs. Sony? I don't see any applicable lessons for Canon or the thread topic there, myself.



it is part of the ongoing debate where some forum members are unable or unwilling to accept that FF mirrorless cameras can also come in a very small package if the mirror box space is totally eliminated by using a (n ew) mount with a short flange focal distance. They love to claim that compact/small cameras are only possible with small(er) sensors. So I was proving that some existing FF MILCs and lenses in a certain focal length range are just as compact as crop sensor cameras with an equivalent lens - all the way down to some mFT gear. 

I remain convinced that Canon will launch their upcoming FF MILC system with a new native mount. Short FFD plus very wide throat. That's the most "elegant" and only viable solution allowing Canon to make and sell future cameras in any size from XS to XXL. There are potential buyers for all of those sizes. Depending on use case / personal preferences. 

And even more importantly: Canon will sell a lot more lenses if they offer new, better lenses with a new mount rather than just EF glass in minor Mk. II, III, IV, V iterations.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 18, 2018)

Durf said:


> One kit you carry with a small camera bag and the other you push around in a wheel barrel! LOL
> I'm a wheel barrel type of guy!



hehe, and I am a "shirt-pocket man". ;D ;D ;D 


PS: Actually "small pouch".


----------



## stevelee (Jul 18, 2018)

When I replaced my S120 with a G7X II, I went from shirt pocket to pants or jacket pocket.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 18, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > And the OLY is a pain in the hands to hold. I can't see the Sony being any better. I have an OLY. Takes good photos for M43. Terrible ergonomics.Terrible. Everything is jammed together and it is not comfortable at all. BUt, I have yuge hands. Yours might be small enough, but that's mighty small. They don't call it Micro 4/3 for nothing.
> ...



Yup. I got the Olympus because my wife is tiny (4'11'') and wanted a tiny camera. She loves it, but only shoots on auto. I've borrowed it a few times to try it out on some of my manual legacy glass (very light and small glass), but still prefer the Canon.

Don, I went from the 70D to the 5D Mark III. The only thing I miss in the switch is the articulated touch screen. Not for video (I don't shoot video), but for those times when I need to get down low or up high. Those screens really make the cameras all the more comfortable to use for an older guy.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 18, 2018)

fullstop said:


> bdbender4 said:
> 
> 
> > Why in the world are we arguing about Olympus vs. Sony? I don't see any applicable lessons for Canon or the thread topic there, myself.
> ...



It's not that simple....

What I am claiming is that with fast or long glass, there are miniscule benefits to be gained from a short flange mirrorless camera and that Canon would be insane to abandon the EF mount and go exclusively to a new mirrorless mount... the gains are not there and the cost is too high. If you are that concerned about small size, you are never going to be able to compete against a crop mirrorless and slower lenses....

HOWEVER!, there is another option here.... For those who want the tiny body and the subsequent loss of controls, there are a few mitigating factors that may make things worthwhile. The first is the touchscreen interface on the 6D2 and 5D4.... this is good enough to compensate for the missing dials and buttons that come (or rather do not come) with a small body. The second factor would be if Canon decided to put out some slow L glass for this smaller flange distance. You do not get decent size savings with fast glass, but you do with F5.6 and 6.3 lenses. The big question, and it is open to debate, is if this market is large enough to be viable? With M, the market is cheap, small, moderate quality.... With FF DSLR the market is expensive, top quality, and size be damned...How many want to be somewhere in the middle? How many wqant the compromise? Can Canon make money there?


Canon is not a company of morons. Look at what they did with the M.... The criteria was to come out with a small camera SYSTEM.... just having a small camera and no small lenses is a ridiculous proposition, so we are now in the position where crop shooters have choices between a small system, or a larger system with faster lenses and with longer lenses...... and I suspect that the same will hold true for FF.


EF is here to stay. I suspect that a shorter flange "M-like" mount will also be here to stay. They are complimentary products, not competing products.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 18, 2018)

fullstop said:


> They love to claim that compact/small cameras are only possible with small(er) sensors. So I was proving that some existing FF MILCs and lenses in a certain focal length range are just as compact as crop sensor cameras with an equivalent lens - all the way down to some mFT gear.



