Odds & Ends - Mirrorless [CR1]

[AvTvM]

So the adapter required to connect an EF[-S] lens to the mirrorless camera would be an extension tube with contacts?

Exactly. I world Expect it included with The camera

[c.d.embrey]

I world Expect it included with The camera

Why do you expect it to be included with the camera

Nikon doesn't supply the $269.97 FT-1 (F) Mount Adapter with the Nikon 1.
Olympus doesn't supply the $169.99 MMF-2 (4/3 to M4/3) with it's M4/3 cameras.
Sony doesn't supply the $399.99 LA-EA2 (Alpha mount to E mount) with NEX cameras.

Why would Canon give it away for free, when they can make a profit by selling it just like everyone else

[gmrza]

Let me restate my position:
1. The Canon mirrorless will be a compromise. it will not satisfy everybody.
2. If FF mirrorless is so easily done, why there is only one FF mirrorless., M9 by Leica. Are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax all dummies???
3. I want a FF mirroless also . But it is and  will be either out of my reach or with features that I do not like.
4. What I really want is a reasonable priced Copy of M9, I would even be happy with a reasonable priced copy of M8. Both must be with M mount.

Realistically, even if the M9 were cheaper, the market for rangefinder cameras is limited, because most people want a camera with AF. - Leica has effectively stayed with the rangefinder design as a way around the fact that nobody has developed an effective AF system without a mirror. - Even Nikon's 1 series seems to be less than perfect in respect of phase detect AF.

I think so far none of the mirrorless offerings has really offered anything really revolutionary, because there have been too many compromises involved - particularly on AF, image quality and view finders.

I think most more serious photographers want a view finder for most of their work.  I for one don't care whether the view finder if optical or electronic.  What I care about is that it works.  EVFs have left a bit to be desired thus far.

The NEX 7 has probably come closest so far in terms of these compromises, but it is hobbled by being a Sony with the inherent lack of available lenses and accessories. - A good Canon or Nikon mirrorless would benefit from access to a huge selection of lenses (via an adapter), good flash equipment and other accessories, which Sony cannot.

I would be prepared to settle for an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless camera, but it would also need a decent viewfinder, decent AF and an adapter for my EF lenses plus the ability to use an ETTL Speedlite.

[AvTvM]

Realistically, even if the M9 were cheaper, the market for rangefinder cameras is limited, because most people want a camera with AF. - Leica has effectively stayed with the rangefinder design as a way around the fact that nobody has developed an effective AF system without a mirror. - Even Nikon's 1 series seems to be less than perfect in respect of phase detect AF.

I think so far none of the mirrorless offerings has really offered anything really revolutionary, because there have been too many compromises involved - particularly on AF, image quality and view finders.

I think most more serious photographers want a view finder for most of their work.  I for one don't care whether the view finder if optical or electronic.  What I care about is that it works.  EVFs have left a bit to be desired thus far.

The NEX 7 has probably come closest so far in terms of these compromises, but it is hobbled by being a Sony with the inherent lack of available lenses and accessories. - A good Canon or Nikon mirrorless would benefit from access to a huge selection of lenses (via an adapter), good flash equipment and other accessories, which Sony cannot.

I would be prepared to settle for an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless camera, but it would also need a decent viewfinder, decent AF and an adapter for my EF lenses plus the ability to use an ETTL Speedlite.

Exactly. I fully agree with all of your observations! 

My expectation for the coming Canon mirrorless line is a low-end total compromise lacklustre G1X with lens mount.

My hope is - or would have been -  that Canon really seizes the mirrorless market with a truly innovative, ground-breaking design. An absolutely class-leading, modern, "fully-digital" FF or at least APS-C mirrorless camera with specs and price as outlined earlier in  this thread. I am convinced this could technically be done and at reasonable cost. At the same time I am also convinced that Canon under its current geriatric, ultra-conservative management will not do it, since they do not (want to) understand that the age of DSLRs with anachronistic mirror box, prism and mechanical shutter is coming to its end very soon - irrespective of their decisions to "protect" their current DSLR-line.

The longer they wait, the higher their risk to not dominate the future world of photography any longer. Somebody else WILL do it. The first one to do it really right will own the market for years to come. 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

Let me restate my position:
1. The Canon mirrorless will be a compromise. it will not satisfy everybody.
2. If FF mirrorless is so easily done, why there is only one FF mirrorless., M9 by Leica. Are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax all dummies???
3. I want a FF mirroless also . But it is and  will be either out of my reach or with features that I do not like.
4. What I really want is a reasonable priced Copy of M9, I would even be happy with a reasonable priced copy of M8. Both must be with M mount.

