could the new EF-M mount support FF sensors too?

[ronderick]

Specs aside, my gut feeling is that the EVIL bodies will be the future home of APS-C sensors.

The next era's "split" will be APS-C EOS EVIL/FF EOS DSLR (especially considering that there's
the rumored entry level FF coming soon...)

[ronderick]

My 2 cents:

Well, assuming that Canon does come out with a FF-sensor-embedded body the size of the M9 or Xpro1... I wonder how much that's going to cost? (Even the XPro1's body price is a bit on the high end, and that's only with the APS-C sensor).

Then there comes the economical sense of making FF lenses for these EVIL full-frames ... I don't think people can stand a camera with the body size of Xpro1 combined with a 24-105L. If Canon indeed have the skill of making a EF-M lens comparable to the quality of it's current L line, you'd see DSLR being deserted as people pick up the lighter body yielding the same FF quality as the 5D3 and 1DX in droves... and they can probably kiss goodbye to the L lenses and face the fury of those photographers who are heavily invested in the current lineup. That's not a venture to be taken likely.

My original guess about which company would have invested in a EVIL FF body was Fuji, but they settled with the APS-C sensor in their Xpro1. Even a company w/o existing lens burden decided on the APS-C, I doubt any of the other company would risk it.

Well, in conclusion, coming up with something that soccer moms can easily use make a lot more economic sense than starting a EVIL FF system from scratch and targeting the high end market which is already been partially claimed by Leica and (to some extent) Fuji.

[moreorless]

This arguement actually seems backwards to me, the real disadvanatge of the Canon M mount being ASPC only is that should they introduce a FF mirrorless its lenses will not be backwards compatable. Any M mount lenses they release arent going to be compatable with FF anyway due to the smaller image circle.

Personally my feeling has always been that if Canon do produce a larger sensor mirrorless its actually more likely to be medium format than FF. That would impact on there existing FF SLR business far less, offer greater size saving than the MF SLR alternatives and service a market that doesnt need as diverse a range of lenses.

[Hillsilly]

The enigmatic individuals who'd prefer to spend their money on a FF mirrorless rather than a 5Diii would only want small, high quality primes specifically designed for the body.  They're not concerned with DSLR usability. Their driving desire would be unparalleled image quality.  They'd see some form of EF compatibility as a bonus, but not the be all and end all.  They would accept that mirrorless models are a new camera system and wouldn't take full compatibility for granted.

In the past, there have been camera systems designed around only a few lenses that have sold in sufficient quantities to make it worthwhile.  My Mamiya 6 is one.  It only comes with a 50mm, 75mm and 150mm.  (Essentially 30mm, 45mm and 90mm in FF equivalents).  The Mamiya 7 only has six lenses.  I'd see a Canon FF mirrorless as the modern day equivalent.  It would only need a few top quality lenses to gain a lot of interest.

[moreorless]

The enigmatic individuals who'd prefer to spend their money on a FF mirrorless rather than a 5Diii would only want small, high quality primes specifically designed for the body.  They're not concerned with DSLR usability. Their driving desire would be unparalleled image quality.  They'd see some form of EF compatibility as a bonus, but not the be all and end all.  They would accept that mirrorless models are a new camera system and wouldn't take full compatibility for granted.

In the past, there have been camera systems designed around only a few lenses that have sold in sufficient quantities to make it worthwhile.  My Mamiya 6 is one.  It only comes with a 50mm, 75mm and 150mm.  (Essentially 30mm, 45mm and 90mm in FF equivalents).  The Mamiya 7 only has six lenses.  I'd see a Canon FF mirrorless as the modern day equivalent.  It would only need a few top quality lenses to gain a lot of interest.

I'd potentially take the comparison further and say that if Canon were to look at a larger sensor mirrorless it might well be a medium format system aimed as you say at those who want the highest possible IQ in a compact hand holdable package(Samsung have already built such a system so its hardly pie in the sky). Like the Mamiya 6 and 7 as the format gets larger cutting out the mirror naturally saves more space and the userbase don't generally demand the same large range of lenses than FF DSLR users expect.

The lenses for such a system would really be too expensive for there to be much of a market for them on an ASPC sized system anyway so backwards compatability doesnt seem like a big issue to me. Being able to use EF lenses on a mirrorless is I'd say a bigger issue since its questionable how large the market for dedicated quality mirrorless lenses is, you look somewhere like amazon and sales of everything but 1-2 pancakes and budget telezooms are very very low indeed compaired to SLR lenses.

[marekjoz]

And I believe we'll see mirrorless FF from Canon sooner or later with it's dedicated lens line. Why?

Because:
1. Hybrid AF (or whatever not requiring a mirror, maybe automatic rangefinder or back to eye controlled focus ) in some time will be quick and accurate
2. One day another competitive company will market such a solution
3. People usualy won't the gear smaller, lighter and more convenient in use

It may have EVF, good quality short focal lenses, alternative EF compatible mount and finally automatic crop mode. I think that no later than in 2015. We should observe upcoming lens patents for FF with short flange.

[Hillsilly]

I'd agree.  It would have to be a very high MP sensor or medium format.  For a serious photographer looking at investing a lot of money into a system, why else would you give up the speed and autofocus advantages of a DSLR?  Outstanding image quality is the only answer I keep coming back to.

