Win a Canon RP Mirrorless Camera!

Your content will be up shortly. Please allow up to 5 seconds
Gear Announcements

Canon To Launch Full Frame Mirrorless Camera at CP+? YONGNUO ANNOUNCES NEW YN-360 LED LIGHT WAND {Daily Roundup}

By Anthony Thurston on January 24th 2016

Welcome to our roundup series where we will hit on several gear news and rumor topics each day. This gives you a chance to get caught up on all of the day’s news and rumors in one place. Make sure to check back daily for the latest gear news, rumors, and announcements.

Canon FF Mirrorless Coming At CP+?


The word on the street is that Canon has a big announcement coming at CP+ in Japan next month. Part of that is almost certainly their next flagship EOS-1D model, and now some are speculating that the other piece could be something mirrorless.

According to the report circulating the rumor mill (both Canon sites and the Mirrorless site picked this up), Canon has a big EOS-M announcement coming at CP+, something that will ‘surprise’ people. I don’t know about you, but I highly doubt another APS-C EOS-M could really surprise anyone short of it being an EOS-1D spec’d body  (spec wise, not size, obviously). So this has led to the speculation, and I repeat, this is JUST SPECULATION, that Canon could be ready to launch their first full frame mirrorless camera.

We don’t know anything (and we don’t even really KNOW that) else about it, unfortunately. We don’t know if it will still have the EOS-M moniker, or if it will be able to use EF lenses (and if it can, how well it can), or if it will have a professional build quality.

Basically, there is a lot we don’t know. But one thing we do know is that Canon finally launching a full frame mirrorless camera to compete against Sony’s A7 series is a BIG deal. Assuming its price/performance/capabilities are even remotely similar to just the base A7 II model, this camera would sell like hotcakes. But I am willing to bet that IF this camera is a full frame mirrorless, the fact that it is full frame will not be the only surprising aspect about it.

Can we get into February already? Sony is expected to make some huge announcements; Olympus has something up its sleeve; and now Canon… I have a feeling CP+ could be a big deal this year (I’m a little surprised some of these big announcements aren’t being held off until Photokina).

Yongnuo Announces New YN-360 LED Light WanD


Today, the interweb is going nuts over Yongnuo‘s latest announcement; an Ice Light-like LED wand they are calling the YN-360. Now, while I say it is ‘Ice Light-like,’ the similarity really ends in the fact that it is an LED wand.

Yongnuo is touting this new product as the only LED video light made from full-color RGB SMD lamps and LED lamp beads. This sets it apart in many ways, but namely, in that there is no need for color gels because you can change the color of the RGB panel to virtually any color you desire.

The YN-360 is powered by standard Sony NP-F style batteries, and also accepts wall power in those situations where you prefer that over a battery. Controlling the light via the manual controls is easy via a dedicated dial, and you can even change them wirelessly via a phone app of some kind.



  • Color temperature: 3200K, 5500K and RGB full color
  • CRI: greater than or equal to 95
  • Mobile APP Remote distance: less than 15 m
  • Power: 19.2 watts Lumen: 2560LM
  • Weight: 489 g illumination angle: 55 degrees and 110 degrees
  • Applicable battery: A lithium battery NP-F series
  • External DC power supply: 8 V DC power supply 5 A
  • Size: 583 * 48 * 24 mm

Pricing and availability for the new YN-360 have not yet been announced. But, given the amount of buzz and demand for these units, I wouldn’t think Yongnuo will wait too long before getting this out to the masses.

You can learn more about the YN-360’s over on the official Yongnuo website.

Leica SL Is The Top Performing Leica According to DXO

Leica SL and 24-90 f2.8-f4

I know, I know, say what you will about DxO, but I found this little tidbit interesting. According to the latest testing data over on the site, DxO has shown the new Leica SL (the new mirrorless camera), to be the highest performing Leica to date.

