Nikon mirrorless definitely on the way

[Riz_Guru]

But the world and his dog immediately attach a grip to make the body bigger and easier to hold!

I do this with my Sony and also did with my Nikon DSLR's.

I think Nikon should make the bodies small to cater for those who want a smaller design and then a good battery grip to make it bigger if required. Best of both worlds.

 

[Mr Badger]

But the world and his dog immediately attach a grip to make the body bigger and easier to hold!

This sort of thing amuses me, years ago we seemed to have a race to produce the smallest candy-bar type phones, now the average mobile phone is the size of a small book! I know this is to do with smartphones and screens large enough to see images, but that's the point, make something too small and it becomes just as uncomfortable to use as something large; be it down to size and weight or it being too small to read and use. There is an ergonomic limit to size, at both ends of the scale, and that's probably why SLRs have stood the test of time, because they're about the right size and shape for the job!

 

[Riz_Guru]

This sort of thing amuses me, years ago we seemed to have a race to produce the smallest candy-bar type phones, now the average mobile phone is the size of a small book! I know this is to do with smartphones and screens large enough to see images, but that's the point, make something too small and it becomes just as uncomfortable to use as something large; be it down to size and weight or it being too small to read and use. There is an ergonomic limit to size, at both ends of the scale, and that's probably why SLRs have stood the test of time, because they're about the right size and shape for the job!

If Nikon's mirrorless FF body was the same size as a DSLR, It wouldn't put me off at all, ergonomically their is nothing wrong with DSLR bodies.
I say keep the same bodies and chop out the mirrors, put in mirrorless technology and job done

 

[Phil V]

You cant deny for a fact that canon have made bizarre choices in there camera's before. more so then Nikon.

They’re the market leaders, and have been for a long time.
So... I have a different view of the ‘bizarre choices’ which aren’t steeped in the mentality of keyboard warriors who can’t grasp concepts like ‘market segmentation’ ‘user focussed design’ etc.

Idiots who’s starting point is their own personal wish list that when not fulfilled decide that Canon havent got a clue or they’ve purposely crippled a camera.

My starting point is above. Canon know the market better than anyone.

 

[Eloise]

Canon know the market better than anyone.

Well they know how to market better than anyone at least.

(But I agree with you Phil)

 

[Phil V]

If you reply then make it constructive and not some kind of defense of Canon / EOS-M!

Myopic!
I’m not ‘defending’ Canon. I’m not a fan boy, i just have an open view of how the industry works rather than ridiculous opinions based on nothing more than internet rumours about Lizards running camera companies and keeping all the good stuff from us.

 

[Riz_Guru]

Myopic!
I’m not ‘defending’ Canon. I’m not a fan boy, i just have an open view of how the industry works rather than ridiculous opinions based on nothing more than internet rumours about Lizards running camera companies and keeping all the good stuff from us.

ok, lets focus on the future... I am actually excited to see what they bring.... I am a gear head and like technology

 

[jonneymendoza]

They’re the market leaders, and have been for a long time.
So... I have a different view of the ‘bizarre choices’ which aren’t steeped in the mentality of keyboard warriors who can’t grasp concepts like ‘market segmentation’ ‘user focussed design’ etc.

Idiots who’s starting point is their own personal wish list that when not fulfilled decide that Canon havent got a clue or they’ve purposely crippled a camera.

My starting point is above. Canon know the market better than anyone.

IMO people are sheep in general. They follow whatever is the trend or the most talked about thing. Not necessarily the best thing so imo, just like apple, they are number one because of people refuse to look elsewhere and not open minded.

NIKON make equally good lenses but there camera bodies are better then canon yet are not market leaders.

Im no sheep and can see the pros and cons on anything based on my needs and i see canon lacking and making bizzare choices and i am not the only one who feels that way.

