# Canon’s EOS-1D X Mark II equivalent mirrorless is coming sooner than originally thought [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 24, 2019)

> We have been told that Canon has “accelerated” development of the “pro” level EOS R camera, and we’re not talking about the high-resolution model that we expect to see in late 2019 or early 2020.
> This new camera will be along the lines of a mirrorless version of the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (or III).
> The source also mentioned that it is possible this camera could be announced alongside the EOS-1D X Mark III in the first or second quarter of 2020. Though the date of the announcement is a long way from being decided.
> Announcing these two cameras together would be a unique move for Canon, and while I think it’s possible, I suspect we’ll see a development announcement for the EOS-1R X (as I feel like calling it) well before the actual camera ships.
> An EOS R professional body with some new...



Continue reading...


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jun 24, 2019)

So, is that effectively also confirmation that we will be seeing a 1DX Mark III then? (I didn't have too much doubt, but many seem to have done).

The R-equivalent could be very interesting - particularly how they get it to mimic the qualities of the existing 1DX line.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 24, 2019)

StoicalEtcher said:


> So, is that effectively also confirmation that we will be seeing a 1DX Mark III then? (I didn't have too much doubt, but many seem to have done).
> 
> The R-equivalent could be very interesting - particularly how they get it to mimic the qualities of the existing 1DX line.



We'll absolutely get an EOS-1D X Mark III. Professionals that live by the EOS-1D series of cameras will be the last to move to mirrorless in my opinion.


----------



## ozturert (Jun 24, 2019)

A fast professional R body will require professional R lenses (especially telephoto). 70-200mm f2.8 will be there, what about others? I'll not but a fast and strong EOS R if I have to use adapters.
Or maybe Canon has a plan to release 1-2 L more telephoto lenses?
We probably will have 24-70 and 15-35 f2.8L so I don't see huge problems there.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 24, 2019)

Exciting!! 

(Not that I’ll ever, ever, in a millions years, be able to afford it)


----------



## navastronia (Jun 24, 2019)

Oh hell yeah


----------



## Chaitanya (Jun 24, 2019)

Will it have DPAF though? I suspect data generated by dpaf might be the reason why so far cameras are slow at continuous af.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 24, 2019)

ozturert said:


> A fast professional R body will require professional R lenses (especially telephoto). 70-200mm f2.8 will be there, what about others?...



Not really. Most professionals will be using this alongside their DSLRs. The adapters work fine and unless and until you are ready to dump all DSLRs (which is a long ways away for most pros) it's likely that R lens sales will be limited to a few key lenses.


----------



## navastronia (Jun 24, 2019)

Chaitanya said:


> Will it have DPAF though? I suspect data generated by dpaf might be the reason why so far cameras are slow at continuous af.



A 1-DX equivalent mirrorless will not underperform in either autofocus speed or accuracy. If DPAF data is the issue, then Canon will either 1) have innovated beyond DPAF, circumventing the problem or 2) will have increased processor throughput to handle the data.


----------



## ozturert (Jun 24, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Not really. Most professionals will be using this alongside their DSLRs. The adapters work fine and unless and until you are ready to dump all DSLRs (which is a long ways away for most pros) it's likely that R lens sales will be limited to a few key lenses.


If I buy a tough body like 1DX, I want it to work under every condition. An adapter is a liability. You won't understand this if you don't push your kit to its limits.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 24, 2019)

ozturert said:


> If I buy a tough body like 1DX, I want it to work under every condition. An adapter is a liability. You won't understand this if you don't push your kit to its limits.


I’m quite happy to use unsealed lenses and extension tubes on my 1DX MkII’s without concern. The 12mm tube gives the superteles much closer focusing and I use the 50 f1.4 a lot and the 35 f2 almost constantly on occasions, nobody ever said I was easy on my gear, I expect it to work reliably whenever and wherever I want it to.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jun 24, 2019)

ozturert said:


> A fast professional R body will require professional R lenses (especially telephoto). 70-200mm f2.8 will be there, what about others? I'll not but a fast and strong EOS R if I have to use adapters.
> Or maybe Canon has a plan to release 1-2 L more telephoto lenses?
> We probably will have 24-70 and 15-35 f2.8L so I don't see huge problems there.



The holy trinity lenses will be there in time for this body. You'll also have an 85 and 50 1.2 and a 35 1.8, all RF mount. Short of supertelephotos/teleconverters that covers every major category of lens reasonably well from 15 - 200mm and wide/medium/short tele fixed, though a 24 1.4 (or perhaps 1.2?) is a bit of a gap for some people.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jun 24, 2019)

Also in terms of the adapter being a liability, I don't see it that way IF you have it semi-permanently attached to a single EF lens. Right now that's essentially how I'm using it, as I have an EF 16 - 35 f/4 on most of the time when walking around, with the RF 24 - 105 and 50's in the bag as well - so the adapter stays with the lens, not the body. Usually if I have the 70 - 200 on the camera that's all I'm shooting (along with swapping out teleconverters), and I have the Sigma 28mm f/1.4 and Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS but I would not be swapping those in the elements, only indoors/in-studio (sometimes I walk around with one or the other but am not swapping). If I wanted to do otherwise I could purchase a 2nd adapter.


----------



## ozturert (Jun 24, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I’m quite happy to use unsealed lenses and extension tubes on my 1DX MkII’s without concern. The 12mm tube gives the superteles much closer focusing and I use the 50 f1.4 a lot and the 35 f2 almost constantly on occasions, nobody ever said I was easy on my gear, I expect it to work reliably whenever and wherever I want it to.


You use tubes only when you need to and 1D series are mostly used for action. If you wnat to use tubes, you can very well go with EOS R which has more MP anyway.
RF mount needs L telephoto lenses (1 or 2) before EOS RX (or what ever it'll be called).


----------



## ozturert (Jun 24, 2019)

twoheadedboy said:


> The holy trinity lenses will be there in time for this body. You'll also have an 85 and 50 1.2 and a 35 1.8, all RF mount. Short of supertelephotos/teleconverters that covers every major category of lens reasonably well from 15 - 200mm and wide/medium/short tele fixed, though a 24 1.4 (or perhaps 1.2?) is a bit of a gap for some people.


I agree with lenses below 200mm (and I said the same thing in my original post). I'm talking about 300mm+ .


----------



## ozturert (Jun 24, 2019)

twoheadedboy said:


> Also in terms of the adapter being a liability, I don't see it that way IF you have it semi-permanently attached to a single EF lens. Right now that's essentially how I'm using it, as I have an EF 16 - 35 f/4 on most of the time when walking around, with the RF 24 - 105 and 50's in the bag as well - so the adapter stays with the lens, not the body. Usually if I have the 70 - 200 on the camera that's all I'm shooting (along with swapping out teleconverters), and I have the Sigma 28mm f/1.4 and Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS but I would not be swapping those in the elements, only indoors/in-studio (sometimes I walk around with one or the other but am not swapping). If I wanted to do otherwise I could purchase a 2nd adapter.


Now go and use that same setup in mud, in desert, put your lenses with your camera in your bag and take them out of the bag etc.. With adapter, you have 1 more place for dirt/dust etc.. to come in and 2 more connections for failure. Professional 1Dx users want reliability. I'm not saying you CANNOT use adapter, I say it is a liability for 1Dx-user profile.


----------



## criscokkat (Jun 24, 2019)

ozturert said:


> Now go and use that same setup in mud, in desert, put your lenses with your camera in your bag and take them out of the bag etc.. With adapter, you have 1 more place for dirt/dust etc.. to come in and 2 more connections for failure. Professional 1Dx users want reliability. I'm not saying you CANNOT use adapter, I say it is a liability for 1Dx-user profile.


At 200 each, it's also easy to leave it permanently attached for an R for a lot of professionals. Yes it's a potential point of failure but if you have 2-3 different lenses with the adapter mounted you can quickly swap a flaky adapter to another one. I really think it's pretty much a non issue in action. You are much more likely to have an issue within a lens than just with the adapter.


----------



## nickorando (Jun 24, 2019)

Like I've said before, I believe the 1DX III will be out for the Rugby World Cup in Japan in September, the R Pro for the Olympics in Japan next year.


----------



## nickorando (Jun 24, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> At 200 each, it's also easy to leave it permanently attached for an R for a lot of professionals. Yes it's a potential point of failure but if you have 2-3 different lenses with the adapter mounted you can quickly swap a flaky adapter to another one. I really think it's pretty much a non issue in action. You are much more likely to have an issue within a lens than just with the adapter.


Yeah, and it's not as though there are any mechanical couplings to fail, either.


----------



## PhotoGenerous (Jun 24, 2019)

In regards to lenses, isn't the rumor for eight lenses to be released next year? I don't think it's out of the question for a 300mm+ lens to be released.


----------



## djack41 (Jun 24, 2019)

I shoot a 1DX2 for wildlife and will definitely make the jump to the mirrorless counter-part provided it offers an AF that equals the competition, a super fast FR with a generous buffer while shooting in silent mode, and a lag-free EV. A little better DR and ISO performance would be nice.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 24, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



I just hope Canon doesn't rush out a half baked idea that was put out just to say they have one. I would rather see a later truly pro camera that puts the competition back to the stone age as the EOS system did 30+ years ago. It has taken this long for the competition to catch up to the EOS and now an incremental lame introduction just is not going to impress. It must be hyper fast, full frame 8K at 120p with no crop or line skipping as Nikon and Sony do to make the FF claim. In other words skip the lame 4K, that train has left the station, move on to a blow them away 8K that is not dumbed down and the still frame rate is second to none by a good margin. No rolling shutter issues either. Minimum stills at 50 MP for this camera and DR at 25 stops. Canon has all these capabilities now they just refuse to incorporate them into their regular camera lines.


----------



## BeenThere (Jun 24, 2019)

It’s a rumor! Seems to soon given the current state of R cameras.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jun 24, 2019)

I am glad I don't yet have the money for the 200-400 that keeps whispering dark secrets to me, all this EF to RF business is causing a lot of uncertainty that if I go and buy the EF 200-400 and 1Dx mark ? body to go with it, will it just be obsolete soon. My EF 300mm F2.8 is pushing 30 years, my next big white I am wanting some good years out of it too.


----------



## tmc784 (Jun 24, 2019)

1DX2 body $6,000.00+ ?


----------



## deleteme (Jun 24, 2019)

ozturert said:


> If I buy a tough body like 1DX, I want it to work under every condition. An adapter is a liability. You won't understand this if you don't push your kit to its limits.


A TC is exactly an adapter that pros use without a second thought today.
Moreover, "pushing to the limits" for these sports and wildlife pros means high frame rates while firmly locked down on a tripod.
We are not talking combat photography here.


----------



## edoorn (Jun 24, 2019)

I shall have the RX and RF 400 2.8 with that new 1.4/2.0 extender, thank you. Please let me know where my kidney needs to be shipped to.


----------



## deleteme (Jun 24, 2019)

If Canon is rushing a 1Dx class mirrorless to market it is a signal to the market that it is serious. This is a halo product just as the 28-70 f2 and the 50 f1.2.
The real truth is this product is not where they make their money. The volumes are small and likely the majority sold to enthusiasts.

The real money maker will be a brace of 5Dxx mirrorless bodies. This is a profit maximizing segment where volume and margins create the profits they need.
However I can see why they want to bring out the flagship to maximize the PR attention of the Olympics. This also allows them to spend more time on the midrange to ensure they have the features and performance the market wants while avoiding missteps like the function bar.


----------



## 6degrees (Jun 24, 2019)

The issue is: how much?

I think most people will be interested in a7riii equivalent, not interested in a9 equivalent.

a7riii equivalent + RF 85mm F1.2L or RF 50mm F1.2L or RF 28-70 F2 are enough to beat Sony alpha.

Need to watch the price. Sony 24mm F1.4 GM already started a price war.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 24, 2019)

djack41 said:


> I shoot a 1DX2 for wildlife and will definitely make the jump to the mirrorless counter-part provided it offers an AF that equals the competition, a super fast FR with a generous buffer while shooting in silent mode, and a lag-free EV. A little better DR and ISO performance would be nice.


And one that can be on all the time for instant response without draining the battery and also cope with staring through the evf.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 24, 2019)

djack41 said:


> I shoot a 1DX2 for wildlife and will definitely make the jump to the mirrorless counter-part provided it offers an AF that equals the competition, a super fast FR with a generous buffer while shooting in silent mode, and a lag-free EV. A little better DR and ISO performance would be nice.



At this point Canon cannot just equal the competition. It must excel and beat the competition demonstrably. Otherwise they are just playing catch-up and the next sonikon will just leave it in the dust playing perpetual catch-up.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 24, 2019)

What's the history of 1D and 5D releases proceeding/following each other?


----------



## ethanz (Jun 24, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> What's the history of 1D and 5D releases proceeding/following each other?



Hasn't it been for the last two release cycles that 1D is first then 5D comes six months later?

(See Jack, I'm still here)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 24, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> No. The TC's are weather sealed to the same level as the body and sealed lenses. The adapters do not have sealing on them so far.


Do you have an RF mount adapter? If so, unfortunately for you it seems your adapter is a counterfeit knock-off.

My EF-EOS R mount adapter has the mount gasket typical of a weather-sealed lens, and Canon describes the adapter as follows:


> With a stylish design that matches the EF and EF-S lens look and a sturdy, *dust- and water-resistant construction*, the Mount Adapter EF-EOS R makes it easy to adapt to more lens choices and possibilities.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 24, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Do you have a mount adapter? If so, unfortunately for you it seems your adapter is a counterfeit knock-off.
> 
> My EF-EOS R mount adapter has the mount gasket typical of a weather-sealed lens, and Canon describes the adapter as follows:


I happily profess to have made a mistake. I did use one but relatively briefly and I didn't notice it. Thanks for the correction.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 24, 2019)

Codebunny said:


> I am glad I don't yet have the money for the 200-400 that keeps whispering dark secrets to me, all this EF to RF business is causing a lot of uncertainty that if I go and buy the EF 200-400 and 1Dx mark ? body to go with it, will it just be obsolete soon. My EF 300mm F2.8 is pushing 30 years, my next big white I am wanting some good years out of it too.



They won't be obsolete until you wear them out.


----------



## Del Paso (Jun 24, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> They won't be obsolete until you wear them out.


Canon lenses never die, they just grow wiser!


----------



## Dragon (Jun 24, 2019)

Hard to believe that such a camera wouldn't be available for the Olympics so Pros can have a choice between SLR and Mirrorless both from Canon. Personally, I'm looking forward to the High Res version as a likely successor to my 5DSR (dual pixel would be nice at that resolution).


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 24, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> Canon lenses never die, they just grow wiser!


The white ones fade badly...


----------



## AlanF (Jun 24, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> The white ones fade badly...


And grow heavier.


----------



## ozturert (Jun 24, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> At 200 each, it's also easy to leave it permanently attached for an R for a lot of professionals. Yes it's a potential point of failure but if you have 2-3 different lenses with the adapter mounted you can quickly swap a flaky adapter to another one. I really think it's pretty much a non issue in action. You are much more likely to have an issue within a lens than just with the adapter.


You leave the adapter attached to the lens, and this will eliminate the additional mount/interface issue?
Maybe I cannot make myself clear: 1Dx is not only about speed, ergonomy and high Iso, it is also about reliability under harsh conditions. Leaving the adapter attached to the lens doesn't have anything to do with it. There is still one more connection that may fail/break. No sane photographer will use that combination at Olympics or in desert or ...


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jun 24, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> The white ones fade badly...



My 300 f2.8 non IS still has most of its paint after all this time.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jun 24, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> They won't be obsolete until you wear them out.


Well I might spend £10,000 on a lens and £5000 on a body then £600 on a memory card and then next week a RF 200-500 F4.0 comes out or the EOS RX comes out and it does all the FPS and focus and now my EF lens is forever mounted by adaptor.


----------



## ozturert (Jun 24, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> A TC is exactly an adapter that pros use without a second thought today.
> Moreover, "pushing to the limits" for these sports and wildlife pros means high frame rates while firmly locked down on a tripod.
> We are not talking combat photography here.


No it isn't, and it is. A TC is a must sometimes. And if you need to use TC with the adapter? Ask sports photographers if they want to use adapted lenses, and see their reaction 
1Dx is a workhorse, Canikon don't even have rotating mode dial because rotating dials might be prone to failure (low probability but it is there).


----------



## Dantana (Jun 24, 2019)

AlanF said:


> And grow heavier.


I feel better now. I thought that was just me getting older.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 24, 2019)

ozturert said:


> There is still one more connection that may fail/break. No sane photographer will use that combination at Olympics or in desert or ...


So you’re saying that no sane photographer uses a teleconverter? Sell crazy somewhere else, we’re all full up here...


----------



## Danglin52 (Jun 24, 2019)

twoheadedboy said:


> The holy trinity lenses will be there in time for this body. You'll also have an 85 and 50 1.2 and a 35 1.8, all RF mount. Short of supertelephotos/teleconverters that covers every major category of lens reasonably well from 15 - 200mm and wide/medium/short tele fixed, though a 24 1.4 (or perhaps 1.2?) is a bit of a gap for some people.


You will also need the 100-400 in addition to the trinity. As a wildlife shooter,, that makes my trinity more than the 16-35. The other big issue for most pros will be battery life and endurance in harsh environments.


----------



## Adrianf (Jun 24, 2019)

A significant proportion of 1DXii owners are wildlife photographers. I just hope that Canon's mirrorless long-lens focusing on distant small randomly-shaped subjects is up to it.


----------



## edoorn (Jun 24, 2019)

Well, the R doesnt do too bad with an adapted 100-400 or 500 ii (even with 1.4 extender)


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jun 24, 2019)

The Olympic Games at home in Tokyo is THE opportunity for Canon for the next ~50 years, before they get again this event. They will absolutely do everything to present the best of the best until then. How can you have doubts for that? Then maybe a long sleep can begin....
So this means of course a 1DX 3 and very propably a RF pendant for it (named RX?) and a high megapixel (named RS?) along with the most used Lenses there...