Now, this all needs the usual DxO grain of salt added, but it is interesting. I don’t hear a ton of Leica fanatics raving about the SL (I even saw a virtually brand new SL on Craigslist in my area this week), so it’s interesting to hear that it could be the ‘best’ Leica on the market right now.

“Although the Leica Q’s sensor performance hinted at the direction Leica was taking, the Leica SL sensor improves on that. Such improvement might be only in some small way, but it is quantifiable.”

You can find the full results of the DxO test over here.

What are your thoughts on today’s roundup? What news/rumors did we miss? What would you like to see covered in future roundups? Leave a comment below and let us know what you think!

This site contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links, however, this does not impact accuracy or integrity of our content.

Anthony Thurston is a photographer based in the Salem, Oregon area specializing in Boudoir. He recently started a new project, Fiercely Boudoir to help support the growing boudoir community. Find him over on Instagram. You may also connect with him via Email.

Q&A Discussions

Please or register to post a comment.

  1. Stephen Glass

    Having said that if I won the lottery I’d get online and get an A7Rii and three lenses in a heartbeat.

    | |
    • Mel Snyder

      No “reply” button on your previous post – but yes, I would opt for the Sony because a) the EVF, b) I shoot mostly small lenses where the camera body size IS significant – and c) my days of carrying 1300-gram cameras are over. I can carry a 640 gram A7II and a spare A7 (450 gm) body and lens when I go into dirty environments (e.g. Turkish, Jordanian & Israeli deserts.

      I came into 35mm photography with a 410 gram Leica IIIa, moved to a 550 gram M4P. Added a Canon F1 system (1400 grams), then added a T90 (800 grams). – but the M4P was always my go-to 35mm. When I needed large format for medical-journal ads, I added a Mamiya 645 system. Went digital with the D70, D300 – and the D7000 for video. Now, I’m going light and EVF.

      | |
    • Stephen Glass

      Thanks for the answer. Yeah that’s what I’m looking for. I think the lens issue will get solved soon enough. The reason I ask is that I’m seriously considering it. I only do a couple of events a year, I shoot mostly headshots for actors and corporate folks. Most often I’m on a tripod there so size isn’t a huge deal for me most of the time. I started on a D70, D300, D700, D7000, D3s, D800, and now D750. I’ve had to send one D750 and they replaced the shutter. The D800 had all kinds of focusing issues. Fortunately I had a 3-year Mack warranty on it. It went into Nikon 3 times. Nikon uses Sony sensors anyway. I think that’s still the case. But my allegiance is solely financial now.
      The other thing I see happening is that the mirrorless are getting a lot of attention from manufacturers making cool stuff for them. At the PPA convention Cambio (?) made a bellows mechanism and a rail system for it So you could do the product work. There’s the other tilt/shift adapters that seem to be plentiful for the Sony but not DSLR.
      I guess that’s due to the focusing ability?
      So anyway…. thanks for the information. I have the same question into Parker Pfister who can’t speak highly enough of the Sony A7Rii. He also shoots a D750 for weddings but seems like he’s rented an A7Rii several times in the last 6 months.

      | |
  2. Stephen Glass

    It’ll be great when manufacturers start taking the best of the mirrorless and the best of the DSLR, stop worrying about size so much, and just make an ultimate camera out of the technology. If it has a mirror or no. Or maybe live view gets better because of the technology from a mirrorless. So I think it’ll be great for Nikon and Canon to enter the mirrorless fray and start working through those issues and see what migrates to the pro market. Whether that ends up being a DSLR or a mirrorless or something having features of both.
    The Sony mirrorless has been out a while but the hype seems to surround this latest iteration of the A7Rii. So many photographers are talking about it competing with their DSLR.
    Lenses seem to be the limiting factor. Especially zooms for wedding work. The physics of optics require a certain size opening to gather the light necessary to shoot at wider apertures. So the limiting factor, seems to me, is just physics. At some point it doesn’t make sense to add a camera body and new lenses to your gear list, unless you just have the money to spare to save you on the aspect of size.
    The other part of me says, photography is one of the most inconvenient activities you’ll perform. When I look at my D750 and what I might gain in a A7Rii I think, “It’s not worth the cost of migration to a new system.”

    | |
    • Mel Snyder

      Stephen, I think we are on the same page, but I’d like to comment on this post. I don’t know how much hands-on shooting experience you have with the Sony system – so excuse me if I’m (as the English say) “teaching my grandmother to suck eggs.”

