Canon Full Frame Mirrorless [CR2]

[douglaurent]

Looking at the size and weight of the Sony E-mount 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 plus the lack of a supertele lens, it's probably not possible to build a complete mirrorless full frame system that is small and lightweight. So maybe people and companies should understand that it's not the main priority to expect and build small and light camera bodies, when the lenses can't keep up with it anyway.

A 5D4 body with EVF, articulating screen and sensor stabilization would be the bomb. Of course there can be a long list of more features like 4K 60fps, and other stuff coming from Sony, Panasonic or Pentax cameras. But PLEASE Canon don't come up with a new mount, a new form factor and other experiments. A 5D4M (= mirrorless) would absolutely do it to start somewhere.

 

[Sator]

IMHO, 5DS/R replacement is a good candidate for Canon first FF mirrorless camera...

A high resolution camera would the worst possible candidate for a 35mm format mirrorless camera. The problem is autofocus.

A better term for a mirrorless camera would be an AF-sensorless camera. It is missing an entire dedicated off-focal plane autofocus sensor, and the camera forced to function with a critical element ripped out of it. Trying to get a 120MP sensor to autofocus sufficiently quickly without that extra autofocus sensor would be rather difficult. I can't image many tolerating a model that shot at a maximum of 2-3 fps.

 

[aero1126]

Perfect camera would be combing DSLT and DSLR. Basically make the reflex mirror translucent so some of the light goes to the sensor for the expanded DPAF coverage, while still getting the low light advantages of the dedicated AF module. Think Sony A99ii without losing light during exposure. Combine with Canon colors and ergonomics + lenses, and you have the perfect system.

 

[Sator]

What is the point of EF mirrorless camera if there is no size saving. Canon could just spend development on a hybrid OVF/ EVF instead.

The full frame mirrorless needs to be EF-M mount. So Canon can design smaller lenses for it and get people to buy them.

Another huge misunderstanding that is often repeated. People think that because a mirrorless body is smaller that therefore the lenses can be made smaller too. The opposite is true. The lenses mostly have to be made LARGER. The only exception is with short focal length designs where the omission of a retrofocal element does permit the design to be more compact.

There are a couple of factors that determine how much of a size blow out you get with mirrorless lens designs:

1. The shorter the flange distance the more telecentric the design has to be and hence the larger the lens
2. The larger the maximum aperture of the lens, the more telecentric it has to be and hence the larger the lens (that's why Sony FE mount lenses are nearly all slower than DSLR equivalents)

But this is the end result of having this sort of telecentric design causing massive blow outs in lens size:



I am comparing the Leica SL 50mm f/1.4, 24-90, 90-280 vs the Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 II. So much for a "more compact future".

Keep in mind that the "more compact" size of the Sony a7 range bodies is also to a large extent achieved by amputating more than the mirror and AF-sensor. Other features that have been ripped out include weather sealing, dual card slots, and a decent sized battery to feed the EVF. It's "more compact"...oh great...

 

[Sator]

Perfect camera would be combing DSLT and DSLR. Basically make the reflex mirror translucent so some of the light goes to the sensor for the expanded DPAF coverage, while still getting the low light advantages of the dedicated AF module. Think Sony A99ii without losing light during exposure. Combine with Canon colors and ergonomics + lenses, and you have the perfect system.

Agreed.

Pellicle mirror designs (DSLTs in Sony terminology) are a Canon invention. Ricoh have a patent for a digital "Pellix" which changes its translucency to take the shot. With Sony issuing a warning saying they have been flooded with greater than expected numbers of preorders for the a99II, I am waiting for a Canon digital Pellix patent to appear.

You then eliminate mirror shock, reduce the size/weight of the body, and you get to keep the extra off-focal plane autofocus sensor to achieve ultra fast focus. Canon also have a patent for a stacked autofocus sensor, meaning that there is a lot of scope for engineering innovation in future DSLR designs too.

 

[rrcphoto]

The specs of Canon's first full frame mirrorless camera unfortunately will be dictated by their internal decision how it will least cannibalize their other products - not their ability to build in great components, or the needs of consumers who discuss this topics here.

Canon will probably never make the "mistake" again by unintentionally overfulfilling expectations like they did with video in the 5D2, when most likely the Canon camcorder department went on the barricades afterwards. Internal politics and egos of anybody at Canon who is responsible for a stable success of traditional DSLRs will try to limit this new mirrorless FF product. That is life.

so much hyperbole.
:

 

[Bob Howland]

> With a mirrorless lens, the new lens can't be mounted on FF and EF-S DSLRs.

