# Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 2, 2014)

```
<p>The next Rebel, apparently coming in Q2 of 2015 will be the first Canon DSLR to use a electronic viewfinder. The camera will also feature the 70D’s 20mp sensor that uses split pixel technology and also feature DIGIC 6 like most of the new cameras. This combination of technologies would raise the bar considerably as far as image quality goes in the Rebel line.</p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_750D.html" target="_blank">NL</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
<p> </p>
```


----------



## Canon1 (Oct 2, 2014)

It's only a cr1 but if the sensor bit is true than that would support the 7d2 having a different sensor than the 70d. 

I wouldn't see canon releasing a rebel less than a year after the 7d2 and give it the same sensor. 

But... As stated... It's a cr1


----------



## pierlux (Oct 2, 2014)

If true, this time nobody is allowed to comment "yawn" at announcement time.

From bottom to top, hopefully the next FF releases are going to include really amazing features. We'll see...


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 2, 2014)

Ehh... evf... it might make sense as long as it's a big one, I forgot how small the VF is on a penta mirror the other day.


----------



## zim (Oct 2, 2014)

Wouldn't be a DSLR then, marks the end of the rebel line and the start of a new one. I'm sure I read a few peeps on hear predicting that a while back? is only CR1 though.


----------



## weixing (Oct 2, 2014)

Hi,
If going pure EVF mean it'll be mirrorless... 2 possibilities:
1) Replace by EOS M or design a slim rebel and use EF-M mount.
2) Remain the similar size as current rebel, so can still use EF mount and also a larger capacity battery.

I hope at least is 2 as EVF need a lot of power...

Have a nice day.


----------



## JRPhotos (Oct 2, 2014)

I hope that they don't bring that to higher models.... Isn't EVF that type of VF in the Point and shoots? If so, that is awful.


----------



## hoodlum (Oct 2, 2014)

JRPhotos said:


> I hope that they don't bring that to higher models.... Isn't EVF that type of VF in the Point and shoots? If so, that is awful.



The latest EVFs would be much better than the existing pentamirror viewfinder in the lower end Rebels. 

It would be a bit sad if a Rebel gets a built-in EVF and split pixel sensor before the EOS-M.


----------



## Skywise (Oct 2, 2014)

dilbert said:


> If it goes EVF ... will Canon make it mirrorless? No more mirror-slap would be good!
> 
> Interesting to see how far Canon will go with this...
> 
> But obviously they're preparing themselves to do mirrorless in an SLR styled body, a la Sony A7.



I would think it'd have to be mirrorless - It doesn't make any sense to have a mirror relay the image to a secondary sensor for the EVF?

At that point though you have to start questioning why the need for a live display on the back and a tiny one with a magnifying glass that you can...see the exact same thing on the larger display with. (Bright light conditions being one problem an EVF solve but I think that could be resolved some other way.)


----------



## Wizardly (Oct 2, 2014)

Unless said "Rebel" is an EOS M3, please say it ain't so.
I take that back, if it's the Fuji hybrid VF, then please do this!


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

hoodlum said:


> JRPhotos said:
> 
> 
> > I hope that they don't bring that to higher models.... Isn't EVF that type of VF in the Point and shoots? If so, that is awful.
> ...



Baloney.


----------



## iron-t (Oct 2, 2014)

Interesting. I like the idea of a hybrid Rebel/EOS-M with an EF-M mount and a more substantial grip for a decent sized battery. EVF would allow that in terms of flange focal distance. The entire package could be smaller than an SL1. If so, I'd buy one and ditch my EOS-M (which I really like while acknowledging that it's close to useless for anything that is moving).


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 2, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> The next Rebel, apparently coming in Q2 of 2015 will be the first Canon DSLR to use a electronic viewfinder. The camera will also feature the 70D’s 20mp sensor that uses split pixel technology and also feature DIGIC 6 like most of the new cameras.



Make that a [CR2+], that sounds about right - Canon will experiment with evf first in their fastest product cycle line to iron out any problems, and trickle down the 70d sensor as they made sure it's less capable than the 7d2's version.

I'm keen to see how their software works, dual pixel af with evf (i.e. "mirror up" photography) sounds very promising even though I'm very attached to the old-school optical vf. Will they have in-vf focus peaking for mf?


----------



## notsosem (Oct 2, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>The next Rebel, apparently coming in Q2 of 2015 will be the first Canon DSLR to use a electronic viewfinder. The camera will also feature the 70D’s 20mp sensor that uses split pixel technology and also feature DIGIC 6 like most of the new cameras. This combination of technologies would raise the bar considerably as far as image quality goes in the Rebel line.</p>
> <p>Source: [<a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_750D.html" target="_blank">NL</a>]</p>
> <p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
> <p> </p>



Noob here. 

Is the "split-pixel" mentioned here another name for DPAF?


----------



## DRR (Oct 2, 2014)

iron-t said:


> Interesting. I like the idea of a hybrid Rebel/EOS-M with an EF-M mount and a more substantial grip for a decent sized battery. EVF would allow that in terms of flange focal distance. The entire package could be smaller than an SL1. If so, I'd buy one and ditch my EOS-M (which I really like while acknowledging that it's close to useless for anything that is moving).



I "predicted" this in a different thread. I see Canon standardizing on EF-M for APS-C. Once EVF improves to a point that's good enough for mass-market consumers (that time might be now) then it makes sense to introduce it on the lower end cameras first. 90% of people who buy the Rebel line don't know the difference between EVF and OVF they just see features. "Hey it's brighter!" An EVF will likely be good enough for soccer moms and birthday party shooters because they aren't sophisticated enough to know the difference. That's not a insult to those shooters, it's just what you will find when you segment the market appropriately.

I'm thinking something like the Fuji XT1 that still "looks pro" so it'll appeal to this market, bundled with a EF-M 18-55. A standard EF-M to EF lens adapter would let people use any existing EF or EF-S glass they already have. 

I might actually buy that as a travel camera to replace my EOS-M.


----------



## emag (Oct 2, 2014)

One advantage my old G2 has over my DSLRs is high speed sync without having to use an expensive HSS capable flash. Maybe this CR1 camera would have this capability.


----------



## Woody (Oct 2, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> hoodlum said:
> 
> 
> > JRPhotos said:
> ...



+1

EVF are hopelessly bad. Still laggy. Yiiiiikes.

I'll take the tiny Rebel pentamirror any day over the EVFs available today.


----------



## Woody (Oct 2, 2014)

iron-t said:


> I like the idea of a hybrid Rebel/EOS-M with an EF-M mount and a more substantial grip for a decent sized battery.



Didn't Canon just release the 7D2 camera, EF-S 24 f/2.8 STM pancake and EF-S 10-18 STM lenses recently? Canon is not likely to abandon their EF-S mount any time soon. 

On the other hand, I won't be surprised if Nikon abandons their DX line altogether. They will rather produce a FX D750 camera than a DX D300s update.


----------



## Corvi (Oct 2, 2014)

Ohgod please no. If Canon is really going to jump on that EVF train ill jump off of it. Back to my old EOS 3, no new one here ..


----------



## Azathoth (Oct 2, 2014)

70D's sensor is the new 18 MP sensor. Yay!


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 2, 2014)

dilbert said:


> +1 for focus peaking! But please don't make us wait for EVF to have it!



Ugh? This was one of the very first features Magic Lantern had (for live view), it's available on most cameras, and it's free. The only thing it cannot manage is peaking in the viewfinder, you simply do need an evf for that.


----------



## jebrady03 (Oct 2, 2014)

If there's any shred of truth to this rumor, I have to assume it's M related. There might be a nugget of truth in there. Kind of like how the "high MP APSC" rumors turned out to be DPAF.


----------



## iron-t (Oct 2, 2014)

Woody said:


> iron-t said:
> 
> 
> > I like the idea of a hybrid Rebel/EOS-M with an EF-M mount and a more substantial grip for a decent sized battery.
> ...



The beauty of an EF-M mount is that it can use EF-M, EF-S and EF lenses equally well. There's really not much reason not to use the EF-M mount if the camera has no mirror. And didn't Canon not so long ago release an EF-M 11-22mm and EF-M 55-200mm? It doesn't look like that mount is going anywhere either.


----------



## Slyham (Oct 2, 2014)

notsosem said:


> Noob here.
> 
> Is the "split-pixel" mentioned here another name for DPAF?



Yes


It would be interesting if the SLx line goes mirrorless and the Txi line keeps the mirror. If it is successful then I could see Canon try it with the xxD line, e.g. 80D has the mirror, 85D does not.


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 2, 2014)

DRR said:


> ... Once EVF improves to a point that's good enough for mass-market consumers (that time might be now) then it makes sense to introduce it on the lower end cameras first. 90% of people who buy the Rebel line don't know the difference between EVF and OVF they just see features. "Hey it's brighter!" An EVF will likely be good enough for soccer moms and birthday party shooters because they aren't sophisticated enough to know the difference. That's not a insult to those shooters, it's just what you will find when you segment the market appropriately.
> 
> I'm thinking something like the Fuji XT1 that still "looks pro" so it'll appeal to this market ...



To quote Basil Fawlty: "You upper-class snob!"


----------



## davidcl0nel (Oct 2, 2014)

I am not very firm about the international nomenclature... 
Whats the name of the smallest DSLR, 100D ? Maybe this is a replacement for this model, to build it even smaller, if you can get rid of the prism.
Or is Rebel only the name of the middle class - in Europe its 300/350/.../700D.