      Those of us who’ve come to Sony from Nikon (my case) or Canon (others) had to use kluges like Hoodman in order to see on “live view” what is presented in the viewfinder of the Sony A7 series…and that Hoodman view of the low-res LCD panel on the backs of our DSLRs was pretty lame. For video, for careful tripod composition and focusing, the Hoodman hit “fail.” For manual focus on “live view” – fail.

      Today’s high-sensitivity sensors plus an OLED EVF means you are often startled to see that the brilliantly lit scene in the EVF demands an ISO of 6400, shutter speed of 1/3rd second and an aperture of f1.4! Trust me, when I’ve carried my Nikon alongside my Sonys and observed the same scene through its optical viewfinder, I could see almost nothing. The EVF effectively puts a night vision scope into your camera. It also has the advantage of putting the histogram right in the viewfinder. Combined with ISO, aperture and shutter speed – and the ability to see for an adjustable time after exposure the actual captured image in the EVF- without lowering the camera and pressing buttons and zooming on the LCD – any wedding or sports photographer, or portrait photographer wondering if his/her subject blinked – that EVF system just blows away anything one could expect of an OVF.

      The lens-limiting factor has very little to do with the aperture of the Sony FE mount. I happily use my Nikkor lenses from the non-AI era onward with dumb adapters, from my Canon FD lenses from my 24mm f2 through my Nikkor 80-200mm f2.8 AF-D ED. I also use my Leica M mounts, from a new 15mm f4.5 Voigtlander Series III through my 35mm Summilux, 50mm Summicron, and 90mm Tele-Elmarit. No problems on any of them.

      The lens limitation for Sonys is largely the result of Sony being an electronics company, not an optics company. Fortunately, Zeiss *** IS*** and optics company, and is closing the lens gap. There isn’t yet the 24-70mm f2.8 zoom so many crave – but one is forecast for later this year.

      Now, manual focus on most OVFs is a bear, and I can well understand why most DLSR users sniff at the idea of using what appears to be “retro” manual focusing with adapted lenses. However, the image peaking and one-button 5x-11.9x magnification on the Sonys makes manual focusing a dream. I just shot a major international symposium of women, with speakers moving back and forth with hand-held mikes – and darned if I couldn’t get shot-after-shot eyelash-perfect as 200mm f2.8, manual focus.

      But if you are Canon or Nikon, think what those points I’ve raised could mean. Your strong suite against Sony and others was your lens arsenal. That’s Sony’s weakness. But those lenses were designed with mount-to-sensor spacing to accommodate a mirror box. It makes little sense to maintain that spacing once there’s no mirror box – but you are forced to, to hang onto your installed lens base. You may want to offer all those EVF/focusing advances – but how do you do that with an empty mirror/shutterbox, to save your installed lens base?

      There is a parallel in the software field: WordPerfect. It was designed for DOS. Along came Windows and OS X. Wordperfect dallied, trying to figure out how to produce a Windows version of Wordperfect that worked just like the DOS version. Meanwhile, a company called Microsoft – without the burden of a legacy installed base – developed a word processing program called Microsoft Word.

      By the time WordPerfect for Windows was released, the enterprise had switched to Word, as had most consumers.

