Ccoppola82
Well-known
jarski
Veteran
nice detail about new Canon is that it protects the sensor for lens changes. finally less stress about changing lenses in a dusty environment!
lynnb
Veteran
The EOS-R and Nikon-Z will stop leakage to Sony. They will keep owners of existing EOS and Nikkor lenses happy and in the fold, without compatibility worries. The cheaper manufacturing costs and higher margins of these models will help to keep both companies profitable in an overall shrinking market.
Biggest margins are in the fast, pro lenses. It makes sense to release these first. Lower priced consumer lenses have been mentioned for later release (Canon, at least). Meanwhile Canon users can use all their EOS lenses. The 40mm f/2.8 STM is already there as an excellent pancake prime that costs peanuts. A natural lens for the EOS-R if 40mm floats your boat.
People who bought Sony A7 series to mount their rangefinder lenses can now consider Canon or Nikon if they already own Canon or Nikon lenses. No reason to jump ship to Sony to use rangefinder lenses. I'm talking about people who don't want or can't afford Leica digital M.
The new mounts give lens designers more freedom to create superb optics, according to the tech sites. Maybe these new mounts will cause some to consider the need to move to digital medium format. Full frame has advantages over medium format, like faster lenses and extensive ecosystems including multiple flash control.
Nikon and Canon had to release these cameras to get a foot into higher profit-per-unit market and stop leakage to Sony before the Christmas buying season.
People who buy Canon usually have other reasons, like their colour science and existing lens ownership. High ISO and other stuff is a moving target and less important IMO.
It will be interesting to see what Panasonic's new full frame mirrorless brings to the party. Rumours suggest Leica SL mount. I'd also bet it will have excellent video capability.
Everyone's a winner with these new cameras.
Biggest margins are in the fast, pro lenses. It makes sense to release these first. Lower priced consumer lenses have been mentioned for later release (Canon, at least). Meanwhile Canon users can use all their EOS lenses. The 40mm f/2.8 STM is already there as an excellent pancake prime that costs peanuts. A natural lens for the EOS-R if 40mm floats your boat.
People who bought Sony A7 series to mount their rangefinder lenses can now consider Canon or Nikon if they already own Canon or Nikon lenses. No reason to jump ship to Sony to use rangefinder lenses. I'm talking about people who don't want or can't afford Leica digital M.
The new mounts give lens designers more freedom to create superb optics, according to the tech sites. Maybe these new mounts will cause some to consider the need to move to digital medium format. Full frame has advantages over medium format, like faster lenses and extensive ecosystems including multiple flash control.
Nikon and Canon had to release these cameras to get a foot into higher profit-per-unit market and stop leakage to Sony before the Christmas buying season.
People who buy Canon usually have other reasons, like their colour science and existing lens ownership. High ISO and other stuff is a moving target and less important IMO.
It will be interesting to see what Panasonic's new full frame mirrorless brings to the party. Rumours suggest Leica SL mount. I'd also bet it will have excellent video capability.
Everyone's a winner with these new cameras.
RichC
Well-known
A thumbs down from me...
I’m a Sony A7R II user who moved from Nikon but kept all my Nikon lenses, and also have a few Leica M lenses for when I want a tiny camera-lens combo that’ll fit in a (large) pocket. I bought the Sony as stopgap, intending to upgrade to a newer mirrorless in a year or two. The major reasons I went from an SLR to mirrorless are, in order of priority,
• I prefer a good electronic viewfinder over an optical one (you capture exactly what you see)
• IBIS (my manual lenses obviously don’t have image stabilisation)
• I’m no longer tied to a camera brand, and can use almost any lens regardless of age or maker
• lighter and smaller.
I’m not wedded to Sony (really Minolta) - I use mostly manual lenses with an adapter, which means I’m now not tied to any camera brand. I have no intention of buying a Sony autofocus lens. So, I feel I can view all three mirrorless cameras somewhat objectively (granted from my preferences).
The Sony does its job but has no soul and its menus and massive number of options are ... irritating. So, I’ve been looking forward to the Canon R and Nikon Z.
