• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Rumours about Canon mirrorless...


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 17 May 2017 - 11:51 AM

They say that it's coming in September 2018 and will have the EF mount, with same flange distance...

 

I'm curious about that, if it's true. The advantage of the same flange distance is obvious. The disadvantage is size. But we know it's not relevant starting from a certain focal length... and - while I'm personally still giving the size feature a fundamental relevance for my switch - slowly but constantly mirrorless cameras are getting larger and heavier... Perhaps Canon thinks that in 2018 that argument won't be really important, and anyway will not focus on attacking Sony on very small combos (such as with some wide and normal lenses).

 

 

OTOH, it the rumors are true, I suppose Sony should now come out with some long teles. Rumors actually are starting about that stuff...

 


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#2 obican

obican

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:02 PM

Eh, Sony cameras are not really small nor lightweight anymore anyway. With almost any lens, they match conventional DSLR sizes. Fuji are usually much smaller than APS-C DSLR systems with their native lenses though.



#3 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:17 PM

Mirrorless lenses are only smaller when it comes to ultra-wide to wide-angle lenses. All the rest is essentially as big as comparable DSLR lenses of the same format. Mirrorless cameras are smaller, of course.

 

A mirrorless camera with EF mount seems really very stupid. The achievable size advantages would all be gone. The "empty deep hole" serves no purpose. An adapter solution would be "good enough" for keeping EF compatibility really. If they really chose EF for their mirrorless camera it will hurt them on the long term. 

 

Pentax tried to do that with the K-01 if you remember that one. It failed miserably.

 

Also - only STM lenses are aligned for serious use on a mirrorless camera. USM lenses will be a compromise at best in terms of AF performance.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#4 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,425 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:17 PM

I think, keeping the flange distance would be a wise decision. A FF mirrorless is neither light nor small, right from the start they would have the full range of excellent lenses and later they could do simpler or better designs for wide angles.

 

Sigma did the same with theri sd quattro series and it felt pretty good. I just think, the should have placed the tripod socket more towards the mount - Sigma has some really heavy lenses - or, even better and much more elegant, put an Arca type swallow tail under their lesn tube.



#5 obican

obican

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:20 PM

I'd be happy with a short flange mount with a free EF mount adapter for old lenses but as most people are allergic to even the sight of adapters, that won't happen. Best would be an optional adapter with a fixed mirror for maximum performance with old USM lenses.

 

Wait... I just described Sony's LA-EA4 solution that they've pretty much abandoned.

 

I'd also be happy with a EF mount camera with EVF and a fixed mirror. Also known as a Sony A99II.

 

But with Canon mount. That's pretty much the crucial part.



#6 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:28 PM

Have you seen the Metabones EF adapter for Sony ?

If that's all what you want ... much faster than I thought actually.

 

 

So you would have access to two systems with this setup actually. Why would you choose Canon only ? 

 

Ref:

http://www.metabones...ils/MB-EF-E-BT4


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#7 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,131 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 17 May 2017 - 03:18 PM

Metabones adapters are excellent :). Which is why I own 3 (2 of them being Speedboosters :).

 

They allow me, in my case anyway, to use my EF-lenses on my Olympus cameras. Works really very well indeed.

 

As to Canon going to do an EF FF camera body: I think that is how one should see it, if they do indeed. Essentially a mirrorless dslr, and an easy solution too. If they are really considering this, they probably have an interesting solution when it comes to AF. I'd go for it, it it is a high MP solution; by now I prefer EVF over OVF. The camera would likely be smaller than a dslr regardless, as th  pentaprism isn't really needed anymore. It should just be a little fatter in the mount area. I do hope they would consider an adapter, however, like the one available for the M-series of Canon MILCs.

 

Having said all this, I wonder how much of a reality this is going to be, considering the rumours about a new 6D which was supposedly a MILC as well.

 

Kind regards, Wim



#8 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,470 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 17 May 2017 - 03:36 PM

With that attitude, they might as well not bother.



#9 obican

obican

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 07:06 PM

Have you seen the Metabones EF adapter for Sony ?

If that's all what you want ... much faster than I thought actually.

 

 

So you would have access to two systems with this setup actually. Why would you choose Canon only ? 

 

Ref:

http://www.metabones...ils/MB-EF-E-BT4

 

Eh, Metabones is quite impressive but I'm not getting a 2500$ camera to exploit that performance ;) 


  • JoJu likes this

#10 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 17 May 2017 - 07:20 PM

Eh, Metabones is quite impressive but I'm not getting a 2500$ camera to exploit that performance ;)

 

What 2500$ camera?


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#11 obican

obican

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 07:35 PM

What 2500$ camera?

 

Used A7RII where I live. OK maybe 2200$.



#12 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 17 May 2017 - 10:19 PM

My question was related to the fact that the Metabones work with the a6*00's too...


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#13 obican

obican

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 10:51 PM

Yeah but why would I use Canon's designed for FF lenses on an APS-C body, except for sports and wildlife which I never do? Almost none of them make any sense on APS-C.



#14 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 17 May 2017 - 11:34 PM

Eh, Metabones is quite impressive but I'm not getting a 2500$ camera to exploit that performance ;)

 

You think a Canon FF mirrorless camera would be cheaper than Sony ? The M5 doesn't really suggest that ...


