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!
An EF & RF mount hybrid mirrorless camera in the works [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
A mirrorless '1 Series' that takes EF and RF without an adapter? - it makes me think of the time Homer Simpson was allowed to design a car.
This is one of those things I have difficulty in seeing why Canon would bother doing. I suppose it's a bit like wishing there was a hybrid FD/EF camera back when EF came in...
I can see why it would appeal to some, but Canon is going all in for the EF-> RF change. The 'hybrid pro' just seems firmly looking in the wrong direction from a business POV (of course, the dead hand of marketing could still step in).
Can't afford the new lenses? You're probably not in the true 'pro' market (horrible and essentially meaningless term that it is) ;-)
The RF mount is so much more than a slightly different bayonet and shorter flange distance. A look at Canon patents over the last year or two shows a lot of adapter related ones. I have a feeling that it is the actual adapters we'll see some novelty in.
Personally, I've been impressed by using an adapter with an EOS RP (and now looking forward to a mirrorless 5Ds replacement), but then again I'm not using the RP for much of my paying work. I'm interested in what the RF mount brings to lens design and the cameras that go with it. I'll carry on using some of my EF lenses for years I'm sure, much as I'm just testing a new M645->RF tilt/shift adapter for using my old M645 lenses on the RP.
This is one of those things I have difficulty in seeing why Canon would bother doing. I suppose it's a bit like wishing there was a hybrid FD/EF camera back when EF came in...
I can see why it would appeal to some, but Canon is going all in for the EF-> RF change. The 'hybrid pro' just seems firmly looking in the wrong direction from a business POV (of course, the dead hand of marketing could still step in).
Can't afford the new lenses? You're probably not in the true 'pro' market (horrible and essentially meaningless term that it is) ;-)
The RF mount is so much more than a slightly different bayonet and shorter flange distance. A look at Canon patents over the last year or two shows a lot of adapter related ones. I have a feeling that it is the actual adapters we'll see some novelty in.
Personally, I've been impressed by using an adapter with an EOS RP (and now looking forward to a mirrorless 5Ds replacement), but then again I'm not using the RP for much of my paying work. I'm interested in what the RF mount brings to lens design and the cameras that go with it. I'll carry on using some of my EF lenses for years I'm sure, much as I'm just testing a new M645->RF tilt/shift adapter for using my old M645 lenses on the RP.
Keith, all good thoughts. However, from a business POV, allow me share some points:
1. In present market conditions Canon may consider utilising a hybrid EF/RF mount system as a bridging solution until such a time when RF lens lineup is complete.
2. the purpose is to keep EF owners within the system and prevent cross brand DSLR to MILC migration while we are in a transition stage.
3. There is a chance that Canon is behind the curve with regards to uptake rate of the new R system by Canon system photographers and feel that an intervention is required.
All the above is a pure speculation and without looking into market dynamics and Canon sales figures is just that. Pure speculation.
Yes, but it still sounds a horrible kludge and the two mounts are different enough to make any solution require what is essentially another new mount if adapters are out.
I'm also looking for a 'mirrorless 1 series' to be a clear evolution in ergonomics, partly afforded by the removal of the mirror box and pentaprism.
In some ways I'd see the real arrival of this posited 'hybrid' as an admission of failure ;-)
I'm also looking for a 'mirrorless 1 series' to be a clear evolution in ergonomics, partly afforded by the removal of the mirror box and pentaprism.
In some ways I'd see the real arrival of this posited 'hybrid' as an admission of failure ;-)
Does everything work correctly if you change lenses without disconnecting the adapter from the body?
certainly does on the RP - works fine with manual lenses too (if you remember to set the option for shutter release without a lens).
If people ask me why I still stick with Canon (digital) I always say: Canon is the Toyota of camera industries, not fancy but you know you will always get from A to B. Now, if Canon comes up with a sort of Prius like hybrid model, they will be even more toyota-esque... 
True, though one major and unfortunate problem is that there is still no way to use manual lenses in silent mode on the RP, since the menu where you enable shutter release “without lens” is not available.
New times, new measures. When it came out it already was said to have features missing and bugs. also some of the concepts seem experimental like the touch bar no one sane likes.
Yes, works fine. And even works fine switching when the camera is left on. I know you're advised to turn it off before switching lenses, but I frequently forget, and never have any problems.
