Nikkei: Canon and Nikon to announce mirrorless pro models

[Talys]

The only reason some people want a full frame for is low light shooting, and probably a good chunk of them, becuse they don't know how to properly use a flash.

People want full frame cameras because they don’t know how to use flashes? Heh from whence did you come up with that statistic ;D

Sadly, I have a friend who is one *cries*

He absolutely refuses to use a flash, lol. Would rather shoot it ISO 25,000, because he is convinced that camera flashes ruin photographs, despite my every effort to explain the contrary. He's bought a couple of Canon full frame DSLRs now, so at least he helps keep local camera stores in business.

On the bright side, I shouldn't complain too much. He sold me my Canon 600EX-RT for $200, because he's convinced that it's junk -- just like a 430EX2 he gave me for free a few years before that

To be honest, he'd probably love a Sony A7iii. What he really wants is a point and shoot with awesome low light that he can take on vacations and to family get togethers.

 

[3kramd5]

The only reason some people want a full frame for is low light shooting, and probably a good chunk of them, becuse they don't know how to properly use a flash.

People want full frame cameras because they don’t know how to use flashes? Heh from whence did you come up with that statistic ;D

Sadly, I have a friend who is one *cries*

He absolutely refuses to use a flash, lol. Would rather shoot it ISO 25,000, because he is convinced that camera flashes ruin photographs...

Hah wow.

I mean, they *can* ruin photos I suppose. But what the heck? Has he never seen a great portrait? Or fashion / fine art tableu? How does he think those are made?

 

[Talys]

Hah wow.

I mean, they *can* ruin photos I suppose. But what the heck? Has he never seen a great portrait? Or fashion / fine art tableu? How does he think those are made?

Presumably, he's actually figured it out, since he's actually a very bright fellow and I've walked him through the whole bounce thing, shown him what gels can do and explained why pointing a flash straight at someone's face is like stepping in poo. And we've taken plenty of great photos of his kids in a studio setting with proper modifiers.

At the end of the day, he's a guy who likes toplay with cameras and just wants an ETTL that magically looks good. Since that doesn't exist, he's settled for full frame cameras in auto mode. Maybe that new auto-bounce flash will be easy enough for him to use. If not, I'll net me a cheap/free one of those! hahaha ;D

 

[BillB]

For the same reason that the EF mount is used on a 1D and SL1 camera. Same mount different set of ergonomics. Stop fixating on just a small camera, the same thin mount can give you a small camera that some people like, but it can also go on a giant camera that a different set of people like. the smallest you can do with the current EF mount is the SL1 camera.

You cannot reconcile this with the crowd that thinks that the SL1 is huge, bulbous, and ugly, as is any camera with a viewfinder bump and a grip. In the go-small-or-go-home crowd, the a7r3 is the limit of acceptable size, the a6500 is with a kit lens is better; and the best camera form factor is something like a smartphone with a collapsible pancake. The only reason some people want a full frame for is low light shooting, and probably a good chunk of them, becuse they don't know how to properly use a flash. Which is probably way too huge, heavy, and ugly anyways.

Regardless of my own preferences and the obvious ridicule I have for it, this is probably a market segment, and camera manufacturers should make someone who wants a $4,000 kit for shooting family photos in low light their dream kit.

And, the mount for it doesn't ever need things like a 70-200/2.8 or a 400/4. Well, unless you can fit that into your shirt pocket.

Then there are the people who want a very small fullframe camera (low cost, with interchangeable lens) mostly because it doesn't exist. Any camera that hits the market will cost too much, be too big, lack the right lenses, and have various other fatal flaws which they will recognize as soon as the camera is announced, followed quickly by forums posts to tell about their acute disappointment, especially is Canon is the manufacturer.

 

[dak723]

For the same reason that the EF mount is used on a 1D and SL1 camera. Same mount different set of ergonomics. Stop fixating on just a small camera, the same thin mount can give you a small camera that some people like, but it can also go on a giant camera that a different set of people like. the smallest you can do with the current EF mount is the SL1 camera.

You cannot reconcile this with the crowd that thinks that the SL1 is huge, bulbous, and ugly, as is any camera with a viewfinder bump and a grip. In the go-small-or-go-home crowd, the a7r3 is the limit of acceptable size, the a6500 is with a kit lens is better; and the best camera form factor is something like a smartphone with a collapsible pancake. The only reason some people want a full frame for is low light shooting, and probably a good chunk of them, becuse they don't know how to properly use a flash. Which is probably way too huge, heavy, and ugly anyways.

Regardless of my own preferences and the obvious ridicule I have for it, this is probably a market segment, and camera manufacturers should make someone who wants a $4,000 kit for shooting family photos in low light their dream kit.

And, the mount for it doesn't ever need things like a 70-200/2.8 or a 400/4. Well, unless you can fit that into your shirt pocket.

