Where are you Canon

[brad_trostad]

<p>I really, really like your products. My old 5d2 is an amazing camera, even by today's standards. The rebels (I have a T3i) are tremendous photo and video camera's given their current prices. Some of your glass is just plain magic. Over the years I acquired a 35L, 85 f1.8, 100L macro, 135L and the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS. I still long for the 85LII and a 24 ts. And what you've given us to produce gorgeous looking video is amazing!</p>

<p>But times are changing and I (like so many others) am longing for that compact mirrorless solution. Something much lighter, yet responsive and up to today's standards when it comes to high iso performance and dynamic range. I'll most likely buy into a new mount if there is commitment to provide a family of standard 35mm equivalent lenses.</p>

<p>I did consider your EOS-M when it was first announced. But my friend's Fuji(s) were so far ahead of it (except video) that I decided to wait. Then you lowered the price on the EOS-M and once again I considered your mirrorless but by this time the Sony's, Olympus and Panasonic's seemed like a better place to go.</p>

<p>So here I am wondering if you will roll out what am I wanting to buy right now today. If it helps any, here's what I think would be a mirrorless product that would grab the market like the 5D2 did (tell me that didn't make you some serious money):<br>

<br /> - About the size of the EOS-M (or just a bit smaller)<br /> - EVF (upper left placement like Sony and Fuji, quality like the NEX 6,7)<br /> - EOS-M mount (with announced commitment for several lenses at acceptable prices)<br /> - 70D (or better) phase detect focus built into imager<br /> - 13+ stops of Dynamic Range <br /> - M --> EF Adapter included with the base package (big mistake of EOS-M rollout)<br /> - Rear LCD is touchscreen<br /> - Mic input<br /> - Raw video sharpness at or better than Panasonic.<br /> - 1080/60p video capability (and encoding similar to the 5D3)<br /> - Built in wifi would be nice but not that big of a deal <br /> - Open development support (or just give Magic Lantern the build files)<br /> - Announce it at $850 (or $950 with the 22mm STM lens)</p>

<p>....I can wait to buy this camera. I just need to know it's on the way. Even if you need to announce it now and it won't be available until next summer I would rather wait and get this than switch to another mfg.</p>

<p>Otherwise it looks like Sony or Panasonic for me. A friend (Canon for decades) has already switched to Fuji. What is going on Canon - where are you?</p>

<p>....and I am very curious as to what other people on the forum think Canon should do next w/r to mirrorless. Is this where you will give up on Canon too?<br /> </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>It truly "don't make me no nevermind" because I doubt I will ever <em>willingly</em> use such a camera in preference to something much more like my present SLRs.</p>

<p>We never know what is going to happen (who thought that the long-awaited English spelling reform would come in the form of txt spk (SMS)?), but I think expecting the kinds of mirrorless cameras derived from P&S cameras to be the wave of the future is like all those steam-powered dirigibles one sees in 19th c predictions.</p>

[jimdavis]

<p>Yes, for me using the Live View screen is just wrong. Mind, having a P&S with a bloody large sensor would be nice, but it would have to be a pocket camera and so using EOS lenses would not be possible.<br>

The big thing for me is holding the camera up where I can see the screen. Makes it hard to keep it steady, hard to frame, keep level, see focus, etc. With a really small camera this is easier of course. With the 75-300 on it, well would it even be possible?<br>

The 70D moveable rear screen is nice, and the camera is small and light so with some lenses it's possible to use the Live View. But mostly I do not.</p>

 

[bobatkins]

<p>Don't hold your breath for your dream camera.</p>

<p>Sony have a firm hold on the APS-C and FF mirrorless market. That may be why Canon doesn't seem to want to play right now. Have you seen the new <strong>full frame</strong> Sony Alpha 7 and 7R (36MP, no anti aliasing filter) mirrorless cameras? Pretty impressive. Then there's the Samsung Galaxy NX, an android based 20MP APS-C mirrorless camera. Since it's Android based, you (or some 3rd party developer) can in theory program it to do whatever you want. And not only does it have WiFi built in, it has 3G and 4G mobile so you can instantly send your images to anywhere. And when you get bored with photography you can play your favorite tunes, Skype your friends and play Angry Birds on it. You can even browse Photo.net.</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

Live view is great when you are using the camera on a tripod and can magnify the image and focus on precisely the spot

you want absolute best resolution on. It's like using a view camera with a loupe.