Silent Shooting is one of the scene modes, but there is no option within it for releasing the shutter w/o a lens attached, which means no manual focus glass can be used in Silent Shooting mode.
I imagine it's just going to be an RF lens mode that automatically engages by raising the mirror and extending the sensor for use with those premium RF lenses. This is simply to appease the 1DX flagship, pro-body shooters who are being excluded from using the flagship, pro-RF lenses. Still nothing for those looking for a mirrorless 5D successor.
I honestly don't think Canon's mirrorless strategy is very well-thought out. They rushed a mirrorless FF to market because they didn't want to become the Windows Phone of mirrorless FF. As far as I'm concerned, they never came out with that 'elegant solution' they promised. They still seem like they're not sure what to do. I'm still miffed that there are 3 mirrorless full frames released: none a genuine 5D successor or better... yet one for astrophotography.
I honestly don't think Canon's mirrorless strategy is very well-thought out. They rushed a mirrorless FF to market because they didn't want to become the Windows Phone of mirrorless FF. As far as I'm concerned, they never came out with that 'elegant solution' they promised. They still seem like they're not sure what to do. I'm still miffed that there are 3 mirrorless full frames released: none a genuine 5D successor or better... yet one for astrophotography.
Last edited:
Somehow I wonders why everyone reading is assuming some movable mount or sensor.. for the mounting possibility in the same physical mount, they just need to make the locking pins in the mount compatible for both, as how the EF-S can take both EF and EF-S lenses but EF-S would get obstruction in the EF mount itself to avoid mis-mounting.
Electronic contact can be via some parallel line configuration, depending on how many pins is connected they can switch between EF or RF protocol.
while the flange distance problem it can be just a set of lens elements built in, if an RF lens was detected they can just flip those in and act as an adapter with correction elements, just like those FD to EF adapters with elements built in. Surely this would make the RF lens performance less than in native RF mount, but it could get those tempting ultra large aperture lenses selling no?
Electronic contact can be via some parallel line configuration, depending on how many pins is connected they can switch between EF or RF protocol.
while the flange distance problem it can be just a set of lens elements built in, if an RF lens was detected they can just flip those in and act as an adapter with correction elements, just like those FD to EF adapters with elements built in. Surely this would make the RF lens performance less than in native RF mount, but it could get those tempting ultra large aperture lenses selling no?
When canon went from FD to EF, pro camera and lens owners were very upset. I expect that they have had a lot of feedback from pro users who buy a huge number of 1 series cameras like the big news agencies asking for a better solution than the current adapter (Its fine for my use). A Hybrid mount body may very well be a attempt to make them happy. With the 2020 Olympics quickly coming up, that could be a way to allow RF lenses to be used on the new EF /RF bodies such that having a mixed inventory of lenses would not be a issue.
There wont be problems on EOS-1 combatibiliness with different ef and R pins cause there isnt pins on that body.
In body aperture leafs.
Autofocusing works only with moving sensor more close and far from lenses. No lens focus. Hybrid mount is just side effect.
Ibis is good enough to replace lens IS.
That is true mirrorless revolution .freely moving sensor.
No image quality weakening extra lenses for focus and IS.
This hybrid camera rumour may be just on drawing board still.
One extra benefit not having electronic connection between lens and mount ,mount can do auto shift operations with medium format lens
In body aperture leafs.
Autofocusing works only with moving sensor more close and far from lenses. No lens focus. Hybrid mount is just side effect.
Ibis is good enough to replace lens IS.
That is true mirrorless revolution .freely moving sensor.
No image quality weakening extra lenses for focus and IS.
This hybrid camera rumour may be just on drawing board still.
One extra benefit not having electronic connection between lens and mount ,mount can do auto shift operations with medium format lens
Last edited:
No. A camera with flipping lens elements to adapt RF lenses to the longer flange distance? Dead on arrival. Moreover, it's dead at the design stage, and the designer is fired and blacklisted. Canon will never do that.
You are absolutely correct! It sure sounds like a business risk mitigation exercise or hedging against a risk of loosing market share due to immaturity of new product line.
Who knows.
canon may just consider offering a camera body with interchangeable mount with some additional thumb screws for fastening mount directly to the camera body. Just like Ef to RF mount adapter but with additional thumb screws. This would make sense to long glass shooters. I can perfectly see this.