[Ricku]

I'd agree.  It would have to be a very high MP sensor or medium format.  For a serious photographer looking at investing a lot of money into a system, why else would you give up the speed and autofocus advantages of a DSLR?  Outstanding image quality is the only answer I keep coming back to.

True.

Also, speed + AF is not important to everyone.

I'd be more than happy with only 2 FPS and turtle slow AF, as long as the camera can deliver in the IQ department. (Resolution, great dynamic range, e.t.c). And i'd prefer if it is a mirrorless body!

[neuroanatomist]

a whopping one reply. no one disagrees then. good.

Probably due to oversaturation.  There are about 4 threads just like this one...

[preppyak]

The enigmatic individuals who'd prefer to spend their money on a FF mirrorless rather than a 5Diii would only want small, high quality primes specifically designed for the body.  They're not concerned with DSLR usability. Their driving desire would be unparalleled image quality.

This is a fair point, but, it begs the question of how many people like this their truly are. Because to get that IQ, you'd be talking a new body design, a new sensor, all new lens designs, and those costs have to be spread out among all potential buyers. Would Canon see it as worth it, making a system that's gonna cost as much as their 1-series cameras and cost nearly as much as Leica? Or is that more the role of niche companies to fill, especially if compatibility with EF/Canon equipment isn't crucial. Then again, it's probably not even as small a market as the $20k cine camera market that Canon just entered with the C300 and that series, so who knows.

Being able to use EF lenses on a mirrorless is I'd say a bigger issue since its questionable how large the market for dedicated quality mirrorless lenses is, you look somewhere like amazon and sales of everything but 1-2 pancakes and budget telezooms are very very low indeed compaired to SLR lenses.

To this, I'd agree that that audience isn't as large as say, the wedding photographer audience, etc. But, there are a lot of adventure photographers (think extreme sports, Nat Geo, etc) who would eat up the size of a mirrorless camera if it could match the performance of even the current 5dIII. Much easier to carry an NEX-7 and a pancake in the pocket of your ski jacket, or back of your kayak, then it is to carry a DSLR.

Of course, the demands of those activities are exactly where mirrorless is falling short at the moment (AF performance, handling of difficult light, etc). But when they figure it out, thats a target audience that won't turn back to DSLR's, because size and weight are critical on multi-day, and the only reason they are using DSLR's now is because its what works.

Again, this is a niche market though, so I'm not sure I'll see Canon as the first company to fill that need. Especially when Sony seems to be about 5 years ahead of them in that market

[unfocused]

Be careful what you wish for.

A full frame mirrorless camera won't be released by Canon or Nikon until the SLR form factor is dead. Personally, I'm not looking forward to that.

[marekjoz]

Be careful what you wish for.

A full frame mirrorless camera won't be released by Canon or Nikon until the SLR form factor is dead. Personally, I'm not looking forward to that.

It will be rather a 5-10 years lasting transition. They will not stand up and say: "ok, here you have the FF mirrorless from Canon. Oh, and BTW, there are no more DSLRs planned in the future". The Iphone generation will kill 'em all, so I think DSLRs are dead in such a form we know them today no earlier than in a few years. But when will/did it start?

[unfocused]

Be careful what you wish for.

A full frame mirrorless camera won't be released by Canon or Nikon until the SLR form factor is dead. Personally, I'm not looking forward to that.

It will be rather a 5-10 years lasting transition. They will not stand up and say: "ok, here you have the FF mirrorless from Canon. Oh, and BTW, there are no more DSLRs planned in the future". The Iphone generation will kill 'em all, so I think DSLRs are dead in such a form we know them today no earlier than in a few years. But when will/did it start?

No disagreement here. Of course it won't happen overnight. My point is simply that those who dream of a full frame Canon version of a Leica are delusional. We won't get a full frame Canon mirrorless until the DSLR form factor is on its deathbed. Whether it takes five, 10 or 20 years for that to happen, who knows?

[dvsDave]

Sorry to rain on your parade...

Now that I revisit this topic, there are a few reasons they've done it this way:

• They needed to make the camera, mount, & lenses as small & light as possible.
• They want all of these cameras to work with EF & EF-S lenses.
• The kind of photogs that want FF also tend to want top-notch AF, and mirrorless systems seem to be a long way from delivering that right now (though it looks like EF-M should be quite good for a mirrorless).
• When Leica made a full-frame camera (the M9) with such a short flange-back distance, they had to get Kodak to design a sensor for them with incrementally offset microlens positioning towards the edges in order to properly capture the photons that are hitting the sensor at an extreme angle towards the edge of the frame.  I don't think Canon wants to go there (although admittedly they could probably buy the patent off Kodak for peanuts at the moment...).

This is the same reasons that Nikon made their 1 series the way they did.  The smaller sensor means that the lens can be porportional to the size of the body, unlike the Sony NEX series, which are just HUGE lenses hanging off tiny bodies.  I was very pleased to see the size of the EOS M.  Still not sure about the touch-screen..

[Daniel Flather]

it´s a 35mm f2 on the leica and a 35mm f1.4 on the 5d mk2.
no longish zoom.

a 35mm f2 would make things look a bit better for the 5D MK2 sure.. but not much.
walk a day with a leica and a day with a 5D MK2 through a city.   

The 35/2 is much smaller than the 35/1.4