      The photography world is changing fast – the point-and-shoot market has died a smartphone death. Few bother to “carry a camera” any more, except for a shrinking base of enthusiasts. As Apple and others seek to improve their smartphone camera function, those DSLR makers who dally in offering highly portable fully electronic alternatives will become the Wordperfects of the camera world.

      | |
    • Stephen Glass

      I’m not against Sony at all. If it sounds like that I misspoke. I wish I had the money to add it in. I simply can’t afford it. Right now, for me, it’s like Profoto lighting. Definitely better then my PCB Einsteins but I can’t afford it.
      So did you add Sony or switch to Sony?. If you switched what was your net cost?
      I guess, as I think about my post, I see how you think I could be “anti-mirrorless”. My point is just that when they create a 70-200mm f/2.8 for it, and no doubt they will, you really won’t be saving size. Because the size of the lens will make the size of the camera secondary. I mean it’s that way now with my D750. If I mount my buddie’s 200mm f/2 on it, the body looks like an afterthought by way of size.
      I’d love to have a
      A7Rii make no mistake. I just can’t afford it. If it sounds like I’m dissing it… it’s just sour grapes. I’d love to have a camera to shoot events without that dang mirror slapping.

      | |
    • Mel Snyder

      I basically switched from Nikon to Sony. I had two D7000s, which I used for both personal and business (mostly medical videos).

      I’d heard about the NEX-7 and its ability to accept Leica M mounts with adapters, and I had 3 great lenses from my M4P days, and went to B&H to buy it – until I learned that the mike input had AGC, which of course made it useless for serious video.

      I decided to spring instead for an NEX-6 when the salesman told me it had the same sensor as the D7000, so I could use my M mounts. I just about welded a 35mm f1.4 Summilux-M to it. Then I tried my Canon FD 85mm f1.2L.

      You are right – once you put big/fast lenses on a mirrorless, many of the size/weight advantages of mirrorless go away. I think that’s why Olympus never scaled its DSLR-shaped bodies to MFT proportions. Uninformed people who looked at the NEX-6 considered it a point-and-shoot because it is so tiny. I bought into Sony for the EVF…and into the A7 for the ability to regain real perspective with film-era lenses.

      To really use 35mm film lenses, one needs full frame. I bought an A7 body for myself, and I rent a backup before each business shoot. I carried one of my D7000s on each business shoot for awhile, but when I discovered LensRental – and when my local LensProToGo offered rental A7II bodies, I gave my son-in-law one D7000. I hung onto one D7000 body in case I ever wanted to shoot my Nikkor 80-200m f2.8 AF-D – but then, 2 weeks ago, I had a business assignment where I put the 80-200 on an A7II – and the in-body stabilization and image peaking made manual focus so fast, I was astounded. The other Nikon just sits.

      Hard to calculate “net cost” because I went to a rather expensive alternative to the Sony 16-35mm f4 – I bought a Sony/Zeiss 35mm f2.8 and a Voigtlander 15mm f4.5 Series III to span the range of the 16-35, with superior wide-open performance. The Sony lens duplicates the focal length of the Summilux, but is AF. The Summilux is pretty useless at f1.4 because of it’s “dreamy” characteristics, but after I rented the Sony 35 for a wedding, where I wanted AF, I had to buy it.

      There are a lot of fine new manual-focus lenses from Zeiss now, and Voigtlander (Cosina, which makes all but one of the many Zeiss lenses for cameras) will be launching a new line of MF lenses, too.

      There’s a 24-70mm f2.8 reputed coming in a few months – but it is sure to to be Canon-prices – and big. If one isn’t attracted to the many EVF advantages over an optical viewfinder, and if one expects to shoot big lenses, the size/weight advantages go away.

      Personally, I find the big/fast lens penchant among Sony users pretty silly when we have the ability to shoot ISO 6400 like it was ISO 200 five years ago. I admit that once or twice a year, I need f1.2 (weight 750 grams – 2 lbs), and am glad to have it. But for most of the year, I carry the 90mm f2.8 Tele-Elmarit instead. It has a 39mm front element, weighs 330 grams, and for most available light portraits, I need to stop the f1.2 to f2.8 to keep both eyes close to focused.

