Lots of New mirrorless and DSLR cameras in the pipeline

[Mikehit]

Would it help if I re-worded my previous post as

As always in these situations, it would help the discussion if you explained how you define 'better'. Without our having any idea of what you have in mind it is a pointless comment for anyone wanting to discuss it with you.

 

[Michael Clark]

Yes, Canon does a great job segmenting the marketing place but IMO fails to address some needs. I want 1Dx AF in a body with a crop sensor. Nikon keeps roughly the same AF in pro and pro sumer bodies. Canon does not, if you want great AF buy a 1Dx M2.

Canon does have pretty much the same AF in the 7D2 as in the 1Dx series - the difference is that the metering sensor is 150,000ixels as opposed to the 1Dx 300,000 pixel and from what I understand this is pretty much the as with the Nikon D500/D5 models. So I am not sure what you mean that Nikon do something that Canon does not.

I along with many other photographers I shoot with, all have said that the 1Dx M2 AF is significantly better than the AF in the 7D M2.

On a recent shoot of flying raptors, I compared the keeper ratio between my 1Dx M2 w/ 200-400 vs Nikon D500 w/ Sigma 150-600 contemporary - the Nikon won.

I agree. But what did you expect that when the metering sensor (which is used by the AF) is half the size, the battery is significantly smaller and it has only one processor to do AF and other functions? Unless you can show me otherwise, I believe the same comparison applies to the D500 vs D5.
And I have also heard many times that the D500 is better than the 7Dii for tracking birds in flight, but that does not mean the D500 is any more similar to the performance of the D5 than the 7D2 is to the 1Dx2.

It's more than just what a manufacturer "decides" to give each model. The physics involved will always constrain the PDAF system in an APS-C camera more than the exact same technology in a FF camera.

The larger sensor of a FF camera, and the resulting wider mirror size which allows a wider semi-translucent portion of the mirror, allows a wider baseline for the PDAF system.

It's more noticeable when comparing APS-C and FF Canon cameras because Canon tunes many of their AF points to operate at wider apertures in order to give them more sensitivity. Nikon tends to tune most of their AF points to work with narrower apertures in order to make them usable with more lenses. This makes the difference less noticeable when comparing the performance of APS-C and FF Nikon cameras.

P.S. What is a Canon 1Dx or 1Dx2? Do you mean the Canon 1D X and 1D X Mark II? Dx is a Nikon thing designating an APS-C sized sensor or a lens made to cast an image circle size for such a sensor.

 

[Michael Clark]

I think they do, and that is why the released the RF 28-70 2.0 as an initial lens release.
To make a statement that they see the importance of the Pro's.

It could just as easily be interpreted to mean they see the importance of what youTubers will say regarding the direction Canon is going with their mirrorless systems.

Introducing very high quality (and priced) lenses has probably reduced the amount of flaming from youTubers regarding the fairly pedestrian specs of the EOS R because they are more or less forced to acknowledge (or, if they do not, they come off looking a bit unperceptive) that a higher level FF ML camera seems to be on the way from Canon.

The fact that Canon is hinting that a higher end EOS R is on the way does not necessarily equate to the idea that Canon thinks the rapidly thinning ranks of true 'Pro' photographers are still more influential in what everyone else buys than the rapidly expanding number of youTube "pro" reviewers.

 

[Michael Clark]

I think a good option would be for the 'shots remaining' indicator to have an option to show the estimated number of shots left on the card or the estimated number of shots remaining until the battery dies. The two numbers could be different colours, for example red number = shots remaining until battery expires, white = number remaining until card is full.

Probably the sensible logic for this would be to switch over to showing 'battery remaining' shots once the battery gets lower than 40% or so. Maybe a little battery symbol next to the number so you also know the number relates to battery and not to card storage.

But with a modern card I hardly ever get close to filling the card. The number of shots remaining on battery power is much more useful.

More useful for you and other shooters that shoot the same way you do. On the other hand, many of us who shoot sports or events swap cards far more often than we swap batteries, particularly if we use vertical grips that hold two batteries.

 

[Talys]

More useful for you and other shooters that shoot the same way you do. On the other hand, many of us who shoot sports or events swap cards far more often than we swap batteries, particularly if we use vertical grips that hold two batteries.

Or, just have batteries in high end bodies that aren't anemic. If I know I can get 8 hours of shooting hard with everything going and 16 hours gripped, then 1/4 battery means that if my event is going to be more than a couple of hours longer, I better have a spare just in case.

I really don't want to sweat it about batteries about swapping them. Really, what I want is one fully charged battery to run a full day of pretty heavy use.

 

[jolyonralph]

Technological advancement normally comes with some penalties relating to power usage. Compare modern smartphones to pre-smartphones that would work great for a week or more on a single charge.

How often did you have to change the battery in your 35mm film SLR?

WIth mirrorless you're going to get shorter battery life than a DSLR for the same capacity battery. That's pretty much unavoidable. With a 128GB or 256GB card I find however much I shoot I'm pretty much not going to fill up the card in one day, even with full-size raw files at 50 megapixels.