----------



## Pitbullo (Oct 2, 2014)

weixing said:


> Hi,
> If going pure EVF mean it'll be mirrorless... 2 possibilities:
> 1) Replace by EOS M or design a slim rebel and use EF-M mount.
> 2) Remain the similar size as current rebel, so can still use EF mount and also a larger capacity battery.
> ...



My bet is that in the long run, the EF-S mount will be discontinued. It is wise to start introducing mirrorless in the rebel line, as the customers here probably is less demanding. Let the technology mature a bit before introducing mirrorless to the 70D/7D lineup. 
I think the new rebels will be either M mount, or an all new mount which later on also will be usable for FF mirrorless, or there about.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

Pitbullo said:


> My bet is that in the long run, the EF-S mount will be discontinued. It is wise to start introducing mirrorless in the rebel line, as the customers here probably is less demanding. Let the technology mature a bit before introducing mirrorless to the 70D/7D lineup.



It would have to "mature" an order of magnitude or two before it would be usable in a 7D type camera.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

EVF/OVF knowledge is lacking on my end. Someone please help me understand a few things / dispel a few misconceptions on my part:

(I'll cluster questions together to help you see where I am stuck / lack the knowledge to answer things. I don't think you need to answer each question so much as have one of them give you an a-ha! moment which flags what I fundamentally don't get.)

1) If this rumor is true and this means it will be an EVF camera w_ith the mirror/SLR setup remaining intact_:


Why go EVF on an SLR line? Why have an EVF if there is a mirror in the way?
Presuming Canon isn't digging into partially transparent mirrors, doesn't the mirror need to go up for the sensor (and therefore the EVF) to see anything?
Are they just trying to get a LiveView working through the viewfinder? If that's the case, why have a mirror at all?
Hybrid OVF / EVF function requires an optical viewfinder pathway that isn't in line with the sensor, doesn't it? Hybrid is only possible on something rangefinder-y like Fuji's bodies, right?

2) Now this battery of questions is interpreting this rumor to mean the new Rebels will get an _EVF which replaces the traditional mirror setup_. In this case, it would be EVF only / mirrorless. Questions if this is the direction:


Why? They'd either keep their EF-S mount to sensor distance (to protect their stable of EF-S glass) and have a far thicker body than any mirrorless competitor or they'd adopt something smaller (like EF-M) that would require a lot of new lenses to be developed.
Why convert Rebel's identity -- i.e. the most used SLR -- to mirrorless? Fantastic brand recognition, sure, but why redefine it so?
Why isn't Canon's second-ever EVF (remember the GI X Mark II has one) being made for EOS-M first, where it is so desperately needed?

Finally, if you buy this rumor, surely it will be the first scenario and not the second, right?

- A


----------



## Pitbullo (Oct 2, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Pitbullo said:
> 
> 
> > My bet is that in the long run, the EF-S mount will be discontinued. It is wise to start introducing mirrorless in the rebel line, as the customers here probably is less demanding. Let the technology mature a bit before introducing mirrorless to the 70D/7D lineup.
> ...



That was my thought also. Bringing the the rebel line into mirrorless makes much sense in that respect.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Why isn't Canon's second-ever EVF (remember the GI X Mark II has one) ...





So do the S1IS, S2IS, S3IS, S5IS, SX1, SX10, SX20, SX40, SX50, SX60, Pro 90 and Pro 1.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Why isn't Canon's second-ever EVF (remember the GI X Mark II has one) ...
> ...



Well, that's embarrassing. 

- A


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 2, 2014)

To me, it makes sense that the future SL2 has electronic viewfinder, and no mirror. But I see no advantage (for consumers) use mounting M. If you mount EF / EF-S maybe I'll buy one or two.


----------



## Famateur (Oct 2, 2014)

If Canon retired the EF-S mount, wouldn't that harm the upgrade path to EF lenses (particularly L series)? Would someone using an entry level body with EF-M mount really be as likely to buy an L lens if they have to buy an adapter, too?

I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

Famateur said:


> If Canon retired the EF-S mount, wouldn't that harm the upgrade path to EF lenses (particularly L series)? Would someone using an entry level body with EF-M mount really be as likely to buy an L lens if they have to buy an adapter, too?
> 
> I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...



Me neither. There's no reason to, and they are still coming out with new EF-s lenses.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 2, 2014)

Famateur said:


> I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...



But they're probably not advancing it further, either. Look at the last lens releases, esp. at the 16-35L/4 with IS with is just made to be a sturdy "standard" zoom on a 20mp crop camera...


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 2, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> 2) Now this battery of questions is interpreting this rumor to mean the new Rebels will get an _EVF which replaces the traditional mirror setup_. In this case, it would be EVF only / mirrorless. Questions if this is the direction:
> 
> 
> Why? They'd either keep their EF-S mount to sensor distance (to protect their stable of EF-S glass) and have a far thicker body than any mirrorless competitor or they'd adopt something smaller (like EF-M) that would require a lot of new lenses to be developed.



There is no absolute law that states mirrorless cameras must be small and have a short flange to focal plane distance. It is just something that somebody started to do and now everyone else does it. So maybe Canon has cottoned that these super-small SLR-like cameras - e.g. E-M5 & E-M10 - are just plain too small and that consumers will possibly want something a tad larger ... i.e. maybe their ergonomics experts have determined that their current line-up of DSLR cameras are just the right size?



ahsanford said:


> Why convert Rebel's identity -- i.e. the most used SLR -- to mirrorless? Fantastic brand recognition, sure, but why redefine it so?



Why not? The "Rebel" line started as a film SLR camera, then became a DSLR camera. So why not progress it to a mirrorless camera? Especially since the target audience for the "Rebel" line are more prone to adopt "new" technology than the more "settled" bunch for the top lines.[/list]


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 2, 2014)

Famateur said:


> If Canon retired the EF-S mount, wouldn't that harm the upgrade path to EF lenses (particularly L series)? Would someone using an entry level body with EF-M mount really be as likely to buy an L lens if they have to buy an adapter, too?
> I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...


Agree. The fact that APS-C cameras are also compatible with EF lenses (without adapter) provides a secure upgrade path for consumers and profitable for Canon. Abandon EF-S mount would be a gigantic stupidity.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 2, 2014)

Woody said:


> EVF are hopelessly bad. Still laggy. Yiiiiikes.
> 
> I'll take the tiny Rebel pentamirror any day over the EVFs available today.



The latest Olympus EVF has a lag of 0.016. (16 milliseconds). I wouldn't call that "hopelessly bad."


----------



## Rocky (Oct 2, 2014)

Famateur said:


> If Canon retired the EF-S mount, wouldn't that harm the upgrade path to EF lenses (particularly L series)? Would someone using an entry level body with EF-M mount really be as likely to buy an L lens if they have to buy an adapter, too?
> 
> I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...


If someone buys the L lens for the M, the cost of adapter is a small change. Why not?? On the other hand, the M mount lenses has already cover from 11mm to 200mm. That is more than enough for most people. One of the idea od M is to keep it small. Put a big L lens on it goes the opposite way. I have a 17-40 L, I have never consider mounting it on the M.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

Famateur said:


> If Canon retired the EF-S mount, wouldn't that harm the upgrade path to EF lenses (particularly L series)? Would someone using an entry level body with EF-M mount really be as likely to buy an L lens if they have to buy an adapter, too?
> 
> I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...



1) Agree with EF-S sticking around for a long time. There are currently (according to TDP) 14 first-party EF-S lenses available today to only (off the top of my head) 4 first-party EF-M lenses. So obsoleting the EF-S mount would put a large burden on EF-M glass development. I don't think they would do that in a leadership position in crop cameras unless crop sales were being devoured by mirrorless sales -- many folks have said that this is happening, but it has been in stops and starts. Crop camera sales aren't eroding from mirrorless like compacts are from cell phone camera use, so abandoning a mount that Canon can build lenses for cheaply in their sleep seems very premature.

2) Mirrorless enthusiasts _absolutely_ buy adapters to try all kinds of nutty lenses on their rigs -- full frame glass, ancient old lenses with manual focus, other companies' lenses, etc. But soccer moms and family archivist dads who buy a camera _that happens to be mirrorless_ will want native glass for that mount. So today, they can go sort-of-small with a crop camera that retains the ability to use EF glass natively, or you can crazy small with mirrorless at the cost of native lens connectivity without an adapter. 

In many cases, going small and using native mirrorless lenses means _waiting for the nicer FF lens you really want to be made for your mount_. This is the mirrorless quandary, and it should be no surprise that companies that lack as comprehensive lens offerings as Canon/Nikon (i.e. everyone) would rather throw the house at native mirrorless lens development rather than try to build an on-ramp for people to use larger existing lenses. As much as Canon owners with a dozen lenses love the value of an adapter for EOS-M (making it an easy 2nd/3rd body addition to our gear), we are very much in the minority. A mirrorless devotee who only uses one body wants great native glass for it, plain and simple.

- A


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > EVF are hopelessly bad. Still laggy. Yiiiiikes.
> ...



Even if it were true (I think it isn't), that's still hopelessly bad. It needs to be under 5ms for all lighting conditions, preferably closer to 2ms.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 2, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> To me, it makes sense that the future SL2 has electronic viewfinder, and no mirror. But I see no advantage (for consumers) use mounting M. If you mount EF / EF-S maybe I'll buy one or two.



The *advantage* for *Canon* is* lower cost* of production  The lower costs will not be passed on to consumers as lower prices  A BIG win-win for Canon, a BIG FU for consumers.


----------



## Marauder (Oct 2, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> hoodlum said:
> 
> 
> > JRPhotos said:
> ...



With mustard! ;D


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

Sella174 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > 2) Now this battery of questions is interpreting this rumor to mean the new Rebels will get an _EVF which replaces the traditional mirror setup_. In this case, it would be EVF only / mirrorless. Questions if this is the direction:
> ...