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#15 borisbg

borisbg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 444 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 18 May 2017 - 02:23 AM

Like you said it in the other tread the cheap times are over. The whole industry is changing the model now to low unit volume and high price. I wander where exactly will be the divider between good camera and the cheep camera. $1500 or $2000?

Or should I say $1500 is the new cheap.



#16 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 18 May 2017 - 08:48 AM

Yeah but why would I use Canon's designed for FF lenses on an APS-C body, except for sports and wildlife which I never do? Almost none of them make any sense on APS-C.

 

But some Metabones adapters have the "speed boster"...

 

Cheap times are over because of cellullar phones. People wanting cheap stuff for taking photos will use them - I presume also some kind of compact camera will stay on the market. On the other hand, the shrinking market for serious stuff probably requires higher prices for ensuring revenues. Not happy about that, but that's life.


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#17 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,425 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 18 May 2017 - 09:12 AM

Again, "cheap" comes at a price - and a smartphone with decent camera around 300 -1000$ doesn't fit my definition of "cheap". Putting selfies on whatsapp or cat-pictures on twitter is a different clientele - these people would not use clumsy, complicated dedicated cameras for that, it's just a waste of time.



#18 popo

popo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,353 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 18 May 2017 - 09:19 AM

A mirrorless camera with EF mount seems really very stupid. The achievable size advantages would all be gone. The "empty deep hole" serves no purpose. An adapter solution would be "good enough" for keeping EF compatibility really. If they really chose EF for their mirrorless camera it will hurt them on the long term. 

 

Pentax tried to do that with the K-01 if you remember that one. It failed miserably.

I think the last statement should simply be Pentax failed miserably. I don't think that is a useful example to say a DSLR-mount mirrorless would fail, since their actual DSLRs aren't selling either outside the few units to remaining system users.

 

The one feature that would sell me a new body is better AF tracking. DSLRs are far from perfect, and I'm not convinced mirrorless have caught up. Videos I've seen showing how mirrorless is as good as DSLRs are simplistic and not challenging scenarios e.g. predictable, large targets. I think using image data processing techniques could eventually allow mirrorless to surpass DSLRs but we're not there yet. Combined with longer lenses, body size is far from my list of priorities.


  • JoJu likes this

dA Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.


#19 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,656 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 18 May 2017 - 11:03 AM

Any rumor that claims that Canon would be making an FF mirrorless with EF mount, is nonsense.


  • Kunzite likes this

#20 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,580 posts

Posted 21 May 2017 - 07:30 AM

Mirrorless lenses are only smaller when it comes to ultra-wide to wide-angle lenses. All the rest is essentially as big as comparable DSLR lenses of the same format. Mirrorless cameras are smaller, of course.

 

A mirrorless camera with EF mount seems really very stupid. The achievable size advantages would all be gone. The "empty deep hole" serves no purpose. An adapter solution would be "good enough" for keeping EF compatibility really. If they really chose EF for their mirrorless camera it will hurt them on the long term. 

 

Pentax tried to do that with the K-01 if you remember that one. It failed miserably.

 

Also - only STM lenses are aligned for serious use on a mirrorless camera. USM lenses will be a compromise at best in terms of AF performance.

  To apply some of Klaus's thoughts to Nikon,  there is also a whole bunch of Nikonites advocating the F mount for a new Nikon ML camera, Matt Granger is putting out a plea to Nikon as well.

   To me it seems suicidal to go ML with the F mount, my thoughts:

 

    Huge Registration distances mean longer lenses.

 

    No chance of mounting legacy lenses from say Canon/Pentax and a whole bunch of other mounts.

 

    Unnecessary thick bodies, leading to unattractive and boxy designs that look clumsy and inelegant.

    

    Lenses that weren't deigned for ML operate less well.(as per Klaus)

  

    Having an adapter would solve all the problems, F mount lenses could mount with all automations, additional adapters allow mounting of most other forms and makes of glass.

  

   A new mount would give more compact bodies and give the possibility of design from the ground up, giving full performance to ML lenses.

 

   A new mount means the ability to "sell a new range of lenses" and the F mount could continue it's current role serving the DSLR.

 

    It amazes me that so many Nikonites advocate the continued adoption of the F mount for ML purely because they have a vested interest in their F mount lenses on their current DSLRs....

   

.....to the point where they actually "crusade" for it's retention rather than looking forward to Nikon's future with the ML  system...........total shortsightedness IMHO.

 

   The K-01 was such an animal, having a boxy body, it looked like and was nicknamed, "the brick"! Pentax in their wisdom thought that the design could actually achieve a 'premium tariff" because of it's forward thinking.....after it's launch it's price had to drop "massively" in order to clear the shelves.

 

 To be fair to the K-01, it had a lot going for it at the time, but the lack of viewfinder and it's slow clunky AF was the additional nail in it's coffin!  

 

 Pentax had dipped their toe into the water of the Dead Sea!

 

 

   I'm just sure that Nikon will not take the same route..... they must bring out a system that is competitive with Fuji and Sony, both in size lens range and performance...

 

    Nikon has already a huge call to make to catch up with Sony.

 

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

  (As a BTW, my K-01 was sold to friend who drowned it with a burst pipe incident, it spend two days underwater, left at 60° C, it dried out of a week and now functions fine as does it's three lenses and a Samsung GX10.)

 

    Amazing!






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de