After 2020 it is interesting, what product line they support more...


----------



## Larsskv (Jun 24, 2019)

AlanF said:


> And one that can be on all the time for instant response without draining the battery and also cope with staring through the evf.



I believe the biggest problem Canon has when it comes to a pro RF body/1DXII replacement, is the viewfinder. The EOS R is supposed to have one of the best EVFs on the market, but to tell you the truth, I hate using it in sunlight, not to mention snow and sun at the same time. For that reason alone I have kept my DSLR and EF lenses, along with my EOS R and RF lenses. If I had to choose one system today, it would be the DSLR, due to the OVF alone. 

The R and it’s EVF has it’s advantages over OVFs in indoor lighting conditions, but overall, I much prefer the OVF.


----------



## navastronia (Jun 24, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> I believe the biggest problem Canon has when it comes to a pro RF body/1DXII replacement, is the viewfinder. The EOS R is supposed to have one of the best EVFs on the market, but to tell you the truth, I hate using it in sunlight, not to mention snow and sun at the same time. For that reason alone I have kept my DSLR and EF lenses, along with my EOS R and RF lenses. If I had to choose one system today, it would be the DSLR, due to the OVF alone.
> 
> The R and it’s EVF has it’s advantages over OVFs in indoor lighting conditions, but overall, I much prefer the OVF.



I for one say "bring on the giant battery that will allow my high-quality EVF to run all day"


----------



## vjlex (Jun 24, 2019)

I suspected just like the R came out of nowhere and surprised everybody, the 5D and/or 1D mirrorless equivalent would be similarly kept under wraps. Of course, this is still just a rumor, but Canon's proved to me they can keep a secret when they really want to.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jun 24, 2019)

All I can say is that as usual expectations are way to high leaving us with page after page of gnashing of teeth when it does arrive. Then, when the dust settles it'll be .... just another solid Canon performer. I hope I'm wrong in my restraint.

As others have said, I think the viewfinder is a the sticking point, as well as battery life. It must be great in all circumstances, otherwise the other advantages tend to pale unless it's strictly a second camera. My daughter used my R and it's hers now, but shooting together, clearly she was battery disadvantaged. RX must have a super battery.

Jack


----------



## HarryFilm (Jun 24, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> All I can say is that as usual expectations are way to high leaving us with page after page of gnashing of teeth when it does arrive. Then, when the dust settles it'll be .... just another solid Canon performer. I hope I'm wrong in my restraint.
> 
> As others have said, I think the viewfinder is a the sticking point, as well as battery life. It must be great in all circumstances, otherwise the other advantages tend to pale unless it's strictly a second camera. My daughter used my R and it's hers now, but shooting together, clearly she was battery disadvantaged. RX must have a super battery.
> 
> Jack



===

Meh! :\)

Where's the 4:3 aspect ratio, 8192 x 6144 pixel (50.3 Megapixel) 60 fps DCI 8K RAW + InterFrame/Intraframe compressed 16-bits per colour channel video AND STILLS, 6.7+ microns per photosite, 56mm x 42mm MF low-noise, high sensitivity image sensor camera with built-in hot-swappable, TWO of multi-terabyte (4 TB each!) SSD hard drives AND rotatable OLED flip screen , built-in high pixel count OLED viewfinder AND swivelling perfectly-form-fitting, sculpted and non-slip, textured hand-grip AND a super-high capacity ALL-DAY Battery (8+ hours video and many thousands of stills) ???

When is THAT type of camera coming from you Canon? 

Ooooooooh It's coming ........ and soooner than you think !!!!!

.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 24, 2019)

I’ve had the opportunity to own the Panasonic S1R for the past few months. The viewfinder and the monitor on that are spectacular. It changed my opinion about how I can tolerate in OVF. It blew the Canon R’s out of the water, and it was no slouch for a mirrorless camera. 

I’m sure the flagship releases coming from Sony and Canon will use tech such as these. 

The real question in my mind is whether or not Canon is capable of putting together a camera that does high frames per second while also doing all of the various calculations that are typically seen as an advantage with a mirrorless camera. 

I will be much relieved if I see a very high FPS number along with an adequate megapixels number. My Sony A9 does 20 frames per second at 24 megapixels. Those 24 megapixels seem closer to the 5D Mark four’s 30 megapixels, because the A9 doesn’t have an AA filter. 

I would like to see a 1D version of the mirrorless camera do something between 28 and 30 mp. My current expectation is that this will not happen, that Canon will help resolve its throughput issue by not improving the 20 mp resolution beyond 24mp. 

I am excited to see what the new flagships are going to be both for Sony and for Canon. 





Larsskv said:


> I believe the biggest problem Canon has when it comes to a pro RF body/1DXII replacement, is the viewfinder. The EOS R is supposed to have one of the best EVFs on the market, but to tell you the truth, I hate using it in sunlight, not to mention snow and sun at the same time. For that reason alone I have kept my DSLR and EF lenses, along with my EOS R and RF lenses. If I had to choose one system today, it would be the DSLR, due to the OVF alone.
> 
> The R and it’s EVF has it’s advantages over OVFs in indoor lighting conditions, but overall, I much prefer the OVF.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jun 24, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> ===
> 
> Meh! :\)
> 
> ...


WOW, wouldn't that be amazing! BTW, what's your track record on predictions - can you offer us a % figure?



Jack


----------



## juststeve (Jun 24, 2019)

I wonder if the next "pro" camera will be more along the lines of a souped up mirrorless 5Div. Something more along the lines of a Nikon 850 at about the same pixel count, slightly more or slightly less, and 8-9 fps and dual or even quad pixel. This would give the 8000 plus horizontal pixels for high quality 4-binned pixel 4K video. 

This would be the ideal sidekick camera to a 1DXiii able to work with the same lenses and provide fallback in case of a failure, plus give access to some superb RX lenses at the shorter focal lengths. Also, this would be more the general pro camera for nearly everything not needing bombproof construction and 12-16 fps. If I were working high end sports, NFL, NBA, NHL, Olympics I would be very happy with this combo, 1DXiii and 400/2.8 and converters, super R with RF 70-200/2.8, RF 24-70/2.8 and perhaps a 15-35/2.8 for just in case. I kinda like that combo for wildlife and general nature work, too.


----------



## TAF (Jun 24, 2019)

navastronia said:


> I for one say "bring on the giant battery that will allow my high-quality EVF to run all day"



How many here are old enough to remember the battery case on your belt for the MF motor drive?

It is a viable solution, albeit not one the youngsters would like.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 25, 2019)

ozturert said:


> You leave the adapter attached to the lens, and this will eliminate the additional mount/interface issue?
> Maybe I cannot make myself clear: 1Dx is not only about speed, ergonomy and high Iso, it is also about reliability under harsh conditions. Leaving the adapter attached to the lens doesn't have anything to do with it. There is still one more connection that may fail/break. No sane photographer will use that combination at Olympics or in desert or ...


Yes, but we are not dealing with sane photographers, we are dealing with forum members


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jun 25, 2019)

juststeve said:


> I wonder if the next "pro" camera will be more along the lines of a souped up mirrorless 5Div. Something more along the lines of a Nikon 850 at about the same pixel count, slightly more or slightly less, and 8-9 fps and dual or even quad pixel. This would give the 8000 plus horizontal pixels for high quality 4-binned pixel 4K video.
> 
> This would be the ideal sidekick camera to a 1DXiii able to work with the same lenses and provide fallback in case of a failure, plus give access to some superb RX lenses at the shorter focal lengths. Also, this would be more the general pro camera for nearly everything not needing bombproof construction and 12-16 fps. If I were working high end sports, NFL, NBA, NHL, Olympics I would be very happy with this combo, 1DXiii and 400/2.8 and converters, super R with RF 70-200/2.8, RF 24-70/2.8 and perhaps a 15-35/2.8 for just in case. I kinda like that combo for wildlife and general nature work, too.



Here is my personal opinion for me relative to this comment. I really don't like the idea of being forced to carry two camera bodies. Also, living in the 14 FPS realm for a couple years ... the other day I forgot to change cards and was at 12 and wondered, what is wrong! People say, just anticipate the moment but human reaction times just don't align with that being a great solution and, while there is a sane limit to what is needed for FPS, I would not be happy with less than 14. Here is a mundane shots that kind of illustrates how 14 FPS helps in capturing a moment.

Jack


----------



## unfocused (Jun 25, 2019)

ozturert said:


> Ask sports photographers if they want to use adapted lenses, and see their reaction ...



Thanks for asking. I'm only a sample size of one sports photographer, but I don't mind using an adapted lens at all. I'd choose that over having to buy and carry duplicate lenses any day of the week. Of course, I would only use the Canon adapter with Canon lenses. And, realistically, since I won't be giving up the 1DX II, 5DIV or even the 7DII anytime soon, I'm much more likely to continue to buy EF lenses and adapt them for the R.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jun 25, 2019)

Without the need for a mirror flopping around, why shouldn't the R series action camera be capable of 24 FPS, full resolution, or even 30 FPS?


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jun 25, 2019)

ozturert said:


> A fast professional R body will require professional R lenses (especially telephoto). 70-200mm f2.8 will be there, what about others? I'll not but a fast and strong EOS R if I have to use adapters.
> Or maybe Canon has a plan to release 1-2 L more telephoto lenses?
> We probably will have 24-70 and 15-35 f2.8L so I don't see huge problems there.



No .. it won't require RF lenses. Any RF lenses would be an added benefit, but even the EOS R presently functions near-perfect with EF glass. The only slight downside would be an extra RF to EF adapter. But on the other hand, Adapting EF glass to a 1DX mirrorless would allow the variable ND filter adapter which would be an extra benefit to continuing with some EF glass. So both options should be very useful options.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jun 25, 2019)

About extenders and other adapters, like other things in life, there are purists who would never place a X1.4 on their lens. They are usually quite vocal about such things and of course they have a point ... to a point. 

My feeling is that folk who are so "picky" (my view of it only) actually miss out on opportunities in life but it's a very personal thing. I'm a perfectionist who regularly lapses into significant imperfection because I've come to realize that such behaviour can be very counterproductive and stress inducing when all you really want is to have fun while doing a decent job. After all, isn't life about having fun!

Now if you happen to be severely competitive then I guess that's a different story or if you're on the verge of being fired because your work isn't cutting it ... I'm glad I'm not a professional photographer; I'm just having FUN.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jun 25, 2019)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> No .. it won't require RF lenses. Any RF lenses would be an added benefit, but even the EOS R presently functions near-perfect with EF glass. The only slight downside would be an extra RF to EF adapter. But on the other hand, Adapting RF glass to a 1DX mirrorless would allow the variable ND filter adapter which would be an extra benefit.


Oops, isn't it that you only benefit from the ND adapter if you're adapting EF glass to the camera (typo??) That ND is why I bought the R.

Jack


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 25, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Thanks for asking. I'm only a sample size of one sports photographer, but I don't mind using an adapted lens at all. I'd choose that over having to buy and carry duplicate lenses any day of the week. Of course, I would only use the Canon adapter with Canon lenses. And, realistically, since I won't be giving up the 1DX II, 5DIV or even the 7DII anytime soon, I'm much more likely to continue to buy EF lenses and adapt them for the R.


You don't understand. He speaks for all of you action guys.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 25, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> About extenders and other adapters, like other things in life, there are purists who would never place a X1.4 on their lens. They are usually quite vocal about such things and of course they have a point ... to a point.
> 
> My feeling is that folk who are so "picky" (my view of it only) actually miss out on opportunities in life but it's a very personal thing. I'm a perfectionist who regularly lapses into significant imperfection because I've come to realize that such behaviour can be very counterproductive and stress inducing when all you really want is to have fun while doing a decent job. After all, isn't life about having fun!
> 
> ...


The appeal of the RP (even the R), to me, is the low cost and ability to adapt my... cough, cough... obsolete, no good, dirty glass.  I think Canon did the right thing by making an adapter. I don't know about anyone else, but I can't afford to go out and drop $15,000+ on a whole new setup all at once. That's nearly a year's income for me. I imagine that most people are in the same boat, that includes many pros. It seems that most people assume pros are making big bucks. Most probably don't. Enthusiasts like myself probably make up a far larger portion of the market than professionals. Canon knows this, so Canon did it right. Very smart, and I am very thankful. Yes, I could get a 6D Mark II for less than the RP, but I want all the extra focus points.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jun 25, 2019)

I will be the first to be in line if Canon can truly make a 1DXII class mirrorless. However they will be up against a Sony A9II, a Nikon D6 and their own 1DXIII so it'll need to be very good. They need to have a quantum jump in performance over the lacklustre R which will finally mean all new (stacked, global shutter) sensor. I know they have the patents let's hope we see some action. So many of the R's failings come down to the not-for-mirrorless sensor of the 5D4.

By Canon affiliation is hanging by a thread at the moment but I'm prepared to wait and hopefully we get announcemnts before year's end. But make no mistake Sony A9II will be my next camera, but I have no qualms running two systems. I'd love to be able to sell my D500 but Nikon has those PF lenses that at this stage I can't see Canon making equivalents. Interesting 12-18 months coming up.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 25, 2019)

Mr Majestyk said:


> So many of the R's failings come down to the not-for-mirrorless sensor of the 5D4.


Yeah, removing the mirror really doesn't work with that sensor.  Somehow, it knows the mirror is gone.


----------



## slclick (Jun 25, 2019)

Lately CR1's have been generating the same responses as CR3's. I'll withhold conjecture for now.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> ...It seems that most people assume pros are making big bucks. Most probably don't. Enthusiasts like myself probably make up a far larger portion of the market than professionals. Canon knows this, so Canon did it right. Very smart, and I am very thankful...



Slight correction. Most professionals don't make big bucks. There are a handful of well-paid elites and then there are the vast majority who do it for the love of the work and feel lucky to get paid enough to get by. 

The truth is that in today's ever shrinking market, even the elite photographers often end up earning more from workshops, websites, You Tube channels, books, etc., than from their photography.


----------



## amorse (Jun 25, 2019)

slclick said:


> Lately CR1's have been generating the same responses as CR3's. I'll withhold conjecture for now.


Oh, definitely. We need to mind that CR1 big time.

Part of me wonders if this camera is actually related to the rumor of two pro-like cameras coming: one high resolution body and one speed focused body. The CR1 then suggested that neither were a match for the 1Dxii, but one was a "sports focused" camera which would have lower resolution, higher frame rates and sensor advancements. If that's the case, I could see the sports camera being confused for a mirrorless 1Dxii if the rumor came from a different source. 

Either way, hopes and dreams look to be through the roof in here.


----------



## Trey T (Jun 25, 2019)

Sounds more like 7D equivalent, not 1D. 1D guys are not pixel peepers, they are money maker. Even if this new one cost $10K, they’re likely not interested in bringing one that potentially a distraction or a career killer.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 25, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Slight correction. Most professionals don't make big bucks. There are a handful of well-paid elites and then there are the vast majority who do it for the love of the work and feel lucky to get paid enough to get by.
> 
> The truth is that in today's ever shrinking market, even the elite photographers often end up earning more from workshops, websites, You Tube channels, books, etc., than from their photography.


Thanks! I read somewhere that the average take home pay for a professional photographer in the USA is about $34,000. Median is about $45,000, which is not a lot of money. For some reason a lot of people think "Professional" means high pay. Nope. It just means it is how a person makes their primary living. Has nothing to do with highly paid. So people screaming, "Canon has to do this or that to attract "pros" and to stay afloat as a company" really don't know what they are talking about. To me, Canon is far more concerned with attracting well heeled enthusiasts, the gearheads with money. That is the big market and where the profits are. Canon uses the elite Professionals to market to those monied enthusiasts. The adapters are what are going to make or break the RF mount for most people, in my opinion. I hope to get an RP (with adapter and grip extender) around Christmas. RF lenses? That will take a lot of Ramen eating and saving for years. 

https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Professional_Photographer/Salary


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 25, 2019)

Jasonmc89 said:


> (Not that I’ll ever, ever, in a millions years, be able to afford it)



Don’t sell yourself short. If you save just a penny a day you’ll get there with 998,082 years to spare!


----------



## ethanz (Jun 25, 2019)

Bob Howland said:


> Without the need for a mirror flopping around, why shouldn't the R series action camera be capable of 24 FPS, full resolution, or even 30 FPS?



The camera would have to be capable of pushing that many pixels through the sensor to the memory card. That has been a big challenge for Canon. I only see them being able to do it if they have really improved their CPU performance for power or if they just throw a huge battery in to power the extra CPUs, AF, and EVF.


----------



## ethanz (Jun 25, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> Here is a mundane shots that kind of illustrates how 14 FPS helps in capturing a moment.
> 
> Jack


 
Beautiful shot Jack!


----------



## ethanz (Jun 25, 2019)

slclick said:


> Lately CR1's have been generating the same responses as CR3's. I'll withhold conjecture for now.



I think that is because CR3's have been lacking, not many big rumors lately. Us fish are hungry for any nibble we can find.


----------



## deleteme (Jun 25, 2019)

ozturert said:


> No it isn't, and it is. A TC is a must sometimes. And if you need to use TC with the adapter? Ask sports photographers if they want to use adapted lenses, and see their reaction
> 1Dx is a workhorse, Canikon don't even have rotating mode dial because rotating dials might be prone to failure (low probability but it is there).


The real complaint by opponents of adapters is the additional surfaces introduced into the optical path. Thus increasing the potential of out of alignment optics.
The controls for focus and aperture are identical and Canon would ensure proper performance. My experience with both Canon TCs and R adapters is that they are completely transparent in operation.
Using a TC and adapter would be clunky but as there are no moving parts in either the risk is low.
The 1D series are solid but so is the 5D series. I have used both for many years and have had no failures with either.