      I’d not leave DSLRs for size or weight – I do it because I want the electronics advantage.

      | |
    • Stephen Glass

      thanks that is informative! Yeah, I thought of that question after our last exchange. That is this: If the A7IIr was the same size as a D4 or D5 would you still use it? Sounds like that’s a yes?

      | |
  3. Adrian Ong

    I just saw an article here that the YN360 will be sold at $62. How true is that? We shall see.

    | |
  4. Paul Empson

    YN360 LED.. very interesting.. I like my Ice Light.. but the price..

    | |
  5. Mark Henry Dela Torre

    If the mirrorless FF happens, sure it will be a new set of lens for it. They have to fix the flange focal distance if they don’t change lenses and support EF or they have to supply an adapter like the metabones.

    | |
    • adam sanford

      Normally, you’d be correct. That follows the line of thinking that ‘the point of mirrorless is to be smaller’, which perhaps 2/3 of users believe to be so.

      But a FF sensor + fast max aperture = big lenses that need a stout grip (regardless of how thin the body can be), and most pros know this. Many of them are espousing Canon to put out — wait for it — a mirrorless system with a straight-up EF mount with normal flange distance, so no adapters or new glass is required.

      That *single* decision — new mount + slow release of many new lenses + adaptor vs. keep it thick and use all existing glass on day one — is the billion dollar decision Canon must make.

      | |
    • Anthony Thurston

      Yeah Adam, Samsung did that with the NX1 (it was pretty much the size of a full DSLR) and I actually liked it. No reason that mirrorless *has* to be smaller. I mean look at it this way, instead of cramming all the components into a smaller body, they could add more components/features in a slightly more standard DSLR sized body with the extra space from removing the Phase Detection AF sensor and mirror box. I would love to see a company give this a shot.

      | |
    • adam sanford

      Besides the obvious — to protect SLR sales — Canon and Nikon have avoided the major investment of FF mirrorless because the market has not defined what it truly wants in mirrorless.

      Some want mirrorless to do 80% of what an SLR can for half the size, and others want it to do 100% of what an SLR can even if it must get big as a result. Canon does not want to p— off one of those two camps with a huge chunky body (meant for, say, a 70-200 f/2.8) or with a dainty little system that *can’t* grip bigger glass.

      There is some wisdom in waiting and not risking the dollars until the market settles, but in the interim, Sony may define the market without them. :-)

      | |
    • Paul Nguyen

      If mirrorless isn’t to be smaller, why would you buy a mirrorless? All of the technological features that were once a part of mirrorless are already making it onto DSLRs. The Nikon D500 has a tilt screen, touch screen, WiFi, SnapBridge (arguably huge news) amongst many other very significant technological (not IQ) improvements. These features will undoubtedly trickle down to the successor of the D810, and alter on, the D750.

      Even Sony doesn’t have a touch screen yet. So the whole argument of how mirrorless has all these cool features like being able to control your camera with a phone is nonsense.

      This is what I don’t get – people going mirrorless for the sake of going mirrorless. Personally, I get the size thing, I shoot Fuji and love its small size! But why go mirrorless for the pure sake of it without any real improvement over a DSLR?

      | |
    • adam sanford

      It’s not just for the sake of going mirrorless. There are those people who love what mirrorless does *better* than an SLR:

      * If you don’t need f/1.4 primes, f/2.8 zooms, or longer focal lengths, you can create a very compact walkaround setup compared to an SLR.
      * No mirror slap (…ever, unlike an SLR that you need to set it to do)
      * Far fewer mechanical items to fail or degrade over time
      * Amplified EVF in dark rooms
      * Customizable viewfinder content
      * Real time histo in viewfinder
      * MF focus peaking in viewfinder — no need to for a specialized focusing screen
      * (with a short flange FF system like the A7) You can adapt older lenses from other mounts
      * When buffer size / CPU power / shutter designs improve, still framerates won’t be mirror-limited some day (hello, 20-30 fps stills shooting at full res)

      Yes, battery life is a big problem.
      Yes, it’s not as responsive / lag-free as an SLR.
      Yes, the lens / accessory ecosystem is tiny.