On your first bit, sure, but let's say they keep the EF-S mount setup and switch to an EVF. That EVF will gobble up battery and have a very small lag, which are downgrades from an OVF. I'd need to know why they'd shoe-horn in an (almost) must for mirrorless in a body that has room for a mirror. What is the upside to doing that? Cost? More compositional feedback a la LiveView (for the entry level?!). I must be missing something here.

On your second bit, you make a fair point -- Rebel _can_ evolve. I just don't think Rebel will evolve overnight. If this rumor is true -- and that's a big if -- one might imagine there would not be a hard exodus from mirrors. So you'd have Rebel SLRs alongside Rebel mirrorless -- they'd have to call them something very clearly different (like Rebel Mirrorless), and that seems a bit of a fragmentation of the brand rather than an evolution. I'm not opposed to it so much as curious why they would do this here instead of grow the EOS-M brand with an EVF, smaller native lenses, etc.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

Rocky said:


> If someone buys the L lens for the M, the cost of adapter is a small change. Why not?? On the other hand, the M mount lenses has already cover from 11mm to 200mm. That is more than enough for most people. One of the idea od M is to keep it small. Put a big L lens on it goes the opposite way. I have a 17-40 L, I have never consider mounting it on the M.



That's the problem. The purpose of mirrorless is to take stellar pictures in a much thinner body, hopefully with smaller lenses as well (but the sensor size does have something to say about that). 

But Canon knew that the first people in line to buy an EOS-M would be mirrorless devotees -- it would be existing Canon guys with lots of glass who want a very small 2nd or 3rd body. That (plus the lack of native EF-M lenses) is why the adapter was available on day one.

So -- at least with Canon -- you have two camps of EOS-M owners. They don't see eye to eye too often re: what should be mounted on it.

- A


----------



## lintoni (Oct 2, 2014)

dilbert said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...


No. It. Doesn't.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 2, 2014)

dilbert said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Focus peaking has a lot of computations to do, that needs power - I fail to see how Canon's implementation would be any different. Unless they put more battery power in, just as they just did with the 7d2 battery - a sign of the things to come.

Btw ML has various power saving mechanism, auto-disabling the cpu intensive stuff after a select idle timeout.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 2, 2014)

Basically Canon has three possible ways to design "a Digital Rebel with OVF".

1. Rebel-style and size body, e.g. like SL-1, fixed (pellicle) mirror, EVF [or hybrid VF] and EF-S mount
This concept has failed already 2 times ... first Canon Pellix, later Sony SLTs ... similar to e.g. Alpha 57 back in 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9545765927/sony-slt-a57-hvl-le1

2. Rebel-style and size body, e.g. like SL-1, mirrorless, EVF and EF-S mount 
This concept has failed also ... see Pentax K01 back in 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/products/pentax/slrs/pentax_k01

3. Mirrorless, EVF, EF-M mount = EOS M3 
Concept has half-failed first time round. Not for technical reasons, but for shortsighted Canon product crippling combined with Canon greed (way too high price). 


In reality Canon does not have a choice but to take route #3. Which is perfectly fine with me. 

And if they are smart, it will be sold body only and in 4 kits: 
A) Body with EF-M 18-55 STM and 
B) Body plus dual zoom kit .. EF-M 18-55 and EF-M 55-200 
C) Body with EF/EF-S adapter
D) Body with EF-M 18-55 and EF/EFS adapter


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 2, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Even if it were true (*I think it isn't)*, that's still hopelessly bad. It needs to be under 5ms for all lighting conditions, preferably closer to 2ms.



Why would I lie ???

*"Other Features and Performance Improvements
Improved EVF display time lag 
The display time lag has been reduced to 16 msec ..."*

Here's the Olympus Press Release http://www.olympus-global.com/en/news/2014b/nr140916em1e.jsp


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 2, 2014)

I think what this is saying most is that Canon is now confident about the capabilities of their dual pixel AF. Apparently one of the biggest challenges of the SL1 was compacting the mechanical parts. Now they can just remove them.

One of the things I want most out of a mirrorless full size EOS is the ability to make 24mm Pancake lenses that sit as much behind the flange as in front.
There isn't much space back there as is, it wouldn't be hard to keep the same EF mount and still have mirrorless lenses incompatible with mirrored bodies, the only thing you have to keep the same is the contacts, which are mostly out of the way sitting on the bottom, which wasn't a problem for EF-S either.

The real question is whether a 24mm pancake is really worth all the trouble, but if you're making a camera with no mirror anyway...
(and yes that an "EF" Full Frame 24mm Pancake that I'm talking about, not "EF-S", which is already coming)


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 2, 2014)

9VIII said:


> One of the things I want most out of a mirrorless full size EOS is the ability to make 24mm Pancake lenses that sit as much behind the flange as in front.
> There isn't much space back there as is, it wouldn't be hard to keep the same EF mount and still have mirrorless lenses incompatible with mirrored bodies, the only thing you have to keep the same is the contacts, which are mostly out of the way sitting on the bottom, which wasn't a problem for EF-S either.
> The real question is whether a 24mm pancake is really worth all the trouble, but if you're making a camera with no mirror anyway...
> (and yes that an "EF" Full Frame 24mm Pancake that I'm talking about, not "EF-S", which is already coming)



Not needed. Exists already ... EF-M 22/2.0. Small pancake. Great lens. Excellent value. ;D


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 2, 2014)

Canon has patents for a hybrid viewfinder that switches from optical to evf when the mirror is raised. That makes more sense to me, the 70D dual pixel sensor is not ready for fast AF yet unless there is a breakthrough that they did not include in the 7D MK II.

I suppose that there could be a mirrorless Rebel that used EF and EF-s lenses. That makes a lot of sense from a standpoint of being able to use existing lenses.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Basically Canon has three possible ways to design "a Digital Rebel with OVF".
> 
> 1. Rebel-style and size body, e.g. like SL-1, fixed (pellicle) mirror, EVF [or hybrid VF] and EF-S mount
> This concept has failed already 2 times ... first Canon Pellix, later Sony SLTs ... similar to e.g. Alpha 57 back in 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9545765927/sony-slt-a57-hvl-le1
> ...



Love the vision here -- a world where EF-M replaces EF-S is not an impossible one. I could see 5-10 years from now SLRs being relegated to the pro end only and the rest of Canon's still cameras being mirrorless. But I see Canon supporting three still camera mounts (EF-M, EF-S, EF) for the foreseeable future. 

It makes *far* more sense to build up EOS-M -- beef up the EF-M lens portfolio, offer an EOS-M EVF, consider a higher end EF-M body, etc. -- _before_ they ever try to replace what Rebels do today.

- A


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 2, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> On your first bit, sure, but let's say they keep the EF-S mount setup and switch to an EVF. That EVF will gobble up battery and have a very small lag, which are downgrades from an OVF. I'd need to know why they'd shoe-horn in an (almost) must for mirrorless in a body that has room for a mirror. What is the upside to doing that? Cost? More compositional feedback a la LiveView (for the entry level?!). I must be missing something here.



A few random points to maybe fill in the parts you might be missing. 

A larger body (for a mirrorless camera) offers the opportunity for a larger or second battery. This point is one of the great Catch-22's of current mirrorless cameras ... the camera is small, so the battery must also be small; yet the camera requires more power, apparently. I say apparently, because the battery of my FUJIFILM X-T1 lasts about 400 actuations; but then I nearly always use the EVF exclusively (and set to auto-on/off).

The EF-S mount allows no-brainer attachment of EF (read *L*) lenses. This provides a clear upgrade for a novice from a mirrorless "Rebel" to *L*-lenses to a full-frame camera. The EF-M mount is single-use only; plus it will require duplication of lenses for those photographers who want the benefits of using both a full-frame camera and a mirrorless camera.

An EVF is also a cheap way to create a huge selling point ... a big viewfinder. With the small mirror in APS-C cameras it is not (easily) possible to have the same size viewfinder as on for example the 1D-series, without resorting to optics (an expense). But an EVF can be made as large or even larger than the viewfinder in full-frame cameras at basically no extra cost - beyond that of the EVF itself.

Then there is the bugbear of lag ... Hehehehe, the EVF in my X-T1 sometimes does funny things, but overall the lag is ... wait, what lag? 

But why should Canon actually do it ... put an EVF in a "Rebel"? Because (a) almost everybody else uses EVF's in their cameras, (b) mirrorless is here to stay and (c) they have to put it somewhere.



ahsanford said:


> On your second bit, you make a fair point -- Rebel _can_ evolve. I just don't think Rebel will evolve overnight. If this rumor is true -- and that's a big if -- one might imagine there would not be a hard exodus from mirrors. So you'd have Rebel SLRs alongside Rebel mirrorless -- they'd have to call them something very clearly different (like Rebel Mirrorless), and that seems a bit of a fragmentation of the brand rather than an evolution. I'm not opposed to it so much as curious why they would do this here instead of grow the EOS-M brand with an EVF, smaller native lenses, etc.



I think mirrors will be a part of Canon's camera strategy for a few more years, especially in their top-end cameras. However, I feel strongly that the 100D/SL1 should have been a mirrorless camera, co-existing with the larger 700D/Rebel "whatever" camera. This would have given consumers a choice between sticking with the traditional or going for the new. And it would have given Canon a great market analysis as to the viability of mirrorless in terms of their brand.

