Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]

Fleetie

Watching for pigs on the wing
Nov 22, 2010
375
5
48
Manchester, UK
www.facebook.com
neuroanatomist said:
Maximilian said:
Canon have immense experience in designing teleconverters, and still teleconverters take a hit on AF speed and accuracy ...
Hi Mikehit!

Sorry, but I don't get your point.

A flange distance adapter is not a teleconverter.
A teleconverter has an influence on optical formula, focal length and aperture.
An adapter is only setting the optical formula in relationship to the image plane.
And it has to conduct the electrical signals properly - without altering them.

Problem with EOS M and adapter hitting the AF performance of EF/EF-S lenses is also not clear to me.
But that's a question for Canon development. It seems they've decided to built up the EOS M AF system different to the EOS.

So why should they do so again when aiming at customers with EF lenses?
The exact nature of the problem using the EF mount adapter and why there's a performance hit is not clear to me, either...but what is clear is that such a performance hit does exist. It seems very unlikely that Canon would find that performance hit desirable, therefore there must be some problem they were unable to solve. What makes you so sure they could solve it for EF lenses on a new short-flange mount for a FF sensor, when they could not solve it for EF lenses on a new short-flange mount for an APS-C sensor?

Following that logic, do you believe Canon would release FF MILC bodies – a higher end product, with a generally more demanding and discerning customer base – with a known performance hit for users with a collection of EF lenses who switch to a FF MILC?
Could it just be that when you attach an EF (or EF-S) lens to a M-series camera, with its smaller battery, then the latter can't deliver the power to drive the AF system in the lens as quickly as the larger non-M cameras can?

Don't I remember hearing that when you attach a big white lens to a 1DX, then the latter can drive the AF system faster, because of the increased power available? I read something similar to that. Could this be the same issue?

That said, I'm not sure what batteries the Rebels and the xxD cameras use, as I've only ever had a 7D and a 5D3.
 

addola

Sold my soul for a flippy screen
Nov 16, 2015
97
61
Maximilian said:
addola said:
I was confused about Mikehit's point and what he meant. It's not only "the glass in the converter", it's the distance
...
Hi addola!

Either you made a such bad joke about optics that I missed the pointe or you should go back learning about optics and lens optical formula...
Ahhh, did you just tell me to "go back to learn optical formulas" then proceeded to use the comma & decimal interchangeably? Ha! Correct me if I am wrong, and I'll be happy I learned something. But first you need to understand what I am talking about:

I was not talking about optical formulas. I was explaining why a teleconverter would cause loss of light regardless of how well designed is the glass elements in it due to the added distance, and that in turn effects the cameras ability to AF.

The way you compute light loss is not correct. Maybe using the term "distance light travels" is inaccurate description to what I meant. To compute the new effective f-number due to this change, we have to understand that it's the ratio of focal length to aperture diameter, and this new f-number will be lower because the new focal length is the original + extensions.
Let:
  • e = extension tube in mm
  • f = focal length used
  • amax = max aperture of the lens at that focal length
We want to find the effective f-number of using e mm extension tubes, let's call is aeffective which is computed (or estimated) by:

aeffective = (f + e) / ( f / amax)

I get this formula by combining two equations:
amax = f / D where D is diameter of exit pupil in original setup and
aeffective = (f + e) / D ration of new focal length to the same pupil

So D = f/amax and we can substitute that in Eq 2

Correct me if I am wrong with the formulas above

So when you say that when 1cm (10mm) is used that the loss of light would have an insignificant effect on AF I urge you to look at Canon cameras specification.

For example, a 100mm f/2.8 camera with a 10mm tube would lose about 1/3 of a stop, as the effective f-number would become ~3.0, if you think this doesn't have any effect on AF, then look at camera specs. Beyond f/2.8, the 6D's center point will lose it's vertical sensitivity, and the 5D Mark 4's Dual Crosstype AF points will lose their left diagonal/right diagonal. The 6D would lose most AF functions beyond f/5.6 (I believe only a single center point can be used at f/8). Canon's extension tubes & teleconverters are longer than just 1cm.

