Why did Canon not include IBIS with their R body?

I've been waiting a long time for a Canon full frame mirrorless body. Now that it's been announced I read it doesn't include IBIS, which unfortunately is a deal breaker for me. I have muscular dystrophy so some form of Image Stabilization is important to me. Guess I'll have to go with Sony or wait and see what comes out later from Canon.

Canon, and to a certain extent Nikon, do not take MILC cameras seriously. More accurately, they see advanced MILC's as a threat to their DSLR market.

Canon, and to a certain extent Nikon, do not take MILC cameras seriously. More accurately, they see advanced MILC's as a threat to their DSLR market.

I think both companies are very serious about MILC's with their R and Z cameras.

If you don't need mirrorless, the Pentax K1 is full frame and has IBIS. It isn't a light camera, though.

Of course both Canon and Nikon are serious about mirrorless. Canon have a number of IS containing lenses (16-35, 24-70, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 100-400, 24/28/35/85/100 primes etc. etc.) that should be completely satisfactory, but currently would need to be used with any one of the 3 EOS to R adapters they have announced. So there is no real need for the OP to feel inhibited in going for Canon mirrorless. If you do not have any Canon lenses, then I guess you will indeed have to wait to see what will be coming in the future, on the assumption you do not feel like investing in EOS lenses for an R system camera. Does an IBIS system work for you currently with your MD? Edited October 10, 2018 by Robin Smith

I think the simple answer is that Canon did not want to pay Sony for the use of its IBIS patents, but Nikon was willing to pay. Compared with Canon, Nikon has a rather larger number of lenses, dating back to 1959, that can mount on the Z via the adapter and benefit from from IBIS. Nikon shooters can therefore get nearly full vibration reduction functionality from their old manual lenses, which is very useful for owners of manual telephoto lenses, and will encourage them to buy the new Z cameras.

AJG

New

If you don't need mirrorless, the Pentax K1 is full frame and has IBIS. It isn't a light camera, though.

 

Those Pentax folk are always trying to prove they are just as....

 

Inferiority complex;))

 

IBIS is important for obvious reasons.

I can't help but see similarities with Leica putting out the Leicaflex and R series of SLRs which weren't quite good enough to eclipse their M cameras and indeed not really good enough to succeed in the market. I think if they want a chance of catching Sony, they need to go all out.

 

That said, for a while there in the late 70s and early 80s, there were some pretty cool LITTLE SLRs before they started growing again. It doesn't seem impossible that Canon and Nikon could make a much smaller line of DSLRs which compete with the mirrorless cameras for size. The thing is, lacking a mirror (or a pentaprism) isn't REALLY a factor here right? It's just the size and EVF. Look at Leica. Is Leica a mirrorless camera? Well yes but it's certainly a different kind of design than the Sony 6500 or A7s. But Nikon and Canon need to take the format more seriously and not worry about the DSLR sales so much. I bet they would prefer to still be dealing with Minolta rather than Sony. Lack of ibis is a pretty serious omission, as is a single memory card, as is the small number of lenses.

. It doesn't seem impossible that Canon and Nikon could make a much smaller line of DSLRs which compete with the mirrorless cameras for size

 

Have you ever handled a D40, D3x00, or D5x00? They're tiny.

 

I was playing with a Z7 at the local camera store yesterday, and although the body is certainly differently shaped and a fair bit thinner(the F mount has a relatively huge 45mm registration distance, while the Z mount is a tiny 16mm) I'd say it's overall comparable in size-if not a bit larger than-the D3x00 cameras. With the 24-70 f/4 on it, it's heavier than one of these cameras with an 18-55.

 

BTW, I think it's hard to look at the Z6 and Z7 and accuse Nikon of not taking mirrorless seriously...although admittedly I'm extrapolating on the Z6 since it's not out yet. In any case, in 5 minutes of playing with it I'd say someone who has used Nikon DSLRs(or late model film cameras) extensively should have no trouble using it. All the controls were well placed and logical, and there again as a Nikon user most of the buttons were right where I expected them to be. The only thing that initially threw me off was the placement of the ISO button, but I can't ding them too much on this since the location is the same as the D850, and honestly I think I'd like it once I got use to the location.

 

Of course, it does only have a single memory card, but then that's the norm on Sony also. Plus, Nikon is essentially going all-in with XQD on their high end cameras, and I'm happy that they did this rather than using tiny, fragile SD cards.

 

The proposed lens line-up is nothing to sneeze at either, even though it will be a year or two before it gets fleshed out fully. The super fast primes are not physically possible on the narrow-throat F mount, and Nikon is taking advantage of the massive Z mount to its fullest extent.

 

The Z7 is not for me-I'm sticking to mirrors-but it's a great camera. Between the body design and the lenses, though, I think it's hard to make an argument that they're not taking it seriously.

Edited October 11, 2018 by ben_hutcherson

Yes, I agree both Nikon and Canon take it seriously. Canon are already high volume mirrorless sellers (I think no 1?), with APS-C cameras.

 

As to the willingness to "buy IBIS from Sony", didn't Olympus have the first IBIS system (still, arguably, the best)?

Of course, it does only have a single memory card, but then that's the norm on Sony also.

Since Sony is the one to beat, it should be noted that their latest cameras have two card slots, including one UHS II, and a battery twice as large as in the Canon and Nikon mirrorless cameras.

 

Sony also formed a solid relationship with Zeiss, which continues to this day. Sigma and other independent manufacturers are able to interface directly with Sony cameras for AF and metadata transfer. In the past, Canon and Nikon have rejected similar alliances, adhering to the "not invented here" principle. Both companies are touting their existing lens lineup while slow-walking dedicated mirrorless lenses. That argument goes nowhere, since the same lenses can be used on Sony cameras, and were found wanting.

 

I can't find any evidence that "IBIS" is licensed from Sony, per se. "In Body Image Stabilization" is not even unique to Sony. Their sensors have found their way into Nikon cameras, which strongly suggests they will share technology when it is to their advantage. This is a long way from their practice in video technology in the early 80's, but then Sony years are like doggy years in the new millennium.

 

Devotees to XQD cards must feel relieved now that their only manufacturer is up and running again. For me, 500 MB/s compared to 300 MB/s is not a game-changer, and older, slower cards do not seem to limit the functionality of my A7Riii, with 84 MB RAW files.

 

You may well be right - I couldn't find a reference to whose IBIS Nikon licenced and I can't recall where I saw it was Sony's.

As to the willingness to "buy IBIS from Sony", didn't Olympus have the first IBIS system (still, arguably, the best)?

Believe Konica/Minolta had the first IBIS - which would explain how Sony got it. Pentax might have been first putting it into a DSLR.

and a battery twice as large as in the Canon and Nikon mirrorless cameras.

2280 mAh (Sony Z) vs 1900 mAh (Nikon) or 1865 (Canon) mAh isn't "twice as large"; it is, however, almost twice what the older Sony mirrorless battery provided (1020 mAh).

The only thing that initially threw me off was the placement of the ISO button

Same as in the D5, D500, D7500 and D850; it's where it's at in Nikon's latest iteration of "moving the cheese".

he F mount has a relatively huge 45mm registration distance

46.5mm and a 44mm throat diameter.

Edited October 12, 2018 by Dieter Schaefer

Believe Konica/Minolta had the first IBIS - which would explain how Sony got it. Pentax might have been first putting it into a DSLR.

Nope Minolta were faster! - Their 6MP DSLR body was really tempting me, back in the day... - Luckily Pentax released the K100 D while I was still saving up.