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

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,240
626
100mm sounds lot ,maybe old extension tubes would be more clever still :)
yeah maybe it would be too big camera ,but on future when cameras hover on air :p
For a 100mm Macro lens, the difference between infinity focus (100mm in front of the image plane) and 1:1 unity focus (200mm in front of the image plane) is exactly 100mm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,240
626
That's not what I'm talking about at all - What I mean is simply a single unit as if you combined the RF adapter and converter together but having the switch move the optical elements just like it does on the 200-400. Having the extra 1.4 at the flick of a switch is much nicer then putting off and on extenders especially in crappy conditions.
But a switch to place optical elements in the path of the lens' optical formula from the side is fundamentally different from a switch that would lengthen or shorten the lens barrel by 24mm.
 

Joe Subolefsky

I'm New Here
Sep 8, 2019
17
69
But a switch to place optical elements in the path of the lens' optical formula from the side is fundamentally different from a switch that would lengthen or shorten the lens barrel by 24mm.
You’re missing the point. All I’m talking about is new extenders that they are going to make anyway for the new big whites. Just like this but one unit with a switch to engage the optics.
 

Attachments

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,240
626
Are you sure that's Robert Frank?
Pretty sure. It was probably taken around the same time as this one in 1953 before he was older than dirt. His hair was shorter on the side, if not on the top, which would have been inside the hat.

1576122296282.png


If not Frank, this one is definitely Larry Burrows in Vietnam sometime between 1962 and when the helicopter he was riding in was shot down over Laos in 1971.



Or W. Eugene Smith in Hitachi, Japan in 1962.

 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,240
626
You’re missing the point. All I’m talking about is new extenders that they are going to make anyway for the new big whites. Just like this but one unit with a switch to engage the optics.
I'm evidently totally missing what you are suggesting. The EF to RF part of that construction has no optics. It's a tube used to extend the lens flange by 24mm. To switch between being usable with an EF lens on an RF camera and an RF lens on an RF camera, the black part of what you are holding would need to retract from 24mm thick to 0mm thick. Ditto it you wanted to US an EF lens on an EF body - the construction would need to shorten itself by 24mm compared to what you would need to use it with an EF lens on an RF body.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,240
626
Are you sure that's Robert Frank?
After a little digging, it turns out that is Michael Wolgensinger, one of Frank's mentors in Switzerland. But there are a near countless number of places on the internet that display this photo and label it as Robert Frank.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Joules

Pape

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 31, 2018
435
270
For a 100mm Macro lens, the difference between infinity focus (100mm in front of the image plane) and 1:1 unity focus (200mm in front of the image plane) is exactly 100mm.
Peoples too used to lenses what focus close without extension rings ,i guess my camera revolution may be just dream .
Even would be easy make long extension rings from lens caps when no camera connection :p
 

Joe Subolefsky

I'm New Here
Sep 8, 2019
17
69
I'm evidently totally missing what you are suggesting. The EF to RF part of that construction has no optics. It's a tube used to extend the lens flange by 24mm. To switch between being usable with an EF lens on an RF camera and an RF lens on an RF camera, the black part of what you are holding would need to retract from 24mm thick to 0mm thick. Ditto it you wanted to US an EF lens on an EF body - the construction would need to shorten itself by 24mm compared to what you would need to use it with an EF lens on an RF body.
Correct. This is for shooting the big whites on RF bodies and making the optical portion switchable like on the 200-400. The new big whites already have the additional electrical connections to work with the RF bodies.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,240
626
Correct. This is for shooting the big whites on RF bodies and making the optical portion switchable like on the 200-400. The new big whites already have the additional electrical connections to work with the RF bodies.
You're still going to need a 24mm difference in length to use the big whites with an RF camera versus with an EF camera. Whether the extender's optics are in the optical path or not.

As to the additional electrical connections; maybe, maybe not. EF lenses compatible with Canon extenders have always had more contacts than those that are not. These extra connections are for communication with the extender itself, which has the extra contacts on the front connection to the lens but does not have extra contacts on the back connection to the camera. It may well be that even more additional contacts will be needed to communicate with an RF extender *and* the RF camera.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,240
626
Correct. This is for shooting the big whites on RF bodies and making the optical portion switchable like on the 200-400. The new big whites already have the additional electrical connections to work with the RF bodies.
Look at it this way: If you took an EF extender and placed it between an EF camera and an EF lens, and moved the optics in the extender out of the optical path, the lens would be the thickness of the extender too far in front of the camera's flange.
 

TAF

EOS RP
Feb 26, 2012
346
35
Youngsters today have no idea...clearly photographers in those days were made of hardier stuff.



Pretty sure. It was probably taken around the same time as this one in 1953 before he was older than dirt. His hair was shorter on the side, if not on the top, which would have been inside the hat.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,443
425
I know some amazing photogs of Today but none of them are loosing their sleep over or even concerned about the technology dramas we discuss here. Seriously, some of The images they produce with an “outdated” Canon 5D level Mirror flapping Camera bodies and canon glass is absolutely a.m.a.z.i.n.g

I highly suggest joining the following Facebook group if you haven’t done so. I registered my FB account purely to have an opportunity to stay in touch with the group:


Some of the images posted to the group:
2176947A-5FBB-421B-B186-88F7225FB289.jpeg
F6BFA890-9E6E-4B17-8A28-918F4361C388.jpeg
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,594
806
aren't the two mounts phisically incompatible? different diameters and distances (not flange distance)
can one actually mount an EF lens on an R body without an adapter? not use the lens, simply mount it
The are incompatible as it stands, but they are the same diameter. It might be possible to modify the mount so that either type of lens would mount, and the electrical contacts line up, I spent a while comparing them and I think its possible. But, since it would weaken the mount to do that, it doesn't seem practical. That ignores the issue of flange distance which would need a moving sensor or extending/ retracting mount.
 

canonmike

EOS 80D
Jan 5, 2013
123
56
I use polarizers to minimize reflections on stone counter tops and in swimming pools and the images are part of a composite/blend of images to get the best looking aspect of each element in the frame, I am not looking to polarize large areas of sky or landscape.

Like this.

View attachment 187697

View attachment 187696
Nicely done and explained. Thx for sharing photo(s) validation. Ah, the voice of experience showing how to solve a problem I didn't even know I had, until seeing your examples. Kudos.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,075
1,378
119
Nicely done and explained. Thx for sharing photo(s) validation. Ah, the voice of experience showing how to solve a problem I didn't even know I had, until seeing your examples. Kudos.
Thanks for the kind words canonmike and I'm glad you found it useful, always happy to post examples when I have relevant ones.
 

Optics Patent

Former Nikon
Nov 6, 2019
134
75
Stefang, that's brilliant. Every lens a tilt lens. Probably not shift. A movable sensor that could control tilt - wow. Talk about opportunities for computational aids. I could imagine a focus analysis done in a few milliseconds, and optimal tilt executed automatically. Pick 2 or three focus points, rather than just one.

That actually would be worth waiting the extra 2 years. Here is where we get our hopes up for a proper dashing.
I file patent applications for ideas like this. Seriously.