Canon’s next entry-level full-frame camera might not have a mirror box. A new report is claiming that Canon’s first full-frame mirrorless camera will spell the end of the 6D series so as not to cannibalize the company’s entry-level full-frame user base.
This rumor comes to us from CanonWatch, who seem pretty confident about the possibility that Canon is ditching the 6D series, and certain that a full-frame mirrorless Canon already exists and is, in fact, being tested by Canon as we type this.
This report adds further credence to previous rumors that Canon’s full-frame mirrorless—a camera that has been making the rounds on the rumor mill for years—will sport an EF mount, letting you use all of Canon’s current full-frame lenses. Maybe, as The Phoblographer speculates, this means a full-frame mirrorless Canon will basically be a 6D Mark II without a mirror box the same way the EOS M5 is basically a mirrorless 80D.
As with all unconfirmed reports, we know nothing for sure just yet. But given the increasing frequency and confidence of the Canon full-frame mirrorless rumors we’re hearing, we expect Canon to finally drop some version of this unicorn camera in 2017.
Sourse: petapixel.com
Shame Canon did not do this 2 years ago when I left Canon for Fuji
If it will cost the same as 6D did at launch it will be a success.
Sounds reasonable. My main issue with the 6D is the AF system. Compared to modern standards it’s utterly terrible. Other than that, I love this cheap entry level option. So what would Canon do to a Mk2 anyway? Put in the 5D AF? Great but I doubt Canon is willing to put that in their entry level Full Frame body. Dual Pixel AF on the other hand would make perfect sense.
Combine that with uncropped x265 4K video recording, dual SD (the fast kind), a touch screen and a free lens adapter and I might just jump on it.
I’ve repeatedly asked this question…why is full frame mirror less such a wanted item? The Sony A7 series clearly shows that when you mount pro glass on the camera the size factor doesn’t matter. Canon just needs to improve their sensors, and put some current “mirrorless” features in the user interface.
“Mirrorless” feature like an EVF?
So what happens to the EOS M system….
Probably going to continue. Sony has an E mount and A mount, Nikon has 2 as well if I remember right.
After using and getting used to EVFs I simply can’t go back to OVFs. Larger megapixel sensors necessitate a more intelligent and accurate readout than a 100 year old focusing screen/mirror box system.
5dmk5evf is my dream camera.
I went the other way. After shooting with an OVF I can’t return to an EVF. Latency cost me a few shots and I can’t see what I’m shooting in high contrast scenes. Still can’t beat the dynamic range perception of the human eye + brain, which are actually doing HDR processing LIVE constantly.
If I need to be absolutely sure of focus I just turn on live view and pull out a tripod if I have one with me.
I’m sure mirrorless has it’s benefits, but I just hate hate hate the ergonomics of them. I shoot with a 70-200 2.8 primarily and maybe I’m an outlier but I really like having a decent ‘heft’ to balance it out. I like a nice chunky full frame body…
I shoot Canon DSLRs professionally and have dabbled in just about every mirrorless brand, currently Sony. I have to admit that things would be much simpler if Canon would finally come out with a FF mirrorless that worked with everything I use on a daily basis. I’ve never understood the thinking that it would cannibalize sales, as I’ve spent plenty of money on other brands that could have gone to Canon.
I look forward to this 1080p beast with Micro Four Thirds cropped 4K at $4500
Price drop on the 6D?
Snore. Waiting on Canon and Nikon to come to market with full-frame mirrorless cameras is like when dinner takes so long to cook, you’re not hungry anymore.
Or you just finally give up and go get dinner at a dynamic new restaurant that makes your aunt’s old casserole look boring. Soon you’re excited to go out and eat dinner again because you never knew what you were missing by hanging onto old traditions.
“Ugh, Aunt Canon’s stale old casserole again?”
Don’t fall for an uncorroborated rumor from CW.
The 6D2 is widely expected to be an SLR and be announced in the first half of next year. Expect an 80D like feature set (tilty-flippy screen + DPAF) but with an FF sensor.