      But in time, all of those items will improve to the point that some of upsides above will trump the upsides of an SLR. It won’t be soon… but it will happen someday.

      Hence, mirrorless is *not* all about size.

      | |
    • Dave Haynie

      If you’re going to keep the flange distance and lens mount (which is absolutely in Canon/Nikon’s best interest), why not do the hybrid thing (as described above)? One of these companies could launch a camera that gives you optical and EVF, something that no mirrorless company can ever match. And of course, it’s just another option in the same system. It’s doable.

      | |
  6. Ralph Hightower

    The Canon FF EOS-M looks interesting. Depending upon specs, I may consider buying one for my wife. I don’t know if I’ll be using mirrorless 10-15 years from now or have another DSLR, but two cameras that I’ll be shooting with are my Canon A-1 and F-1N, depending upon whether or not film is still available.

    | |
  7. adam sanford

    Canon needs some *much* more basic things in mirrorless than a FF sensor, like:

    1) A viewfinder :-P
    2) **Native** EF-M lenses that are as good as EF lenses — not plastic, unsealed, STM nonsense.
    3) Focus speeds quicker than molasses running out of a bottle

    That said — yes, a Canon FF mirrorless offering would be a massive piece of news.

    | |
  8. John Cavan

    I’ll be interested in seeing the reviews for the Yongnuo light and the price, but given history I would expect a reasonable price.

    The Ice Light was interesting, the price was not…

    | |
    • J D

      I agree, I would enjoy messing around with something like this but not at the price of the Ice Light, especially for how little I would actually use it.

      | |
  9. Paul Nguyen

    Anthony, I think you’ve made a bit of a slight fallacy in interpreting DxOMark’s results that many other people tend to make as well. They aren’t saying the SL is the highest performing Leica, they’re saying that the sensor in the SL is the highest performing sensor in any Leica. Very different statements, but you can definitely understand why it would be the case, considering the SL is the newest and best. You wouldn’t expect it to have a worse sensor than the M240, would you?

    I don’t see the huge deal with Canon’s mirrorless. I actually shoot with both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras and personally, I don’t see why everyone makes such a big deal about it. It’s almost like there’s some sort of hipster trend towards moving to mirrorless these days that I find quite odd. Some people view it as almost some ideological battle (almost like Canon vs. Nikon) and it seems that any mirrorless announcement is like the next best thing. I don’t see the hype, personally.

    | |
    • adam sanford

      Paul, the reasons why Canon (or Nikon) going to FF mirrorless are hyped so much are myriad, but I’ll highlight two:

      1) Many believe that in 10-15 years or so, the only people shooting with SLRs will the most demanding action photographers. Everyone else will be moved to mirrorless because those rigs will work just as well as SLRs do (much like how Plasma TVs were overtaken by LCD TVs — 99% as good for less price, less mechanical items to fail, less size and weight, etc.).

      2) The industry is waiting for Canon or Nikon to slide from one side of the see saw (resisting pro FF mirrorless to protect SLR sales) to the other side (going all in and offering pro FF mirrorless). Once that happens, the other major has to respond, and top-end mirrorless rigs/lenses/accessories would naturally follow at a good pace, i.e. Sony/Leica wouldn’t be the only show in town, and MANY folks want this — some for size reasons, others for mirrorless functionality reasons.