Apparently people who dislike canon's way of doing things are keyboard warriors without a clue

 

[Ste_S]

I wonder what the landscape would look like if Nikon hadn't botched the 1 series launch. Either by appealing to a market segment that wasn't there / hobbling the system to not encroach on DX camera sales / misjudging the initial pricing.

 

[simonbarker]

My starting point is above. Canon know the market better than anyone.

They do but that doesn't mean they can't be making mistakes, companies do it all the time.

I just don't believe their recent slew of cameras were the best they could have done, I don't expect them to bankrupt the company chasing perfection but their latest cameras have been a little... underwhelming and yes before I'm crucified for that comment they're still good cameras but so is a 10 year old 5D2.

It's the main reason I didn't wait for Canon, I don't have faith that they'll deliver the best product they can but I'd be more than happy to be wrong when they do launch.

 

[Eloise]

I wonder what the landscape would look like if Nikon hadn't botched the 1 series launch. Either by appealing to a market segment that wasn't there / hobbling the system to not encroach on DX camera sales / misjudging the initial pricing.

Nikon also got hampered (after the initial launch) when their sensor "partner" was bought up and the new owner moved away from larger sensors. I suspect part of the problem was also that people just couldn't see past the 1" sensor and Nikon's lack of marketing skills.

Hopefully (yeah right) Nikon might have learned.

I would personally still be interested in an updated Nikon 1 range to go along with full frame mirrorless.

 

[woof woof]

IMO people are sheep in general. They follow whatever is the trend or the most talked about thing. Not necessarily the best thing so imo, just like apple, they are number one because of people refuse to look elsewhere and not open minded.

NIKON make equally good lenses but there camera bodies are better then canon yet are not market leaders.

Im no sheep and can see the pros and cons on anything based on my needs and i see canon lacking and making bizzare choices and i am not the only one who feels that way.

Apparently people who dislike canon's way of doing things are keyboard warriors without a clue

Yup.

There are many examples in many sectors of products being the market leaders not in quality, reliability or usability but in sales and brand image.

I like to buy British if possible to keep people here in a job but in camera gear that very probably isn't an option so why should I care if the stuff is made in one factory in China, Japan, Thailand or wherever or another? I don't care and I don't care what the badge is on the front either but the reality is that many do and as has been said many times if Canon or Nikon get mirrorless anywhere near right it'll sell by the boatload no matter how much better the Sony A7v is at the time, maybe not to people on internet forums who may still buy a Sony or a Fuji in dwindling numbers but to the wider market.

 

[Riz_Guru]

<< Apple sheep beeeeh beeeeeh.
Looking for my next Apple GAS fix

 

[StewartR]

Can't believe I spent 10 mins scanning this thread, I was just as well informed from reading the thread title.

Indeed. I did warn you, right there in the opening post:

It's hard to disentangle the hard facts provided by Nikon from the rumours and expectations added by third parties, so I'll leave you to do that. The only solid fact seems to be that Nikon definitely have something in the pipeline.

 

[Phil V]

They do but that doesn't mean they can't be making mistakes, companies do it all the time.

I just don't believe their recent slew of cameras were the best they could have done, I don't expect them to bankrupt the company chasing perfection but their latest cameras have been a little... underwhelming and yes before I'm crucified for that comment they're still good cameras but so is a 10 year old 5D2.

I think they do produce the best they can. There’s no reason not to!
They’re seriously behind Sony in DR and high ISO performance, which skews how people view them.
Seriously only an idiot would believe that Canon could outdo Sony but choose not to. But the internet is great at creating stories to feed idiots.
As for mistakes, canon have treated mirrorless as a product ‘photographers’ had no interest in, but I’d guess that changed a couple of years ago and now they’re playing catch-up.
It’ll be interesting to see how that pans out.

OTOH do you think Sony could make a better job of their touchscreens than Canon but choose not to? Or their AF motors?

Along with the marketing, there’s some challenging technology.