The EOS-M is a cute camera. However, it is a dead-end in terms of long-term development of the photographer, as the EF-M mount doesn't lend itself to a seamless "upgrade" path to ... well, full-frame.

If Canon does indeed decide to grow the EOS-M brand, then they will have to add much more in terms of capabilities and lenses; and this will bite into their top-end cameras. If they don't add these things, then the EOS-M brand remains a once-off, cute camera for hobbiests. (The current poor battery-life of the EOS-M makes it unsuitable as a travel camera, although this would be a great application of it.)


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

Sella174 said:


> A few random points to maybe fill in the parts you might be missing.



Great comments, thank you. Very helpful for answering my questions.

Always having a road to allow EF glass to work presumes that Canon will ride their epic EF lens lineup to the bitter end, which is not a terrible assumption. But part of me wonders if the world would really end if smaller mounts got higher quality native lenses -- L, USM, pro build, etc. 

But hell -- throw us a bone, Canon. Give me just one decent native USM lens for EF-M and I might buy an EOS-M.

- A


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 2, 2014)

It will be interesting to see how much Canon *cripples* the* EVF Rebel*. Will it be as good as an Olympus E-M10 (entry level $750.00 w/kit zoom) ??? Or will Canon deem that level of performance a threat to their more expensive 70D ??? 

*My next camera will have an EVF* -- how bad does Canon want my business ???


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 2, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> ... offer an EOS-M EVF ...



Olympus tried this with the E-Px series and now they are concentrating on the SLR-like E-Mx series. The conclusion is to quote Rincewind: "That doesn't work." 



ahsanford said:


> ... consider a higher end EF-M body ...



How higher? On par with the 70D? That'll kill their "prosumer" mid-level camera range for sure. :'(


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 2, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> But part of me wonders if the world would really end if smaller mounts got higher quality native lenses -- L, USM, pro build, etc.



The very fact that Canon has still today refused to treat us with an *EF-S L* lens, should be your answer: yes.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

Sella174 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > ... consider a higher end EF-M body ...
> ...



Those are different user groups. 70D / 7D / 7D2 guys value responsiveness as much as functions/features. They won't give up their OVFs anytime soon.

I just think one sweeping EOS-M upgrade that addresses the major needs of mirrorless devotees -- an EVF, more responsive focusing, better grip, etc. -- will still allow a smaller form factor camera to take pictures in more arenas.

Will it bite into crop SLR sales? Maybe. But if it's the inevitable future, why run from it? 

- A


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 2, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Those are different user groups. 70D / 7D / 7D2 guys value responsiveness as much as functions/features. They won't give up their OVFs anytime soon.



I fall in the 70D "grouping" and I gave up the OVF. (The decision on upgrading my 30D's was either the 70D or the X-T1. And I chose ... 8))

The 7D2 is for me a conundrum: great camera, iffy native lenses. But that aside, obviously Canon cannot improve the EOS-M to this level, both technologically and fiscally.



ahsanford said:


> I just think one sweeping EOS-M upgrade that addresses the major needs of mirrorless devotees -- an EVF, more responsive focusing, better grip, etc. -- will still allow a smaller form factor camera to take pictures in more arenas.



Call me negative, but I think it is too late for Canon. Everyone who wants those things in a primary camera has already bought a Panasonic, FUJIFILM, Olympus or Sony camera and lenses. Unless Canon can do it cheaper, but then we won't be getting "an EVF, more responsive focusing, better grip, etc." 



ahsanford said:


> But if it's the inevitable future, why run from it?



What else is there to do?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

Sella174 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Those are different user groups. 70D / 7D / 7D2 guys value responsiveness as much as functions/features. They won't give up their OVFs anytime soon.
> ...



That's the weird bit. I almost now see the _70D_ as the top end crop camera for _all-purpose_ use, and I see the 7D2 (by any measure, a better rig) becoming more of the specialist reach/sports tool for better funded shooters -- i.e. most of the reach-limited folks who will be bolting superteles on to their new 7D2 probably aren't sad about the lack of high-quality ultrawide and 'wider standard zoom' options for it. : To those folks, the 7D2 becomes a crop teleconverter for big glass to do more for them. 

So I just don't see the 7D2 as something you buy for standard FL use. _It's the reach camera_. No need for standard FLs on it. If you really need great 16-something / 24-something FF equivalent, the 7D2 might not be the camera for you. It might be time to look into a 6D or used 5D3 to tap into that great EF glass.

I know that's a minority position, but hey.

- A


----------



## iron-t (Oct 2, 2014)

Quite a debate. I think if this rumor is true it will take this form: EVF replaces mirror assembly; body size (particularly thickness front to back) is reduced but retains general shape of Rebel series including body height; EF-M mount; kits include EF-M to EF adapter; only larger size, hand grip, battery, body material (black/white polymer), dial configuration and EVF differentiate from next EOS-M; Canon retains either some Rebel models with mirrors (and native EF-S mount) or creates a new line for those products; and Canon does not introduce many more EF-M lenses.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

iron-t said:


> Quite a debate. I think if this rumor is true it will take this form: EVF replaces mirror assembly; body size (particularly thickness front to back) is reduced but retains general shape of Rebel series including body height; EF-M mount; kits include EF-M to EF adapter; only larger size, hand grip, battery, body material (black/white polymer), dial configuration and EVF differentiate from next EOS-M; Canon retains either some Rebel models with mirrors (and native EF-S mount) or creates a new line for those products; and Canon does not introduce many more EF-M lenses.



I never put it together that way, but that's clever --> it'd be an EOS-M with a decent grip like a Rebel. That might be the 'EOS-M3' everyone has been waiting for.

- A


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 2, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> So I just don't see the 7D2 as something you buy for standard FL use. _It's the reach camera_. No need for standard FLs on it.



You're probably absolutely right. I wonder what the kit lens will be ... an *EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM* lens?


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> ...most of the reach-limited folks who will be bolting superteles on to their new 7D2 probably aren't sad about the lack of high-quality ultrawide and 'wider standard zoom' options for it.



High quality ultrawide options don't seem to me to be lacking at all - 10-22, 10-18, 10mm fisheye, 10-17 zoom fisheye, 11-16/2.8, 10-20, 8-16, 12-28, 10-24, and so on.

Now, standard zooms that actually start at 24mm equivalent is a huge problem. There's just one, the 15-85IS. The huge rash of 16,17,18-xx zooms out there just annoy the heck out of me.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 2, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> High quality ultrawide options don't seem to me to be lacking at all - 10-22, 10-18, 10mm fisheye, 10-17 zoom fisheye, 11-16/2.8, 10-20, 8-16, 12-28, 10-24, and so on.



No interest in Big/Bulky/Slow zoomz  Where are the small/light/fast primes ??? Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic have wide/fast primes


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > High quality ultrawide options don't seem to me to be lacking at all - 10-22, 10-18, 10mm fisheye, 10-17 zoom fisheye, 11-16/2.8, 10-20, 8-16, 12-28, 10-24, and so on.
> ...



Well, I use a 15mm/2.8 fisheye on full-frame, and the 10mm f/2.8 for crop seems to be quite good as well.


----------



## distant.star (Oct 2, 2014)

.
[CR1] No further comment.


----------



## ecka (Oct 2, 2014)

*EOS M*_ebel_?


----------



## Policar (Oct 2, 2014)

Rebels always had bad viewfinders. Entry-level shooters prefer WISYWIG though god knows anyone who has a clue what they're doing prefers optical finders.

I can see it happening. Although between the Rebel line and the C100 Canon has proven their adeptness at making any kind of finder horrible lol.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Oct 2, 2014)

Mirrorless & no moving parts would make it difficult to wear out. Image quality goes up when mirror bounce is removed. +++ I use live view for critical work- big difference. If it will take all my big glass, I'd be very tempted to give it a try. Also, the lack of moving parts would open the door to a higher frame rate. +++++++
It would be nice to be able to shoot video without holding the damn thing 2 feet out in front of you- especially with a "big white" attached. Should be interesting.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 2, 2014)

KeithBreazeal said:


> Mirrorless & no moving parts would make it difficult to wear out. Image quality goes up when mirror bounce is removed. +++ I use live view for critical work- big difference. If it will take all my big glass, I'd be very tempted to give it a try. Also, the lack of moving parts would open the door to a higher frame rate. +++++++
> It would be nice to be able to shoot video without holding the damn thing 2 feet out in front of you- especially with a "big white" attached. Should be interesting.



exactly. I am looking forweard to SSCs .. solid stae cameras. 100% mechanics-free. Fully electronic, Global Shutter. No noise. No slapping. No flapping. No cocking. No springing. No vibration. YES! 

Last element to get rid of will be mechanical apertures - replace with electro-translucent LCD or similar. Always perfectly circular at any f-stop. Smaller unit. And no miore mechanical focus gears and focus rings. Everything by wire. Makes .. smaller lenses. And better wheathersealed ones, too. Pancakes galore. Plus tiny f/4 zooms all the way to 135 mm. All of them dirt cheap like EF-M lenses. And optically more than "good enough". For me. And most enthusiasts. All the others may just go and buy Leica and Zeiss Otusses. 8)


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

Oh boy. I've had exactly two viewfinders die in my life. One was an EVF, one was an LCD.

An electrochromic aperture isn't an aperture, it's an ND filter. You can reduce light that way but you can't stop down to change DOF.


----------



## keriboi (Oct 2, 2014)

Does anyone not think it is strange that its so far away? Q2? 
Maybe it is going to be a big step up and be a direct competetor to the 70D so they are wating to get as many 70D sales out. 80D will then be released Q3?


