Re: A Bit More About the New Big White Lenses That Are Coming
Don Haines said:
A bit of history here...
The EF mount (EF stands for Electro Focus) came out in 1987. The primary design feature of the mount was that all communication to and from the lens be done through serial data streams (thus allowing auto-focus) and that there be no mechanical couplings such as levers... It replaced the FD mount, which had levers and a couple of dedicated pins. FD mount was not conducive to automatic focusing. Canon had realized that it was a dead end, and eventually Nikon also realized that mechanical linkages were passe….
Fast forward to today, where the EF mount is still in primary use.... The mount still works well, but as computing power and data communication speeds have increased, the slow communications between lens and body have started to limit system performance. Canon has patented a new version of this mount which will allow for the negotiation between camera and lens of higher data rates. How this works is you turn on the camera, it sends a query (using the slow EF link speed) to the lens asking what the max supported lens link speed is. If there is no answer (legacy EF glass), then it continues at the EF link speed. If it responds by saying it supports a faster speed, then both switch to that faster speed. We expect to see this very soon, be it on new EF bodies, or if it is a new mount... Canon has stated that there will be an "elegant" solution with a new mirrorless mount, and the odds are exceptionally high that this will be part of it....
As far as mount size goes, you can make the flange shorter, but as a result the lens will have to bend light from regular and telephoto lenses more, and the result will be more chromatic aberration and there will be more vignetting as a result of the light hitting the sensor at a greater angle. For wide angle lenses, you are better off as there will be less vignetting and less chromatic aberrations.... a classic example of trade-offs... There is no A is better than B, they both have their strengths and their weaknesses. You can not say that the current EF mount is not optimal without acknowledging that whatever any possible new mirrorless mount is, that it will also not be optimal. You can not cherry pick your conditions.
...
Thanks for sharing Your knowledge on this!
FYI, I have a degree as a "service engineer".
Which means I studied analog and digital electronics for three years about 30 years ago.
Enough for me to get a deeper understanding of that part than most others, at least that's what I like to believe
It´s sad that most people discussing in this thread either didn't take their time to read Your post carefully enough.
Or they don't really understand the technical side of this well enough.
Basically, what You write. Is that Canon has developed a "version 2" of the EF-mount. That is fully backward compatible with the existing EF-mount.
Considering what happened since the EF mount was released. There is a possibility to upgrade the speed which the body and the lens communicates. Big, big, big time.
I do also see a possibility to actually ad new "functions" to the protocol.
And that creates a possibility of great AF improvements.
Without a need for a "new" mount that won't work with existing bodies and lenses.
Also, without a need for "adapters".
To me, it makes a lot of sense. A lot more than a new mount that won't work with older lenses (with or without "adapters").
Another part that's important to understand here. Is that a totally new mount unlikely will improve AF performance.
No matter of which kind of AF-motor that's inside the lens.
There is a lot to say about this.
One thing that's really important to understand here.
Is that a whole lot of AF-performance is built into the lens itself.
As an example. The EF 400/2,8L IS II USM has "sensors" that measures the position of focus, which improves accuracy from previous lenses. That didn't have this built in.
I.E. You can make USM faster with DPAF, without a totally new mount.
Considering the "trade-offs" with a totally new mount.
The only reason for introducing it. Would be the possibility to make the bodies smaller.
My very personal opinion is that I don't really want smaller bodies while working with "FF-lenses" especially lenses from 70-200/2,8 and bigger.
I do actually prefer the size of the 1D-series. Both for the ergonomic part. And how it affects the balance when working with l"big lenses". Also, it allows for bigger batteries, with a longer battery time. And a built-in ethernet port.
RGF said:
Will Canon put a drop in extender into their III super teles? This would allow them to raise their price point and give a real incentive for all current owners to upgrade.
...
Personally, I do definitely hope so.
N***n recently upgraded their V.2 of the 200-400 to a 180-400 with built-in TC, and reduced weight at the same time.
I would totally love a 400/2,8 with built-in 1,4X TC.
It would pretty much be 400/2,8 and a 600/4 (well 560/4) in the same lens.
Would be absolutely great for soccer and some other sports. And make the lens more versatile, without trade-offs for DOF.
Mr Majestyk said:
Clever, you know that has just to do with lack of glass and not the cameras AF,
...
Well, for somebody that actually worked during the recent "WC" in Russia.
I did see three photographers with Sony gear. And mostly Canon lenses on it.
That said. For Sony to actually take over a big part of sports photographers.
The need to improve their "pro support" big, big time.
At the WC, just like other really big sports events. Both Canon and N***n have both loaners and service such as cleaning bodies and lenses available at all games. If they can, they even fix broken gear, on place. (I had a worn out lens mount exchanged during the EURO 2016 in France).
So far Sony doesn´t offer this kind of service. (And their existing "pro service" is, so far, limited to a pretty small amount of countries around the world).
It´s also absolutely crucial that the build in the possibility to transfer images by FTP, to their cameras. Both wireless and thru ethernet. (On the really big events only Ethernet are stable enough, and both UEFA and FIFA offer at least on ethernet cable for each photographer. The only solution stable and fast enough in that kind of games/events).
For what it is worth. The games Sweden played, I did transmit images straight from my camera directly to a major Swedish newspaper. Most of them cropped in camera before transmitting them. (Other than that I also submitted my work to the worlds biggest photo agency.
Something not possible with Sony right now.
Another issue is battery life, and problems when the buffer gets full.
(And if somebody is interested, some of my images, and some tear sheets from the "World cup" can be found here: https://agency.jkpg-sports.photo/index/G0000FrucfpGrwrQ ).
[EDIT]
I do truly like the idea of Sony become a true competitor to both Canon & Nikon when it comes to pro/sports photo.
It would benefit us all.
And i would actually love to try their gear.
That said, I do think that Sony has several things to improve first.
[/EDIT]