Canon 18-45 f/3.5-5.6 Kit Lens for APS-C Mirrorless Patent

[DzPhotography]

Excuse me for coming off ignorant, but what is with all the hype over mirror-less cameras.  I'm serious, what am I missing?  I get the part of less mechanical, maybe higher shutter speeds (maybe not), but what about the loss of a "real" viewfinder?   

Yes, I know mirror-less have been around on and off for years, but I don't understand what market they're aimed at.  Is this to compete with the P&S market, DSLR, market or its own?  It seems to me they targeted towards the hip, got-to-have-the-lastest, the in-thing, trendy market.

Please, someone enlighten me.

See Leica M9...

not a good example imho. Leica M9 is rangefinder, not mirror-less. And also not affordable for most of the people. I don't understand the hype either, maybe it has to do with less bulky design and still interchangeable lenses. But most mirrorless systems do not have fast enough lenses for my use. Maybe the new Fuji X-Pro 1 will resolve that matter, but it's really expensive again...

[c.d.embrey]

Gimme an EF compatible body and a pancake prime for taking on vacation and I'll be a happy happy man.

You'd buy a bulky/over-sized camera like a Pentax K-01 ?  http://pentaximaging.com/hybrid/K-01  A Canon CSC with an EF mount would have to be the size of a T3i without the Penta-mirror  

[kdsand]

Excuse me for coming off ignorant, but what is with all the hype over mirror-less cameras.  I'm serious, what am I missing?  I get the part of less mechanical, maybe higher shutter speeds (maybe not), but what about the loss of a "real" viewfinder?   

Yes, I know mirror-less have been around on and off for years, but I don't understand what market they're aimed at.  Is this to compete with the P&S market, DSLR, market or its own?  It seems to me they targeted towards the hip, got-to-have-the-lastest, the in-thing, trendy market.

Please, someone enlighten me.

See Leica M9...

I've been seeing  some huge improvements regarding digital viewfinder tech.
Now nobody start screaming.....  good old optic will be around awhile yet.
I think a relatively good veiwfinder as accessory would make these much more viable and relevant.

 Well that's me speculating.

[c.d.embrey]

I'm not so sure what the outcome will be but I think Canon seems to have pulled all the stops in miniaturizing the lens design. Typical back focus for EF lenses are in the range of 40-70mm range. But this one apparently has a "0.5mm" back focus. Which means an extremely rear plane ! Typically, a lens with a very close rear plane can be made smaller to cover the same image circle.   

I wonder how this compares to other mirrorless systems or maybe even the Leica M system ?   Anyone has any clues what are the back focus of other mirrorless systems like the NEX  ?

18mm for the NEX. Here's a list of ALL lens mounts  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount

[marekjoz]

Excuse me for coming off ignorant, but what is with all the hype over mirror-less cameras.  I'm serious, what am I missing?  I get the part of less mechanical, maybe higher shutter speeds (maybe not), but what about the loss of a "real" viewfinder?   

Yes, I know mirror-less have been around on and off for years, but I don't understand what market they're aimed at.  Is this to compete with the P&S market, DSLR, market or its own?  It seems to me they targeted towards the hip, got-to-have-the-lastest, the in-thing, trendy market.

Please, someone enlighten me.

See Leica M9...

not a good example imho. Leica M9 is rangefinder, not mirror-less. And also not affordable for most of the people. I don't understand the hype either, maybe it has to do with less bulky design and still interchangeable lenses. But most mirrorless systems do not have fast enough lenses for my use. Maybe the new Fuji X-Pro 1 will resolve that matter, but it's really expensive again...

Pardon. Does it have a mirror? No? Then it's mirror-less. Rangefinder? OK. Why Canon couldn't? Rangefinder + AF via Liveview.
No affordable? True. Does it have cost so much? I don't think so.

Example was to show how good mirrorless camera could be, not how expensive. And I think it might be cheaper if sth lke that was made by Canon.

