# Canon Asking Select Professionals What They Want in a Mirrorless Camera



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 11, 2018)

```
A good source has told us that Canon has been asking select Explorers of Light and other professionals what they think would make a professional mirrorless camera “compelling” enough to purchase and use.</p>
<p>In the same survey by Canon, they asked specifically what the photographers thought about the Sony a9 and  medium format Fujifulm GFX 50s.</p>

<p>I will note that the likelihood of a Canon medium format camera coming to market is slim-to-none at best, perhaps it was more to gauge the interest in higher resolution cameras.</p>
<p>I’m not sure of when these questions were being asked, but if it was recently, that would likely tell us that a full frame mirrorless professional camera is not in the near future.</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## basisunus (Jan 11, 2018)

1. Standard EF mount without adapter;
2. Solid build quality on par with 7D;
3. Hot shoe and wireless/radio flash control;
4. No builtin flash;
5. Wireless/detachable touch LCD display that can also clip on;
6. Relatively deep grip.
Basically a light-weight and compact 7D that can make a capable companion for a 1D.


----------



## Talys (Jan 11, 2018)

basisunus said:


> 1. Standard EF mount without adapter;
> 2. Solid build quality on par with 7D;
> 3. Hot shoe and wireless/radio flash control;
> 4. No builtin flash;
> ...



I like all thoese things, though wireless/detachable touch LCD introduces another battery issue. I'd be fine with some sort of articulation on the screen, even if it's only tilting.

The grip also needs to be not vertically diminutive.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jan 11, 2018)

basisunus said:


> 1. Standard EF mount without adapter;
> 2. Solid build quality on par with 7D;
> 3. Hot shoe and wireless/radio flash control;
> 4. No builtin flash;
> ...


So basically a 6D sized camera without mirror.


----------



## applecider (Jan 11, 2018)

Detachable screen is a nice touch, but a possibly better implementation might be an optional wireless screen useable on any cam with wifi eventually.

Could a medium format camera have EF lenses as an option, where the camera functions as a 35mm with EF lens and as a larger format camera with a larger mount?


----------



## frankenbeans (Jan 11, 2018)

4K video


----------



## msatter (Jan 11, 2018)

basisunus said:


> 1. Standard EF mount without adapter;
> 2. Solid build quality on par with 7D;
> 3. Hot shoe and wireless/radio flash control;
> 4. No builtin flash;
> ...



Make that with default adapter for EF lenses. It will companion the deep grip. EF-EF

Detachable display needs a battery build in and a phone is a better option.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 11, 2018)

frankenbeans said:


> 4K video



Seriously? From what I had seen recently pro video content creators working with the sub cinema class cameras are turning away from 4k. They do want high quality 4:4:2 high frame rate 1080, preferably with a good Log profile, they also want Canon color science and flip out touch screens, good battery life and unconstrained internal and external recording depending on their specific use in any given scenario. 

As I have seen 4k is becoming less well accepted in anything but a truthfully pro production, in which case the proposed camera isn't a primary choice. Yes 4K is becoming more popular, just not in the market segment this new line of cameras will occupy.


----------



## Aaron D (Jan 11, 2018)

Here's my request list, and I really honestly would buy at least one of these immediately and use it to earn my livelihood (I'm an un-invited professional, but I figure they already know what I like, I've said so here lots of times!):

1) Please DON'T be compelled to stick to an EF mount! This is an opportunity to optimize an entire system to a short flange-distance mount! I know I'm going to rile up the "I've got a hundred old lenses I can't bear to use an adapter with" faction... But to build-in permanent dead space for a non-existant mirror box is ludicrous.

2) Include an EF adapter!

3) A built-in viewfinder as in the Leica M9 or Hasselblad X1D, ie: no bump, or minimal if absolutely necessary. It doesn't have to be centered on top.

4) A 4:3 aspect ration would be wonderful (without wasting cropped-out pixels) but I'd be happy with the ol' 2:3

5) Lots of resolution, like 5DS ballpark, no more than that is necessary.

6) I personally don't need blazing autofocus or burst rates, or video for that matter. But that's just me.

7) This is a big one: To go with, develop a razor sharp 20 mm or so TSE that will take front filters (or a built-in polarizer!). 

eight) No built-in flash. Wasted body volume for a camera that will have modern super-high ISOs. Buy a real flash if you need one!

OK, I've probably pissed-off enough people--my apologies to the world.

(and Bean's idea of a dual-format body sounds great...)


----------



## The Fat Fish (Jan 11, 2018)

Give me an A7RIII with the Canon name on it and a Canon mount. After the very underwhelming 5DIV and massively disappointing 6DII I want to see Canon excite us. I saved up £2000 for the 6DII before it was announced and now even if it was £1000 I wouldn't buy it. I'd like to spend that money of a competitive Canon mirrorless.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 11, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> 7) This is a big one: To go with, develop a razor sharp 20 mm or so TSE that will take front filters (or a built-in polarizer!).



Surely a TS-E lens will be at the top of Canon’s list for a new lens mount. I’m surprised there’s not a TS-E lens for the EOS M series yet.

Oh, wait...I’m not.


----------



## tolusina (Jan 11, 2018)

Yesterday would be good.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 11, 2018)

HMMPFFF!!!!

They did not ask me, so I am switching to Sony!


----------



## hne (Jan 11, 2018)

Easy, peasy! Take the 6DmkII, switch to the 5DmkIV sensor and remove the mirror. Place an LCD where the focus screen is and lock the camera in live-view mode.

Bonus points if you:

Add zebras and/or focus peaking
Cram an EX-RT wireless radio trigger in there somewhere (perhaps where the PDAF module is no longer needed?)
Fit an AF point selection joystick
Improve the face detect to focus on closest eye


----------



## Ditboy (Jan 11, 2018)

Canon is so far behind at this point they should just keep making DSLR's and focus on quality lenses. If you want mirrorless buy a Sony and use Canon glass. Or if you don't care about FF go with Fuji. I've used Canon for the duration of my 40 years in journalism. Went through the the change from FD to EOS and took a beating. I had 18 lenses and six camera bodies. I have 4 M5s in addition to a couple DSLR I can use when shooting sports. I use the M5 75% of the time. But basically the 22 EF-M is the only modern Canon lens I use. I have several of the other EF-m lenses, but I use Rokinons, and Canon FD lenses most of the time because I need something faster than f6.3.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

These lists are a bit too specific. I think it's all about the mount and Canon cannot afford to muck that up. That's the one decision they can't undo.

For the professional user, full mount EF all the way. It basically needs to be a 5D4 without a mirror and with an EVF, more or less. That's 80% on target and they can refine the specifics from there, perhaps add a tilty-flippy or wait for the 5DS2 sensor instead.

For the enthusiast, I think they are at a 50-50 thin vs. Full EF impossible decision point. If a full EF mirrorless 'pro' rig is happening, good luck financially justifying even a partial line of new lenses just for the 6D-level user who wants to keep it small. (Still may happen, though.)

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Aaron D said:
> 
> 
> > 7) This is a big one: To go with, develop a razor sharp 20 mm or so TSE that will take front filters (or a built-in polarizer!).
> ...



+1. Aaron, you may want this, but this might be priority #374 for a new mirrorless mount for Canon.

(And what's wrong with the 24mm T/S? It takes filters, doesn't it?)

- A


----------



## aceflibble (Jan 11, 2018)

basisunus said:


> 1. Standard EF mount without adapter;
> 2. Solid build quality on par with 7D;
> 3. Hot shoe and wireless/radio flash control;
> 4. No builtin flash;
> ...


... And what you're seeing here is why Canon ask a small number of pros and not randoms on forums.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> Canon is so far behind at this point...



Think about what you just said. They said the same thing in general before EOS M and yet _you now own four M5s_. :

...now apply that to FF.

They don't care that they are behind the internet's expectations. 

They care that their own customers will buy them in nontrivial percentages once they are offered.

- A


----------



## Sithaputh (Jan 11, 2018)

#### Canon ####

I hope you are reading this.

You guys need to stop short cutting us. I've been a long time loyal canon user. Give us 4k full frame with usable codec. Make dual native ISO. Make it a user friendly Hybrid for photo and video. Add 5axis stabilizer. MUST be EF mount, otherwise I won't invest in a newer mount, and newer lenses. Make C-log as standard, or have a very good dynamic range. Must be Touch AF, phase detect, not contrast detect. Your lack of innovation makes me want to buy a Sony or Panasonic.

1. Full Frame with EF mounts
2. 4K full Frame with "usable" codecs @ 60fps
3. Pro-res, C-log as standard not upgrades
4. Dual native ISO
5. 20-ish Megapixel with great Low light performance.
6. Touch Autofocus
7. Articulating LCD Screen
8. 5 axis stablizer
9. 12 FPS
10. Focus Peak, zebra, etc.
11. 4:2:2 - 10bit video
12. Weatherseal
13. High Flash sync maybe up to 1000/s without HSS
14. Timecode
15. Better phone app
16. Faster Wifi/bluetooth
17. New touchscreen menu system, similar to any modern phone
18. New digital LCD on top Screen. The old style is outdated since the 80's
19. Big Battery life
20. Hybrid EVF with optical viewfinder


----------



## MrToes (Jan 11, 2018)

*EF Mount please!*


----------



## IglooEater (Jan 11, 2018)

I sincerely hope the questionnaires are aimed at finalizing specifics and not developing a drawing board discussion.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 11, 2018)

aceflibble said:


> And what you're seeing here is why Canon ask a small number of pros and not randoms on forums.



Exactly!


----------



## Yasko (Jan 11, 2018)

I can only hope that Canon releases a mirrorless at the price point around 2000$ eith full format sensor. Basically a M5 scaled up with fully flippable screen and having learned from the M5's weaknesses such as only one card slot, bad battery life and af performance.


----------



## BeenThere (Jan 11, 2018)

I’m sure Canon will get an earful from the Pros that they asked. Problems arise if they start compromising to meet self imposed targets for price, size weight, sales quantities, etc. A pro level camera should be fast handling and rugged, without a ton of fun features, but cost $6-7K U.S. The Pro-sumer version is the one that a lot of us want (5Dx equivalent).


----------



## tmroper (Jan 11, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> Canon is so far behind at this point they should just keep making DSLR's and focus on quality lenses.



Canon isn't behind one bit. They, Sony, and Panasonic have all been making mirrorless cameras for a couple of decades now in the form of video cameras, and they all have roughly the same level of technology. They do, however, have different business strategies for migrating that tech down to smaller form factor cameras with stills capabilities. And often, being a "first mover" is a losing business strategy, but sometimes it isn't. Only time will tell.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

Yasko said:


> I can only hope that Canon releases a mirrorless at the price point around 2000$ eith full format sensor. Basically a M5 scaled up with fully flippable screen and having learned from the M5's weaknesses such as only one card slot, bad battery life and af performance.



Or, put another way, a 6D2 with extra stuff for the same price.

I don't think that's going to happen.

Canon will mark up the initial FF mirrorless offering above it's SLR equivalent, i.e. if the first FF mirrorless is 6D2-spec'd, it'll cost $2300-2500, if it's 5D4-spec'd, it'll cost $3500 or so.

Again: they are not competing with Sony with their price, value proposition, etc. They will simply be taking money from pent up Canonites who have been waiting for this.

- A


----------



## Adelino (Jan 11, 2018)

To pros size would not be a huge issue, grip and ergonomics trump size. Oh and battery life. There is nothing precluding Canon from offering EF mount now and adding another mount later if sales are disappointing. Safest move is EF mount. If pros are being asked now maybe Canon will start with a lesser version like they did with the M series. They could use a 6D-ish mirrorless with a better sensor to pop between a discounted 6D2 and 5DIV right now.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

Sithaputh said:


> 4. Dual native ISO



I've never shot this with ML. Would this not hamper the frame rate, buffer, etc?



Sithaputh said:


> 8. 5 axis stablizer



If it's full EF mount, you aren't adapting old lenses, so what do you need IBIS for? Canon sells lenses with IS that outperform IBIS, do they not?



Sithaputh said:


> 13. High Flash sync maybe up to 1000/s without HSS



That would require leaf shutter lenses, right? That's not happening.

Lovely list you gave, it would be a terrific camera. But my guess is you won't get much of that. Expect a mirrorless variant of the 6D2, 5D4 or 5DS2 (if they wait that long).

- A


----------



## amorse (Jan 11, 2018)

If Canon posed these questions to their explorers of light (well known professional photographers) with respect to a pro rig, and asked for impressions of other mirrorless pro rigs (a9, GFX50s), then I don't think we can expect Canon to use the answers to these questions to decide on how to build an entry level full frame camera (i.e. mirrorless 6D). I'd liken that decision to asking what a race-car driver would like in an consumer car. Sure, the race-car driver may have an opinion on consumer cars, but what are the odds that the opinion would align with other consumer car buyers?