 

Live view is also useful when holding the camera down low or overhead to turn "Hail Mary" shots into "hell yes" shots.

[philip_wilson]

The issue for any of the mirrorless systems is lenses. A full selection of top quality lenses is challenging for any

manufacturer. M43 has spent over 5 years (it was announced early August 2008) building up a fairly mediocre collection

of lenses. Sony, Nikon 1 and Samsung have very limited ranges and the new Sony full frame mirrorless has yet another

mount. Fuji X series now has 8 lenses after three years and probably offers the best range for a serious photographer.

Only one brand has a good line up and that is Leica but they are very much a niche player. I shoot both Canon and Leica

and have shot/owned most other systems. For professional use the Canon and Nikon SLR systems are hard to beat. I

love my Leica M bodies (film and digital) and they can be used professionally for some subjects but lack the flexibility of

the. Nikon and. Canon systems. At the moment mirrorless systems have been targeted at the more casual user and I

suspect that margins have been lower than on higher end DSLR systems. In addition most of the systems I have used

have a rather artificial quality to the images. This seems to be cause by inferior lenses and in camera software

corrections in addition to smaller sensors. Using my Leica lenses on adapters improves the situation but I find that only

my Leicas give results like my Canon DSLRs. The only mirrorless body I have that can match my Canon DSLRs is my

new Leica M and given the price this is unlikely to go mainstream. I think Sony is targeting the A7 full frame mirrorless

models at the Leica. M user base. These bodies currently are very limited compared to a. DSLR - try shooting sport with

one!

[dogbert]

<p>Its been too little too late from Canon for me. I've sold a lot of my Canon gear and moved to M4/3 and loving it.<br>

Among the deciding factors for me were:<br>

Lack of in-body stabilisation from Canon - the Olympus 5 axis system is as good if not superior to any of the Canon IS lenses that I have used (24-105 L, 70-300 DO, EF-S 55-250 to name a few) and all your primes and legacy lenses are stabilised too;<br>

Small size with professional form factor - full weather sealing in the OM-D EM5 and EM-1;<br>

Blazing fast and silent autofocus, couple with a touch screen that allows near instant shooting - touch a point in live view to focus and shoot in a split second;<br>

The EVFs are now really good and to the point where I don't feel like I am missing too much compared to an OVF.<br>

10 fps - not that I use it that often but nice to know that I can without having to pay for a 1Dx.</p>

<p>Philip I am not sure what M4/3 cmaeras you have tried but the new Olympus 16 MP sony sensor has better IQ than my 60D and 5D and more dynamic range. I am not claiming it beats a 5DII, but if you not aiming to print much larger than 13x19 it has all the IQ anyone needs.</p>

<p> </p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>My primary camera is a 5D2 with a bunch of lenses. It does things that current mirror less cameras cannot do.</p>

<p>However...</p>

<p>I also shoot a Fujifilm X-E1... which does things my 5D2 cannot do. In fact, sometimes I use the two cameras in tandem, since their capabilities complement one another in many ways. </p>

<p>I don't see mirror less cameras being "replacements" for DSLRs, at least not at this point. They are alternatives for some people and they are adjuncts for others.</p>

<p>I don't especially care whether my mirror less comes from Canon or not. At the current time, Canon isn't really competitive in this market. Perhaps they will be at some point.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>Wee mirrorless cameras are great for wee lenses and intimate venues. I'm an avid M43 shooter with Oly and Lumix and a cupboard of small primes. I carry my E-P3 and pancake lens 24/7. Okay, maybe 8/7. But they're a silly platform for larger optics and action. Trying to hold a tiny camera with three fingers and a big telephoto is not realistic. But a small prime on the street or at a social event is wonderful. And while my Oly VF-4 EVF is one of the best ever, I still great prefer the clarity, speed and simplicity of an optical finder. And mirrorless eat batteries like candy. So not a replacement for my Canon DSLRs. M43 is more of supplement and a replacement for iPhone camera app. Heck I often carry both cameras while traveling!</p>

