We were wrong, all of your Canon mirrorless dreams are likely coming true soon
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
One idea: The OVF doesn't have to be in the light path:
(See how that works here (jump to 0:40))
Second idea: It's an SLR but with the flip of a switch, the mirror locks up and the EVF (or even a side by side EVF/OVF, if you like) kicks in, effectively pumping Liveview to the viewfinder.- A
Upvote
0
Fully agree. Still, there are some things where mirrorless and EVF can help:
- very low light "easy" framing
- wider AF spread
- higher framerates
- smaller/lighter/cheaper short lenses
- no AFMA (my favorite)
This comes at a cost (battery is one) so I don't think we are replacing the DSLRs anytime soon but one of my cams can be a mirrorless..
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Short lenses yea, but can you explain the classes of long lenses? Most long lenses have already a lot of air behind the rear cap...
Mechanically this is nontrivial to solve but harder things have been done. The problem that I see is while you can fully utilize the space in the front of the sensor ("sans mirror"), you cant use it behind it..
Upvote
0
Honestly, it seems like a lot of you may benefit from just logging out for a few days and taking a breather until the camera is announced and we know for sure.
If you step back from this crazy echo chamber of outlandish rumors, it's only logical to assume that we're going to get a pretty vanilla, if solid, mirrorless camera out of Canon.
This is the camera that they're going to stake their future on, at least the first generation of it. There's not going to be some crazy hybrid OVF/EVF (even though I'd like that.) There's not going to be a wild telescoping EF mount or moving sensor that will automatically adapt to whatever lens you use.
It's just gonna be a mirrorless camera. It's gonna have a full frame sensor. It's gonna have pretty good specs. It's gonna be a worthy competitor to Nikon and Sony. YouTube reviewers will breathlessly obsess over the most minute difference in specs to attempt to determine which is the best camera, even though they're all pretty good.
There's gonna be an adapter to fit EF lenses onto whatever the new mount is, because Canon probably knew about Nikon's strategy months ago, and were not going to be caught flat footed without their own adapter to use old lenses. (They will not want to abandon all of the great EF lenses they've recently developed and released either.) The adapter is gonna work pretty well because the lens, adapter, and camera will all be made by the same manufacturer, so they'll all communicate well together.
If you think about Canon's track record for new products, it's laughable to think that we're going to see any sort of wild new technology out of this camera. That just isn't how Canon does things.
It's just gonna be a mirrorless camera. It's gonna be pretty good, and it's gonna have rock solid reliability because it's going to use a bunch of tried and true technology, and we'll all buy it because of that.
If you step back from this crazy echo chamber of outlandish rumors, it's only logical to assume that we're going to get a pretty vanilla, if solid, mirrorless camera out of Canon.
This is the camera that they're going to stake their future on, at least the first generation of it. There's not going to be some crazy hybrid OVF/EVF (even though I'd like that.) There's not going to be a wild telescoping EF mount or moving sensor that will automatically adapt to whatever lens you use.
It's just gonna be a mirrorless camera. It's gonna have a full frame sensor. It's gonna have pretty good specs. It's gonna be a worthy competitor to Nikon and Sony. YouTube reviewers will breathlessly obsess over the most minute difference in specs to attempt to determine which is the best camera, even though they're all pretty good.
There's gonna be an adapter to fit EF lenses onto whatever the new mount is, because Canon probably knew about Nikon's strategy months ago, and were not going to be caught flat footed without their own adapter to use old lenses. (They will not want to abandon all of the great EF lenses they've recently developed and released either.) The adapter is gonna work pretty well because the lens, adapter, and camera will all be made by the same manufacturer, so they'll all communicate well together.
If you think about Canon's track record for new products, it's laughable to think that we're going to see any sort of wild new technology out of this camera. That just isn't how Canon does things.
It's just gonna be a mirrorless camera. It's gonna be pretty good, and it's gonna have rock solid reliability because it's going to use a bunch of tried and true technology, and we'll all buy it because of that.
Upvote
0
Yeah, I would hope so too. But I don't think there's even a question now that Nikon has done it. There's no way that Canon would allow Nikon to exclusively have that feature.
I don't see it being some crazy telescoping mount or moving sensor though. That's just more moving parts, more complexity that could easily just be handled with an adapter. Canon does not rock the boat like that. I think it's just going to be a simple adapter.
Upvote
0
Durf
Picture Taker - Image Maker
Well, it is very hard for me to believe Canon will do worse than what Nikon just released as their 1st two FF Mirror-Less cameras. Those Z 6's and 7's in my opinion are over priced and you also need to then purchase a $230.00 card to use the darn thing! I surely would never buy one even if I was a Nikon shooter; what a joke!
As I've said before on this forum, Canon doesn't need to do much to hit a home run with their 1st edition FF Mirrorless camera's.....
As I've said before on this forum, Canon doesn't need to do much to hit a home run with their 1st edition FF Mirrorless camera's.....
Upvote
0
This and your prior post are correct -- I largely agree. But riffing on what they might do is kinda fun.
- A
Upvote
0
Yeah I know, and the site is Canon Rumors, so I guess what else can I really expect. I do genuinely hope for a hybrid OVF/EVF. Somebody let me try a Fuji with that, and I was blown away... All the precision and realness of an OVF, with all the enhancements of an EVF... Really cool.
