Canon explains Mirrorless

Discussion in 'Mirrorless Cameras' started by Solarflare, Mar 3, 2016.

  1. Solarflare

    Solarflare No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    394
    Canon explains why they still don't have a professional mirrorless camera | Photo Rumors
    Not bad, not bad. But the third IMHO would be the angle of incidence issue.

    One of the prime benefits of having a mirrorless camera is that the distance between sensor and lens can be much smaller. This in principle allows simpler, shorter, more lightweight, higher quality and cheaper wide angle lenses, that do not need to be constructed as retrofocus. But to fully exploit this advantage, the sensor has to be able to handle light with steep angles of incidence.

    And finally, of course there is also battery life.


     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. jaomul

    jaomul Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,715
    Likes Received:
    1,552
    Location:
    Cork Ireland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I understand that this is an article of some interest, but with the amount of dslr systems and mirrorless systems why does anyone give a rats ass if Canon or Nikon make a mirrorless. The lenses will be different so will need an adapter regardless of your existing non mirrorless system, and existing mirrorless systems already adapt to other lenses
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. beagle100

    beagle100 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2015
    Messages:
    2,068
    Likes Received:
    539
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit

    right on
    I'll stick with my ($100) mirrorless camera
    maybe some day I'll go crazy and splurge on a $200 mirrorless camera !
    www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless
     
  4. Solarflare

    Solarflare No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    394
    Um, what ?

    Canon and Nikon both already make mirrorless systems, Canon EOS M and Nikon "One".

    The issue is if they are making a PROFESSIONAL mirrorless system. I.e. something like their DSLR - only mirrorless.

    And such a thing isnt around yet. The closest is maybe Fuji X. Sony TRIES to make something like that, but I bet Canikon can do better.
     
  5. robbins.photo

    robbins.photo Yup, It's The Zoo Guy Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2013
    Messages:
    11,518
    Likes Received:
    4,786
    Location:
    Louisville, Nebraksa - United States
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Which is probably why they don't make one in a nutshell. The big advantage to mirrorless is size and weight. Well, if you want to use all the same lenses as your DSLR's, you can't really make the camera body a whole lot smaller than what it is already. So your really inheriting all the mirrorless design issues (such as autofocus and the need for ELV) without really getting the biggest benefit from using mirrorless in return which is smaller size and weight.

    On the other side of the coin if you do change the lens mount then none of your vast array of lenses designed for your DSLR lines are really going to work, and you need smaller, lighter lenses to really take advantage of the much smaller camera body.

    My guess is both Canon and Nikon did the market research and realized that at least for now their just isn't a big enough market out there to really make such designs profitable. Eventually my guess is as the tech improves and the prices of engineering and building such systems decreases in comparison to the current DSLR tech being used today that eventually both Nikon and Canon will begin to offer such options.
     
  6. Overread

    Overread has a hat around here somewhere Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    25,265
    Likes Received:
    4,783
    Location:
    UK - England
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Thing is Canon might well do a mirrorless camera in DSLR format - once the mirrorbox is superseded by video and liveview and once that won't impact battery life in a meaningful way. The thing is for that we need a huge advance in video tech and processing power; plus a likely shift to sensor reading data from the whole unit not in strips (again even more processor power needed).

    And in the end a digital overlay over the viewfinder image is easier to work with; likely cheaper and not as resource intensive.

    Mirrorless saves in size and weight and that's is main selling point; heck its its only real selling point. Take that away and their systems are nothing special next to a regular DSLR.
     
  7. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    48,229
    Likes Received:
    18,870
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Canon has just about ZERO need to create a professional mirrorless camera system--and that is exactly what a "professional" mirrorless entry would require--a system. Currently, digital system cameras of the smaller size is a market dominated by Canon and Nikon. The market leaders, Canon and Nikon, have no need to try to legitimize what upstarts in the camera business have tried to do, and failed with--which is making lots of cameras and selling lots of cameras, and tens of millions of lenses for each company (EF, EF-S, and F mount lenses).