<p>Oddly, after a day of shooting with a tiny mirror less E-P3 or GX1 I appreciate my 5D2 a lot more: the DLSR is so much easier to hold, work the controls and look through and shoot with! I've been shooting with M43 for two years now but I shoot more than ever with my DSLR. However, I no longer use my S90 or iPhone.</p>

<p>I think there are enough mirrorless options on the market and Canon doesn't need to be another "me too." Pentax, Oly, Panasonic, Leica, Fuji, Nikon, Samsung, etc. are enough. I'd like to see Canon continue to refine the DSLR. The transmissive overlay in the 7D/5D3 is moving the direction of a hybrid optical-electronic display and I suspect they have the next design tweak ready in the wings.</p>

[dogbert]

<blockquote>Trying to hold a tiny camera with three fingers and a big telephoto is not realistic.</blockquote>

<p>The Pen series are meant to appeal to the crowd that are after something better than a P&S. Try using an EM-1 with the Oly M.Zuiko 70-300. This is eminently handholdable, work really well with the Olympus IBIS, and it gives you a 150-600 equivalent lens!<br>

In fact I could make the same criticism in reverse, namely that with M4/3 one can handhold a 600 mm equivalent lens all day and get good results, but who in their right mind could do this with a 5D3 and a Canon 600 f4 L.</p>

<p>To make an accurate judgement about mirrorless, you need to consider the whole system not just the experience based on one camera. That is like judging Canon EOS based on using the EOS M. I used to be skeptical about M4/3 but having used the system I have pretty much completely changed my mind.</p>

<p>I agree the EVF's still aren't quite as good as a FF OVF, but Canon is not offering a FF OVF in any camera under $1500 and the EM-1 viewfinder is bigger and more detailed than any APS-C OVF viewfinder from Canon. And it works in the dark!</p>

<p>Where I think M4/3 is lacking is less DoF control for those that want extremely shallow DoF, ie it won't make the 85 f1.2 crowd happy but will match the 50 f1.8; Maintaining quality in prints gets challenging beyond say 16'' by 24'' print size. FF is about two stops better on noise at high ISO but noise as an issue only really comes in as an issue above ISO 1600 and the latest M4/3 bodies are probably better than Canon APS-C bodies noise-wise.</p>

<p>On the other hand, the AF on the EM-1 with the Oly MSC lenses is blazing fast and faster than Canon ring USM! The dam thing can shoots at 10 fps, focus points can be set pretty much anywhere in the frame, you have live histogram in the VF, live horizontal and vertical levels, focus peaking. The in-body stabilisation is also a major benefit that has convinced me Canon's lens-based approach is expensive and obsolete.</p>

<p> </p>

[PuppyDigs]

<blockquote>

<p>To make an accurate judgement about mirrorless, you need to consider the whole system not just the experience based on one camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Actually I own an E-P5, GX1 and briefly had an E-M5 last year (totally hated it). So judging by three cameras! Didn't care for the E-M5/E-M1 form factor but love the smaller rangefinder shaped offerings like the E-PL5, E-P5, GX1 and GX7. For me it's all about the wee factor and pancakes. The E-M1 is surely a fine camera but it's growing in size, weight and cost and is overkill for my fav lenses, the Panasonic 14mm F/2.5 and Oly 17 2.8. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>The Pen series are meant to appeal to the crowd that are after something better than a P&S.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Or perhaps prefer a rangefinder form factor and use alternative lenses. The E-P3, VF-1 (bright line optical finder) and 17 2.8 are my fav shoot from the hip street cam, dinner cam, happy hour cam and casino cam! Sorta a poor man's Leica and iPhone camera app all rolled in one!</p>

[massimo_foti]

<p>Brad, seems to me like Sony Alpha 7 and 7R could deliver what you are looking for, but at a higher price. Their currently limited lens selection is another factor to consider.<br>