----------



## brad-man (Oct 2, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> KeithBreazeal said:
> 
> 
> > Mirrorless & no moving parts would make it difficult to wear out. Image quality goes up when mirror bounce is removed. +++ I use live view for critical work- big difference. If it will take all my big glass, I'd be very tempted to give it a try. Also, the lack of moving parts would open the door to a higher frame rate. +++++++
> ...



And they all lived happily ever after, never worrying about shutter count/failure. Now if they could only make the lenses just as rugged...


----------



## Woody (Oct 2, 2014)

Sella174 said:


> Call me negative, but I think it is too late for Canon. Everyone who wants those things in a primary camera has already bought a Panasonic, FUJIFILM, Olympus or Sony camera and lenses.



What Canon brings to the table for me:
i) customer service (may vary according to where one lives) is great where I am
ii) backward compatibility with wide range of EF and EF-S lenses, e.g., neither Panasonic, Fujifilm, Olympus or Sony has a > 150 mm (FF equivalent) 1:1 macro lens; I can adapt an EF 100 mm macro lens on EF-M camera without significant loss in AF capability... 
iii) compatibility with ACR/Lightroom: Adobe has problems with Fujifilm RAW files
iv) accessories, e.g., Panasonic, Fujifilm, Olympus and Sony all have gaps with respect to wired and wireless remotes


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 2, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Oh boy. I've had exactly two viewfinders die in my life. One was an EVF, one was an LCD.
> 
> An electrochromic aperture isn't an aperture, it's an ND filter. You can reduce light that way but you can't stop down to change DOF.



of course you can. it just needs to be engineered to make the translucent portion perfectly round and variable in size. 

like here, for example: http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2014/06/future-smartphone-cameras-may-use-a-micro-electrochromic-iris-made-from-smart-glass-eliminating-the-use-of-actuators.html

I don't care, HOW they make it. I just want it to be perfectly round, 100% mechanics and vibration-free, small, light and designed for 10 million actuations.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Oh boy. I've had exactly two viewfinders die in my life. One was an EVF, one was an LCD.
> ...



Then it's going to have to be a high resolution, high transmission, high contrast screen that doesn't create new reflections or cause other optical aberrations since it's going to be in the light path.

And when is the last time you had trouble with a mechanical aperture?


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 2, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> And when is the last time you had trouble with a mechanical aperture?



Never. But I want "better and smaller". 100% mechanics-free. Electronic apertures are a necessary part for future Solid State Cameras with functionality that far surpasses the hybrid-half-mechanical machines of yesterday and today. At least until we really move on to lightfield imaging devices.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > And when is the last time you had trouble with a mechanical aperture?
> ...



I really don't want smaller, except for my pocket camera. My 35/1.4L is too small for me. My hands aren't getting any smaller, so why do I want my cameras to get smaller?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > And when is the last time you had trouble with a mechanical aperture?
> ...



I think you forgot the intermediate evolutionary phase where we all become videographers and poach our best stills from video. 

- A


----------



## dak723 (Oct 2, 2014)

Policar said:


> Rebels always had bad viewfinders. Entry-level shooters prefer WISYWIG though god knows anyone who has a clue what they're doing prefers optical finders.



Always glad to see insulting, ignorant comments on the web!

Having 35 years of photography experience, I was less than enthusiastic when I purchased an Olympus EM-1 with EVF. All I had ever used was an OVF, so was skeptical.  Now after 1 year of owning both the Olympus and a Canon 6D, I wish the Canon had an EVF. Great advantage of WYSIWYG for difficult lighting situations such as sunsets. Many other "in viewfinder" adjustments and info available. The lag is so minimal it has never been an issue on any shot I have taken. In fact, the EVF is so good, I forget that it is an EVF while shooting.

And yes, I do have a clue what I am doing. Apology expected.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 2, 2014)

keriboi said:


> Does anyone not think it is strange that its so far away? Q2?
> Maybe it is going to be a big step up and be a direct competetor to the 70D so they are wating to get as many 70D sales out. 80D will then be released Q3?


 
Since its a CR1, which means unlikely to happen. Well, maybe Q2 of 2035. Its just a rumor and a great discussion item, but when you start worrying about delivery dates, that's very premature.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Oct 2, 2014)

It's really interesting reading this debate the U.S. has had the worst take up of mirror less cameras. I've used them all the way back to the first Olympus E-PL1 and now use the Olympus OM-D E-M10. The E-M10 is a great camera with great IQ certainly better than my Canon 7d which I now hardly use. However the E-M10 is no match for the 6d which far excels it IQ wise. 
As I can afford both systems they have separate uses for city / urban or walkabout the Oly is my choice for landscape the 6d is my choice and for wildlife & sport I still use the 7d. 
I really don't notice any longer the difference between the Optical Finder and the EVF you quickly adapt to both I'm more interested in control layout and intuitive menus here Canon beats Olympus but the rotary control on the E-M10 to adjust exposure comp is easier than Canon.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Oct 2, 2014)

Woody
The Olympus OM-D E-M10 can use their iPhone app. For wireless remote with live view and touch screen focus. The Canon 6d uses Canon similar app. and I have to say Olympus app is better. 
I have the grip for both cameras and flash for both cameras so Olympus doesn't really have that much of a gap than Canon.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

dak723 said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > Rebels always had bad viewfinders. Entry-level shooters prefer WISYWIG though god knows anyone who has a clue what they're doing prefers optical finders.
> ...



Yeah, I wish the world could take a more measured approach to condemning things they don't like.

_Personally_, I prefer the responsiveness of an OVF and have shot DSLRs for about ten years now. 

That said, I've never owned an EVF camera (unless cell phones count ). I have tinkered with EVFs in hands-on moments in stores -- particularly Sony mirrorless models as I have a Sony store near me. I have found the EVFs to be bright and loaded full of information, but a shade laggy compared to what I am used to.

I think the appeal of an EVF varies on what you shoot. If I could completely decouple the fact that _those shooting with EVFs do so because it's the only VF you get with mirrorless_ (unless you go... Fuji or Leica, right?) -- and that's a big if -- you could parse out some nice upsides to an EVF:


You get the upside of LiveView without the somewhat detached composition feel of looking at the LCD. I personally love LiveView on a tripod for landscape work, but it's not the responsive framing experience that using handholding through the viewfinder gives you. Someone just made a comment about super bright shooting like a sunset, and you just can't experience that before you shoot on an OVF.


You can shape / modify your viewfinder experience. A real time histo instead of a basic EV indicator, focus peaking, highlight clipping warnings in context in the shot, etc. would seem to be powerful opportunities if they didn't clutter things too much.


It has got to be easier to see in dark conditions, right?

But there are realities about battery life and responsiveness that would represent a downgrade to OVF shooters. So, _for me_ (and not condemning those that disagree), I'm still OVF until I get a compelling reason to leave that behind.

- A


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 2, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> ...the Oly is my choice for landscape...
> 
> ...I really don't notice any longer the difference between the Optical Finder and the EVF...



These two are directly related. For landscape, you can get away without a viewfinder, in many cases. Try shooting low-light action with the EVF camera and you'll quickly find it in pieces on the ground after you've missed your hundredth consecutive shot.


----------



## Policar (Oct 2, 2014)

dak723 said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > Rebels always had bad viewfinders. Entry-level shooters prefer WISYWIG though god knows anyone who has a clue what they're doing prefers optical finders.
> ...



Good for you, I can tell. Continue posting them!

Those of us who know what we're doing will get back to shooting with optical finders and knowing how to meter properly in the first place. 

As for my apology, you've earned it. I'm sorry you've been shooting that long and still don't have a clue how to meter!


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 2, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> I'm more interested in control layout and intuitive menus here Canon beats Olympus but the rotary control on the E-M10 to adjust exposure comp is easier than Canon.



Wow. My 5D3 (and I think both your 6D and 7D) use the back wheel for EC. There are no buttons to press... you just turn the wheel. I'd argue that's the easiest adjustment Canon has other than the index finger wheel (for shutter or aperture, depending on what mode you're in).

I've never shot the Olympus, but how does it beat a dedicated wheel for a task? Is it in a better location, perhaps? Just curious.

- A


----------



## Bennymiata (Oct 3, 2014)

Many of us on this forum have been asking Canon to catch up with Sony, but we want Canon to catch up with their sensors, and NOT the horrible evf!


----------



## RodS57 (Oct 3, 2014)

Responding to nothing in particular but some of the comments in general.

As far as smaller size camera goes with or without EVF and no mirror - not interested. I like to have room to hold onto the camera without accidentally touching controls. Actually being able to get a comfortable grip is the biggest short coming of all these small cameras. 

EVF vs OVF - my last camera had EVF and didn't work well but to be fair the camera is old and no comparison to what's out there today. That being said the EVF provided much more information than my 'new' OVF. Short term this was an issue because I can't read with glasses off and can't see through the viewfinder with glasses on. I just got used to not seeing information that i normally could see in the EVF.


----------



## Woody (Oct 3, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> Woody
> The Olympus OM-D E-M10 can use their iPhone app. For wireless remote with live view and touch screen focus. The Canon 6d uses Canon similar app. and I have to say Olympus app is better.
> I have the grip for both cameras and flash for both cameras so Olympus doesn't really have that much of a gap than Canon.



Thanks for the info.

But as many users have pointed out, there is still a preference for non-wifi remote as one does not need to worry about phone battery. Also, is there a wired remote to allow star trails photography?

In addition, doesn't the use of grip negate the size/weight advantage of the E-M10? This however is not a concern for me as I am used to carrying spare batteries.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 3, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Well, I use a 15mm/2.8 fisheye on full-frame, and the 10mm f/2.8 for crop seems to be quite good as well.