 

[Pound Coin]

IMO people are sheep in general. They follow whatever is the trend or the most talked about thing. Not necessarily the best thing so imo, just like apple, they are number one because of people refuse to look elsewhere and not open minded.

This is a bit of disingenuous nonsense.

Whilst Apple may not have been the absolute instigator of ideas they have been leaders, taking a concept and creating/massively growing a market. iMac all in one. iPod. iPad. iPhone. Slim lightweight stylish laptops. No floppy. no DVD drive. etc.

You may not like them, but best not call people sheep etc.

 

[jonneymendoza]

Not imo.

My opinion is many are sheep's to whatever brand or trend Is hot at the moment.

Apple did some stuff great but others copied from other lesser brands that because they diddnt have an apple logo in front. No one batted an eye lid.

Same could be said for Sony ff mirrorless. General public don't care as it doesn't have a canon badge but Mark my words as soon as canon release a mirrorless ff body with probably half the spec of the current a7mk3 it's gunna be hailed as a game changer.

 

[Eloise]

They’re seriously behind Sony in DR and high ISO performance, which skews how people view them.

Seriously behind Phil? Surely you mean "Canon are marginally behind Sony in DR and high ISO when measured in test conditions but which in real usage makes very little (note I didn't say no) difference".

 

[jonneymendoza]

Seriously behind Phil? Surely you mean "Canon are marginally behind Sony in DR and high ISO when measured in test conditions but which in real usage makes very little (note I didn't say no) difference".

The 6d2 is shocking behind the Sony but the 5d4 is great!

 

[Eloise]

My opinion is many are sheep's to whatever brand or trend Is hot at the moment.

Then why are they still buying Apple? Incase you haven't noticed Apple are getting hammered (hyperbole on purpose) in market share and in reviews.

Apple did some stuff great but others copied from other lesser brands that because they diddnt have an apple logo in front. No one batted an eye lid.

You're talking about technology for technologies sake vs what Apple do which is use technology to implement ideas. Like what use was NFC on all the phones that came before Apple launched Apple Pay?

Same could be said for Sony ff mirrorless. General public don't care as it doesn't have a canon badge but Mark my words as soon as canon release a mirrorless ff body with probably half the spec of the current a7mk3 it's gunna be hailed as a game changer.

General public perhaps - though many people in the past have bought Sony devices on the back of the badge rather than because they were the best; so Sony can hardly complain that people are sticking with Canon on the back of the badge rather than technology. But we're not talking about general public are we - enthusiasts and professionals (two categories which sums up the vast majority of people here)
have been aware of Sony and the vaunted superiority of mirrorless cameras for the past half a decade or so. Many CHOOSE to stick with dSLR for a variety of reasons - all of them good and very few reasons having anything to do with being a sheep!

 

[simonbarker]

I think they do produce the best they can. There’s no reason not to!

There's plenty of reasons not to, the most obvious that springs to my mind is profit, followed by not having one product line stepping on the toes of another.

Seriously only an idiot would believe that Canon could outdo Sony but choose not to. But the internet is great at creating stories to feed idiots.

Why? Canon could bring out a mirrorless that's inferior to Sony's and that would be enough thanks to their market position, equally so if they can put out a product that requires less work/expense then that increases the amount of profit and that has to be a serious consideration for any business.

I don't hold it against Canon for doing this, it's perfectly sound business sense but it's incentive for me not to use their system (within reason).

As for mistakes, canon have treated mirrorless as a product ‘photographers’ had no interest in, but I’d guess that changed a couple of years ago and now they’re playing catch-up.
It’ll be interesting to see how that pans out.

They could have been right in this regard, I'd say the A7 range is on par with other DSLR's now but there's still rough edges, going back a few years it's entirely possible Canon saw no point putting out a product which would have been outright inferior compared to their existing ranges but that allows companies that have been making mirrorless cameras an advantage in that the product is reasonably polished and practical at this stage.