I would expect that Canon already has a reasonable idea of what an entry-level full frame mirrorless camera would need, and at what price point the market would bear. Asking for impressions of competitive high-end mirrorless cameras from professional users implies (in my mind) that Canon is exploring what a top tier mirrorless camera should look like to someone whose livelihood depends on performance of the camera.


----------



## canonic (Jan 11, 2018)

Only NOW????
Oh and profis dont need any mirrorless why bother asking?!


----------



## Cthulhu (Jan 11, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Sithaputh said:
> 
> 
> > 8. 5 axis stablizer
> ...



Because more is better?


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 11, 2018)

For me the number one feature that would make me buy a Canon mirrorless vs Sony or any other is to have the same level of weather sealing as their current 5D range.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Jan 11, 2018)

You don't hear too many pros requesting a smaller form factor. Sure, compact size can be nice, but traveling light is a luxury amateurs and prosumers put as priority over the entire ecosystem of an imaging tool. Given the choice of keeping EF in mirrorless bodies and offering a completely new FF mount, almost every pro is going to say keep EF. Heck the A9 got some praise because it was bigger than the A7 and offered better ergonomics. 

Canon doesn't really need to reinvent the wheel here. Keep the exact same 5D IV form factor and replace the mirror box with an EVF and grant all the goodies that come along with that. Done.


----------



## Karlbug (Jan 11, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> For me the number one feature that would make me buy a Canon mirrorless vs Sony or any other is to have the same level of weather sealing as their current 5D range.



+1! ;D


----------



## mb66energy (Jan 11, 2018)

Please mount with short flange distance and an adapter which fits nicely onto the body.
I really want a FF body to use old FD glass with.

If it has native EF mount - I will wait 1 year or two and buy a cheap Sony 7 or Sony 7ii for that purpose for some hundreds of bucks. Sony helps by bringing out refreshed models frequently.


----------



## slclick (Jan 11, 2018)

Take the M5. Make it a bit larger, of course. Switch the screen to articulating. Put in the best EVF tech Canon can muster. Keep the focusing, it's too good as is. Seal it up. 4k or not, I don't have a dog in that fight but if adding it means an unwieldy battery size then don't add it. Make the grip usable, not a finger pincher like Sony. EF mount, no adapter. Don't make size your first priority, but keep it 6D or a bit smaller. Trigger, high speed sync, no onboard flash. Dual cards. Joystick? Maybe not with thumb touchscreen focusing.


----------



## steliosk (Jan 11, 2018)

- ef mount
- 5d4 sensor
- focus peaking
- dpaf
- tilt screen
- 5 axis stabilization in body
- bt/nfc/wifi
- ergonomics

why have anything less than other competators such as sony a7 series


----------



## AlanF (Jan 11, 2018)

I have been weighing up mirrorless for bird photography. Basically they all suck for BIF apart possibly from the Sony A9 and they lack the lenses. So, I want a Canon mirrorless that takes the LP-E6N and has blazingly fast and accurate AF and takes EF lenses without or with an adaptor. Oh, and Canon should make some lightweight telephotos.


----------



## Isaacheus (Jan 11, 2018)

steliosk said:


> - ef mount
> - 5d4 sensor
> - focus peaking
> - dpaf
> ...



Basically take the a7r3 and match all the specs possible, with an ef mount (either native or natively adapted) and keep the Canon ergonomic feel. 

That should really be the minimum benchmark to aim for at this stage.


----------



## rfdesigner (Jan 11, 2018)

basisunus said:


> 5. Wireless/detachable touch LCD display that can also clip on;



I've proposed this in the past.

Wireless charging of the screen from the camera, even if it's only got half an hour battery with the screen illuminated it could be days without the screen on, dual function as a remote intervalometer.
By doing a dedicated screen the link speed, reliability and efficiency all improve. Relying on the user also having a smartphone compatible with any APP canon might produce might be a longer shot, not everyone has a smartphone, I don't.

Taking the smartphone idea but turning it around..

A Canon smartphone with an adapter (the mirrorless body minus screen) which takes the lenses, but because it's dedicated it isn't some nasty delicate monstrosity, it's tough and ergonomic.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

canonic said:


> Only NOW????



Read amorse's post at the bottom of page 2 of this thread. Canon won't court pros for the 6D market the same way they would for the 5D market -- it's possible...


...the enthusiast FF ILC mirrorless is already in development and doesn't need the pro-level feedback (again, see that amorse post),


...Canon may have been mapping out a full FF ILC mirrorless portfolio in the ivory tower back at corporate and just wanted to suss out how well it plays with heavy hitters in the field before banking it as the plan,


...Canon was on the fence as to mirrorless needing to match their FF SLR specs vs. offer different functionality for pros. In other words, Canon might have been curious if FF pro mirrorless was simply what we think it is (i.e. trade an EVF for the mirror) or if its appeal to pros is for different applications (travel assignments --> small size, utterly silent for weddings, b-cam with stronger video than the primary SLR)

So I don't read this as day 1 of the FF ILC mirrorless adventure. I see this as a focus group for a specific level of that future FF mirrorless product lines. I could be wrong.



canonic said:


> Oh and profis dont need any mirrorless why bother asking?!



Because amplifying light in really dark rooms, a histo in the VF, eliminating mirror slap, taking up less space in the bag, etc. only benefits enthusiasts? Everyone other than the 1% most demanding application photographers (think wildlifers, sports photogs, etc.) will shoot mirrorless when it's all said and done. All of them. It makes sense to ask what future they'd like to see before you launch something. 

- A


----------



## ken (Jan 11, 2018)

I don't get the desire for a non-EF mount from so many people. If it has a short flange on the body, you'll just have a flange on EVERY lens (eating up valuable bag space), or the equivalent in an adapter (which makes the mount less stable). 

Are the people asking for short flange not aware of the physics? Or... are they wanting the ability to use non-Canon glass? Or something I haven't thought of?


----------



## Sporgon (Jan 11, 2018)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Keep the exact same 5D IV form factor and replace the mirror box with an EVF and grant all the goodies that come along with that. Done.



Just remind me what those goodies are.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

steliosk said:


> why have anything less than other competators such as sony a7 series



Because we presume Canon has solid market data, surveys, VOC information that says that they don't need everything A7 offers to get current Canon users to buy it.

I'm fairly confident a straight 5D4 with [OVF + Mirror] traded for an EVF -- so a full EF mount rig with no other changes* -- would sell very well. Consider what _an EVF alone_ could unlock for current 62 or 5D4 users:


In-viewfinder histo (for that matter customize the hell out of the viewfinder in general)
Amplify light in dark rooms
Focusing screens RIP, aka "oh wow, I can use wide aperture manual focus lenses off the tripod now!"
Mirror slap RIP

Sure, an A7 could do that and a whole lot more. But it's built by Sony (see recent weathersealing videos), requires the use of a third party adaptor to _possibly_ get your AF to work well, and has the ergonomic/controls/menu sensibilities of a Playstation controller. Parts of it are brilliant... while parts of it are the opposite of brilliant.

Honestly, I think Canon will sleep like a baby if when they FF mirrorless that is underspec'd to Sony. Because they know it will sell well.

- A

* And we know they'll do more than that -- give it a tilty-flippy, possibly look into a quieter silent shutter, etc.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

ken said:


> I don't get the desire for a non-EF mount from so many people. If it has a short flange on the body, you'll just have a flange on EVERY lens (eating up valuable bag space), or the equivalent in an adapter (which makes the mount less stable).
> 
> Are the people asking for short flange not aware of the physics? Or... are they wanting the ability to use non-Canon glass? Or something I haven't thought of?



You are right about the lens tube phenomenon (e.g. see all Sony GM lenses), but some folks covet small size to a very high degree. For those folks, if you are very strict with your lens specs / FLs, you can create a relatively tiny FF kit.

So, for instance, a FF 'thin' mount body with a 35 f/2.8, 50 f/2, perhaps a collapsible 24-70 f/4 zoom yet to be designed, etc. would actually create a smaller overall form factor than than a full EF mount. 

But yes, if you want f/1.4 primes, f/2.8 zooms or longer FL lens you are fooling yourself w.r.t. a thin body actually building a smaller camera + lens combo.

But we'd collectively be quite foolish to drive past a boatload of people who truly buy the notion that mirrorless is all about being smaller/thinner. Those folks exist and they will pay good money for the 'presumption of value' that a thin body brings.

- A


----------



## rjbray01 (Jan 11, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> steliosk said:
> 
> 
> > why have anything less than other competators such as sony a7 series
> ...



I beg to differ ... simply taking a 5D4 and swapping [OVF + Mirror] for an EVF will in many people's opinion produce a worse camera, simply because an EVF is laggy and the viewfinder image quality is terrible compared to "real life" directly through the lens.

Personally, I can't bear to use an EVF. My theory is that the sales in mirrorless cameras are being driven by two factors : small/lightweight for some people, and feature-rich for others. I find it difficult to believe anyone actually prefers the VF image quality.

Only once we have "retina" quality high-res images with 100Hz lag-free refresh will a straight EVF-for-OVF swap produce a camera of equal value.

I appreciate that I don't speak for everyone here ... but having owned and used a 5D4, 80D and M5 I have no doubts about my feelings on the subject ...


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 11, 2018)

rjbray01 said:


> I beg to differ ... simply taking a 5D4 and swapping [OVF + Mirror] for an EVF will in many people's opinion produce a worse camera, simply because an EVF is laggy and the viewfinder image quality is terrible compared to "real life" directly through the lens.



You drove right by my point. Mirrorless isn't about being categorically better/worse than SLRs -- _it's another option that can do other things. _

Tell me, how has your Zeiss Otus focusing been at f/1.4 handheld on your 5D4, if you don't mind my asking? 

How has your focusing worked in a dark room, say 200-300 lumens of light? Are you hitting and hoping? Are you stopping down to range focus, now requiring ISO 6 gajillion? Are you 5x/10x-ing in LiveView with your camera a good foot away from your eye?

Do you like chimping your histo exposure after the fact?

In those three instances, a (well designed) mirrorless rig would mop the floor with the 5D4. It's not a better camera than a 5D4, but in those use cases a mirrorless rig might shine above what an SLR can do.

Full disclosure: I don't own a mirrorless rig -- I prefer an OVF setup like you do. But mirrorless can undeniably tackle a few more asks than an SLR can in some circumstances.

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 11, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> rjbray01 said:
> 
> 
> > I beg to differ ... simply taking a 5D4 and swapping [OVF + Mirror] for an EVF will in many people's opinion produce a worse camera, simply because an EVF is laggy and the viewfinder image quality is terrible compared to "real life" directly through the lens.
> ...



Like burst mode.....

A 1DX2 tops out at 14
A 7D2 tops out at 10

A mirror less should be able to hit 120


----------



## IglooEater (Jan 12, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > rjbray01 said:
> ...



And fill up a 64 gig card in 22 seconds XD


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 12, 2018)

ahsanford said:


>



The one on the left would be comfortable to hold, the one on the right would give me a hand cramps very quickly. I know which one I'd pick.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> The one on the left would be comfortable to hold, the one on the right would give me a hand cramps very quickly. I know which one I'd pick.



The funny thing? The same is true of the small lens comparison, b/c the grip is sooooo much more than something to counterbalance the lens weight with:

More buttons
More surface area for gripping
More room for a larger battery
More comfortable resting hand position
Less awkward finger movements to use the controls
Top LCD

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 12, 2018)

IglooEater said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



And if you catch the baseball deforming as the bat hits it, you are much more likely to sell that photo..... It all depends on what you are after. For those who need it, faster burst is wonderful!


----------



## Talys (Jan 12, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Top LCD



I'm surprised that this isn't more important to some people. I can hardly imagine purchasing a workhorse camera without one.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 12, 2018)

Talys said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Top LCD
> ...



+1

Got to have the shoulder display and enough controls to operate it! None of this go through a menu to change basic settings crap!


----------



## bhf3737 (Jan 12, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> You drove right by my point. Mirrorless isn't about being categorically better/worse than SLRs -- _it's another option that can do other things. _
> 
> Tell me, how has your Zeiss Otus focusing been at f/1.4 handheld on your 5D4, if you don't mind my asking?
> 
> ...


Thanks for explaining the use-cases in great details. 
If I may add to that, no need for AFMA is a huge plus for mirrorless. It is time saving and removes worries about whether the body-lens combo is calibrated or not.
on the other hand, my limited experience with mirrorless (M5 and XT-2) tells me that autofocus with mirrorless in moderate to extreme low light is inconsistent and slow at best, and DSLRs (e.g. 5DSr and 35mm f/2) do a much better job there.


