I told you CANON would come again

[zenpmd]

http://www.canonwatch.com/canon-going-serious-mirrorless-2015-full-frame-milc-coming/

[SleepyWill]

But is it what photographers have been waiting for, or us? Either way, exciting news!

[Inazuma]

Rumors have been pretty sketchy recently. The OMD em1 thing, the overinflated 7d mk ii, the zero rumours about an a7 with 5 axis.

[Fatalfury]

They don't have much choice do they now. They must to do this, it's 2015.

[leeys]

Geez, another Canon fanboy. Messiah? It's just a camera for goodness sake, why the religious fanaticism over it? 

[zenpmd]

Canon and Nikon are both companies with a long experience in making cameras with good colour reproduction and excellent ergonomics. More than Sony they have the ability to produce superb lenses are reasonable prices. The fact that Canon can do everything in house is I think an advantage in these very competitive times which, coupled with their brand, will protect their margins.

 

No matter what anyone says, nothing compares to FF for stills when you are shooting professionally (and larger formats above FF don't have decent AF etc), so FF mirrorless is a very good thing. The problem with the Sony's is that theyre just not mature systems, and have poor ergonomics and rely on either not great sony lenses or super expensive Zeiss.

[jax_rox]

You mean it's rumoured that Canon are designing a camera with technology that's been around for 10 years? Tell me again how the 'messiah' is returning?

[zenpmd]

My post wasn't meant to be entirely serious dude. Chillax

[/p/]

So a mirrorless Canon camera with the same old outdated video specs we can expect from Canon? Yawn.

[sudopera]

Well, we all have to work with something, so maybe a bit too late to the party. We dont make a living of rumors. 

[SleepyWill]

No matter what anyone says, nothing compares to FF for stills when you are shooting professionally (and larger formats above FF don't have decent AF etc), so FF mirrorless is a very good thing. The problem with the Sony's is that theyre just not mature systems, and have poor ergonomics and rely on either not great sony lenses or super expensive Zeiss.

 

I wonder what percentage of sales were made directly or indirectly because of the e-mount flange distance? I suspect that without it, we wouldn't have sony mirrorless cameras, but translucent lens minolta mount slr's.

[mtheory]

I'd be happy if they just released something that matched the low light performance to D4S or A7S both in stills and video.

[Andrew Reid]

At this rate Canon will catch up with a 2 year old Nikon sensor. 7D Mark II at DPReview on the studio scene is behind the D7100 (2 years old), 5D Mark III, Fuji X-T1 and Samsung NX1 for all aspects of image quality.

 

And the sensor in the G1 X Mark II is behind the Panasonic LX100 and Sony RX100 Mark III in all aspects of the image http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-LX100-sensor-review-Potent-point-and-shoot/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-LX100-vs-Canon-PowerShot-G1-X-Mark-II-vs-Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-III-Tradeoff-in-performance-against-smaller-Sony-sensor

 

Canon are said to be working on a dual ISO sensor with alternating pixels at low and high ISOs to extend dynamic range. The 5D Mark III already has an alternating line technique for this but Canon didn't implement it. Magic Lantern did but only unofficially.

 

I think Canon will definitely take a step in 2015.

 

The question is... will it be a catch-up step or a revolution?

[Juan Le]

It look like Canon is trying to benefit from second mover advantage, after being THE industry leader in the past. I think it could benefit consumers if they can pull it off and offer the product at the price range that is competitive to what's out there now (sony, fuji, panasonic).

 

But yea like what Andrew said I'm more interested if canon will innovate or will they be playing catch up.

[zenpmd]

Sony sensors are not that much better. I have an a7s and a 5dmk3. While the former can pull the shadows a lot better the noise isnt that different. Im consistently amazed how good the noise is on the 5dmk3 for stills. the issue is the banding chroma, but thats gone with the 7dmk2 apparently

[jax_rox]

Canon mirrorless loses them the advantage of those who have invested in their lenses. An EOS-M needs an adapter to use EF lenses, as does any other mirrorless camera from any other manufacturer. So it loses the benefit of a native EF mount. And to make a mirrorless camera with EF mount would be to take away the adaptability of the mount, which is to take away a main drawcard of a mirrorless camera.

Their potential full frame mirrorless offering will need to be the absolute best mirrorless camera on the market and be at a competitive price point, or it will not be able to compete. It will also need some strong, quality EF-M lens offerings for anyone to be able to take it seriously.

