Canon FF mirrorless...

Not everyone will get on with every camera, phew, good thing there's choice.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Ahh ok cool. Hopefully 4th gen fixes that.
Click to expand...
I hope so but one thing I love on canon over sony/Nikon it the vertical front wheel rather than horizontal. I find it sits under the finger much better, would love all makes to change to this:eek::D
 
Phil V said:
I think it’s a better starting line up than the Nikon.

With the known Canon tech, it’ll be ‘OK’ rather than amazing, and even with a single card slot Canon won’t get half the flak Nikon did, because it’s a camera aimed at people who’d have bought a 6dIII and Canon haven’t got consumers addicted to the need for a 2nd card slot.

In the grand scheme of things, the answer to ‘why do you need a 2nd card slot’ is ‘because that’s what I’m used to’.

Plain and simple, before the 5dIII all canon shooting wedding photographers put up with a single slot, they might have wished for a 2nd slot, but it didn’t stop them using their cameras for pro work. Nikon owners who were already addicted thought they were mental for accepting the risk.
Click to expand...

I have a vague impression (what I used to call memory :-) ) that when two card slots were introduced it wasn't for security, it was convenience, being able to use them for different purposes. Being able to run completely duplicate cards "for security" seemed to be added as an afterthought, much like someone selling you a pair of braces pointing out that if you were worried about the braces failing and your trousers falling down in public, you could always wear a belt as well.

I'm also a bit puzzled by the effect on burst speeds and sizes if you're using two card slots. I seem to recall that a lot of wedding photographers are very stern about the need for the very best burst speeds and sizes (not just buffer size, because speed of buffer clearance affects how long you can run a burst in combination with buffer). I've been to a few weddings and heard the prolonged machine gun shutter bursts that some wedding photographers now use. But nobody talks about the effect that using two card slots has on burst sizes and speeds. These days I go to a lot more funerals than weddings. I don't hear the funeral photographers using machine gun bursts nearly so fiercely, if at all. Nor do the few I've talked to seem to bother about second card slots. Yet no matter how many weddings a person has, they never have more than one funeral. It's an even more unrepeatable singular event.

It's odd how wedding photographers who insist on second card slots are so firmly convinced that there's no need for logic, evidence, etc..
 
woof woof said:
I doubt very much it'll be a true macro. Maybe it'll focus a little closer than we'd normally expect a 35mm to and maybe that'll be about it. A true 1:1 35mm f1.8 macro would be quite a surprise :D
Click to expand...
Sony make a 30mm f2 macro (A-mount). I thought I'd stop using it and sell it once I had the better 90mm Tamron macro lens, but I've been surprised how often it still turns out to be useful.
 
architectfadi said:
Canon and Nikon are going about their new FF mirrorless the right way, offering their customers a FF mirrorless system that works well with their existing lenses and not competing with their established DSLRs. I don't think they are worried about what Sony is doing.

Unlike Sony on the other hand who killed their A system in one hit ignoring everyone who has invested in it and then did the same with their NEX offering to focus on their FF mirrorless camera and lenses.
Click to expand...
It's weird how many people believe that Sony killed the A-mount considering that there's zero evidence to support such a belief. It seems to be based on "oh look, other camera mount users are getting new toys every few months and A-mount users haven't had any for ages."
 
Fraser Euan White said:
I think lots of us forget that the technology involved in what one camera manufacturer incorporates and works well may be exceeding difficult to engineer/reverse engineer especially when they have patents to consider.

As mentioned each manufacturer will have meetings to decide what they consider is important to have in a camera and the 'price point' they wish to market that camera at. It may well not be possible to put all the technology into that camera at that price point; if they had a limitless budget then features may be different. These are decisions that the general public will never be privy to and what one person considers as irrational the other will consider perfectly rational.

Raymond - a camera manufacturer may well be able to incorporate every feature you think is important (the Sony appears to anyway) but the cost of that product produced by another company may well be prohibitive.
Click to expand...
Even without the patent problems it's not easy to adopt a new technology. You need to have engineers who been using and developing it for a long time, and understand all the things that haven't yet been documented obviously enough for newcomers to pick up on. You can't buy an engineering culture off the shelf.
 