As for me, I too feel the need for something lighter that I can carry much more often than my current Canon kit. I am looking into Olympus EM-1 with 3-4 lenses, but it could not replace my DSLR gear and the financial implications of having to maintain two different systems keep preventing me from making such a move.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Currently when I go lighter I just take my 5DII, 40mm pancake, 24mm IS, and either an 85/1.8, or 135/2. It's not as light as an Olympus OM-D, but it's certainly not bad and it is very capable. The lighter cameras are great but I actually agree with Puppy, having just fiddled with all these new cameras at PhotoExpo in NYC, I have no real burning desire to get one apart from the usual desire to get new toys. The camera I liked the most was the Sony RX10 to be honest.</p>

[DickArnold]

Two years ago I purchased a Sony NEX 5N with kit lens. I added the 16mm with 12mm adapter, the 55-210 lenses, upgrade flash and a 350 dollar EVF. Just before the Sony A 7 and 7r came out I traded the NEX outfit for a Canon lens. I shot several thousand pictures with the 5N.

 

 

The good things about the 5N outfit were: Sony APS-c 16MB sensor for really good enlargements, The relatively small size and light wt., the convenient use for head shots at sporting events and for family pictures, unobtrusive use on the street, good noise characteristics up to 3200. The live view was better than my Canons. It is a great camera to shoot parties with. The upgrade bounce flash worked very well in the horizontal plane.

 

 

The drawbacks were: Slow lenses unless one wanted to use an adapter for lenses that completely overwhelmed the camera and in practice did not work that well. lack of the equivalent to Canon Ai tracking, slow focus capture compared to my Canons, a slight but perceptible EVF delay(This is the same EVF used in the NEX 7 except it was not built in), The EVF was not good in bright light compared to the optical finder on my EOS 7d, too much content in lengthy somewhat illogical menus and not enough buttons. Video button next to the view button for inadvertent video actuation. For these and other reasons I did not think the NEX 5N was good for sports.

 

 

Overall I think I got into mirrorless way too early. Sony has moved quite far along with the A7 and 7r. With their inception, however, they have apparently abandoned the NEX line. The e mount lenses that I had for the 5N will work on the A7s but with a significant reduction in effective megapixels because of their APS-c field of coverage on the full frame sensors. There is an adjustment to adapt the e mounts. Sony has come out with a new line of lenses to cover the full frame but most are not yet available. The same thing happened when the NEX line came out. E mounts took a while to hit the market. Maybe with the A7s it is possible to replicate all DSLR functions but my experience with the NEX line says to me there is some ways to go. Don't get me wrong. I had a lot of fun with my 5N and I think it was a quality product but for my uses it had its limitations. This is just my experience with mirrorless. Others may have different outcomes.

[massimo_foti]

<blockquote>

<p>For these and other reasons I did not think the NEX 5N was good for sports.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't expect any camera using contrast-detection auto-focus to be usable for sports. </p>

[tom_elessar]

<p>@P<a href="/photodb/user?user_id=4435813">hilip Wilson</a></p>

<blockquote>

<p>M43 has spent over 5 years (it was announced early August 2008) building up a fairly mediocre collection of lenses</p>

</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/standard-range-micro-43-imatest-results">That doesn't appear to be true</a>. Note too that the deficiencies in zooms have been substantially remedied.<br>

<br />We may be talking past each other due to <a href="https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/06/the-rashomon-effect-and-my-small-camera-choice">the Rashomon Effect</a>. </p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>A funny (as in "odd") thing often happens in threads like this one - which can contain quite a few posts that are obsessive and bordering on religious.</p>

<p>Just because I happen to think that the combination of a large full frame DSLR (a 5D2 in my case) and a small mirrorless camera (a Fujifilm X-E1) is a wonderful way to go, this doesn't mean that it will be for you. Because you feel that mirrorless cameras are too small and not fast enough, doesn't mean that some other user will agree of find this to be a meaningful issue. And because you think that small mirrorless cameras make the DSLR obsolete, it does not follow that anyone with an alternative point of view is a fool.</p>