Nobody said this, ever. Listening to those voices in your head again? You didn't have to prove anything. The evidence is already there with Sony.

What anyone is saying against mirrorless is that what is currently out there in FF is crap to hold, would be ungainly with "L" glass, has all the buttons and dials crammed together, etc. The ergonomics suck. Really suck.

You showed the FF Sony next to an Olympus m43 camera of about the same size. I actually have one. I have actually hold one every few days. I have an Olympus pro lens. Even with that small lens and light weight, it sucks! The ergonomics suck! By the looks of it, Sony sucks too. Add to that heavier glass (a la Sony) and the suck would suffocate.

I mean really, AvTvM, you are obsessed with an idea in your head that has absolutely no basis in reality: That Canon would sell more stuff if only Canon would do what you think Canon should do. They'd sell a lot more Cameras and Lenses if they would only tap your wisdom listen to you. You have your finger finger on the pulse of the market... because in your mind, _*you*_ are the market. Anyone who doesn't see that must be daft, in your opinion.

Paraphrase: "I want *this* and millions of other people do too. They are all just too dense to see that they will love my idea if they will just obey and follow. The people at Canon are also too stupid to see my vision."

Here's what your comparison photos don't show: That the savings would be in the lens size not the camera body size. All the smaller body really does is cramp and %#@* things up. So keep dreaming. Keep deluding yourself into thinking you know better than we (and your millions of friends that you personally know) want to have. Of course, I have yuge hands. A tiny camera would fit you better. I can guess why a FF Canon is cumbersome to you.

The Canon fits me. The tiny camera? Nope. It's actually harder to handle and manipulate. I pray you never get what you want.

Tell me again, what is a tiny bodied camera going to do for us? Allow us to fit another filter in the bag? BTW: The last photo shows a FF (M42 screw on) to M43 adapter. Sort of like the adapter we'd have to use with your fantasy camera while we wait for our EF glass to die on the vine.

I don't believe that Canon will make a tiny FF camera. It would really suck.


----------



## bdbender4 (Jul 19, 2018)

Durf said:


> One kit you carry with a small camera bag and the other you push around in a wheel barrel! LOL
> 
> I'm a wheel barrel type of guy!



Durf, good on ye', now that is funny! And I got rid of my heavy stuff, as I said. Small bag now.

I am still confused by all the Oly stuff, though. 

Am I the only one on this thread with an M5? Canon did a good job with ergonomics on this camera. Far from perfect, and fewer buttons and dials than a FF Pro DSLR, for sure. And not enough good lenses yet for a system. But a pleasure to use, at least for me. I didn't have Oly or Sony, but in my case the M5 booted my Fuji setup out the door.

AND the M5 has another message from the present/future: a really good touch screen setup, that works when you use either eye on the viewfinder. You can set it up to not nose poke! And now being left-eyed due to fairly recent eye surgery, this is a big deal.


----------



## slclick (Jul 19, 2018)

bdbender4 said:


> Durf said:
> 
> 
> > One kit you carry with a small camera bag and the other you push around in a wheel barrel! LOL
> ...



Yes, I have said these same sentiments over and over. But who reads my posts, right


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2018)

slclick said:


> bdbender4 said:
> 
> 
> > Durf said:
> ...



I read them everyday.


----------



## renlok (Jul 19, 2018)

If this full frame mirrorless and the 90D is a flop, i think im ready to jump ships. But I have faith in Canon, been with you guys for many many years!!


----------



## BillB (Jul 19, 2018)

So did Canon delay the rollout? Was it somebody messing with our minds? Or did the rumors just get it wrong? Maybe Canon wants Nikon to put its cards on the table first (marketing strategy). Or maybe Canon is just taking its time. Or maybe it is moving as fast as it wants to (development schedule).


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 19, 2018)

BillB said:


> So did Canon delay the rollout? Was it somebody messing with our minds? Or did the rumors just get it wrong? *Maybe Canon wants Nikon to put its cards on the table first (marketing strategy).* Or maybe Canon is just taking its time. Or maybe it is moving as fast as it wants to (development schedule).



