So many models, which ones do what and are designed for what intended purposes?

[FidoQ]

Howdy, still just trying to learn more about the Canon camera models, seems that Ikeep hearing that the future is going mirrorles and this model is better for photography and this one for sports and still this one better for portraits etc. etc. 

So is there a link somehwere that explains all the different models and if Canon really did design them for specific purposes?

Thanks

[Waddizzle]

As a general rule, there are no cameras that are exclusively designed for a specific type of application.  The only truly specialized camera gear are the lenses, not the camera bodies.

Of course, there are a few exceptions, but these are for filling a niche.  There is a camera with a specail image sensor assembly, that has been optimized for serious astrophotography, a task which most cameras can perform quite adequately There used to be a compact camera that specifically designed for underwater photography.

The different camera models offer a variety of features and performance specifications.  There are no cameras that are designed exclusively for sports, portraiture, landscapes, etc. Nearly all of the entry level cameras are designed for general purpose use.  They are a jack of all trades, but a true master of none.

At the high end, there are cameras that are workhorses, designed for the type of hard demanding use needed by professionals.  The entry level cameras can perform the 90% general photography use cases almost as well as the high performance, professional models.  It is the last 10% that separates the pro cameras from the consumer cameras.

Deciding which camera to buy is mostly a matter of budget.  How you plan to use the camera is a secondary consideration.  

[FidoQ]

Great insight and explanation sir, but I am still curious about an explnation or "evolution" of the various models, 70D, 80D now 90D, guessing there was a 6D way back when and now a 6Dmk2 like I own. It does also appear that most lenses being made at non- pro price levels are only for the cropsensored machines, sure sems that if some company made lenses in those price ranges that worked on full frame non crop cameras they would have huge sales volume, just me thinking I have some common sense but maybe I dont lol.

So is there a "history" of canon camera models somewhere?

Tnx

[Waddizzle]

There is a wide range of full frame EF lenses that are not professional L models.  Most of them are standard zooms, and standard and wide angle primes.

[FidoQ]

Maybe I should have worded different or I'm looking in all the wrong places like B&H and Adorama. I like zooms and have not seen anything under $1500.00 that is an F2.8 in Canon brand and with IS, thats what I am wanting. Maybe some other brands out there that i need to look at but was trying to keep it all Canon. 16-35 F2.8 would be mu ideal lens but at two grand by the time you pay taxes is not what I call an enthusiast price range but more of  professional lens and price. 

Sigma has some good pricing but no IS and not sure if true but the B&H rep stated that those lenses have some auto focus issues on the Canon brand cameras,just what I was told. 

[Tronhard]

It will help if you give us a full idea of your situation, so I suggest reviewing this post and considering the questions that it poses.  If you can provide as many answers as possible it will help you get the best advice for your situation.

https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/General-Camera-Discussion/G-A-S-and-the-Advice-People-get/m-p/279...

---

@FidoQ wrote:

Maybe I should have worded different or I'm looking in all the wrong places like B&H and Adorama. I like zooms and have not seen anything under $1500.00 that is an F2.8 in Canon brand and with IS, thats what I am wanting. Maybe some other brands out there that i need to look at but was trying to keep it all Canon. 16-35 F2.8 would be mu ideal lens but at two grand by the time you pay taxes is not what I call an enthusiast price range but more of  professional lens and price. 

Sigma has some good pricing but no IS and not sure if true but the B&H rep stated that those lenses have some auto focus issues on the Canon brand cameras,just what I was told. 

---

[Waddizzle]

---

@FidoQ wrote:

Maybe I should have worded different or I'm looking in all the wrong places like B&H and Adorama. I like zooms and have not seen anything under $1500.00 that is an F2.8 in Canon brand and with IS, thats what I am wanting. Maybe some other brands out there that i need to look at but was trying to keep it all Canon. 16-35 F2.8 would be my ideal lens but at two grand by the time you pay taxes is not what I call an enthusiast price range but more of  professional lens and price. 

Sigma has some good pricing but no IS and not sure if true but the B&H rep stated that those lenses have some auto focus issues on the Canon brand cameras,just what I was told. 

---

You do not really need IS at that range of focal lengths, 16-35mm.  Are you familiar with the rule of thumb for shutter speed that says the minimum speed should be one over the focal length.  For most of the shooting scenarios with almost any lens, not just wide angle, your shutter speed will very likely be an order of magnitude faster than 1/40 sec shutter speed.

I believe Canon has released an ultra-wide angle zoom with IS for the RF mount.  The IS could be beneficial in very low light situations when shooting handheld.  For the most part, I think it is a solution looking for a problem.  If the light were that low, I would most likely be using a tripod, which assumes that my subject is not moving.

You seem to be looking for a lens that does not really exist.  There is not much of a need for it.

One of the biggest benefits of having IS in a lens is that it helps to stabilize and remove camera shake from the image in the viewfinder, which allows for better tracking of moving subjects.  I cannot think of an occasion when I used my ultra-wide angle to track and shoot a moving subject.  My wide angle shots seem to always be photographs of still subjects, no subject motion at all.

When I want to realize critical focus, I turn off Image Stabilization in my lenses, anyway.

[ebiggs1]

"... Canon really did design them for specific purposes?"

You might want to consider price.  A lot of cameras and lenses and gear of all kinds are aimed at a specific market.  Their features and thus their cost dictate.  If you don't have six K to spend on a camera it doesn't mater what it can do.

Sometimes the feature can be nothing more than durability and not really anything else. Doesn't give it the ability to take a "better" picture but it will do what it does longer and under extreme conditions.

As for a specific list, start reading Canon advertisements.