An EF & RF mount hybrid mirrorless camera in the works [CR2]

[Focus Pocus]

What is all this talk about different "backs"? What exactly moves the sensor back and forth? And how is it more convenient to replace both that "back" and a lens, as opposed just have the adapter on a lens?

 

[slclick]

What is all this talk about different "backs"? What exactly moves the sensor back and forth? And how is it more convenient to replace both that "back" and a lens, as opposed just have the adapter on a lens?

Although currently used in certain digital cameras, backs were first a film body component. You swapped backs out for various film size needs or for certain cameras to switch from film to digital. Hasselblad is the main user of the design.

Digital camera back - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[criscokkat]

hybrid EF/RF mount - yes possible, technically. having a deeper back for EF flange distance and second one, a shallow one, for RF. you’d be able to mount both types of lenses without the use of an adapter."
it could well be a 1D style camera. or 5d style camera. or hybrid. with multitude of new possibilities including : EF/RF native compatibility and multi sensor options. I can create a loooong bullet point list of how such a camera may add value in a professional setting

Except the mount in the front and the controls on top are the cheap things. A removable back would include all of the expensive parts, and would introduce a whole bevy of potential problems for sealing, just to save Canon (and the consumer) less than 100 dollars in manufacturing costs for the front of a camera.

Moving things on rails is not rocket science for a lens manufacturer. They already do it with a high degree of precision in their lenses. It's really no different, with the exception of having a ribbon cable attached to it. Many old Large format film cameras use rails to move the film plane closer or further away to focus and because of that the lenses were much simpler as they didn't need as much glass to focus. CCD cameras attached to telescopes still do this as well, so the idea of moving the sensor plane is an old one. That's one reason I thought this process was more likely in a C series camera, as it could natively support both EF and RF lenses (especially if they do the pins on top for RF/pins on bottom for ef) and then be able to move the focal plane to a different location for PL once an adapter was put on. With such a system it might also work with Panavision lenses even.

 

[SecureGSM]

This. There is much more to It, of course.

Mamiya Leaf Medium Format Digital Backs and Cameras

Mamiya Leaf makes medium format digital cameras.

www.mamiyaleaf.com

 

[Architect1776]

AFAIK, the mount diameters are identical, and the differences are in flange distance and additional contacts. The adapter is just a 26mm extension tube with contacts, and the camera realizes an EF lens in mounted via an adapter via protocol and/or the additional contacts left disconnected.

Are the mounting lugs the same configuration?
In other words will an EF lens currently mount directly to a RF camera?
Not operate or anything but just physically mount?

 

[koenkooi]

Are the mounting lugs the same configuration?
In other words will an EF lens currently mount directly to a RF camera?
Not operate or anything but just physically mount?

They aren't. The RF lugs are even less rotational symmetric than the EF ones, the caps will only fits one way, so you have to pay attention when changing lenses.

 

[Architect1776]

They aren't. The RF lugs are even less rotational symmetric than the EF ones, the caps will only fits one way, so you have to pay attention when changing lenses.

Just something to think about if EF and RF are to live on the same camera without an adapter. Just moving a sensor around will not work. It would require a whole new mount beyond the RF and EF.
Not a good idea unless they have some trick up their sleeve.
Who knows?

 

[Marphoto]

I can't believe that folks are falling for this marketing ploy? It's up there with Musk's hyperbole and the truth is Canon is getting their socks knocked off for being way behind both in terms of AF for DSLRs and in the mirrorless arena. FWIW, before all of the fanboys attack, I have Canon cred, having been using their gear since the mid 80's.

 

[Pape]

R and EF bodyplug fits both to EF so maybe ef mount could be modified to house R lenses too?
I think hybrid mount and viewfinder camera can be done but is it sensible?
May be too expensive and heavy.

 

[mpeeps]

the R was obviously rushed and at the least an experiment. It was released in a beta state using an old sensor. pretty much an attempt to stop people from switching to other brands because of the mirrorless hype.

I'm pretty sure Canon doesn't roll like that. I'm using both EF 5dsr and R now and the R is producing excellent results with mount and even better with RF lenses, especially UWA's.

