First Canon Mirrorless Related Patent?

[Canon Rumors Guy]

<div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=6287" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=6287"></a></div>
<p><strong>The First Canon Mirrorless Related Patent?

</strong>This appears to be a lens adaptor. EF to something else?</p>
<p>Egami compares it to the Sony NEX to alpha mount adaptor.</p>
<p><strong>Publication number:</strong> Patent 2011-53437 (P2011-53437A)

<strong>Release date</strong>: March 17, 2011 (2011.3.17)

<strong>Title of invention:</strong> Lens adapter apparatus and system</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fegami.blog.so-net.ne.jp%2F2011-03-18%23more" target="_blank">Google Translated Link</a> (egami)</strong></p>
<p><strong>CR’s Take

</strong>I don’t read japanese, so I’m relying on the job the translator does to the site. It looks like a lens mount adaptor. If/when Canon enters the mirrorless market, I am pretty confident they will have an EF adaptor for such a system.</p>
<p>This is the first patent I’ve seen that has even a remote chance of being about a mirrorless camera from Canon.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>

 

[CdnBook]

Perhaps it's a PL mount adapter for cinema lenses?

 

[J-Man]

Not even close to PL mount, PL mount has 4 lugs on the bayonet where Canon has 3, also PL mount has no electronic communication.

I scaled the image size to match with the EF mount, it appears the registration distance for this EVIL camera is close to 30mm, which puts it just slightly deeper than Contax G1, so no Leica M & Screw mount lenses.
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

Also the throat dia. looks too small for FF, APS-H is almost the same size, so is too close to call, looks like it might be APS-C. I hope there is some wiggle room for sensor size. (I have not ray traced any camera lenses so I'm not sure if there will be any vignetting with larger than APS-C sensors.)

 

[able]

CR... I think you need to show the second image. The first image shows how the adapter design was engineered by competitors and the second image shows the Canon design with the contacts rotated. The Canon design is apparently simpler to fabricate resulting in lower manufacturing cost.

Since one competitor already manufactures a Canon version of the mount, this adapter most likely solves an existing problem.

 

[J-Man]

Looks to me like they are just comparing 4/3 to m4/3, Alpha to E mount, and EF to Canon's new mount.
the 2 diagrams show two locations for the communication connections, the first, similar to Sony's patent and the 2nd which is different than Sony's and therefor not a patent infringement.

 

[coldstone]

sigma shares the same protocol with canon
only the contact block looks a bit different
i saw custom made blocks to fit canon lenses on sigma cameras for infrared images
maybe the adapter is for sigma

 

[kubelik]

I don't see a reason for making an adaptor for sigma lenses as sigma makes lenses specifically for EF mount already. I agree with CR that this is the first hint of Canon starting to think about developing a mirrorless camera system.

I'm not one of those people dying to get my hands on a mirrorless as I enjoy having a large viewfinder and having a body that balances well with large lenses, but I sure wouldn't mind an EF-variant mirrorless camera that I can stick some existing lenses on, to bring as a backup or to bring to places that my 5DII sticks out like a sore thumb in

 

[transpo1]

Could be an adapter for a an APS-C camcorder...

 

[x-vision]

Perhaps it's a PL mount adapter for cinema lenses?

That's what I'm thinking too.
Or maybe an adapter to mount EF lenses on video cameras.

 

[Grendel]

Hm, eyeballing the thickness of the adapter in the drawing -- could be EF-to-FT. Too thin for something w/ a flange-back distance of MFT IMHO.

 

[dougkerr]

The corresponding US patent application is 2011/0052185.

If we took the figure in the patent to be realistic and to scale, it would suggest that the "new" body had a back flange of about 29.8 mm. (The scale flange-to-flange thickness of the adapter seems to be about 14.2 mm; the back flange of the EF/EOS mount is 44.0 mm.)

The information I have is that the back flange for the Four Thirds format is 38.67 mm; for the Micro Four Thirds, 20.00 mm.

I have not seen a back flange speculated for the rumored Canon "EVIL" body.

There have been many recent Canon patents that suggest applicability to a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera (mostly in the area of AF technique).

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Jonathan]

Hello guys !

@Dougkerr :
At the first glance your calculation is right, i've found the same result of 14.2mm when i did ot the first time too.
I've redone the calculation a second time (after the measuring the distance between the mount and the mirror in upper position on my rebel) and i've found 12.8mm (which approximately matches the adapter lenght and the spacing between mount and mirror in a rebel).

