Unofficial Canon Mirrorless Concept

[dtameling]

The Flange Focal Distance for FD is only 2mm less than the EF. Old EF lenses wouldn't be usable unless the body were beefy.

Though that seems to be fine for Olympus. The new K-01 follows that design though the jury is still out on if anybody adopts it...it's not much smaller than a K-5.

snip

I disagree, the 50mm 1.4 SSC and 400mm 4.5 SSC FD lenses work just fine on our GH2 which is smaller than a rebel but similar in size to a Canon F1....

They work...but only with an adapter. Flange Focal distance on 4/3 is 20mm, FD is 42mm. A GH2 style camera which accepted FD lenses natively would need to be thicker to build in the space which the adapter is creating. Depending on how miniature things can get this year, that may or may not make a viable product.

I agree however; less is better so that more lenses are compatible.

[Neeneko]

  And this one might be hard to swallow but the idea of an open source camera system, one with interchange-able mounts from any vendor and user programmable functionality, is long over-due.  The markets of the future will no longer bear the outmoded, planned obsolescence/proprietary models of yesteryear, better to come to terms with that ahead of time rather then when it's too late.

I suspect it is only a matter of time till someone starts a good DIY/OSS camera project, esp now that reprap derivatives are getting more common.  I have occasionally fantasized about grabbing an Altara board and giving it a try, but then I realize I have no freetime as it is....

Still, I am starting to see some people out there with some cool ideas, and it is only a matter of time till someone grabs a low end machine vision camera from EO or something and builds something cool.    This would probably move away from Canon and twoard Kodak and Sony though since you can buy their sensors (including development boards I believe) as 3rd parties.  Crow, if someone was dedicated enough you can buy Kodak medium format sensors strait from them.

[goodmane]

I have to say on reflection I'd be happier with the g1x sensor in this body so I can afford it as a second camera. But I'd probably stretch to it anyway being fullframe.

For me the main advantage of full frame is just the bigger viewfinder which is not an issue with mirrorless.

If it were full frame though I probably would just sell my 5D and move to the smaller format, and more asesthetic manual controls. So long as they bring a 24-70 f2.8 or f4.

[infared]

I have to say...I love my 5D Mk II (will most likely own a III)...but I also LOVE my MFT equipment. Two bodies and 9 lenses. Yes, a complete system. No kidding.  The whole thing about mirrorless, for me, is to make it small with quality.  The whole point is ...you have a complete system that fits in one little bag and weighs almost nothing. So if Canon is going to jump in...it has to be a whole new design and all new lenses. Small, small..small..did I say small?  But keep the glass fast...or at least offer it. I love my full-frame...and right now nothing is replacing it...but let me tell you ....some of my snobbo photo friends have seen images I have shot with MFT..and their response is..."you shot that with what???". One thing you can't beat is the fun factor of MFT..and knowing that you are also getting great images is such a kick!!!!  I sell the images a galleries, regularly. Its about the image in the end.
I hope Canon jumps in full-bore....but it would take a LOT for me to give up my existing, extremely versatile MFT system...no doubt. 
I love David's rendering without the prism...RF-Style finder or add-on is a MUST though.

[gmrza]

"We know a mirrorless camera from Canon is likely to appear in 2012. What form it takes is anyones guess."

I just reread the post. Unfortunately looking at the G1X I think we'll see a formfactor closer to that camera with interchangable lenses. And the G1X sensor as well.
Oh well, we can dream, right?

There is some sense in what you are saying here.  The G1X sensor fits the bill more from the point of view of cost.  I have my doubts that Canon would put something into the market in the $2000+ category, which is what a full frame system would probably cost (body plus one lens).
Canon probably needs to have a play closer to $1000 (or below) in order to get the volumes to make a product viable.

Canon also has the problem that due its size as one of the biggest camera manufacturers in the world, it is very difficult to justify niche products. - A niche product would not make any appreciable difference on the Canon balance sheet, and would have to have a very very very strong strategic need to be developed.

Canon's biggest problem, right now, is probably Apple.  Loads of people are ignoring P&S cameras because smartphones do an often great job of taking snapshots.  (If I look at my wife, for instance, for a night out with the girls, she no longer takes a compact camera with - she takes her iPhone.)
One of the strategies that Canon appears to be following is to educate people more about photography, in order to make them more skilled, and hence more demanding of their equipment.  A $2000 product would not benefit this strategy, whereas a $1000 product would (only just) form part of that kind of strategy.  I believe the intention of this kind of approach is not to counter smartphones, but to drive demand for more sophisticated camera products in addition to smartphones.  The 1X00D and XX0D EOS bodies fit into this strategy as they are now so cheap - a mirrorless system would probably also need to fit into that ballpark.

None of this helps anyone who would like something that follows in the lineage of rangefinder cameras, however.

[Neeneko]

I think one thing this thread has demonstrated, if Canon was willing to take the risk, it should not release a single spiffy mirrorless solution, but instead a whole range.  An entry level, a mid level, a videoographer version, and a general professional body.  That would not only show Canon's commitment to the future but its competency and its ability to offer a wide ranging solution.  It would also not hurt to have a range of lenses the span the use cases...

If Canon got its ass in gear, they could utterly crush this market, but I have a feeling they will cling to their current model and, just like Canon stole the crown from Kodak and Nikon.... someone will be the leader for the next 10-20 years.

[stabmasterasron]

My two cents:

I don't think canon will develop a FF mirrorless system.  Mirrorless systems are selling like hotcakes right now.  Not because of the sensor size, but in spite of it.  Canon knows this.  If they decide they want a piece of the mirrorless market, they will develop a product that is similar to what is already out there.  I mean, come on, when was the last time that Canon really went out on a limb for something.  There products are usually evolutionary, not revolutionary.  They probably feel safe to let Panasonic, sony, and Olympus develop the mirrorless market, then use Canon magic to sweep in with a superior product and capture a good market share when they are GD good and ready to do it.  A FF mirrorless is a highly specialized product that would not have a very wide appeal, especially with the premium price that would certainly come with it.  I love the idea of a FF mirrorless, but if the price were within $1000 of a 5d mk iii, I think I would take the mark iii. 

This camera is a great concept and if Canon were to make it - good for them, they had the balls to make a gutsy move. 

[Hillsilly]

Where can I buy it?

Love the concept.  Like others, I'd prefer a shallower flange distance (you'd still be able to use EF and FD lenses with an adapter).  But I understand the design dilema.  The Olympus OM-D, which is the closest thing I can think of, looks a bit too narrow with the hump on top, and doesn't seem quite right.

If I was going to be nit-picky, I'd also suggest some form of grip on the RHS.  It also looks a bit too rounded, but I'd have to see it in real life.

I like the thought that's gone into the detachable viewfinder.  It looks very well integrated.

Where's the direct print button?

[dilbert]

What is the point of this?

It reads like someone's pipe dream.

[DavidRiesenberg]

It is a pipe dream, though I believe not mine alone. The point of actually doing this was simply to visualize this dream. That's what I do.

[bycostello]

if only it was true!!...

[Caps18]

I'm not a huge fan of the viewfinder/eye piece, if the auto zoom is fast enough in live view, and the battery still works for a long time.  I would rather save the size and weight.

I would want to use EF lenses, even if it meant that they would be on a cropped sensor.

[DavidRiesenberg]

The EVF is detachable / optional so it should both work for people who enjoy shooting with a viewfinder and those who not.

Ef lenses could be easily used using a simple adapter.