FF mirrorless is coming, but Canon won’t tuck it under the ‘budget’ FF brand. It would be a new brand sold at a premium.
A 6DMkII with a flip out screen (so help me, Canon if you make it flip down…) + DPAF would make it a serious video contender which I would love. I almost don’t want it to happen though because my wallet isn’t prepared to by a new body next year…
I’ve said it before, and I still think it’s true. First we will see the 6D MK II, then after it has been out for a couple months they will release the 6Dm as a mirrorless variant.
Certainly possible. I still think Canon may go fixed-lens with its first mirrorless mount a la the Leica Q or RX1R II to (a) figure out the form factor, controls, handling, etc. and (b) scoop up the luxury dollars in that segment.
YAY CANON FF GLASS + EVF FINALLY!!
To everyone acting like this is the end of the world, don’t worry, literally every other Canon FF camera has a mirror and an OVF.
Oh, Tony… You just got rickrolled by CanonWatch. The 6D2 will have a mirror.
Nice prediction on the 5D4 not coming out this year, btw. Spot on. 😛
Whatever position you are in, as a Canon costumer that is, everyone would probably benefit with Canon consolidating it’s multiple overlapping lines.
I dunno about pros that uses Canon cameras and consumers in general, but honestly, what I’d really like to see is Canon focusing all it’s attention on at most a couple of dSLR lines (one high end, one prossumer), and perhaps mirrorless.
It has to be some balance where Canon doesn’t have to cripple one line to avoid cannibalizing the other.
And it might come with the best Canon sensor ever…also known as the 17th best sensor ever tested by DXO.
I don’t see how a mirroless 6D would be better seeing as it would need to be just as large to accomodate the flange distance of the EF mount anyways? Mirrorless is supposed to be smaller/lighter etc but this would be none of that. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
FF mirrorless is *not* all about being smaller and lighter. People will bolt huge f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 zooms on any CaNikon FF mirrorless offering on day one — take that to the bank.
Ask Sony fans — they whined about not having pro glass for the A7 mount, and when they finally got it, folks complained about the size and weight of them. Removing a mirror from FF SLRs doesn’t absolve the manufacturers of the burden of physics.
So expect FF mirrorless to be big and have a proper chunky FF SLR grip to hold bigger glass.
Yeah sure people will certainly be putting big lenses on it and you can’t get around the physics probelm.
I guess I imagine a good FF mirorless to give you the flexibility to put massive glass on when you need but then also shoot smaller more practical glass when you want too.
Canon possibly assumes that they’ll be fine with this choice, as the users don’t have the urge to use “smaller more practical glass”.
Let’s look at this from another point of view. If a DSLR user valued mobility and small size above anything else, he most likely already moved to a Sony FE. It’s small, it offers a few “Canon L-quality” lenses and is a fairly mature system at this point (first A7 was terrible).
What Canon observes in feedback (and you can too – just check forums of DSLR users) is: people really do like the size of Sony FE bodies, but they’ve chosen to keep using a DSLR because of the ergonomics, the battery life, the Canon lenses, the body familiarity or the huge accessory choice (putting AF aside for a while). So Canon might decide to keep everything they can unchanged. That’s what we call “listening to customers”.
Going back to AF: mirrorless matched still precision, but can’t (and never will) match tracking and low-light (physical limits). As the latter 2 are mostly important for sport and journalism, 6D seems a great choice for a mirrorless move.
I was wondering the same thing. Seems like a terrible design decision to lock you into a certain flange distance and rule out adapting other lenses to the body. It would be great if it came bundled with a dedicated EF adapter that makes the lenses seem native but you can pop it off and then get other adapters for other lenses.
But that seems very Canon to me. “We want people to only buy our lenses! Lets make it so the camera can’t be adapted to Sony, Nikon, or Leica lenses.”
I’m not a fan of the EVF in mirrorless cams. I used my friends Sony A72 and while it can take great shots I just didn’t like the view through the finder. Despite improvements, there is still obvious lag. That was my biggest issue.