As the thread explained earlier this is no small change thanks to what this does to their lenses, so I don't critisize them for not having a mirrorless yet but I do wonder how long it can continue.

OTOH do you think Sony could make a better job of their touchscreens than Canon but choose not to? Or their AF motors?

Let's not talk about Sony touchscreens... I assume the person responsible fell off a cliff but it's a bad omission whatever the cause. I'm assuming it's considered a low priority thing as it can be fixed in software but yes definitely they could and should have done better.

What's wrong with their AF motors?

 

[HoppyUK]

Seriously behind Phil? Surely you mean "Canon are marginally behind Sony in DR and high ISO when measured in test conditions but which in real usage makes very little (note I didn't say no) difference".

Agree. All manufacturers are in the business of selling cameras and making money, and Canon has done that better than any other for decades. Canon currently sells more cameras than all the others put together. WE may lust after more dynamic range, higher ISO, more pixels etc etc, but we've had more than enough of all these things for some time now and most buyers are more pragmatic.

If Canikon finally put all their weight behind mirrorless in the coming year, I think their timing will be just right. IMHO, it's only since Sony came out with the A9 and A7iii that mirrorless came of age with real benefits and no serious drawbacks. If Canikon can match that, they will be very successful, not just because of the brand label, but because these new cameras will come, in effect, with a) a free set of our favourite lenses, and b) a user-interface that's familiar and comfortable. We'll feel right at home straight away.

 

[MatBin]

Agree. All manufacturers are in the business of selling cameras and making money, and Canon has done that better than any other for decades. Canon currently sells more cameras than all the others put together. WE may lust after more dynamic range, higher ISO, more pixels etc etc, but we've had more than enough of all these things for some time now and most buyers are more pragmatic.

If Canikon finally put all their weight behind mirrorless in the coming year, I think their timing will be just right. IMHO, it's only since Sony came out with the A9 and A7iii that mirrorless came of age with real benefits. If Canikon can match that, they will be very successful, not because of the brand label, but because these new cameras will come, in effect, with a) a free set of our favourite lenses, and b) a user-interface that's familiar and comfortable. We'll feel right at home straight away.

Oh do stop talking sense Hoppy
Matt

 

[HoppyUK]

Oh do stop talking sense Hoppy
Matt

Sorry

 

[Phil V]

There's plenty of reasons not to, the most obvious that springs to my mind is profit, followed by not having one product line stepping on the toes of another.

Surely ‘profit’ comes along with viable product. And ‘stepping on the toes’ is just idiotspeak for market segmentation.

So we agree. they’re building the best cameras they can (within reason to a price that matches their investment to returns).

Why? Canon could bring out a mirrorless that's inferior to Sony's and that would be enough thanks to their market position, equally so if they can put out a product that requires less work/expense then that increases the amount of profit and that has to be a serious consideration for any business.

I don't hold it against Canon for doing this, it's perfectly sound business sense but it's incentive for me not to use their system (within reason).

But your only defense of your opinion is that you wouldn’t blame them?
When I set out to shoot a wedding, I go to do the best I can. Whilst we all do that, it’s true some will be better than others. But no one goes out to work with a stated aim of being mediocre.

They could have been right in this regard, I'd say the A7 range is on par with other DSLR's now but there's still rough edges, going back a few years it's entirely possible Canon saw no point putting out a product which would have been outright inferior compared to their existing ranges but that allows companies that have been making mirrorless cameras an advantage in that the product is reasonably polished and practical at this stage.

As the thread explained earlier this is no small change thanks to what this does to their lenses, so I don't critisize them for not having a mirrorless yet but I do wonder how long it can continue.

Again, they misjudged the market (as did Nikon) partly because they’re risk averse.
Both companies were also late with FF DSLR’s. but in the long run, it cost them very little. I’d guess it’ll be the same again.

