Hint about what to expect from Canon's step into full frame mirrorless?

[stevelee]

100% of my sample bought a 6D2 last year. I don't know anybody else who bought a new camera.

 

[Mikehit]

I the last three years, everyone I know who has bought a camera has bought a DSLR or MFT. And those who bought DSLR did so despite me telling them why I though MFT was better for them.

 

[Talys]

That's one scenario. Another scenario might be that there will be an equilibrium with both DSLR's and Mirrorless being produced at lower levels than at present, where marginally improved versions of both types of cameras are produced. It is often a mistake to assume that rapid improvements in a new design concept will continue.

it is often a mistake to assume new tech could not rapidly replace older one. If there are still new DSLRs made and sold 5 years from now, i expect their share to be smaller than that of Vinyl LPs. Or the one for horse-drawn carts. Or typewriters. ;D

Then again, life's full of disappointments.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

That's one scenario. Another scenario might be that there will be an equilibrium with both DSLR's and Mirrorless being produced at lower levels than at present, where marginally improved versions of both types of cameras are produced. It is often a mistake to assume that rapid improvements in a new design concept will continue.

it is often a mistake to assume new tech could not rapidly replace older one. If there are still new DSLRs made and sold 5 years from now, i expect their share to be smaller than that of Vinyl LPs. Or the one for horse-drawn carts. Or typewriters. ;D

The comparison with vinyl LPs is very interesting, because in the early 1990s I can remember people laughing at me because I had kept all my vinyl records instead of replacing them with CDs. I was warned that the vinyl record was about to become obsolete and I had better replace my collection quickly or I would be left behind. There were plenty of articles in the music magazines forecasting the demise of vinyl, just as we see today with the predictions that DLSRs will soon be replaced by mirrorless cameras. Yet, vinyl sales have recovered dramatically in recent years and some of the records that I refused to dispose of 30 years ago are now worth 50 times what I paid for them.
Fortunately, there have always been choices about which type of camera to use, or at least there have since I started taking photos and I hope this will always be the case. Photography will lose much of its interest if those choices are removed and all we are left with is mirrorless cameras for enthusiasts or professionals and mobile phones for everyone else.

 

[Mikehit]

That's one scenario. Another scenario might be that there will be an equilibrium with both DSLR's and Mirrorless being produced at lower levels than at present, where marginally improved versions of both types of cameras are produced. It is often a mistake to assume that rapid improvements in a new design concept will continue.

it is often a mistake to assume new tech could not rapidly replace older one. If there are still new DSLRs made and sold 5 years from now, i expect their share to be smaller than that of Vinyl LPs. Or the one for horse-drawn carts. Or typewriters. ;D

It is often a mistake to assume new technology will take over more rapidly than it does. Or overplay its importance. Film to digital was a paradigm shift. As was vinyl to digital.

When I was a kid I was told that by now we would all be wearing shiny suits, main meals would consist of a few protein pills and we would be having holidays on the moon. Well actually it should all have happened 20 years ago.
Ever noticed how a cure for a disease is always '10 years away'?

 

[fullstop]

I hope innovative Canon puts a decent hi-rez, fast refresh EVF into its upcoming FF MILCs. If they are not innovative enough to build one, they can buy them from Sony ... at only 50000 Yen a piece. Lol.

https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201805/18-049E/index.html

UXGA 1600x1200, up to 240 fps. Although clearly state of the art for EVFs today, I would really like to get a MILC with a 4k EVF instead of 4k video capture. ;D

 

[Talys]

I hope innovative Canon puts a decent hi-rez, fast refresh EVF into its upcoming FF MILCs. If they are not innovative enough to build one, they can buy them from Sony ... at only 50000 Yen a piece. Lol.

https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201805/18-049E/index.html

UXGA 1600x1200, up to 240 fps. Although clearly state of the art for EVFs today, I would really like to get a MILC with a 4k EVF instead of 4k video capture. ;D

The $750 M50 has a 2.36 million pixel OLED EVF. That's exactly the spec of the EVF in the $2,000 Sony A7III. Nobody is going to put in a 240fps EVF in a 2018 camera.

I don't really care if the dot pitch on the EVF is so tight that it makes it 4k. I would just like the EVF to always be on when the camera is on, and not consume very much power doing so. If 1 battery could run the EVF and shutter continuously for 8 hours (ie 2 batteries in a gripped camera for full work day of shooting with the EVF never turning off), I'd be excited.

One of my biggest gripes with using an EVF is that it's blacked out unless I have my eye to it (in order to save battery). But screw the battery; the blackout costs me shots.

