Opticallimits

If you mean the 35/2.8, I can't imagine why anyone would bother with that, other than for the dearth of AF 35mm options in the system. If Sigma beats them to the rush and makes something similar to the (highly regarded) Voigtländer 40mm f/2 - but with AF, they're going to sell thousands of those. Or even a "regular" sized/shaped 35/2 for that matter. It's funny how densely is the 50mm(ish) focal length populated now while at 35mm the situation is... weird.

 

But back to the 6D successor...

The crowd will never shut up  We chew a pancake with some maple syrup on it, after swallowing we shout for more.

 

An advantage in size might work for Asian persons with smaller fingers than Eurasians. But first it has to be ergonomic and second, going high res on bigger than APS-C sensors needs a certain amount of precision which cannot be maintained for reasonable prices in small and only medium solid plastic bodies. Systems like the Fuji GFX show well how we can expect to go.

 

In long term, I think going "only FF" for high resolution woul dbe stupid at the moment when new lenses need to be developed. There's a resaon to keep the proportions of sensors, but there's not much of a reason to stick at 24×36 mm.

 

A Tamron 15-30/2.8 in front of a Sony Î±7 gives me some concerns about tripod mount and body deformation due to weight and size of the lens mounted on bayonet - it can be very stiff, if the sensor is mounted directly to the lens-mount but if there's no strong connection the whole system will suffer of deformed geometry.

 

Lately we see a lot of heavy long lenses without a tripod collar, like the Sigma 85/1.4 Art and some Sony stuff and I don't now if this development of high quality yet heavy lenses will not become counterproductive?

Remember Canon executives priority: Sales and profit.

If it will sell they will make one.

They tried with M3 M5 if it works (good sales and profit without affecting other lines) they will surely make one. Most likely it won't be called 6D mkii

Quote:Remember Canon executives priority: Sales and profit.

If it will sell they will make one.

They tried with M3 M5 if it works (good sales and profit without affecting other lines) they will surely make one. Most likely it won't be called 6D mkii

I guess you could say that about any company...

Quote:Simple fact: What most people who consider mirrorless are after is size and weight reduction. According to Canon's execs, they view that as one of the things against FF mirrorless (read it in interviews). Then to say, just make a FF mirrorless with the size of a DSLR and the lenses of a DSLR, that makes very little sense.

 

The 6D on its own sells in bigger numbers than all the FF mirrorless cameras. Canon of course will not decide to not make an affordable FF DSLR to follow up on the 6D.

 

 

Yes, I agree this is this is the goal of many of the people who by mirrorless cameras.  And the concept is almost a valid one if they plan on shooting only wide, and normal focal length lenses.  But fast, high quality FF lenses end up just as large, or larger than with DSLR's.  It makes total sense for them to cater to the compact lens concept.  They should have a 40/2 (Voitlander has a FF version, and canon of course with its 40/2.8 pancake lens).  There are a lot of people who think photography is all about what the Leica covers, and even there, many think the only important focal lengths are 35mm, and 50mm.

 

If mirrorless users are willing to adopt the Leica user's goals of high quality compact portable cameras no problem.

 

But rather than fight Olympus who already makes an excellent compact system with an array of available lenses, it is possible to target another group.  Photographers who want the most capable camera possible.  It has been said before that DSLR is an going to be obsolete at some point.  I say that point will be when they can do everything a DSLR can do, and more.  That isn't going to be a camera that is smaller and lighter than a DSLR.  And a lot of photographers like myself, are never going with a FF mirrorless that is trying to be to many things at once.  If I get a mirrorless it is going to be something like MFT that adds new capabilities and small size.  I'm not buying into an undersized FF mirrorless body with huge expensive lenses.

 

The 6D II, I assume will by a conventional DSLR.  Because that is still the best, most reliable, and easy to handle FF camera.  But when Canon does enter the FF mirrorless market, I hope the don't pursue the silly small camera, undersized mount route.  They are already available.  I hope they stick to making professional, no compromise FF cameras that leverage an already existing selection of quality lenses!

      In essence we are a big family on this forum.............

 

 

                            .........and you know what it's like with families!  B)

Don't disturb me.

 

I'm counting possible income by selling lenses. Even the dirt-cheap GFX50S is a little bit to steep now, especially because so many DSLR users are abandon ship. (of course I have no numbers, what is the point in making pointless points with numbers in? )

 

One number I know: Uncompressed Fuji RAW will be roughly 100+ MB/RAF. Per picture, that is. So, when ordering that machine, I just need to get a box of fresh HDs...

Quote:Don't disturb me.

 

I'm counting possible income by selling lenses. Even the dirt-cheap GFX50S is a little bit to steep now, especially because so many DSLR users are abandon ship. (of course I have no numbers, what is the point in making pointless points with numbers in? )

 

One number I know: Uncompressed Fuji RAW will be roughly 100+ MB/RAF. Per picture, that is. So, when ordering that machine, I just need to get a box of fresh HDs...

 

And a fast PC with lots of RAM .

 

Kind regards, Wim

24 GB should do  ^_^

 

I should start calculating about screen size. Extrapolating the size my old iMac's screen, non 5K, I need something like 3.5 Macs in 3.5 rows, although 8256 × 6192 pixels doesn't sound really big.

 

And it is not big today - Even a Canon 5DR has 50 MP. But looking at the pictures coming out of it, I have to congratulate Fuji to just overstep FF with it's limits. I mean, bigger sensors are available up to 100 MP and new lenses had to be designed anyway, so why not going really big - but in a small package which is less bulky and heavy than an average FF pro body (Fuji 0.74 kg, D810 0.98 kg, 5DRs 0.845 kg) and one of the best EVF systems I know of. Well done, Fuji.  

Quote:24 GB should do  ^_^

 

I should start calculating about screen size. Extrapolating the size my old iMac's screen, non 5K, I need something like 3.5 Macs in 3.5 rows, although 8256 × 6192 pixels doesn't sound really big.

 

And it is not big today - Even a Canon 5DR has 50 MP. But looking at the pictures coming out of it, I have to congratulate Fuji to just overstep FF with it's limits. I mean, bigger sensors are available up to 100 MP and new lenses had to be designed anyway, so why not going really big - but in a small package which is less bulky and heavy than an average FF pro body (Fuji 0.74 kg, D810 0.98 kg, 5DRs 0.845 kg) and one of the best EVF systems I know of. Well done, Fuji.  

 



 

Possibly true, but for me the limit is an FF body and lenses, whether dslr or ilc with evf. The Fuji with lenses is a lot bigger, and by the time you have the lenses you'd really want, you need a carrier, or maybe even two . This apart from the price tag .

 

Kind regards, Wim