Well you can certainly buy good people in.

I don't know about the camera and lens makers but certainly in other areas of tech there tends to be a rather small talent pool with people tending to know each other. It's a while since I travelled the country but years ago lots of times I'd go to another company and meet someone there who I worked with and we'd chat about where everyone was and what they were doing, it happened time after time. It is perhaps relatively easy to identify the talent and at least try and head hunt, if you've a mind too even today in the more global market. I'd expect the camera and lens industry to be similar.

The issue is possibly more that some companies resist change and maybe for reasons of pride don't want to buy people in. I have been to companies where the talent was, shall we say a little set in their ways and not really up to it. But buying people in wont release the funds to put a new production process in and get it going and maybe that's an issue for some.
 
Last edited:
chris malcolm said:
It's weird how many people believe that Sony killed the A-mount considering that there's zero evidence to support such a belief. It seems to be based on "oh look, other camera mount users are getting new toys every few months and A-mount users haven't had any for ages."
Click to expand...

Well if they stop making any meaningful updates for the system and focus on another one entirely, what would you like that to be called instead?
 
Cagey75 said:
I glide my finger along the screen, and can nail the spot I want without thinking. it felt odd the first few times but it feels pretty natural now. I don't have the camera set to shoot using the touch screen, so there's no accidental hiccups

BBF on the other hand, I have tried so many times but my instinct is to half press the shutter every time, cant drop that habit
Click to expand...

I feel the same about BBF. Tried it so many times but it just didnt feel like the right thing for me. I have no issues remembering what to press etc, it just never seemed worth it.
 
chris malcolm said:
I have a vague impression (what I used to call memory :) ) that when two card slots were introduced it wasn't for security, it was convenience, being able to use them for different purposes. Being able to run completely duplicate cards "for security" seemed to be added as an afterthought, much like someone selling you a pair of braces pointing out that if you were worried about the braces failing and your trousers falling down in public, you could always wear a belt as well.

I'm also a bit puzzled by the effect on burst speeds and sizes if you're using two card slots. I seem to recall that a lot of wedding photographers are very stern about the need for the very best burst speeds and sizes (not just buffer size, because speed of buffer clearance affects how long you can run a burst in combination with buffer). I've been to a few weddings and heard the prolonged machine gun shutter bursts that some wedding photographers now use. But nobody talks about the effect that using two card slots has on burst sizes and speeds. These days I go to a lot more funerals than weddings. I don't hear the funeral photographers using machine gun bursts nearly so fiercely, if at all. Nor do the few I've talked to seem to bother about second card slots. Yet no matter how many weddings a person has, they never have more than one funeral. It's an even more unrepeatable singular event.

It's odd how wedding photographers who insist on second card slots are so firmly convinced that there's no need for logic, evidence, etc..
Click to expand...
Wow, I didn't realise there was such a thing as a funeral photographer :eek: I've been to enough funerals to realise that I don't want the memory of any of them, and it's took me by surprise that anyone does to be honest. You live and learn (y)
 
dave_bass5 said:
I feel the same about BBF. Tried it so many times but it just didnt feel like the right thing for me. I have no issues remembering what to press etc, it just never seemed worth it.
Click to expand...

I can't go back to the shutter button now, it just feels wrong.

Saying that, Canon's implementation BBF on the M5 is absolutely terrible, makes no sense whatsoever.

Edit: Maybe I should say button placement rather than implementation.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Wow, I didn't realise there was such a thing as a funeral photographer :eek: I've been to enough funerals to realise that I don't want the memory of any of them, and it's took me by surprise that anyone does to be honest. You live and learn (y)
Click to expand...

I think that stems from our unhealthy attitude towards death in the UK, it seems more natural to me that life should be celebrated and death accepted as part of it rather than doing our best to repress all mention of it.
 
snerkler said:
Wow, I didn't realise there was such a thing as a funeral photographer :eek: I've been to enough funerals to realise that I don't want the memory of any of them, and it's took me by surprise that anyone does to be honest. You live and learn (y)
Click to expand...