I think it's just that: If you see Nikon marketing you cannot change the camera quickly but you can modify advertising flyers / web sites / videos to emphasize your products strengths in comparison to the product of the other company.

Another reason may be the fact that the news-like character of news fades very fast - so it might be better to create these news maybe 3 weeks in front of photokina to put a new product in the media effectively. And new news put older news down - sometimes it is better to be the second one.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 19, 2018)

mb66energy said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > So did Canon delay the rollout? Was it somebody messing with our minds? Or did the rumors just get it wrong? *Maybe Canon wants Nikon to put its cards on the table first (marketing strategy).* Or maybe Canon is just taking its time. Or maybe it is moving as fast as it wants to (development schedule).
> ...



Canon have never to my knowledge done that, and never targetted their advertising to counteract someone else's. Are you aware of how much time and effort it takes to develop and design a global roll-out campaign? Coordinating publications, training sales teams, getting your favoured professionals on-message? It is not something you can change in a couple of weeks.

In fact I would go so far as to say Canon are actually quite poor at pushing aspects of their cameras that are not immediately obvious on the spec sheet. By that I mean the little things that make the whole experience more enjoyable.


----------



## filipe.ngra (Jul 19, 2018)

We have to love this ecosystem...

Did you guys know that the m50 (i have bought one to my wife) have eye focus that works very nice? It is the absolutly main feature that will make me move to one ff mirrorless.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 19, 2018)

BillB said:


> So did Canon delay the rollout? Was it somebody messing with our minds? Or did the rumors just get it wrong? Maybe Canon wants Nikon to put its cards on the table first (marketing strategy). Or maybe Canon is just taking its time. Or maybe it is moving as fast as it wants to (development schedule).


Maybe Canon just doesn't want to release an unfinished product.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 19, 2018)

filipe.ngra said:


> Did you guys know that the m50 (i have bought one to my wife) have eye focus that works very nice? It is the absolutly main feature that will make me move to one ff mirrorless.



yes. first AF system in any Canon camera that i consider "competitive and halfway advanced". it could be much better than that really. "AI-AF" that is truly "intelligent" and "truly intuitive" .. instead of 199 "custom function AF settings filling 5 menu screens" ... or "AF-MA hell".


----------



## dak723 (Jul 19, 2018)

BillB said:


> So did Canon delay the rollout? Was it somebody messing with our minds? Or did the rumors just get it wrong? Maybe Canon wants Nikon to put its cards on the table first (marketing strategy). Or maybe Canon is just taking its time. Or maybe it is moving as fast as it wants to (development schedule).



Going back about a year or so, the most reliable rumors have said Canon mirrorless FF announcement in last quarter 2018 and rollout in early 2019.


----------



## applecider (Jul 19, 2018)

BillB said:


> So did Canon delay the rollout? Was it somebody messing with our minds? Or did the rumors just get it wrong? Maybe Canon wants Nikon to put its cards on the table first (marketing strategy). Or maybe Canon is just taking its time. Or maybe it is moving as fast as it wants to (development schedule).



It’s highly unlikely that canon wants Nikon to show its cards at least with the intent to change plans, I think it is safe to say at this point the hardware is set in stone. Maybe price points and marketing can be flexible to address competition, but then Sony has been hanging it out there for years.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 20, 2018)

applecider said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > So did Canon delay the rollout? Was it somebody messing with our minds? Or did the rumors just get it wrong? Maybe Canon wants Nikon to put its cards on the table first (marketing strategy). Or maybe Canon is just taking its time. Or maybe it is moving as fast as it wants to (development schedule).
> ...



One also has to consider that Canon, Nikon, and Sony are all (presumably) doing industrial espionage on each other and they probably have a very good idea of what is coming from each other for the next several years.....


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> applecider said:
> 
> 
> > BillB said:
> ...



Most importantly, they are all studying the same universe, so if their research is decent, they all come to the same basic conclusions.


----------



## neonlight (Jul 25, 2018)

B****r. Just as I was expecting Canon's FF mirrorless to be a 5D size EF mount N****n go and announce a new mount FF MILC. You guys expecting a new mount may be right, but it makes no sense to me. I don't want to change EF lenses (just like I didn't want to change from FD ...lol).