----------



## Larsskv (Jun 25, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> I’ve had the opportunity to own the Panasonic S1R for the past few months. The viewfinder and the monitor on that are spectacular. It changed my opinion about how I can tolerate in OVF. It blew the Canon R’s out of the water, and it was no slouch for a mirrorless camera.
> 
> I’m sure the flagship releases coming from Sony and Canon will use tech such as these.
> 
> ...


I am aware that the new Panasonic has a great EVF, but is it bright enough to render a scene for eyes adjusted to strong sunlight?


----------



## Woody (Jun 25, 2019)

Sony's A9 was released in 2017 and it set a very very very high bar.

I am curious how Canon's 1RX is going to measure up.


----------



## lawny13 (Jun 25, 2019)

ozturert said:


> A fast professional R body will require professional R lenses (especially telephoto). 70-200mm f2.8 will be there, what about others? I'll not but a fast and strong EOS R if I have to use adapters.
> Or maybe Canon has a plan to release 1-2 L more telephoto lenses?
> We probably will have 24-70 and 15-35 f2.8L so I don't see huge problems there.



If the camera can drive the EF 100-400, the 300, 400, 500 etc primes like native would that not suffice? It would be for existing 1DX owners. Those who will be entering the system from scratch will just have to determine for themselves if it is good enough. Last but not least, if it is smaller than the 1DX (like the R is to the 5DIV) there are people like wedding photographers that would definitely pick this up, with the trinity f2.8 zooms, it would be an awesome combo.


----------



## Rixy (Jun 25, 2019)

I have 6 months to save...


----------



## dsut4392 (Jun 25, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> The real complaint by opponents of adapters is _the additional surfaces introduced into the optical path. Thus increasing the potential of out of alignment optics_.
> The controls for focus and aperture are identical and Canon would ensure proper performance. My experience with both Canon TCs and R adapters is that they are completely transparent in operation.
> Using a TC and adapter would be clunky but as there are no moving parts in either the risk is low.
> The 1D series are solid but so is the 5D series. I have used both for many years and have had no failures with either.



That only makes sense if the adapters contain optical elements, which these don't. Adapters do increase the chance of there being tilt between the optical axis of the lens and the sensor plane (due to slop in the interface), but the chance of this having any significance in the real world is minimal (unless your real world involves shooting flat planes perfectly aligned to your sensor).


----------



## AlanF (Jun 25, 2019)

dsut4392 said:


> That only makes sense if the adapters contain optical elements, which these don't. Adapters do increase the chance of there being tilt between the optical axis of the lens and the sensor plane (due to slop in the interface), but the chance of this having any significance in the real world is minimal (unless your real world involves shooting flat planes perfectly aligned to your sensor).


A tilt induced by an adapter will affect the phase detect AF, and would require AFMA even for mirrorless (contrast-based AF is relatively less affected).


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 25, 2019)

I wonder would Canon bring out a white weather sealed adapter you could leave on a big white.
A9 specs on paper at least are a high level. It will be interesting if Canon match or exceed those specs.


----------



## Kit. (Jun 25, 2019)

AlanF said:


> A tilt induced by an adapter will affect the phase detect AF, and would require AFMA even for mirrorless (contrast-based AF is relatively less affected).


At which magnitude does the lens tilt angle start to affect on-sensor phase detect AF?


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 25, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> All I can say is that as usual expectations are way to high leaving us with page after page of gnashing of teeth when it does arrive. Then, when the dust settles it'll be .... just another solid Canon performer. I hope I'm wrong in my restraint.
> 
> As others have said, I think the viewfinder is a the sticking point, as well as battery life. It must be great in all circumstances, otherwise the other advantages tend to pale unless it's strictly a second camera. My daughter used my R and it's hers now, but shooting together, clearly she was battery disadvantaged. RX must have a super battery.
> 
> Jack


It’ll probably have the big fat one all 1D series bodies have.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> At which magnitude does the lens tilt angle start to affect on-sensor phase detect AF?



The Canon 77D and cheaper DSLRs don't even have AFMA so the sometimes large AF effects aren't considered by Canon significant for users of those!
Tilt-angle effects on on-sensor phase detect will be progressive and vary according to the lens, focal length etc, and I don't know the formulae. But, the effects with mirrorless can obviously be significant enough for Olympus and Sony to add an AFMA function.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 25, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Tilt-angle effects on on-sensor phase detect will be progressive and vary according to the lens, focal length etc, and I don't know the formulae. But, the effects with mirrorless can obviously be significant enough for Olympus and Sony to add an AFMA function.


Nikon, too.


----------



## Kit. (Jun 25, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The Canon 77D and cheaper DSLRs don't even have AFMA so the sometimes large AF effects aren't considered by Canon significant for users of those!
> Tilt-angle effects on on-sensor phase detect will be progressive and vary according to the lens, focal length etc, and I don't know the formulae. But, the effects with mirrorless can obviously be significant enough for Olympus and Sony to add an AFMA function.


If you are going to claim that the adapter mount adds some problems that the lens mount itself doesn't have despite being essentially the same stuff, you need to tell the difference between these two cases.

A mirror tilt introduces the difference in the actual phases being measured, which can make the camera believe that the image is not in focus when it in fact is, where the DPAF sensor tilt merely introduces a really small _relative_ error to the perceived distance the lens focusing group needs to travel to achieve the focus.

There also other reasons to introduce the AFMA other than the AF sensor accuracy. The lens AF accuracy also plays its role if you want the lens to focus fast and to avoid focus hunt.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 25, 2019)

All adapters will affect the mounting of a lens on one body relative to how it would mount to another.

Most combinations will be acceptable for photography. Those which are not are outliers. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if the current eos r cameras have AFMA but that it’s not user accessible.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> If you are going to claim that the adapter mount adds some problems that the lens mount itself doesn't have despite being essentially the same stuff, you need to tell the difference between these two cases.
> 
> A mirror tilt introduces the difference in the actual phases being measured, which can make the camera believe that the image is not in focus when it in fact is, where the DPAF sensor tilt merely introduces a really small _relative_ error to the perceived distance the lens focusing group needs to travel to achieve the focus.
> 
> There also other reasons to introduce the AFMA other than the AF sensor accuracy. The lens AF accuracy also plays its role if you want the lens to focus fast and to avoid focus hunt.


I did not in that post claim anything about the adapter mount, so I don't know why you brought it up. I just pointed out that AFMA can be required to correct for tilt etc of the lens relative to the on-sensor AF. If you want me to say something about an adapter, I will do. It's not a question about being "essentially the same stuff", it's the standard problem of propagation of error when combining more than one component: if there is an error of tilt angle of the lens flange of e1 and that of the adapter front surface of e2 and of the rear surface e3, then the errors will sum as e(total) = sqrt(e1^2 + e2^2 + e3^2). On average, the overall tilt angle increases as more components are added, and in some rarer cases there will be compensation.


----------



## amorse (Jun 25, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> I wonder would Canon bring out a white weather sealed adapter you could leave on a big white.
> A9 specs on paper at least are a high level. It will be interesting if Canon match or exceed those specs.


I believe Canon lists the current adapters as already being weather sealed, so I suspect that they wouldn't release a white one.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 25, 2019)

amorse said:


> I believe Canon lists the current adapters as already being weather sealed, so I suspect that they wouldn't release a white one.


Yes, the existing EF-EOS R adapters (including the drop-in version) are weather sealed. Many people seem unaware of that fact.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jun 25, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> In short the trinity is dead,



Is it dead like all dead and nobody can use it? Can I still use it please? I'll go and check now if the lenses are still usable...


----------



## gdanmitchell (Jun 25, 2019)

"Announcing these two cameras together would be a unique move for Canon..."

The concept reminds me a bit of Canon's decision to introduce both the 5Ds and the 5DsR at the same time, though clearly DSLR and mirrorless versions of the 1DX-series models would be more different from one another.

As with the 5Ds/5DsR introduction, I suppose the logic could be that Canon would be letting users make the decision, with those thirsty for a mirrorless version getting what they want and those with concerns about such cameras' performance being allowed to take a more conservative path. 

(I'm fascinated that Canon still bothers with the 5Ds version, since almost everyone prefers the non-AA-filtering version of the camera and, as far as I can tell, few of the AA-filtering 5Ds models are sold at this point.)

However, given that this strategy would require significant'y different camera – different mounts, largely different physical construction – that seems unlikely in this case.


----------



## amorse (Jun 25, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> I've gone to always shooting primes in the mid-90s, to trinity around 2001, but since 2010 or sometime I've switched to 24-105/4IS and stayed there. The first-gen EF was good but a little soft. The RF is as sharp as it needs to be, though, in my opinion.
> 
> I really don't think the 24-70/2.8IS is a must-have for a pro any more. You've got the f/4IS prime on one side, then on the other the 28-70/2 and the f/1.2 primes.
> 
> ...


I think that is a bit of an overstatement - it really depends on the needs of the "pro" and what they professionally shoot. 

I'll take the f/2.8 from 16 to 200 range over f/4 12-400, but to each their own. I just don't find myself below 16mm or over 200 very often, but that extra light capturing capability has a lot of value to me, and I have no interest in carrying more glass than I need so primes are largely out. My pack is heavy enough as it is!


----------



## AlanF (Jun 25, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> All adapters will affect the mounting of a lens on one body relative to how it would mount to another.
> 
> Most combinations will be acceptable for photography. Those which are not are outliers. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if the current eos r cameras have AFMA but that it’s not user accessible.
> View attachment 185243


The x-axis is in standard deviations from the mean. I'll take a bet that the Canon standard deviations are much less than the Chinese knock-offs and most will be within spec. But some of those knock offs that are not even outliers will cause problems. There was post that 20µ difference could be noticeable but I am not going to hunt through the posts for it.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 25, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The x-axis is in standard deviations from the mean. I'll take a bet that the Canon standard deviations are much less than the Chinese knock-offs and most will be within spec. But some of those knock offs that are not even outliers will cause problems. There was post that 20µ difference could be noticeable but I am not going to hunt through the posts for it.


I’d bet it’s measureable. Noticeable becomes a qualitative assessment.


----------



## sdz (Jun 25, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I just hope Canon doesn't rush out a half baked idea that was put out just to say they have one. I would rather see a later truly pro camera that puts the competition back to the stone age as the EOS system did 30+ years ago. It has taken this long for the competition to catch up to the EOS and now an incremental lame introduction just is not going to impress. It must be hyper fast, full frame 8K at 120p with no crop or line skipping as Nikon and Sony do to make the FF claim. In other words skip the lame 4K, that train has left the station, move on to a blow them away 8K that is not dumbed down and the still frame rate is second to none by a good margin. No rolling shutter issues either. Minimum stills at 50 MP for this camera and DR at 25 stops. *Canon has all these capabilities now they just refuse to incorporate them into their regular camera lines* {emphasis added}.



Canon may not have the technology needed to accomplish these goals. If they do not have it, then they are not refusing to provide it. They cannot provide it.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 25, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> At this point Canon cannot just equal the competition. It must excel and beat the competition demonstrably. Otherwise they are just playing catch-up and the next sonikon will just leave it in the dust playing perpetual catch-up.



Canon-centric sites often label the competition as Sonikon. Sony-centric sites often label it as Canikon. What do nikon-centric sites call it? Canny? Sonon? Sonosonic? Either way it’s dumb. Stop.


----------



## Kit. (Jun 25, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I did not in that post claim anything about the adapter mount, so I don't know why you brought it up.





AlanF said:


> A tilt induced by an adapter will affect the phase detect AF, and would require AFMA even for mirrorless (contrast-based AF is relatively less affected).


Pick one.



AlanF said:


> I just pointed out that AFMA can be required to correct for tilt etc of the lens relative to the on-sensor AF.


No, you did not say "can be required". You said "would require". Such a claim needs the numbers to defend.



AlanF said:


> If you want me to say something about an adapter, I will do. It's not a question about being "essentially the same stuff", it's the standard problem of propagation of error when combining more than one component: if there is an error of tilt angle of the lens flange of e1 and that of the adapter front surface of e2 and of the rear surface e3, then the errors will sum as e(total) = sqrt(e1^2 + e2^2 + e3^2). On average, the overall tilt angle increases as more components are added, and in some rarer cases there will be compensation.


And what is the threshold value for e(total) where AFMA starts to be required for DPAF, and to which tilt angle value does it correspond?



AlanF said:


> The x-axis is in standard deviations from the mean. I'll take a bet that the Canon standard deviations are much less than the Chinese knock-offs and most will be within spec. But some of those knock offs that are not even outliers will cause problems. There was post that 20µ difference could be noticeable but I am not going to hunt through the posts for it.


Inabilitiy to keep the whole flat chart in focus by a tilted lens has nothing to do with autofocus and cannot be fixed with AFMA.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 25, 2019)

sdz said:


> Canon may not have the technology needed to accomplish these goals. If they do not have it, then they are not refusing to provide it. They cannot provide it.



If you look at some of their industrial products they are amazing. Check it out.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 25, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Canon-centric sites often label the competition as Sonikon. Sony-centric sites often label it as Canikon. What do nikon-centric sites call it? Canny? Sonon? Sonosonic? Either way it’s dumb. Stop.



Why, does it hurt your feelings?


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 25, 2019)

Woody said:


> Sony's A9 was released in 2017 and it set a very very very high bar.
> 
> I am curious how Canon's 1RX is going to measure up.



It will be interesting. They cannot measure up but must substantially exceed as Sony has rhe MII version ready to go so canon is obliged to exceed that as well.


----------



## takesome1 (Jun 25, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Why, does it hurt your feelings?



Perhaps he is anti Dr. Seuss and doesn't like made up nonsense words.


----------



## sdz (Jun 25, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> If you look at some of their industrial products they are amazing. Check it out.



I have looked at the industrial products. But these sensors need not provide a platform for a consumer/professional camera. A camera would have ergonomic requirements that industrial imagers would not have. Cooling would also be easier to control on an industrial camera than it would on DSLR/ML cameras.

Canon, sadly, lags behind Sony in sensor development. Canon News has this evaluation of the situation:



> The author also felt that Canon was “holding back” that they should have simply put better technology into their cameras. While it would be wonderful if Canon had the best technology in the business, the current state is that they are behind. Their sensor readout speeds are slower, and their processors are struggling with the increased workload that mirrorless demands. My belief is that we will see Canon move forward, possibly quickly, however, it will be most likely based upon when they have faster DIGIC processors available to work with. Not to mention new sensor designs such as stacked sensors.


----------



## amorse (Jun 25, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> It will be interesting. They cannot measure up but must substantially exceed as Sony has rhe MII version ready to go so canon is obliged to exceed that as well.


I don't know, I think Canon is going to release something they think is competitive for the expected potential buyers and may not concern themselves on whether or not it meets/exceeds some/all of the a9II's specifications. 

Different users have different needs, and for many users the specs race which is so frequently touted on forums and blogs is largely irrelevant. The bottom line is the mirrorless 1Dx equivalent camera probably doesn't need to beat the a9ii in specs, it just needs to convince current 1Dxii users that it will get the job done with the same reliability that the 1Dxii had. Make no mistake, that's not a small feat. Just because one body has better performance on paper doesn't mean people will transition in droves or else we'd already have seen people give up on the 1Dxii a long time ago. As with all things though, time will tell!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 25, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> It will be interesting. They cannot measure up but must substantially exceed as Sony has rhe MII version ready to go so canon is obliged to exceed that as well.


Sony’s specs have exceeded Canon’s for years...over which time Sony failed to capture ILC market share from Canon. But hey, maybe the next time Newton lets an apple go, it will float up.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Pick one.
> 
> 
> No, you did not say "can be required". You said "would require". Such a claim needs the numbers to defend.
> ...



I am interested in the general theory about on-sensor AFMA and its limitations, and how it will affect my photography. Here are some good articles of how PDAF actually works and on-sensor limitations: http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/understanding.autofocus/ and https://photo.stackexchange.com/que...ection-autofocus-need-adjustment-for-accuracy 

PD uses phases from opposite sides of the lens, and these may be affected by aberrations of the lens and differences in path length because of mechanical errors. On-sensor PDAF requires contrast detection or its equivalent for final accuracy: PD instructs the direction of movement focus of the lens, CD or (Canon's DP equivalent) then nails the focus. In the absence of CD, on-sensor PD is more accurate than DSLR PD, but the errors are reduced and may not necessarily be eliminated. 

Read this to see how AFMA can still be necessary if you are not convinced: https://eduardolibby.com/2018/12/22/nikons-z7-requires-af-fine-tuning/ ("The claims that on-sensor phase-detection autofocus sensors in Nikon’s Z7 does away with autofocus fine-tuning are wrong. I had to use AF Fine Tuning to get my lenses to focus properly.")


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 25, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Why, does it hurt your feelings?


No, why would it?

It just makes everyone look like idiots.


----------



## Del Paso (Jun 25, 2019)

Maybe I'm being naive, but I believe what really matters for a body in the EOS 1 category, is less to "beat" Sony in specs, but in reliability and professionality (handling, menu, colors,sealing).
High fps. and AF are of course not to be neglected, and I'm quite confident, Canon will once again succeed! (Or, is there any more reliable camera than the EOS 1?, certainly not from ...)


----------



## jonebize (Jun 25, 2019)

ozturert said:


> If I buy a tough body like 1DX, I want it to work under every condition. An adapter is a liability. You won't understand this if you don't push your kit to its limits.



You're talking for shooting sports? I'd be curious to hear what it's like to push it to the limits.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 25, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> No, why would it?
> 
> It just makes everyone look like idiots.


I’m going to stop referring to the ILC market, and instead use the term, CaNikoSonOlySonic.


----------



## Hallvardk (Jun 25, 2019)

I've shot professionally with 1DX2 for the last 3 years, making a living shooting action sports in the Arctic; both photo and video. I also own Canon cinema gear and quite some lenses.