----------



## Aaron D (Jan 12, 2018)

You guys who draw a line in the sand for a native EF mount kill me. Why make a mirrorless camera if all it is is a DSLR without a mirror? some additional burst rate? And all the distress about your hands cramping on such a tiny grip! Does Canon often make stupidly impossible cameras to hold? And all that space in your bags eaten up by lenses with the mirror void built-in! Really? A couple centimeters times TWELVE isn't going to force you to throw out your favorite Domke. Which is probably worn out ANYWAY and needs to be replaced because you're changing lenses 30 time a day and can't.

Are you all still using FD lenses because you refuse to go with the new EF mount? No! You bought new lenses! Are you still painting with oils because photography is a silly fad that won't last? 

Hyperventilate!


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

bhf3737 said:


> my limited experience with mirrorless (M5 and XT-2) tells me that autofocus with mirrorless in moderate to extreme low light is inconsistent and slow at best, and DSLRs (e.g. 5DSr and 35mm f/2) do a much better job there.



You are correct. But a mirrorless rig in very low light has manual focusing options the 6D2 and 5D4 do not. On the mirrorless rig, you could conceivably amplify the light enough for you to use manual focusing + focus peaking, all while the camera is stably being held up to your face/eye.

Handheld on a 6D2/5D4 -- which does not have a focusing screen option, if it's darker than the AF will operate under, you have to resort to hacks you mentioned above or possibly just use a speedlite's AF assist beam without firing the flash -- if the situation/venue even lets you do that.

On this, it's Point: Mirrorless. It just has more ways to pull the shot off under those (admittedly specific) constraints. Again, I still prefer an SLR and that's why I use my 5D3. But I wish I could better wield manual focus lenses and shoot with some sort of focus assist in dark rooms.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> Why make a mirrorless camera if all it is is a DSLR without a mirror?



There are _many_ virtues to mirrorless besides size. I'd advise reading the thread as we've offered quite a few. 



Aaron D said:


> And all the distress about your hands cramping on such a tiny grip! Does Canon often make stupidly impossible cameras to hold?



No, but have you shot all day with a 70-200 f/2.8 lens on an SL2 / 200D? _Did you like that feeling?_ I ask because that's about the size grip the A7R3 comes with (see pic) -- do you honestly want to use big fast FF lenses on a consumer grip designed to principally hold a crop 18-55 on it? 

So, yeah, I think a FF mirrorless rig with a smaller grip 'because mirrorless is defined as being smaller' is patently absurd for this class of camera.

- A


----------



## Dvash7 (Jan 12, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Yasko said:
> 
> 
> > I can only hope that Canon releases a mirrorless at the price point around 2000$ eith full format sensor. Basically a M5 scaled up with fully flippable screen and having learned from the M5's weaknesses such as only one card slot, bad battery life and af performance.
> ...



This is exactly what I'm most worried about.
I've had a 7D for ages, and was looking forward to the 6D2. Needless to say, I took a hard pass on that one.
The only reason I haven't jumped ship to Sony yet is that I'm heavily invested in Canon glass, and with all the rumors circulating it just seems reasonable that Canon will come out with a FF mirrorless option sooner rather than later.
I certainly hope it isn't just for "pent up" Canonites like me. I really don't want to spend my money on its JUST because it's mirrorless, I want a decent product!


----------



## Aaron D (Jan 12, 2018)

A H,

If we're going to be honest with ourselves, I think there are not many of us who support the weight of a camera and big heavy lens in our right hand alone. When I shoot all day long with a heavy camera, I use a strap and all that weight hangs off my shoulder 80% of the time. When it's at my eye, I support the weight of the camera on my left hand which is beneath the lens. Yeah, I pull it up to my eye with my right hand, but I think we're being a little dramatic to claim a non-stop 24-hour day (or 8, even) with 12 pounds of camera (or 4 even) cantilevered off a right-handed death grip.

And yeah, the 20 mm or so TSE would be wonderful--I saw your comment a while back. I do have the 24 and the 17, too. But a 20 would capture the same approximate view (cropped a little at the sides) as two 24 mm exposures stitched in a "vertical panorama" as I do in 70% of my shots. The 17 can do about the same, but it's really not sharp enough for high-detail shots when shifted. And no polarizing filter, besides. Such a lens would allow the time to make half-a-dozen outrageous posts every day!


----------



## eosuser1234 (Jan 12, 2018)

-4k.
-Electronic Global shutter (flash sync heaven)
-EF-m mount, with EF adapter. Because when i want small lenses i am okay with a slow lens. If I want a faster, then a larger one is fine, but I don't need a faster lense all of the time. 
-Wifi.
-GPS which can be logged through phone gps APP to save battery life. 
-external grip with two, or even three LP-E17 storage. Two in base, and one in vertical column.
-Full Frame with automatic APS-C scale mode when used with ef-m or ef-s lenses. Also manual scale mode option for extra reach with telephoto lenses.
-12FPS.

Take my $3000.00 
Good bye mirror slappers.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 12, 2018)

eosuser1234 said:


> -4k.
> -Electronic Global shutter (flash sync heaven)
> -EF-m mount, with EF adapter. Because when i want small lenses i am okay with a slow lens. If I want a faster, then a larger one is fine, but I don't need a faster lense all of the time.
> -Wifi.
> ...



What??? LP-E17 hope you are joking on that one... Did you not hear that Sony introduced new bigger batteries and increased the size of A9 and A7r3 to improve the ergonomics and battery capacity


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 12, 2018)

If it is pro camera I would say
Use the 5D4 sensor & body
Remove the mirror
Add a EVF
Add H.265 codec for 4k
Add focus peaking
Add Zebras
EF Mount
Dual SD UHS ll cards are good enough. Most likely Canon will not do this

For the amateur users EF-M mount
Add more lenses to EF-M mount especially fast primes
We all know there is at least one camera M50 in the pipeline and I am sure there will be more coming

I am on the camp that thinks the 80D, 6D, 5D and 1D have good ergonomics compared to any Sony or any other mirror less cameras for that matter. At this point I do not even care if it is a mirro less or not. All I need is 4k without crop (obviously aspect ratio crop is expected) internal recording 4k h.265 or 4k out over HDMI so that I can use a external recorder and 1080p 120 fps.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 12, 2018)

eosuser1234 said:


> -4k.
> -Electronic Global shutter (flash sync heaven)
> -EF-m mount, with EF adapter. Because when i want small lenses i am okay with a slow lens. If I want a faster, then a larger one is fine, but I don't need a faster lense all of the time.
> -Wifi.
> ...



BTW mirror slappers still have an edge in low light AF performance. I own Sony A9 and 5D4. My 5D4 can focus in low light situation where my A9 cannot


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 12, 2018)

IglooEater said:


> I sincerely hope the questionnaires are aimed at finalizing specifics and not developing a drawing board discussion.



+1


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 12, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > rjbray01 said:
> ...



you mean pictures @ 120 fps, I am afraid there is no storage technology exist today to write that much data. The EVF on the a9 I believe has a 120 fps refresh rate for EVF, that means the image on the EVF is refreshed at 120 fps if this is what you are referring to


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 12, 2018)

Talys said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Top LCD
> ...



I agree with you on the top LCD. Tony Northrup complains about this all the time and calls it a 80s technology while it is true it is an 80s technology it still does the job with an ultra low power consumption. When it comes to power consumption I guess there is nothing else exists that comes closer to that.


----------



## Ryananthony (Jan 12, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > I sincerely hope the questionnaires are aimed at finalizing specifics and not developing a drawing board discussion.
> ...



haha! I thought the exact same thing.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 12, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Well.... the Photron high speed cameras top out at 29.4GB per second at dumping to memory....

If we assumed a 26Mpixel sensor, and dumped uncompressed RAW data to memory, that would be 646 full size uncompressed frames per second..... I think that 120 is possible.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

Dvash7 said:


> This is exactly what I'm most worried about.
> I've had a 7D for ages, and was looking forward to the 6D2. Needless to say, I took a hard pass on that one.
> The only reason I haven't jumped ship to Sony yet is that I'm heavily invested in Canon glass, and with all the rumors circulating it just seems reasonable that Canon will come out with a FF mirrorless option sooner rather than later.
> I certainly hope it isn't just for "pent up" Canonites like me. I really don't want to spend my money on its JUST because it's mirrorless, I want a decent product!



Because FF is a larger investment for consumers and the products have longer lifecyles than crop (with the possible exception of the 7D line), I don't think anyone is expect a first-gen EOS M -like FF offering that lacks a VF and has horrible AF speed:


If it's an ILC and not a fixed lens rig, it'll have an integral EVF
It will have DPAF, touchscreen, etc.
It will have *at least* a 6D2 sensor (if not something better)

So it'll be well designed, peppy, and work well. What we don't know is what price point they are after or (specifically) who their first targeted Canon user base is, so all the 'other' to what I just wrote above -- MP, fps, AF coverage, tracking, etc. -- is a huge wildcard.

So I don't see Canon putting out something slow and clunky, it just might not be blazingly fast, come with IBIS or have a hybrid VF. I think it'll be something like an EOS M5 scaled up, but again, it depends on who this first rig is after.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> If we're going to be honest with ourselves, I think there are not many of us who support the weight of a camera and big heavy lens in our right hand alone.



I don't disagree with you, and neither would Canon. _So surely Canon's tried a daintily-gripped FF rig lately, right?
_
[Checks bodies at TDP...]

To find a non-chunky gripped FF SLR from Canon, I hope you like film. For some reason Canon has *always* put a chunky grip on their FF DSLRs since the line started in 2002. I contend that reason is the lenses, and I fail to see how removing a mirror magically absolves the wrist of the burden of fast glass.

I still contend whatever they do with the mount, it should be a chunky grip. 

(Now, if it was a _fixed lens FF rig_ out the gate, like the Sony RX1 line or the Leica Q, absolutely the grip could be smaller than what we have today. Those are 28-35mm f/2-ish lenses, so the demand on the wrist is peanuts compared to bigger glass.)



Aaron D said:


> And yeah, the 20 mm or so TSE would be wonderful--I saw your comment a while back. I do have the 24 and the 17, too. But a 20 would capture the same approximate view (cropped a little at the sides) as two 24 mm exposures stitched in a "vertical panorama" as I do in 70% of my shots. The 17 can do about the same, but it's really not sharp enough for high-detail shots when shifted. And no polarizing filter, besides. Such a lens would allow the time to make half-a-dozen outrageous posts every day!



Thanks for the detail there -- appreciated. The low priority quip was not belittling your need so much as it's probably the first time I've heard of _that_ ask in this forum, and given that the mother lode of T/S _just_ arrived, it just might be a while before you see that lens.

- A


----------



## Sithaputh (Jan 12, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Sithaputh said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Dual native ISO
> ...




Yes.. that would be my dream camera, I have more to add to list, but, these are the important part.


----------



## snoke (Jan 12, 2018)

Good story. Canon see threat in A9/GFX50?

A9 no shutter noise. Perfect many places. Church. Wedding. Tennis.

Why GFX50? Cant understand it. Color? Noise? Controls?

Who they ask important. Explorer of Light/professional = 1DX & 1DX Mark II. Not small body.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 12, 2018)

snoke said:


> Good story. Canon see threat in A9/GFX50?
> 
> A9 no shutter noise. Perfect many places. Church. Wedding. Tennis.
> 
> ...



No look at their bios, far more EoL’s use 5D Mkiv’s and 5DS/R’s than 1Dx’s.


----------



## Deleted member 374702 (Jan 12, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> ...what they think would make a professional mirrorless camera “compelling” enough to purchase and use... they asked specifically what the photographers thought about the Sony a9...



Professionals (compellingly):
- No slow buffer / locking previews etc.
- No dropping to 12 bit in continuous
- No weather unsealed
- No menus written in Klingon
- No lossy compression in high speed
- Not without top LCD screen !!!!!!!!!!!
- No hipster retro dials BS
- No dead/stuck/in-comma pixels in the VF 
Canon:
- But we've been doing that for ages - it's called DSLR 
---
Because I'm not a professional, and Canon never asked me... :-D


----------



## LDS (Jan 12, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Well.... the Photron high speed cameras top out at 29.4GB per second at dumping to memory....
> If we assumed a 26Mpixel sensor, and dumped uncompressed RAW data to memory, that would be 646 full size uncompressed frames per second..... I think that 120 is possible.



Where do they record to? CFexpress 1.0 will top at 2GB/s, you'll need to wait a future development with 8 PCIe lanes ones to reach 8GB/s (30MB images at 120 per second are slightly less than 4GB/s)

But that require also a far powerful hardware inside the camera, you'll need also a fast CPU and fast memory to cope with that, and the power juice to run everything at those speeds, plus removing the heat produced.