It must be very different in the UK, I have sadly been to many a funeral, and not once seen a photographer at them.
 
Cagey75 said:
It must be very different in the UK, I have sadly been to many a funeral, and not once seen a photographer at them.
Click to expand...
I have never described myself as a funeral photographer, nor indeed ever suggested it was one of the many kinds of photography that I could do, but I have twice been contracted to be the official photographer at a funeral. Except that funeral photography is not quite the right description, because mostly what they wanted photographed wasn't the actual church funeral, but the reception or wake afterwards, featuring songs, speeches, poetry, instrumentals, etc.. It's probably a Celtic thing.
 
chris malcolm said:
I have never described myself as a funeral photographer, nor indeed ever suggested it was one of the many kinds of photography that I could do, but I have twice been contracted to be the official photographer at a funeral. Except that funeral photography is not quite the right description, because mostly what they wanted photographed wasn't the actual church funeral, but the reception or wake afterwards, featuring songs, speeches, poetry, instrumentals, etc.. It's probably a Celtic thing.
Click to expand...


An Irish wake is certainly something, they are the only kind I have been to. Still never seen a photographer at one, in fact it would be seen as kind of rude, and invasion of privacy. That's why I find it strange. I have wondered about it before, why it's the ony kind of get together that isn't commonly photographed in the Republic at least. Because it is often the only time a whole clan will get together.
 
Mike.P said:
Google funeral photography ... seems there are more than a few people doing it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, seems a thing alright. Add 'Ireland' to the search though and it's mostly news photos from big funerals
 


 
Last edited:
Again, it's videographers and vloggers having most of the say, or nay-say as seems to be the case for the most part. Are the vloggers starting to influence the stills shooter? When did it become a thing that we here moaned abut 4K or slow-mo or flip out screens? None of these things should matter to the stills only shooter. Sometimes I wish they would come up with 2 versions, give us the option to not care about these video add-ons - remember when that is what they were? Now it's almost as if options for stills are the add-on. Give me a much cheaper option without all the 4K, flippy flappy, headphone jack stuff I'll never use, but will still have to pay for if I decide it will be decent for photography.
 
Cagey75 said:
Again, it's videographers and vloggers having most of the say, or nay-say as seems to be the case for the most part. Are the vloggers starting to influence the stills shooter? When did it become a thing that we here moaned abut 4K or slow-mo or flip out screens? None of these things should matter to the stills only shooter. Sometimes I wish they would come up with 2 versions, give us the option to not care about these video add-ons - remember when that is what they were? Now it's almost as if options for stills are the add-on. Give me a much cheaper option without all the 4K, flippy flappy, headphone jack stuff I'll never use, but will still have to pay for if I decide it will be decent for photography.
Click to expand...
As long as the quality of the stills photos don't suffer from the inclusion of video, then I don't see the problem. If you or anyone else have no real intrest in video, then there is no need to take any notice of what the vloggers or reviewers have to say.
I have no need for 4k video, I don't have anything to view 4k on and am not likely to in the foreseeable future. So when I was looking for a new camera and the model I was looking at was marked down for not having 4k, it didn't bother me. As for a flip out screen, I do find it useful for some of the things I photograph in liveview (macro/close up). I find it easier to compose a shot when the camera is very close to the ground or above my head.
 
Nostromo said:
As long as the quality of the stills photos don't suffer from the inclusion of video, then I don't see the problem. If you or anyone else have no real intrest in video, then there is no need to take any notice of what the vloggers or reviewers have to say.
I have no need for 4k video, I don't have anything to view 4k on and am not likely to in the foreseeable future. So when I was looking for a new camera and the model I was looking at was marked down for not having 4k, it didn't bother me. As for a flip out screen, I do find it useful for some of the things I photograph in liveview (macro/close up). I find it easier to compose a shot when the camera is very close to the ground or above my head.
Click to expand...

What if I want everything else but don't care for the 4K, but it's all any of the 'previewers' harp on about? It's how it is, and will be going forward I fear

dave_bass5 said:
Yeah, the M50 got slatted all over YT when it was announced. Seems like the Vloggers think they are the only ones who use cameras. A breed best ignored....unless you are a Vlogger.
Click to expand...