Adapters: Hate 'em, but will use them if absolutely needed. I'd pay another $1-2 if it would mean that I got rid of it. If something breaks on a shoot you need a replacement, which is expensive and not always easy to find. I'm hesitant to carry 3-4-5 adapters to fit all lenses.

For a 1DX3, mirrorless or not, it would first of all be as good as the mark 2, but then add something that would make it financially reasonable to buy it for. 10 bit 422 internal, 8K external, log, double battery life, 40 MP. Something in that range. I don't care about 5 more MP or 2 fps more, and I don't think any other pro does either. The camera needs to bring in jobs or take over for other existing gear to make sense.

Canon are workhorses. Yes, reliability is the main point with the 1D line to me and many of my colleagues, and I don't really care what Sony is doing until they fix sealing, battery stuff and the good ol' ergonomics.


----------



## MadisonMike (Jun 25, 2019)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Exciting!!
> 
> (Not that I’ll ever, ever, in a millions years, be able to afford it)


Exactly


----------



## MadisonMike (Jun 25, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sony’s specs have exceeded Canon’s for years...over which time Sony failed to capture ILC market share from Canon. But hey, maybe the next time Newton lets an apple go, it will float up.



But in the past Sony did not have much if any glass that was competitive with Canon, that is changing. The G Masters are really nice lenses. I still do not see most Canon users jumping ship. But the ones that do are enjoying the benefits that Sony already brought to market. That is more fun than coming to CR daily hoping the next release will be the one they have been waiting for. They must have the technology, but I see the problem with Canon is too many lines have power over one another. Every camera seems to be limited in some way. Most are awesome, but missing something that is available in another line. Unless they revamp the entire way to do their business, we will see more of the same. Luckily the lenses don't work that way.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 25, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> I’m going to stop referring to the ILC market, and instead use the term, CaNikoSonOlySonic.



*Ri*CaNikoSonOlySonic*Uji*Rumor dot com!

Also, for medium formatters, PhaselbladNews.com


----------



## Kit. (Jun 25, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I am interested in the general theory about on-sensor AFMA and its limitations, and how it will affect my photography. Here are some good articles of how PDAF actually works and on-sensor limitations: http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/understanding.autofocus/ and https://photo.stackexchange.com/que...ection-autofocus-need-adjustment-for-accuracy


On, I see why these "explanations" confuse you. They totally omit the description of how PDAF actually works.

(Maybe I should write one myself, but it would take a couple of hours of my life, so I'd rather avoid it)



AlanF said:


> PD uses phases from opposite sides of the lens, and these may be affected by aberrations of the lens and differences in path length because of mechanical errors.


They are affected in exactly the same way as the focus is affected.

In Canon's DPAF, it is possible (and common) that pixel pairs receive non-equal exposure even when they are in focus (the main reason for it is that the EF lenses are not fully image-space telecentric, but tilted or shifted optical axis may also play a very small role). However, if the lens is in focus, there is _no phase shift_ in the dual-pixel array, no matter where the lens optical axis is.



AlanF said:


> On-sensor PDAF requires contrast detection or its equivalent for final accuracy:


Only when the PDAF points are sparse. Not Canon's case.



AlanF said:


> Read this to see how AFMA can still be necessary if you are not convinced: https://eduardolibby.com/2018/12/22/nikons-z7-requires-af-fine-tuning/ ("The claims that on-sensor phase-detection autofocus sensors in Nikon’s Z7 does away with autofocus fine-tuning are wrong. I had to use AF Fine Tuning to get my lenses to focus properly.")


AFMA may be necessary for a multitude of reasons, but why do you think that adapter-introduced tilt is one of them?


----------



## BillB (Jun 25, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> What we really need more than anything is 35/2 and 50/1.8 that stick out no further than the grip, so we can have our R's in our backpack at all times. And with f/4 trinity you could see quite a number sold to even the reporters who today have no interest in f/1.8 given that their limited-range trinity is f/2.8.



My guess is that it may be quite a while before there is a canon lens that you can put on an R camera that smaller than the RF 35mm F1.8. I don't know how small you can make a 35mm lens for the RF mount, but there has to be a practical limit.


----------



## tpatana (Jun 25, 2019)

My key item why I shy away from mirrorless is tracking accuracy in dim gyms. That's my reason for 1DX. Everything else should be there more or less already:
-enough fps (Canon can do it, the question is if they will do it)
-generic good all-around camera

Two items I'm not sure if/how mirrorless will compare to 1DX
-comfortable to hold with 70-200 for 8 hours. Maybe with grip it'll be good?
-8 hours of shooting with 2 batteries, ~4000-6000 clicks. Grip might help but probably still not enough? Might need 4 batteries? 1DX can do that ~with one battery, although I carry second one just in case.

Items I don't care:
-1 card slot vs 2 card slots. 2 is nice but not mandatory for my use.

Nice to have items:
-240fps video at 1080p (480p even better)


----------



## AlanF (Jun 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> On, I see why these "explanations" confuse you. They totally omit the description of how PDAF actually works.
> 
> (Maybe I should write one myself, but it would take a couple of hours of my life, so I'd rather avoid it)
> 
> ...


I'd be most grateful, and I am sure sure many CR members would be also, if you did take out the time to write something. I am here to learn and to pass on what I have learned, and I am eager to hear from you.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 25, 2019)

Prediction: Canon will release an awesome camera. The perpetually negative, who'll never buy a camera at that level no matter what, will %itch and moan and tell us why they will switch to Sony if Canon doesn't "get it right" in 3-4 years with the 1RX II. I'll recycle this comment at that time. Oh! And we'll hear about all their friends at the local camera club switching too. Meanwhile, Sony's market share will slide to 8%. We'll also keep hearing about how an empty tube (adapter) destroys IQ and is a potential point of failure, and complaints it doesn't come in white to match their big tele lenses. We'll get links to all the articles and YouTube videos they think prove their points. In the mean time, somehow people will still be taking great photos and videos with piss poor Canon gear. Oh! And all the design experts / engineers who'll fake knowledge they gained thanks to google will be there too.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Jun 26, 2019)

Canon always has loan bodies and lenses for major events. The Olympics and World Cup qualify as major! They will have the biggist of the Big Whites available for use by accridited pros.


----------



## BillB (Jun 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Prediction: Canon will release an awesome camera. The perpetually negative, who'll never buy a camera at that level no matter what, will %itch and moan and tell us why they will switch to Sony if Canon doesn't "get it right" in 3-4 years with the 1RX II. I'll recycle this comment at that time. Oh! And we'll hear about all their friends at the local camera club switching too. Meanwhile, Sony's market share will slide to 8%. We'll also keep hearing about how an empty tube (adapter) destroys IQ and is a potential point of failure, and complaints it doesn't come in white to match their big tele lenses. We'll get links to all the articles and YouTube videos they think prove their points. In the mean time, somehow people will still be taking great photos and videos with piss poor Canon gear. Oh! And all the design experts / engineers who'll fake knowledge they gained thanks to google will be there too.


Either that or it will all gradually fizzle out because nobody cares which cameras are best because it becomes more and more clear that all the cameras are pretty good and all the magic numbers don't mean very much unless you are trying to photograph bats flying around inside a dark cave. And the market shares will sort themselves out without much help from the internet, as they always do.


----------



## deleteme (Jun 26, 2019)

dsut4392 said:


> That only makes sense if the adapters contain optical elements, which these don't. Adapters do increase the chance of there being tilt between the optical axis of the lens and the sensor plane (due to slop in the interface), but the chance of this having any significance in the real world is minimal (unless your real world involves shooting flat planes perfectly aligned to your sensor).


When I am speaking of surfaces I am speaking of the mount surfaces not glass.


----------



## dsut4392 (Jun 26, 2019)

AlanF said:


> A tilt induced by an adapter will affect the phase detect AF, and would require AFMA even for mirrorless (contrast-based AF is relatively less affected).



Tilt affects the plane of focus, so of course AF is affected, but I'm not sure how AFMA comes into play, or why CDAF should be different from PDAF? Unless you're suggesting that AFMA can compensate for tilt?


----------



## Kit. (Jun 26, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I'd be most grateful, and I am sure sure many CR members would be also, if you did take out the time to write something. I am here to learn and to pass on what I have learned, and I am eager to hear from you.


OK.

After long thoughts and some ugly and overcomplicated drawing attempts... let's start from this simple picture from Wikipedia:







The middle row shows a point object (on the left) in the plane of focus of the lens perfectly focused on the sensor (on the right).

The upper and the lower rows show how _the same lens focused at the same distance_ will render point objects in front of and behind the plane of focus correspondingly.

The circle that out-of-focus point object produces on the sensor is called "circle of confusion" (or "circle of indistinction"). If it's intentionally made big enough, it is known as a "bokeh ball".

When it comes to phase-detect autofocus (and DPAF in particular), two things about the circle of confusion are important:

1. For the object in front of the plane of focus, left half of the circle comes from the left side of the lens, and the right half of the circle comes from the right side of the lens; for the object behind the plane of focus, it's inverse.

2. The size of the circle of confusion is a monotonous function from the amount of defocus. When the object is in focus, the circle of confusion is zero (this is true only for the out-of-focus circles, but the other kinds of blurs practically don't depend on from which side of the lens the light comes).

Now, what if we are able to split the light coming from the left and from the right half of the lens and to project these halves on the different sensors? Then one sensor will see only one half of the circle, another one will be able to see only the other half, and by measuring the offset ("phase shift") between the geometric centers (or some similar features) of the halves we can predict the direction and the amount of defocus.

Of course, typically we don't have a point object we need to focus on. But if we have _some_ local contrast on or at the border of our out-of-focus object, it will be blurred but hopefully still recognized by our autofocus system, and we will be able to calculate its phase shift.

In the case of DPAF, there are lots of things that prevent us from clearly separating the rays from two halves of the lens, so we won't be getting the exact halves, but that mostly affects the amplitude difference and not the phase shift. And again, if we are in focus, the phase shift is zero.

In the case of a dedicated autofocus sensor, we can precisely extract the particular areas of the lenses from which we want to calculate the phase shift. It makes autofocus more precise and less computationally intensive, but... it will focus the lens exactly on the dedicated autofocus sensor, but not necessarily on the image capture sensor.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 26, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I'd be most grateful, and I am sure sure many CR members would be also, if you did take out the time to write something. I am here to learn and to pass on what I have learned, and I am eager to hear from you.



I suggest reading neuroanatomist’s article here:








Canon EOS DSLR Autofocus Explained


Canon EOS DSLR Autofocus Explained




www.the-digital-picture.com


----------



## scottkinfw (Jun 26, 2019)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Exciting!!
> 
> (Not that I’ll ever, ever, in a millions years, be able to afford it)


The body is one thing, the lenses are quite another (huge) thing.


----------



## Viggo (Jun 26, 2019)

Sadly, I think that whatever Canon comes out with will be so severely trashed by the “media” in the industry that it doesn’t matter how good it is. I know people in a few of the biggest shops around in my country and they’ve all said “we don’t sell any Canon nowadays, it’s just Fuji, Sony and Nikon”. They all have the RF85 in stock which they shouldn’t. They also had the 28-70 and 50 in stock, super special offers on the R and I think it’s taking a toll on Canon what the trolls of YouTube and comment sections have done that past few years.

It’s not true what they claim, but people looking for a camera sees it as truth, because it’s everywhere.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 26, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sony’s specs have exceeded Canon’s for years...over which time Sony failed to capture ILC market share from Canon. But hey, maybe the next time Newton lets an apple go, it will float up.



Canon are like Liverpool football club, full of history, one of the best club teams in the world, dominated in the past, loved by millions.

Sony are Manchester City. Probably _the _best club team in the world. Used to be rubbish, only got where they are now because of vast investment, boring.

Man City won the premier league last season. Nobody cared. Everybody expected it.

Liverpool has FAR more supporters globally.

That’s how I feel about Canon and Sony anyway! If you’re from the UK you might get it. If not, then I apologise!


----------



## AlanF (Jun 26, 2019)

Kit. said:


> OK.
> 
> After long thoughts and some ugly and overcomplicated drawing attempts... let's start from this simple picture from Wikipedia:
> 
> ...


Thank you for that very clear explanation, which is much appreciated. The two articles I quoted were basically correct but your exposition is far better and gets to the crucial points. 

So what are the main reasons for requiring AFMA for on-sensor PDAF? 
Canon's DPAF does combine characteristics of CD with PD, which is advantageous for accurate AF. Does that and the density of AF points mean that it's going to be slower than rivals with fewer PD detectors combined with CD?


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Jun 26, 2019)

Viggo said:


> Sadly, I think that whatever Canon comes out with will be so severely trashed by the “media” in the industry that it doesn’t matter how good it is. I know people in a few of the biggest shops around in my country and they’ve all said “we don’t sell any Canon nowadays, it’s just Fuji, Sony and Nikon”. They all have the RF85 in stock which they shouldn’t. They also had the 28-70 and 50 in stock, super special offers on the R and I think it’s taking a toll on Canon what the trolls of YouTube and comment sections have done that past few years.
> 
> It’s not true what they claim, but people looking for a camera sees it as truth, because it’s everywhere.


No doubt there are a few people who make a lot of noise and who are continually deriding Canon, but Canon still sell more camera equipment than Sony or Nikon, and a lot more than Fuji. Maybe those of us who still use a Canon camera are just not interested in joining the debate and we are much happier to go out and take some photos instead.
A couple of weeks ago I attended an event that was sponsored by Sony. As I walked through the door I was mobbed by a crowd of Sony zealots who wanted to know why I had not yet "upgraded" my Canon 5D mk4 to a Sony a73 or A9. They each had their own story to tell about how they once used a Canon or Nikon DSLR but they had now seen the light and moved to Sony. Well good luck to them, but in the practical session I did not notice that their pictures were any better than those that were taken by the few Canon and Nikon photographers who were present.


----------



## dolina (Jun 26, 2019)

DSLR will never disappear... mirrorless is a joke...


----------



## ozturert (Jun 26, 2019)

jonebize said:


> You're talking for shooting sports? I'd be curious to hear what it's like to push it to the limits.


Where 1Dx series are used. Can be sports, can be anything. The best thing about 1Dx series is they can be used under any condition.


----------



## Del Paso (Jun 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Prediction: Canon will release an awesome camera. The perpetually negative, who'll never buy a camera at that level no matter what, will %itch and moan and tell us why they will switch to Sony if Canon doesn't "get it right" in 3-4 years with the 1RX II. I'll recycle this comment at that time. Oh! And we'll hear about all their friends at the local camera club switching too. Meanwhile, Sony's market share will slide to 8%. We'll also keep hearing about how an empty tube (adapter) destroys IQ and is a potential point of failure, and complaints it doesn't come in white to match their big tele lenses. We'll get links to all the articles and YouTube videos they think prove their points. In the mean time, somehow people will still be taking great photos and videos with piss poor Canon gear. Oh! And all the design experts / engineers who'll fake knowledge they gained thanks to google will be there too.


This is indeed to be expected, and, as usual, trolling will come from the same Wonderful Sony Fanboys, never from Nikon or Fuji.
But you are right: the camera will be awesome!


----------



## Kit. (Jun 26, 2019)

AlanF said:


> So what are the main reasons for requiring AFMA for on-sensor PDAF?


I think it's because some lenses cannot be focused both fast and accurately at the same time, and AFMA helps to avoid focus hunt.



AlanF said:


> Canon's DPAF does combine characteristics of CD with PD, which is advantageous for accurate AF. Does that and the density of AF points mean that it's going to be slower than rivals with fewer PD detectors combined with CD detect?


It is more computationally intensive, which doesn't mean that focusing by itself is slower, but it may lead to slower frame rate with continuous AF. And of course all the drawbacks of the need to deal with 2x more pixels than the competitors have for the sensors of similar resolution.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 26, 2019)

Ian_of_glos said:


> No doubt there are a few people who make a lot of noise and who are continually deriding Canon, but Canon still sell more camera equipment than Sony or Nikon, and a lot more than Fuji. Maybe those of us who still use a Canon camera are just not interested in joining the debate and we are much happier to go out and take some photos instead.
> A couple of weeks ago I attended an event that was sponsored by Sony. As I walked through the door I was mobbed by a crowd of Sony zealots who wanted to know why I had not yet "upgraded" my Canon 5D mk4 to a Sony a73 or A9. They each had their own story to tell about how they once used a Canon or Nikon DSLR but they had now seen the light and moved to Sony. Well good luck to them, but in the practical session I did not notice that their pictures were any better than those that were taken by the few Canon and Nikon photographers who were present.


There are a lot of people on forums that can not get past spec sheets for the sensor. Most people use a camera system, and that means lenses, flashes, and bodies. It greatly includes ergonomics, a place where Canon excels. And reputation for reliably......

Yes, Sony has better sensors, but that is only one piece of the puzzle.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 26, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I think it's because some lenses cannot be focused both fast and accurately at the same time, and AFMA helps to avoid focus hunt.
> 
> 
> It is more computationally intensive, which doesn't mean that focusing by itself is slower, but it may lead to slower frame rate with continuous AF. And of course all the drawbacks of the need to deal with 2x more pixels than the competitors have for the sensors of similar resolution.


I have seen it mentioned elsewhere that the AFMA on mirrorless is to speed up the focus acquisition and avoid hunting when the CD comes in. So there must be some aberrations that need to be corrected by AFMA for on-sensor PD. Do you know what these aberrations are?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jun 26, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> This is indeed to be expected, and, as usual, trolling will come from the same Wonderful Sony Fanboys, never from Nikon or Fuji.
> But you are right: the camera will be awesome!



Probably it's not a camera for me, I don't even want to think about the price. I'll be waiting for a 5DIV-grade one. However, I don't know if the camera will be awesome. I hope they put a new sensor in it that can compete with Sony. I'm not a Sony fanboy btw, I don't even have a Sony. But Nikon and Fuji all use Sony sensors. That's the only area where Canon lags behind...