    THE market LEADER, Canon, does not need to go chasing after new customers when it already has the lion's share. This is the difference between mirrorless fanboys and camera company executives. The former occasionally pine for something they think they would like, the latter devote their lives to the camera business.

    The idea that Canon needs a "professional mirrorless" system doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. Besides, switching the paradigm is a potentially very dangerous proposition in the camera business. Leica, Hasselblad, Rolleiflex, Yashica, Bronica, Minolta, Konica, Petri, Graflex, Pentax, Olympus, Ricoh--all of those companies had severe,severe problems when paradigms shifted. Making a "new type of camera" is something that the above companies had immense difficulty with.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Overread

    Overread has a hat around here somewhere Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    25,265
    Likes Received:
    4,783
    Location:
    UK - England
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    The other is that mirrorless isn't really replacing DSLRs. It's sitting alongside as another option for a person to use.

    Those I see selling up and moving tend to be those who have reached the end of their DSLR lifespan and were not investing further into it because they were no longer using it. As null customers their loss is minimal and the act of moving away to a new format might well even make them a repeat customer in a few years - when the novelty of mirrorless has worn off and they've built their mirrorless into a monster as big as entry level DSKR
     
  9. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    48,229
    Likes Received:
    18,870
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    The original premise of mirrorless cameras was set forth years ago as, "Smaller and lighter cameras, smaller and lighter lenses." However, once one gets into lenses that have top-shelf optical performance, especially at the telephoto end, there really is no size or weight savings for the performance lenses that give the 24-70mm f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 equivalence--those types of lenses really can not be made much smaller or lighter than they have been since the 1980's...so what people end up with is a tiny camera body with a BIG lens hanging off the front of it. Sony's newest lens releases, their BRAND-new last month 85/1.4, 24-70, and 70-200 are BIG, heavy, solid lenses, touted as having exceptionally high performance optics, but again, pretty much as large and heavy as a Canon or Nikon lens of comparable specification.

    Leica's new SL mirrorless: a no-compromise, MASSIVE body camera...BIG, full-bodied, and a massive standard zoom with it, high-performance EVF, apparently the best ever built and offered...priced right at Canon 1DX or Nikon D3x price points--right at around $7,999 US dollars body-only.

    Canon already faces a diminishing sales camera market, so devoting hundreds of millions of Yen to R&D and tooling for an all-new lens line doesn't make a lot of sense. I think Canon ought to maintain the Canon EF mount in any serious mirrorless camera they might make. Frankly, I think the smaller, lighter mirrorless original premise has mostly been played out, and that people are now realizing that the original premise and promise of the 2007 era has just not been met, except in the short-lens and compact zoom end of things.

    I think if Canon or Nikon do decide to enter the professional mirrorless segment, they would be incredibly foolish to do it using anything except their current, best mounts: Canon EF and Nikon F-mount. Sacrifice the non-retrofocus wide-angle idea, and go with what has the worlds's two largest installed user lens bases...EF and F. Go for a balls-out, high-performance mirrorless, and leave the tiny camera business to Fuji and Panasonic and Olympus--companies that each sell a month's worth of Canon d-slr sales over their entire calendar year.
     
  10. pixmedic

    pixmedic I am the Lord thy Mod Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    Messages:
    15,289
    Likes Received:
    7,367
    Location:
    Central Florida
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I find it interesting that there is all this talk of canon/nikon getting into "professional" mirrorless cameras. what would a "professional" mirrorless camera be anyway? is anyone suggesting that people cant/dont do professional work with canon or nikons "non professional" DSLR's? all I really hear about is the AF system and FPS differences. what if your profession doesn't need the higher end AF or FPS?
    a wedding photographer I follow uses M4/3 cameras to shoot weddings. Featured: 'Mu43 Wedding Experience' by SSSYURRR
    his shots are amazing, using an E-M5 and a E-p5.
    I cant imagine not being able to shoot a wedding with my fuji X-E2. or a sony a7. (with proper glass of course)
    how about portraits? im pretty sure I can still do good portrait work with my mirrorless.
    or is a fuji mirrorless somehow less "professional" than the myriad of people using entry-mid level nikon and canon DSLR's for the same work?