The point about Sony’s touchscreen tech was to prove that everyone is developing different tech at different rates.
Canon beat everyone with dual pixel AF, others are catching up (or have caught up). It’s a moving feast. The day lady hasn’t started warming up.

 

[simonbarker]

Surely ‘profit’ comes along with viable product. And ‘stepping on the toes’ is just idiotspeak for market segmentation.

No, that affects the number of sales not how profitable each sale is. Insulting me won't change the validity of my point either.

So we agree. they’re building the best cameras they can (within reason to a price that matches their investment to returns).

No for goodness sake, your answer basically excuses whatever decisions Canon makes because they're doing the best they can. If you leave any company alone in a market it controls you get them slowing things down, not making the very best products they can, Intel is a good example of this, Canon is too.

But your only defense of your opinion is that you wouldn’t blame them?

That's not a defense of my opinion, it's a statement of the obvious.

When I set out to shoot a wedding, I go to do the best I can. Whilst we all do that, it’s true some will be better than others. But no one goes out to work with a stated aim of being mediocre.

I agree but this has absolutely nothing to do with large camera companies and how they're run.

Again, they misjudged the market (as did Nikon) partly because they’re risk averse.
Both companies were also late with FF DSLR’s. but in the long run, it cost them very little. I’d guess it’ll be the same again.

As I pointed out, they don't have to make a better product than Sony, being close enough and their market position is enough for them to succeed. I want them to do better because that'll benefit me but I'm under no illusion they're in trouble.

The point about Sony’s touchscreen tech was to prove that everyone is developing different tech at different rates.
Canon beat everyone with dual pixel AF, others are catching up (or have caught up). It’s a moving feast. The day lady hasn’t started warming up.

Yeah I figured that was your point about the touchscreen but the missing feature is a failure, they already have the know how to implement it properly but for whatever reason they didn't finish off the UI control and it isn't good enough. Sony shouldn't get a free pass because 'they're building the best cameras they can'.

Would that especially help Sony? I don't see anyone crying out for DP AF on Sony A7 (not that I pay much attention to video).

 

[HoppyUK]

<snip>your answer basically excuses whatever decisions Canon makes because they're doing the best they can. If you leave any company alone in a market it controls you get them slowing things down, not making the very best products they can, Intel is a good example of this, Canon is too.<snip>

This is true. Dominant market leaders always abuse their position, because that's human nature and if they don't do it voluntarily their share holders will force it anyway. I used to see this all the time at my old company (Emap - magazines publishing) despite our fine mission statement that talked about customer focus and all those other lies. No customers ever asked for price rises but they always got them ahead of inflation with reductions in production quality at the same time. But we dressed it up very well and were extremely successful. For one publication under my remit, the company budget model had to be redrafted to accommodate double-digit mi££ions.

Canon has certainly been guilty of only doing 'just enough' on occasion and leaving off low cost features in order to favour more expensive models. Only in minor areas, but it speaks volumes about what is the real driver (profit) and who the real customers are (share holders). Heck, would mirrorless even exist if it had been left up to the Canikon duopoly? Hand on heart, I doubt it. We have other manufacturers to thank for that, and Sony in particular at the top end.

My hope though, is that Canikon will need to at least match Sony, as a matter of pride to prove they have the technology, and that the last few years of treading water have been worth it. They will probably hold back a bit with their first full-frame venture, testing the water, but they'll need to hit the bulleye with the follow-up to stop me buying a Sony A7 Mk5.

 

[RedRobin]

Does it work perfectly on the telephoto primes?

....Yes the Canon M Adapter does work perfectly regarding image quality for Canon L telephoto lenses < I have mounted and shot with Canon 100mm, 100-400mm, 500mm L lenses on the Canon M5 mirrorless APSC body.

However, the physical balance between a small mirrorless camera body and lenses bigger than 100mm is horrific in my opinion! As a result I hardly use my M5 body now.

Whether we are discussing Nikon or Canon FF mirrorless bodies, I think the same applies.