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 26, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sony’s specs have exceeded Canon’s for years...over which time Sony failed to capture ILC market share from Canon. But hey, maybe the next time Newton lets an apple go, it will float up.



Sony has not exceeded in many ways as far as specs go. In a couple of areas yes but by a slim margin so as to be irrelevant. But Sony very recently has stepped the game up in the last year and is beginning to almost be pro level as Canon and Nikon have been all along. There is more to being a pro product than blogger and enthusiasts exaggerated comments in order to get clicks etc. Sony will struggle with the limited mount as time goes forward as Nikon did for decades until finally moving on to the Z cameras.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 26, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Probably it's not a camera for me, I don't even want to think about the price. I'll be waiting for a 5DIV-grade one. However, I don't know if the camera will be awesome. I hope they put a new sensor in it that can compete with Sony. I'm not a Sony fanboy btw, I don't even have a Sony. But Nikon and Fuji all use Sony sensors. That's the only area where Canon lags behind...


Canon sensors are now very good. The 5DIV is pretty close to the best of Sony/Nikon, and the 1DXII is as good as the A9 for DR. The extreme BIF folks claim that Canon lags behind in AF, which is inferior to Sony A9 and Nikon D850/500 for tracking fast flying birds against backgrounds. For my type of BIF and even flying dragonflies, Canon locks on very quickly. But, I have seen some remarkable shots from Sonys and Nikons for the extreme stuff.


----------



## Aregal (Jun 26, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> The white ones fade badly...


If this is true, I hope the 100-400/4.5-5.6L ii that I got last week will fade to match my 70-200/2.8L i. I can't fight the urge to get the 70-200/2.8L iii to get the lenses to match.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 26, 2019)

davidcl0nel said:


> The Olympic Games at home in Tokyo is THE opportunity for Canon for the next ~50 years, before they get again this event. They will absolutely do everything to present the best of the best until then. How can you have doubts for that? Then maybe a long sleep can begin....
> So this means of course a 1DX 3 and very propably a RF pendant for it (named RX?) and a high megapixel (named RS?) along with the most used Lenses there...
> 
> After 2020 it is interesting, what product line they support more...


They will be on home turf, so your argument has merit in front of the home crowd. And, I hope you are right.


----------



## Del Paso (Jun 26, 2019)

MadisonMike said:


> But in the past Sony did not have much if any glass that was competitive with Canon, that is changing. The G Masters are really nice lenses. I still do not see most Canon users jumping ship. But the ones that do are enjoying the benefits that Sony already brought to market. That is more fun than coming to CR daily hoping the next release will be the one they have been waiting for. They must have the technology, but I see the problem with Canon is too many lines have power over one another. Every camera seems to be limited in some way. Most are awesome, but missing something that is available in another line. Unless they revamp the entire way to do their business, we will see more of the same. Luckily the lenses don't work that way.


You seem to forget that Canon has entered the mirrorless market very recently!


----------



## canonmike (Jun 26, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> I've gone to always shooting primes in the mid-90s, to trinity around 2001, but since 2010 or sometime I've switched to 24-105/4IS and stayed there. The first-gen EF was good but a little soft. The RF is as sharp as it needs to be, though, in my opinion.
> 
> I really don't think the 24-70/2.8IS is a must-have for a pro any more. You've got the f/4IS prime on one side, then on the other the 28-70/2 and the f/1.2 primes.
> 
> ...


Good points. That's why I like the F/2.0 22mm EF-M on my M50. You can stick this combo in your pocket, all the while maintaining a low profile, waiting for that next candid shot. The added bonus, both are very affordable.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 26, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> You seem to forget that Canon has entered the mirrorless market very recently!


I'm sure you mean, the FF mirrorless market.


----------



## MadisonMike (Jun 26, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> You seem to forget that Canon has entered the mirrorless market very recently!


They did and pushed some people away. The R and RP look nice but are limited in their scope. I was super excited about them till I saw the real world reviews. I cannot imagine that Canon with their tech and financial resources could not make a mirrorless camera that can shoot more than a couple frames per second when in continuous auto-focus. That had to be a design choice as to not interfere with other lines. Sure they have a "Pro" model in the pipeline, and with the "Pro" moniker it will price it out of the range of many. I don't have time to wait for the 2nd and 3rd generation of the R to mature and add features I do need now. The EOS R system is the future, but it is taking too long to get there.


----------



## Kit. (Jun 26, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I have seen it mentioned elsewhere that the AFMA on mirrorless is to speed up the focus acquisition and avoid hunting when the CD comes in. So there must be some aberrations that need to be corrected by AFMA for on-sensor PD. Do you know what these aberrations are?


I don't know. Pure speculation from my side, but I think CDAF itself needs to know how sharp the lens can actually be to avoid hunting.

Another thing to consider is that some lens protocols designed for SLRs may be suboptimal for CDAF. For example, Canon EF protocol has "focus to max", "focus to min", and "move focus for +-N units" commands, but seems to lack a "stop right there" command.


----------



## Dantana (Jun 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Prediction: Canon will release an awesome camera. The perpetually negative, who'll never buy a camera at that level no matter what, will %itch and moan and tell us why they will switch to Sony if Canon doesn't "get it right" in 3-4 years with the 1RX II. I'll recycle this comment at that time. Oh! And we'll hear about all their friends at the local camera club switching too. Meanwhile, Sony's market share will slide to 8%. We'll also keep hearing about how an empty tube (adapter) destroys IQ and is a potential point of failure, and complaints it doesn't come in white to match their big tele lenses. We'll get links to all the articles and YouTube videos they think prove their points. In the mean time, somehow people will still be taking great photos and videos with piss poor Canon gear. Oh! And all the design experts / engineers who'll fake knowledge they gained thanks to google will be there too.


I would put money on that happening.

I may, however, place a side bet that Canon introduces a white EF to RF adapter that has some capability that I can't think of right now (Filter plus control ring? Built in switchable 1.4x TC?).


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 26, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sony’s specs have exceeded Canon’s for years...over which time Sony failed to capture ILC market share from Canon. But hey, maybe the next time Newton lets an apple go, it will float up.



I do think there is more of a threat to Canon’s market share now. Not that I’m part of the “*******!” Crowd. It is simply that we are at the crux of a tech shift, like when digital came about, or AF; and people like me - knowing we’ll likely have a very different system in 2020 than we did in 2018 - are open to switching.

I own a dozen EF lenses and the 1dx2, but in the past month I’ve taken more shots on those lenses with the Sony A9 and the Lumix s1r via Sigma’s rather amazing little adapters. This gives me a different perspective. Yes, Canon may repeat it’s swallowing of the market, but if it does so, I believe it will require as-good tech. I personally hope it will do just that, but it hasn’t yet.

It’s quite easy now to add a new system body to a legacy ef lens library without the old consequences of major hassle and losses involved in switching out lenses. This time feels different to me. 

The recent evolutions of the A9 firmware and the Sigma mc11 firmware surprised me in different ways. I think the A9 tracking is now so good that even on adapted glass it is better than that of my 1dx2 using the same ef lens. The sigma mc11 adapter is now finally providing a good deal of “invisibility” of the adapter. I’ve never had so much fun using my tilt shifts as now. Focus peaking makes my tilt adjustments instant and decisive.

My hope is that Canon gives us a mirrorless flagship with >10 fps while autofocusing; eye detect tracking that works at least 20 feet away; either 30 mp or 24mp with no AA filter. Happy to sell my A9 tomorrow if it does. Doesn’t affect my lens lineup either way. That brand nonchalance is precisely what could never happen before.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 26, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I hope they put a new sensor in it that can compete with Sony.



By which you mean what?


----------



## takesome1 (Jun 26, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> No, why would it?
> 
> It just makes everyone look like idiots.



You should think about your posts and their content., especially when offering a critique of how someone communicates in a post.
If it makes everyone look like idiots, everyone would also include you.


----------



## deleteme (Jun 26, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I have seen it mentioned elsewhere that the AFMA on mirrorless is to speed up the focus acquisition and avoid hunting when the CD comes in. So there must be some aberrations that need to be corrected by AFMA for on-sensor PD. Do you know what these aberrations are?


I do not believe this can be accurate as focus is achieved at the sensor plane. AFMA is an adjustment that offsets the calibrated settings of a lens to correct for the mis-alignment of the PD array that is in the body of the camera and not at the focal plane.
The very definition of focus at the sensor plane means no inaccuracy can be introduced as the focus error would be instantly detected and adjusted for.
None of my ML cameras have AFMA and they are frantically sharper with better AF accuracy than any of my Canon DSLRs.
The R does not even have that ability.
As for hunting, that is not an AFMA issue but an AF issue that bedevils AF of every stripe.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 26, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> You should think about your posts and their content., especially when offering a critique of how someone communicates in a post.
> If it makes everyone look like idiots, everyone would also include you.



Yes’m; why do you suspect I would exclude myself from this population? If people only made themselves look like idiots, I would have commented differently (or, more likely, not at all).


----------



## cellomaster27 (Jun 26, 2019)

I will thank Nikon here for this plausible announcement from canon. Nikon stated that they will release a FF ML after the D5. Then canon came out with this response. Yay for Nikon. haha


----------



## BillB (Jun 27, 2019)

cellomaster27 said:


> I will thank Nikon here for this plausible announcement from canon. Nikon stated that they will release a FF ML after the D5. Then canon came out with this response. Yay for Nikon. haha


A CR1 Rumor isn't exactly a Canon response. Canon didn't come out with anything.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jun 27, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> By which you mean what?


Another sensor war of course!!
But seriously I'm looking forward to seeing what sensor Canon puts in the next high(er) end camera.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 27, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Another sensor war of course!!
> But seriously I'm looking forward to seeing what sensor Canon puts in the next high(er) end camera.



What I really meant was: define compete?

Commercially? Canon doesn’t attempt to sell consumer camera sensors externally (although there was talk of that maybe late last year), so you likely won’t be satisfied if that’s what you mean. Playing the guessing game, Sony makes more sensors so they may yield better profit margins (a good measure of competitiveness), but on the other hand they _appear to_ invest more than canon in their foundry, etc., and develop new models more frequently, and those costs may tip the profit scales towards Canon.

I suspect you meant technically, i.e., performance. In that context, what defines competitive?

Does canon have to be within a given range relative to some Sony sensor for each performance parameter to be considered “competing with?” e.g., +/- .1 dB; +/- 3%, +/- .2 watts, etc.? Or only for certain parameters and, if so: which ones (#of AF points, noise and well capacity, output bandwidth, power consumption, thermal resistance at the junction, etc)?

Finally, how will we asses it? Outside of the OEMs and their customers, it’s doubtful anyone has built equipment to measure sensor-level performance. Sony will probably sell evaluation boards, but not their acceptance-test equipment and software. Canon doesn’t publish datasheets as far as I’ve seen (since as discussed above they don’t sell consumer camera sensors), and Sony only publishes limited data for some sensors.

Seems to me evaluating cameras is both more applicable to users and substantially easier to do than evaluating the sensors inside them.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 27, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The extreme BIF folks claim that Canon lags behind in AF, which is inferior to Sony A9 and Nikon D850/500 for tracking fast flying birds against backgrounds. For my type of BIF and even flying dragonflies, Canon locks on very quickly. But, I have seen some remarkable shots from Sonys and Nikons for the extreme stuff.


Are you referring to Canon AF generally, or the EOS R / RP? Was standing on a beach yesterday with the EOS R and an adapted 70-300L, and the R couldn’t manage to lock onto a gliding seagull or flying cormorant against a blue sky even with the AF frame tracking right on the bird through a >120° arc of sky. I know from years of experience that my 1D X would have zero problems with this. IMO, DPAF has a ways to go before I’ll rely on it for basic BIF, much less tracking swallows or birds against a complex background.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 27, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Are you referring to Canon AF generally, or the EOS R / RP? Was standing on a beach yesterday with the EOS R and an adapted 70-300L, and the R couldn’t manage to lock onto a gliding seagull or flying cormorant against a blue sky even with the AF frame tracking right on the bird through a >120° arc of sky. I know from years of experience that my 1D X would have zero problems with this. IMO, DPAF has a ways to go before I’ll rely on it for basic BIF, much less tracking swallows or birds against a complex background.


My experiences with 1DX MkII and EOS-R have been the same, though completely different circumstances, I was shooting slower moving subjects in poor light. I have zero interest in Canon mirrorless for continuous AF situations until it at least matches the 1DX MkII.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> My experiences with 1DX MkII and EOS-R have been the same, though completely different circumstances, I was shooting slower moving subjects in poor light. I have zero interest in Canon mirrorless for continuous AF situations until it at least matches the 1DX MkII.



Outside of the canon implementation, I know two people (I know, it’s anecdotal) who own both a Sony A9 and a Sony a99ii. Despite A9 having a tremendous advantage in terms of how quickly data comes off the sensor, both maintain that for quick subject acquisition in difficult situations, the older a99ii is more reliable, likely due to its off-image-sensor PDAF. They also maintain that for subject tracking, once acquired, A9 is more reliable. So, at least in one lawn, there is not uniformly green grass.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 27, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Outside of the canon implementation, I know two people (I know, it’s anecdotal) who own both a Sony A9 and a Sony a99ii. Despite A9 having a tremendous advantage in terms of how quickly data comes off the sensor, both maintain that for quick subject acquisition in difficult situations, the older a99ii is more reliable, likely due to its off-image-sensor PDAF. They also maintain that for subject tracking, once acquired, A9 is more reliable. So, at least in one lawn, there is not uniformly green grass.


I know two pro tennis and golf photographers who have been doing the job at the highest level for decades. They sold 1DX MkII’s and 5D MkIV’s for A9’s and A7 somethings, they couldn’t be happier.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I know two pro tennis and golf photographers who have been doing the job at the highest level for decades. They sold 1DX MkII’s and 5D MkIV’s for A9’s and A7 somethings, they couldn’t be happier.



The ability to shoot silently without sacrificing framerate or AF is likely a substantial advantage to tennis and golf photographers.

That aside I don’t doubt A9 is really good (used one for a few weeks: if I found it more comfortable I’d probably buy one) especially in typically good conditions (like tennis). I’ve not used an a99ii so I can’t vouch for such a comparison, I’m only mentioning it as it comes from wildlife photographers whose opinions I respect. My suspicion is that an a99iii with stacked image sensor (like that in A9) and off-image-sensor PDAF (like that in SLR) would be significantly capable.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 27, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Are you referring to Canon AF generally, or the EOS R / RP? Was standing on a beach yesterday with the EOS R and an adapted 70-300L, and the R couldn’t manage to lock onto a gliding seagull or flying cormorant against a blue sky even with the AF frame tracking right on the bird through a >120° arc of sky. I know from years of experience that my 1D X would have zero problems with this. IMO, DPAF has a ways to go before I’ll rely on it for basic BIF, much less tracking swallows or birds against a complex background.


Canon DSLRs, the 1, 5 and 7Ds in particular.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 27, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> I do not believe this can be accurate as focus is achieved at the sensor plane. AFMA is an adjustment that offsets the calibrated settings of a lens to correct for the mis-alignment of the PD array that is in the body of the camera and not at the focal plane.
> The very definition of focus at the sensor plane means no inaccuracy can be introduced as the focus error would be instantly detected and adjusted for.
> None of my ML cameras have AFMA and they are frantically sharper with better AF accuracy than any of my Canon DSLRs.
> The R does not even have that ability.
> As for hunting, that is not an AFMA issue but an AF issue that bedevils AF of every stripe.


Can you then answer why Olympus, Sony and Nikon have AFMA for phase detect AF and there are reports of it being necessary fo a Nikon? That’s not a rhetorical question.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 27, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Can you then answer why Olympus, Sony and Nikon have AFMA for phase detect AF and there are reports of it being necessary fo a Nikon? That’s not a rhetorical question.


I don’t know about Olympus and Nikon, but for Sony mirrorless cameras it’s intended for use with the a-mount adapters which have mirrors.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jun 27, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> Oops, isn't it that you only benefit from the ND adapter if you're adapting EF glass to the camera (typo??) That ND is why I bought the R.
> 
> Jack



Typo .. yes, I think I meant EF in the sentence you referred to.


----------



## degos (Jun 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I know two pro tennis and golf photographers who have been doing the job at the highest level for decades. They sold 1DX MkII’s and 5D MkIV’s for A9’s and A7 somethings, they couldn’t be happier.



Golfers and tennis players are fairly easy AF targets, especially as they usually occur under good / high-contrast light. Once the camera acquires focus there's not a lot to disrupt other than movement.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 27, 2019)

I am beginning to piece together more information about AFMA on mirrorless, particularly the Nikon Z7. As I have mentioned earlier, many mirrorless use phase detect for rapid initial acquisition and then contrast detect for final accuracy - on-sensor CD is pretty close to being absolutely accurate. This review by the ever reliable Thom Hogan http://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/c...mirrorless-camera/nikon-z7-camera-review.html discusses the AF of the Z7 in detail. It uses only PD (apart from the special case of pinpoint focus). There can be AFMA errors when using on-sensor PD without CD - I posted a link to where one user had to do AFMA with the Z7, and here is another from a specialist company about doing it for the Z7 https://www.cameracal.co.uk/calibration/mirrorless-cameras-and-lens-calibration/ (Canon DPAF is different but more computationally expensive).
That last article points out that Sony A7 and Olympus have AFMA for use with the MC11 and Metabones adapters and also for correcting errors in lenses. Why would those adapters cause AFMA problems I wonder as they don't have lenses in them?

Whatever the theoretical arguments, there is definite practical and observational evidence that on-sensor PD when used without CD is not necessarily accurate and can benefit from AFMA.