Sadly it's becoming harder to ignore, they are the ones voicing the most, and they get their way eventually
 
Nostromo said:
As long as the quality of the stills photos don't suffer from the inclusion of video, then I don't see the problem. If you or anyone else have no real intrest in video, then there is no need to take any notice of what the vloggers or reviewers have to say.
I have no need for 4k video, I don't have anything to view 4k on and am not likely to in the foreseeable future. So when I was looking for a new camera and the model I was looking at was marked down for not having 4k, it didn't bother me. As for a flip out screen, I do find it useful for some of the things I photograph in liveview (macro/close up). I find it easier to compose a shot when the camera is very close to the ground or above my head.
Click to expand...


Thats 100% my thoughts as well. While i dont use the flip out screen all the time, i find it makes life easier if i want to shoot really low, or at arms length above a crowd. Trying to do the same shots with my 5D4 is a lot harder.
I too have no need for 4K, and dont have any 4K screens, but it does allow a lot of cropping down to what i can view, without losing sharpness, so i do use it, but mainly on my iphone and GoPro. I tend to like having features i may need or use in the future, if possible. So although 4K is of no interest I’m glad I have it.
 
dave_bass5 said:
Thats 100% my thoughts as well. While i dont use the flip out screen all the time, i find it makes life easier if i want to shoot really low, or at arms length above a crowd. Trying to do the same shots with my 5D4 is a lot harder.
I too have no need for 4K, and dont have any 4K screens, but it does allow a lot of cropping down to what i can view, without losing sharpness, so i do use it, but mainly on my iphone and GoPro. I tend to like having features i may need or use in the future, if possible. So although 4K is of no interest I’m glad I have it.
Click to expand...


I actually much prefer the standard tilt screen, which is just as useful for over head or ground shots, without being awkwardly out to the side. That's another one I wish they'd offer options on, I know it'll never happen. I have messed about with 4K, it is a nightmare to process when you have a bunch of clips to string together, chokes even a decent machine. Because of this, for simple family vids I would shoot, 1080p is more than good enough, and a lot easier to process.
 
Oh yeah, the tilt screen is a more elegant solution. I did feel i I would have preferred that at first. Once i got the M50 i noticed its a lot more hassle having to pull it out to use it tilted, but based on my old 60D I realised that its a lot more maneuverable for tricky situations, and of course for selfies. Ive had other cameras where the screen just tilts, but ive found them quite limited in that they never have full tilt in both directions. Ive taken quite a few shots with the camera literally over my head.
It would be great to have the option to just tilt or full flip out.
 
dave_bass5 said:
Oh yeah, the tilt screen is a more elegant solution. I did feel i I would have preferred that at first. Once i got the M50 i noticed its a lot more hassle having to pull it out to use it tilted, but based on my old 60D I realised that its a lot more maneuverable for tricky situations, and of course for selfies. Ive had other cameras where the screen just tilts, but ive found them quite limited in that they never have full tilt in both directions. Ive taken quite a few shots with the camera literally over my head.
It would be great to have the option to just tilt or full flip out.
Click to expand...

One situation where I do prefer the fully articulated, is for portrait orientation. The ability t cup the camera this way, with the screen neatly in your palm, at any height, is cool. And I guess yeah, if you do need to go right overhead, it has advantages over the standard tilting. Some day one of these manufacturers will come up with a way to give us both. Sony actually were close in the past with the A77, it didn't flip out to the side, but it tilted and could face forward u over the camera, pretty clever.

 
I like the tilt screen more than I thought I would on the Nikon D500. :) And not just for getting the camera into low/high positions, but just the screen being comfortable previewing/reviewing when on my smaller tripod. But, when I have the camera in the portrait orientation it is virtually useless. :rolleyes: :( I would have preferred the twist out LCD used on cameras like the Canon M50 / Nikon D5600 as there are more options position, and some even give the option to reverse the LCD on the back to protect the LCD from damage when not in use.
 
simonbarker said:
Well if they stop making any meaningful updates for the system and focus on another one entirely, what would you like that to be called instead?
Click to expand...