Glad that you like fisheye lenses. I prefer wide rectilinear lenses. Something like the EF 14mm f/2.8. A 9mm crop lens (=14.4 Full Frame). An f/1.8 or f/2.0 would be nice 

BTW the Sigma 10mm F/2.8 EX DC Fisheye is a Sigma, not a Canon lens


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 3, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> I really don't want smaller, except for my pocket camera. My 35/1.4L is too small for me. My hands aren't getting any smaller, so why do I want my cameras to get smaller?



I'm over 6' tall, wear size 13 shoes and have hands to match  And I prefer holding a Sony NEX over any of my Canon Film SLR or DSLR cameras. YMMV, but please don't tell me what I should or shouldn't like.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 3, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > I really don't want smaller, except for my pocket camera. My 35/1.4L is too small for me. My hands aren't getting any smaller, so why do I want my cameras to get smaller?
> ...



I'm 5'6" and wear size 7 shoes, and my 5D and 70-200/2.8 is the easiest and most comfortable combo I've ever used. I can use if all day every day with no trouble, but a Rebel and 15-85 killed my hands after just an hour and a half - too small.


----------



## sanj (Oct 3, 2014)

Oh no!!! The mighty Canon is going to have the lowly EVF. Oh hooo. Now what will all the anti EVF people say??? 
Let me start reading the thread after posting this…

It ought to be entertaining...


----------



## sanj (Oct 3, 2014)

dilbert said:


> If it goes EVF ... will Canon make it mirrorless? No more mirror-slap would be good!
> 
> Interesting to see how far Canon will go with this...
> 
> But obviously they're preparing themselves to do mirrorless in an SLR styled body, a la Sony A7.



Canon and mirror less? Naaaa that is for inferior camera manufactures. [Sarcasm]


----------



## sanj (Oct 3, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > Woody said:
> ...



I wonder if you have actually used an EVF. To me, after using XE2 for over a year, they are GREAT.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 3, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > One of the things I want most out of a mirrorless full size EOS is the ability to make 24mm Pancake lenses that sit as much behind the flange as in front.
> ...



I'm looking for the 24mm Full Frame FOV, it would have to be a 15mm EF-M lens to do that.


----------



## Woody (Oct 3, 2014)

Bennymiata said:


> Many of us on this forum have been asking Canon to catch up with Sony, but we want Canon to catch up with their sensors, and NOT the horrible evf!



Unfortunately, the EVF end is inevitable. See here:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/sensors-are-a-moving-target.html

"... it’s inevitable that DSLRs eventually become mirrorless... DSLRs are too complex to continue to drop in inflation-adjusted pricing and stay in that under-US$1000 pocket. So we’ll see separate parts (meter, focus sensor) move into the ever-improving image sensor, and the things they previously needed to support them disappear. Exactly the way Sony has done it in the A7 series...

Mirrorless approaches will drive out problematic complexity and cost; they remove components (meter, focus system) and put them on the sensor itself at no other tangible cost than R&D."


----------



## sanj (Oct 3, 2014)

Woody said:


> Bennymiata said:
> 
> 
> > Many of us on this forum have been asking Canon to catch up with Sony, but we want Canon to catch up with their sensors, and NOT the horrible evf!
> ...



I like both EVF and Optical. Both should exist side by side. As of today.


----------



## dgatwood (Oct 3, 2014)

Woody said:


> Bennymiata said:
> 
> 
> > Many of us on this forum have been asking Canon to catch up with Sony, but we want Canon to catch up with their sensors, and NOT the horrible evf!
> ...



That's silly. Pros don't give a flying you-know-what about whether they're in the under-$1000 pocket. They care about things like low latency, maintaining dark adaptation of their eyes at night, fast focusing speed, and ability to see critical focus with the naked eye (at normal f-stops, anyway). EVFs can't deliver that combination, nor are they likely to be able to deliver it within the next ten years.

The OLED displays are getting close to not blowing out your night vision, but they only last two or three years, and they have poor resolution, which means you can't focus accurately by eye alone (without zooming in and losing the ability to pay attention to what's happening around you, anyway). And LCD-based EVFs have higher resolution and longer life, but have crap contrast and can't get very dark. And latency and focusing speed have a long way to go.

I just don't see EVFs replacing OVFs for high-end still photography gear any time soon. It's not that they're not quite ready; it's that they're nowhere *near* ready. In theory, I could see them take over the Rebel line, but in practice, I can't see that, either. the problem is, they won't be able to call them DSLRs anymore, and a sizable percentage of the folks who buy low-end DSLRs buy them *because they're DSLRs*. Half of them don't even know what DSLR means, but they know that they want one. So I would expect mirrorless cameras to continue to exist alongside true DSLRs for many more years even at the low end. Then again, what do I know?


----------



## Policar (Oct 3, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > Bennymiata said:
> ...



While I agree entirely, and have suffered from using the C100's awful EVF during daylight enough to prove it, I find the Rebel line's finders so poor that I would take a great EVF over their dreadful OVFs in some circumstances and I think most inexperienced photographers who want WYSIWYG exposure, histograms, etc. would agree. Sony has marketed faux-dSLRs for years to the gullible; as have others. If Canon does, no huge surprise.

The idea that an EVF is better is laughable. Even the most precisely calibrated monitor won't retain the color gamut, resolution, and contrast of real light. If you find yourself preferring EVFs, either learn to shoot or consult your eye doctor. 

But I've been spoiled a bit. The 5D Mark III has a gorgeous finder. I've used film cameras with poor finders and I realize it's all relative. I've found the Alexa to have an adequate EVF, but a mercifully uncluttered one (not even the option to pull up a waveform monitor or histogram!).


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 3, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> That said, I've never owned an EVF camera (unless cell phones count ). I have tinkered with EVFs in hands-on moments in stores -- particularly Sony mirrorless models as I have a Sony store near me. I have found the EVFs to be bright and loaded full of information, but a shade laggy compared to what I am used to.



It depends on the available light: I have found that in certain light conditions, especially indoors with fluorescent light (which flickers at 50/60Hz) the EVF of my X-T1 does struggle a bit. But outside in the sun or indoors with incandescent light it is really fast enough.


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 3, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> That's silly. Pros don't give a flying you-know-what about whether they're in the under-$1000 pocket. They care about things like low latency, maintaining dark adaptation of their eyes at night, fast focusing speed, and ability to see critical focus with the naked eye (at normal f-stops, anyway). EVFs can't deliver that combination, nor are they likely to be able to deliver it within the next ten years.



Depends on your definition of what a "pro" photographer does for a living. Good professional photographers are primarily interested in creating the picture. Good professional photographers then use the gear best suited to producing said required/desired picture. Good professional photographers actually don't give a hoot about those things you've mentioned ... if you can't take a good picture with your FUJIFILM Instax or Apple iPhone, then you ain't a good professional photographer. I have seen too many "professional" photographers totally depending on the abilities of their "pro" cameras and "post" to actually take a mediocre picture. (Just for fun, go watch those DigitalRev episodes on YouTube where they challenge a professional photographer with a crappola camera ... and see who makes it and who don't, as it is very informative ... especially when you look at the "preferred gear" of those who do poorly on the test.)


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 3, 2014)

Policar said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Policar said:
> ...



Wow, talk about denial. Sheesh-kebabs!


----------



## Tugela (Oct 3, 2014)

Policar said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > Woody said:
> ...



What is laughable is the notion that you need color gamut, resolution and contrast in a viewfinder.

The purpose of the viewfinder is to compose the image, nothing more.

EFVs can display extremely useful information that an optical viewfinder cannot, such as exposure information and focus information.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 3, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > ...the Oly is my choice for landscape...
> ...



Why? An EFV can see in the dark, an OFV can't.

With an EFV you get some idea of what your camera sees, in other words what the picture is going to look like. An OFV can't do that.


----------



## sanj (Oct 3, 2014)

Tugela said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > dgatwood said:
> ...



Nooo! With me shooting on RED and Alexia for film making I judge lighting in the viewfinder with perfect ease and success.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 3, 2014)

sanj said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > c.d.embrey said:
> ...



I doubt it. I get the feeling that a lot of people here are reactionary and resist change just because it is different. ;D


----------



## Policar (Oct 3, 2014)

Tugela said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > dgatwood said:
> ...



Funny, I like to compose an image in full resolution based on the actual light, and find the resolution of a ground glass far superior to that of a small, pixellated LCD. I'd rather compose in real time than with lag, and don't enjoy rainbow artifacts when I'm trying to base my image on color.

And generally I nail my exposures, by, you know, metering correctly in the first place.

But if it's adequate for you, great!


----------



## Policar (Oct 3, 2014)

sanj said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Policar said:
> ...



Tell that to Roger Deakins. 

But while I am a big fan of optical finders over electronic ones, I'll admit the Alexa has a nice EVF and the red a... well... adequate one. Better than the current Rebel's OVF, even.

Even if so, you're in the minority. I find most modern DPs are awful at judging ratios and can't light a set without a camera in front of them. The others use a meter.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 3, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> It's really interesting reading this debate the U.S. has had the worst take up of mirror less cameras. I've used them all the way back to the first Olympus E-PL1 and now use the Olympus OM-D E-M10. The E-M10 is a great camera with great IQ certainly better than my Canon 7d which I now hardly use. However the E-M10 is no match for the 6d which far excels it IQ wise.
> As I can afford both systems they have separate uses for city / urban or walkabout the Oly is my choice for landscape the 6d is my choice and for wildlife & sport I still use the 7d.
> I really don't notice any longer the difference between the Optical Finder and the EVF you quickly adapt to both I'm more interested in control layout and intuitive menus here Canon beats Olympus but the rotary control on the E-M10 to adjust exposure comp is easier than Canon.