But, anyway, do sport stills still sell well? Today I do expect short videos with showing the best actions from start to finish. Just hitting a ball or receiving one says very little.


----------



## IglooEater (Jan 12, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Agreed, it could be put to amazing use! Sorry for sounding negative, I didn’t mean it.


----------



## rjbray01 (Jan 12, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Sithaputh said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Dual native ISO
> ...



For me, one big advantage of IBIS would be the ability to buy a Sigma 85mm ART f/1.4 (or the 135mm) and couple it with a Canon camera and have the huge benefit of image stabilization in low light situations. 

Reading Dustin's review it seems that the Sigma lens has the edge over the new Canon 85mm f/1.4 in terms of resolution - and is cheaper. 

... and that's one reason why I suspect that Canon my *not* give us IBIS !!


----------



## duckshots (Jan 12, 2018)

I want a 40 mm fixed lens, full frame. I'd settle for a 35mm, 1.4. Flash optional, but I want a shoe, a tilt screen and a high quality EVF.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 12, 2018)

Sithaputh said:


> #### Canon ####
> 
> I hope you are reading this.
> 
> ...



what did you do? take every rumor and spec sheet item and toss it together?

canon's not going to do 1/3 of that .. especially IBIS. get a sony now if you want that.


----------



## Aaron D (Jan 12, 2018)

When I was poking at the sore-wristed-right-hand-grippers, I didn't mean to say a tiny grip was a good thing--only that mirror-less doesn't preclude good ergonomics. Why can't you put a good stout grip on a mirrorless camera? I used a Nikon FM for years before DSLR. That's a very small camera by 5Div standards, and it felt great in my hand--with a battery grip. And there's the illustration: a camera's grip is a thing that literally can be bolted on after the fact. Just make a mirror-less camera with a good grip! That's one of the few things Canon doesn't have to design from scratch on this camera--they've been making grips on cameras for decades. It's all the teeth-nashing about something that doesn't exist yet that I find entertaining. We're all up in arms about that horrible tiny grip that Canon has not yet and probably won't condemn us to.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

Nik said:


> - No dropping to 12 bit in continuous
> - No lossy compression in high speed



In fairness to Sony, they have been listening to folks who get butt hurt on fine print preventing them from getting full max burst speed with uncompressed RAW. You can now opt out of mandatory compression nonsense in the menus.

Reporting testing from Imaging Resource below:

A99-II: Max advertised = 12 fps JPEG or compressed RAW, and they tell you right in the manual it will slow down with uncompressed RAW. But when tested with uncompressed RAW, it still delivered 11.1 fps.

A7R3: Max advertised = 10 fps for JPEG or compressed RAW, and they tell you right in the manual it will slow down with uncompressed RAW. But when tested with uncompressed RAW, it still delivered 9.2 fps.

A9 is a soup of conditions because of that mechanical / electronic shutter setup. Max advertised = 20 fps JPEG or compressed RAW (elec) / 12 fps uncompressed RAW (elec) / 5 fps (mech) for all files, and that's exactly how it tests.

So only in one instance above is fps seriously hit for wanting uncompressed RAW output. Sony is improving on this front, and let's tip our cap here -- 42 x 11.1 uncompressed RAW is an impressive accomplishment. When we talk about this latest round of supercameras (D850 / A9 / A99-II / A7R3), they move a _ton_ of data.

- A


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jan 12, 2018)

snoke said:


> Why GFX50? Cant understand it. Color? Noise? Controls?



Because the price point of the rumored rangefinder (and less expensive) version of the GFX 50S body may begin to encroach on the 5DsR (and future 5Ds Mk II) price point. Also once the 100S version is released in 2019, the 50S price will drop substantially. And the GF lenses are not any more expensive than Canon's best L lenses, yet they can resolve up to 100 MP.

Canon may think if they're going to bother with mirrorless, why not go all-out? If they went medium format, then creating a new mount and lens line would make a lot of sense.

The real question is, why did they wait so long to start asking?


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

duckshots said:


> I want a 40 mm fixed lens, full frame. I'd settle for a 35mm, 1.4. Flash optional, but I want a shoe, a tilt screen and a high quality EVF.



FF + 1.4 breaks a fixed lens concept*, IMHO -- see below comparing Canon/Sony 35 f/1.4 options on mirrorless vs. what a fixed lens 35 f/2 or 28 f/1.7 can deliver.

*I appreciate that a fixed lens design would be tucked inside of the body thickness and not quite as big as what is shown on the left, but it's clear that there's an big inflection point in size for primes moving from f/2 to f/1.4. The one exception might be a 50 f/1.4 prime, of which some double gauss designs are rather famously tiny compared to other FLs. But there's a reason every cell phone is 28-35mm FF equivalent -- if you are stuck with a single FL for all time on a camera, those focal lengths are the right ones. 50 would be too long as the only option for a lot of people.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> When I was poking at the sore-wristed-right-hand-grippers, I didn't mean to say a tiny grip was a good thing--only that mirror-less doesn't preclude good ergonomics. Why can't you put a good stout grip on a mirrorless camera? I used a Nikon FM for years before DSLR. That's a very small camera by 5Div standards, and it felt great in my hand--with a battery grip. And there's the illustration: a camera's grip is a thing that literally can be bolted on after the fact. Just make a mirror-less camera with a good grip! That's one of the few things Canon doesn't have to design from scratch on this camera--they've been making grips on cameras for decades. It's all the teeth-nashing about something that doesn't exist yet that I find entertaining. We're all up in arms about that horrible tiny grip that Canon has not yet and probably won't condemn us to.



Oh, okay, I get you now. Yep, some folks think that going thin with the mount is part and parcel with a tiny grip, and that a tiny grip means terrible controls, RIP the top side LCD, etc.

So, in some chain-of-events logic, thin mount = ergonomic disaster. That is faulty logic. I do believe a tiny grip undermines a host of ergonomic considerations for a FF camera, but *there is no mandate for a thin mount to have a tiny grip*. This notion that 'if Canon goes small, they need to go small every way possible' is insane. In fact, folks would be much better off entirely decoupling the words 'thin', 'grip' and 'small' from their mental Venn diagrams on this subject.

For me:

Thin mount + thin grip = fail
Full mount + thin grip = fail 
Thin mount + thick grip = fine
Full mount + thick grip = fine

See attached terrible photoshoppery on my part. This is ugly as sin and I'm not proposing this as a concept, but the idea is clear: if even a slow crop lens will stick past the front of a chunky 5D grip, Canon FF mirrorless should have a chunky 5D grip. There is zero space savings in your bag to put the grip on a diet unless you only pack the body with no lens attached (something I presume most of us only do when we travel or if we're using really heavy glass), so why not avail yourself of all these good things and delight your customers? To please a small percentage of people who want to believe a small gripped camera will better fit in a small bag despite the unavoidable size of the lenses?

Grip = go big.

- A


----------



## dak723 (Jan 12, 2018)

The size of the camera is dictated more by the size of the grip than the removal of the mirror and reducing the flange distance - especially for anyone who has a wide array of lenses which most likely includes lenses that are large. Generally speaking, the grip will be wider than any reduction in width due to the removal of the mirror, so creating a new mount in order to get "smaller" just doesn't work if you want to keep a good ergonomic grip. 

If people want smaller, they have plenty of mirrorless choices. APS-C cameras such as the M series will more than fit the bill for those folks looking far a major size reduction advantage. Or you can go 4/3rds. If you are looking at FF cameras - and the fact that the level of photographer who is going FF is also looking at fast lenses and often large zooms - FF cameras whether mirrorless or not will not be small.

In my opinion, based on the above, changing the mount will have absolutely no advantage. Hopefully, Canon has come to a similar conclusion!


----------



## FramerMCB (Jan 12, 2018)

snoke said:


> Good story. Canon see threat in A9/GFX50?
> 
> A9 no shutter noise. Perfect many places. Church. Wedding. Tennis.
> 
> ...



A lot of those "explorer's" use 5D III's and Mk IV's, and 5DS r's too...just sayin'.


----------



## Aaron D (Jan 12, 2018)

Sure, and without any photoshopping, you can set a 5D next to an A7 and there's your comparison. A useful FF mirrorless grip has already been done! And then assume Canon will do it better than Sony and Bob's yer uncle.

And yes the A7 is a smaller camera. Believe your eyes. Not you AH, I mean anyone...


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 12, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > rjbray01 said:
> ...



your aperture blades would fly out of the lens and kill people at 20 paces.

unless you want to pull a Sony and do stop down shooting (good luck in a studio environment or when you need to stop down for depth of field then)


----------



## drjlo (Jan 12, 2018)

You know, I always wanted a Sony RX1R, and it's a good time to track down a used one at good price


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

highdesertmesa said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > Why GFX50? Cant understand it. Color? Noise? Controls?
> ...



I went on a mini rant about medium format's appeal to FF users recently: post 1 / post 2 

In my mind, it's a _very_ hard sell to FF users. Many more takeaways than advantages, and the hotness the bigger sensor brings isn't that much hotter than what FF can deliver today.

I'm not saying that there is not benefit to MF -- leaf shutters and bigger sensors are not bad things at all. But I feel one is walking away from so much more than they are walking towards in a FF --> MF conversation.

But a total agreement / +1 on the 100 MP arriving to change things there. That's a clear selling point that FF will not have for some time.

- A


----------



## acekin (Jan 12, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> Here's my request list, and I really honestly would buy at least one of these immediately and use it to earn my livelihood (I'm an un-invited professional, but I figure they already know what I like, I've said so here lots of times!):
> 
> 1) Please DON'T be compelled to stick to an EF mount! This is an opportunity to optimize an entire system to a short flange-distance mount! I know I'm going to rile up the "I've got a hundred old lenses I can't bear to use an adapter with" faction... But to build-in permanent dead space for a non-existant mirror box is ludicrous.
> 
> ...



In other words, create a 21st-century photography camera that does not get loaded with features that create hype, not benefits. Real innovation is in finding the real needs and satisfying them, not a smorgasbord of features that are at the fringes or provide no perceived benefits. Please, please, stick to the core photographic ideas and needs.

An optical viewfinder for at least a limited range of focal length will be truly innovative on a mirrorless camera, it is hard to replicate the view in an optical viewfinder. But, everything else articulated by Aaron D sound on the mark.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 12, 2018)

drjlo said:


> You know, I always wanted a Sony RX1R, and it's a good time to track down a used one at good price



Good luck with that. The price for a new one has not budged from official resellers in 2+ years of time on the market. It's a very 1%-er sort of product going after Leica dollars: "You know what this is and you are going to pay for it, Senator/Trust-funder/Kardashian/Celebrity Instagrammer/etc."

RX1R = A7R internals
RX1R II = A7R II internals

...is an RX1R III coming based on the A7R3? Goodness knows Sony loves updating all of its RX1/10/100 cameras.

- A


----------



## crashpc (Jan 12, 2018)

Lenses and specialty stuff. Like larger resolution for macro work and other niches.


----------



## drjlo (Jan 12, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> RX1R = A7R internals
> RX1R II = A7R II internals



Small correction. RX1R=A7 internals (24 MP) not A7R (36 MP). 

I already have A7R and FE 35 f/2.8 but always wished Sony made that Zeiss 35 f/2 lens detachable for FE mount instead. I wish the FE 35 f/2.8 was a smidge sharper and smidge wider aperture, and the 35 f/1.4 is simply too big (and expensive) for portability.


----------



## RGF (Jan 12, 2018)

Interesting that ask Pros. After all they will buy a few hundred copies. While amateurs will drive the volume w/ 10,000s. I guess numbers don't matter too much.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 12, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I went on a mini rant about medium format's appeal to FF users recently: post 1 / post 2
> 
> In my mind, it's a _very_ hard sell to FF users. Many more takeaways than advantages, and the hotness the bigger sensor brings isn't that much hotter than what FF can deliver today.



People seem to forget that the 35mm camera pretty much killed medium format in it's day because it gave the photographer so many more advantages. Today, with DSLRs available with high MP counts and medium format shrinking towards 35mm size, there is virtually no reason left to go medium format, in my opinion. Sure there will always be an extreme fringe element that wants more than the typical pro who is using a DSLR. Let other companies cater to the fringe.


----------



## SkynetTX (Jan 12, 2018)

RGF said:


> Interesting that ask Pros. After all they will buy a few hundred copies. While amateurs will drive the volume w/ 10,000s. I guess numbers don't matter too much.


+1
I love shooting beetles so I need a crop DSLR with a sensor that is able to decrease the diffraction effect at f/16 or smaller and has better noise performance than the currently existing ones. See my specifications of the 9000D. 
