Jump to content

Canon FF Mirrorless will have new lens mount as well.


pierces
 Share

Recommended Posts

Canon has squeezed the leaks pretty tight but some details are leaking prior to the Sept. 5 announcement.

 

 

"Mount Adapter EF-EOS R" is a telling point. It looks like four lenses will be available at release as well as the mount adapter. It also looks like they are sticking with optical stabilization.

 

All this is leaked, so salt grains of varying sizes are recommended.

 

 

 

 

On another note. Panasonic is rumored to be prepping a FF camera body. I haven't done the math, but at 38mm or so, the Micro 4/3 lens mount may not accommodate an FF sensor. New Micro FF lens mount? I hope they don't increase the body size proportionally! :)

 

 

Dave

Edited by pierces
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canon has squeezed the leaks pretty tight but some details are leaking prior to the Sept. 5 announcement.

 

 

 

"Mount Adapter EF-EOS R" is a telling point. It looks like four lenses will be available at release as well as the mount adapter. It also looks like they are sticking with optical stabilization.

 

All this is leaked, so salt grains of varying sizes are recommended.

 

 

 

 

On another note. Panasonic is rumored to be prepping a FF camera body. I haven't done the math, but at 38mm or so, the Micro 4/3 lens mount may not accommodate an FF sensor. New Micro FF lens mount? I hope they don't increase the body size proportionally! :)

 

 

Dave

 

I actually believe the Canon has IBIS... we’ll see.

 

The really early indications look like it’s a good camera but more consumerish than pro. No af thumbstick, doesn’t seem to be weather sealed, only a single card slot.

 

But 30mp is a nice resolution upgrade from the Z6 and a7iii.

 

And the 28-70/2 is pretty exciting IF:

The weight and price are similar to the Sony 24-70/2.8 GM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new mount is a bit of an oddball choice though. Having already developed a new mount for M, and already having their extremely well established EF line, now introducing a third independent lens line in R? Nikon and Sony got some grief from existing users making and supporting a second mount...I can't imagine some Canon folks giving some complaints over 3 separate mounts. Seems a bit of an odd choice. Of course, this is Nikon's 3rd digital mount too, but they discontinued their 1 line already, so they will only have two active mounts to support and develop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new mount is a bit of an oddball choice though. Having already developed a new mount for M, and already having their extremely well established EF line, now introducing a third independent lens line in R? Nikon and Sony got some grief from existing users making and supporting a second mount...I can't imagine some Canon folks giving some complaints over 3 separate mounts. Seems a bit of an odd choice. Of course, this is Nikon's 3rd digital mount too, but they discontinued their 1 line already, so they will only have two active mounts to support and develop.

 

Agreed but not sure their M mount could have supported full frame.

 

In the *long* run, Nikon and Canon will have an advantage over Sony: The tight diameter of the Sony FE mount has already led to lens development restraint. Sony lenses often require extra correction, often have particularly weak corners. (and typically corrections worsen corners in other ways). In the long run, Canon and Nikon will be able to produce superior lens performance to Sony.

All the more reason for Sony to push lens development hard now.

 

It's unknown what Nikon is going to do for aps-c mirrorless. They may end up in the same situation as Canon -- 3 different mounts. Arguably, the Nikon Z mount is actually too big for aps-c -- camera bodies will have to be pretty big, which goes against a big advantage of aps-c.

 

For Canon.... it does seem to be a headache for consumers. If you buy into the M system, you need an adapter to use EF lenses. Then will you even be able to use RF lenses? You may need 1 adapter for EF lenses and another for RF lenses. Meanwhile, if you stick to EF-M lenses, and then decide to upgrade to full frame, your lenses will become worthless. (At least Sony E lenses can be used with crop on FE cameras).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been a Canon shooter a long time but I've started the process of converting to Sony. in particular the a7 III.

 

I may accelerate the process if indeed the new Canon is a single slot. As a wedding photog you've got to have dual slot cameras. I've been hanging on to some of my L glass and the great Canon flash system until I know for sure what the new Canon will actually be ....

 

My new a7 III and two high end Sony lenses will be here late next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canon has squeezed the leaks pretty tight but some details are leaking prior to the Sept. 5 announcement.

