Canon mirrorless camera, when?

For all their bluster it's hard to imagine that the likes of Canon and Nikon will ignore the mirrorless market forever. In the case of Canon I believe the rumour-mongers had tagged it EIS (Electro-Imaging System) as opposed to EOS (Elector-Optical System). The name didn't make a lot of sense, however. It's the 22MP bit of this rumour that seems a bit odd to me. Mirrorless cameras seem better positioned as entry to mid-level cameras, and there is barely justification for high-end cameras to be outputting 22MP, let alone lower-spec models. All Canon would need to do is drop the 15MP sensor from the old 50D/500D series in and they would already be ahead of the current m4/3 cameras for resolution and noise control.

 

IIRC, the 22MP "rumor" was more like a fanboy wish list as it combined the best technology from every manufacturer into one product and had it at entry-level DSLR pricing.

I have to think the boardrooms at Canikon have to be filled with discussions of all the money being spent in a market they don't compete in.

 

I would have to disagree with that I had a 50d and I think the gh2 beats it for noise control and obviously does (just) for resolution.. Even my G2 is more pleasant up until iso 1250 or so if you shoot with RAW.. I just found the canon 50d got soft even shooting in RAW, I think the 50d sensor was a bit of a failure..

 

WIthout trying to take this thread too OT - I can't comment on the performance of the latest generation m4/3 sensor in the GH2, but having bought/used/sold four different 50D's and one 500D, I can say that for pixel-peepers their output is not in the slightest bit soft, and I would be more confident to use higher ISO values on them that I would consider using on my E-P1.

 

Mmm, maybe mine was an exception but I iust never liked it and am not disappointed with the g2 by comparison..

 

I don't mean to dis m4/3, I'm in no way disappointed by my E-P1 either. The differences are for pixel-peepers only. My Olympus and Canons are completely different, but equally great cameras in their own way.

Anyhow, sorry Herman :smile:. Canon...mirrorless...when...discuss...

 

22 MP does not surprise me. Camera makers are still hung up on megapixels. I do disagree on the mirror less as only an entry to mid-level camera only. I think there would be a market for a higher end mirrorless camera once there are adequate fast optics available. The GH2 is a big step forward in autofocus that would enable much broader use of :43: cameras by a more sophisticated user. While some pros will need the ability of the large pro bodies from Canon and Nikon to drive nails :smile: , some will and have been paying attention to the advantages of the much lower weight and portability of the :43: systems.

 

As for AF, the rumor implied BOTH PDAF and CDAF systems IIRC

 

I started to type a reply to this thread yesterday, but it got really long so I spun it off into a blog post instead.

tl;dr I don't think Canon will release a mirrorless system. They originally said they'd rather compete with mirrorless cameras by just putting out very small DSLR's, and I believe them. Denying any mirrorless plans would make no marketing sense unless it were true, and I don't think they really want to sell people a camera system that gives them no upgrade path to their big cameras.

In any case, that particular rumor about the 22MP "EIS" system and its library of dream primes is ridiculous fanfiction.

 

Canon would have a great secondary camera if they squeezed their APS-C into a G12 type body (size, shape, and controls), released it with a purpose-built compact wide prime, and created an adapter that allowed users to mount existing Canon lenses with autofocus enabled. I still prefer my G12 to my GF1 (and the E-P2 that I had briefly) for form an control.

 

I don't think it will ever happen... too much investment in an already crowded lineup of DSLRs AND not much room between the bottom line DSLRs and the G-series P&S. Its a rumor probably spawning from someones wish list.

G12 type body with an adaptable EF lenses wouldn't be ideal as even the smallest of EF primes are rather large. It defeats the primary purpose of what drives a system similar to m43rds.

They would also have to drive to market with a new line of lenses to take advantage of more compact sizes..... not an easy task and most Canon consumers would either gravitate towards Rebels or G-series.


This is the same reason why the Digital Rangefinder shooters will have to wait a long time for a Digital version of the Nikon Rangefinder.

 

Herman I think Canon are not bothered Canon make so many types of DSLR and sell so many of them and they do have P&S ultra zoom's too.

So many first time buyers just go for an entry level Canon DSLR so mirrorless would seem of little advantage to those users.

Even if one became available I would not buy one m43 is simply to good now, and is getting better.

 

The beginning of the end.

I recently had the opportunity to speak with someone who writes for Pop Photo. After they reviewed the GH2, he commented that the Micro Four-Third cameras were likely the beginning of the end of traditional D-SLR cameras as we knew them. I'd have to agree. He also commented (before the last lens firmware update) that the GH2's AF was virtually equal to a 50D. Given the "boost in AF speed following the latest update, I'm wondering how it measures up now?

If we saw Canon and Nikon jump on the mirror-less camera train, to me, that would certainly strengthen the demise of the D-SLR.

Regarding the pixel-peeping activity, I think it's ridiculous. That's just NOT how we view photos. How many women would still be thrilled if we gave them microscopes with their diamond rings?

 

Canikon have kind of put themselves on a sticky wicket. Mirror less HAS to be more profitable - less cost, same price. The market has shown to be reasonably strong. The mirror legacy has to be weighing around their neck like a boat anchor

 

Oh, I wouldn't say that. Do you have any idea how many Rebels and 5DII's Canon sells every month? I don't offhand, but last time I saw the numbers my eyes bugged out.

The industry is starting to take notice of the success of mirrorless systems for sure, especially at home in Japan where they've taken a sizable bite, but imagining that Canon and Nikon are shaking in their boots about SLR's suddenly becoming outmoded is a bit of biased thinking. Pro-grade SLR's are still unchallenged for actual professional use (medium format nonwithstanding), and the pros are the tastemakers. The balance could change, but it's a long way off, I think.

 

I didn't say anything about SLR's being outmoded - I said they would make more profit by selling mirrorless instead of mirrored. At the end of the day, pro photographer tastes and everything is nothing compared to a company's need to make money. At some point, the shareholders are going to demand an entry into the mirrorless market, and they will be out of options. To my knowledge, neither of them have a suitable EVF (perhaps they do in a pro-video product), and the lens issue has already been discussed - however, if they make an adapter to allow use of EOS lenses with IS, AF, and aperture control, they would have a significant advantage over any other format.

 

Just some general laymen thoughts:

I was in the market for an entry level Canon Rebel or Nikon D5000 but my friend, who is a long time full-frame and digital 4/3rd user, introduced me to the mirror-less system. A few hundred on a Oly pen, a few franklins on a lenses, a tripod and some accessories later and here I am.

In the process, I persuaded a few prospective entry level DSLR shoppers who were on the fence about their next camera. Even my old man, who is an oldschool photographer is interested in the m4/3rd system ...and he swears by his old OM-4.

Some of you guys have been around long enough to take a chance with the mirror-less system(and we thank you for that) so your perspective of the timeline is more drawn out, making the Canon/Nikon "truancy" seem indefinite. To the average consumer, the entry level dslr product line is convoluted while the P&S market is losing foot to the evolving camera phone. This is exciting times for a casual shooter and consumer like me and I doubt the rest of the industry can ignore that.

Early m4/3rd camera bodies are becoming more affordable while entry level systems are being introduced. I'm certain that Canon and Nikon (like Toyota) are just observing the global trend. Like most industry leaders, they will want to perfect a system, and market, that already exists as long as it guarantees them a profitable bottom-line. Let's hope they take that calculated "risk" into the fray, sooner than later.

For now, I am enjoying what Panasonic and Olympus has to offer. With all the third-party support, :43: doesn't look like it is going anywhere for awhile.