[DzPhotography]

Pardon. Does it have a mirror? No? Then it's mirror-less. Rangefinder? OK. Why Canon couldn't? Rangefinder + AF via Liveview.
No affordable? True. Does it have cost so much? I don't think so.

Example was to show how good mirrorless camera could be, not how expensive. And I think it might be cheaper if sth lke that was made by Canon.

Ok, if you see it in that way, it's mirrorless. But you can't compare it to the whole bunch of the other mirrorless systems. It's another type of cam it's a rangefinder...give it into the hands of someone who uses a mirrorless system for only P&S and they're completely lost...

[marekjoz]

Pardon. Does it have a mirror? No? Then it's mirror-less. Rangefinder? OK. Why Canon couldn't? Rangefinder + AF via Liveview.
No affordable? True. Does it have cost so much? I don't think so.

Example was to show how good mirrorless camera could be, not how expensive. And I think it might be cheaper if sth lke that was made by Canon.

Ok, if you see it in that way, it's mirrorless. But you can't compare it to the whole bunch of the other mirrorless systems. It's another type of cam it's a rangefinder...give it into the hands of someone who uses a mirrorless system for only P&S and they're completely lost...

Certainly, that's right. The question is - will Canon make mirrorless like P&S and throw away entry DSLR or rather go Leica's way? Or both?
I mean - mirrorless system is at least bodies + lenses. High end - rangefinder like Leica, low end - P&S but same lenses + EF-S compatible. Why not?

[c.d.embrey]

I agree.  I am worried it will look like the Sony NEX system.  Sure the body is small, but the lenses are still large because of the sensor.  Not sure how miniaturizing the body helps when the lenses are still large.  Just makes working with the body harder as it is small and has fewer external controls.

The small/light Sony NEX makes photography fun again. Until recently my big/bulky/heavy Canon DSLRs were used for paying jobs or test shooting, my walk-around-camera was an iPod Touch 4G. Now I'm using a NEX for walk-around AND some paying jobs. It's so light you hardly know your carrying it  

[unfocused]

Excuse me for coming off ignorant, but what is with all the hype over mirror-less cameras.  I'm serious, what am I missing?  I get the part of less mechanical, maybe higher shutter speeds (maybe not), but what about the loss of a "real" viewfinder?   

Yes, I know mirror-less have been around on and off for years, but I don't understand what market they're aimed at.  Is this to compete with the P&S market, DSLR, market or its own?  It seems to me they targeted towards the hip, got-to-have-the-lastest, the in-thing, trendy market.

Please, someone enlighten me.

See Leica M9...

not a good example imho. Leica M9 is rangefinder, not mirror-less. And also not affordable for most of the people. I don't understand the hype either, maybe it has to do with less bulky design and still interchangeable lenses. But most mirrorless systems do not have fast enough lenses for my use. Maybe the new Fuji X-Pro 1 will resolve that matter, but it's really expensive again...

I fully agree. Most consumers don't even buy an extra lens for their DSLRs, what makes anything think people will be buying extra lenses for these mirror-less boxes? And, who wants to invest in a completely new set of lenses anyway?

The frustrating thing is this shouldn't be that tough. The Fuji X-10 is about 80% of the way there, and the Canon G1-X is also about 80% there. But, they both seem to have bungled the remaining 20%. Having more interchangeable lenses to invest in isn't a plus in my book. Give me a good viewfinder, decent resolution and a quality 2.8-ish lens that zooms from 28ish-100ish and I'll be there.

[DzPhotography]

Pardon. Does it have a mirror? No? Then it's mirror-less. Rangefinder? OK. Why Canon couldn't? Rangefinder + AF via Liveview.
No affordable? True. Does it have cost so much? I don't think so.

Example was to show how good mirrorless camera could be, not how expensive. And I think it might be cheaper if sth lke that was made by Canon.

Ok, if you see it in that way, it's mirrorless. But you can't compare it to the whole bunch of the other mirrorless systems. It's another type of cam it's a rangefinder...give it into the hands of someone who uses a mirrorless system for only P&S and they're completely lost...