This would indicate that they would be doing a 4th mount type (ie, it's not EF, and not EF-S) which is apparently what isn't going to happen.


OK. look at the EF-M mount. It was designed to be able to use a full-frame sensor. If they were going to stick to APS-C forever on EF-M they could have used a smaller mount (if you're not sure about this, check out the size of Sony FE and E lenses. Almost identical mount size.)

Now, having said that I really don't think that Canon should do this, I hate to say that I predicted exactly this (a FF mirrorless camera that takes EF lenses only) almost exactly a year ago

Apologies for the shameless link, but I think it's appropriate in this case.

http://www.everyothershot.com/full-frame-mirrorless-eos-5dm-in-the-works/

My reply was intended to address the notion of having the rear lens elements of FF mirrorless lenses extend into the mirror box while "keeping" the same EF lens mount. The people discussing the notion seemed to ignore that putting a lens like that onto a mirrored DSLR could be catastrophic.

How do you "know" that the M-mount and E-mount were "designed" with FF in mind? I don't think that Sony expected the Alpha mount to become so irrelevant and, as I recall, Canon has openly stated that the M-mount will never be FF. However, both the E and M mounts are larger than the Nikon SLR F-mount introduced in 1959.

By your definition, is it the same EF mount if Canon changes only the flange distance for FF mirrorless cameras from 44mm to 22mm?

 

[Sator]

There will not be a 4th mount (EF, EF-S, EF-M) added to the Canon ILC lineup

Although most readers have jumped to the conclusion that Canon will make a EOS mount (EF mount) mirrorless camera, there is another way of interpreting this. Canon will convert the EF-M mount into a 35mm mount. There is a growing trend towards creating mirrorless mounts with ultra short flange distances e.g. the Sony FE mount with a 18mm flange distance, Leica SL mount with 19mm, and Hasselblad X mount with 20mm. The reason is that the main advantage of mirrorless is the short flange distance and the improvement in lens acutance this can theoretically engender—and which may be the one and only meaningful point to mirrorless designs.

 

[ahsanford]

Apologies for the shameless link, but I think it's appropriate in this case.

http://www.everyothershot.com/full-frame-mirrorless-eos-5dm-in-the-works/

Au Mg I heart me a good lens chart. Well done.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Some believe mirrorless is all about size and weight. Others do not share that opinion.

The second group would say that there are some things mirrorless can do that an SLR cannot (gasp!):

• Peaking for manual focus use through the viewfinder, because that is a more comfortable and stable means to shoot handheld and make focus adjustments more quickly
  
• The ability to adapt older lenses

I never cease to be amazed when people state that focus peaking is an extraordinary technical feature unique to mirrorless camera designs. In fact, Sony had focus peaking in a DSLR A mount body years before they ever made a mirrorless camera. The Pentax K-1 DSLR also has focus peaking. You can even install focus peaking in a Canon DSLR via Magic Lantern.

Apologies. Updated it for you. I've never said focus peaking is revolutionary, but LiveView functionality through the viewfinder is better than having liveview solely through the back display. Taking pictures with two hands on the camera a foot from my face like it's a (fancy) cell phone makes me want to smash something with a hammer.

EVF would (in theory) give me a much more responsive closed chain that resembles (and augments) my OVF shooting experience today: not looking at controls or pressing many buttons -- just framing through the VF, making small adjustments and turning a few key knobs, which I can do without looking.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

so much the most hyperbole ever.
:

Fixed it for you.

- A

 

[Refurb7]

The specs of Canon's first full frame mirrorless camera unfortunately will be dictated by their internal decision how it will least cannibalize their other products - not their ability to build in great components, or the needs of consumers who discuss this topics here.

Canon will probably never make the "mistake" again by unintentionally overfulfilling expectations like they did with video in the 5D2, when most likely the Canon camcorder department went on the barricades afterwards. Internal politics and egos of anybody at Canon who is responsible for a stable success of traditional DSLRs will try to limit this new mirrorless FF product. That is life.

so much hyperbole.
:

Canon's products cannibalize each other all of the time. That is part of the reason for Canon's success. There is a great deal of overlap in the system, and for many consumers the cheaper products can easily substitute for the more expensive ones. At the same time, they make a great deal of specialized gear to meet the needs of consumers. Canon could certainly offer a much smaller system and still do well. Also, a company like Canon is run from the top, not by some guy in one department trying to "limit the success" of another department. That sounds like complete nonsense. Why would mirrorless and DSLRs be in different departments anyway? Likely they have the same people working on both. Why not use the expertise they already have, especially to build cross-system integration and familiar controls, etc.?