On shorter focal length, the effect would be greater, as a 24-70 f/2.8 at 24mm would effectively lose almost one complete stop, as the effective f-number would be f/3.9

An FFD adapter simply allows you to achieve infinity focus. It does not adjust the optical formula of the lens per se, but rather project it as you mentioned. You are simply pushing the lens further so that the image is projected on the sensor "as intended" by its optical formula, which is to focus from infinity to minimum focus distance. Pushing it any further will add the extension tube effects: reducing MFD, loss of infinity focus, and loss of some light.


If the FFD is shorter than the correct one, it's as you said: vignetting presented as dark corners. It is not almost 0%, it is exactly 0% since light travel in straight lines. This is "kind of" like what happens with Nikon DX lenses on FX bodies. Have you ever wondered why vignetting is prevalent in FF & not APS-C cameras? and why is it only in the corner & not center? Of course light takes "longer" to reach the corners, and I have seen lenses with vignetting as low as -3 EV!

But what about infinity focus? I actually never thought about that before. If you have ideas, share them!

So what I am saying is, a Canon EF lens on a CR1 rumored FF mirrorless would have to have the same FFD as the EOS bodies. Otherwise, the effective focal length would be different. I don't know what that would cause beyond the vignetting. Maybe their "new" sensor technology involves glass elements, layered sensor or something. I don't know.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,645
2,159
Fleetie said:
Could it just be that when you attach an EF (or EF-S) lens to a M-series camera, with its smaller battery, then the latter can't deliver the power to drive the AF system in the lens as quickly as the larger non-M cameras can?

Don't I remember hearing that when you attach a big white lens to a 1DX, then the latter can drive the AF system faster, because of the increased power available? I read something similar to that. Could this be the same issue?

That said, I'm not sure what batteries the Rebels and the xxD cameras use, as I've only ever had a 7D and a 5D3.
I don't think so. The AF drive difference is because the 1-series batteries output 11.1V, whereas the non-1-series dSLR batteries output 7.2V, regardless of capacity. As for the M-series using a smaller battery, my EOS M/M2 as well as the current M5/M6 use the LP-E17, and that's the same battery used by the T6i/s, T7i, and 77D bodies.
 

Fleetie

Watching for pigs on the wing
Nov 22, 2010
375
5
48
Manchester, UK
www.facebook.com
neuroanatomist said:
Fleetie said:
Could it just be that when you attach an EF (or EF-S) lens to a M-series camera, with its smaller battery, then the latter can't deliver the power to drive the AF system in the lens as quickly as the larger non-M cameras can?

Don't I remember hearing that when you attach a big white lens to a 1DX, then the latter can drive the AF system faster, because of the increased power available? I read something similar to that. Could this be the same issue?

That said, I'm not sure what batteries the Rebels and the xxD cameras use, as I've only ever had a 7D and a 5D3.
I don't think so. The AF drive difference is because the 1-series batteries output 11.1V, whereas the non-1-series dSLR batteries output 7.2V, regardless of capacity. As for the M-series using a smaller battery, my EOS M/M2 as well as the current M5/M6 use the LP-E17, and that's the same battery used by the T6i/s, T7i, and 77D bodies.
I just wonder whether the LP-E17 batteries "sag" more under load than the larger batteries of the 7F, 5D series cameras.


Or, perhaps the M-series bodies even *restrict* the current flow out of the camera bodies, to the EF lenses, to preserve battery life, at the expense of AF speed. Perhaps the EF lenses will gobble as much power as they can, left to their own devices. Perhaps restricting current out to the EF lenses was considered necessary. "You can have 7V at 0.5A, but you're not having 1A of it. Easy, tiger!"