Certainly, that's right. The question is - will Canon make mirrorless like P&S and throw away entry DSLR or rather go Leica's way? Or both?
I mean - mirrorless system is at least bodies + lenses. High end - rangefinder like Leica, low end - P&S but same lenses + EF-S compatible. Why not?

They'll make whatever they can sell the most of it....

[c.d.embrey]

My fear is that Canon will treat their CSC cameras as a step-up from P&S, instead of a step-up from a 7D. With modern technology there is no reason for not building a Pro Quality CSC and Pro Quality Primes.

Please. please. please don't give us Rebel quality CSCs with effing-kit-zoomz  

[Freshprince08]

My rebel camera with kit zoom is not much heavier than a mirrorless camera, and is already a bit too small for my hands. For me there are two types of cameras: Those who fit in my pocket, and those who don't.
The mirrorlss and the DSLR are both in the second category.
For the first category, I prefer cameras like the Lumix LX3.

Tend to agree with this, especially for guys. If it's big enough to require its own bag then there's not much difference in bringing a DSLR. Pocketable + 50mm equiv pancake lens, however, would be different!

[DzPhotography]

I fully agree. Most consumers don't even buy an extra lens for their DSLRs, what makes anything think people will be buying extra lenses for these mirror-less boxes? And, who wants to invest in a completely new set of lenses anyway?

The frustrating thing is this shouldn't be that tough. The Fuji X-10 is about 80% of the way there, and the Canon G1-X is also about 80% there. But, they both seem to have bungled the remaining 20%. Having more interchangeable lenses to invest in isn't a plus in my book. Give me a good viewfinder, decent resolution and a quality 2.8-ish lens that zooms from 28ish-100ish and I'll be there.

+1 I fully agree. A cam like you describe it is on the top of my wishlist. Don't need extra lenses in my compact then

[gmrza]

Gimme an EF compatible body and a pancake prime for taking on vacation and I'll be a happy happy man.

I agree, EF compatible body is what I am waiting for in the mirror less camera from Canon, I have seen EF adapters for other mirror less cameras in the market but it would be nice if Canon released one with EF and EFS mount

About this new lens 18-45mm, it would have been nice if they had provided 24 - 70mm instead of 29 to 70mm

In order to be "compatible" with EF lenses, it is necessary to maintain the same distance from the mount to the focal plane as in an EOS (D)SLR.  That doesn't help much for compactness - the xx0D range is possibly about as compact as you can get with an EF (well, really EF-S) mount.

Using an adapter to mount an EF (or EF-S) lens is a different discussion. - That is what Sony already does with its Nex cameras.

I believe it is very challenging for a camera manufacturer to build a mirrorless system that is really going to be revolutionary.  In order to really compete, EVFs and in-sensor phase-detect AF will need to mature as technologies first.  Canon probably also still needs deal with the challenge of how to collect light from a lens that is closer to the focal plane - because current sensors don't collect light which coming from extreme angles very well. - Just think of the ISO-fudging that Canon does with lenses like the 85mm f/1.2L when it is wide open.  (I am not sure what patents Leica/Kodak own that may block Canon's progress in this respect.)

[dr croubie]

That is the start of the future of APS-C with its gradual move into the consumer arena. Imagine a mirrorless 7D equivalent and then wonder if there is a future for the DSLR 7D as well?

There already is, and it's called the NEX-7.
Sure, it's expensive, but it's there, it's APS-C, it's 24MP, and from what i've read, IQ isn't so bad either.
I love my 7D, but if I could go on a holiday, take one do-it-all-zoom (like EFs 15-85), a wide prime (like zeiss 21 or canon/samyang 14), and maybe a portrait (like my Takumar 50/1.4 is the size of a niftyfifty), I could leave the 7D at home and not worry about the weight.
I'd still keep the 7D, shooting birds on live-view is too hard (although i'm sure i could practise more) but mirrorless is the future for travel.


ps, M9 is MILC but not EVIL. M10 is rumoured to have live-view, then it will be both...