topic Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent in EOS DSLR & Mirrorless Cameras

EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

shadowsports — Sun, 08 Sep 2019 02:51:57 GMT

Just a rumor, but an interesting one for sure.

https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-to-announce-eos-1d-x-equivalent-eos-r-system-camera-in-2021/

Make sure it has an articulating screen if/when it comes guys!

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

Waddizzle — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 00:41:14 GMT

@shadowsports wrote:

Make sure it has an articulating screen if/when it comes guys!

Cameras like the Canon 1Dx II and the Nikon D5 are really designed for the professional sports photographer or wildlife photographer. I do not see how a fully articulating screen for those shooting scenarios [would be useful.]

I do some sports and wildlife photography with my 6D2, and I have never needed to use the articulating screen. For me, the only benefit of a fully articulating screen is that I can fold away the screen for protection and storage.

A fully articulating screen is for s selfie stick, shooting over a crowd, shooting from a low angle, etc. Those types of shooting scenarios do not occur very often when shooting sports, and even less so when shooting wildlife.

I think fully articulating screens are great for snapshots.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

RobertTheFat — Sun, 08 Sep 2019 16:35:32 GMT

A professional-quality mirrorless like the 1D-R might well find a niche in photojournalism, notably for photographing White House events and Congressional hearings. Such occasions are typically characterized by an ear-splitting racket from the cameras used to photograph them. But a mirrorless camera is capable, at least in principle, of absolutely silent operation. There's no mirror flap, and the focal plane shutter is needed only when there's a risk that the sensor may be damaged by inadvertently pointing the camera at the sun. So I can envision a time in the not-too-distant future when today's noisy cameras might be banned altogether from such events.

Incidentally, I don't read the Canon rumor the way the referenced article does. It doesn't sound to me as though Canon plans an adapter to turn a mirrorless camera into a DSLR, but rather that there will be an adapter that will allow all EF and EF-S lenses to be used on their serious mirrorless cameras (which I believe is now already the case).

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

Waddizzle — Sun, 08 Sep 2019 18:00:05 GMT

@RobertTheFat wrote:

Incidentally, I don't read the Canon rumor the way the referenced article does. It doesn't sound to me as though Canon plans an adapter to turn a mirrorless camera into a DSLR, but rather that there will be an adapter that will allow all EF and EF-S lenses to be used on their serious mirrorless cameras (which I believe is now already the case).

I did not see the referenced in the same light as the rumor article, either. But I did not see it the same way as you described. Canon has already released EF/EF-S lens adapters prior to the reported date of the patent. So, I do not think it is a lens adapter.

I think Canon could be trying come up with a hybrid camera, maybe? I think Canon is trying a work around the negative effects of a rolling shutter on moving subjects. But, using a global shutter could mean blanking the viewfinder/sensor to capture the image, which would not be a pleasant experience at high frame rates.

———————————————————————.

One big difference between a DSLR and a mirrorless camera has to do with how their shutters operate. A DSLR primarily uses a mechanical shutter, which negates the side effects of a rolling shutter, or reading the sensor line by line. The shutter opens, the sensor collects light, the shutter closes, and NOW the static image captured by the sensor is read line by line.

If the shutter did not close, then you are sampling a dynamic image. You introduce a time difference between when you began reading the sensor and when you finished reading the sensor. This is where the distortion of moving subject originates. A global shutter reads the entire sensor at once. It reads a static image, which is effectively what a DSLR does after the shutter closes.

For mirrorless camera to keep its’ EVF active, you must keep the sensor active. Many mirrorless cameras briefly blank the EVF, so that a static image can be sampled. If they did not briefly stop the image sensor from sampling, you would introduce the negative effects of a rolling shuttter. Designers have a choice, briefly stop the image from updating, or briefly delay the image in the EVF, which causes EVF display to lag behind real time.

I think Brand S has solved this problem by double sampling the images, possibly right on the image sensor. I suspect there are more than one sensing element making up each photosite. One set of photosites are what get sampled for image capture, The other set of photosites feed the EVF for an uninterrupted view through the lens. However they do it, there has to be at leas two image streams, not just one. I suspect that this is how their flagship cameras takes photos without blanking the EVF.