I'd call that good evidence that the system was dead. That doesn't apply to the A-mount, however. The top two current models in the A-mount are the A99ii (full frame) and the A77ii (crop frame). Historically Sony has followed a roughly four year upgrade cycle for these two model lines. That means we should expect an A77iii (or similar) around 2018 and an A99iii (or similar) around 2020. It's therefore a bit premature to say that Sony has stopped updating these before it's even the end of 2018.
 
chris malcolm said:
I'd call that good evidence that the system was dead. That doesn't apply to the A-mount, however. The top two current models in the A-mount are the A99ii (full frame) and the A77ii (crop frame). Historically Sony has followed a roughly four year upgrade cycle for these two model lines. That means we should expect an A77iii (or similar) around 2018 and an A99iii (or similar) around 2020. It's therefore a bit premature to say that Sony has stopped updating these before it's even the end of 2018.
Click to expand...

Any recent lenses, flashes released or in the pipeline?
 
chris malcolm said:
I'd call that good evidence that the system was dead. That doesn't apply to the A-mount, however. The top two current models in the A-mount are the A99ii (full frame) and the A77ii (crop frame). Historically Sony has followed a roughly four year upgrade cycle for these two model lines. That means we should expect an A77iii (or similar) around 2018 and an A99iii (or similar) around 2020. It's therefore a bit premature to say that Sony has stopped updating these before it's even the end of 2018.
Click to expand...

True enough but I can't see many positive arguments for it happening, anything that competes with E mount is probably verboten and it seems unlikely they'd invest in any new lens designs for A mount while E mount still has obvious gaps in its line up and has received all their marketing/investment/R&D.
 
chris malcolm said:
I'd call that good evidence that the system was dead. That doesn't apply to the A-mount, however. The top two current models in the A-mount are the A99ii (full frame) and the A77ii (crop frame). Historically Sony has followed a roughly four year upgrade cycle for these two model lines. That means we should expect an A77iii (or similar) around 2018 and an A99iii (or similar) around 2020. It's therefore a bit premature to say that Sony has stopped updating these before it's even the end of 2018.
Click to expand...
Do you have any of their A mount cameras or lenses? My last cameras were the A900 and the A65 with their Ziess f2.8 lenses. Really enjoyed using them.
 
architectfadi said:
Do you have any of their A mount cameras or lenses? My last cameras were the A900 and the A65 with their Ziess f2.8 lenses. Really enjoyed using them.
Click to expand...

Your last cameras, or your last A-mount cameras?

My current camera is a Sony A77. I've had it for four years and am still really enjoying using it. I'm a budget conscious shooter who usually buys second hand and usually thinks the next model in the range (in this case the A77ii) is not enough of an improvement over the previous to be worth the money. If I had the money I'd be more likely to buy a lens with it. Which is probably why I've got more lenses than I could carry!

My most used lenses are a Sigma 8-16mm, Sony 16-50mm f2.8, Minolta 80-200mm f2.8, Sony 500mm f8 reflex, Sony 135mm STF, Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro, Sony 35mm f1.8, and the "Swiss Army Knife" Tamron 16-300mm which is what sits on the A77 when I've nothing particular in mind, just carrying the camera around in case a photo opportunity turns up.

I'm waiting to see what the rumoured A77iii turns out to be, or whatever upgrade path Sony next offers the A-mount, which might be a backwards compatible B-mount, or a much improved A-mount to E-mount lens adapter.
 
Raymond Lin said:
Any recent [A-mount] lenses, flashes released or in the pipeline?
Click to expand...

Don't know of any, probably not, but think there are good reasons for Sony to be holding back on A-mount lens development. They're probably trying to decide whether they've at last got good enough technology to dump the A-mount pellicle mirror, and if so, whether to take that opportunity to upgrade the A-mount to a backwards compatible B-mount with electronic aperture, zoom, etc.. There's also the question of image sensor MP. Increasing MP past 24MP crop and 50MP FF will be shifting into an area where detail resolution is being held back by lens resolution. They've already started revising the top E-mount glass to higher resolution specs. They also have to assess the new mirrorless competition from Nikon and Canon, and how the market reacts to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top