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

uri.raz

EOS 80D
Jan 5, 2016
155
113
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
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RGB86

kraats

EOS 80D
Oct 9, 2011
115
19
Because it would be a pro feature that they could charge extra for. Especially if they do something really cool like allow macro with EF lenses by shifting the sensor position.
What is pro? It is a nerd term for my camera gear is more expensive then yours. I can 't hear it anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canon1966

yeahright

EOS M50
Aug 28, 2014
45
16
Because you can't have both RF mount and a mirror, so optical or hybrid viewfinders are impossible. Best you could do is a hybrid EVF/rangefinder.
With a hybrid mount that is geometrically essentially an EF mount, with the sensor moving towards the lens for RF lenses, you could well fit a mirror that is working as in a DSLR in EF mode, and locked up in RF mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

Ivan Muller

EOS RP
Oct 25, 2011
357
9
mmm , I thought maybe the adapter could have a build in mirror, but it looks kinda short to accommodate a mirror, unless its build into the body and only releases with the special adapter. The body would then be a mirrorless body with a hybrid viewfinder? Personally I think a R type body with all the bells and whistles of the 1Dx makes more sense as one could use EF and RF lenses anyway, like one can now with the R/RF.
My R works superbly well with the EF lenses, the adapter only increases the total length minimally, and because it can accommodate pol /ND filters etc actually makes the EF lenses via an adapter more versatile than the RF lenses, IMO...I never pick up my R and think mmm there is an adapter attached to this body, it just feels part of the camera. I think sceptics of the EF via Sdapter R/RF solution are theorizing only with no practical experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rixy

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,809
3,303
That sounds like a great idea. I'm not at all convinced that 24mm of flange depth is worth obsoleting all of my existing EF lenses. Now that Canon has skimmed-off the early adopters (who were going to buy almost any mirrorless solution Canon offered) it would be nice to see a better solution for EF lenses going forward.

Adaptors get old really quickly and I'm guessing the integrated filter thing sounds better than it really works.

If I have to use an adapter anyway, I might as well just buy an S1R or a A7/A9.

edit: I really appreciate the rumors and such but I think it's time Canon gave us some visibility into where they are going. IMO the entire EF vs RF vs M rollout has been a complete cluster that has done nothing but create a lot of uncertainty about the future of the brand.
Adapters may get old really quickly but early adopters certainly do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Graphic.Artifacts

Joules

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2017
369
288
Hamburg, Germany
As someone who is interested in actual releases of new FF camera models (since none of the current offerings fit the bill) am I the only one who would rather have silence as opposed to CR1's and 2's?
What would that leave? Actual Canon Anouncements. You can get these from the official site as well. But as this is a rumors site, I think you are almost the only one who doesn't want to hear rumors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shunsai

jolyonralph

Kodak Brownie
Aug 25, 2015
1,103
323
50
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
what do you think is happening with ibis every time its used on systems that have it? It has to recalibrate itself back to center every movement. each adapter joint can introduce micro adjustment issues. However mirrorless corrects for most of these issues automatically using focus. The same techniques for focus should be applicable to a rail movement. It only needs to get within 1/4 of a millimeter and the ibis can compensate for the rest. Getting it perfect without ibis would be hard, but for ibis to work well it needs to self adjust, which can correct for small differences in linear stepping motors that would most likely be used to move a sensor along rails. to be honest moving a sensor in this way is not much different than moving a lens element, with the difference of a ribbon cable thats attached to it.
But it's still going to be slow. The camera would have to detect a different type of lens has been connected, and then it would have to move the sensor 26mm forwards. That's going to take time that no professional is going to want to waste.

Tell me again, what is the benefit of doing this vs having an inexpensive adaptor on the EF lens where you can swap lenses and shoot immediately?