If this brainstorm reminded you Canon’s Dual Pixel AF sensors, then you are thinking in the same direction I am. I think the patent is trying to achieve the multiple image streams mechanically, instead of electronically.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

wq9nsc — Tue, 10 Sep 2019 14:07:17 GMT

I may be dense but I am still missing what key advantages a mirrorless offers the sports shooter over a DSLR.

At this point, the mirrorless has greater power consumption due to the need for an electric view finder display with continuous sensor operation and any lag between actual scene and displayed EVF image is a major negative. I shot a few volleyball games Saturday and realized that I had to up my timing game over shooting football and soccer. Keeping the sensor powered and sampled continuously increases the potential for high ISO noise from sensor heating and I do a lot of fairly high ISO sports shooting. With the sensor constantly exposed, it is more subject to damage from laser light and inadvertent sunlight exposure magnified by the lens.

I can see the mirrorless advantage for making a lighter body, at least where long battery life isn't critical and it can provide for a higher frame rate. It is a simpler setup but the pro series DSLR bodies have been extremely reliable under high duty cycle operation for years. Wadizzle did a nice job of pointing out some of the technological challenges to avoid additional drawbacks of the mirrorless platform. At this point, I see it as an alternative approach but one whose benefits don't exceed the drawbacks for many of the current applications of the 1 series bodies. If I were primarily a studio or landscape photographer, I would look at things differently but for those primary applications I would seriously consider 5 series bodies as the better comparison point against current mirrorless offerings.

Rodger

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

ebiggs1 — Tue, 10 Sep 2019 15:46:07 GMT

Rodger,

"I may be dense but I am still missing what key advantages a mirrorless offers the sports shooter over a DSLR."

The main most advantage is you don't need all the mechanical assembly and linkages and very violent action of the shutter. Less moving parts. Less complicated. Less manufcturing problems. The real question is, is mirrorless better than a mechanical shutter with it's associated issues? In my way of thinking it is not.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

Waddizzle — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:04:06 GMT

@ebiggs1 wrote:
Rodger,
"I may be dense but I am still missing what key advantages a mirrorless offers the sports shooter over a DSLR."

The main most advantage is you don't need all the mechanical assembly and linkages and very violent action of the shutter. Less moving parts. Less complicated. Less manufcturing problems. The real question is, is mirrorless better than a mechanical shutter with it's associated issues? In my way of thinking it is not.

I suspect that Canon patent is an attempt to implement an optical viewfinder on a “mirrorless” camera. An EVF is a power hog. If you could build a mirrorless camera with an OVF, instead an EVF, then you would have struck gold.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

ebiggs1 — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 14:51:02 GMT

" An EVF is a power hog."

Not to mention they are crappy at best.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

ebiggs1 — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 14:55:13 GMT

I have not looked at all mirrorless cameras since they don't interest me in the least but, the ones I have looked at still have a shutter. Its just different than a DSLR's shutter.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

wq9nsc — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:39:31 GMT

At least for the mirrorless techhology with which I am familiar, the shutter is only used during the short time of the actual exposure but the rest of the time the sensor is exposed just like a video camera with the same heightened concern about sensor damage. Current mirrorless techonolgy seems best suited for the segment of the market where lighter weight and the cost advantage of simpler build take precedence over absolute performance; also those who want a "still" camera more biased towards video capability than the current crop of high end DSLR models will probably also find happiness with mirrorless.

One day it may be the best tool for the job for me but that day hasn't arrived yet. Really the only change I would really like with my current 1DX and 1DX 2 bodies is even better high ISO performance and it is already extremely good but more always provides for increased versatility in poorly lit venues. Higher sensor receptor density would allow for even further cropping if it can be provided at the same or greater ISO noise performance. The current sustained FPS rate is more than enough. These bodies are still far more capable than most users including me. From the experimental point of view, I would love to see what I could do with a model that has the sensor aspect ratio and receptor density of my old 1D Mark II but using current sensor and AF technology; that could be an absolute killer sports camera for indoor and night field sports but it wouldn't stand a chance in the market because most wouldn't look past its low megapixel count.