The EVF takes a little getting used to, but the eye-lock focus is a game changer.
I love being able to see the proper exposure through the EVF without having to chimp shots all the time. I can just keep shooting variable light on the fly without haveing to waste anytime at the beginning “Dialing in settings”.
But I admit I don’t do sports shots so I’m not whipping my camera around all the time. I’m more worried about a motionless static shot than having to track a passing race car or linebacker.
A great feature for sure but give me an OVF with eye lock and I’ll be happy. Also, it’s not really a game changer. Many people, myself included, get great photos with eyes in focus without it. It might make it easier, but certainly doesn’t change the game.
What made eye focus possible and viable on the Sony is mirrorless technology. The sophisticated shape recognition algorithms that you can employ when using the sensor to view your subject plane would be a much harder thing to ask a typical phase detect AF module in a DSLR to do. Put another way, eye focus is a cousin of face detect, which to my knowledge no DSLR can have unless employed in live view (which effectively switches the camera to a mirrorless mode).
A mirrorless 6D Mark 2, with EF mount, that’d be my dreams come true. However according to Canon rumors the mirrorless is supposed to arrive later in 2017 than the 6D. But lets wait and see.
Trust and track record of CR > trust and track record of CW.
Expect the 6D2 to have a mirror.
So £3600 for a 5D IV is the same target market as £1200 for a 6D? That’s a shame as I was looking towards The 6D II as a second body to replace my ageing 5D II as no way I’m buying a 5D IV at those prices!
I was looking at a 6D II as an upgrade from my 7D. The 6D is nice but i’ve been holding out for better AF performance.
So does this mean canon will be developing high end lenses to match?
Not sure if get your question but the rumor suggests that the current lineup of EF lenses (including the premium “L” series) will be compatible with that mirrorless FF 6D replacement so they wont need to develop high-end glass specifically for this new body.
Without an adapter?
Getting rid of the mirrorbox but maintaining the size of the mirrobox is rather pointless.
Sony and Fuji obviously have “high-end lenses” vs. Canon and Nikon today, amirite?
To answer my own question, Sony has exactly 2 high-end lenses that can compete with the best of Canon and Nikon. They are the 85/1.4 G Master and the 135/1.8. Unfortunately, only one of them is for a mirrorless camera (their best lens, the 135/1.8, is for A Mount).
Fuji has one lens I would classify as “high-end,” a nice 58/1.2.
35 1.4, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, 90 macro, 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 are all what are regarded as high end.
Not to mention the zeiss batis lenses.
The Sony GM 24-70 2.8 lags behind the Canon 24-70 2.8 L II even by your precious DxoMark in clinical tests and sharpness (as well as the immeasurable “character” in the shots that pros look for) despite being four years “newer.” Likewise, the clinically best 50/1.4 (by DxOMark) for either Canon or Sony is the same lens: the Sigma ART. Inexplicably though, it is only available for A Mount. Sigma didn’t make a version for E Mount (i.e., mirrorless cameras). I do like the Zeiss 50/1.4 lenses for Sony though, both the E Mount version you reference and the equally amazing A Mount version (that is 300g lighter, negating any weight advantage of Sony mirrorless).
It goes without saying however that outside of a laboratory, the Canon 50/1.2 L is unrivaled in the “character” quality as per above. Just in case though, there’s a new release of the 50/1.2 L coming out in 2017. I don’t expect Sony to ever make a 50/1.2, 85/1.2, 105/1.4, etc., like Canon and Nikon make, but I’d settle for just converting the lovely 135/1.8 that they did make to E Mount instead of allowing it only on their DSLR A Mount.
There is not a lot about the Batis 85/1.8 that anyone could consider high end. It doesn’t go to wide aperture (a world of difference between the Canon 85/1.2 L and the Batis 85/1.8 there). It has very busy bokeh. And yet it’s portrait-length.