Sure it's possible. But it's so utterly stupid that whoever thought this fantasy up should hang their head in shame.
 

yeahright

EOS M50
Aug 28, 2014
45
16
But it's still going to be slow. The camera would have to detect a different type of lens has been connected, and then it would have to move the sensor 26mm forwards. That's going to take time that no professional is going to want to waste.
How long do you think moving a sensor by 26 mm would take? Certainly only a fraction of the time it takes to change lenses. How fast can you change lenses? In 10 seconds maybe? I would guess the sensor could be moved in less than a second, so that would be a non-issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
545
412
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
But it's still going to be slow. The camera would have to detect a different type of lens has been connected, and then it would have to move the sensor 26mm forwards. That's going to take time that no professional is going to want to waste.
Well the detection will probably be electronic, I don't know, 2-3 milliseconds? Sensor movement is another 1/10 of a second or so. Extremely fast trained lens re-mount will take maybe 5-10 seconds. That is, 50-100 times longer than internal camera adjustments. I doubt any professional would ever notice.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,153
390
As someone who is interested in actual releases of new FF camera models (since none of the current offerings fit the bill) am I the only one who would rather have silence as opposed to CR1's and 2's?
Actually, the rumors are ok as far as I am concerned. It's all the speculation that follows that can be a bit much if I take it seriously. Sometimes, it is better for me if read CR for the humor.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,340
322
But it's still going to be slow. The camera would have to detect a different type of lens has been connected, and then it would have to move the sensor 26mm forwards. That's going to take time that no professional is going to want to waste.

Tell me again, what is the benefit of doing this vs having an inexpensive adaptor on the EF lens where you can swap lenses and shoot immediately?

Sure it's possible. But it's so utterly stupid that whoever thought this fantasy up should hang their head in shame.
it depends.. let me share a use case, where universal EF/RF mount may be useful.
now, a moving sensor idea is a bit crazy. let's not even consider this possibility. it is crazy .. full stop..
let's assume that (a) a camera with interchangeable digital back and hybrid EF/RF mount has been release by company XXXXX.
(b) each digital back is equipped with a sensor.
(c) there are the following types of digital backs are available:
1. EF flange distance type, FULL FRAME, around 40Mp resolution
2. RF flange distance type, FULL FRAME, around 40Mp resolution
3. EF flange distance type, HIGH RESOLUTION FULL FRAME, 80Mp
4. RF flange distance type, HIGH RESOLUTION FULL FRAME, 80Mp
5. EF flange distance type, HIGH RESOLUTION APS-C, 30Mp-ish.
6. EF flange distance type, FULL FRAME, around 30Mp resolution - optimised for high frame rate shooting??? perhaps...
7. RF flange distance type, FULL FRAME, around 30Mp resolution - optimised for high frame rate shooting??? perhaps...
8. EF sensor optimised for video 4K or 8K application, pixel sized 1:1 to match 4K or *k video resolution - global Shutter. :)
9. RF sensor optimised for video 4K or 8K application, pixel sized 1:1 to match 4K or *k video resolution - global Shutter. :)

now.. shooting with two such cameras you can universally interchange between RF and EF mounts and also sensor size and resolution, still and video optimised
don't you see the benefits of such a design and possibilities???

and one more possibility to consider:

in 2-3 years time - upgrade you digital back to a shiny new digital back with a latest sensor - improved in what ever way... you name it..

does this address your question, as follows?
"Tell me again, what is the benefit of doing this vs having an inexpensive adaptor on the EF lens where you can swap lenses and shoot immediately?"

personally i would love to have a pair of cameras with interchangeable sensor size and mount. I think it is a great idea.. right? :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
545
412
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
personally i would love to have a pair of cameras with interchangeable sensor size and mount. I think it is a great idea.. right? :D
Interchangeable back is an interesting idea but it wouldn't be a 1D-line system, it'd be a totally different system. Not a system that's meant in this rumour.
Most importantly, it wouldn't address the main issue with the EF-RF adapter - the hassle of having the adapter itself. Instead of having a $100 adapter one would have to carry two digital backs for a (prospective) combination of EF and RF lenses. In order to change from EF to RF lens, not only one would have to change the lenses, but also the digital backs. With the adapter, at least it's possible to keep it mounted on a lens. Not an option with the digital back.
Also such a modular design comes at a cost, not only the whole system with a single digital back would be more expensive than a monolithic 1D-like camera , but one would have to buy two expensive digital backs (around $2-4k I guess) just in order to to be able to change the lenses.