 

[HoppyUK]

....Yes the Canon M Adapter does work perfectly regarding image quality for Canon L telephoto lenses < I have mounted and shot with Canon 100mm, 100-400mm, 500mm L lenses on the Canon M5 mirrorless APSC body.

However, the physical balance between a small mirrorless camera body and lenses bigger than 100mm is horrific in my opinion! As a result I hardly use my M5 body now.

Whether we are discussing Nikon or Canon FF mirrorless bodies, I think the same applies.

Sure, but isn't that a size thing rather than weight?

Mirrorless offers the opportunity for both a small camera for walkabout with say a slim pancake prime, or attach a nice fat grip (with or without battery pack) for more workhorse tasks. While reducing weight is very difficult, adding a bit more is easy for better balance on a gimbal and it's very effective at reducing shutter-shock vibration too - just bolt a solid metal bar to the tripod socket.

 

[jonneymendoza]

Not talking about iq but af performance and reliability. Could you use it in a professional environment without fail?

 

[jonneymendoza]

Sure, but isn't that a size thing rather that weight?

Mirrorless offers the opportunity for both a small camera for walkabout with say a slim pancake prime, or attach a nice fat grip (with or without battery pack) for more workhorse tasks. Extra weight is also easy if you want it, and very effective at reducing shutter-shock vibration - just bolt a solid metal bar to the tripod socket.

Or a grip on the body

 

[BigBudgie]

Latest rumour updates https://nikonrumors.com/2018/05/04/nikon-mirrorless-camera-rumors-the-most-likely-scenario.aspx/

Maybe not so long to wait after all.

 

[RedRobin]

Sure, but isn't that a size thing rather than weight?

Mirrorless offers the opportunity for both a small camera for walkabout with say a slim pancake prime, or attach a nice fat grip (with or without battery pack) for more workhorse tasks. While reducing weight is very difficult, adding a bit more is easy for better balance on a gimbal and it's very effective at reducing shutter-shock vibration too - just bolt a solid metal bar to the tripod socket.

....It's a size and weight thing.

I don't think Canon make a grip for the M5, or do they?

As I use an EF Adapter and only use Canon L lenses, I have a long Wimberley Arca-Swiss profile plate attached to the Adapter but the feel is still out of balance.

The bottom line is that I simply find a small sized camera far too uncomfortable physically and am not alone in that view. Therefore I really hope that mirrorless full-frame bodies from either Nikon or Canon will have both decent size and weight.

I agree that mirrorless potentially offers a small walkabout camera but is that the same market as for the full-frame D-SLR? - I suggest not.

It all goes to further prove that there is no such thing as the perfect camera!

 

[Phil V]

It all goes to further prove that there is no such thing as the perfect camera!

This^
I want a mirrorless body that’s small and well laid out x pro with FF. no bigger than a 6d.

The M5 is too much of a tiny DSLR and the M6 is a compact with interchangeable lenses.

And please some lenses, anything less than 100mm should be available native. Once beyond that, adding an adapter is no real hardship.

Frankly lenses for the M5 will do for now.

Nowt wrong with Robins needs either, we have to acknowledge we’re all looking for different things. And Canikon are just trying to please the biggest number of us for the smallest outlay.

 

[Phil V]

Latest rumour updates https://nikonrumors.com/2018/05/04/nikon-mirrorless-camera-rumors-the-most-likely-scenario.aspx/

Maybe not so long to wait after all.

I’ve no idea when Nikon normally launch, but Canon often aim for Photokina

 

[Deleted member 49428]

I can't help but to think about the RF SLR debates. Some, not all but some of the arguments are pretty alike. But does These actually matter if more people get access to cameras slr of mirrorless that will fill their needs. Do we need the " this is to small to handle long lenses" when it's possible to get some that either are the right size or be fitted with grip to make it

 

[HoppyUK]

....It's a size and weight thing.

