Canon Mirrorless in 2012?

[wickidwombat]

This is the picture you all wanted to see 

hahahahaha that is hillarious it makes the lens look enormous

[briansquibb]

This is the picture you all wanted to see 

hahahahaha that is hillarious it makes the lens look enormous

There is film in it and if the sun comes out I will run the roll through it - makes me giggle at the thought of an APS camera with a 400 f/2.8 + 1.4 ...... 

[alipaulphotography]

That is hilarious! But I would kill for a digital version! How the hell does the mirror even fit?!

[Rocky]

That is hilarious! But I would kill for a digital version! How the hell does the mirror even fit?!

If you look at the camera closely, the mirror box is the "round tube" between the lens and the flat part of the body. It is an APS camera. therefore a smaller mirror is used.

[briansquibb]

This is the picture you all wanted to see 

First picture is from the EOS IX with the 400/f2.8 + 1.4 @5.6, kodak APS asa 200
Second picture is from the same place using the 1Ds3, iso 800. f/5.6

[moreorless]

That's the thing. A DSLR, by definition, cannot have an electronic viewfinder at the same time as an optical one. It may have a second, smaller sensor for the EVF component, but we shall not get into that. Of course, OVFs have electronic parts embedded, but it is not a preview of what the sensor is seeing, because of the mirror. It is all about that mirror. Sony has their A65/77, but that lacks an OVF ...

The mirror could be flipped up when the EVF is in use though, obviously that means no contrast detect AF but then again the same would be true for any mirrorless camera.

We talk about improved EVF's but really there never going to provide the same thing as an OVF just as even the largest most hi tech TV is still obviously a TV.

[kapanak]

That's the thing. A DSLR, by definition, cannot have an electronic viewfinder at the same time as an optical one. It may have a second, smaller sensor for the EVF component, but we shall not get into that. Of course, OVFs have electronic parts embedded, but it is not a preview of what the sensor is seeing, because of the mirror. It is all about that mirror. Sony has their A65/77, but that lacks an OVF ...

The mirror could be flipped up when the EVF is in use though, obviously that means no contrast detect AF but then again the same would be true for any mirrorless camera.

We talk about improved EVF's but really there never going to provide the same thing as an OVF just as even the largest most hi tech TV is still obviously a TV.

I believe you meant "no phase detect AF", which is what the addition of the AF chip with the mirror offers.
If we think of the mirror as locked for the EVF, the LCD on the back of a DSLR is technically an EVF during Live View. Also, some Mirrorless cameras offer Phase detect by using pixels on the sensor itself dedicated to the job, like the Nikon 1 series.

I still cannot see why people advocate for one side or the other. The two (DSLR and Rangefinder-style) form factors have been around for a very long time, and have co-existed peacefully. No reason to kill one in favour of the other now.

[moreorless]

I believe you meant "no phase detect AF", which is what the addition of the AF chip with the mirror offers.
If we think of the mirror as locked for the EVF, the LCD on the back of a DSLR is technically an EVF during Live View. Also, some Mirrorless cameras offer Phase detect by using pixels on the sensor itself dedicated to the job, like the Nikon 1 series.

I still cannot see why people advocate for one side or the other. The two (DSLR and Rangefinder-style) form factors have been around for a very long time, and have co-existed peacefully. No reason to kill one in favour of the other now.

Yeah sorry phase rather than contrast.

It just seems to me that theres little need to lose weight with DSLR's that are going to be used with a large zoom lens anyway so why give up an OVF when it shouldnt stop you having the advanatges of an EVF aswell.

My guess would be that in the coming years the high end market will be divided between DSLR's based around zooms and rangefinder similar to this new Fuji based around primes.

[Rocky]

We can lose wight on the DSLR by using penta mirror (used in Rebel series) instead of penta prism (used in all XXD and 1Ds). However, we will give up a little bit of brightness in th view finder and potentailly with less relibility.

[elflord]

Yeah sorry phase rather than contrast.

It just seems to me that theres little need to lose weight with DSLR's that are going to be used with a large zoom lens anyway so why give up an OVF when it shouldnt stop you having the advanatges of an EVF aswell.

My guess would be that in the coming years the high end market will be divided between DSLR's based around zooms and rangefinder similar to this new Fuji based around primes.

I think the distinction is more big versus small lenses than zoom versus prime. Wide angle zooms make plenty of sense for mirrorless.

What is less practical are fast telephoto lenses (zoom or prime) -- these simply require a lot of glass because of the absolute size of the aperture. It's much easier to make a small 20mm f/1.7 or even a 45mm f/1.8 than it is a 135mm f/2 or a 70-200mm f/4.

[Fotofanten]

I hope they stray very little from the original Canonet design. A full frame sensor and a fixed 40mm f/1.7 lens would be perfect. Alternately, a 1,5x crop sensor and a 35mm f/1.4 lens. It would be a slightly tighter view, but you not really loose as much freedom with regards to DoF. The viewfinder could be completely from any information for all I care, as long as it is at least as big as on the one on the 5D.