On the other hand Pros can ask for features that amateurs will find useful as well.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 12, 2018)

RGF said:


> Interesting that ask Pros. After all they will buy a few hundred copies. While amateurs will drive the volume w/ 10,000s. I guess numbers don't matter too much.



Yes, but most amateurs will just want more green box modes


----------



## SkynetTX (Jan 12, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Yes, but most amateurs will just want more green box modes



+1
But do they really need a DSLR or mirrorless if they don't want to take the advantages of it? Except the IQ maybe?


----------



## gmon750 (Jan 13, 2018)

I'd be happy with a well-engineered mirrorless version of the 5DM3 that lets me use my EF lenses. I don't care much for all that fancy, detachable screen and 4K-video nonsense.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 13, 2018)

drjlo said:


> Small correction. RX1R=A7 internals (24 MP) not A7R (36 MP).



Spot on. My memory failed me there.

- A


----------



## slclick (Jan 13, 2018)

RGF said:


> Interesting that ask Pros. After all they will buy a few hundred copies. While amateurs will drive the volume w/ 10,000s. I guess numbers don't matter too much.



yes, asking experts...crazy notion.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 13, 2018)

dak723 said:


> People seem to forget that the 35mm camera pretty much killed medium format in it's day because it gave the photographer so many more advantages. Today, with DSLRs available with high MP counts and medium format shrinking towards 35mm size, there is virtually no reason left to go medium format, in my opinion. Sure there will always be an extreme fringe element that wants more than the typical pro who is using a DSLR. Let other companies cater to the fringe.



That's the tenor of my rant (the current state of things, not the backstory).

MF can be successful, but I think it needs to fundamentally be better than just 'but it has leaf shutter lenses' or 'you need to have to shot this with film to see why it's so exciting for digital'. All of those chats feel like a Leica rangefinder conversation that is more spiritual / philosophical than analytical.

In the end, the sensor (and the ability to get the most out of it) has to be worth the trouble of leaving the FF space for it. 50 MP + 1 stop more DR + the quick sync a leaf shutter brings isn't enough to walk away from so so so much that the FF ecosystem offers, IMHO.

- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 13, 2018)

SkynetTX said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting that ask Pros. After all they will buy a few hundred copies. While amateurs will drive the volume w/ 10,000s. I guess numbers don't matter too much.
> ...



Er that would be a FF sensor, it gives you all you ask for (better diffraction performance (because the CoC is larger), and better ISO performance (because noise per capture is based on total sensor area)), just get a lens that matches your crop equivalence and you and your beetle photography are taken to the next level.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 13, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > People seem to forget that the 35mm camera pretty much killed medium format in it's day because it gave the photographer so many more advantages. Today, with DSLRs available with high MP counts and medium format shrinking towards 35mm size, there is virtually no reason left to go medium format, in my opinion. Sure there will always be an extreme fringe element that wants more than the typical pro who is using a DSLR. Let other companies cater to the fringe.
> ...


Having shot in formats ranging from 8X10 to the Kodak Disk camera, 35mm was a good balance between size and quality..... that’s probably why it was so popular.

Nowadays, the quality of the lenses is much higher and the sensors have better resolution than film, so a decent 35mm digital camera beats the quality of most medium format cameras of 40 years ago....


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 13, 2018)

slclick said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting that ask Pros. After all they will buy a few hundred copies. While amateurs will drive the volume w/ 10,000s. I guess numbers don't matter too much.
> ...



Damned if you do and damned if you don't. For sure whatever Canon do they will be castigated for it and any product will be decried as DOA and 'if only it had' by soul-searching internet 'experts' who are actually looking for nothing more than page hits.


----------



## dolina (Jan 13, 2018)

* Stock Android 8 Oreo
* 6-inch display
* Snapdragon 835 SoC or better


----------



## JP (Jan 13, 2018)

The pros they are probably talking to are saying:

1. We want a relatively slow frame rate.
2. A max burst time of 1.3 seconds before the buffer is full, and a waiting time of 4-5 seconds before we can take the next photo.
3. A 1/200ths top sync speed for studio flashes. 1/250ths is never needed, nor desired. 
4. No PC socket needed... that's for old school photographers. Replace that with a Direct Print button.
5. An AF coverage of the middle of the frame only.
6. A loooooong shutter lag time.. 
7. A 50+ MP sensor to ensure quality images. 
8. Top iso of 200,000,000... 
9. Low iso of 100
10. able to fit into the same pocket we use for our cell phones.


----------



## hne (Jan 13, 2018)

JP said:


> The pros they are probably talking to are saying:
> 
> 1. We want a relatively slow frame rate.
> 2. A max burst time of 1.3 seconds before the buffer is full, and a waiting time of 4-5 seconds before we can take the next photo.
> ...



Yes. If they instead made a camera with

8-10fps
4-5s burst time, with 1.3s for the buffer to clear
1/2000s sync speed
PC socket
DPAF normal coverage
Zero lag shutter (by preparing when you half-press)
25-30Mpx
Top ISO 12800
Low ISO 25
Any size

... then it might be a huge success.


----------



## thomic (Jan 13, 2018)

-EF mount
-Blackout free EVF with more than 99fps
-Dpaf locks focus in 0.03s
-8-12fps with autofocus and 100% success rate for subject walking, running or cycling
-Tilty flippy display with touch AF 
-Small crop factor 4k with decent codec
-30-45Mpix FF sensor
-13.5-14Evs DR
-Stereo microphone
-Headphone and microphone sockets
-Decent battery life (600px)
-USB-C socket with USB3.1 standard
-Wifi/Bluetooth/NFC
-$1999
*Eye catching design a la m6
*2 UHS-II card slots
*Compatible with EF-S in a crop mode
*No AA filter
*Wireless charging
*Global shutter
*5-axis IBIS
*$2499


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jan 13, 2018)

RGF said:


> Interesting that ask Pros. After all they will buy a few hundred copies. While amateurs will drive the volume w/ 10,000s. I guess numbers don't matter too much.



A couple of thoughts to add to those of others:

1. While some amateurs (and no doubt many on this forum) will use their camera regularly, many (most?) amateurs may only use their cameras occasionally - special events etc. - whereas there is nothing like a pro who may be using a camera for a few hours a day, day-in, day-out, to interpret what works and what doesn't and what would improve the existing state.

2. Think of the marketing angle: would you rather be advertising it as "as used by the world's leading professional photogs", or "as used by thousands of amateurs"...


Stoical.


----------



## Deleted member 374702 (Jan 13, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Nik said:
> 
> 
> > - No dropping to 12 bit in continuous
> ...



The only reason, why they added the uncompressed mode, was because they got caught(by DPR?), not because they "listened"! 
People give too much credit to Sony - as if they're some Prometheus incarnates bringing fire down to the mortals - but, in reality, all they did, was to do the only thing they could to get out of the DSLT mire, as radical as it might've seemed. 
Yes, α9 is a soup, I completely agree with that. My problem lies with people who believe it is a nectar from the gods 
The only one that moves ton of data properly is the D850 - it's buffer, in it's most challenging speed, empties out for about 3-4 seconds w/o locking you out of anything: 46mpx, 14bit @ 9fps. None of the others have anything that even gets close. People say well, it's the size that limits the cards choice, the battery, the CPU, blah, blah... then what is the big and chunky α99II's excuse of 25 images buffer that takes 34 seconds to clear?! Obviously, Sony are listening to people very selectively 
I don't hate Sony, don't get me wrong, it's just the accompanying clamor that is getting more and more annoying.
Cheers


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jan 13, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> highdesertmesa said:
> 
> 
> > snoke said:
> ...



I own the GFX and 5DsR, and I can tell you the difference in the files is substantial and well worth the price difference (I got the GFX body for just over $5K). The only thing I use the 5DsR for any more is longer telephoto shots, but that will change somewhat when the GF 250 plus 1.4x comes out this year. I'll still keep the 5DsR and 100-400 II with 1.4x III for the occasional 500mm+ shot.


----------



## tmroper (Jan 13, 2018)

dak723 said:


> People seem to forget that the 35mm camera pretty much killed medium format in it's day because it gave the photographer so many more advantages. Today, with DSLRs available with high MP counts and medium format shrinking towards 35mm size, there is virtually no reason left to go medium format, in my opinion. Sure there will always be an extreme fringe element that wants more than the typical pro who is using a DSLR. Let other companies cater to the fringe.



I don't think that's true at all. MF started off and stayed mostly a professional and commercial format. Meanwhile, 35mm came along first as a more consumer format, and then became something professionals adopted because it suited their needs better (conflict photography, photojournalism, etc). But in professional studios, and on produced location commercial shoots, MF film stayed very prevalent until digital took over. The Mamiya RZ67 was probably the most ubiquitous, and that's why there are so many of those available to buy used today.


----------



## koofoo (Jan 13, 2018)

We shoot weddings and studio portraiture and have been Canonites for nearly 15 years. We've spent over £100k on bodies and lenses. However, we've recently acquired Sony's A7SIIs and A7RIIIs and can definitely say that if Canon wants to please it's loyal customer base it better get off of it's lardy backside and develop something like an A7RIII killer. Buying the Sonys wasn't an easy decision but we got tired of waiting. We know of other fellow crews who've switched too.


----------



## TAF (Jan 13, 2018)

tmroper said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > People seem to forget that the 35mm camera pretty much killed medium format in it's day because it gave the photographer so many more advantages. Today, with DSLRs available with high MP counts and medium format shrinking towards 35mm size, there is virtually no reason left to go medium format, in my opinion. Sure there will always be an extreme fringe element that wants more than the typical pro who is using a DSLR. Let other companies cater to the fringe.
> ...




Might I politely suggest you review "Film Formats" at Wikipedia; notice the dates of introduction of the various film formats. You will find that MF came first - by years. If you bought a camera, it used MF film. 35mm came along as a motion picture format, and Oskar Barnack adapted it to small portable cameras because he was not in the best of health and didn't want to carry the much larger and heavier cameras of the day (story also found at Wikipedia).

MF survived initially because there were so many cameras that used roll film, then it became the professional choice due to higher image quality. It survives now due to the endpoints of the film genre; higher image quality for the professionals, and the Holga world or art.

In the digital realm, the larger sensors are still superior; as long as the technology we take for granted in the FF/APS arena propagates 'upward', it always will. Bigger sensors win. If that stops, then MF will probably die (in the digital arena, the film should be with us for a good long time - I hope!).


----------



## FunkyCamera (Jan 13, 2018)

Hopefully these professionals will tell them the right answer - they don't want Canon to waste their time on these toy cameras, and hopefully Canon will listen to those professionals instead of forums warriors who don't actually take photos, and just own a mirrorless because they think it's cool.

Professionals use DSLRs, and I'm sure Canon will be smart enough to remember that, and not fall into the Fony Hype.


----------



## TAF (Jan 13, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> Does Canon often make stupidly impossible cameras to hold?



That would describe the entire EOS M line until you get to the M5. It would also describe many of the P+S line. And I have pretty average American sized hands (glove size 9).

Of course Canon sells much of their products in Asia, where hand sizes are a bit smaller.

Ergonomics are very challenging on an international level; there really is a significant difference in size around the world.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jan 14, 2018)

snoke said:


> Good story. Canon see threat in A9/GFX50?
> 
> A9 no shutter noise. Perfect many places. Church. Wedding. Tennis.
> 
> ...



I own an a9, 80d, 5D4 and M5. I am fairly confident that a9 will not replace any Canons in the sports and wildlife because there is no native lenses. Sure enough the a9 and a7r3 are threat to some Canons especially with wedding, studio photographers, photo journalists, etc but has some pretty serious down sides. 

1) A9 cannot trigger any flashes while using electronic shutter. Most likely one would need some form of lightning when shooting indoor especially inside a place like a Church which makes the silent electronic shutter useless. 

2) I had a6300, a6500 in the past and now an a9, one other problem I have seen with all these Sony's are inconsistent white balance between shots. I know it is easily correctable but because of the inconsistency between shots (in the same lighting conditions) each shot needs to be corrected with a different value which often takes a lot of time to get all shots to look pretty much similar in color but at least Sony's black looks black in a9. It using to look greenish in the older cameras.

3) When using auto ISO and flash Sony cameras are inconsistent with the ISO selection. I usually shoot in manual mode, with flash in E-TTL mode (if required) and leave the ISO in auto. In any Canon camera it will try to optimize a low enough ISO and brighter flash to get a decent image with low noise. Even though ISO varies by shot there is not much swing Vs when I do that in any Sony the ISO is all over the place. For e.g. one shot it will pick ISO 1000 the next shot it will pick ISO 3200 and randomly one shot will be in ISO 6400. This is indoor when lightning is not changing at all. When lighting condition changes it is even worse with Sonys

4) Based on a recent low light focus test I did DSLRs still have an edge when it comes to AF in low light. My 5D4 and 80D were able to acquire focus while the M5 and a9 completely failed.