Actually that is not true. All cameras except DSLRs are mirrorless, and DSLRs are a small potion of all cameras sold. 

Mirrors are the exception, not the rule.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 3, 2014)

Policar said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Policar said:
> ...



You don't shoot in RAW? The color you see through your viewfinder is irrelevant, you can change all that in post. What is critical are things like exposure and focus, both of which have OFVs as poor cousins to EFVs in terms of the information they deliver.

An EFV can tell you what is overexposed and what is underexposed. An OFV can't. 

If you are doing manual focus, forget about it with an OFV. With an EFV you can switch on focus aids, plus you can zoom in on your critical focus point and visually see if it is in focus or not. An OFV - not so much - you have to guess, and on a one square centimeter piece of glass your guess is probably going to be wrong.


----------



## Policar (Oct 3, 2014)

Tugela said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



I hear bicycles fall over less with training wheels.


----------



## sanj (Oct 3, 2014)

Policar said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



And give him my deepest regard. Yes lighting is foremost with the naked eye. But now with film gone away, the meters hardly come out, the monitor at the video village and the EVF do the job. And perfectly mind you. The suspense of watching dailies is long gone. What you see on the monitor is what you get. And if you don't, you can easily achieve that in grading.


----------



## sanj (Oct 3, 2014)

Tugela said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



Absolutely correct about it all. And if anyone does not agree with you, ask them to shoot with a cover on the LCD. They will then understand!


----------



## Policar (Oct 3, 2014)

sanj said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Policar said:
> ...



Welp, enjoy the mediocre images. Goodness knows your audience won't.

Fwiw, my day job is color grading. Not at the highest level, but seven figure budgets... I am young getting started. My other job is in camera department and I've seen DPs who shoot properly and those who don't. 

If you can win the tour de france with training wheels, more power to you, but composing a picture in a thumbnail leads to a thumbnail-worthy photo. I'd rather compose on ground glass.

And I'll give Roger your best regards next time I see him. 

I'd try shooting with the LCD off, but my 4x5 doesn't have one and I don't shoot serious work on my dSLR.


----------



## Gortimer (Oct 3, 2014)

I like EVF on the latest Olympus.


----------



## Policar (Oct 3, 2014)

dilbert said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



The resolution and gamut of ground glass surpasses both an EVF and a print, but the RAW file (22 megapixels, 16 bit color) still surpasses what's seen in the low res EVF by far. Even an analogue negative far surpasses what's seen on the print... It's just part of the process.

Whether I capture all of it or not, I'm composing based on what I see, and either attempting to replicate that accurately or improve upon it by throwing in a subjective spin or at worst mitigating the damage if the scene is too detailed/there's not enough light/the contrast ratio is too high. When I grade, I don't use an iPhone. I want a high end CRT or Flanders LCD (or my Dreamcolor at home at worst!). Just because the final result is inevitably a compromise doesn't mean I need to compose for a worst case scenario.

When I shoot, I want the truest representation of the scene available to compose from; as for worrying about contrast ratios and white balance and whatnot well... years of spot metering and color temperature metering gives me the experience to know roughly what I'm getting and if I don't, I take out the meter. 

I'm not kidding when I say if you win the Tour de France it doesn't matter if you have on training wheels. If your photos are amazing in the print, you could have taken them blind for all I care. 

But, personally, I do better when I don't.


----------



## moreorless (Oct 3, 2014)

dilbert said:


> Right and because of color gamut issues (amongst others), you'll never see on your monitor at home or on paper what it is that you saw through the viewfinder that was glass and mirrors. In which case, what value does the optical view finder have if the colors that you see will not be the colors that are captured and displayed later?



To be fair though a monitor or a printer at home do have the potential to be much better calibrated than an EVF in a camera. The biggie for me though would be getting maximum dynamic range so I can compose for areas of a picture I intend to lift in post.

I can definitely see an EOS mount camera with some form of EVF(either replacing the OVF or a hybrid viewfinder) in the not too distant future if only to cater to the video market, not sure I see a Rebel next year though.

For one thing the Rebel line will likely be getting the 70D/7D2 sensor, I don't think theres a problem with that as the 7D2 is being sold on AF, FPS and handling not the sensor plus even the 70D now has the old 7D AF unit. You add in wifi as well and that's already a bigger shift in the Rebel likeup than we've had since the T2i/550D years ago.

My opinion would be as well that the EOS mount isn't really that well suited for very small mirrorless bodies. Of course any DSLR mount will have a long flange distance BUT the EOS mount is also pretty large compared to say the F-mount meaning more empty space. I spose you could argue that space could be used for recessed lens designs but I'm not sure Canon or Nikon want to get into the position of producing lenses that can't just not be used on certain other bodies but will damage them.

The EF-M lens lineup might not be very deep but honestly I think it covers a lot of the needs of the average entry level users anyway, maybe add in a normal macro lens(say a 50mm F/2.8 2:1) and I think you've covered 95% of the market. Canon have a real advantage in terms of lens performance/value at the moment I would say plus I suspect a lot of the reason for the EF-M project is simply to devalue the market as a whole. If theres an EF-M body with EVF and decent controls with that lens lineup I think some of the current high end mirrorless prices will not be sustainable.


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 3, 2014)

Policar said:


> ... my day job is color grading. ... My other job is in camera department ...



In this case, notwithstanding the fact that _you_ don't like EVF's, stop putting down _actual_ photographers who do prefer an EVF in their cameras.


----------



## roby17269 (Oct 3, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Basically Canon has three possible ways to design "a Digital Rebel with OVF".
> 
> 1. Rebel-style and size body, e.g. like SL-1, fixed (pellicle) mirror, EVF [or hybrid VF] and EF-S mount
> This concept has failed already 2 times ... first Canon Pellix, later Sony SLTs ... similar to e.g. Alpha 57 back in 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9545765927/sony-slt-a57-hvl-le1
> ...



While I do agree with your analysis, at the same type I hope you're wrong... mostly because I dislike using adaptors.
People seem to be ok with adaptors, but they do increase the risk of mechanical misalignments and make the whole system more cumbersome.

I guess I am not the target audience for this type of product but I do hope they keep the EF mount around


----------



## Woody (Oct 3, 2014)

sanj said:


> To me, after using XE2 for over a year, they are GREAT.



From http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-e2/3:

"One significant improvement Fujifilm claims compared to the X-E1 relates to the refresh rate in low light. Where the X-E1's finder dropped to 20 fps at 2EV, the X-E2 can now maintain 50 fps, which gives a noticeably more fluid and natural-looking live view feed. The consequent trade-off, though, is a visibly noisy viewfinder image in low light, especially when shooting with a zoom lens (as opposed to a fast prime)."


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 3, 2014)

roby17269 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Basically Canon has three possible ways to design "a Digital Rebel with OVF".
> ...



Well, I only have experience using the (original Canon) EF/EF-M adaptor on my EOS-M. And for me I have no issues whatsoever .. it works like a charm. 

If I am out only with EF-S/EF glass, I leave the adapter attached to the camera body ... a little extension of the body, a small nozzle ... and change lenses as on any DSLR ... one move. 

If I am out with EF-M glass and only have one EF lens [typically 40/2.8] or EF-S lens [often 55-250 STM or 60 Macro] along, I leave the adapter attached to that lens and mount it, whenever needed, in just the one, usual movement .. exactly as on a DSLR. 

ANd yes, in theory an adapter introduces one more coupling between lens and camera. One more joint were something can go wrong. In my practice however, I have not experienced any issues long thos lines. Everything is very solidly held in place and connected. There is no flex or mechanical instability.

At the end of the day, people will migrate to native short flange-distance lenses for mirrorless cameras, of course. But those little adapters will tide us over for as long as we want or for as long as we may have to wait for the right native lens to come along.


----------



## Woody (Oct 3, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> At the end of the day, people will migrate to native short flange-distance lenses for mirrorless cameras, of course. But those little adapters will tide us over for as long as we want or for as long as we may have to wait for the right native lens to come along.



+1


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Oct 3, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...
> ...



Huh?! The latest lens releases include EF-S glass...I think they're advancing it. 

And the 16-35 f/4 as evidence that EF-S is on its way out?! Sorry, but that's the craziest thing I've heard. There are much better standard crop lenses (17-55mm f/2.8 ), and there's no way Canon intended, even for a second, that the 16-35 f/4 IS would replace any of them, officially or in practice by customers. Least we mention Sigma's "standard" crop zoom....with just about the same focal range at a constant *f/1.8* AND yet more affordable.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Oct 3, 2014)

dilbert said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



+1


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 3, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...
> ...



Canon released a new EF-s lens this year - the 10-18IS STM. They released two new EF-s lenses in 2013, the 18-55IS STM and the 55-250IS STM.

So, from March 21st, 2013 to now, they've released three lenses that cover a 16mm to 400mm equivalent zoom range for the EF-s mount.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 3, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Canon released a new EF-s lens this year - the 10-18IS STM. They released two new EF-s lenses in 2013, the 18-55IS STM and the 55-250IS STM.
> 
> So, from March 21st, 2013 to now, they've released three lenses that cover a 16mm to 400mm equivalent zoom range for the EF-s mount.



You forgot the EF-S 24 / 2.8 pancake. 
On the other hand i would not count iterations of the kit zoom or the 55-250 as "new lenses".