But seriously, for all of our frantic hypotheses about what this camera might be, you guys know it's just going to be a standard, run of the mill, albeit good mirrorless camera, right?
I mean, you guys remember how they just announced new lenses and one of the selling features they listed was that they were a new shade of white, right?
Canon makes great reliable products, but rapid innovators and risk takers they are not.
But seriously, for all of our frantic hypotheses about what this camera might be, you guys know it's just going to be a standard, run of the mill, albeit good mirrorless camera, right?
I mean, you guys remember how they just announced new lenses and one of the selling features they listed was that they were a new shade of white, right?
Canon makes great reliable products, but rapid innovators and risk takers they are not.
Upvote
0
I agree they won’t likely have a telescoping. Maybe a semi-permanent mount adapter with a way to align it.
I found seeing the lens distracting, but it’s a neat idea.
I found seeing the lens distracting, but it’s a neat idea.
Upvote
0
Agree, I've been intrigued with the concept, but I love true OVF framing without a lens in the frame, and rangefinder VFs can't do that unless you dig pancakes.
I have long been interested in a fixed lens camera (X100, RX1R, Leica Q, etc.) as I'd love a smaller rig and I also happen to love the 28-35mm lenses that these things tend to have. One of these days I'll just snap one up.
- A
Upvote
0
We've heard it all here for bridging the thin vs. Full EF divide -- CR folks are a clever bunch:
- Thin mount + adaptor (only)
- Thin mount + adaptor AND Full EF mount (this is the go for the throat move)
- Full EF mount (only) -- no need for a bridge if the other side doesn't exist...
- Thin mount + adaptor + the option to permanently/securely bolt the adaptor to the body.
- Moving sensor (doesn't really buy you much)
- Telescoping mount from Full EF to thin mount
- EF-X concept with dixie cup sized lens caps
- A
Upvote
0
hmatthes
EOS-R, RF and EF Lenses of all types.
If the new mount natively accepts both traditional EF lenses as well as new "RF?" lenses, I will be a first day buyer.
There are plenty of complaints and complainers but let's compare the two offerings at $2k.
Nikon: I have a Z6 on order (soon to be cancelled, it was contingency if Canon blew it) -- Kit Z6 with 24~79 f/4, 2nd battery, XQD card, and XQD reader is $3,170 at B&H. No way to use my EF lenses.
Canon: If the Canon is $2,000, let's say the 24~70 f/2.0 is $1,500, then I'm in for $3,500 with a much faster prime zoom. I already have lots of batteries, SD cards, and SD readers. -- optical physics suggest that f2.0 is far better for many subjects than f/4.0. And all my EF glass works as intended!
Not a tough decision any all!
There are plenty of complaints and complainers but let's compare the two offerings at $2k.
Nikon: I have a Z6 on order (soon to be cancelled, it was contingency if Canon blew it) -- Kit Z6 with 24~79 f/4, 2nd battery, XQD card, and XQD reader is $3,170 at B&H. No way to use my EF lenses.
Canon: If the Canon is $2,000, let's say the 24~70 f/2.0 is $1,500, then I'm in for $3,500 with a much faster prime zoom. I already have lots of batteries, SD cards, and SD readers. -- optical physics suggest that f2.0 is far better for many subjects than f/4.0. And all my EF glass works as intended!
Not a tough decision any all!
Upvote
0
I guess I didn't mean 'Long' lenses, just more typical ones. I'm thinking of something like the 28-135. Right now that is a little under 100mm long when it is full retracted. There might be ways to make that same lens an extra 28mm smaller by recessing it. On long lenses like the 70-200 2.8 this wouldn't really make much of a difference, but a lens that recessed into the camera slightly would change the balance of that lens since it's not pivoted all the way out at the end.
As for possibilities if there was a variable flange distance, I'm thinking more of a DO style zoom. By knowing the sensor could move to anywhere between 16mm and 44mm away from the rear element, the glass element wouldn't always have to focus down to one spot, it would just need to make sure at any given zoom/focal point the focused image presented to the sensor would need to be between those ranges.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Love the course correction from you hmatthes, I do. But if a world's first 24-70 f/2 lens (surely L level quality, perhaps not called L if it's a new line of lenses) will cost a slight bit over $1500.
For perspective: the 24-70 f/2.8L II debuted at $2299, and that was six years ago. If it's real -- a constant f/2 max aperture standard zoom -- it is probably a $3k lens, but Canon might surprise us.
- A
Upvote
0
hmatthes
EOS-R, RF and EF Lenses of all types.
Or they might release the "kit" lens as a variable aperture, perhaps 2.0~4.5, and only charge $1,000.But if a world's first 24-70 f/2 lens (surely L level quality, perhaps not called L if it's a new line of lenses) will cost a slight bit over $1500.
For perspective: the 24-70 f/2.8L II debuted at $2299, and that was six years ago. If it's real -- a constant f/2 max aperture standard zoom -- it is probably a $3k lens, but Canon might surprise us.
- A
I have the 24~70 f2.8L II and it is my lens choice for more than ½ my images.
If the new lens is equally big and too expensive, I'll save money by using the one I already use.
I could buy the body only for $2,000 and avoid "discussions" with my wife!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 3 staff post(s)