These may sound like nitpicking but these are annoyance with Sony and processing taking longer in real world usage.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 14, 2018)

Sound like easily fixable issues and the Sony lens range will expand . Canon can’t rest in its laurels and the first mirrorless they produce needs to be good. I’d buy it if it had a high frame rate and reasonably good overall. By the time it comes out Sony will probably have 400/500/600 F4s. It would be a decision point on my future purchases. Preference would be Canon but if it’s a weak offering it won’t be a good sign.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 14, 2018)

TAF said:


> Aaron D said:
> 
> 
> > Does Canon often make stupidly impossible cameras to hold?
> ...



This is entirely irrelevant to the subject at hand, but I must ask - do we have any data on this? It's often repeated, but are there any empirical surveys of hand size across different nationalities? I'm genuinely interested.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 14, 2018)

Hector1970 said:


> Sound like easily fixable issues and the Sony lens range will expand . Canon can’t rest in its laurels and the first mirrorless they produce needs to be good. I’d buy it if it had a high frame rate and reasonably good overall. By the time it comes out Sony will probably have 400/500/600 F4s. It would be a decision point on my future purchases. Preference would be Canon but if it’s a weak offering it won’t be a good sign.



I still don't understand the blind faith people have in Sony addressing every criticism of their devices and lineup. Why should we be certain they'll release a 600mm lens, for example? Whereas the same people always assume Canon will never do what they want. Where's the balance?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 14, 2018)

TAF said:


> Aaron D said:
> 
> 
> > Does Canon often make stupidly impossible cameras to hold?
> ...



I disagree. I have average-sized hands (7.5" base of palm to tip of middle finger, average is 7.44"), and have no trouble holding smaller M-series (I had the M, have the M2 and M6)..._with the native lenses_. Where they get 'stupidly impossible to hold' is when I mount a 'typical' high quality FF zoom lens via adapter onto the small M body.

In the context of a FF MILC, typical high quality zooms won't be much (or any) smaller.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 14, 2018)

sigh.......

Perhaps Canon has figured it out already.....

If you want small size in a mirrorless camera, you want short flange sizes and above all else, TINY LENSES! This means a decided lack of F1.4 primes.... and by using a crop sensor, you can keep those F5.6 lenses small. Such a camera will still take great quality pictures..... and so came the "M" series.

If you are after the ultimate in quality from your mirrorless camera, then you want FF and you are going to want big fast lenses. You will avoid short flange distances because of the chromatic aberration problems of bending the light too sharply to fit that short flange. These are the people who are going to want lots of controls and shoulder displays on their camera, so you end up with a body the size of a 5D series camera to fit it in. Any camera designed to meet such criteria will not be tiny like a Sony.

Everything comes at a price. You can not have best quality with great ergonomics, and small size in the same package. They are mutually exclusive.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 14, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Hector1970 said:
> 
> 
> > Sound like easily fixable issues and the Sony lens range will expand . Canon can’t rest in its laurels and the first mirrorless they produce needs to be good. I’d buy it if it had a high frame rate and reasonably good overall. By the time it comes out Sony will probably have 400/500/600 F4s. It would be a decision point on my future purchases. Preference would be Canon but if it’s a weak offering it won’t be a good sign.
> ...



Seriously? Balance? On an internet forum? It would be nice, but probably 75% of the people on internet forums are not interested in the truth or accuracy, but merely to advance their own agenda. A few of us who have actually used cameras of different brands and try to give informed opinions are usually ignored or ridiculed. Anyone buying a camera based on internet information is bound to be disappointed, if not totally misled.


----------



## Talys (Jan 14, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> sigh.......
> 
> Perhaps Canon has figured it out already.....
> 
> ...



The Sony equation "works" for a certain customers.

1. Have a small camera, with a few mediocre but small zooms. That's "good enough" to wow people looking for a tiny full frame camera.

2. Have a large, pro-quality zooms and primes that take away any size benefits of the small camera. They're already invested in the body, so now they'll rationalize the big lens with other benefits from the body.


So the small, sexy package and the high-end optics are not mutually exclusive in the Sony system; you just can't pair them up -- you CAN have both, just not operate them at the same time -- _and that's just fine with some people_. 

It is totally pointless for people like me, because usually I mount telephoto lenses. A 70-200/2.8, 100-400, or 150-600 feel terrible handheld on a small body, because when it's a sensor floating on a lens, the camera is very front-heavy. While manually focusing, it is difficult to "hold" the mount-end of the camera with your right hand, because (a) the grip is lousy and (b) all the weight falls on your left hand, which is trying to be precise.

I'm not lucky enough to own a big white, but I can just imagine that it would feel ridiculous on a small mirrorless (since an adapted 150-600 already does -- even on a gimbal).

Basically, my opinion is that any camera/lens combo that you can shoot one-handed for an extended period of time feels great if the body is pint-sized. Any lens/camera combo that requires 2 hands to hold steady and shoot feels like poo if the body doesn't have full-sized ergonomics.


So, I'm the furthest thing from a professional, but what I _want_ in a full-frame mirrorless, if Canon is to convince me to purchase one, is:

1. A device that can attach big, pro lenses and feel as or more comfortable than current bodies.
2. A device that works will with telephoto lenses
3. An EVF that doesn't feel like a handicap with fast moving objects

Probably, the maximum price I would pay is in the price range of an A7RIII or D850; it would have to provide tangible benefits for the kind of photos I like to take, though -- wildlife, mostly -- and body size is unlikely to be one of them.


----------



## Gino (Jan 14, 2018)

I am not a Pro, but I do have the means to purchase nice gear. Personally, I like the current size and feel of the 5D MKIV and 1DX MKII bodies, but I would welcome a reduction in weight...even if it was a small reduction of 100-200 grams. The Sony mirrorless cameras feel too small in my hand, and they do not feel very comfortable. 

I hope when Canon comes out with Pro Mirrorless cameras, they keep the current size of the 5D & 1D bodies that they have now, but Canon is able to reduce the weight.

Also, I hope Canon can provide autofocus point coverage across the entire sensor in the mirrorless bodies, with the same type of red translucent LED autofocus points that are currently in the 1D MKII, which are easy to view in low lighting conditions!

Thanks


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 14, 2018)

Talys said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > sigh.......
> ...



Yes, it does work.

The Sony system is a "medium size" solution. It is a very good compromise between small size and quality/ergonomics... Canon already has a successful "small" system (M series) and the lenses for a "large" system (EF mount). It makes much more sense for them to come out with a "large" mirrorless body and to offer the public both a large and high quality/ergonomic system and a small system, than it does to invent a whole new medium sized system that leaves thier current high end users dngling....

There are 140 million EF lenses out there... a mirrorless FF EF mount could use them all. take FF images when a EF lens is mounted, and crop the sensor when EF-S is mounted.....


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 14, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I disagree. I have average-sized hands (7.5" base of palm to tip of middle finger, average is 7.44"), and have no trouble holding smaller M-series (I had the M, have the M2 and M6)..._with the native lenses_. Where they get 'stupidly impossible to hold' is when I mount a 'typical' high quality FF zoom lens via adapter onto the small M body.
> 
> In the context of a FF MILC, typical high quality zooms won't be much (or any) smaller.



+1. This is the heart of it. M5 is fine for the glass it natively works with. Even a 1.2x-1.3x scaled up version of the EOS M5 design will not work for FF mirrorless as the lenses simply get huge/heavy quickly. Canon could only go with a dainty body with FF if it kept its lenses to f/2.8 primes and f/4 zooms, which only a small portion of the market would be happy with (ask Sony), and we know folks will mount EF glass on these new FF rigs on day one, so who are we kidding?

That doesn't mean the body needs to be thick or thin mounted. Either will work, so I'd de-couple that from your thinking. Canon simply needs *a chunky grip* that is *appropriately spaced from the mount for finger space with the bigger barrel f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes*. I think that's a must for any system that has an on-ramp to the EF mount somehow.

- A


----------



## tmroper (Jan 14, 2018)

I once took the dimensions of the original Sony A7, and compared them to my Nikon FM. Turns out they were just about the same size, and ever since I've been wondering if Sony used SLRs like the Nikon as a goal for their mirrorless camera form factor. Because millions of those film SLRs were sold, all roughly the same size, and I don't think people complained too much about their "ergonomics." On the other hand, many it's a coincidence.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 14, 2018)

tmroper said:


> I once took the dimensions of the original Sony A7, and compared them to my Nikon FM. Turns out they were just about the same size, and ever since I've been wondering if Sony used SLRs like the Nikon as a goal for their mirrorless camera form factor. Because millions of those film SLRs were sold, all roughly the same size, and I don't think people complained too much about their "ergonomics." On the other hand, many it's a coincidence.



At that time, sensors came in rolls with 24 or 36 full frame sensors per roll, costing a few bucks. Film SLRs were 'consumer-level' cameras. With what lenses were those 'millions of film SLRs' generally sold? Earlier...with 50mm prime lenses. Later...with slow, variable aperture zoom lenses. Those were relatively small, light lenses...nothing to complain about from an ergonomic standpoint when used with a small body. An f/2.8 zoom or f/1.4 prime is a different beast.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 14, 2018)

Hector1970 said:


> Sound like easily fixable issues and the Sony lens range will expand . Canon can’t rest in its laurels and the first mirrorless they produce needs to be good. I’d buy it if it had a high frame rate and reasonably good overall. By the time it comes out Sony will probably have 400/500/600 F4s. It would be a decision point on my future purchases. Preference would be Canon but if it’s a weak offering it won’t be a good sign.



If they are 'easily fixable' why was the camera released with these problems in the first place? It is like general ergonomics - Sony have been heavily criticised since the days of the first NEX camera and yet only now have they got tow cameras (A7R-III and A9) that come anywhere near people saying 'they have been fixed'. Up to now Sony have been majoring on slamming as many features as they can in their cameras in order to attract new users but where they are closing the gap on Canon regards real-world uses, Canon is catching up on sensor capability. Are you sure it is Canon who should not rest on their laurels?


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 14, 2018)

tmroper said:


> I once took the dimensions of the original Sony A7, and compared them to my Nikon FM. Turns out they were just about the same size, and ever since I've been wondering if Sony used SLRs like the Nikon as a goal for their mirrorless camera form factor. Because millions of those film SLRs were sold, all roughly the same size, and I don't think people complained too much about their "ergonomics." On the other hand, many it's a coincidence.



except those FM film cameras had far less control over camera operation that simply didn't exist in the days of film and manual focus, and also relied on aperture control based on the lens.

never had to flip between auto-ISO, ISO, white balances, AF modes, image controls, menu controls, AF point selection, picture profiles, special function buttons,etc.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 15, 2018)

highdesertmesa said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > highdesertmesa said:
> ...



Beautiful photos. Santa Fe?


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 15, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> The Sony system is a "medium size" solution. It is a very good compromise between small size and quality/ergonomics... Canon already has a successful "small" system (M series) and the lenses for a "large" system (EF mount). It makes much more sense for them to come out with a "large" mirrorless body and to offer the public both a large and high quality/ergonomic system and a small system, than it does to invent a whole new medium sized system that leaves thier current high end users dngling....



Don, I think you're conflating FF and crop with these small/medium/larges above. Crop and FF are apples and oranges to me even if a crop body can use FF glass.

Consider that the A7 is smaller than any FF DSLR Canon has ever made. You say it's a medium, but for FF, I see the A7 and even the thicker A9, A7R3 designs as "Small" for that sensor size and the glass you'll put on it. You can't really make that setup much smaller without turning it into a fancy RX1R point and shoot.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 15, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> An f/2.8 zoom or f/1.4 prime is a different beast.



+1. People will put big pickle jar lenses on these new mirrorless bodies on the very first day out of the box.

Again: thick or thin mount is possible, but the _grip_ needs to be ready for the 24-70 f/2.8s and 85 f/1.4s of the world.

- A


----------



## bf (Jan 15, 2018)

Shouldn't Canon asked us who used its mirror-less for years instead? Man, if they had just listened!


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 15, 2018)

bf said:


> Shouldn't Canon asked us who used its mirror-less for years instead? Man, if they had just listened!



If you are referring to getting input from current EOS M users, the assumption is professionals are either (a) not using that brand or (b) they may not be doing professional work on it.

In other words, and this may be unfair to professionals who use EOS M as a b-rig or 2nd body, but using EOS M5/M6 to inform future FF mirrorless designs will deliver _a product that works well in general_ but it may not sufficiently entice professionals. (I could be wrong.)

But I understand why they did this (if indeed this rumor is accurate) -- there's more a FF mirrorless rig than saying "Merge everything mirrorless you've learned about M5/M6 with all the professional feature set of the 5D4 and boom, you're done." Canon is wise to put out feelers with as many potential markets for this camera as they can.

