[northcoastgreg]

How do we know that the Sony FF cameras are more profitable than the A6000 and A6300?

Partly because it is generally assumed that Sony's imaging division didn't start making money until they released the A7 and A7r, partly because Sony is paying a lot more attention to their FF system (and the relative neglect of their APS-C line), and partly because it fits the general trend in the mirrorless industry, where higher end cameras make more money (or lose less money) than lower end cameras.

My personal belief is that MILC technology is more likely to be dominant in consumer lines than in pro/semi-pro lines.

Five years ago I would've been inclined to agree with you; but from everything I've seen in recent years, I've become rather skeptical of that view. The fact is, in terms of bang for your buck, APS-C DSLRs system cameras (and here I include lenses and not just cameras) just give you more than m43 or Sony APS-C. And brand name awareness coupled with the ability to put product in the big box scores gives Nikon and Canon huge advantages.

The larger point is that if Canon were to come out with a well designed mirrorless camera along with some high-end lenses comparable to L glass (but much smaller — and no adapters please!), they could seize the number one spot in mirrorless ILC sales from Sony in the matter of a few years. So why don't they do that? The common excuse is that they don't want cannibalize their DSLR business; but that excuse has never made sense to me.

For a long time Pentax Q users have been requesting(whining) a EVF,Canon must be listening to their market.

The trend in mirrorless is heavily biased toward EVF cameras, and that's because cameras without EVFs don't sell as well and often lose a lot money. Olympus and Sony lost loads of money with their Pens and Nex 3 and 5's.

vI don't see any difference from the fact that BIG K mount lenses are(in some circumstances) mounted on even smaller Qute cameras.

Some people (mostly mirrorless fanboys?) aren't bothered by putting a big lens on a small camera; but many people are bothered by the awkwardness of such an arrangement, and if the future is large heavy lenses attached to small cameras, that's a very dark future indeed.

This Canon has an AF adapter(U$100ish) that makes every lens that is AF, useable as it was designed.

Given that none of the L lenses were designed to be used on tiny cameras, "useable as it was designed" strikes me as a bit of a stretch. I've used large lenses on a small mirrorless camera and it's not an experience I remember fondly.

[reh321]

Some people (mostly mirrorless fanboys?) aren't bothered by putting a big lens on a small camera; but many people are bothered by the awkwardness of such an arrangement, and if the future is large heavy lenses attached to small cameras, that's a very dark future indeed.

Many people today don't hold a camera "properly" {as we were taught to do it 30+ years ago when I got my first SLR - a Pentax, incidentally}. Partly because of the need to focus, partly because of the ergonomics of the equipment of the day, we were taught to hold the camera with the right hand and support a long lens with the left hand; today, lots of people seem to want an enormous grip on the camera so they can hold the whole thing with the right hand. To me, that is as dumb as the full "zombie" hold. If you hold one with each hand, you have a very stable hold, it is not awkward at all, and it puts less stress on the mount. If you can pack the entire camera body into something more svelte, I see no reason to enlarge it just to provide a "good grip". Yes, I have a K-30, but that is primarily because of the pricing at the time; if there had been a DSLR the size of my Super Program {first camera in my signature}, or if the K-01 had an EVF, and either were priced the same as a K-30, I would have happily bought it instead. I am interested in getting the best system in the most svelte package at the best price. Period.

[Ratcheteer]

Partly because it is generally assumed

assumptions can have disastrous results

I found a site that rates products purely based on clicks PriceSpy - Compare prices and do more with your money! (The product rank on PriceSpy is based on the amount of clicks/product views that the product has recieved. The more clicks, the higher up in rankings.)

the A7's isnt even in the top 20 yet the a6000 is ranked 4th

on the NZ version PriceSpy - Compare prices and do more with your money!

the A7 II is ranked 19th and the A7R II is ranked 20th where the a6300 is ranked 7th

Many people today don't hold a camera "properly" {as we were taught to do it 30+ years ago

camera's 30 years age weren't littered with buttons screens and knobby bits n dials on the backside of the body and most of todays camera;s are 1/3rd the weight

and even if you get rid of the buttons and leave the touch screen, try holding one of these the traditional way

[Rondec]

The IBIS is electronic, not mechanical, if that matters.

I think it probably does -- mechanical works better. I hadn't realized that you could use electronic stabilization for still photography, I thought it was just for video.

[biz-engineer]

The choice of autofocus lenses of the EF-M mount isn't so exciting.

[mecrox]

assumptions can have disastrous results

I found a site that rates products purely based on clicks PriceSpy - Compare prices and do more with your money! (The product rank on PriceSpy is based on the amount of clicks/product views that the product has recieved. The more clicks, the higher up in rankings.)

the A7's isnt even in the top 20 yet the a6000 is ranked 4th

on the NZ version PriceSpy - Compare prices and do more with your money!

the A7 II is ranked 19th and the A7R II is ranked 20th where the a6300 is ranked 7th


camera's 30 years age weren't littered with buttons screens and knobby bits n dials on the backside of the body and most of todays camera;s are 1/3rd the weight

and even if you get rid of the buttons and leave the touch screen, try holding one of these the traditional way

My impression is that PriceSpy tells you who clicked on what but not whether they actually purchased it? Thus the UK version contains what one would expect to find among the most pop cameras but also a couple of what could easily be aspirational items - v. costly FF cameras - which people like to dream about but only buy in very small numbers, relatively. TBH, there were no surprises really. The most pop cams are the sub £500 ones from the three big brands, what one would expect I guess.