 

 

 

"Mount Adapter EF-EOS R" is a telling point. It looks like four lenses will be available at release as well as the mount adapter. It also looks like they are sticking with optical stabilization.

 

All this is leaked, so salt grains of varying sizes are recommended.

 

 

 

 

On another note. Panasonic is rumored to be prepping a FF camera body. I haven't done the math, but at 38mm or so, the Micro 4/3 lens mount may not accommodate an FF sensor. New Micro FF lens mount? I hope they don't increase the body size proportionally! :)

 

 

Dave

 

There is some *speculation* that any full frame Panasonic might adopt the 'L' mount, used on the Leica SL full frame mirrorless camera. Based on past and current cross branding, Panasonic may well be the source for most of the SL body anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is some *speculation* that any full frame Panasonic might adopt the 'L' mount, used on the Leica SL full frame mirrorless camera. Based on past and current cross branding, Panasonic may well be the source for most of the SL body anyway.

 

That makes sense. Leica's premium P&S line have been rebranded Panasonic models for years. It doesn't bode well for lens affordability unless they rebrand lenses back the other way or introdece less costly alternatives. Then again, maybe they are targeting the high-end video brands like Red.

 

Interesting times ahead.

 

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes sense. Leica's premium P&S line have been rebranded Panasonic models for years. It doesn't bode well for lens affordability unless they rebrand lenses back the other way or introdece less costly alternatives. Then again, maybe they are targeting the high-end video brands like Red.

 

Interesting times ahead.

 

 

Dave

They may copy their existing micro 4/3 model, with two tiers of lenses - with the Leica branded lenses forming the upper tier [competing with the Olympus 'Pro' series]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets add a new Zeiss camera (Icon?). Fixed lens likely based on RX1 tech with a Zeiss lens specifically designed for the camera to showcase their lens skills.

 

Interestinger and interestinger.

 

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More leaks via several sites:

 

Canon EOS R Key Features

 

  • JPEG, RAW (14 bit), C-RAW
  • Dual pixel RAW support
  • 0.71x Magnification EVF
  • ISO 100-40,000 (extended ISO 50-102,400)
  • 1/8000 to 30 seconds and Bulb Shutter Speed Range
  • Up to 8 fps Stills Capture (Servo AF: up to 5 fps)
  • 4K/30p, 1080/60p, 720/120p
  • 3.15″ Rear LCD with 2.1M-dots touch panel
  • E-TTL II Flash System
  • SD / SDHC / SDXC card slot
  • LP-E6N / LP-E6 Battery
  • Dimensions: 135.8 x 98.3 x 84.4mm
  • Weight: 660g (including battery / memory card) · 580 g (body only)

Looks like another entry in the sub-$2000 FF range. Minimal cannibilzation of existing high end.

Or is it a clever misdirection plan, leaking the wrong specs? (Jaws movie music starts playing here...)

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All postings have said that so far.

 

My guess is $1899 to undercut the Sony and Nikon 24MP "Entry" FF cameras or $1999 and "it's a Canon!"

 

 

Dave

 

Thanks Dave ...

 

If that is the way it goes down I'll be selling anothor FF Canon, some nice glass and a bunch of top end Canon speedlights.

 

Then I'll buy another a7 III and another lens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canon and Nikon we’re both developing these cameras even before the a7iii.At least Nikon tried to anticipate and move to where the ball was going to be. It appears they came up with a product competitive with the a7iii.

The Canon looks like they simply aimed for the a7ii.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canon and Nikon we’re both developing these cameras even before the a7iii.At least Nikon tried to anticipate and move to where the ball was going to be. It appears they came up with a product competitive with the a7iii.

The Canon looks like they simply aimed for the a7ii.

 

I believe the Nikon is a single slot card as well.

 

The a7 III is aimed at pro wedding shooters and placed the price point to go after Canon and Nikon shooters who will give it a try and buy a little glass. That is exactly me .... I've hung on to my L glass awaiting what Canon will do but pro wedding shooters require dual slot cameras ....

 

Pro wedding shooters really don't want more than 24mp. They first and foremost want dual slot then a high operating ISO range.

 

The a 7 III delivers what most pro wedding shooters want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canon and Nikon we’re both developing these cameras even before the a7iii.At least Nikon tried to anticipate and move to where the ball was going to be. It appears they came up with a product competitive with the a7iii.