      For the record, I love my SLR and its OVF and hope to use it for a long time. But as mirrorless battery life, AF systems and lens offerings improve, the reasons *not* to buy mirrorless are getting fewer and fewer, especially if we can bolt our existing lenses on them…

      | |
    • Rafael Steffen

      The Nikon D5 may be the last of the FF sensors beast. I can´t imagine what a D6 could improve.

      | |
    • Paul Nguyen

      What benefits do mirrorless cameras provide that make them likely to kill DSLRs? Plasma TVs were killed by LCDs because LCDs were cheaper to manufacture, ran cooler, wasted less power and were significantly lighter. The A7II weighs like 100g less than the Nikon D750. I don’t think that matters all that much. People like to jump on every new gravy train that comes out because it’s cool and hip, not because it’s actually any better than the old guard. Perhaps Canon and Nikon going down the mirrorless route makes business sense.

      The way I see it though, Adam, isn’t like Plasma vs. LCD, but rather, more like Diesel vs. Petrol cars. Mirrorless and SLRs are almost identical these days, with the Sony A7 series even having a DSLR layout and feel (surely Canon/Nikon will have that layout too) and ultimately, whether you shot mirrorless or DSLR is completely irrelevant to the final picture you get, so I think it comes down to personal preference, but I don’t get all the hype and fist-pumping over it all.

      Personally, I don’t see Canon/Nikon protecting SLR sales. If they release a mirrorless, people will buy a mirrorless from them rather than an SLR, so it’s not like they’re losing anything. If anything, they gain because they’ll get all those people who were going to get a Sony or whatever. I think the bigger reason is that mirrorless is a bit of a fad. It’s not like people are moving to Sony in droves. Note that there are many people moving in the opposite direction as well, i.e. from Sony to Canon/Nikon after realising the AF is crap.

      Ultimately, I think we’ll reach a stage of equilibrium again, which is what it has been over the past two decades. People who beat the drum of mirrorless should remember two things :

      1) The Contax G – also dubbed the SLR killer, with good lenses, good AF and a very well-rounded system in a rangefinder format with no mirror. It was a flop.

      2) The fact that Sony hasn’t really gained as much market share as predicted (the A7 has been out for years and years now) and that Fuji and Olympus haven’t really exactly significantly strengthened their positions either, with both of them doing well, but neither really going to make a significant dent on market share.

      | |
    • Mel Snyder

      I disagree. I can understand why Canon and Nikon have been reluctant to enter the mirrorless market.

      Canon must recognize that cameras have become more electronics boxes than optical/mechanical devices. Leave the mirror box and mechanical shutter and you leave their technologic strengths behind. Basically it re-starts the whole race for the top-end interchangeable lens camera market.

      Second, one of the great advantages of the Sony mirrorless line is their short mount-to-sensor distance. It enables them to use – with adapters – any company’s lenses. To utilize their current lenses, Canon and Nikon would need to make their cameras uncompetitively deep, or sell an adapter, in order to make Sony-like camera. Of course, in their hubris, they might develop a whole new line of mirrorless lenses. But Sony appears to have engineered the A7RII to focus competitively with Canon’s current lenses and electronic adapters. The space for a Canon mirrorless may be narrow.

      Canon’s entry into the mirrorless market with a credible camera would greatly enhance market acceptance of the technology. It can’t be another EOS-M.

      | |
    • Dave Haynie

      Actually, you can adapt pretty much any film camera lens to an EOS body. You can’t necessarily adapt mirrorless lenses to other mirrorless cameras. Plus, it’s usually either the Nikon or Canon lenses you want to adapt to that mirrorless body… both of those work on Canon, today. So do my old Olympus OM-series lenses…. one reason I jumped to Canon after the the OM system was discontinued.

      | |
    • Dave Haynie

      I think Canon and Nikon would be wrong to go strongly in mirrorless, basically because DSLR is their strength, the mirrorless companies — or more specifically, the mirrorless lens systems — are already established, and at least when you’re at full frame, I agree that there’s very little advantage to being mirrorless, and plenty of disadvantages. For one, you get 3x-4x as many shots per battery with a DSLR versus something like an A7II. Doesn’t matter to everyone, but for some, it does. Half the time, I’m shooting my OM-D with a battery grip. That, plus some tweaking of operating modes, gets me close to the 1000 shots I’m used to with my Canon. And it’s still noticably smaller. But try that with a Sony, you only get just over half-way to those 1000 shots, and the camera-plus-grip is heavier than the same kind of camera from Nikon or Canon (a D7200 or 6D, Sony doesn’t make a 5D or 1D analog).