----------



## jedy (Jun 27, 2019)

Canon should bring out a mirrorless 5DIV successor next. I believe enticing the 5D users over to mirrorless would be more successful right now. Pro users using the 1D-X line are not the sort of people to be early switchers. Firstly, there would need to be equivalent lenses in RF mount or else they’d have to use an adapter. Secondly, Pro shooters will generally stick with an older camera model for longer because they know it inside out and how to get the best out of it. Thirdly, it would need a very decent evf as, from comments I’ve seen over the years, ovf’s, with their ‘always on’ approach are still highly valued amongst the sports/action photographers.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 27, 2019)

AlanF said:


> That last article points out that Sony A7 and Olympus have AFMA for use with the MC11 and Metabones adapters and also for correcting errors in lenses.



Sony didn’t go out of its way to help sigma and metabones users. As stated above and cited from Sony documentation, it’s for their a-Mount adapters which have mirrors and built-in PDAF.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jun 27, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Sony didn’t go out of its way to help sigma and metabones users. As stated above and cited from Sony documentation, it’s for their a-Mount adapters which have mirrors and built-in PDAF.



Speaking of Sigma on Sony E Mount:









Sigma 35mm f/1.2 FE lens rumors - Photo Rumors


SonyAddict reports that Sigma will soon announce a new 35mm f/1.2 FE lens for Sony E-mount. The report originated first on the Chinese social media platform Weibo. No additional information is available. You can see all full-frame Sigma lenses for Sony E-mount here. Now on Kickstarter: DUO...




photorumors.com


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 27, 2019)

degos said:


> Golfers and tennis players are fairly easy AF targets, especially as they usually occur under good / high-contrast light. Once the camera acquires focus there's not a lot to disrupt other than movement.


I do wish people would stop saying that. Half of tennis is indoors without the benefit of TV lighting and as for golf, it isn’t only played in Florida!

High end tennis shooting is as technically challenging for AF as any other pro level sport, the ball is small and the erratic movements of the players very fast considering your proximity to them. 

I am still using my 1D MkIII’s, I know professional sports shooters who have gained a market advantage swapping systems and camera type. It is a simple statement of fact, stop trying to make pathetic excuses or overly broad generalizations.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 27, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Sony didn’t go out of its way to help sigma and metabones users. As stated above and cited from Sony documentation, it’s for their a-Mount adapters which have mirrors and built-in PDAF.


And does Olympus have an equivalent adapter that has mirrors and built in PDAF?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 27, 2019)

AlanF said:


> And does Olympus have an equivalent adapter that has mirrors and built in PDAF?



As mentioned above, no idea about Olympus or Nikon. My comments were specific to Sony.

I’m questioning the validity of your second link. They may know how to run tools in order to calibrate for customers, but either their writeup is wrong, or I am.

It makes an assertion that A7 series cameras allow micro adjustments to accommodate displacement errors, which it seems to define as an adapter being too long or short. This doesn’t jive with Sony’s own documentation, and they don’t explain why that necessitates micro adjustments when it is the image sensor itself dictating.

It also makes an assertion that the Nikon Z7 is different from the Sony A7 and some Olympus models, in that Z7 uses phase detect pixels like Nikon DSLRs. But Sony A7 and Olympus use phase detect pixels, and Nikon SLRs (I believe) do not; in mirror lockup they use CDAF.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jun 27, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> I've gone to always shooting primes in the mid-90s, to trinity around 2001, but since 2010 or sometime I've switched to 24-105/4IS and stayed there. The first-gen EF was good but a little soft. The RF is as sharp as it needs to be, though, in my opinion.
> 
> I really don't think the 24-70/2.8IS is a must-have for a pro any more. You've got the f/4IS prime on one side, then on the other the 28-70/2 and the f/1.2 primes.
> 
> ...



I agree, I just know "holy trinity" availability and qualitative analysis is how a lot of people judge a camera. Personally I'm good with a wider range zoom in the middle at f/4 (or even a range, I used a 24 - 85 f/3.5 - 4.5 for a long time in Nikon film, and the STM in EF), supplemented with big glass fixed lenses that are going to be better than f/2.8 zooms anyway (in my case, 28mm, 50mm, and 85mm). And I really like the 70 - 200 f/2.8 because it's the most affordable, hand-holdable, flexible (with teleconverters) solution for the range it covers for action...agree that lighter smaller lenses are fine if you don't shoot sports indoors or at night.

I would love a non-distorted full frame 12 - 24 f/4, particularly if it kept 77mm filter threads (which the 15 - 35 f/2.8 IS isn't doing).


----------



## AlanF (Jun 27, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> As mentioned above, no idea about Olympus or Nikon. My comments were specific to Sony.
> 
> I’m questioning the validity of your second link. They may know how to run tools in order to calibrate for customers, but either their writeup is wrong, or I am.
> 
> ...


I think you may have misinterpreted what they wrote in "This is in order to combat element displacement errors". "Element displacement errors" usually means errors in position of individual elements in the lens such as their tilt angle and decentering not an adapter being too short or long. But how would an adapter affect element displacement - do they mean tilt? So it's all a bit waffley. What we do know is that the Nikon Z7 does need AFMA and some Olympus have AFMA capacity. And that's what puzzles me and the real reasons for it.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 27, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I think you may have misinterpreted what they wrote in "This is in order to combat element displacement errors". "Element displacement errors" usually means errors in position of individual elements in the lens such as their tilt angle and decentering not an adapter being too short or long. But how would an adapter affect element displacement - do they mean tilt?



Yes I would ordinarily assume ‘element displacement’ refers to a lens internally, but in this context (*) they appear to be referring to an adapter putting a lens in the wrong location (and maybe also orientation).


*Edit: I missed the word “or” in my read.

Here is a curiosity: can AF micro adjustment account for a misoriented lens?


----------



## Kit. (Jun 27, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Here is a curiosity: can AF micro adjustment account for a misoriented lens?


I don't see how. The only thing it does at so small angles is tilting the plane of focus. Even if it could affect autofocus performance, you would need at least two independent values per lens to correct it across all the focus points (vertical tilt and horizontal tilt, for example). Nikon has only one.


----------



## deleteme (Jun 27, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Can you then answer why Olympus, Sony and Nikon have AFMA for phase detect AF and there are reports of it being necessary fo a Nikon? That’s not a rhetorical question.


I was unaware of these brands doing this but then again, I don't own them.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 27, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I don't see how. The only thing it does at so small angles is tilting the plane of focus. Even if it could affect autofocus performance, you would need at least two independent values per lens to correct it across all the focus points (vertical tilt and horizontal tilt, for example). Nikon has only one.


That was my suspicion.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 28, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> In the digital world, I've been waiting since about 2000 for a manufacturer to just stop worrying about optical distortion, and fix distortion in software.



... you mean like Digital Photo Professional?


----------



## Kit. (Jun 28, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> A bit different topic but lens distortion is a tradeoff with everything else: improving distortion means either hurting sharpness, size, price, coma, or something.
> 
> In the digital world, I've been waiting since about 2000 for a manufacturer to just stop worrying about optical distortion, and fix distortion in software. If you look at how much simpler fisheye lenses are to rectilinear counterparts, the idea should be clear.


You lose peripheral resolution when you fix barrel distortion in software.

Also, doing mass-undistortion when importing pictures makes cataloguing software slow.


----------



## koenkooi (Jun 28, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> A bit different topic but lens distortion is a tradeoff with everything else: improving distortion means either hurting sharpness, size, price, coma, or something.
> 
> In the digital world, I've been waiting since about 2000 for a manufacturer to just stop worrying about optical distortion, and fix distortion in software. If you look at how much simpler fisheye lenses are to rectilinear counterparts, the idea should be clear.



Doesn't the m4/3 world do that? AIUI that's what all the complaining about "pre-cooked RAWs" is about. But as Kit. says above, it will decrease resolution, so it wouldn't make much sense on L series primes.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 29, 2019)

dsut4392 said:


> Tilt affects the plane of focus, so of course AF is affected, but I'm not sure how AFMA comes into play, or why CDAF should be different from PDAF? Unless you're suggesting that AFMA can compensate for tilt?


How much tilt is there? None.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 29, 2019)

ozturert said:


> If I buy a tough body like 1DX, I want it to work under every condition. An adapter is a liability. You won't understand this if you don't push your kit to its limits.



An EF to RF adapter is less of a liability than an EF 1.4X III or EF 2X III extender. Lots of 1D X Mark II shooters use extenders regularly.




ozturert said:


> You use tubes only when you need to and 1D series are mostly used for action. If you wnat to use tubes, you can very well go with EOS R which has more MP anyway.
> RF mount needs L telephoto lenses (1 or 2) before EOS RX (or what ever it'll be called).



Most action/sports shooters are used to using extenders without considering them a durability liability.




ozturert said:


> I agree with lenses below 200mm (and I said the same thing in my original post). I'm talking about 300mm+ .



Many 1D X type shooters who use lenses above 300mm already frequently use extenders.

An EF to RF adapter is simpler than an extender, which has optical elements that can become misaligned.

An EF to RF adapter can be just as weather resistant as an EF extender, and has no optical glass in the light path.

It's not even really an "adapter" in the sense that a cross platform adapter has to "translate" between the camera and lens.

EF and RF lenses and bodies are both backward/forward compatible with one another.
There are no top secret protocols to reverse engineer since the RF protocol is built on top of the EF protocol and the same entity owns all of the IP for both of them.




ozturert said:


> Now go and use that same setup in mud, in desert, put your lenses with your camera in your bag and take them out of the bag etc.. With adapter, you have 1 more place for dirt/dust etc.. to come in and 2 more connections for failure. Professional 1Dx users want reliability. I'm not saying you CANNOT use adapter, I say it is a liability for 1Dx-user profile.




There's only one additional connection. A lens to camera is one connection. A lens to adapter to camera is two connections.

Many professional 1D X users already use extenders in such environments. There's no real practical/functional difference other than the adapter has no optics that degrade the lens' performance.




Normalnorm said:


> A TC is exactly an adapter that pros use without a second thought today.
> Moreover, "pushing to the limits" for these sports and wildlife pros means high frame rates while firmly locked down on a tripod.
> We are not talking combat photography here.



Tripods for wildlife. For sports, you don;t very often see anything more than a monopod for the photographer's heaviest lens.




ozturert said:


> You leave the adapter attached to the lens, and this will eliminate the additional mount/interface issue?
> Maybe I cannot make myself clear: 1Dx is not only about speed, ergonomy and high Iso, it is also about reliability under harsh conditions. Leaving the adapter attached to the lens doesn't have anything to do with it. There is still one more connection that may fail/break. No sane photographer will use that combination at Olympics or in desert or ...



It's exactly the same as the one extra interface that many 1D X users shooting sports/action/wildlife have no trouble using with an extender. Are you saying 95% of pro sports shooters are not sane?





ozturert said:


> No it isn't, and it is. A TC is a must sometimes. And if you need to use TC with the adapter? Ask sports photographers if they want to use adapted lenses, and see their reaction
> 1Dx is a workhorse, Canikon don't even have rotating mode dial because rotating dials might be prone to failure (low probability but it is there).




When you ask a sports shooter if he wants to use adapted lenses, he's thinking EF glass on a Sony α9 and the resulting reduction in frame rate from 20 fps to 5 fps. There is no such penalty for using an EF to RF adapter between EOS lenses and EOS cameras.



AlanF said:


> The x-axis is in standard deviations from the mean. I'll take a bet that the Canon standard deviations are much less than the Chinese knock-offs and most will be within spec. But some of those knock offs that are not even outliers will cause problems. There was post that 20µ difference could be noticeable but I am not going to hunt through the posts for it.



The 20µm number came from a post by Uncle Roger (scroll down to the section under "Camera body variation also occurs). It had nothing to do with AF. He was discussing perceived blur from one side of the frame to the other in images taken with wide aperture, wide angle lenses. He also made clear the tolerance is more forgiving for narrower angle lenses.

The reason some mirrorless systems have AFMA is to compensate for lenses that do not move the focusing elements exactly the requested distance when the camera instructs the lens to move. Making lens focus element movements more accurate allows faster autofocus because it requires fewer follow-up measurements and movements. It has absolutely nothing to do with tilt.




c.d.embrey said:


> Canon always has loan bodies and lenses for major events. The Olympics and World Cup qualify as major! They will have the biggist of the Big Whites available for use by accridited pros.




Most of those loaners are for accredited pros who's own gear breaks during the event.




dsut4392 said:


> Tilt affects the plane of focus, so of course AF is affected, but I'm not sure how AFMA comes into play, or why CDAF should be different from PDAF? Unless you're suggesting that AFMA can compensate for tilt?



It can't.




AlanF said:


> Thank you for that very clear explanation, which is much appreciated. The two articles I quoted were basically correct but your exposition is far better and gets to the crucial points.
> 
> So what are the main reasons for requiring AFMA for on-sensor PDAF?
> Canon's DPAF does combine characteristics of CD with PD, which is advantageous for accurate AF. Does that and the density of AF points mean that it's going to be slower than rivals with fewer PD detectors combined with CD?



The reason some mirrorless systems have AFMA is to compensate for lenses that do not move the focusing elements exactly the requested distance when the camera instructs the lens to move. Making lens focus element movements more accurate allows faster autofocus because it requires fewer follow-up measurements and movements. It has absolutely nothing to do with tilt.




ozturert said:


> Where 1Dx series are used. Can be sports, can be anything. The best thing about 1Dx series is they can be used under any condition.



1D-series cameras can be used with extenders under any condition as well. There's no fundamental difference between an extender and an EF to RF adapter except no addition glass.



AlanF said:


> I have seen it mentioned elsewhere that the AFMA on mirrorless is to speed up the focus acquisition and avoid hunting when the CD comes in. So there must be some aberrations that need to be corrected by AFMA for on-sensor PD. Do you know what these aberrations are?



There are no aberrations that will make the captured image blurry at the same spot on the sensor that it was sharp during AF, because the _same exact surface that was used to focus is also used to capture the image_. AFMA in mirrorless cameras is to compensate for errors in focus element movement so fewer follow-up measurements/movements are needed.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 29, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> An EF to RF adapter is less of a liability than an EF 1.4X III or EF 2X III extender. Lots of 1D X Mark II shooters use extenders regularly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for that Michael. I have read a lot to find out why AFMA is required, and the proposal that it is to correct for lenses that do not respond correctly is a really plausible suggestion. Please let me know where you got the info from so I can follow it up.

Edit: found it here https://blog.reikanfocal.com/2018/10/the-new-nikon-z7-investigating-with-reikan-focal/


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 29, 2019)

ozturert said:


> If I buy a tough body like 1DX, I want it to work under every condition. An adapter is a liability.


Admittedly I'm fishing from a fairly small pool here, but I know enough pros to have a feel for how they work. And I don't know a single one (in wildlife or sport photography) who would hesitate to use _whatever he needed to use_ in order to get the shot: if that was an adaptor or a converter, so be it.


> You won't understand this if you don't push your kit to its limits.


Are you a pro that "pushes his kit to its limits"? Unless you're using it as a hammer, I'm going to guess not...

Pro kit is _built_ to be used hard (which is why I choose to use it, even thought I'm not a pro myself): nobody reaches the "limits" of its capabilities unless they're _ab_using it.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jun 29, 2019)

In support of what has been said above:
Sidelines Pro sport shooters frequently being seen having their pro Canon camera and big white lens combo attached to a monopod let go. Just like that. Let it drop while reaching out for a second camera lens combo. I was shocked first time I seen this with my own eyes.


----------



## cpsico (Jun 29, 2019)

If we have to go to the hassle of buying new lenses for the system, what is stopping us from going to Sony who has a much more mature product at this point


----------



## Viggo (Jun 29, 2019)

cpsico said:


> If we have to go to the hassle of buying new lenses for the system, what is stopping us from going to Sony who has a much more mature product at this point


Nothing is stopping you.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 29, 2019)

cpsico said:


> If we have to go to the hassle of buying new lenses for the system, what is stopping us from going to Sony who has a much more mature product at this point


My EOS R cane with an adapter that allows me to use my EF lenses ranging from 11mm to 600mm. TS-E. 5x Macro. My flashes and radio triggers work, too. No hassle, and EF is a much more mature system than FE.


----------



## cpsico (Jun 30, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> My EOS R cane with an adapter that allows me to use my EF lenses ranging from 11mm to 600mm. TS-E. 5x Macro. My flashes and radio triggers work, too. No hassle, and EF is a much more mature system than FE.


How is the functionality of EF on the EOS R?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 30, 2019)

cpsico said:


> How is the functionality of EF on the EOS R?


The same as on a Canon DSLR.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 30, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> My EOS R cane with an adapter that allows me to use my EF lenses ranging from 11mm to 600mm. TS-E. 5x Macro. My flashes and radio triggers work, too. No hassle, and EF is a much more mature system than FE.



Wait: the way you've written that, it's almost as if Canon has presented its users with a sensible, versatile, and practical way to get the best out of their existing _and_ new gear.

_Surely not?

_


----------



## SecureGSM (Jun 30, 2019)

.... including inexpensive ef-s lenses like 15-85 perfect for a travel or casual shots.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 30, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> My EOS R came with an adapter that allows me to use my EF lenses ranging from 11mm to 600mm. TS-E. 5x Macro. My flashes and radio triggers work, too. No hassle, and EF is a much more mature system than FE.





cpsico said:


> How is the functionality of EF on the EOS R?





neuroanatomist said:


> The same as on a Canon DSLR.



I can change ISO by rotating a ring on my EF Adapter. I can't do that with a DSLR.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 30, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> .... including inexpensive ef-s lenses like 15-85 perfect for a travel or casual shots.


It's even better on an M5, like other EF-S lenses.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 30, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I can change ISO by rotating a ring on my EF Adapter. I can't do that with a DSLR.