A competition that might put photo cat among the pigeons would be giving 100 people a Nikon D3300 with a small kit lens, and then reviewing the results against much, much more expensive cameras. I suspect the results would be surprisingly in favour of not spending all those $$$ on upgrades. It must be one of the world's most pop cameras and I've seen some stunning images taken with it and modest lenses. It looks to be this market that the (alleged) new Canon is after so I doubt it will work if Canon try to price it at funny-money levels.

[reh321]

camera's 30 years age weren't littered with buttons screens and knobby bits n dials on the backside of the body and most of todays camera;s are 1/3rd the weight and even if you get rid of the buttons and leave the touch screen, try holding one of these the traditional way

You need to interpret my comment

Many people today don't hold a camera "properly" {as we were taught to do it 30+ years ago when I got my first SLR - a Pentax, incidentally}.....

in the context of what I was responding to, namely a longish lens on a smallish camera.

Some people (mostly mirrorless fanboys?) aren't bothered by putting a big lens on a small camera; but many people are bothered by the awkwardness of such an arrangement, and if the future is large heavy lenses attached to small cameras, that's a very dark future indeed.

And, yes, even with the various buttons, screens, knobs, and dials, I still hold my K-30 the traditional way when I have a longish lens on it, and returning to the comment I was responding to, if Pentax were to release an MILC version of the K-70, I would happily buy it and be entirely comfortable using any lens I own or could buy with it.

added: in fact, holding a camera with a longish lens the traditional way actually improves the ergonomics, because I end up supporting much of the weight via the lens, so my right hand on the body is actually less likely to accidentally encounter one of those buttons, screens, knobs or dials than it would if I were supporting the entire weight via the body.

---

Last edited by reh321; 09-11-2016 at 10:59 AM. Reason: added comment

[Ratcheteer]

You need to interpret my comment

actually i was using your comment out of context to purposely poke fun at the canon powershot n2
sorry if my failed attempt at humor offended you

[reh321]

actually i was using your comment out of context to purposely poke fun at the canon powershot n2
sorry if my failed attempt at humor offended you

No, I wasn't offended at all, but I was concerned that my point might be lost.

added: I suppose I should have attached a picture of my Q-7 hung on the end of the physically heaviest lens I own - a 300mm Super Takumar. That turned out to be a disastrous combination with respect to Image Quality. In that case I literally did support the entire thing via my left hand, and the only thing my right hand did was to operated the shutter.

[philbaum]

I've just bought my first Canon lens, the EF 85 f1.8 USM for use on a A7rII. Its price of $369 is small compared to Sony's high prices. Focusing is quick and accurate in either AFs or AFc. Tracking function isn't available on my MC-11 adapter but i'm drooling at the possibility of having access to other Canon FF lenses. The lens provides incredibly sharp images at F4 and f5.6, but edges get wonky at f1.8. But i finally figured out i don't need sharp edges for my moody type of twilight pictures wide open.

Its ironic that Canon isn't taking mirrorless advantage of their FF lenses, but several Sony A7X owners are - at least they are writing a lot about them - even have databases of which Canon lenses are the best with the metabones and/or Sigma adapters. Maybe this aps M5 camera is a way of testing their product for a subsequent full frame mirrorless. At this point i don't care. The adapters are good enough now that I'd be fine with either a Sony FF or some hypothetical Canon mirrorless FF model as my single new and future Canon glass will fit either.

[surfar]

Its ironic that Canon isn't taking mirrorless advantage of their FF lenses, but several Sony A7X owners are

Sony shooters can use PLENTY of different brand lenses apart from Canon too.A7s/r ii and A6300 has the Techart Pro adapter that will use lots of different mounts.For a little over the cost of the 85mm, you can get a lot of old glass functioning pretty well.


I've read of some Sony shooters who don't own a Sony lens!

[Fogel70]

I think it probably does -- mechanical works better. I hadn't realized that you could use electronic stabilization for still photography, I thought it was just for video.

Electronic stabilization usually works by moving a crop in captured images, so it only works for video.
Electronic Image Stabilization | InvenSense

But the leaked specs also mention blur correction, so it might have built in software to remove blur from captured images.
Maybe something like this. SmartDeblur - Fix Blurry, Defocused or Shake Cam Photos

But it could be that I'm lost in translation.

[philbaum]

Electronic stabilization usually works by moving a crop in captured images, so it only works for video.
Electronic Image Stabilization | InvenSense

But the leaked specs also mention blur correction, so it might have built in software to remove blur from captured images.
Maybe something like this. SmartDeblur - Fix Blurry, Defocused or Shake Cam Photos

But it could be that I'm lost in translation.

Thanks for the reference to the InvenSense site. I remembered a Steve Huff video comparison, real world testing, here: The Sony A7II Real World Camera Review. My Camera of the Year 2014. – STEVE HUFF PHOTOS
between the A7II and the A7S. This made quite an impression on me when i saw it in 2014. It seems obvious that Sony is either using the Invensense system or something like it.to stabilize its video from these cameras, and also to stabilize the EVF. As stated on the invensense site, their technology helps camera mfr bring their product to market quicker as it is not sensitive to different sensor sizes. Just plug the chip in and one is good to go

Now i'm not sure whether Sony has a mechanical system in their camera or the electronic. If its just a moving crop, then they wouldn't be able to produce a consistent full-size frame.

Wow, that Smart Deblur software is amazing.

[D1N0]

No 4k. Maybe Canon will come with yet a higher specced one. But they don't have enough native lenses.

[surfar]

No 4k

But they don't have enough native lenses

Same as K1!