I mean, what else could it be? The EF-M -> EF adaptor is just plastic/metal, air and straight-through electrical contacts. *Unless* there are electronics in the adaptor that we don't know about (seems unlikely), then it pretty much has to be either a power issue, or a firmware issue, if the camera or lens "knows" that the adaptor is there.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,645
2,159
Fleetie said:
I mean, what else could it be? The EF-M -> EF adaptor is just plastic/metal, air and straight-through electrical contacts. *Unless* there are electronics in the adaptor that we don't know about (seems unlikely), then it pretty much has to be either a power issue, or a firmware issue, if the camera or lens "knows" that the adaptor is there.
A firmware issue (more of a decision by Canon engineers, actually) seems most likely. When you mount a 1.4x TC, AF slows by 50% relative to the bare lens, and when you mount a 2x TC, it slows by 75%. They slow it down on purpose to improve accuracy. No idea what the technical reason is for the EF mount adapter, but I assume there must be one.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,309
502
douglaurent said:
And even if by then Canon keeps up with a Sony A9R2 or A7R4, the Canon camera will have the disadvantage of less lens options, no speedboosters etc. Sony just released a 16-35/2.8 and 12-24/4. In 1.5 years it's likely they have their native lens lineup complete incl. tele lenses. What Canon advantage is left by then?
And how many times are you gong to spout this garbage about it being Canon's responsibility to produce a speedbooster so you can fit third party lenses onto their cameras?
If this is your idea of good marketing strategy you are a conceptual retard whose opinions are merely a wishlist of what you want. If Canon followed your suggestions they would go bust.
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,917
934
Germany
Addola, it seems I hit a nerv. Really sorry, if I did so. But I was reading your reply thrice before I decided it was neccessary to answer.

addola said:
Ahhh, did you just tell me to "go back to learn optical formulas" then proceeded to use the comma & decimal interchangeably?
If the use of comma was the only error you could find in my explaination, then you really had to dug in deep.
I am German, to for me the comma is standard. As this is a American forum I tried to adapt, but this sometimes ends in a mixture.
So please don't tell me how to use my SI system but show some more tollerance.

Ha! Correct me if I am wrong, and I'll be happy I learned something. But first you need to understand what I am talking about:

I was not talking about optical formulas. I was explaining why a teleconverter would cause loss of light regardless of how well designed is the glass elements in it due to the added distance, and that in turn effects the cameras ability to AF.
Sorry, but you were not talking about teleconverters but about this:
addola said:
Think of extension tubes which are about the size of a DSLR-to-Mirrorless adapter.
And as you were talking about extension tubes as I quoted above the rest was wrong.

If you meant something else it is now not about accusing me beeing smart-aleckand and patronizing you
but you should look at your post and say "Sorry, you didn't understand me right. Please let me point that out."

The way you compute light loss is not correct.
I didn't compute anything but the transit time of light through 1 cm. I said that a flange distance adapter is not making any change to the basic optical formula and therefore to the basic setting. So if this would affect anything like AF I'd be really surprised.

addola said:
...
Correct me if I am wrong with the formulas above
I don't want to because I don't need to.
The calculations refer to a situation I was not refering to (extension tube vs. adapter).
But seeing the rest of your calculations make me apologize that I seem to have assumed something wrong.

But your basic statement was not correct and therefore my choice was to put it right.

So hopefully you can agree to the fact that your initial post was ambiguous as far as I can agree to the fact that I did simplify the use and optical effects of an extension tube because I thought it was enough at that point.
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,917
934
Germany
neuroanatomist said:
Fleetie said:
I mean, what else could it be? The EF-M -> EF adaptor is just plastic/metal, air and straight-through electrical contacts. *Unless* there are electronics in the adaptor that we don't know about (seems unlikely), then it pretty much has to be either a power issue, or a firmware issue, if the camera or lens "knows" that the adaptor is there.
A firmware issue (more of a decision by Canon engineers, actually) seems most likely. When you mount a 1.4x TC, AF slows by 50% relative to the bare lens, and when you mount a 2x TC, it slows by 75%. They slow it down on purpose to improve accuracy. No idea what the technical reason is for the EF mount adapter, but I assume there must be one.
Comming back here into the discussion and your question, Neuro, about what's the reason for the performance hit and what Canon could do against it, of course I can only make a guess, as I am not in their dev. department.
My guess is similar to what is mentioned above that it has to do with phase detection AF (DSLR) vs. contrast AF (MILC) and that DSLRs + EF/EF-S are better designed for phase detection AF and that switching to contrast AF gives the punch to the AF performance.
As I have no data it is a pure guess. And Canon could work against that by increasing the performance of technologies like DPAF. But this was also mentioned already above.
 