- A


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 15, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> Canon is so far behind at this point they should just keep making DSLR's and focus on quality lenses. If you want mirrorless buy a Sony and use Canon glass. Or if you don't care about FF go with Fuji. I've used Canon for the duration of my 40 years in journalism. Went through the the change from FD to EOS and took a beating. I had 18 lenses and six camera bodies. I have 4 M5s in addition to a couple DSLR I can use when shooting sports. I use the M5 75% of the time. But basically the 22 EF-M is the only modern Canon lens I use. I have several of the other EF-m lenses, but I use Rokinons, and Canon FD lenses most of the time because I need something faster than f6.3.



I was going to switch to Sony, but I already have a slurpee cup.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 15, 2018)

ken said:


> I don't get the desire for a non-EF mount from so many people. If it has a short flange on the body, you'll just have a flange on EVERY lens (eating up valuable bag space), or the equivalent in an adapter (which makes the mount less stable).
> 
> Are the people asking for short flange not aware of the physics? Or... are they wanting the ability to use non-Canon glass? Or something I haven't thought of?



They think that few millimeters of difference is going to add cubic feet of space to their bags. Silly people.


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jan 15, 2018)

Adelino said:


> highdesertmesa said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Thank you. They were taken in Placitas, NM – about 10 miles north of ABQ and 40 miles south of Santa Fe on I-25.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 15, 2018)

highdesertmesa said:


> Adelino said:
> 
> 
> > highdesertmesa said:
> ...



Interestingly derivative of Adams' 'Moonrise over Hernandez', but he controlled the exposure of the moon 'better'. I read an interesting article about how he set up for the shot in such a rush he didn't have an exposure meter, but he knew the moon followed the 'Moony/Loony/Luna f11 Rule' so he exposed for that placing it in a high Zone and then lifted the rest of the detail from the shadows via film development and printing mastery.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > The Sony system is a "medium size" solution. It is a very good compromise between small size and quality/ergonomics... Canon already has a successful "small" system (M series) and the lenses for a "large" system (EF mount). It makes much more sense for them to come out with a "large" mirrorless body and to offer the public both a large and high quality/ergonomic system and a small system, than it does to invent a whole new medium sized system that leaves thier current high end users dngling....
> ...


I probably didn’t explain myself too well......

What I was getting at, was that if you wanted small, and all the compromises that goes with it, then you end up with an M series camera, but if you want top quality/ergonomics, to tap into those 140 million lenses out there, and damn the weight, then you put an EF Mount and a Ff sensor together.


----------



## hne (Jan 15, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> sigh.......
> 
> Perhaps Canon has figured it out already.....
> 
> ...



You can have compact f/1.4 primes on a small mirrorless FF sensor camera. Leica M + 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 is small in comparison to A7rIII with similar lenses. 6DmkII + 35/1.4LmkII added to comparison for those not familiar with the size.


----------



## I Simonius (Jan 15, 2018)

SMALL CAMERA 
HIGH QUALITY LENSES
FAST AF
DOF preview
APS-C sensor (otherwise it will just be too big)

good diopter adjustment range
plenty of free space on the body without buttons etc for big hands


----------



## OlAf (Jan 15, 2018)

I expect normal size camera with excellent color rendering and EF mount. High iso doesn't matter.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 15, 2018)

hne said:


> You can have compact f/1.4 primes on a small mirrorless FF sensor camera. Leica M + 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 is small in comparison to A7rIII with similar lenses. 6DmkII + 35/1.4LmkII added to comparison for those not familiar with the size.



...and don't forget small + fast SLR lenses like the EF 50 f/1.4 USM. Double gauss 50s can be super tiny for their max aperture.

I've always wondered how Leica got such fast lenses so small, and someone please explain if they know. Wild guess: they just use ancient / simple / tiny lens designs and spend a mint on component tolerancing to get the most out of them. Is that how they do it, or are they just really well built old designs that aren't that sharp and have all sorts of older lens optical problems like our 50 f/1.4?

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 15, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



totally agree - it's the ergonomics that dictate the size.

canon could slap a full frame sensor into an SL2 sized mirrorless and call it a day. it'd be as small as a A7 series camera and still use the EF mount.

however it would also have SL2 ergonomics and not 5D Mark IV ergonomics.

you want 5D Mark IV ergonomics, it's going to be nearly the same size (but weigh less) than a 5D Mark IV does now currently.

EF mount or no EF mount, for 5D Mark IV ergonomics the body is going to be similar.


----------



## hne (Jan 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> hne said:
> 
> 
> > You can have compact f/1.4 primes on a small mirrorless FF sensor camera. Leica M + 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 is small in comparison to A7rIII with similar lenses. 6DmkII + 35/1.4LmkII added to comparison for those not familiar with the size.
> ...



Seems like they're small and sharp:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/comparing-rangefinder-and-slr-50mm-lenses-version-0-7/


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 15, 2018)

hne said:


> Seems like they're small and sharp:
> https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/comparing-rangefinder-and-slr-50mm-lenses-version-0-7/



Yep, so what's the magic in those designs? Are they just throwing money at airtight tolerances or are these possibly lenses that are _only_ concerned about sharpness? Are those lenses plagued with aberrations, focus shift, distortion, etc?

...or are we sheep for believing that great fast FF lenses must be big? Are big pickle jar modern retrofocus lenses simply a means to deliver the same sharpness a Summilux can without costing $4-5k?

In these discussions, the cruel master -- Physics -- usually eats his supper. Someone please clarify the optical black magic at play here.

- A


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jan 15, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> highdesertmesa said:
> 
> 
> > Adelino said:
> ...



Yes, and evidently he knew it wasn't exposed exactly right and had to adjust the negative developing, too. A master all around.


----------



## Rocky (Jan 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> hne said:
> 
> 
> > Seems like they're small and sharp:
> ...


There is no optical back magic here. Leica M mount has a flange distance of 27.8 mm, Canon EF mount has a flange distance of 44mm. That make it much easier to design a small lenses that have focal length 50mm or less for Leica. On top of that Leica lenses are all manual, no auto focus, no electronically controlled iris. That also make the lenses smaller. You are right about Leica put a lot of effort( read it as expense) to make the lens being excellent. The old optical formula are so good that my 50 years old leica lenses can still complete with the modern lenses, except modern Leica lenses


----------



## 3dit0r (Jan 15, 2018)

My wishlist would be:
- new mount, but full compatibility with EF mount (probably with an included adapter or ‘dual mount’) with no compromises in performance.
- the above would allow Canon and it’s users to hit the ground running with a great, full system of lenses, but allow the development of:
- a range of slightly more compact, but significantly lighter, lenses. BUT, these must still be fast aperture, top quality, pro lenses with fast silent AF and weather sealing. Leica and Fujifilm do it, so can Canon. Consider f/1.8 lenses instead of f/1.4 if it makes a big difference to size/weight (e.g., Sony/Zeiss FE 55 f/1.8, or Zeiss Batis, etc.)
- body doesn’t have to be much smaller, but should be a few hundred grams lighter than 5Dmkiv. E.g., a little larger/better ergonomically than A7riii but as light.
- IBIS
- not too much resolution, around 30mp but with great clean files and optimised for both stills and video
- body and lenses as well sealed as 5Dmkiv
- 4K with at least 10-bit 4:2:2 internal and choice of FF or APS-C crop. C-log, very well controlled moiré, aliasing, rolling shutter, etc.
- Focus peaking and zebras for video. Scopes would be nice. LUT preview.
- stills and video AF should be on sensor Phase Detect AF/and next generation Dual Pixel AF. Both should have at least Sony A7riii eye tracking AF (this in video would be a first and a game changer)
- Same level of ergonomic control/responsiveness as 5Dmkiv
- Same level of flash functionality as 5Dmkiv
- Canon traditional colour science, and maybe some nice dedicated film emulations à la Fuji


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jan 15, 2018)

"Canon Asking Select Professionals What They Want in a Mirrorless Camera".

For me - a large 3 cell battery (LP-E4N or similar), full compatibility (without compromise) on EF lenses and a Mirror! If it hasn't got an optical viewfinder and TTL viewing then it is of no use to me.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 15, 2018)

johnf3f said:


> "Canon Asking Select Professionals What They Want in a Mirrorless Camera".
> 
> For me - a large 3 cell battery (LP-E4N or similar), full compatibility (without compromise) on EF lenses and a Mirror! If it hasn't got an optical viewfinder and TTL viewing then it is of no use to me.



I do not think that question means what you think it means...


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jan 16, 2018)

brad-man said:


> johnf3f said:
> 
> 
> > "Canon Asking Select Professionals What They Want in a Mirrorless Camera".
> ...



I think it means what pro's want out of a Mirrorless camera. I am not a "Pro" but I do use equivalent gear and shoot alongside a few, so just my thoughts. I (and they) do not lug around heavy pro cameras for their looks, we do it because of the large batteries, solid build and excellent AF - which is of limited use with an EVF.

Certainly, for other users, this may be the way to go - but for me and all bar one of the "Pro" photographers that I know it is not. 

Not having a dig just trying to put things in perspective. Many are tempted by mirrorless cameras, as am I, but having tried a few the viewfinders/AF and lenses severely limit them for many uses - or virtually all uses in my personal case.

For the landscape (and similar) shooters they look very tempting - especially the newer Sony models. However they are far from all round cameras, yet. If they suit your needs then GREAT! They just cannot work for me or most of the photographers that I know and shoot with.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 16, 2018)

johnf3f said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > johnf3f said:
> ...



John, I wasn't questioning your rationale behind desiring features currently found only in DSLRs. I recently bought a 5DIV (which I love) and have no interest in a FF mirrorless camera either. I simply found it amusing that one of your requirements for a _mirrorless camera_ was that it have a mirror.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 16, 2018)

For Professional Journalists, It is about the investment in lenses, but also about size and the ability to hold and operate a camera securely with one hand. The ability to change memory cards in sub zero conditions while wearing gloves. Journalists have some pretty different expectations for a camera.

Then, there are Professional Wedding and Event photographers who have a totally different list of items, the 5 Series was aimed at them, and they are a very large and important group of pros. 

Enthusiast photographers seem to run a wide gamut, but they are important because they buy so many cameras and lenses. A camera for them is hard to pin down, some want small, some want big.

I'd like to see better functionality in existing cameras, better exposure algorithms, if Lightroom can do it, so can Cannon. the latest Lightroom takes a poorly exposed image from my camera and does a excellent but not perfect job. Exposures linked to the AF spot in all cameras would be helpful. Right now, I can do that in live view with the touch screen, and its a big improvement for getting the main subject properly exposed.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 16, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Exposures linked to the AF spot in all cameras would be helpful.



+1 Gajillion

A Nikon D5500 can do this, but a 5D cannot. My _cell phone_ can do this, but a 5D cannot. Come on.

- A


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 16, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Exposures linked to the AF spot in all cameras would be helpful.
> ...



I very rarely use exposure linked to the AF point, but I would ask how reliable is it? I think Canon has an ethos that if it is not totally reliable they often do not include it rather than give the user the option.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 16, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I very rarely use exposure linked to the AF point, but I would ask how reliable is it? I think Canon has an ethos that if it is not totally reliable they often do not include it rather than give the user the option.



On a mirrorless system it would be 100% reliable.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 16, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



It's a long-standing 1-series feature, so it seems Canon thinks it's pretty reliable. 

Just to be clear, with evaluative metering the exposure *is* linked to the AF point, but the rest of the scene is also considered. Only the 1-series cameras can spot meter (where only the spot is considered) at the AF point, all other cameras can spot meter only in the center, so you must meter then AE lock and recompose.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 16, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Thats the one feature I discovered when using the touch panel and live view on my SL2. The exposure adjusted right at the spot I touched. I hadn't noticed it on my 5D MK IV, so I checked it, and it does as well, but it seems to do a better exposure job, so the difference was not so striking.

Most of the time, the feature is not used, but in shooting event an stage photos with lots of light and dark areas, it makes a huge difference.


----------



## Uneternal (Jan 16, 2018)

Here are my proposals:

1) Make a joint venture with Samsung, take the sensor tech from their NX1 and make it fullframe.
2) Put this sensor in the 1DX Mark III, 5D Mark V and 6D Mark III, there should also be two or 3 mirrorless options on the same level as 5D and 6D. These should be compatible with existing lenses or at least just use a simple adapter to make them fully compatible.
3) Stop crippling lower grade models unneccesarily. The whole lineup should have 4K video, dual pixel AF and AF sensors that are not just cramped in the middle.
4) The 6D models and mirrorless cameras also should be affordable.
5) To separate higher models, give them more megapixels, better processors, faster series capturing, IPX water protection and other premium goodies.