----------



## fullstop (Jul 25, 2018)

neonlight said:


> B****r. Just as I was expecting Canon's FF mirrorless to be a 5D size EF mount N****n go and announce a new mount FF MILC. You guys expecting a new mount may be right, but it makes no sense to me. I don't want to change EF lenses (just like I didn't want to change from FD ...lol).



dont worry! transition for canon ef users will be painless this time round. ef lenses will keep working. all you need will be a simple little hollow air-filled extension tube "adapter". so not like in 1987. and not like in 2018 for nikon f-users.


----------



## Mikehit (Jul 25, 2018)

neonlight said:


> B****r. Just as I was expecting Canon's FF mirrorless to be a 5D size EF mount N****n go and announce a new mount FF MILC. You guys expecting a new mount may be right, but it makes no sense to me. I don't want to change EF lenses (just like I didn't want to change from FD ...lol).



Nikon are a bit different because their legacy lens lineup is a mess arising from the way they introduced AF lenses. Canon make a complete break from their FD lens line so they have a different set of parameters to their decision on mount design. I am not saying the will stay with EF, just that Nikon's design can't really be any guide.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 1, 2018)

Canoneer said:


> I would be satisfied with just a Mark III teleporter from Sony.




I'd never buy a teleporter from a company that releases half-baked "beta" level products using a very fast new product cycle and then touting those products as "years ahead" of everyone else instead of taking the time to thoroughly test and revise their products to guarantee reliability and interoperability, and expects their customers to do their reliability and compatibility testing for them just so they can shout at the top of their lungs "We are the leaders in innovation" with features that (kind of) work (some of the time) out of the box.

For a teleporter or any other mission critical device, I'll always go with the company that is last to the marketplace, but brings to the market a product that has been exhaustively tested for all conceivable scenarios with every possible variation of connecting devices, power supplies, atmospheric conditions at both ends, etc.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 1, 2018)

mb66energy said:


> I think it's just that: If you see Nikon marketing you cannot change the camera quickly but you can modify advertising flyers / web sites / videos to emphasize your products strengths in comparison to the product of the other company.
> 
> Another reason may be the fact that the news-like character of news fades very fast - so it might be better to create these news maybe 3 weeks in front of photokina to put a new product in the media effectively. And new news put older news down - sometimes it is better to be the second one.



The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 1, 2018)

Any volunteers to test the new teleporter design? Beam them up Scotty.


----------



## BillB (Aug 1, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.



Especially when the early bird has backward compatability issues with new lenses that won't work on old cameras and old lenses that won't work on new cameras until an adapter is available for purchase bye and bye.


----------



## melgross (Aug 1, 2018)

Hey, this is a rumors site. I know because it says so in the name. So we want rumors, not facts. At any time a rumor can be turned into a fact, and a fact into a rumor, so at this point, both have equal weight.

Besides it’s no fun debating facts. After all, facts are real, and can’t be debated, but rumors...well, that’s something else altogether. Gives our tripod points something to dig into.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 2, 2018)

BillB said:


> Especially when the early bird has backward compatability issues with new lenses that won't work on old cameras and old lenses that won't work on new cameras until an adapter is available for purchase bye and bye.




Name one EF lens introduced since 1987 that doesn't work as well on the latest EOS bodies as it did on the bodies current at the time it was introduced. It may not have features that newer lenses do, but every feature each lens is capable of will work on every single EOS body ever sold.

Nikon F, on the other hand...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 2, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> Name one EF lens introduced since 1987 that doesn't work as well on the latest EOS bodies as it did on the bodies current at the time it was introduced. It may not have features that newer lenses do, but every feature each lens is capable of will work on every single EOS body ever sold.
> 
> Nikon F, on the other hand...


Since Nikon has announced a coming-soon FF MILC and Canon has not, it's pretty clear that BillB was referring to compatibility issues with Nikon.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 4, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Since Nikon has announced a coming-soon FF MILC and Canon has not, it's pretty clear that BillB was referring to compatibility issues with Nikon.



Maybe, but Canon was the early bird with regard to the all electronic camera/lens interface back in 1987...


----------