 

[sanj]

"Removeable back" will not happen. Nope.

 

[sanj]

Lens mount change is a possibility. I doubt even that.

 

[mpeeps]

Buying an RP in my case was the plan with EF-RF and FD-RF adapter to reuse e.g. FD 4.0 17, 1.4 50, 2.5 135 and 4.0 300 which still exist in my household. But they got me with an offer where body + adapter at 1094 EUR which is very cheap anyway. But they added - and that is something I cannot believe antil the tools arrive - the RF lens as some free goodie . And there is 55 Euro cash back available after I reveive these things. Maybe the RF 35 is not selling very well and they want to convince the hesitating individuals (like me) to buy into RF mount and lenses.

I am not too happy to have a third mount around but the intended use is as one body two lens combo e.g. RF 35 + EF macro 100 or RF35 + 70-300 4.0. Or as two body combo e.g. M50 + EF 32mm + RP with 70-200 or RP with RF 35 + M50 70-200 if I need stabilized lenses.
And If I do not like the RF 35 maybe I will sell it and enjoy the lenses I already have but 1:2 macro + IS is still interesting. I will see.

And after using the FDn 4.0 17 for a test video with my M50 it showed very strong quality (as ~28mm equiv) so I cannot wait to see how this little lens performs on the RP for photo and especially video (1080p is enough for my purposes so this lens will be fine).

 

[mpeeps]

You'll love the RF 35....until you spring for 50 or 15-35!!

 

[Hector1970]

I’m sure it’s technically possible to have a mount compatible to both but it would seem daft to do it now. They must surely considered this in designing a mirror less and ruled it out. Part of the objective of a new system is to encourage users to buy new lens too. The adapter caters for old lens but is an additional thing to add to the camera. If Canon are seriously thinking of doing this there must be some severe engineering arguments going on between those loyal to EF and those engineering RF lens. I doubt this is the case and this is not a real product that’s coming.

 

[koch1948]

I assume Canon’s objective is to switch customers from the EF to the RF mount. Then why would it be in the corporate interest to go beyond adapters onto a hybrid approach which would make it easier for customers to stay with their EF lenses?

 

[criscokkat]

Are the mounting lugs the same configuration?
In other words will an EF lens currently mount directly to a RF camera?
Not operate or anything but just physically mount?

The lugs are different as people have pointed out but that's mainly to make sure the wrong lens is not mounted on the wrong system. If the pins are in two different places, there might be a rotational feature on the body to spin and lock it into EF or RF which could change the lug pattern? I think mechanically there are multiple ways to do it. I think this is an interesting approach, but it definitely only works on a mirrored sized body, so I think we'd only see it on the 1 series. But as Canon has said multiple times, the 6d, 5d, 5ds/r, and 1d bodies will not line up directly with the RF mount models. So this functionality might only be on their highest tiers.

Or their Cinema line. I still think this matches well with the philosophy behind those cameras, but I guess that would also apply to news agencies and the like as well.

 

[Kit.]

I assume Canon’s objective is to switch customers from the EF to the RF mount.

I wouldn't assume that. Canon will sell what sells, and there is little incentive for Canon to make big whites that work on RF mount cameras only.

There is some incentive to make telephoto lenses that benefit from the faster RF protocol, but are still EF mount compatible.

 

[Dantana]

I don't think this will be a thing.

But I do think there is a possibility of a 1 series R camera that has a beefier more integrated EF adapter that people with the really big whites would be more comfortable trusting. Maybe something that screws onto the body like the current adapter but then also has a secondary secure mechanical connection to really bolt it to the body.

I just got the R for my birthday yesterday and I don't understand why there would be an issue with the current adapters. I have the one with the control ring and I didn't have any issues with it in my first tests.

 

[magarity]

I've been giving this idea of taking both mounts in the same camera some serious thought and I've come up with the answer. Put the RF mount directly in front of the sensor in the normal way. Then.... put the EF mount off to the right with a series of mirrors going over to the sensor!! If an EF lens is detected, the final mirror swings in front of the sensor, routing incoming light from that mount. This avoids all that troublesome problems with the moving sensor that others have speculated about. Genius!