Rumors > Lenses

Is there any reason EF mount lenses couldn't fit mirrorless cameras?

(1/3) > >>

ScottyP:
1.)  Assuming that a manufacturer wanted to make them work, and was not hoping instead to sell 2x as many lenses (or to make a smaller body), is there any reason a mirrorless camera body couldn't use everyone's nice, expensive, existing "L" glass?  I mean, is there any basic mechanical/operational difference necessary for a mirrorless lens vs. a traditional lens? 

2.)  If there is no difference, do you think Canon will nevertheless choose to make new mirrorless bodies incompatible with EF lenses?

neuroanatomist:
They'll work.  Canon has already patented what looks to be an EF-to-mirrorless adapter.

Mt Spokane Photography:
As noted, you could use the patented adapter.  Of course, Canon could make a mirrorless camera that used them, but the camera could not be any smaller, which is one of the appealing things about a mirrirless camera.  The EF and EF-s lenses are designed for a fixed distance from the lens mount to the sensor, while mirrorless bodies often have about 1/2 that distance which makes a camera body much thinner.  They often also have a smaller sensor, so the lens diameter is smaller.  All this adds up to a much smaller camera body.  But, you will be able to adapt a EF lens.  This is a huge advantage for Canon, since they have a huge number of excellent lenses available, and specialized smaller lenses will be likely limited to three or maybe four at the start.

Jettatore:
One thing to note here, is that for any infant system to have it's best shot at thriving, it should be built from scratch without any compromises or hindrances of compatibility to an older system.  One thing that appears in Leica's marketing mumbo jumbo is how they didn't compromise the M system because the camera was completely blah blah blah, here read it yourself..

"The 18-megapixel CCD image sensor, specifically designed and developed for this camera, enables the capture of the full 35-mm film format without any compromises. All M lenses mounted on the M9 or M9-P offer the same angle of view they had when using film material. This means that the high resolution and unique imaging quality of the now-digital M9 and M9-P are capable of fully exploiting the enormous potentials of M lenses. Or, in other words: in the case of the M9 and M9-P, it wasn't a matter of modifying the lenses to match the image sensor, but rather the other way around. This results in images particularly rich in details. Natural. Authentic. Without compromise."

So, in theory, to be even less without compromise, a mirrorless format might do well to be completely designed around new lenses and bodies without any consideration to compatibility to the EF or EFS mounts.  This would probably be wise weather Canon goes for FF or for a crop variation because EF lenses in particular dwarf those of FF Leica or crop micro 4/3rds and crop Nikon 1 series mirrorless efforts.  There is also to date (but this won't hold forever with new in camera softwares) no great reasons other than ultra small sizes and weights to go fully mirrorless.  So compatibility with large and or heavy lenses should be IMO the absolute last thing on Canon's list if they choose to enter this market.  Could you imagine hooking up a 24-70L to a small micro 4/3rds system or a Nikon 1 body, or even a Lieca, it would be a disaster.

Rocky:

--- Quote from: Jettatore on June 13, 2012, 06:17:54 PM ---One thing to note here, is that for any infant system to have it's best shot at thriving, it should be built from scratch without any compromises or hindrances of compatibility to an older system.  One thing that appears in Leica's marketing mumbo jumbo is how they didn't compromise the M system because the camera was completely blah blah blah, here read it yourself..

"The 18-megapixel CCD image sensor, specifically designed and developed for this camera, enables the capture of the full 35-mm film format without any compromises. All M lenses mounted on the M9 or M9-P offer the same angle of view they had when using film material. This means that the high resolution and unique imaging quality of the now-digital M9 and M9-P are capable of fully exploiting the enormous potentials of M lenses. Or, in other words: in the case of the M9 and M9-P, it wasn't a matter of modifying the lenses to match the image sensor, but rather the other way around. This results in images particularly rich in details. Natural. Authentic. Without compromise."

--- End quote ---
You have totally misunderstood The Leica statement.  Leica M lenses are of 27.8 mm back focus fringe distance. Some lenses also have element that are pushed into the lens mount.  Traditional film does not care about the incident angle of the light ray. CCD and CMOS sensor like to have incident angle as close to 90 deg as possible. Some Leica lenses has incident angle less than 45deg.  In order to be able to use existing lenses., Leica have to have offset micro lenses. That is what Leica mean" to tailor the body to the lenses". It is not a compromise. It is a technical break through. If Leica does not take this approach, the alternative will be increase the fringe distance of the camera and start to build the lenses that is based on SLR.  that will make everything a lot bigger. There is nothing wrong on the existing approach. It keep the body small and all the Leica lenses are still usable.
In fact, Every body in the DSLR business does not make new lenses for the DSLR. They just use the existing 35mm film lenses. The EF-S lenses exist in due to cost cutting mainly (in some occasion is due to the need of wide angle lenses) We do not have EF-S lenses until in the pass few years. and EF-S has been in existance for  more than 25 years.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page