If this patent really exists and if canon released such a thing with a new mount, it will be very exciting !

It means that they will split the EF/EF-s systems into two distinctive systems ensuring in the same time a full retrocompatibility from up to bottom.

IMHO, what i've red about future canon decisions, they won't make MIRRORLESS, and for me that's a good thing.
Nonetheless, they claim their will to make a decent compact dslr alternative for canon user's with a mirror !
They know that most of their users do not want to get a rid of an OVF.

What we could see and "extract" from the patent diagram:
- The new mount's throat is slightly smaller.
- It's a 12.8mm adapter that will accept actual EF-S Lenses. => The new system will keep the actual APS-C (1.6x crop factor) sensors.
- The pin connectors on the newer mount side are the same as EF's ones, they just added 3 extra pins, so the communication protocal would be same as EF.

(olympus did the same when they created micro four third from original four third mount, in order to add a high speed communication port between body&lenses for video functions. Even Sony did exactly the same Alpha/Nex. )

- The pin connectors are located on the right side of the camera and vertically mounted. ???

=> Can we imagine a body with vertically mounted sensor ?? Why not, Olympus have already done this with the original compact half frame Pen FT and it got a fixed pellix mirror. Canon have experience with pellix, just see the EOS RT.
Canon could even make a camera with a slapping pellix mirror for a liveview mode with better IQ if the optical finder isn't needed. ;D

- The new mount will have a 12.8mm shorter register than EF. => ~31.2mm register. That's enough to keep the APS-C mirror box in a tight fit.

- A shorter flange back have two main advantages for optical engineers 8):
*It's easier to make wide angle lenses more compact with less vignetting and aberrations and even brighter
(ex: leica M lenses )
*A complete compact prime lenses offering (APS-C image circle) would make more sense for a smaller mount.
They gain 12.8mm whereas a compact prime could only measure 20mm in lenght (example: sony E 16mm 2.8 or voigtlander 20mm & 40mm SLII pancake).

As a conclusion, the new system would be a sort of "shaved" or "receded " EF-S mount but still with a mirror box.
I wonder how will they name this new sytem, EF-SS (EF-Small Shorter) ? EF-S minus? EF-S Evolution ? EF-S v2.0 ?

Plus we can imagine the dimension of the new body, it's quite obvious:

*Grab an EOS Rebel/Kiss/XXXD and put off the 12.8mm on the mount.
*Put-off the pop-up flash above the pentamirror and replace it by a built-in tilt-up flash located on the left of the body.
*Remove the protuding grip for the right hand.
*Put SD or even micro SD card and a smaller battery.
*Mount a bright compact prime ( 30mm f/1.8 ) or a "pancake" lens.
=> You obtain a compact APS-C sized sensor DSLR with an OVF with the dimension of an Olympus EPL2 and its 20mm 1.7 pana prime ! :

**Create an optional battery-grip if needed to obtain a pro dslr in reduction . :

PS: I apologize for my scholar english, english is not my first language.

 

[DuLt]

Couldn't they be ditching the EF-S system in order to make a new mount with a shorter flage focal distance?

So they would have EF system and a new EF-SS (super short flage focal distance) system with smaller lenses that would fully accept EF and EF-S lenses?

This way they would increase the distance between amateur and pro ranges.

 

[Jonathan]

Yes, "they would have EF system and a new EF-SS (super short flage focal distance) system with smaller lenses that would fully accept EF and EF-S lenses." That's right.

But i don't agree, they would not increase the distance between amateur and pro range.
They would provided a full interoperability and full retrocompatibilty even with old FD lens with another adapter (with the APS-C 1.6x crop factor) .

Plus; by adding a complete compact prime range, they would fill the gap for the ef-S lenses user.
There is a lack of prime lenses for EF-S. (EF-S = APS-C lenses such as the 60mm 2.8 macro)

I think, they plan to make all EF DSLR Full Frame or at least with APS-H sensor.

So that, EF-S lenses user will have to move into the new mount, and they'll gain compactness without decreasing quality and performance.
EF 24x36 lenses user will keep the existing mount and would benefit from democratized full frame sensor in the EF dslr range.

 

[DuLt]

I see. basically making a new, backward's compatible, full frame mount.

 

[Jonathan]

If you have seen the diagram you would immediately understand that the new mount can only support APS-C format sensor.

 

[dougkerr]

Hi, Jonathan,

Hello guys !