Strictly speaking, that’s adapter functionality, not lens functionality


----------



## Viggo (Jun 30, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Strictly speaking, that’s adapter functionality, not lens functionality


With RF lenses that’s a lens function


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 30, 2019)

cpsico said:


> How is the functionality of EF on the EOS R?



EF lenses are EOS system lenses.

RF lenses are EOS system lenses.

The RF communication protocol is built upon the same EOS protocol that EF cameras and lenses use. It's the equivalent of "USB3.1" compared to "USB2".
RF cameras and lenses have certain additional/expanded capabilities in terms of lens/body communication that EF cameras and lenses do not. But there is nothing that an EF lens can do on an EF body that it can not do on an RF body.

When using an EF lens on an RF camera via one of several EF-RF adapters from Canon, the EF lenses lose _none_ of the functionality they have when used on EF bodies. NONE. On the other hand, they may not have certain functionality that RF lenses have on RF cameras. But that is functionality the EF system never had, so EF lenses do not lose anything when used on RF bodies.

Nothing.Nada.Zilch.Nought. Zip.Zero.


----------



## TAF (Jun 30, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> EF lenses are EOS system lenses.
> 
> RF lenses are EOS system lenses.
> 
> ...




In fairness to the poster who asked the question, it is reasonable question given our previous experience where EF lenses did not appear to work as well on the 'M' sub-system with the Canon adapter as they do on a regular DSLR.

I have an 'M', and find the behavior with the adapter somewhat disappointing.

I am pleased Canon managed to nail it this time, so when the R body comes out with IBIS I will not hesitate (except for the cringe when I look at the price) to pick one up to start me down the full frame mirrorless road.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 1, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I would rather see a later truly pro camera that puts the competition back to the stone age as the EOS system did 30+ years ago.



You're going to be disapointed then, this is not even remotely realistic (from any manufacturer). While I wasn't involved in photography back then, and so can't assess whether you're exaggerating, 2019 is not 1989, and no revolutionary developments are currently on the cards for consumer cameras.



Architect1776 said:


> It has taken this long for the competition to catch up to the EOS and now an incremental lame introduction just is not going to impress. It must be hyper fast, full frame 8K at 120p with no crop or line skipping as Nikon and Sony do to make the FF claim. In other words skip the lame 4K, that train has left the station, move on to a blow them away 8K that is not dumbed down and the still frame rate is second to none by a good margin. No rolling shutter issues either. Minimum stills at 50 MP for this camera and DR at 25 stops. Canon has all these capabilities now they just refuse to incorporate them into their regular camera lines.



Oh I see


----------



## Kit. (Jul 1, 2019)

scyrene said:


> You're going to be disapointed then, this is not even remotely realistic (from any manufacturer). While I wasn't involved in photography back then, and so can't assess whether you're exaggerating, 2019 is not 1989, and no revolutionary developments are currently on the cards for consumer cameras.


I think it is possible, but it will come from an unexpected angle, such as the ability to use external GPUs.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 1, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I think it is possible, but it will come from an unexpected angle



Agreed. For me to call something a revolution it will have to change how we use/interact with something (in this case a camera). Improvements to what cameras already do are welcome, but evolutionary.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 1, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I think it is possible, but it will come from an unexpected angle, such as the ability to use external GPUs.



I don't doubt future paradigmatic shifts are possible - even likely - but when and how is unknown and really beyond the scope of this discussion. But out of interest, what do you mean? More processing power? For computational imaging?


----------



## Kit. (Jul 1, 2019)

Content-aware focusing/exposure/IS, for example. "Track a cat, keep the whole head in the DoF, pan the background if needed; ignore dogs".


----------



## unfocused (Jul 1, 2019)

_e_


Kit. said:


> Content-aware focusing/exposure/IS, for example. "Track a cat, keep the whole head in the DoF, pan the background if needed; ignore dogs".


The ability to add cat ears, noses and whiskers to subjects might be even more popular.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 1, 2019)

unfocused said:


> The ability to add cat ears, noses and whiskers to subjects might be even more popular.


Yeah, but that can be done in post.

The ability to decide "the thing we are tracking is a white cat, we should not overexpose it except for backlit halo" cannot.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 1, 2019)

unfocused said:


> _e_
> 
> The ability to add cat ears, noses and whiskers to subjects might be even more popular.



Snapchat teaches us that it would be wildly popular, and almost unbearable.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 2, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I can change ISO by rotating a ring on my EF Adapter. I can't do that with a DSLR.


You can with Nikon, I really like the three dial layout on some of the Nikons.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 2, 2019)

TAF said:


> In fairness to the poster who asked the question, it is reasonable question given our previous experience where EF lenses did not appear to work as well on the 'M' sub-system with the Canon adapter as they do on a regular DSLR.
> 
> I have an 'M', and find the behavior with the adapter somewhat disappointing.
> 
> I am pleased Canon managed to nail it this time, so when the R body comes out with IBIS I will not hesitate (except for the cringe when I look at the price) to pick one up to start me down the full frame mirrorless road.



The main issue with EOS M is the rate at which Canon is willing to allow the camera to supply power to the AF motor in the lens. This is not unique to EOS M bodies, though. Smaller EOS DSLRs with smaller batteries can also have the same issues. So could EOS RF mount cameras with smaller batteries.

But that is not anything that is inherent in the EOS M mount or EOS EF mount or EOS R mount. All three interfaces are capable of supplying more power than some bodies in all three mounts may be able to supply.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 2, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> You can with Nikon, I really like the three dial layout on some of the Nikons.



You can by rotating a _dial_ on Nikon DSLRs. You can also map _dials_ on other DSLRs to change ISO. But as far as I know, no Nikon DSLR has a control _ring_ on the body.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 2, 2019)

As always here it devolves from useful information, Nikon has a three dial/ring control interface on some cameras, into a semantic contretemps on the difference between dial and ring.

With a Nikon D5 you can effortlessly change all three exposure controls, shutter speed/aperture/iso with your right hand (sucks if you are a leftie) Canon do not have that functionality and I have always wondered why. You don't need anything on a Nikon lens because it is easy to control all exposure controls with the right hand.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 2, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> As always here it devolves from useful information, Nikon has a three dial/ring control interface on some cameras, into a semantic contretemps on the difference between dial and ring.
> 
> With a Nikon D5 you can effortlessly change all three exposure controls, shutter speed/aperture/iso with your right hand (sucks if you are a leftie) Canon do not have that functionality and I have always wondered why. You don't need anything on a Nikon lens because it is easy to control all exposure controls with the right hand.


I’ve always found Nikon’s and Sony’s location of the third dial spinny control thing awkward. My thumb more naturally sits near the center of the body by the other rear dial spinny control thing. I programmed the Set button to toggle ISO control, so I can control shutter, aperture, and ISO without moving my fingers or thumb from where they want to be.

Granted this is likely in part due to how infrequently I use Nikon cameras. If I were used to it, it might not feel awkward. But I would like perhaps a control on the front of the grip down where my ring or middle fingers sit. That would be excellent; control all three parameters simultaneously without lifting my fingers.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 2, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> If I were used to it, it might not feel awkward.


Which is equally true of familiarity with Canon controls, of course.

Up to the D200 I was a Nikon shooter: the D200 had a similar arrangement to that of the D5, and although I liked it, I certainly don't _miss_ it. 

It was a solution looking for a problem to solve, like rather a lot of Nikon's bells and whistles...


----------



## unfocused (Jul 2, 2019)

I have to say, I really like the control ring option on the "R" and I originally just picked ISO because I didn't see anything else I was interested in.. 

I prefer not to use the auto ISO setting on DSLRs because I don't like letting the camera pick the ISO. With the R, I can easily adjust the ISO when going from one environment to another. I was afraid I would inadvertently change the ISO or forget to change it when I moved to a different lighting situation, but so far, that hasn't been the case. 

I actually think the control ring on the adapter is in a more intuitive and less confusing spot than the control ring on the 24-105 R lens.

Having grown up with film, it has taken me quite a while to think of ISO as a third option to adjust. And, honestly, until the most recent generations of sensors, I didn't like the results of most ISOs above 400.


----------



## ClickIt_AC (Jul 8, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Are you referring to Canon AF generally, or the EOS R / RP? Was standing on a beach yesterday with the EOS R and an adapted 70-300L, and the R couldn’t manage to lock onto a gliding seagull or flying cormorant against a blue sky even with the AF frame tracking right on the bird through a >120° arc of sky. I know from years of experience that my 1D X would have zero problems with this. IMO, DPAF has a ways to go before I’ll rely on it for basic BIF, much less tracking swallows or birds against a complex background.



Which illustrates quite nicely, why many of us here have a selection of cameras in our signature. We will all no doubt use anything at hand on the spur of a moment, if it means we can at least try to 'get that shot'. However, if we are 'planning' for a certain type of shoot, we select the best from those tools that we have available in our kit. I love the EOS R with a grip, for close work and weddings/Christenings etc. it is also a bonus that I can stick on an EF-S lens and remove the grip to have a light travel and general tourism rig (even if there is a reduced image MP to consider for EF-S). For BIF then I would use a better weighted body (like my 1D IV) to hold the larger of my distance lenses and on this basis I would also usually make myself comfortable somewhere and sit down with a resting post or monopod in front of me to help with the weight. I find the EOS R even with a grip, somewhat too light when used with my heavier lenses, whilst I know Canon has its own map to replace the EF's with the RF's, all the same, for the mid-to-long term transitioners, it will be interesting to see how the counter balancing mass of the 1D series bodies, is accommodated in any new EOS R Pro Body. The fact that I could use any combination of my Canon gear to still attempt to obtain whatever shot, however impractical, when in a pinch (i.e. when bodies are in for service or are out on loan) is versatility that should be applauded but forgotten in this thread sometimes. BTW, I too have adapters and Extenders, none of which cause me any issue in practical use.


----------



## Dreamwalker Photography (Jul 12, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


While I truly laud Canon for getting into a pro-body mirrorless system, for me, it is too little, too late. As a working pro with a huge investment in EF L glass and 1D bodies (including the 1D XII), I added the Sony Alpha system in 2015 after finding the EF-M system only suitable for 'grabbing' images with a lighter back up (though I must admit the EF to EF-M adapter worked with the large glass quite well). I was very interested in what mirrorless could offer, but the EF-M just fell short.

Now, four years later I have four Sony alphas (a7RII, a7SII, a7RIII, and a9) and they all function better with the EF L glass using the Metabones adapter than do the M bodies. Far better, as the Sony bodies are technologically vastly superior. Last month Sony announced the 200-400mm and the 600mm super telephotos, and my pre-order is already in place. A former Canon pro shooter who sold me on the Sony with the Metabones back in 2015 whilst on a trip to Svalbard has field tested this new Sony glass and he raves about them. "As good, if not better, than my 200-400 w/1/4x and 600mm LII, with an adapter or natively on my D XI." I have the 200-400mm /1.4x and a 600mm L, so this translates for me quite nicely.

I still use my Canon bodies and glass, as there is really no equivalent—from a weatherproof point-of-view—than the X bodies. However, for Canon to expect me to invest in their R system, even an R D-type body, which came out for years too late and still does not match up with the Sony offerings...well, it's just not going to happen. I have too much sunk cost in Sony, just as I have in the Canon EF system, to move into a third pro system (which still does not have the requisite stable of long glass). I can support two pro systems, but not three.

With the Metabones adapter, I can use my Canon glass with performance almost as good as natively, and now Sony has long glass equalling the Canon glass. Not sure what an argument to drop Sony and follow the R system would look like, but I doubt it would work for me. For others, it might be just the ticket.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 12, 2019)

Dreamwalker Photography said:


> While I truly laud Canon for getting into a pro-body mirrorless system, for me, it is too little, too late. As a working pro with a huge investment in EF L glass and 1D bodies (including the 1D XII), I added the Sony Alpha system in 2015 after finding the EF-M system only suitable for 'grabbing' images with a lighter back up (though I must admit the EF to EF-M adapter worked with the large glass quite well). I was very interested in what mirrorless could offer, but the EF-M just fell short.
> 
> Now, four years later I have four Sony alphas (a7RII, a7SII, a7RIII, and a9) and they all function better with the EF L glass using the Metabones adapter than do the M bodies. Far better, as the Sony bodies are technologically vastly superior. Last month Sony announced the 200-400mm and the 600mm super telephotos, and my pre-order is already in place. A former Canon pro shooter who sold me on the Sony with the Metabones back in 2015 whilst on a trip to Svalbard has field tested this new Sony glass and he raves about them. "As good, if not better, than my 200-400 w/1/4x and 600mm LII, with an adapter or natively on my D XI." I have the 200-400mm /1.4x and a 600mm L, so this translates for me quite nicely.
> 
> ...



Ooh. Another 'I'm new here paid Sony Troll?


----------



## Dreamwalker Photography (Jul 12, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Ooh. Another 'I'm new here paid Sony Troll?





Aussie shooter said:


> Ooh. Another 'I'm new here paid Sony Troll?


No, you bloody idiot, I am NOT another paid Sony troll. I have been using Canon equipment since 1983...probably before you were born or while you were still on your mother's hind tit...and I still have, and use, my F1 from 1985. I have invested more money in Canon equipment over the years than you probably earned from photography in a lifetime.

I simply stated that Sony is years ahead of Canon—a marque which I truly love and will continue to use—when it comes to mirrorless, and I was an enthusiastic adopter of Canon mirrorless. I own the M1, M2, M3, M5 and M6, along with every EF-M lens Canon produced. The simple fact is that the R offering from Canon is dated, and years behind Sony. Period. They haven't caught up and are unlikely to in the next few years.

Will Canon catch Sony eventually? Sure, I bet they will. But I have too much invested in Canon EF and Sony E to wait for them.

That does not make me a paid, or unpaid, shill for Sony. It makes me a realist. Canon makes the best DSLRs in the world, IMHO. Unfortunately, this success and technology does not translate into the mirrorless world. One day it might; I hold no doubts about the technological prowess of Canon. However, they are not there yet, and I simply cannot justify jumping on the R System boat when it is naught but a canoe and Sony's alpha line is a F1 speedboat.

Who is the shill here? Methinks it is you, as "...doth Lady protest too much..."


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 12, 2019)

Dreamwalker Photography said:


> No, you bloody idiot, I am NOT another paid Sony troll. I have been using Canon equipment since 1983...probably before you were born or while you were still on your mother's hind tit...and I still have, and use, my F1 from 1985. I have invested more money in Canon equipment over the years than you probably earned from photography in a lifetime.
> 
> I simply stated that Sony is years ahead of Canon—a marque which I truly love and will continue to use—when it comes to mirrorless, and I was an enthusiastic adopter of Canon mirrorless. I own the M1, M2, M3, M5 and M6, along with every EF-M lens Canon produced. The simple fact is that the R offering from Canon is dated, and years behind Sony. Period. They haven't caught up and are unlikely to in the next few years.
> 
> ...



But I have used sonys with metabones adapters. They are sub par at best. Yes. They work. But not at 'near native' standards. Nowhere near. And sorry for the insult. But this forum seems to attract a lot of 'I'm new here' members that post long rants about the brilliance and functionality of Sony. You fit that bill perfectly. I am sceptical of your claims.
And don't misunderstand me. I think Sony make great specced cameras. The A9 is incredible. Still crap to hold but some awesome features. I am no shill. I am not anti Sony. Just over the rants that are very selective and very annoying. Especially when the thread is NOT ABOUT SONY!!!!


----------



## Dreamwalker Photography (Jul 12, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> But I have used sonys with metabones adapters. They are sub par at best. Yes. They work. But not at 'near native' standards. Nowhere near. And sorry for the insult. But this forum seems to attract a lot of 'I'm new here' members that post long rants about the brilliance and functionality of Sony. You fit that bill perfectly. I am sceptical of your claims.
> And don't misunderstand me. I think Sony make great specced cameras. The A9 is incredible. Still crap to hold but some awesome features. I am no shill. I am not anti Sony. Just over the rants that are very selective and very annoying


I used Sony with Metabones adapters when I was using Canon and Sigma glass. I also have a large stable of Sony glass, and finally they are coming out with long glass.

Yes, the Sonys with the Metabones are not the same as a Canon with the same lines used natively, but they are damned close. Any idiot except you would get that, bit you were too eager to cast aspersions about me being a shill, without any foundation whatsoever. Foundation...that means 'facts', just in case you didn't know.

However, there is no Canon body which shoots 20fps whilst maintaining autofocus on the eye. None. Period. With the new firmware release, the a9 does this even with the Metabones and my 200-400 w/1.4x.

Where is the Rf lens for that? It does NOT exist. Where is the R body to match an a9 or...hell, even an old 1 Ds III or 1D IV? It does not exist.

These are facts. They do not require a shill to point them out as facts. They are self-evident. Check Canon's own specs to prove the point. I did not make any 'claims' for which you to be [sceptical] of. (It's actually spelled 'skeptical'. You cannot use spell-check yet you seem to have the ability to read between the lines. Interesting. There are openings at the NSA.)

If, in 2015, Canon had released a mirrorless body equal to the a7RII, I would have never, ever bought the Sony. But Canon did not produce such a body. And Canon still has not produced such a body. And for me, it is too late.

Maybe not for you, and perhaps not for may others. Others will find, or have found, the Sony system compelling. Others will move to the Canon R platform when and if they produce such a body equal to what Sony has produced since 2015.

But to label anyone who incorporated the Sony platform back in 2015 a shill is unfair, untrue, and exposes your deficiencies in applying logic and critical thinking. That translates into 'idiot.'


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 13, 2019)

Dreamwalker Photography said:


> I used Sony with Metabones adapters when I was using Canon and Sigma glass. I also have a large stable of Sony glass, and finally they are coming out with long glass.
> 
> Yes, the Sonys with the Metabones are not the same as a Canon with the same lines used natively, but they are damned close. Any idiot except you would get that, bit you were too eager to cast aspersions about me being a shill, without any foundation whatsoever. Foundation...that means 'facts', just in case you didn't know.
> 
> ...