Sony may only have a small handful of full frame E-mount lenses (they have quite a bit more in their APS-C selection), but the EOS M has what - 3 native lenses? At least Sony's are (mostly) Zeiss made.

If it materialises, my money's on it being a consumer - 'affordable full frame' type camera, marketed at consumers and as a small 2nd camera for professionals.

[LunyAlex]

Considering that the mirrorless scene has been all about The Battle of the Formats and The Lens Mount War for some years now, Canon better come out with something impressive if they want a serious bite. 

By now everyone's probably invested in one lens mount or another and that makes the target audience way more rigid from the get go. 

[Andrew Reid]

Canon mirrorless loses them the advantage of those who have invested in their lenses. An EOS-M needs an adapter to use EF lenses, as does any other mirrorless camera from any other manufacturer. So it loses the benefit of a native EF mount. And to make a mirrorless camera with EF mount would be to take away the adaptability of the mount, which is to take away a main drawcard of a mirrorless camera.

 

Not really. You can make an EF mount mirrorless camera and still gain an EVF, smaller body, lighter, etc. It will just be 20mm deeper from screen to mount. Hardly a deal breaker! Samsung NX1 is the template. It's nice and chunky for a mirrorless camera, not toy-like - a DSLR form factor and handles like a 7D Mark II.

 

The Canon EF mount is actually rather adaptable...

 

Nikon

Contax Zeiss

Olympus OM

Leica R

M42

Pentax

Pretty much every other SLR lens ever made.

 

And it gets even more adaptable without the mirror. No mirror hit on some Pentax lenses like the 45mm pancake.

 

When you have a native EF mount, you have a huge range of glass to choose from not least of all the actual EF stuff.

 

Canon are far too invested in optical viewfinders and apparently they're not even prepared to let us choose, because whatever they do will compete against their existing line, which they are also heavily invested in because they continue to sell well to people who don't realise that mirrorless is in many cases better technology.

[Quirky]

Not really. You can make an EF mount mirrorless camera and still gain an EVF, smaller body, lighter, etc. It will just be 20mm deeper from screen to mount. Hardly a deal breaker! 

 

Maybe not in business/marketing sense, but it would still be a technical compromise. A different one than, say, the Sony FE mount but still. 

 

The flange distance of the EF mount is shorter than most other (d)SLR's but it's still a system originally designed for an SLR for stills shooting. I believe that quite a few of the existing EF (as opposed the Cine) lenses have been made for the Canon (d)SLR bodies and have AF motors and lens arrays designed/optimised for stills rather than for video. Most lenses designed for video (and mirrorless) are slightly different in their internal design. Hence the slowness of the EF lenses even with Canon's own EOS M system.

For optimal results, Canon would still have to come up with new dedicated mirrorless lenses for that new mirrorless EF body.

 

 

Canon are far too invested in optical viewfinders and apparently they're not even prepared to let us choose, because whatever they do will compete against their existing line, which they are also heavily invested in because they continue to sell well to people who don't realise that mirrorless is in many cases better technology.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Canon came with an all new short flange distance FF mount and lenses some time next year or in the near future, after all. At least if those rumours about a new FF mirrorless Canon have any credit.

 

They will have to update their lens line and let go of their dSLR milk cow at some point, anyway. Like they did when they launched the EOS line and dumped the FD mount in the late 80's. It might as well be soon rather than too late.

 

For more or less the same reason I still believe that Sony made a mistake in rushing in with the FF models sporting an E-mount, instead of re-purposing the good old A-mount or launching an all new FF mirrorless mount. Hopefully Sony will change their policy once again in the near future.

 

 

Pretty much every other SLR lens ever made.

 

Not really. Looks like Minolta MD lenses won't fit without an optical adapter, for example. There are probably others, too.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

The EOS M mount has a very short flange distance and Canon sells an adapter that makes it an exact EF mount. The EOS M mount should be what Canon uses for video cameras, makes much more sense.

They didn't use it on the C100/300/500 because they needed the mirror area to put the ND filter wheel. A mirrorless camera without ND filters should be their next step, with an EVF of course.

It just that the C100 mk II specs make it seem impossible for the to make 4K s35 image that's better than the C100 for less than 5K.

I don't expect HQ 4K to some to the under 5K mark before the C100 mk II is upgraded to 4K, sadly. What they might do is make something with the same 1080p quality on the C100, on the 5D or a new mirrorless, that would make sense.