Of course 'sensor on rails' looks like a much more plausible solution, but don't worry, it's only relatively more plausible compared to the digital back idea. Both solutions are unlikely to be implemented. The very rumour in question is implausible in my opinion.
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,076
364
It is a rumors site alright but I guess there is a distinction between plausible rumor, improbable rumor. or complete BS. If something is a complete BS - like CR0 or not plausible CR1 - and still it is mentioned then it's pure clickbait and the site becomes from an excellent one to a BS one. Now this is a thought that I have independent of this specific thread. But the one mentioning a 20Mpixel 1DxIII is a BS clickbait one.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,340
322
Interchangeable back is an interesting idea but it wouldn't be a 1D-line system, it'd be a totally different system. Not a system that's meant in this rumour.
Most importantly, it wouldn't address the main issue with the EF-RF adapter - the hassle of having the adapter itself. Instead of having a $100 adapter one would have to carry two digital backs for a (prospective) combination of EF and RF lenses. In order to change from EF to RF lens, not only one would have to change the lenses, but also the digital backs. With the adapter, at least it's possible to keep it mounted on a lens. Not an option with the digital back.
Also such a modular design comes at a cost, not only the whole system with a single digital back would be more expensive than a monolithic 1D-like camera , but one would have to buy two expensive digital backs (around $2-4k I guess) just in order to to be able to change the lenses.

Of course 'sensor on rails' looks like a much more plausible solution, but don't worry, it's only relatively more plausible compared to the digital back idea. Both solutions are unlikely to be implemented. The very rumour in question is implausible in my opinion.
++ but one would have to buy two expensive digital backs (around $2-4k I guess) just in order to to be able to change the lenses.

lets see, ideally I need 4 pro grade cameras - ideally..:

2 x jack of all trade Full frame - 5D level - for run and gun scenario - mid res - around 40Mp ??
1 x high res - studio, landscape, reproduction work, what ever requires high res work - 80Mp ??
1 x sport fast action type.. say. 30Mp - 15+ FPS Full frame.
I do not shoot video - so this leaves me wanting 4 cameras (only :) ) - say around $3500 + $3500 $4000 + $6,000 = $17K so far.

in the interchangeable digital back scenario, lets assume, each camera /wo digital back cost: $4,000 and digital back $2000 each?
I need 2 camera bodies and 4 digital backs. that's $8,000 + $8000 = $16,000.00
so the total cost of ownership is just about the same but flexibility though.

we understand benefits of interchangeable lenses very well. having a flexibility of multi resolution digital back at our disposal would be nice to have :)
 
Last edited:

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
545
412
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
Having a Canon modular system with digital backs would be nice. I doubt they'd do it, but it'd be nice.
My point is, such a modular system is not what was meant in this particular rumour. Because

“EOS-1 style EOS R camera” and "hybrid EF/RF lens mount. So this basically means that you’d be able to mount both types of lenses without the use of an adapter."

++ but one would have to buy two expensive digital backs (around $2-4k I guess) just in order to to be able to change the lenses.

lets see, ideally I need 4 pro grade cameras - ideally..:

2 x jack of all trade Full frame - 5D level - for run and gun scenario - mid res - around 40Mp ??
1 x high res - studio, landscape, reproduction work, what ever requires high res work - 80Mp ??
1 x sport fast action type.. say. 30Mp - 15+ FPS Full frame.
I do not shoot video - so this leaves me wanting 4 cameras (only :) ) - say around $3500 + $3500 $4000 + $6,000 = $17K so far.

in the interchangeable digital back scenario, lets assume, each camera /wo digital back cost: $4,000 and digital back $2000 each?
I need 2 camera bodies and 4 digital backs. that's $8,000 + $8000 = $16,000.00
so the total cost of ownership is just about the same but flexibility though.

we understand benefits of interchangeable lenses very well. having a flexibility of multi resolution digital back at our disposal would be nice to have :)
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,340
322
Having a Canon modular system with digital backs would be nice. I doubt they'd do it, but it'd be nice.
My point is, such a modular system is not what was meant in this particular rumour. Because

“EOS-1 style EOS R camera” and "hybrid EF/RF lens mount. So this basically means that you’d be able to mount both types of lenses without the use of an adapter."
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 :)
 
Sep 8, 2019
8
43
i keep getting lens connection error with the 70-200. i dont think the adapter is good for long whites when the camera is vertical
That's simply not true.

I have been shooting a 600III with and without extenders on an R almost daily since March and have had zero issues vertical or horizontal.

Personally I would much rather just see a simple EF to RF extenders with a builtin flip switch like the 200-400.