Neither the Canon nor Nikon excite me. The Sony A7R III has far better features, and is more versatile. The Canon, in particular, is unappealing with its lack of image stabilisation. I suspect image quality will also be below par - Sony/Nikon sensors have far superior dynamic range, something I often need. Compared with the current Sony A7R III, the Canon and Nikon seem almost a generation behind.
Also, neither has dual card slots - my Sony A7R II doesn’t either, which is one reason it’s a stopgap: this lack is a problem for photographers (like me) who cannot afford to lose images (I’ve had a card die - albeit just one).
Finally, Sony made its e mount specifications public. Nikon has refused to do this for its new mount - as will Canon, I suspect. This will make manufacture of third-party adapters more difficult, possibly affecting performance. Clearly they’d like to lock me into their systems and for me to buy new Canon or Nikon autofocus lenses: no thanks.
In short, the Canon R and Nikon Z seem to be marketed users of their SLRs to stop them moving to Sony. Unlike the Sony A series, which are aimed at all photographers regardless of the brand they use.
So, no thanks Canon (I’ll give it 4/10) or Nikon (6/10). I’ll stick with Sony (8/10) despite its irritating ergonomics and menus - unless the former shape up and confront Sony head on.
I’m a Sony A7R II user who moved from Nikon but kept all my Nikon lenses, and also have a few Leica M lenses for when I want a tiny camera-lens combo that’ll fit in a (large) pocket. I bought the Sony as stopgap, intending to upgrade to a newer mirrorless in a year or two. The major reasons I went from an SLR to mirrorless are, in order of priority,
• I prefer a good electronic viewfinder over an optical one (you capture exactly what you see)
• IBIS (my manual lenses obviously don’t have image stabilisation)
• I’m no longer tied to a camera brand, and can use almost any lens regardless of age or maker
• lighter and smaller.
I’m not wedded to Sony (really Minolta) - I use mostly manual lenses with an adapter, which means I’m now not tied to any camera brand. I have no intention of buying a Sony autofocus lens. So, I feel I can view all three mirrorless cameras somewhat objectively (granted from my preferences).
The Sony does its job but has no soul and its menus and massive number of options are ... irritating. So, I’ve been looking forward to the Canon R and Nikon Z.
Neither the Canon nor Nikon excite me. The Sony A7R III has far better features, and is more versatile. The Canon, in particular, is unappealing with its lack of image stabilisation. I suspect image quality will also be below par - Sony/Nikon sensors have far superior dynamic range, something I often need. Compared with the current Sony A7R III, the Canon and Nikon seem almost a generation behind.
Also, neither has dual card slots - my Sony A7R II doesn’t either, which is one reason it’s a stopgap: this lack is a problem for photographers (like me) who cannot afford to lose images (I’ve had a card die - albeit just one).
Finally, Sony made its e mount specifications public. Nikon has refused to do this for its new mount - as will Canon, I suspect. This will make manufacture of third-party adapters more difficult, possibly affecting performance. Clearly they’d like to lock me into their systems and for me to buy new Canon or Nikon autofocus lenses: no thanks.
In short, the Canon R and Nikon Z seem to be marketed users of their SLRs to stop them moving to Sony. Unlike the Sony A series, which are aimed at all photographers regardless of the brand they use.
So, no thanks Canon (I’ll give it 4/10) or Nikon (6/10). I’ll stick with Sony (8/10) despite its irritating ergonomics and menus - unless the former shape up and confront Sony head on.
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
So nice to see someone calling SONY, Minolta...
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
https://www.canon.co.nz/-/media/images/canon/products/eos-r/rf-35mm-f18-macro-is-stm/feature_3-rf-35mm-f1-8-macro-is-stm.ashx
Canon New Zealand has one picture on the camera with 35/1.8!
Canon New Zealand has one picture on the camera with 35/1.8!
But you knew that wasn`t going to happen... the Df wasn`t that successful and let`s face it, those of us that like retro designs are the minority. I loved the Df and want this too. BUT, Leica and Fuji are the only ones brave enough to do it.
arseniii
Well-known
Exactly what I thought! The bodies are also keep getting bigger and bigger. Even m43 cameras are now the size of basic compact DSLR.