 

[dak723]

"they will happily co-exist for many years."

it may take a few years until the last new DSLR is produced. just like Canon and Nikon still produced their kast (top tier model) analog SLRs for some more years. Just like Leica ending production/sales of their last film-M camera (M7) only now.

Forcall practical means and purposes, mirrorless is completely replacing DSLRs at a rapid pace. maybe already in 2018, at the latest next year, more new mirrorless cameras are expected to be sold than DSLRs. i expects DSLRs to pretty much vanish from online and offline stores within 4-5 years. there will be 1, maybe even 2 more generations of marginally improved DSLR iterations, depending on model/product development cycles cycles. after that DSLRs will only happily exist in collector's cupboards or - hopefully - in dust-proof pelicases. thats where my 5D3 already spends most of its time today. not so "happily", i guess.

You are just one of many who have been predicting the downfall of the DSLR with absolutely no data to back up your claims. Mirrorless has been gaining slightly on DSLR sales worldwide and will no doubt continue, but this is not a question of a newer, superior tech replacing an inferior tech. DSLRs still have many advantages than mirrorless offerings. It appears that as each year goes by, the tech gets closer to being similar. Any great advantage to mirrorless is so far not apparent.

Mirrorless cameras are not replacing DSLRs at a rapid pace. No one actually following the sales data is expecting mirrorless to outsell DSLRs this year or next. In 2017, the worldwide percentages were about 65% DSLR, 35% mirrorless. In 2016, it was 73% DSLR, 27% mirrorless.

Here are some charts, so you don't just have to make up arguments based on no data in the future. ;D

https://www.google.com/search?q=camera+industry+facts+2017&client=firefox-b-1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjrh8zEyqvbAhUN2lMKHWZoAt8QsAQIhAE&biw=1536&bih=839#imgrc=Lrja89cp1hr0eM:

 

[Talys]

Here are some charts, so you don't just have to make up arguments based on no data in the future. ;D

But... but... it's so much more fun to live in the world of alternative facts ;D

You know, the one where mirrorless has been exploding with exponential growth year over year and DSLR sales are crashing, propped up by Canon and Nikon giving away their top-end models in fire sales!

 

[fullstop]

...
Any great advantage to mirrorless is so far not apparent.
..
Mirrorless cameras are not replacing DSLRs at a rapid pace.
...

"640 kB ought to be enough for anybody" ;D


How about - for example: no vibrations, no noise, viewfinder showing scene as camera will capture the image, no possibility for front- or back-focused images? But of course in the world of yesteryears alternative facts DSLR lovers, these are all worthless. Mere conjecture. Speculation. Phew ... ;D

 

[fullstop]

Nobody is going to put in a 240fps EVF in a 2018 camera.

Don't bet on it. Sony A7S Mk. III may be just around the corner. With this very UXGA 240 fps electronic viewfinder built in. In 2018.

;D ;D ;D


And maybe - pure speculation of course - just maybe, Canon manages to move their ass and finally launch an FF MILC in 2018. With this very Sony EVF or even one of their own *innovative* EVFs with 4k and 240fps refresh rate built into it. I might buy it then.

 

[Talys]

Nobody is going to put in a 240fps EVF in a 2018 camera.

Don't bet on it. Sony A7S Mk. III may be just around the corner. With this very UXGA 240 fps electronic viewfinder built in. In 2018.

;D ;D ;D


And maybe - pure speculation of course - just maybe, Canon manages to move their ass and finally launch an FF MILC in 2018. With this very Sony EVF or even one of their own *innovative* EVFs with 4k and 240fps refresh rate built into it. I might buy it then.

The A7R3 has a 3.69 million pixel 120fps OLED EVF. There is no chance an A7S3 (if there is even an A7S3) goes to a 1.92 million pixel 240fps OLED EVF.

That's lower resolution than the A7R2, at 2.36 million pixels (same resolution as A73 and M50). As anyone who looks at the A9/A7R3 vs A73 can see immediately, there is a visible difference in the viewfinders. That extra 1.5 million pixels is a big plus. Nobody would be happy with a 2018 Sony camera about the same price as the A7R3 with a EVF that resolution.

 

[dak723]

...
Any great advantage to mirrorless is so far not apparent.
..
Mirrorless cameras are not replacing DSLRs at a rapid pace.
...

"640 kB ought to be enough for anybody" ;D


How about - for example: no vibrations, no noise, viewfinder showing scene as camera will capture the image, no possibility for front- or back-focused images? But of course in the world of yesteryears alternative facts DSLR lovers, these are all worthless. Mere conjecture. Speculation. Phew ... ;D

Since you are addressing a person who owns two mirrorless cameras and no DSLRs, you have no argument from me that their are advantages to mirrorless. So I am not sure why you are implying that I see no advantages to mirrorless unless - as you seem to be doing over and over again - that you are intentionally trolling.