Rodger

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

ebiggs1 — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:03:05 GMT

I doubt going back to the smaller sensor would enhance low light performance. At least not easily.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

wq9nsc — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:11:07 GMT

For a given level of sensor technology, the bigger the individual receptor area, the better the low light/high ISO noise performance for the array. This is a primary reason that a full frame sensor of the same level of sensor technology has a high ISO advantage over its APS-C counterpart which will have smaller individual receptor areas if both have the same absoulte number of individual receptors.

Sensor technology has experienced the same huge leaps in performance in the past 15 years that we saw in the early days of CPU performance and the performance benefits have been divided between providing both higher sensor cell density and increasing low light/high ISO performance. I realize it wouldn't be an economically feasible market offering from a main line producer but I suspect the old 1.3X "crop" in an 8 to 10 MP offering would provide stunning sports shooting performance in a low light environment.

Rodger

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

Waddizzle — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:47:04 GMT

@wq9nsc
Sensor technology has experienced the same huge leaps in performance in the past 15 years that we saw in the early days of CPU performance and the performance benefits have been divided between providing both higher sensor cell density and increasing low light/high ISO performance. I realize it wouldn't be an economically feasible market offering from a main line producer but I suspect the old 1.3X "crop" in an 8 to 10 MP offering would provide stunning sports shooting performance in a low light environment.

Rodger

Canon already makes and sells such a sensor

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

wq9nsc — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 17:24:07 GMT

Thanks Wadizzle and I should have known that because I looked briefly at the C-100 last year when I decided to go with an dedicated video camera instead of shooting video with my 1DX bodies. Not surprisingly it receives high marks for its high ISO performance.

Rodger

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

Waddizzle — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 18:28:27 GMT

Except, Rodger, it only captures at video shutter speeds, 1/2000 or slower.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

ebiggs1 — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:22:00 GMT

"I realize it wouldn't be an economically feasible market offering from a main line producer but I suspect the old 1.3X "crop" in an 8 to 10 MP offering would provide stunning sports shooting performance ..."

Go buy a good used 1D Mk IV. I still have mine and I intend on always keeping it.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

diverhank — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:26:27 GMT

@Waddizzle wrote:
@shadowsports wrote:

Make sure it has an articulating screen if/when it comes guys!
...
I do some sports and wildlife photography with my 6D2, and I have never needed to use the articulating screen. For me, the only benefit of a fully articulating screen is that I can fold away the screen for protection and storage.

A fully articulating screen is for s selfie stick, shooting over a crowd, shooting from a low angle, etc. Those types of shooting scenarios do not occur very often when shooting sports, and even less so when shooting wildlife.
...
.

I beg to differ for wildlife cases...to get low angles on the critters, like ducks or avocets mating ... a lot of wildlife photographers right now get their cameras and tripods inches from the ground and without the articulating screens have to lie down flat with the cameras to see. I've done it personally, often I had to lie on birds droppings to do it. It's wonderful to be able to sit and do it with the screen. This is where mirrorless excels because you can't do that easily with the DSLR live view...different AF method and way too slow for action.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

Waddizzle — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:43:57 GMT

Getting down on the ground allows them to get closer and hide behind a camouflaged lens, too. I do not think sitting in a folding chair out in the open works well.

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

ebiggs1 — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 20:03:19 GMT

As much as mirrorless doesn't appeal to me, articulating screens don't either. Maybe less!

Re: EOS-1D X Mirrorless - EOS-R Equivlent

wq9nsc — Wed, 11 Sep 2019 20:17:47 GMT

Wadizzle wrote: "Except, Rodger, it only captures at video shutter speeds, 1/2000 or slower."

A cinema EOS body doesn't fit my needs but I find the low density, large sensor interesting. As demand for tranditional cameras shrink, I could see a niche market for a camera built around such a sensor. Production cost should be far lower than a high density sensor camera system (not just the sensor itself but all of the supporting hardware to handle the data) and Canon could come up with a very suitable low light camera for people who do deal with low light (i.e. lots of parents) who aren't willing to sink a ton of money into expensive bodies and a set of fast lens choices.

Rodger