Realistically, even if the M9 were cheaper, the market for rangefinder cameras is limited, because most people want a camera with AF. - Leica has effectively stayed with the rangefinder design as a way around the fact that nobody has developed an effective AF system without a mirror. - Even Nikon's 1 series seems to be less than perfect in respect of phase detect AF.

I think so far none of the mirrorless offerings has really offered anything really revolutionary, because there have been too many compromises involved - particularly on AF, image quality and view finders.

I think most more serious photographers want a view finder for most of their work.  I for one don't care whether the view finder if optical or electronic.  What I care about is that it works.  EVFs have left a bit to be desired thus far.

The NEX 7 has probably come closest so far in terms of these compromises, but it is hobbled by being a Sony with the inherent lack of available lenses and accessories. - A good Canon or Nikon mirrorless would benefit from access to a huge selection of lenses (via an adapter), good flash equipment and other accessories, which Sony cannot.

I would be prepared to settle for an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless camera, but it would also need a decent viewfinder, decent AF and an adapter for my EF lenses plus the ability to use an ETTL Speedlite.

I agree with much of what you say here, but there are a few excellent lenses that could be used on the NEX7 with an adaptor: namely the Zeiss for alpha 16 - 35 and 24 - 70 plus there are one or two very good Sony G lenses like the 70 - 200 G.  OK not as wide a range as Nikon or Canon, but these are all very good lenses.  I used to have the A900 - a very meaty FF camera - A pity that Sony took the direction it did after.

[Ellen Schmidtee]

I world Expect it included with The camera

Why do you expect it to be included with the camera

Nikon doesn't supply the $269.97 FT-1 (F) Mount Adapter with the Nikon 1.
Olympus doesn't supply the $169.99 MMF-2 (4/3 to M4/3) with it's M4/3 cameras.
Sony doesn't supply the $399.99 LA-EA2 (Alpha mount to E mount) with NEX cameras.

Why would Canon give it away for free, when they can make a profit by selling it just like everyone else

It would be the same as with current extension tubes w/ EOS contacts - Canon sells price it's branded tubes to cause sticker shock, and the unwashed masses will buy Chinese tubes for $15 a piece on Amazon.

[Rocky]

Let me restate my position:
1. The Canon mirrorless will be a compromise. it will not satisfy everybody.
2. If FF mirrorless is so easily done, why there is only one FF mirrorless., M9 by Leica. Are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax all dummies???
3. I want a FF mirroless also . But it is and  will be either out of my reach or with features that I do not like.
4. What I really want is a reasonable priced Copy of M9, I would even be happy with a reasonable priced copy of M8. Both must be with M mount.

Realistically, even if the M9 were cheaper, the market for rangefinder cameras is limited, because most people want a camera with AF. - Leica has effectively stayed with the rangefinder design as a way around the fact that nobody has developed an effective AF system without a mirror. - Even Nikon's 1 series seems to be less than perfect in respect of phase detect AF.

I think so far none of the mirrorless offerings has really offered anything really revolutionary, because there have been too many compromises involved - particularly on AF, image quality and view finders.

I think most more serious photographers want a view finder for most of their work.  I for one don't care whether the view finder if optical or electronic.  What I care about is that it works.  EVFs have left a bit to be desired thus far.

The NEX 7 has probably come closest so far in terms of these compromises, but it is hobbled by being a Sony with the inherent lack of available lenses and accessories. - A good Canon or Nikon mirrorless would benefit from access to a huge selection of lenses (via an adapter), good flash equipment and other accessories, which Sony cannot.

I would be prepared to settle for an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless camera, but it would also need a decent viewfinder, decent AF and an adapter for my EF lenses plus the ability to use an ETTL Speedlite.

Well said and agree. Another reason why M9 stays with the range finder approach is to allow owners of the M lenses to use most of their lenses on the M8 or M9.  Without AF, the M8 or M9 can actually faster than AF as long as you do not wide open the lens and use "zone  focusing". The reason why I will (or can) settle with M9 or M8 copy is that I am not a fan of long lens. 135mm is my upper limit that I use less than 5%. 28mm to 90mm are my major focal length. 35mm is the focal length that I use mostly.