Oct 7, 2013
350
0
Mikehit said:
douglaurent said:
And even if by then Canon keeps up with a Sony A9R2 or A7R4, the Canon camera will have the disadvantage of less lens options, no speedboosters etc. Sony just released a 16-35/2.8 and 12-24/4. In 1.5 years it's likely they have their native lens lineup complete incl. tele lenses. What Canon advantage is left by then?
And how many times are you gong to spout this garbage about it being Canon's responsibility to produce a speedbooster so you can fit third party lenses onto their cameras?
If this is your idea of good marketing strategy you are a conceptual retard whose opinions are merely a wishlist of what you want. If Canon followed your suggestions they would go bust.
Unfortunately for you I never demanded or expected that Canon will introduce a Speedbooster, as of course it's technically impossible. But it's a 100% true and clear disadvantage for Canon and a fact that is worth mentioning once every 4 month. Like temporary disadvantages of Sony which are mentioned here 10 times a day by others.
 
Oct 7, 2013
350
0
neuroanatomist said:
douglaurent said:
What Canon advantage is left by then?
Reputation. Service. In the US, mutliple company service centers vs. one contracted 3rd party service vendor. Much larger consumer user base. Far larger and more varied OEM lens selection. Popularity. A much larger professional user base. Extremely unlikey that they'll just abandon the market.
Yeah, but all these points don't actively help when you're a working Canon photographer or filmmaker out in the field in the coming 1000 days, and are not able to use 20+ relevant workflow features of a Sony mirrorless camera (starting most obviously with an electronic viewfinder that lets you see the actual exposure right away, focus peaking helps, the video image and the playback of photos and videos).

Canon's (and Nikon's) reputation, popularity and service seem to be going downhill, and Sony, Panasonic and Olympus are going the other direction. Give 100 pros or amateurs a 1DX2, 5D4+Grip, A9 and A7R2+Grip for a week, and then let them say which workflow they did like more (visual results would hardly look much different).
 
Oct 7, 2013
350
0
Strangely, the feel of a Canon DSLR and a Sony mirrorless camera is pretty similar to the use of CanonRumors and SonyAlphaRumors: CanonRumors for example is nearly unreadable on cell phones and does not allow me to change the stupid public "6D" user info I never added - it feels very much like 2010.

The Sony forum, like the cameras, feels like it's 2017. While the Sony mirrorless cameras have lots of refreshing and important features like a third wheel for ISO, the Sony rumors website has lots more little refreshing and important infos about their brand's products.

If something good can be done better, it had to be said.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,645
2,159
douglaurent said:
Canon's (and Nikon's) reputation, popularity and service seem to be going downhill, and Sony, Panasonic and Olympus are going the other direction.
Your evidence for Canon's popularity going downhill is what? Their rising market share? Oh, that's right...it's your opinion, which is shared by 50 of your close friends and colleagues. Yeah. ::)
 

Ryananthony

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 7, 2015
498
2
douglaurent said:
Strangely, the feel of a Canon DSLR and a Sony mirrorless camera is pretty similar to the use of CanonRumors and ++++++++Rumors: CanonRumors for example is nearly unreadable on cell phones and does not allow me to change the stupid public "6D" user info I never added - it feels very much like 2010.

The Sony forum, like the cameras, feels like it's 2017. While the Sony mirrorless cameras have lots of refreshing and important features like a third wheel for ISO, the Sony rumors website has lots more little refreshing and important infos about their brand's products.

If something good can be done better, it had to be said.
What about viewing the forum on mobile is nearly unreadable? Using Chrome on my Android, it converts perfectly to my phone. For me it is 100% mobile friendly. Sounds like you are misunderstood about the ''6d'' label under your name. As your posts rise, that ''6d'' will change to higher end cameras, and I believe lenses. If you want to show off your cameras, you can use your signature like many others have done. I support the addition of a third wheel to Canon cameras.
 