<p>It has long been the case in photography that we have had a variety of tools that seemed more or less suitable for different shooting situations and different types of results. It has also long been true that many photographers (though there are a few exceptions) use a range of equipment, selecting the gear for a particular need from the larger, diverse set of equipment available to them.</p>

<p>In fact, "you" may find the mirrorless cameras to be too small and (some other) "you" may not think this is an issue at all. Beyond your own personal perspective and preferences, neither of you is more or less right than the other.</p>

<p>How about simply relating your own individual experience with a bit of humility and perspective and allowing some sort of body of information to emerge, from which other photographers can make some judgments relative to their own needs and experience?</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>What I fail to understand is why Canon made such a half-hearted gesture at mirrorless with the EOS-M. If you're going to do mirrorless, do it right. If not, don't bother at all and put the development costs back into DSLR tech.</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>There is reason to think that Canon may not have realized that the mirrorless segment of the market was about to become competitive, with fine offerings from a number of manufacturers that appeal to both serious amateurs and professionals. Given how the smaller cameras have been seen for the past decade or so - as much lower quality options that could not equal the image quality of DSLRS - Canon can probably be forgiven for missing the quick change that took place.</p>

<p>It has also been pointed out that from their perspective - whether rightly or wrongly - they may have regarded the SL1 as being a better option for a small, high quality camera. To some extent they have a point, but more potential buyers are not likely to see it this way. To many serious users of the new, high quality 4/3 and cropped sensor mirrorless products, the SL1 feels like an entry-level camera, while the best mirrorless offerings from brands like Fujifilm, Sony, Olympus, and others feel like very serious small cameras.</p>

<p>They aren't for everyone nor are they for all shooting situations. In my own shooting, I would almost never choose my X-E1 over my 5D2 for landscape shooting or for photography of active subjects including sports and most wildlife. For other kinds of shooting, I could (and do) use either - some kinds of low light street and environmental portrait work, certain travel photography, and so forth. For a few other kinds of photography, <em>for me </em>the X-E1 is a <em>better </em>option many times - street photography, the kinds of travel photography where light weight is important, etc.</p>

<p>And, from my perspective as a person who regards himself as a serious photographer and as a photographers whose target output is often large prints, the X-E1 (and, no doubt, a number of the alternatives) can produce excellent image quality. </p>

<p>No camera is perfect for all things, and every camera (and system and brand and format) has its pluses and minuses. If you are interested in understanding these cameras a bit more, you might be interested in an <a href="http://www.gdanmitchell.com/2013/08/24/taking-stock-of-the-fujifilm-x-e1-mirrorless-camera">article about the X-E1</a> that I wrote.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>Made with the X-E1:</p>

<p>"Turret Skylight, SFMOMA"<br>

<img src="http://gdanmitchell.com/gallery/d/7402-3/TurretSkylightSFMOMA20130531.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>"Priory Church of St. Bartholomew the Great"<br>

<img src="http://gdanmitchell.com/gallery/d/7616-3/PrioryChurchStBartholomewTheGreatMain20130706.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>"Heidelberg Haupstrasse"<br>

<img src="http://gdanmitchell.com/gallery/d/7506-3/HeidelbergHaupstrasse20130712.jpg" alt="" /> </p>

<p>"Hohenwerfen Castle"<br>

<img src="http://gdanmitchell.com/gallery/d/7500-4/HohenwerfenCastleSalzachValley20130719.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[Nick D.]

<p>If camera you want already exist on market from other manufacturers, why wait for Canon, you were saying, that you agree to buy new lenses for that camera anyway.<br>

On second thought, I want Mac Pro in Mac Mini size and price, where are you Apple?</p>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>I want Mac Pro in Mac Mini size and price, where are you Apple?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Since you raised the point,<br /> Actually, Nick, the new Mac Pro (9.9"tall (25cm) x 6.6"(16cm) diameter) is not much larger than the mini. However, the price is a little harder....<br /> Frankly I was surprised and pleased to see how close they came to the standard new Mac Pro level in price (over the years 1978-now, I've paid $2500-3K for a 'Pro' sort of computer from Apple unadjusted for inflation).</p>