The Canon looks like they simply aimed for the a7ii.

 

To be fair, nobody expected the A7III to be what it is. Nikon was likely trying to one-up Sony's next gen offering and was lucky that they ended up being in the ballpark. Like you said, not so much with Canon. It really looks like the word from on high was "Thou shalt not endanger our Pro line!"

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, nobody expected the A7III to be what it is. Nikon was likely trying to one-up Sony's next gen offering and was lucky that they ended up being in the ballpark. Like you said, not so much with Canon. It really looks like the word from on high was "Thou shalt not endanger our Pro line!"

 

Dave

 

For the most part, Nikon surpassed my expectations for their first mirrorless though I do have some questions about their long term strategy and plan for aps-c.

 

It appears Canon is coming in below expectations. And their strategy is even more bewildering.... what are they doing about aps-c??

The new RF lenses appear totally incompatible — can’t even be adapted — to the M cameras. The M50 is actually an excellent camera, I’m sure some owners would love to use some of the new RF lenses. And you won’t be able to use the M lenses on the R, not even in a crop mode.

 

So there can be no back and forth between owning an aps-c and FF camera. I know you own both — there is value in being able to use your FF lenses on aps-c. Such as using your 70-300 on either camera.

 

Essentially, Canon seems to be saying, “aps-c is solely for casual entry level type shooters... if you want the best glass, you absolutely must go full frame”

 

I’ve been beating this drum for a while — Sony’s answer should be a super-performance aps-c camera.

A mini a9– 20fps, blackout free EVF without rolling shutter effects. Priced just slightly below the a7iii and Z6.

 

A message to customers: “for $2,000, you can get a high IQ 24mp full frame camera from either Sony or Nikon... but from Sony, for $1800, you can also choose an ultra performance model... extra speed, extra reach....”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I’ve been beating this drum for a while — Sony’s answer should be a super-performance aps-c camera.

A mini a9– 20fps, blackout free EVF without rolling shutter effects. Priced just slightly below the a7iii and Z6.

 

A message to customers: “for $2,000, you can get a high IQ 24mp full frame camera from either Sony or Nikon... but from Sony, for $1800, you can also choose an ultra performance model... extra speed, extra reach....”

 

An increasing number of sources are pointing to the upcoming Sony APS-C camera being exactly what you describe. An APS-C screamer that can either be an alternative or companion to an FF Sony. If it truly is a significant upgrade to the A6300/A6500, I would likely upgrade to a camera of this type to take advantage of the best of both formats.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An increasing number of sources are pointing to the upcoming Sony APS-C camera being exactly what you describe. An APS-C screamer that can either be an alternative or companion to an FF Sony. If it truly is a significant upgrade to the A6300/A6500, I would likely upgrade to a camera of this type to take advantage of the best of both formats.

 

Dave

 

I've used the A9, it's pretty darn amazing. But I suspect sales are struggling because it's not a big enough step above the A7iii. 20 fps is incredible but few people need more than the A7iii 8-10 fps. The blackout free EVF is really nice but not $2,000 nice upgrade. The big advantage is a silent shutter that is really usable in all light and without rolling shutter.

If you could get all that goodness in a body cheaper than the A7iii... I think you'll have many buyers jumping at those advantages over the full frame IQ advantage.

 

And it would continue to invite switchers from Canon and Nikon. Might no longer be worth switching to Sony for the A7iii, as Canon and Nikon can at least offer somewhat comparable products while keeping your lenses. But they don't offer anything like the mini A9.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve been beating this drum for a while — Sony’s answer should be a super-performance aps-c camera.

 

I have to admit that I was and still is tempted to go full frame.

But I want to see what the A6700+ is going to look-like performance wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I was and still is tempted to go full frame.

But I want to see what the A6700+ is going to look-like performance wise.

 

I love FF and it's hard to "go back" to aps-c. But if I'm being honest, you can get images 95% as good with an aps-c camera. Especially if you aren't a narrow DOF shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I understated things...... the Canon R looks a bit better than my first impressions.

Advantages over Sony: Dual pixel AF, better ergonomics, full articulated LCD, better touch screen, probable better weather sealing, and higher resolution EVF/LCD than A7iii.

