Canon: DSLR's will live on...except the flagship 1DX series

If I might chime in, re Full Time Manual focus.

I believe the reason manufacturers specify full time manual focusing using a term or acronym to identify it, is because the earliest auto-focus lenses could not be used to manual focus unless you turned auto-focus off completely. In an action oriented situation, this might be detrimental and cause you to lose a shot. (particularly in the early days when AF was not nearly as capable as it is today)

Higher cost later generations of some lenses allowed you to override auto focus using the manual focus ring at any time, without the need to switch from auto focus to manual on the lens. This was a feature that was almost instantly asked for with AF lenses, and a feature that is more complicated and expansive to implement than the type where you had to switch it off.

Today, FTM is the norm for most all Canon lenses, in fact has been for a long time. Very few EF lenses do not offer this feature, but in the grand scheme of things there are still plenty of lenses out there that don't. Back in the mid 2000s MOST 3rd party lenses did not. Even companies like SIGMA (who was the first 3rd party to master a USM autofocus motor alternative) only installed that AF motor in their highest end EX lenses. All others used slow noisy AF motors, and many could not be manually focused while Af was switched on at the lens. Other manufactures like Tamron, Kenko, Tokina, did not have a USM equivalent at all, and the vast majority if not all of their lenses needed to be switched "manual" to allow manual.

Personally Ive not had reason to look at low end 3rd party lenses in a long time, so I may not be up to date here, but it would not surprise me at all of many of the hyper-zooms and bargains still lack an FTM ability.

It's a feature I use all the time, and could easily understand that it would seem like a normal experience, especially for a Canon shooter who's lenses have included it for so long. But ti's a feature none the less, and therefore I sympathize with Choderboy that it is not just "manual focus". It is the ability to override auto focus using the manual focus ring at any time.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19379160
If I might chime in, re Full Time Manual focus.

I believe the reason manufacturers specify full time manual focusing using a term or acronym to identify it, is because the earliest auto-focus lenses could not be used to manual focus unless you turned auto-focus off completely. In an action oriented situation, this might be detrimental and cause you to lose a shot. (particularly in the early days when AF was not nearly as capable as it is today)

I have and still use an old 70-300IS lens. Optically it is a great lens but it also does not have FTM and I keep forgetting to switch off AF. It reminds you rather quickly as the focus ring is really tight but it is a pain.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19379160
If I might chime in, re Full Time Manual focus.

I believe the reason manufacturers specify full time manual focusing using a term or acronym to identify it, is because the earliest auto-focus lenses could not be used to manual focus unless you turned auto-focus off completely. In an action oriented situation, this might be detrimental and cause you to lose a shot. (particularly in the early days when AF was not nearly as capable as it is today)

Higher cost later generations of some lenses allowed you to override auto focus using the manual focus ring at any time, without the need to switch from auto focus to manual on the lens. This was a feature that was almost instantly asked for with AF lenses, and a feature that is more complicated and expansive to implement than the type where you had to switch it off.

Today, FTM is the norm for most all Canon lenses, in fact has been for a long time. Very few EF lenses do not offer this feature, but in the grand scheme of things there are still plenty of lenses out there that don't. Back in the mid 2000s MOST 3rd party lenses did not. Even companies like SIGMA (who was the first 3rd party to master a USM autofocus motor alternative) only installed that AF motor in their highest end EX lenses. All others used slow noisy AF motors, and many could not be manually focused while Af was switched on at the lens. Other manufactures like Tamron, Kenko, Tokina, did not have a USM equivalent at all, and the vast majority if not all of their lenses needed to be switched "manual" to allow manual.

Personally Ive not had reason to look at low end 3rd party lenses in a long time, so I may not be up to date here, but it would not surprise me at all of many of the hyper-zooms and bargains still lack an FTM ability.

It's a feature I use all the time, and could easily understand that it would seem like a normal experience, especially for a Canon shooter who's lenses have included it for so long. But ti's a feature none the less, and therefore I sympathize with Choderboy that it is not just "manual focus". It is the ability to override auto focus using the manual focus ring at any time.

Thanks for the nice explanation, and the history!

I wish primes had a full-time autofocus option. On my 400 5.6 I had to damp down the focus ring with wristbands. (Stylish Canon-L-red, thin-red-line wristbands I might add.) Kept hitting the focus ring by accident. Autofocus has to start over. It's FTM override whether I want it or not.

I think this post by Perry Ge, on POTN in 2009 is correct:
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=13049354
Sigma HSM lenses, all canon ring USM lenses (with some qualifiers on the 85L), but none of the micro-USM lenses except the 50 1.4 (so e.g. 70-300 IS USM doesn't have FTM)

Since then STM (Stepper Motor) lenses have been released and I think they do have FTM, eg 50 1.8 STM definitely does.

EF 50 1.8 II is the only Canon lens I have owned that did not have FTM.

Canon have a list, but there are errors and confusing info.