However, if you believe that there are no vibrations with mirrorless, you are wrong. Shutter shock has been an issue, although some models do address the issue. Silent shutter is another spec that is not totally workable either. Not yet anyway. But WYSIWIG exposure is a a big advantage, in my opinion.

Of course, their are advantages to DSLR's as well including much better battery life, being able to view a scene without much (if any) battery drain, and there are still some advantages to an OVF, especially for wildlife and sports shooters.

Since their are advantages to each system, it seems that there is no reason that mirrorless will replace DSLRs in the near future and they will both be sold for many years. I think this seems fairly obvious to most folks. Only those looking for an argument seem to be vocally opposed to the obvious.

 

[fullstop]

there are no advantages to mirrorslappers. Vibration issue is solved as soon as the last 19th century mechanical component in cameras [mech shutter] is replaced by solid state electronics. Global shutter in every MILC, hopefully VERY soon now. Fuji and other mirrorless cameras have fully electronic shutters (in addition to mech). innovative Canon was not able to implement it (yet). unfortunately.

 

[3kramd5]

there are no advantages to mirrorslappers. Vibration issue is solved as soon as the last 19th century mechanical component in cameras [mech shutter] is replaced by solid state electronics. Global shutter in every MILC, hopefully VERY soon now. Fuji and other mirrorless cameras have fully electronic shutters (in addition to mech). innovative Canon was not able to implement it (yet). unfortunately.

Until mirrorless cameras violate the law of conservation of energy, SLR will carry at least one advantage.

Back in the real world, other than form factor, which a subjective advantage, there is nothing that a mirrorless camera can do that a reflex cannot (aside from operating mirror free without the slight power draw associated with holding the mirror up). The opposite is not also true.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Once mirrorless technology can match DSLR's, the cost is the next issue. Why does a M5 cost $829 when a SL2 costs $549? The SL2 is more capable, has EOS firmware rather than powershot firmware.

I'd bet it costs more to make as well.

Right now, Mirrorless cameras are a big profit item, and if people pay such a big price differential for one, then we will see more.

 

[sanj]

Once mirrorless technology can match DSLR's, the cost is the next issue. Why does a M5 cost $829 when a SL2 costs $549? The SL2 is more capable, has EOS firmware rather than powershot firmware.

I'd bet it costs more to make as well.

Right now, Mirrorless cameras are a big profit item, and if people pay such a big price differential for one, then we will see more.

Curious to know why you feel mirrorless technology is less than DSLR? I was under different impression...

 

[fullstop]

EOS M50 has significantly lower MSRP 599 than EOS 80D 1199? - although M50 offers everything an 80D can do and then some, eg more advanced AF system (no front-/backfocus - no AFMA needed, face/eye recognition + tracking AF mode) and (hobbled) 4k video capture. ;D

 

[Ian_of_glos]

Once mirrorless technology can match DSLR's, the cost is the next issue. Why does a M5 cost $829 when a SL2 costs $549? The SL2 is more capable, has EOS firmware rather than powershot firmware.

I'd bet it costs more to make as well.

Right now, Mirrorless cameras are a big profit item, and if people pay such a big price differential for one, then we will see more.

I think mirrorless cameras have an image problem. If I turned up to a shoot with an entry level mirrorless camera such as a Canon M100 most people would think it was a point and shoot camera. They are then likely to ask why are they paying for a professional photographer when he just uses the same camera as any amateur. However if I used an entry level DSLR such as a Canon 1300D, it looks more like a professional camera and I would be more likely to get away with it, even though it actually costs less than the M100.

Curious to know why you feel mirrorless technology is less than DSLR? I was under different impression...

 

[Ian_of_glos]

EOS M50 has significantly lower MSRP 599 than EOS 80D 1199? - although M50 offers everything an 80D can do and then some, eg more advanced AF system (no front-/backfocus - no AFMA needed, face/eye recognition + tracking AF mode) and (hobbled) 4k video capture. ;D

I don't think this is a fair comparison. The 80D is one of the more advanced Canon APSC DSLRs whereas the M50 is in the middle of canon's mirrorless range. It is difficult to find an exact match but in my opinion the M50 is more like an 800D than an 80D.
The basic point though was that one of the advantages of mirrorless cameras was supposed to be that they used a simpler mechanism and therefore they would be cheaper to make. However we don't see that and mirrorless cameras are often more expensive than the equivalent DSLR - eg in the UK the entry level mirrorless (the M100) costs around £320. The entry level DSLR (the 1300D) costs £280.