[Reinier]

But is the rumour about the 6D serious? We got somewhat side tracked.



Kind regards,


Reinier

[Brightcolours]

But is the rumour about the 6D serious? We got somewhat side tracked.



Kind regards,


Reinier

No, it is not.

A more serious rumour about the 6D mk II:

28mp DSLR with swivel screen (60/70/80D style) DP live view AF, touchscreen.

http://www.canonrumors.com/some-canon-eo...-talk-cr2/

[Rover]

I'm failing to find the AF spec in this rumor article... I wonder if is it going to be the same paltry 11 AF points clustered in the middle, so as to absolutely not cannibalize the 5D Mark IV sales?

[Brightcolours]

I'm failing to find the AF spec in this rumor article... I wonder if is it going to be the same paltry 11 AF points clustered in the middle, so as to absolutely not cannibalize the 5D Mark IV sales?

It either will go for very high sensitivity (like the 6D's center point) or 80D like. Time will tell?

[Rover]

Maybe it's going to be the next thing - 19 points a la 1D Mark III, but less precise. I mean, I hope they're not going to leave the system as is - if it was antiquated in 2012 (even versus the Nikon counterpart), it's positively stone age now. I don't expect even the 80D level of AF system sophistication (incidentally, the 80D is the camera that I'm taking the longest, hardest look at as a backup body for my own use).

[toni-a]

Well a mirrorless full frame makes a lot of sense, and personally I would be really interested, all EF lenses will work on mirrorless via an adapter (that would be easy to make  since it's nothing more than an extension tube to increase flange distance practically) plus some mirrorless specific lenses.

Canon has everything ready to make such a body, however maybe they are not ready to be compared head to head with Sony A7 where Sony has the edge

[Arthur Macmillan]

Yes!  I don't see why people are so convinced that how thin the camera is is the most important thing.  My iPhone is thin.  I rarely use it as a camera!

 

Since you mentioned it Toni-a, I think that would be the perfect way to make a full frame MILC.  As you say, the adapter for EOS would be an extension tube.  Does Canon really need to repeat Sony, and all of the others mistake of making the mount to close to the image plane?  If you are shooting full frame, I assume you want excellent results more than the smallest size possible.  People have been banging their heads saying, "Oh, someday, they will have a battery that will allow the camera to take enough photos.

 

Why not make a registry distance that is enough shorter than Leica M and Zeiss Contax / Kiev / Nikon 35mm rangefinders.  Then you would have a camera that can fully use some of the legendary lenses, finally on a camera that can also utilize the Canon lenses developed.  But I would foresee a couple obvious shifts in direction:

 

1- The increased registry distance, would provide space for a much larger battery.  One that is practical to use.

2- The greater space would also allow light to be dispersed to the corners and edges without being directed at distortion causing angles.

3-The wide throat would allow Canon to incorporated some sort of in camera image stabilization.  Sony has to deal with its insufficient room because there is not enough room near the image circle to allow much shift, and its short registry distance exaggerates the problem.

 

If you want a FF sensor, you necessarily will have FF sized lenses. When I lift my 5D Mark II body, I don't feel there is any big strain involved.  If you want a very fast lens, or a long telephoto, and you don't like the weight, then you want a smaller format.

 

The improvements I look for are low light focusing performance, and electronic viewfinders that allow you to see better in low light situations.  I also look forward to slightly cheaper FF lenses that don't require image stabilization within the lens.

 

If Canon started out with all the right ingredients it would not have to make a ton of compromises later.  For instance, I'm not sure if Oly, Sony, Pentax, and other makers with in camera stabilization always read the focal length data of third party lenses, or if they make you enter it manually.  I seem to remember an Oly user having to input the length of his Sigma Macro, in order for the ICIS to work correctly.  That seems lame to me, but I could be wrong.

 

Also, if Canon wants to keep its enviable user base, It would do well to make something as simple as a tube to convert current FF lenses.  For people that want APS-C sized cameras, or smaller...then stick with them!

 

I agree with toni-a.  It makes a lot of sense to work with specifications that do not leave current Canon users out in the cold, and yet give Canon the room to grow, and easy surpass Sony, just by virtue of a versatile mount with room to grow and an established base of lenses.  Many of Canon's best lenses require you to chose from the not stabilized F/2.8 version, or stabilized F/4 version.  E.g 24-70 F/2.8 or the F/4 IS version.  Canon:  It's time to realize people can have both! 

[Brightcolours]

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.

 

If Canon is going to make a FF mirrorless camera, it will NOT be a 6D mkII. If they develop one, it will be one which can have the size advantage (so with a shorter flange distance, and at least a few compact mirrorless primes). And of course, EOS DSLR lenses can then be used with an extension tube just like the EOS-M range does.

 

To give an idea on the size of the market for FF mirrorless at the moment... The newest data from the Japanese market shows that for mirrorless, Olympus is at nr 1 position with 26.8%. The camera maker with the smallest mirrorless concept (disregarding silly small like Nikon and Pentax sensor size) has by far the biggest market share. At nr 2: Canon, with 18.5%. Canon who only sells small APS-C mirrorless with small lenses. Sony takes position nr 3 (17.9%), with a combination of APS-C and FF mirrorless.

 

Most of the market (in Japan at least) is price conscious. Sony going expensive with FF and even with the new APS-C models does not help their sales numbers (24.8% to 17.9% in 1 year).

 

Again, this is only the Japanese market.

[Rover]

Yeah, the forums are full of an endless stream of complaint about "huge" Sony FE lenses. I can understand that the disgruntled contingent is the most vocal one, but it appears that the sentiment is widespread, even though these people do not seem to understand that it's not really possible/feasible to create a system of full frame, good quality AND modern lenses the size of their Leica M nominal counterparts. Much less a small 24-70/2.8 lens.

 

I just wish Sony makes a 40/2.8(ish) pancake for the FE system as a bone to throw to that crowd and make them shut up.

[Brightcolours]

They could easily do a 40mm f2 and keep it small. Maybe they do not want to eat into the "lucrative" 55mm f2.8?