 

[Luds34]

Biggest draw to mirrorless for me is the size reduction... I would not be opposed to a ff mirrorless with some sort of new mount with L equivilent lenses.. Not sure how they could get L glass quality in a smaller package though

And that's the rub, at full frame sensor size, once you factor in the lens (assuming fast L glass and not say the shorty forty) the size/weight savings on the body become pretty much negligible. I think you need to drop down to APS-C to really appreciate a size savings by moving to a mirrorless system.

 

[9VIII]

• actually, with no mirror you can make pancakes that go deep into the mount, even more so than EF-S

Keep in mind that my entire original post you quoted took the CR rumor and interpreted it to mean that 'Canon would offer a full-blown EF mount camera for mirrorless'.

That's only one of three possibilities based on the rumor. Others on this very thread believe EF-M might well serve a FF sensor. So my theory of a full EF mount / no new lenses needed / no adaptors needed / etc. may very well turn out to be incorrect (even if it is quite practical ).

- A

Ugh.
Putting a Full Frame sensor in EOS-M would be so lame.
The E mount is exactly the same size and half of what we've heard about it is trouble, Canon should not repeat the same move...
Unless their curved sensor tech turn out.
That was the main problem with the Sony E mount and if Canon can say "we've done the same thing, only better" then that's compelling, otherwise EF mount seems like it would open up better options.

 

[pokerz]

USM len designed for off sensor phase detection AF, you have to buy new STM len anyway.
More important, FF dual pixel AF is a battery drainer, ie. 1dx2 with a 30Wh juice in liveview shooting = 260 shoots.


Lithium-ion rechargeable battery,
(CIPA standard, Optical Viewfinder)
1,210
Lithium-ion rechargeable battery,
(CIPA standard, Live View LCD)
260

 

[davidmurray]

I don't care for a mirrorless camera unless it has a view finder so that the shot can be framed.

 

[canonic]

<p>The product roadmap for mirrorless from Canon has no been finalized and there’s a good chance we’re going to hear a lot of conflicting information over the coming months. The source doesn’t expect any sort of full frame mirrorless announcement until the end of 2017 at the earliest.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

... until the end of 2017 at the earliest
... too late!

 

[Zv]

Am I right in assuming that current EF-M lenses won't cover a full frame sensor if it were possible to fit one into an EOS M today? So, if that's the case it seems unlikely that they would make a mirrorless EF-M mount FF camera. That would need a new class of lenses and possibly confuse consumers who might try and mount regular EF-M lenses.

My money's on an EF mount FF mirrorless or a fixed lens camera. And due to the deeper flange of the EF mount the camera would be about the size of a 6D or rebel, wouldn't it. Which then begs the question of why bother?

Fixed lens would be no doubt an expensive niche market thing like the RX1

New question - would an APS-H (or something similar) work instead? And could that be fitted into the EOS M to make it useable with existing lenses? (Probably not since APS-H is dead, right?)

 

[Alex_M]

Pure gold... Hard to imagine working in live view mode and handholding camera with anything longer than 200-300mm attached. For some shooters not even that... Not very practical in my humble opinion.

Taking pictures with two hands on the camera a foot from my face like it's a (fancy) cell phone makes me want to smash something with a hammer.

EVF would (in theory) give me a much more responsive closed chain that resembles (and augments) my OVF shooting experience today: not looking at controls or pressing many buttons -- just framing through the VF, making small adjustments and turning a few key knobs, which I can do without looking.

- A

 

[Mistral75]

(...)

Measuring the Fuji GFX mount by comparing it to the sensor size in a picture of the prototype, it looks like they've actually got a 90mm outer diameter and 70mm inner throat diameter on the mount, that would actually fit the proper "6x4.5" sized Hassleblad or Phase One sensor size.
That sounds like planning for future expansion.

(...)

The throat diameter of the Fujifilm G mount is 65mm. It's enough to accommodate a 36x48 sensor (diagonal=60mm) but probably too narrow for a 'full 645' sensor (currently 40x53.4, diagonal=67mm).