<p>As for cameras? If I wanted this sort of thing, I'm another who wouldn't worry about who made it, but rather who made it the best. There's no real issue here about legacy lenses that makes sense to me, at least.</p>

[dogbert]

<blockquote>Currently when I go lighter I just take my 5DII, 40mm pancake, 24mm IS, and either an 85/1.8, or 135/2. It's not as light as an Olympus OM-D,</blockquote>

<p>These days when I go light I take an Oly EM-1, 60 f2.8 macro or 7 mm fisheye, 9-18 wide angle zoom, 12-40 f2.8 normal zoom, 20 f1.7 pancake, and either the 45-150 or 75-300 Oly telephotos.<br>

I can have 18 to 300 mm or 18 to 600 mm equivalent focal lengths, plus macro and lowlight capability. It all fits in a Think Tank Retrospective 5!<br>

If I want to go heavy, I take the 5D with a 24-105 f4L, which is about the same weight.</p>

[brad_trostad]

Lots of great input, I appreciate the different perspectives regarding the emerging mirror less trend!

 

I guess I fall in the camp of desiring a EVF nowadays vs traditional OVF, even for a future full sized large camera. That is partly

driven from being as interested in video as photography. When it's sunny outside I want to be able to review my photos via the EVF. I

really like focus peaking to pick a very specific area of focus. The mirror slapping away is getting kinda old. It would be nice to be able

to shoot Full frame video with the body held to the eye vs holding 5lbs of camera at arms length struggling to see live view (yes, I

normally use a tripod, but to be able to hand hold would be a welcome relief).

 

So, as a few have mentioned, the new Sony A7 is at the head of the pack (the Panasonics are also very appealing to me). But, just

like the smaller "wee" mirror less offerings, Canon isn't in the game with a FF camera with EVF either. As I mentioned in the initial

post, I really like Canon I just wish they'd make a statement to clarify their strategy.

 

Let's say Canon does roll out a NEX 6 like camera. I'd be kinda silly to walk around with a 135L on it - but at least I could dabble if I

wanted to. I'm sure I'd normally have a M mount smaller lens on it. But it would be nice to know those FF primes would still be useful.

If I go with another brand for mirror less that means expensive adapters just to get aperture control for the EF lenses and probably

slow AF at best.

 

Plus I also have a hunch Canon is up to something interesting. I am starting to think they will roll out a mirror less medium format.

Perhaps if done properly, all our Full frame lenses via an adapter would cover tje inner 35mm area of the imager so it could be used

as a FF camera. Then remove the adapter and use MF lenses for mega resolution when needed. I know that takes this discussion

another direction but thinking along those lines and given the market trend for EVF and no mirrors I am quite sure Canon wil go mirror

less. It would just be nice to have some guidance regarding any future "wee" version.

 

Otherwise, I really liked trying out the NEX 6 the other day. The new A7 looks awesome but at that price I would like to see Canon's

move first.

 

As several of you have mentioned, the 5d2 (and obviously 5d3) is such a wonderful camera. I recently took several family photos with the 135L on it, all wide open just to have fun with it. People really comment on the "look" of those photos. I'm not giving up that combo an time soon - unless it's a 5Dx with an awesome EVF :)

[PuppyDigs]

<p>The 5D2/5D3 are so popular for HD video you can buy lots of attachments for using the LCD as an EVF, as well as LCDs to mount on a bracket or on the hotshoe. I saw something called the Zacuto EVF flip for the 5D3. Oddly after using an EVF for two years it left me wanting for more optical. The EVF worked fine but looks so fake and electronic it spoiled a lot of the excitement and glory of the scene for. It looks so bad I have to force myself to shoot! Someday the EVF will be better than reality but in 2013 it blocks up shadows, compresses dynamics, tears during pans and looks really contrasty. </p>

[john_tran14]

<p>Firstly, I really like what Bob Atkins says.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>To answer the question<br>

"Canon I just wish they'd make a statement to clarify their strategy"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They made <strong>very clear</strong> statements with the G1X and EOS M, the statements are so clear that they dont need me to translate them</p>