LonelyBoy

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 18, 2015
745
0
AvTvM said:
Other than that there are no examples, since currently Sony has the only mirrorless FF system on the market. So you are asking me the sort of "proof", the Spanish inquisition demanded from their delinquents.
So, again (I went through this with you a while ago), you want us to accept your word that this is possible, when everyone building mirrorless cameras doesn't do it? Forget the proof demanded by the Spanish Inquisition, you're insisting the sun orbits the Earth despite all evidence to the contrary.
 

LonelyBoy

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 18, 2015
745
0
douglaurent said:
Strangely, the feel of a Canon DSLR and a Sony mirrorless camera is pretty similar to the use of CanonRumors and ++++++++Rumors: CanonRumors for example is nearly unreadable on cell phones and does not allow me to change the stupid public "6D" user info I never added - it feels very much like 2010.

The Sony forum, like the cameras, feels like it's 2017. While the Sony mirrorless cameras have lots of refreshing and important features like a third wheel for ISO, the Sony rumors website has lots more little refreshing and important infos about their brand's products.

If something good can be done better, it had to be said.
Serious question: Why are you still shooting Canon and hanging out on this forum? It sounds like you'd be happier with a Sony and on those forums. So, why are you still here with "inferior" cameras and forum software? Is there something missing from the Sony paradise, maybe?
 

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,496
2,343
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
douglaurent said:
Strangely, the feel of a Canon DSLR and a Sony mirrorless camera is pretty similar to the use of CanonRumors and ++++++++Rumors: CanonRumors for example is nearly unreadable on cell phones and does not allow me to change the stupid public "6D" user info I never added - it feels very much like 2010.

The Sony forum, like the cameras, feels like it's 2017. While the Sony mirrorless cameras have lots of refreshing and important features like a third wheel for ISO, the Sony rumors website has lots more little refreshing and important infos about their brand's products.

If something good can be done better, it had to be said.
And yet, just as Canon dominates its market, Canon Rumors dominates in its market. Perhaps that's because appearances are far less important than the actual quality of the product.
 

weixing

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
612
14
Hi,
neuroanatomist said:
Fleetie said:
Could it just be that when you attach an EF (or EF-S) lens to a M-series camera, with its smaller battery, then the latter can't deliver the power to drive the AF system in the lens as quickly as the larger non-M cameras can?

Don't I remember hearing that when you attach a big white lens to a 1DX, then the latter can drive the AF system faster, because of the increased power available? I read something similar to that. Could this be the same issue?

That said, I'm not sure what batteries the Rebels and the xxD cameras use, as I've only ever had a 7D and a 5D3.
I don't think so. The AF drive difference is because the 1-series batteries output 11.1V, whereas the non-1-series dSLR batteries output 7.2V, regardless of capacity. As for the M-series using a smaller battery, my EOS M/M2 as well as the current M5/M6 use the LP-E17, and that's the same battery used by the T6i/s, T7i, and 77D bodies.
May be current dual pixel technology is still not as fast?? Base on my experience, my M5 + EF to EF-M adapter + EF lens focusing speed is at least if not slightly faster than my 7D2 live view + EF lens.

Have a nice day.
 

sanj

EOS 5D SR
Jan 22, 2012
3,512
317
Dylan777 said:
sanj said:
CR1 today. CR2 tomorrow. CR3 soon. It is matter of time. Cant fight progress. I embrace it.
Visited your site, good stuffs you got there :)
Thank you sir. Need to revise it desperate... :)
 

pokerz

EOS 80D
Aug 19, 2016
167
0
Bernard said:
unfocused said:
  • New sensor technology required for the EF mount in a mirrorless application. Don't understand why it would require a new sensor technology.
Maybe they are working on a faster sensor readout. Most mirrorless cameras are slow to update the display, which makes them useless for action.
They could also be working on a better way to clear the sensor. The current options are closing the shutter, clearing the sensor, and opening the shutter for the shot; or EFC which limits DR and creates other artifacts. Neither solution is optimal.
That's why Canon needs a blackout free EVF