    I remember years ago, Nikon, on their own web site, stated that the only "professional" model's they made were the Dx line.
    (at the time that was D3 (X, S) and D4. everything else was listed as "consumer". im pretty sure canon probably had a similar listing.

    I agree on the reasons canon/nikon probably are not very serious in the mirrorless scene now, but I dont think that detracts any from the fact that many MILC's are extremely capable cameras for all but those few that actually require high FPS and the absolute best AF system for their job/hobby.
     
  11. Dao

    Dao No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,423
    Likes Received:
    462
    Location:
    St. Louis
    Look back at 6 to 7 years ago. There were a lot more companies made DSLRs for the consumer market but something changed. Low end consumer camera market share are shrinking due to cell phone camera and nobody were able to make a dent on the DSLR market which dominated by Canon and Nikon. Sony tried, but not going anyway.

    In order to survive, Panasonic and Olympus create a new market called Mirrorless and hoping to gain some business. Soon after that, others followed and they are the one who are not able to make money in point and shoot camera as well as DSLR market.

    I really don't see why Canon need to create a high end mirrorless camera. They do good in the DSLR market. They create a small DSLR (SL) for someone who like to travel lighter. Their high end point and shoots are not bad. Their super zoom point and shoot are decent. Of course, it is hard to beat the Smartphone camera market now. They did come up with one camera that pair with Smartphone, but I do not think it gain any traction.

    I think we need to understand Canon is here to make money, and they will focus on where they can make more money. I really do not think making a Professional Mirrorless camera will make them more money.
     
  12. Solarflare

    Solarflare No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    394


    I dont care for mirrorless being smaller. That effect much less strong than most people think. Current mirrorless are mostly being smaller simply because they have smaller sensors. While Sony A7* cameras are smaller than DSLR, but their lenses have to be longer than the DSLR counterparts, because the laws of optics do not change with mirrorless.

    Also, personally I simply have large hands. Current mirrorless are thus more or less uncomfortable to hold for me. Especially if theres huge lenses attached.

    Mirrorless, to me, have the following advantages and disadvantages (I hope I didnt forget something):

    + no mirrorbox - much less complexity, more reliable and cheaper camera possible
    + short flange distance - allows smaller, higher quality and cheaper wide angle lenses if angle of incidence issue with digital sensors is resolved
    + can adapt any DSLR lens thanks to reduced flange distance
    + EVF with many secondary processing possible - focus peaking, magnification, digital split screen, life histogram, false color, zebras, ...
    + very broad coverage of the AF
    + viewfinder size independent of sensor size
    + perfect framing
    + often no calibration of the AF necessary, since it is at least partially a contrast autofocus
    + possibly a rangefinder OVF (see outside the current picture frame for better descisive moment)

    - increased current requirement (sensor and EVF have to run permanently during useage)
    - issue of using current during looking through sensor for prolonged times without actually shooting a photo (typical wildlife scenario)
    - general heat and overheating issues with the sensor
    - typical EVF issues (lag especially in low light, dazzling the user in low light by being too bright, flickering in artifical light, etc)
    - having a rangefinder OVF solves above issues, but the coverage of the finder is limited (no ultra wide, no macro, no tilt/shift, poor telephoto, issues with polarization filters, wont notice lens cap still on the camera)
    - no "real" OVF like a SLR, useable for any lens
    - no film camera variants for the system
    - potentially poor action focus performance especially with pure contrast autofocus concepts
    - incompete systems, small number of lenses, poor flash support, poor used and secondary markets

    All in all I currently doubt I will ever fully convert to mirrorless. I think I will always have a full frame DSLR with two zooms (wide and tele) and some primes, and I will later point get a medium format mirrorless system with a nice trinity of prime lenses (wide, normal, tele).
     
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page