The 'fact' is that you come onto a thread about the future canon 1dx3 and have a rant about how and why you went to Sony. NO ONE CARES!!! Heres a thought. Start your own thread in the 'third party' section and post about your move as much as you want. That way the rest of us won't have to constantly trawl through a thread to fine relevant information instead of stuff we don't care about. Your move is not interesting. And no. The metabones adapters i have used on sonys for canon lenses are not nearly as good as native. Not in my books.


----------



## Viggo (Jul 13, 2019)

Man, it’s a real mood killer to find all this [email protected] Sony [email protected] in EVERY thread here these days... and I’m also in the crowd that seriously don’t care... I’ve used Sony’s like most other brands and different models. Would I really be following CR if I would like Sony better than Canon? 

This has always been the nicest forum I’ve used, nearly always very polite members, even when we don’t agree, no name calling etc. Always learning and enjoying. So to those who can’t join in like that; get lost...


----------



## AlanF (Jul 13, 2019)

The camera manufacturers are here to serve us, and we pay for it; not for us to serve them and still pay for it. The more competition among them for our custom the better for us.


----------



## BillB (Jul 13, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> Yes, but we are not dealing with sane photographers, we are dealing with forum members


I sometimes wonder how many sane photographer there are out there.


----------



## Dreamwalker Photography (Jul 14, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> The 'fact' is that you come onto a thread about the future canon 1dx3 and have a rant about how and why you went to Sony. NO ONE CARES!!! Heres a thought. Start your own thread in the 'third party' section and post about your move as much as you want. That way the rest of us won't have to constantly trawl through a thread to fine relevant information instead of stuff we don't care about. Your move is not interesting. And no. The metabones adapters i have used on sonys for canon lenses are not nearly as good as native. Not in my books.


I always believed they taught people how to read in Australia. This thread is NOT about a future 1dx3, but about "Canon’s EOS-1D X Mark II equivalent mirrorless is coming sooner than originally thought" which would be, I expect, an R body.

My post was simply to state an opinion for my situation that this offering, if and when it comes to see the light of day, would be too little and too late as I have too much sunk costs in Canon and Sony.

If you don't like my posts, please feel free to not read them. I do not recall sending you a PM to read my posts. It would behoove all of us if you would simply ignore what you don't like, refrain from accusations and verbal abuse, and just shut up.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 14, 2019)

reported



Dreamwalker Photography said:


> ......................
> If you don't like my posts, please feel free to not read them. I do not recall sending you a PM to read my posts. It would behoove all of us if you would simply ignore what you don't like, refrain from accusations and verbal abuse,* and just shut the f^&k up.*


----------



## Quirkz (Jul 14, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Ooh. Another 'I'm new here paid Sony Troll?



This didn’t sound like a troll post to me. Just a polite description as to why he switched to Sony. The troll posts are the ones that tell us we’re stupid for sticking with canon, or that canon is *******. 

Shame the conversation devolved.

Best trick? If you think someone is a troll, don’t feed them. Then the conversation remains polite for everyone else.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 14, 2019)

Dreamwalker Photography said:


> I always believed they taught people how to read in Australia. This thread is NOT about a future 1dx3, but about "Canon’s EOS-1D X Mark II equivalent mirrorless is coming sooner than originally thought" which would be, I expect, an R body.
> 
> My post was simply to state an opinion for my situation that this offering, if and when it comes to see the light of day, would be too little and too late as I have too much sunk costs in Canon and Sony.
> 
> If you don't like my posts, please feel free to not read them. I do not recall sending you a PM to read my posts. It would behoove all of us if you would simply ignore what you don't like, refrain from accusations and verbal abuse, and just shut up.


The problem is not that we have to read posts unrelated to the topic. And believe me your entering into the Sony system is completely unrelated to the topic. The problem is that people who are interested in the actual topic have to trawl through all the BS 'Why I switched to sony' posts. Your opinion as to why you went to sony is no about a future 1dx3 equivalent. It is about your desire to be noticed. Your switch is not interesting. It is not relevant. And we don't care. If you want a pat on the back for doing so or for others to hold you in awe then start a specific thread in the relevant parts of the forum or go to the Sony forums where you will encounter plenty of people just like yourself. If you post here stick to the topic.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 15, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> If you post here stick to the topic.



You must be new here.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 15, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> You must be new here.


Touche! New compared to many. True. Long enough however to be well and truly over being so graciously informed about how, when, where and why someone decided to buy into the Sony system when I am trying to get to information that is relevant to the thread I am reading. In this case the future mirrorless pro canon. A camera which I will be in no position to buy of course but any information on this camera will likely give me an inkling into the general future direction and capabilities of all future canon mirrorless cameras


----------



## miketcool (Jul 17, 2019)

If Canon released a 1D-X body along with the mirror equivalent, can we assume they’ll use the same batteries? I feel like Canon has an opportunity to introduce a new battery format (higher capacity, better tech) along with these new flagships. I would think additional connectivity, USB charging, GPS tagging, and an indestructible fixed screen are in order. I’m torn between illuminated buttons as I often learn the location by memory in the dark, but I would welcome a low power, dimmable solution for this. Even a way to change the UI to night mode would be helpful for my work.

Fast primes declicked for occasional video work are wanted. I don’t mind cropping if electronic, mirror, and lens stabilization are working in concert. The stabilization duo on my EOS R works brilliantly, and I’d love to see that feature on the flagship along with stills. Bracketing intervalometer settings would also be welcome. 

A truly revolutionary idea that I haven’t seen done yet with EVF, is allowing the viewfinder to tilt up for studio or field work. This would be great on the higher resolution edition but not the field workhorses. I really don’t see value on a rugged body, to having the screen articulate. A wind storm knocked over my 5Dmk4 body which would have been rendered useless if the screen was sticking out.


----------



## HarryFilm (Jul 19, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> WOW, wouldn't that be amazing! BTW, what's your track record on predictions - can you offer us a % figure?
> 
> 
> 
> Jack



2 out of 300 or about 0.6% (i.e. less than one percent!)

1) The Canon C700 I got spot on.

2) a new 60 fps 50 megapixel MF camera and a 2/3rds inch Smartphone which will ALSO be spot on....

and after that? You shall see soon enough!
.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> 1) The Canon C700 I got spot on.


Demonstrating that you can regurgitate a leak published on the internet.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 19, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> 2 out of 300 or about 0.6% (i.e. less than one percent!)
> 
> 1) The Canon C700 I got spot on.
> 
> ...


I think that's really one out of 300.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 19, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I think that's really one out of 300.


It’s zero/300 “predictions”

Also, for many months he’s been on about an APS-C camera phone. Now he’s slipping 2/3” in its place.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 19, 2019)

MadisonMike said:


> But in the past Sony did not have much if any glass that was competitive with Canon, that is changing. The G Masters are really nice lenses. I still do not see most Canon users jumping ship. But the ones that do are enjoying the benefits that Sony already brought to market. That is more fun than coming to CR daily hoping the next release will be the one they have been waiting for. They must have the technology, but I see the problem with Canon is too many lines have power over one another. Every camera seems to be limited in some way. Most are awesome, but missing something that is available in another line. Unless they revamp the entire way to do their business, we will see more of the same. Luckily the lenses don't work that way.


You say that but many are already saying the A7r IV video specs are deliberately neutered, certainly they don’t even match competitions specs from years ago. Indeed ‘many internet experts’ are pointing out that Panasonic are eating Sony’s lunch for video specs in these cameras.


----------



## HarryFilm (Jul 21, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> It’s zero/300 “predictions”
> 
> Also, for many months he’s been on about an APS-C camera phone. Now he’s slipping 2/3” in its place.



===

The 2/3rd inch phone is what is coming first! It is now built at a consumer-acceptable thickness. It is complete and ready for FCC/EU certification!

The APS-C phone is coming later because the prototype is a tad "THICK" and a NEW type of lens technology is required to get it down below an acceptable 15mm of thickness.

When you see these .... You will be BLOWN AWAY by the sheer technological prowess displayed by these devices. They truly ARE game changers! IP-68 Waterproofing and Ruggedness too!

The 60 fps 4:4:4 RAW and Compressed 8192 x 6144 pixel (50.3 megapixels) Medium Format combined stills/video camera is also a game changer. It's quite a bit superior to the Fujifilm GFX 100 in terms of actual image quality, sensitivity, still and video frame rates, multiple output file formats and still/video image aspect ratios, AND colour depths. It now SUPERSEDES Canon's Colour science and is EQUAL to the Arri Alexa-65 in a MUCH CHEAPER and much smaller body! The ergonomics are so much more improved too. No more big lens that intrude upon your hands! The hand-grip and screen swivel and are lockable to various positions! You can even use it for Vlogging and selfies in addition to Sports/Action/Wildlife Stills and Video!

Price-wise, it will be fairly close to the $10 000 US mark, so Red is Dead now, Canon C-series and 1D/5D is Toast, Nikon is So-Gone, Panasonic is the Goat and Arri is Sushi!

Soooooo .... who ELSE could it be?

,


----------



## flip314 (Jul 21, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> The APS-C phone is coming later because the prototype is a tad "THICK" and a NEW type of lens technology is required to get it down below an acceptable 15mm of thickness.



I haven't had a 15mm thick phone since flip phones were a thing...


----------



## Pape (Jul 21, 2019)

Will be intresting see what Rx can do with computing photography.
Should work better with handhold shoots when smaller pixel density and lot faster bursts. And ibis stuff
I am hoping 50fps focus stacking and HDR pixel shift .
X serie shooting speed HdR stack could be actually working most of situations except extreme action. good bye DR problems
Maybe thats why canon been compromicing focusing ability over DR on sensor. computing progress may been just slower they expected.


----------



## ozturert (Jul 21, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> 1) many pro photogs never use the telephotos. Simple reportage, travel, wedding, stock, etc. are probably fine with trinity zooms. The 2.8 trinity is already announced, with IS all the way. Many working pros don't need anything more. I grant there are _other_ pros that almost _only_ use the telephotos (sports, wildlife), but it's not like Canon can't get any sales until they have literally _everyone's_ bases covered.
> 
> 2) of course all EF glass works via adapter. I think pros are probably OK with this as long as it doesn't fail (break, weather, etc.) I mean pros think nothing of a macro tube when needed, and no-one using the white telephotos would refuse a teleconverter. So why refuse the RF-EF adapter?
> 
> I actually feel point 1 strongly enough that I wonder if they made a mistake not releasing the R with trinity 2.8's. But they're pros at marketing as well as optic design, so I imagined they have this all timed out. The current R's, I bet, aren't even being made to sell, but rather to get people talking about the system. No other motivation for the ridiculous 28-70/2.0... So, if this year is just to build buzz, I bet we'll still have trinity plus a pro body all long before the Olympics, so all the reportage going on can be done by people who are totally familiar with their R's, even if the actual event shooters are still using EF glass (and potentially EF cameras).



We were talking about Olympics.
Did I say EF lenses do not work with the adapter? I have the adapter and it works good enough (though I see some AF issues with some lenses). Also see point 1 (Olympics). Now try to use teleconverters with EF-R adapter.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 21, 2019)

ozturert said:


> Now try to use teleconverters with EF-R adapter.


Is that a problem for some reason?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 21, 2019)

I've used 70-200 2.8 II X1.4 with EF to R and it was perfectly OK although kind of long. Nice results and good focusing.

Jack


----------



## Pape (Jul 22, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Is that a problem for some reason?


I am using extra cord on my computer and its slow!! must be same problem


----------



## HarryFilm (Jul 22, 2019)

flip314 said:


> I haven't had a 15mm thick phone since flip phones were a thing...



---

The larger the sensor size, the DEEPER the camera opening is required to be. A 2/3rd inch sensor is the current size limit for modern 9 mm thick and less smartphones for proper focal plane "focus" on the sensor itself. Like I said earlier, the 2/3rds inch sensor smartphone is basically completely ready and just needs U.S. FCC (Federal Communications Commission) and EU wireless certifications before sale. So once you see a certain smartphone on the certification list, it means public introduction is a mere few weeks away! Around $900 to $1000 US!

The APS-C smartphone version is a whole different ball of wax as this is fully IP-68 ruggedized super-flagship smartphone, so it is close to 15mm thick and the battery is much much larger than normal at over 10 000 mAh (milli-Amp-hours for all day use of LIKELY running time of 4 to 6 at DCI 8K video recording and 8 to 12 hours for 4K DCI video. It sucks a lot of juice as it's screen is a full DCI 4K screen (4096 by 2160 pixels) and the APS-C camera sensor (23.6 mm by 15.6 mm) is a full DCI 8K (8192 x 4320) video-centric actual resolution which is about 35.3 megapixels!

This is a cinema-centric phone with 60 fps and super-low light sensitivity at a little over 2.7 microns per photosite in a Bayer sensor-type, 4:4:4 and 4:2:2 colour at 10 to 16-bits per channel HDR output. BOTH the Still images and Video will be a Hollywood cinema-centric 1.89:1 aspect ratio! It DOES have the latest version HDMI output port for DCI 8k 60fps 4:4:4 with CLEAN audio/video output and BOTH a 3.5mm audio input and output jack (i.e. TWO audio jacks)!

It will be a entry-level 8K video capture system that competes DIRECTLY with the Blackmagic 4K pocket camera AND be a daily-use super-smartphone! The USB-3 charging system ALLOWS stills/video camera use while charging so it means the smartphone can be powered externally during use. There will also be external lens attachment and extra power supply/handgrip accessories offered right away in order to fulfill it's ability to be an entry level cinema camera! Now word yet on a specific date but the prototype is a nearly-finished consumer-ready model !!! A few more months and FCC/EU certs needed!

It will also be priced at about $1500 U.S. which is Red Hydrogen pricing territory BUT it looks like people WILL buy it!

.


----------



## ozturert (Jul 22, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Is that a problem for some reason?


Reliability. Extra risk for professionals. OK for me because I don't need the best reliability but if I was at Olympics I wouldn't want to miss shots because of failure in one of the adapters.
To clarify, my first comment was about professionals at Olympics. I don't care about amateurs.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 22, 2019)

ozturert said:


> Reliability. Extra risk for professionals. OK for me because I don't need the best reliability but if I was at Olympics I wouldn't want to miss shots because of failure in one of the adapters.
> To clarify, my first comment was about professionals at Olympics. I don't care about amateurs.


That explains why professionals never use a teleconverter. I just knew there was a reason, thanks!


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 23, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> The APS-C smartphone version is a whole different ball of wax as this is fully IP-68 ruggedized super-flagship smartphone, so it is close to 15mm thick and the battery is much much larger than normal at over 10 000 MAh for all day use.



Boy, that’s a trick. 10,000 mega amp hours at an assumed ~4VDC (typical of phone batteries) is enough to power 400,000 of tesla’s longest range sedans, or 33 time-traveling DeLoreans (for an hour each).


----------



## HarryFilm (Jul 23, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Boy, that’s a trick. 10,000 mega amp hours at an assumed ~4VDC (typical of phone batteries) is enough to power 400,000 of tesla’s longest range sedans, or 33 time-traveling DeLoreans (for an hour each).




Ok! Make that mAh (Milli-Amp Hours!) -- I think as an engineer you SHOULD have gotten the original intent! At 10,000 mAh, I am guessing 4 to 6 hours with the smartphone camera running at 60 fps DCI 8k video at say an average 12 bits 4:2:2 compressed interframe codec. At 4k DCI 4:2:2 10-bit video, I am guessing 8 hours to 12 hours. That is a BIG battery even if they are using a high powered Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 CPU. It will depend upon screen brightness being used, and other running apps BUT if the user is judicious with their apps usage I can easily see all-day use for budget cinematography for this APS-C smartphone.
.

I am ASSUMING its a newer type Thin-Film Lithium Ion battery with a more advanced cell draw and charge balancing controller which means its draw-down curve will be quite flat so you actually DO get the full run times indicated!
.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 23, 2019)

ozturert said:


> Reliability. Extra risk for professionals. OK for me because I don't need the best reliability but if I was at Olympics I wouldn't want to miss shots because of failure in one of the adapters.
> To clarify, my first comment was about professionals at Olympics. I don't care about amateurs.


A pro uses the right tool for the job.

At the olympics, reliability really isn’t an issue as there are a bazillion spare cameras and Canon service/loaners on site....

The reason for using a 1DX2 at the olympics is the file transfer..... as the photographer is clicking away, the files are being sent to HQ, where someone else is editing and posting them Yes, the camera is superior in many other ways, but in that scenario, Live file uploads are the killer app.

As far as teleconverters go, they suck on high density sensors when you are using a crappy lens. Put them on a low density FF camera with L primes, and as long as the lighting will let you AF quickly, they are great.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 24, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> Ok! Make that mAh (Milli-Amp Hours!) -- I think as an engineer you SHOULD have gotten the original intent!



I thought the sarcastic nature in my reply made it clear that I got the intent. If I really thought you meant 10GAh I would have responded... less tongue in cheek.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 24, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Touche! New compared to many. True. Long enough however to be well and truly over being so graciously informed about how, when, where and why someone decided to buy into the Sony system when I am trying to get to information that is relevant to the thread I am reading. In this case the future mirrorless pro canon. A camera which I will be in no position to buy of course but any information on this camera will likely give me an inkling into the general future direction and capabilities of all future canon mirrorless cameras


My favorite one was from a guy who said he decided to jump ship when he was on a cruise, or something like that.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 24, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> Even with spares and service, you're not going to have a chance to get a spare during most events.
> 
> I don't think reliability is a huge issue, that said: even an EOS R, definitely not a pro-grade camera, isn't going to just stop working half-way through the 50m dash or what have you.


What I meant is that in an event like the olympics, the photographers have several spares with them, and if one did fail, they can have it replaced by the next day. It’s not like they are on Safari or in Antarctica


----------