I don't think Canon make a grip for the M5, or do they?

As I use an EF Adapter and only use Canon L lenses, I have a long Wimberley Arca-Swiss profile plate attached to the Adapter but the feel is still out of balance.

The bottom line is that I simply find a small sized camera far too uncomfortable physically and am not alone in that view. Therefore I really hope that mirrorless full-frame bodies from either Nikon or Canon will have both decent size and weight.

I agree that mirrorless potentially offers a small walkabout camera but is that the same market as for the full-frame D-SLR? - I suggest not.

It all goes to further prove that there is no such thing as the perfect camera!

Agree totally.

My point is it's easy to make a small camera bigger and heavier, eg this EOS-M grip for £12 with a weight bolted underneath http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/3817...id=229508&lgeo=1&item=381787660891&rmvSB=true

Edit: and as long as cameras still have a mechanical shutter (not for long I hope) then there will be real benefits to the extra weight killing shutter-shock vibration.

 

[woof woof]

If the Sony A7 wasn't small I almost certainly wouldn't have bought it.

I love having a small camera and lens combination and at the moment my preferred lens is very often 35mm or 50mm. I have the Sony 35mm f2.8 and Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 and with either fitted the camera and lens fit in the same small bag my Panasonic MFT GX80 and 17mm fit in. The Sony 55mm f1.8 is a bit bigger so when I use that I use a slightly larger bag but the A7 and 55mm f1.8 is still dwarfed by a DSLR and 50mm.

It's great for me that I can have a camera and lens combination that's so small and yet capable of very good image quality and really the A7 isn't small it's just about the size of the 35mm SLR's I had years ago. I do hope that small form FF mirrorless cameras remain a choice, just the size my SLR's used to be. Not everyone wants a DSLR sized package.

 

[jj_glos]

This is true. Dominant market leaders always abuse their position, because that's human nature and if they don't do it voluntarily their share holders will force it anyway. I used to see this all the time at my old company (Emap - magazines publishing) despite our fine mission statement that talked about customer focus and all those other lies. No customers ever asked for price rises but they always got them ahead of inflation with reductions in production quality at the same time. But we dressed it up very well and were extremely successful. For one publication under my remit, the company budget model had to be redrafted to accommodate double-digit mi££ions.

Canon has certainly been guilty of only doing 'just enough' on occasion and leaving off low cost features in order to favour more expensive models. Only in minor areas, but it speaks volumes about what is the real driver (profit) and who the real customers are (share holders). Heck, would mirrorless even exist if it had been left up to the Canikon duopoly? Hand on heart, I doubt it. We have other manufacturers to thank for that, and Sony in particular at the top end.

My hope though, is that Canikon will need to at least match Sony, as a matter of pride to prove they have the technology, and that the last few years of treading water have been worth it. They will probably hold back a bit with their first full-frame venture, testing the water, but they'll need to hit the bulleye with the follow-up to stop me buying a Sony A7 Mk5.

It doesn't help matters when Canon are outselling Sony in the mirrorless sector in their home region of Japan. I think Olympus are number one followed by Canon then Sony.

I want Canikon to bring out a decent FF mirrorless that supports their existing lens family well as it's a much cheaper proposition to me. As Sony is still quite niche they command a higher price for their lenses and there isn't much of a second hand market at all (unless you want a 35mm f2.8!). Sigma releasing FE mount is quite interesting, once they are released a big drop in prices would be nice

 

[JJ!]

Hate the A7 gen 4 size. Tried using it again with the 70-200 then back to the D750. Sony is just damn right uncomfortable.

My tripod plate over hangs the edges, the lens release button is in a daft place, the whole thing just feels odd and pretty horrible. But if it suits your hands and you find it comfortable (or tell yourself over and over that it is) then that’s great, I’m happy for you. But I want something that I can hold comfortably in my hand.

People want these small cameras but I bet just as many people if not bit more want something just that bit bigger!