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 3, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Canon released a new EF-s lens this year - the 10-18IS STM. They released two new EF-s lenses in 2013, the 18-55IS STM and the 55-250IS STM.
> ...



Gee...I didn't even realize the 24/2.8 was an EF-s! I really pay very little attention to slow primes.

These aren't just version II, III and IV of the kit lenses (like all the 28-80s and so on), they are genuinely new in that they use STM focusing systems. So I think they're worthy of being "new lenses" especially since they still sell the old ones.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 3, 2014)

Policar said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Policar said:
> ...



Having tools available to you to capture the perfect image is a bad thing? Real men walk backwards in the snow uphill for an hour to do their thing? Really? that is your argument????? :


----------



## lescrane (Oct 3, 2014)

canon is way behind in mirrorless, totally squandered an opportunity to keep loyal customers who want mirrorless. 

I don;t think a Canon mirrorless system has to use EF S or EF lenses.. It can exist side by side. As mentioned before, one of the big advantages of mirrorless is reduced size . I have an EOS M and will never even consider mounting my L lenses on it. What';s the point? what's most important to me is that the mirrorless body is NOT A STEP DOWN in features from my mid level 70D. I don't want Rebel features only. I am willing to invest in 2 more mirrorless lenses (beyond the kit) but they are not coming.

Bottom line for me is one word: SONY. Sony clearly is way beyond Canon. If I'm going to buy lenses anyway, why not get into a new ecosystem, and go with a company that is dedicated to building it?

I will not give up my 70D, 60d etc for use with long lenses for wildlife, etc... BUt am ready to move on for walk around use, even landscapes, street photography etc. I;m not trying to spite Canon, but I am ready and they are not.


----------



## Policar (Oct 3, 2014)

Tugela said:


> Policar said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



Depends what tools you need. For me, the racing bike would be the better tool than the training wheels (metaphorically speaking, I've never used a bike that takes a good photo.) OVFs offer better performance in every area except having a built-in histogram, which is pretty useless to anyone who meters competently.


----------



## moreorless (Oct 4, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Canon released a new EF-s lens this year - the 10-18IS STM. They released two new EF-s lenses in 2013, the 18-55IS STM and the 55-250IS STM.
> ...



If were talking about keeping the EF-S mount for entry level bodies then I would say the 18-55mm especially is actually a very important lens, no advance in specs but in terms of performance and build its a clear upgrade.


----------



## sanj (Oct 5, 2014)

Policar said:


> Sella174 said:
> 
> 
> > Policar said:
> ...



If this is directed to me, please point out my bad photographs with suggestions. I so want to improve. I will appreciate. Honest. www.sanjayfgupta.co


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 5, 2014)

Policar said:


> Sella174 said:
> 
> 
> > Policar said:
> ...



It is now the time to put your knowledge where your mouth is ... by telling me (and other photographers) why preferring an EVF equates to bad photography. Go ahead, let 'er rip with a comprehensive and numbered list!

_P.S. An excuse why you won't will mean you can't, because it does._


----------



## traveller (Oct 5, 2014)

This thread is a perfect example of how discussions on CR (and most forums) degenerate into personal attacks. :

The title of the thread is "Next _ Rebel_ going EVF"; everyone should frame their discussions within this context and stop dragging high-end DSLRs, cinema cameras and large format film cameras into the mix. The question is whether an EVF would be superior to a 0.5x pentamirror optical viewfinder for the majority of that camera's target market, not whether EVFs or OVFs are _always_ superior. Not that our opinions are really that relevant, as for the most part, we are not the target demographic.


----------



## Ebrahim Saadawi (Oct 5, 2014)

The childish war of ovf vs evf, all over again, 

yet nobody seems to understand that both have their advantages and both have their disadvantages and each one should choose the one that fits his meeds and stop claiming superiority to the other type of user. 

Anyway, the rebel with evf, not going to happen. I can bet big money on that. 

The next Canon with an evf is the eos m, this is coming soon, and so is a high megapixel body. 

The next rebel will have the 70D sensor, dpaf, digic 6, articulating touch monitor, no 1/8000s, no top lcd, no , pentaprism, no mfa, no weather sealing etc, just like the difference between the 600d and the 60D.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 5, 2014)

Ebrahim Saadawi said:


> yet nobody seems to understand that both have their advantages and both have their disadvantages and each one should choose the one that fits his meeds and stop claiming superiority to the other type of user.



Few people seem to understand that this in a xxd/Rebel isn't about advantages or disadvantages, but about production cost. With on-sensor af and metering you can cut all those ovf parts... and might even end up with a bigger vf than the current entry-level models.

With the consumers buying Rebels (except for being short on money), who is going to care if the price drop €100 or more? And many of them will never look through the evf anyway, but simply use the touch screen for the dual pixel af in live view.



Ebrahim Saadawi said:


> Anyway, the rebel with evf, not going to happen. I can bet big money on that.



We'll quote that when the time comes :->


----------



## Tugela (Oct 5, 2014)

The vast majority of Rebel owners neither know nor care if there is a mirror in their camera or not. Probably the same applies to the majority of 5D3/70D owners as well I bet, opinions on this board not withstanding.

Very few people buy their cameras "because" it has on OVF/mirror, they simply do not care about that.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 5, 2014)

Tugela said:


> The vast majority of Rebel owners neither know nor care if there is a mirror in their camera or not. Probably the same applies to the majority of 5D3/70D owners as well I bet, opinions on this board not withstanding.
> 
> Very few people buy their cameras "because" it has on OVF/mirror, they simply do not care about that.


 
Is that a opinion, or do you have facts? 

I personally have no way of knowing what regular consumers prefer in the way of viewfinders, the photography forums are mostly posted to by those that are serious photographers who might be concerned when a EVF smears the image when you are tracking a BIF, where first time DSLR buyers tend to buy what camera is most impressive, or what the Best Buy salesman tells them. Canon once remarked that their survey showed that US buyers wanted large cameras because they thought that the large DSLR's meant better quality. Unless something happens to change that, its going to continue that way.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 6, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > The vast majority of Rebel owners neither know nor care if there is a mirror in their camera or not. Probably the same applies to the majority of 5D3/70D owners as well I bet, opinions on this board not withstanding.
> ...



Bolded the operative phrase. 

It is not an opinion, but based on conversations with friends and family who buy those sorts of cameras. They usually think that because it is bigger and has the name of a reputable manufacturer on it, it must take better pictures. They don't know why it is better, and they certainly don't know what goes on inside (or care), other than that it takes pictures. And in most cases IMO they don't need a high end camera at all, since all they do with the things is take family snapshots. And certainly not a 5D3. 

The thing is, something like a 5D3 is expensive, and THAT is what they are paying for. It is expensive jewelry that you can use to display your signs of wealth.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 6, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > The vast majority of Rebel owners neither know nor care if there is a mirror in their camera or not. Probably the same applies to the majority of 5D3/70D owners as well I bet, opinions on this board not withstanding.
> ...


Nikon did a survey that showed them that price was the biggest thing influencing sales of beginner DSLRs, followed by the number of megapixels and then what their family/friends shoot with..

DR, IQ, AF systems, lens selection, ergonomics, and advanced modes had very little to do with the purchase. Remember, we CR members are not representative of the typical consumer.....


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 6, 2014)

US buyers are not that stupid. The notion that "larger pieces of gear have more/better functionality" has faded considerably since the days of the Ford Edsel. Nowadyas US buyers all recognize that good things can also come in very small packags. Like BMW Mini Cooper or Apple iPhones. 

Up until the latest breed of mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras [OMD1,. XT1, A7/R/S], consumers globally KNEW perfectly well, that DSLRs provided superior functionality (and often also better image quality). 

If Canon and/or Nikon also start offering REALLY GREAT and SMALL MILCS at reasonable prices ... of course people everywhere will buy them. Not despite their compact size, but BECAUSE of it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 6, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> US buyers are not that stupid. The notion that "larger pieces of gear have more/better functionality" has faded considerably since the days of the Ford Edsel. Nowadyas US buyers all recognize that good things can also come in very small packags. Like BMW Mini Cooper or Apple iPhones.



Of course, the current (3rd gen) Mini Cooper is larger and heavier than the (BMW) original, iPhones have gotten progressively bigger and now we even have the iPhone 6 _Plus_. So apparently US buyers want those small 'good things' in ever-larger packages.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 6, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Of course, the current (3rd gen) Mini Cooper is larger and heavier than the (BMW) original, iPhones have gotten progressively bigger and now we even have the iPhone 6 _Plus_. So apparently US buyers want those small 'good things' in ever-larger packages.



People will ACCEPT larger, if it really OFFERS MORE .. functionality, quality, ... 

iPhone 6plus replaces smartphone plus small Tablet (eg iPad Mini) ... so it is overall SMALLER and LIGHTER than carrying both. Although I will stick with my 4S for as long as that little sucker keeps working. Just love that form factor.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 6, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Although I will stick with my 4S for as long as that little sucker keeps working. Just love that form factor.



Luddite! 

Seriously, I'm sticking with my 4S as well. Meets my needs just fine. Tough little bugger, no case on it, it's dropped from waist level to pavement ~10 times, just some dings on the edges and one $30 back glass replacement.


----------



## sanj (Oct 6, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Although I will stick with my 4S for as long as that little sucker keeps working. Just love that form factor.
> ...



Me sticking with my 4s as well. But how come it fell 10 times??


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 6, 2014)

mine took some falls as well. Survived everything so far. Most often it slips from my shirt pocket, when I bend down ... ouch!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 6, 2014)

sanj said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Usually juggling keys, kids, and groceries. Another reason I have a 1-series body. 8)


----------