*6) Dont rest on the dual pixel pillow and develop features, nobody yet has. Like dual pixel + defocus + depth sensor depthmap calculation which allows to blur backgrounds even better than a smartphone.*


=> Lean back and watch how Canon rises to the top again.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 16, 2018)

I was hoping that they would have been asking these questions a couple years ago. This means that a pro mirrorless camera is still years away.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 16, 2018)

Random Orbits said:


> I was hoping that they would have been asking these questions a couple years ago. This means that a pro mirrorless camera is still years away.



Based on the story that just dropped today here at CR:
http://www.canonrumors.com/bcn-rankings-are-out-canon-continues-to-dominate-dslrs-further-growth-in-mirrorless/

They remain dominant in SLRs and lens sales, and they are #2 in mirrorless... _to an m43 company._

Apparently not having FF mirrorless isn't hurting Canon all that much at all. 

- A


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 16, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > I was hoping that they would have been asking these questions a couple years ago. This means that a pro mirrorless camera is still years away.
> ...



True, but I'd rather Canon take Sony's lunch away. ;D

It doesn't take that much effort/expense to ask your target customer what they want. Incorporating their suggestions in products is a whole different matter. Unfortunately, what questions you ask in marketing affects the answers you get. Hopefully Canon asked enough of the right ones early enough.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 16, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > I was hoping that they would have been asking these questions a couple years ago. This means that a pro mirrorless camera is still years away.
> ...



If I did not have the legacy glass to cloud my judgement and was looking for a mirror less crop camera, I would pick Oly over Canon any day of the week..... better features, better specs, more glass......

I find it to not be a surprise that they are #1 in mirrorless, they are a hard act to follow. 

Now as to FF mirrorless..... it’s Sony with a decided lack of competition..... let’s see what happens when Nikon and Canon enter the fray..... Nikon seems to be coming into the battle with a new mount (more lens incompatibility), and I would not be surprised in the least if Canon came in with an EF Mount (140,000,000 lenses in the field) and even using the same old LP-E6 battery. Show me another camera maker where they have kept the same battery over so many cameras and so many years!


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 16, 2018)

Random Orbits said:


> Unfortunately, what questions you ask in marketing affects the answers you get. Hopefully Canon asked enough of the right ones early enough.



When it comes to the DSLR market they have majored on asking them what would make the camera more enjoyable to use and improve their workflow (whereas Sony have majored on flashy functions). 
You can argue how closely the requirements of a pro match the requirements of the general market but it seems to have worked. Whether that same logic will apply to mirrorless we will have to see.


----------



## tmroper (Jan 16, 2018)

hne said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > hne said:
> ...



And don't forget the Contax G series. That's a 35mm rangefinder system with very small and very good lenses (by Zeiss) that also have auto focus (however rudimentary). The 45mm f2 is very, very highly regarded, and the thing is pretty small and lightweight. I used to figure the Leicas and other RF lenses like them were small because of no AF. But the Contax proves that wrong. Now, maybe to have modern, very fast and accurate AF for FF does require a larger lens. But I'm not so sure...


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > Unfortunately, what questions you ask in marketing affects the answers you get. Hopefully Canon asked enough of the right ones early enough.
> ...



And Canon has developed a mirrorless lineup (M series) while maintaining it's profitability, which is no easy feat. Companies that face declining market share/margins are more desperate, and they do riskier things. Sometimes it works (Sony), other times, the company goes out of business. It is hard to keep a company profitable in a competitive market, but it is very easy for management to ruin companies. When the original M first came out, it was ridiculed as a powershot with a removable lens, which it was. Even the Nikon 1 system won higher praise. And now, the Nikon 1 system is basically dead, and Canon has learned from its mistakes and the M series now have really good cameras.

And in hindsight, it would have been nice if Canon got a bunch of pros in the office with a Sony A7 or A7R a few years ago, and asked them what they liked about the mirrorless technology. Low light AF -- DSLRs win, but for tracking eyes or objects, mirrorless can win because they have a lot more AF points. I'm not surprised that Canon asks its target audience for input, I just wish it was initiated earlier when many of us could see the threat that Sony projected years ago.

The original M was a mis-step. They got it right for Japan, but not worldwide. I got the original M for about 300. I just sold it for about 150, and I kept the 22 f/2 lens, so I didn't lose much on it at all. M2 wasn't sold in the USA, and M3 arrived late. I just replaced the M1 and M3 with the M5, and I really like it. It's the first time that the M felt like a Rebel replacement. For a 1 or 5 series replacement, they have to get the design right the first time, and it needs to be better than the existing DSLR technology. Not easy to do, but I think Canon now has most of the pieces in place.

I think that Canon's first FF mirrorless offering should be EF mount to shore up the markets using 6D, 5D and 1D series. Once that is done, they can release a smaller FF mirrorless with a new mount with only a few lenses (a la EF-M) and have an adapter bridge to the rest of the EF family of lenses.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jan 17, 2018)

brad-man said:


> johnf3f said:
> 
> 
> > brad-man said:
> ...



I see what you are getting at! 

Well I have never been accused of being normal 8)


----------



## TAF (Jan 20, 2018)

scyrene said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > Aaron D said:
> ...




It is something of a derived value.

According to the text books (anatomy and forensics), humans are (statistically speaking) proportional. So in general, you will find that people who are tall will have large hands and feet, while those who are short will have smaller hands and feet. Yes, there are exceptions, but broadly speaking, that is what you find.

This URL is the average height by country for adult males and females:

http://www.wecare4eyes.com/averageemployeeheights.htm

So folks in Asia are a bit shorter than those of us in the West, and thus have smaller hands. Ergo, it is not unreasonable to assume they would prefer smaller cameras.

However, having said that, finger length does not track so cleanly:
http://www.handresearch.com/diagnostics/finger-length-around-the-world-international-populations.htm

While hand span does seem to:
http://www.smallpianokeyboards.org/hand-span-data.html

All of which further complicates things. Narrow hands with long fingers will find one layout appealing, while wider hands with short(er) fingers will prefer something else. And how far your fingers will spread will of course also affect how you like your grip.

All of which again is going to result in different populations preferring different size cameras.

I am certain that Canon has in house research detailing all of this, which no doubt factors into their designs.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 21, 2018)

Whether you want a big, medium or small camera is not just about hand size. It has a lot to do with how and when you use and carry your camera. I have small hands and can easily hold and use the M5. But I also owned the 6D for years and had no trouble holding and using that camera. But, in the end, I sold it. Mainly, the weight became far more important than the size -especially when carrying a bag with camera and two or three lenses for extended periods of time. For me, weight is still far more important than size. I also found that most times I had the camera, I also had my dog on a leash. So, with just the camera and attached lens, the 6D was far to big, heavy and cumbersome to take with me. I also own a hip camera bag that can hold an M5 or my Olympus E-M1, but would not be big enough for a FF DSLR. As this is the most convenient bag I own for taking the camera and the dog, it plays a part in deciding what size camera I would be looking at getting. Hand size ends up having little or nothing to do with it.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 23, 2018)

Way late to the party!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 23, 2018)

djack41 said:


> Way late to the party!



Doesn't matter, the party won't start until they get there!


----------



## Tugela (Jan 30, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> frankenbeans said:
> 
> 
> > 4K video
> ...



That is why no new cameras include 4K video any more. Only HD.


----------



## Tugela (Jan 30, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> Canon is so far behind at this point they should just keep making DSLR's and focus on quality lenses. If you want mirrorless buy a Sony and use Canon glass. Or if you don't care about FF go with Fuji. I've used Canon for the duration of my 40 years in journalism. Went through the the change from FD to EOS and took a beating. I had 18 lenses and six camera bodies. I have 4 M5s in addition to a couple DSLR I can use when shooting sports. I use the M5 75% of the time. But basically the 22 EF-M is the only modern Canon lens I use. I have several of the other EF-m lenses, but I use Rokinons, and Canon FD lenses most of the time because I need something faster than f6.3.



They don't have a choice. Cameras are going the way of an integrated computer/imaging system, and to make full use of that potential you need to be mirrorless.


----------



## Tugela (Jan 30, 2018)

Sithaputh said:


> #### Canon ####
> 
> I hope you are reading this.
> 
> ...



A lot of that is not possible without a high performance thermally efficient processor. So far Canon appear to be way behind the competition in that regard, so don't expect anything cutting edge from them. If they do make a FF mirrorless, it will likely be very conservative in specs based on the capabilities of current DIGIC processors.


----------



## Tugela (Jan 30, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > I was hoping that they would have been asking these questions a couple years ago. This means that a pro mirrorless camera is still years away.
> ...



BCN is 50% of Japan, not worldwide. 

When it comes to FF offerings (where the high margins are) Canon has zero presence. All of their products in that market segment are DSLRs, which are rapidly falling in overall sales volumes. MILCs on the other hand are slowly picking up in volume. The writing is on the wall, those trends are NOT going to reverse.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 30, 2018)

Tugela said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > frankenbeans said:
> ...



: Did you seriously not even read the second paragraph? 

For low and mid level video cameras there are specs far more important and relevant to those users than 4k. That doesn't mean everybody doesn't 'want it' on every visual recording device from phones on up, just that people who are serious about actually using video features want other bullet points crossed off first.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 30, 2018)

Tugela said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Random Orbits said:
> ...



Thom Hogan, who's data are generally reliable, indicated that Canon is #2 in MILCs globally. Given that only Sony (and Leica, in essentially irrelevant numbers) sell FF MILC, it's evident that FF is niche segment of the MILC market.


----------



## Talys (Jan 30, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > When it comes to FF offerings (where the high margins are) Canon has zero presence. All of their products in that market segment are DSLRs, which are rapidly falling in overall sales volumes. MILCs on the other hand are slowly picking up in volume. The writing is on the wall, those trends are NOT going to reverse.
> ...



I will bet dollars to donuts that M5 and M6 are extremely profitable cameras. Those things are $1,000+ kits.

Also, the economies of scale are a lot better for APSC than full frame. Regardless of brand, APSC cameras are cheaper to make because they make a lot more of them than FF's.


----------



## MayaTlab (Jan 31, 2018)

Talys said:


> I will bet dollars to donuts that M5 and M6 are extremely profitable cameras.



That may be profitable, but at least in France or Germany they are very, very poor sellers. Shops have started to stop stocking them, they're now special order items in various shops in both countries. An example ("sur commande" means "special order") in the photo linked.

The M5/M6 were also heavily discounted here recently, while the 80D wasn't. 

Same applies to the 5DS / 5DSR.

That same shop stocks other comparable mirrorless models from other manufacturers. 

I have very little doubt though that the story is different in the rest of the world. 

So at least where I live the M5 isn't drawing much attention. The recipe didn't work. My guess is that quite a lot of it has to do with the EF-M lens lineup.


----------



## Azathoth (Jan 31, 2018)

- 5DmkIV sensor
- DPAF that works like on the M5
- EF mount
- Flippy tilty screen
- Decent built in EVF
- Weather sealing
- Focus peaking
- Decent battery life similiar to the A9/A7riii
- Could have a Body similar to the M5
- Decent price ? 

PS:
- No need for video


----------



## Talys (Feb 4, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > I will bet dollars to donuts that M5 and M6 are extremely profitable cameras.
> ...



Wow, really? M5/M6 are good sellers here. Every camera store has them.

I'm not quete sure I get it though. If Canon is the #2 MILC manufacturer, are not most of those sales of M5/M6?


----------



## MayaTlab (Feb 4, 2018)

Talys said:


> MayaTlab said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



Europe and America aren't a huge part of mirrorless sales, so I guess that it's entirely possible for Canon to still be able to claim the second spot. Besides I only commented on France and Germany, because that's what I know. 

But yep. Stores such as Digit-photo.fr are basically the French equivalent to Adorama : specialised, reasonably high volume shops. If a camera is a special order, it's because it sells sufficiently poorly that they don't want to stock it. In Germany the M5 has recently had a big price cut to help sales. It's now available for €700 or so, vs. €950 or so for the 80D. These are fairly good indications that the Canon M5 simply isn't flying off the shelves in these countries. 

Why, I don't know. The lens lineup could be a problem. There is a lack of well-balanced primes (think : Fuji F2 lineup, which is a major seller), for example. But then it isn't exactly like the EF APSC DSLRs are endowed with a good lens lineup either, so... my gut feeling is that something else is lacking. 

My guess is that a repeat of the M5, but just with a larger sensor, may not work here in France or Germany. Even using the EF mount may not provide sufficient relief when it comes to lenses, as, for example, the most popular primes (middle range 50s and 85s), which also are in terms of size and weight the most relevant ones for a more compact mirrorless camera, aren't exactly stellar in Canon's lineup.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 4, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> So at least where I live the M5 isn't drawing much attention. The recipe didn't work. My guess is that quite a lot of it has to do with the EF-M lens lineup.



Given the vast majority of ILC camera buyers never get a second lens (and even fewer buy more than two), I'm not sure that is likely.


----------