Then there are the people who want a very small fullframe camera (low cost, with interchangeable lens) mostly because it doesn't exist. Any camera that hits the market will cost too much, be too big, lack the right lenses, and have various other fatal flaws which they will recognize as soon as the camera is announced, followed quickly by forums posts to tell about their acute disappointment, especially is Canon is the manufacturer.

I suppose being number one (as Canon is) makes them an easy target. The anti-Canon bias on the internet review sites and forums is almost beyond belief. Saw an in-depth review of the Sony A7III - which was mainly positive, but pointed out that many of the features don't work as well as the spec sheet would make one believe - and the Sony fanboys were out in force! Similar comments on this forum and other places that criticize Sony for putting out cameras that are in many ways beta-testers, seem to be ignored or downplayed to the extreme. Even Nikon - whose executives in an interview gave basically the same type of comment as Canon execs - were not vilified as Canon execs are. Those Nikon execs basically said that their major concern was putting out a product that was high quality, with reliable working features, rather than putting in a lot of more gimmicky features that look good on the spec sheet. When Canon says that - they are killed!

I seriously wonder how many of the great spec features are actually used and tested in the internet reviews. Very few, I would imagine, as time constraints probably cause the reviewers to just test the basics and then just repeat verbatim from the promotional material the spec features that they don't get to test. And one should not forget that these reviews are not done by journalists pledged to be fair and honest. Many if not most - are basically advertisements.

My personal experience with a recent purchase of an Olympus E-M1 II only reinforces my belief that Canon's approach is far better than putting "innovations" into a camera just because it looks good on the spec sheet, impresses reviewers and makes the next generation of camera seem like a bigger upgrade. Two features that I was looking forward to with the new Olympus - their new touch/drag focus point selection and their new High-resolution mode. Compared to Canon's M5, their touch/drag AF point selection is very poor. Canon's works great, Olympus's jumps around and is barely usable. I haven't tried the high-res mode, but just got off an Olympus user forum where many users commented. While a great feature on the spec sheet, it is pretty much useless in practice according to users. The camera must be completely still for it to work. A tripod many not be stable enough. Any sort of breeze makes it unusable. Users using an 8 second delay found that the camera was probably still vibrating ever so slightly after 8 seconds. A remote shutter release is needed. If you aren't using their Pro lenses, you might not see a difference between hi-res and a regular shot, etc. etc.

Based on user comments here, many of the great Sony specs are also not working particularly well in practice. yet, Sony gets nothing but internet love! And Canon nothing but internet hate.

 

[Talys]

@dak723 -

My top Sony beta/misleading features list for the A7R3:

- 10fps: But VF doesn't refresh in real time. Solution: set to 8fps.
- Silent Shutter: But there's massive distortion with movement. Solution: turn it off.
- Weather resistant: except the hotshoe, if uncovered, and the bottom of the camera.
- Fast Hybrid Autofocus: But it only works in Continuous AF; otherwise, it's Contrast Detect.
- AF points across the whole frame: Except only the 70% covered by Phase Detect is fast AF; the rest hunts like a Nikon in live view.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Don't you love it when even the fine print has fine print?

 

[jeffa4444]

An announcement just before Photokina, Koln, Germany in September. This is the last bi-annual and in September Photokina. Next year it moves to May and becomes annual.

 

[Deleted member 379512]

@dak723 -

My top Sony beta/misleading features list for the A7R3:

- 10fps: But VF doesn't refresh in real time. Solution: set to 8fps.
- Silent Shutter: But there's massive distortion with movement. Solution: turn it off.
- Weather resistant: except the hotshoe, if uncovered, and the bottom of the camera.
- Fast Hybrid Autofocus: But it only works in Continuous AF; otherwise, it's Contrast Detect.
- AF points across the whole frame: Except only the 70% covered by Phase Detect is fast AF; the rest hunts like a Nikon in live view.

On the flipside, I think Canon should be trying to push the boundaries more than they are, a lot of the positive press sony get is from trying to add useful features, rather than omitting them completely.

Silent shooting and 10 fps are two great examples of this: not ideal for all situations due to the limitations, but far more useful being there for the times you want /need them, than not having them at all.

Canon also has a trend of releasing special sheet additions that are limited in real use.
The 4k conditions on the 5dmk4 and M50, dual pixel raw seems to be a bit limiting in real use, the eye af only being available in some shooting modes etc.

I like that Canon are adding extras, and still think that it should be counted as a positive that those are added even with the fine print, it just means we can't knock on Sony for having the same situation

 

[kphoto99]

I had an idea for a mount, the mount could "zoom" between 44mm for the standard EF flange distance and retract for a 18mm flange distance. This way you could use regular EF lenses and also use small EF-X lenses.

No way of forgetting an adapter. Small camera with short FL lenses, yet still uses all EF lenses.

 

[Jeffrey]

What, me worry?

If new gear comes out and the image quality is superior to the gear I have, then I move forward in purchasing the new gear.

Speculation is just that; somewhat entertaining, but nothing to be concerned with until we see images from the new camera.