@Dougkerr :
At the first glance your calculation is right, i've found the same result of 14.2mm when i did ot the first time too.
I've redone the calculation a second time (after the measuring the distance between the mount and the mirror in upper position on my rebel) and i've found 12.8mm (which approximately matches the adapter lenght and the spacing between mount and mirror in a rebel).

I'm not sure I follow. Are you trying to determine the flange back distance of an EOS body? That is known to be 44.00 mm.

Or were you trying to determine the thickness of the adapter from the patent drawing? I scaled it from the inside diameter of the flange ring on the front of the adapter, assuming it to be the same as the corresponding distance on an EOS mount (which is 54.0 mm).

That gives me a flange-face-to-flange-face thickness for the adapter of approximately 14.2 mm.

- The pin connectors on the newer mount side are the same as EF's ones, they just added 3 extra pins, so the communication protocal would be same as EF.

The patent says that when using the "new" lenses" the protocol would be a new one, but when an EF lens was attached through a (passive) adapter, the body would use the EF protocol.

- The pin connectors are located on the right side of the camera and vertically mounted. ???

The (entire) point of the patent is that if the contact block on the new body were put at 6 o'clock, things in that area of the adapter would be very congested, so it would be desirable on the new body to have the contacts either at 12 o'clock or at 9' o'clock (as would be seen looking at the face of the camera). Both these situations are shown in figures in the patent.

- The new mount will have a 12.8mm shorter register than EF.

Not by my reckoning. How did you get that value?

PS: I apologize for my scholar english, english is not my first language.

Your English is fine!

Best regards,

Doug

 

[dougkerr]

Hi, Jonathan,

If you have seen the diagram you would immediately understand that the new mount can only support APS-C format sensor.

The rumor is that the new body series will have an 18 x 12 mm sensor. I see nothing in the patent that would conflict with that.

Just a rumor, of course.

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Jonathan]

Hi dougkerr,

The first time i've done the measurement between 33a and 31a, and i've found 14.2mm like you.
But if you look closely to the diagram, i suppose it will create a tiny gap of a few millimeters.
So i redone the calculation, suposing the adapter would "embrace" the new mount "gapless". It gives approximately 12.8~13mm

Quote

- The pin connectors on the newer mount side are the same as EF's ones, they just added 3 extra pins, so the communication protocal would be same as EF.

I suppose they would "mimick" what olympus did with their "passive" 4/3 to micro4/3 adapter.

Best regards,

Jonathan

 

[dougkerr]

Hi, Jonathan,

The first time i've done the measurement between 33a and 31a, and i've found 14.2mm like you.
But if you look closely to the diagram, i suppose it will create a tiny gap of a few millimeters.

I'm not sure what you mean.

In any case, the back face of the EF lens would contact surface 33a, and face 31a would contact the face of the "new body" mount (the face that, on an actual EOS mount, corresponds to surface 33a of the adapter).

Note that in the rear view that ring 31 has two contacting ribs on its outer and inner edges, exactly as we see on the rear of an EF lens (they touch surface 33a).

The four screws seen on the rear view are "between" those ribs, actually invading them a little. It is just like that on the rear of an EF lens (at a slightly larger diameter, of course).

So i redone the calculation, suposing the adapter would "embrace" the new mount "gapless". It gives approximately 12.8~13mm

I don't follow your vision of the coupling. As I said above, as I see it, the back face of the EF lens would contact surface 33a, and face 31a would contact the face of the "new body" mount (the face that, on an actual EOS mount, corresponds to surface 33a of the adapter).

Do you not agree that the distance from surface 33a to surface 31a appears to be about 14.2 mm?

At the arbitrary scale at which I worked, the distance across the inner diameter of the front flange of the adapter (the circle that lies just inside the heads of the four cross-head screws) measured 1.981". I have no reason to believe that this face is any different than the mount on my EOS 40D (it looks exactly like the picture). There, that actual diameter is 54.0 mm.

In my workspace, the distance between surfaces 33a and 31a is 0.520". Thus, the real-size thickness of the mount would be 14.17 mm.

Certainly, the face of the "new" mount that surface 31a contacts is the reference datum from which the back flange is defined. (In the case of the EOS/EF mount, it is measured from the equivalent of surface 33a on the adapter.

- The pin connectors on the newer mount side are the same as EF's ones, they just added 3 extra pins, so the communication protocal would be same as EF.

As I said, the patent says that with a "new" lens the protocol is different from the EOS/EF protocol, but that when an EF lens was attached, the body would use the old protocol.

Best regards,

Doug