Advantages of Sony over Canon: More dynamic range, dual card slots, IBIS, much better burst shooting with AF-C, more effective silent shutter and eye-AF.

 

Canon making strides: Definitely catching up with eye-AF (can be used in AF-S and AF-C but not burst shooting). catching up with silent shutter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly...though some of those 'advantages' can't be truly weighed until actual hands-on with the camera and tests of how it performs. Dual-pixel AF isn't necessarily an advantage unless it performs in some way better than Sony's AF system - generally, it's only been observed to be particularly useful for video focusing in most previous Canon bodies. As for ergonomics, I think there should be a ban on allowing that to be a positive or negative in any camera review, as it's entirely up to individual tastes and familiarity - but even so, there are things I would not like from what I see so far in the ergo of the Canon - namely, I don't like the virtual mode dial without specific dial settings and indents for blind switching, I don't know if it's set up for easy programming of MR banks and switching between them, and I particularly dislike that type of fully articulated LCD screen - because of the requirement to flip it out to the side just to tilt it up or down, which is my most common way of using such a screen. If the screen must be fully articulating, I prefer the solutions that keep it in line with the body and prioritize the tilting movements. But I wouldn't necessarily put those in a 'negative' column for Canon because those are my personal likes/tastes which may differ from others.

 

Still, the competition from all competitors should drive them all to constantly seek to improve, steal features and ideas from one another, and always try to one-up each other, which should keep developments and improvements coming constantly for all brands, which is great for the consumer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly...though some of those 'advantages' can't be truly weighed until actual hands-on with the camera and tests of how it performs. Dual-pixel AF isn't necessarily an advantage unless it performs in some way better than Sony's AF system - generally, it's only been observed to be particularly useful for video focusing in most previous Canon bodies. As for ergonomics, I think there should be a ban on allowing that to be a positive or negative in any camera review, as it's entirely up to individual tastes and familiarity - but even so, there are things I would not like from what I see so far in the ergo of the Canon - namely, I don't like the virtual mode dial without specific dial settings and indents for blind switching, I don't know if it's set up for easy programming of MR banks and switching between them, and I particularly dislike that type of fully articulated LCD screen - because of the requirement to flip it out to the side just to tilt it up or down, which is my most common way of using such a screen. If the screen must be fully articulating, I prefer the solutions that keep it in line with the body and prioritize the tilting movements. But I wouldn't necessarily put those in a 'negative' column for Canon because those are my personal likes/tastes which may differ from others.

 

Still, the competition from all competitors should drive them all to constantly seek to improve, steal features and ideas from one another, and always try to one-up each other, which should keep developments and improvements coming constantly for all brands, which is great for the consumer.

 

The dual pixel system is fast and accurate for single shot shooting. Where it may not hold up as well, is when doing any sort of burst shooting. The Canon R slows down to only 3 fps for "tracking priority."

 

Ergonomics has subjective and objective elements. They are also dependent on the physical features of the person using it -- What is comfortable for a lefty may be different than for a rightie. Someone with large hands may find different comfort than someone with small hands.

 

But there absolutely are objective elements.

Larger raised buttons that are easy to press are better than very small flat buttons that are more difficult to manipulate, for example.

A grip on which you can fit your whole hand it better than a grip that is too small for your hand.

As just some examples.

 

For those 2 examples I mentioned -- Sony has greatly improved in terms of their buttons including placement. They could still be a little better, but they have come a long way.

As to the grip -- I typically don't mind it. But yesterday, I was playing with the Sony A9 with battery grip. The hand placement was immediately more comfortable -- Instead of my pinkie dangling off the end of the camera, it could now firmly be wrapped around the grip just like the other fingers.

Now, are there some people who prefer to have their pinkie dangling off the end? Maybe. But I think it's fair to say that it's better to have a grip that fits the hand.

 

With the Sony A6xxx series, it's an entirely different consideration -- There, size is the paramount priority. And some objective ergonomic sacrifices are being made in order to gain the advantage of smaller size.

And this is where things start to become subjective again --- preference for small or larger cameras is very subjective.

 

But you can objectively compare the ergonomics of two similarly sized cameras.

The A7/A9 cameras, Z cameras and Canon R, are all roughly the same weight and pretty close in size. Having a body 1 cm taller is a very very small price to pay to get a significant improvement in the grip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...