      What I think Nikon or Canon should do is what Fujifilm did for “rangefinders” — a hybrid viewfinder. That’s a DSLR with a transparent OLED screen overlaying the focusing glass. So you get mirrorless-style information in the viewfinder overlaying an optical view — that information is the one big advantage of mirrorless other than size, IMHO. Then, if you press the “mirrorless” button, the screen locks up and that OLED becomes your viewfinder. They’d need to improve their “live mode” focusing a bit, but other than that, not a big stretch of technology.

      | |
    • Rafael Steffen

      I believe mirrorless cameras will be great for travel and as a second camera during a gig.

      | |
    • Dave Haynie

      I have kind of a different take on the mirrorless thing.

      So ok, it’s pretty clear that we’ve been reading about an article covering just about every fart emitted by a company doing mirrorless. And this started basically before no one outside of Japan or The Press had even used an ILM.

      But I think there was a good reason here… it was all New! and Exciting! Canon and Nikon… pretty much no excitement. Pentax… well, they try harder, but between being smaller and being tossed around between Hoya and Ricoh, they didn’t get much coverage, either.

      Meanwhile, on mirrorless, we had Panasonic, one of the Big Four in camcorders. And Sony, another of the Big Four in camcorders. And Samsung, the world’s second largest IC maker. And Olympus, rising from a death of nothing but P&S models. And Fujifilm. So, lots of noise. And then, all this cool stuff. Olympus and Fujifilm did retro right. Panasonic was the first credible challenge to Canon’s DSLR-for-video business. Sony made really tiny APS cameras, and then FF mirrorless. And they release a new body every six weeks or so :-) And we got great IBIS from Olympus and Canon. Cool tricks built-in. Great software updates with new features.

      In short, it’s been fun to watch the rise of mirrorless, rather boring back in DSLR land, most of the time at least. Which makes sense — it’s harder for an established technology to innovate. And it’s harder for an established, successful company to take risks — but it’s only the successful risk taken that’s seen, after that success, as innovation.

      And if you were really paying attention, you might have noticed that the sales of digital cameras has been dropping. Get a large enough time vs. sales graph, and you’ll notice that recently, sales of digital cameras is essentially back to where it was with film cameras, before digital came along. In short, we’ve had a 15 year bubble, while the industry tried to figure out what a digital camera was, then deliver one that didn’t need to be replaced with the next model. Now that we’re there, sales have leveled back to “buying a camera” as it was in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

      Factor that in, and it’s questionable if that market supports all the current brands of digital cameras. In fact, Samsung’s been asking the very question lately. So these newer companies are forced to be even hungrier than they might have been otherwise.. that’s Big Fun for camera geeks like me. Particularly when Canon’s not doing anything interesting (well, sure, the Cinema EOS stuff was pretty meaningful for plenty of film makers, but mostly off my radar.

      | |
  10. Magnus Nyborg

    Holy moly, if this is true I can’t wait to see what it’s going to be like. I’ve had so many back and fourths with myself, wanting so badly to make the move to mirrorless, but being unsure wether the a7rii is a good way to go. From the point to calling my local store and reserving one, to watching hours of reviews and deciding it’s just not good enough yet. If Canon is dropping a mirrorless FF with full EF-lens support I’ll be the first in line.

    Camping outside for weeks to see the next LOTR-movie? No way in hell, but I’ll sure break out my tent for this one!!

    | |