▼

Saturday, 1 September 2018

Canon EOS R Full Frame Mirrorless Camera - Is this the future?


And then there were four. (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera systems with a 'Full-Frame' sensor). Leaked images and specs. of the Canon EOS R + lens road map, including a 24-70mm f/2 (I'd love to see what that looks like - and how much it costs!!) have surfaced. So Canon have basically gone with the 'Lets make an A7 but better' approach, as did Nikon. It looks OK, but I need to see all the specs. to see if I'm interested. What's the EF adapter like?, are there two card slots?, is there an AA filter? etc. etc. 

When (If?) Panasonic announce their version we will have 5 FFMC's. Sony, Leica, Nikon, Canon and Panasonic will all be competing for our disposable income. Canon of course will have four different formats, 'Full-Frame' DSLR, 'Full-Frame' Mirrorless, APS-C DSLR and APS-C Mirrorless. So in the face of declining sales the answer from the camera manufacturers seems to be, 'MAKE MORE CAMERAS !!.' Now surely somebody has to lose out here. Is there really a market for all of these different Canon cameras? Plus aside from FFMC there is Micro Four Thirds, Fuji MF and APS-C, Sony APS-C, Nikon APS-C, Pentax FF DSLR's and Leica Rangefinder and APS-C etc.. So potential customers, who don't live on the photographic internet, going into a camera shop (if they can find one!) are going to have a great time. Though I suspect the really important question is still going to be 'How much does it cost?'

'Full Frame' mirrorless is obviously this years trend for the discerning photographic enthusiast. And I have to say I've always been surprised by the popularity of the 35mm sized sensor. As a multi-format user, everything from smartphone micro sensors up to 6 x 9 cm. Medium Format film, I see advantages in all of them. But it seems the lust for big files from big lenses with reduced depth of field seems to increase as time goes by. Now as someone who learnt photography with 35mm film cameras, I can see it's attractions, but also the disadvantages. As predominantly a landscape photographer m4/3 is probably the ideal format for me, but as I did today, I'm still prepared to carry around a monster outfit like my Leica SL (Typ 601) + 24-90mm zoom to get that 'Full-Frame' look. 

I suspect it has something to do with a notion of 'proper photography' and certainly there is a great history to 35mm photography. But it also has to be remembered that as each day goes by more and more people are shooting on their phones, for better or worse, but certainly in some quantity. And I suppose it can be argued that if we want to stand out from that herd as 'serious' photographers, then 'Full-Frame' may be the way to do it. Because all things being equal, the quality should be better, we can use some genuine wide-angle lenses and we can play around with that aforementioned depth of field. Though it has to be said that my iPhone does a damn good impression of a fast lens wide open with it's 'bokeh effect.' 

In the short term I suspect Sony, who just a few short weeks ago had the market pretty much to themselves (The Leica SL's price making it a very niche option) now have some serious competition. Not only from the big two, but from Panasonic as well. Something I doubt they anticipated. Plus if Olympus weigh in as well, then a few panic meetings at Sony HQ may be the order of the day. But then it serves them right. They rushed out a system and tried to match up big lenses to a small body with an APS-C mount. OK they made some money and sold a lot of gear. But that gravy train is about to be derailed. If they had produced a well thought out system in the first place then they wouldn't be in this position. What I find interesting is that when they were the dominant producers of FFMC, my negative comments about ergonomics, design, battery life, poor wide-angle performance etc. etc. got a pretty bad reaction. Now it seems with the introduction of more options, I see lots of equally negative criticisms surfacing. I also suspect a lot of Sony owners are going to see the value of their Sony 'assets' diminish.

But then none of that has anything to do with me. If multi-nationals start loosing money then so be it, they see me as just a consumer to be parted with his cash ASAP, so do I have any sympathy for them? Of course I don't. Returning to the Canon EOS R, I have to say it looks more interesting to me than the Nikon Z's. Whether it remains so depends almost entirely on whether I can use my large collection of Canon EF lenses seamlessly on it. Certainly the grip looks nice, I note there is a battery grip and there is not too much of a 'knobfest' on the back. Plus it looks like the screen is fully articulating, unlike that nonsense on the Nikon Z's. Who on earth thinks a screen you only tilt horizontally is a good idea? There are some of us who use our cameras in vertical / portrait mode you know. Obviously not Nikon users. 

So a few days to wait for the full specs., plus of course the full BS!! And only a few weeks until Panasonic (probably) reveal all. Exciting times for everyone, if only for a bit of internet window shopping. Keep 'em coming!!! 

UPDATE 02/09/2018 7.30 GMT + 1

There is a spec. list now available. Unless I missed it
  • No IBIS
  • No second card slot
  • No fully articulating screen
  • It has an AA filter
All of the above are on my Lumix G9 (or missing as in the case of the AA / Low Pass filter) Personally I want all of the above. If Panasonic do come up with a FFMC and it has what the Canon doesn't then I think it will do very well. There is some ridiculous number of AF points (5000+!!) but if that impresses people maybe they should be doing something else. For me, there's too much missing for it to be interesting.


Stock photography by david martyn hughes at Alamy

© David Taylor-Hughes / Soundimageplus Blog





at