Yeah, SIGMA was the runaway 3rd party with HSM (HyperSonic focus Motors) for a long time before Tamron finally caught up with (and arguably surpassed) SIGMA AF technology. As such SIGMA was for many years the only 3rd party i would own, as I felt I needed the fast AF and FTM for my preferred subject matter.

drsilver wrote in post #19379332
I wish primes had a full-time autofocus option. On my 400 5.6 I had to damp down the focus ring with wristbands. (Stylish Canon-L-red, thin-red-line wristbands I might add.) Kept hitting the focus ring by accident. Autofocus has to start over. It's FTM override whether I want it or not.

I don't recall that being an issue specifically with that lens, but I've certainly run into the old focus ring bump often enough all told. Another reason I like to keep my thumb mashing the [AF-ON] button

The problem with the 400 5.6 is that half the barrel is focus ring. It's hard to hold without touching it. Wristbands solved the problem.

Asked Canon Canada Ambassador couple of days ago. Still using 5D MK IV.
Where is difference between forums gear gurus and real pros , which Canon is aware of.

You need more than one data point to make a statistic to try to prove some point...

Here are 3 other data points, so at this point, 75% of the mentioned Canon Ambassadors use mirrorless. How's that for a new stat, lol?

- Helen Bartlett, Canon ambassador uses the R.
- Peter McKinnon, ditto, uses the R5.
- IRENE RUDNYK, ditto, uses the R5.

The list can go on from here, these are just a few.

It's quite funny, DSLRs are obviously on their way out, so why try to "fight" against it? Shoot whatever you want, but stop trying to discredit the entire market segment of mirrorless, it is fruitless and silly.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19379896
You need more than one data point to make a statistic to try to prove some point...

Here are 3 other data points, so at this point, 75% of the mentioned Canon Ambassadors use mirrorless. How's that for a new stat, lol?

- Helen Bartlett, Canon ambassador uses the R.
- Peter McKinnon, ditto, uses the R5.
- IRENE RUDNYK, ditto, uses the R5.

The list can go on from here, these are just a few.

It's quite funny, DSLRs are obviously on their way out, so why try to "fight" against it? Shoot whatever you want, but stop trying to discredit the entire market segment of mirrorless, it is fruitless and silly.

Pulleeeese- that is some of the biggest load of crapola you have ever written

These Canon ambassadors shoot Mirrorless cameras because canon gives them the cameras......and they write rave reviews convincing the semi pro and pro markets that their photography results will improve expeditiously when they switch to a mirrorless system.......and the sheeps all rush out and buy a mirrorless camera

Nothing more and nothing less.......Its all about marketing.

Geez, Mike. What happened to you? When the R5 and R6 came out, you were all over them. Only question was which one to get. Then you saw my high ISO test shots of a gull and you were raving about the results. It was settled, you said, you would get the R6.

After that I saw you here and there on the board, in doubt again and praising your 1DXII. And now I find you here, in a sad thread with a few sad people digging their heels in the sand because they refuse to move on to the new system, trying hard to convince everyone and probably mostly themselves that their DSLR’s are totally superior.

The thing is, it’s fine with us. Nobody tells you to switch to mirrorless. Nobody cares. So stop the ranting already and go out, shoot with your 1DXII and be happy.

Some folks might have dug heels in, about switching from dSLR to mirrorless. But there are many/most of us who would LIKE to make a switch, but

• we have NOT YET found sufficient reason to actually make the change,
  
• because the beneficial features in today's mirrorless are not yet 'worth it' to make the investment of $$$ to buy a brand new mirrorless camera
  
• which is felt to be enough of an improvement for each of us, over what we currently own.
  

Wilt wrote in post #19380355
Some folks might have dug heels in, about switching from dSLR to mirrorless. But there are many/most of us who would LIKE to make a switch, but

• we have NOT YET found sufficient reason to actually make the change,
  
• because the beneficial features in today's mirrorless are not yet 'worth it' to make the investment of $$$ to buy a brand new mirrorless camera
  
• which is felt to be enough of an improvement over what we currently own.
  

The endless 'spend another few thousand dollars' to buy the newest dSLR every few years is not something that folks again are willing to repeat with mirrorless evolution. Mirrorless may have attained the same 'evolution not revolution' progression that kept SLR users from completely changing the body every few years, it was once a decade when the progression was sufficiently large to warrant the expense.

I fully understand the reasons for not wanting to make the switch to mirrorless, Wilt. So this is not about the choice. It’s about the incessant whining and ranting about it.

Mike already made it clear that his evaluation put him into the 'not yet worth it for me' group,

".and the 1Dx series camera Never fail to lock in low light, especially if subjects move and your in servo....Mirrorless with my limited experience does not do as well...This is my last summer shooting professionally as I am retiring. I will be a part time wildlife hobbiest .....I have no need to reinvest in mirrorless when the top of the line DSLR's are so good. I am interested in this rumored R7 if it comes for fruition....The R3 is just too expensive for me to get into when I have so many other interests for my retirement years. "

I am not see a rant from him, it seems that he is simply not buying the 'everyone, including the big name pros, is making the switch' perspective that some are voicing...Canon-sponsored equipment is not a good reflection of a general shift in the pro community, he is right on that point.
And his expressed point of view above seems to fall very much in line with my own view of the current situation.