I would not even consider mirrorless from Canon/Nikon for the money I can get a very VERY good second hand DSLR that will do everything I need it to do. There is plenty of already awesome glass on the market and REALLY who needs f0.95!?
Contarama
Well-known
My friends have been telling me I'd love a Fuji haha
Note in my other post I say Leica and Fuji are still the king in this segment (after seeing these two newest howitzers)
So let me tell you my latest crazytown idea for myself now that I know Im not getting my dream camera. Im thinking about selling the Df, buying a 5d2 or 3, and leitaxing my Nikkors for Canon mount. I know I know...lol
Looks like Ill be keeping my mirror or jumping on the Leica or Fuji train. Man I love my set of Nikkors though.
Oren Grad
Well-known
There are four new lenses so far. Two of them, the 28-70/2 and 50/1.2, are designed to show off cutting-edge optical capabilities made possible by the new lens mount. Those two are quite large. But the other two, 24-105 and 35/1.8, are bread-and-butter lenses that are both smaller and lighter than their existing EF-mount counterparts.
The body is smaller and lighter than any full frame DSLR that Canon has ever offered.
Archlich
Well-known
At 680 grams it (and most of the other FF mirrorless cameras) also weights the same as a digital Leica...
I seldom see people complaining their Leica being huge or heavy. Mostly praises on how small and light they are. Weird! The gripless bodies are far from ergonomic-friendly and in most cases, require a thumbie which means extra weight.
ptpdprinter
Veteran
Looking at the dimensions of the M10 and the Z6/Z7, the volume (HxLxW) of the M10 is 428,120 cubic mm and the volume of the Z6/Z7 is over twice as great at 909,022 cubic mm. The Canon R is even larger. While the weight of the M10 and the Z6/Z7 are comparable, the M10 is less than half the overall size of the Z6/Z7 and Canon R, and the manual focus Leica lenses are considerably smaller than the autofocus lenses for the Z6/Z7 and Canon R, making the difference even more dramatic. The Z6/Z7 and Canon R are comparable in size to the Leica SL, and even Leica adherents have complained about its size. And until the M10, digital M owners have routinely complained about how much thicker it is than the M film bodies. If you want small, think M4/3.
Peter Jennings
Well-known
I'll just go back to my criticism of the Nikon (which goes for Sony, which I own, as well) and question why the designers insist on putting the viewfinder in line with the lens mount when there is no practical reason to do so. Do they think photographers get incredible pleasure cleaning nose grease off of LCD screens?
Just keep that great Df a little longer... and grab an older generation Fuji cheap.
It could be because some people use their right and some people use they left eye to view... in the center, everyone gets screwed!
Peter Jennings
Well-known
There! Finally a reason that makes some sense. I apologize for forgetting about all the southpaws.
benlees
Well-known
As a lefty, and being somewhat nasally endowed, I still would prefer the VF on the left for aesthetic reasons. Grease can be wiped off but an ugly camera is ugly forever.
Contarama
Well-known
Contarama
Well-known
Okay...because it is you...I am going to think about this. You are not the first person who has suggested a similar idea to me either. There are a bunch of you forum members whom I may not engage with much but let me tell you I weigh your words carefully.
That great Df is backed up with 7159990 de1 with all the early differences except the small Nikon body engraving in different font and the apollo lever. 28/2 35/2 50/2 85/1.8 105/2.5 135/2 all Ks with factory conversion rings...it is an amazing assemblage really. These new rigs just dont do it for me.
Sorry for ot folks
The Canon no mirror gets closer for myself I kind of think because of the mount. For some reason Im thinking Leitax will start making conversion mounts and perhaps a f mount to eosr would be thinner than the f to z native adapter. If this is true I could go with the Canon. So give me Nikkors with leitaxs that are thin and I am in. So is it possible?
No Sony doesnt work with my Nikkors. Weird reflections sometimes. I have never heard anything different.
aizan
Veteran
to their credit, the mounts and EVFs on the nikon and canon are shifted as far to the side as they could, and they set back the eyepiece to make room for your nose.