The GM 85/1.4 is much, much nicer in all departments. Except it is large and heavy, negating the whole mirrorless advantage thing. I’d rather they made big lenses like that for A Mount after all. It’d be much better balanced on an a99 II!
The Canon 24-70 2.8 L II scores higher on sharpness because it was tested on a higher resolution sensor. As a percentage of sensor resolution (5DS R vs a7Rii) it’s actually slightly less sharp. It also has significantly more chromatic aberration, more vignetting, and lower transmission. They’re pretty equivalent lenses. When the Canon was released, the Sony a7 didn’t even exist yet, so I’d say Sony is doing a pretty good job of catching up.
DxOMark hasn’t tested the Sony 50/1.4 yet, so it remains to be seen which is the best 50/1.4, but as it’s reportedly better than the 55/1.8 (which in turn is sharper than the Sigma 50 you like so much) it would be pretty foolish to say the Sony isn’t “high end”.
“Character” is subjective; one person’s “character” is another person’s flaw.
And the GM 85/1.4 still weighs significantly less than the Canon 85/1.2 L, so an a7Rii with the GM 85/1.4 weighs about 445 g less than the 5DS R with the 85/1.2. What was that about the mirrorless advantage?
Grow up, you’ll live longer. All three companies make excellent, “high end” cameras and excellent, “high end” lenses.
This guy clearly doesn’t shoot Sony- Just look up the 90mm on DXO. Sony is trouncing Canon glass with every new release.
Sorry, I forgot about your “high-end” f/2.8 prime lens (admittedly, it is high-end if for macro shooting only).
Their entry level Full Frame is a good place to experiment at least.
But it’s nowhere near yet
> the same way the EOS M5 is basically a mirrorless 80D.
Why would I spend significantly more on an M5 body when I could buy an 80D?
And yet no one is really excited about the M5. Very nice camera, but not exactly selling a ton of them. When it comes down to it…do people want an M5 or something more along the lines of what they’re used to, but with mirrorless technology in them? Answer: they want the latter. Again, most people…not you.
The huge problem with the M5 is the lack of decent M series lenses, and canon’s obviously half hearted interest in developing the system to date. If you have to fall back on big existing EF lenses (and an adapter) then the advantages of a new system start to fall away dramatically.
I went from a 50D to a 70D as that was a significant step-change.
I can’t see a case for replacing the 70D with an 80D. So I certainly can’t see a case for the M5 which costs even more.
I’m not anti mirrorless per se. But if there’s the slightest hint of lag and it costs more then I’m not going there.
The biggest mistake Canon made (from my POV) was introducing a mirrorless range with a different mount.
Agree. The experience between what’s rumored and the DSLR needs to be the same or it’ll seem half-baked. Once that’s achieved (and it’s coming of course), consumers won’t even care if there’s a mirror in there or not. Who’d care? Someone would have to be a hardcore stickler to proclaim the DSLR as being superior once mirrorless technology is to the point where you can’t even tell the difference. It’s fun stuff. For newer photographers especially, seeing your exposure live in the EVF is so helpful. People get what’s going on a lot faster and I think that overall, they enjoy photography more. There’s less frustration. So it’s definitely coming. Now imagine if Nikon has no counter to this. Not good. We need Nikon to give Canon incentive to do cool things. I suspect though that we’re going to see a slow down in the industry. Even breakneck update Sony has to slow down at some point or they’ll have nothing new to put in their cameras. They’re going for marketshare and mindshare right now. They’re Pokemon. Gotta collect them all. Them being camera buyers.
er, liveview gives the user their exposure live.
Yeahhhhhhh, but not everyone has that kind of time to be engaging LiveView and operating their camera with their eye away from the viewfinder. For sports, action, wildlife, photojournalism and a host of other types of photography, your suggestion falls short.
i think one benefit of throwing out the mirrorhouse is to reduce the flange distance to be able to have non-retrofocal wide lenses.
Keeping the same mount would define the flange distance, so small, but sharp wide lenses would be wet dreams. Except if they would look like the Jupiter 12/Biogon 35…