What if they use a lens element within the camera, like the ND filters in some compact cameras, to keep a short(ish) flange distance for a thin body and RF lenses and also enable proper focusing with conventional EF lenses?
Upvote
0
Exactly. However, I feel like both Sony and now Nikon are still living off the fascination about the size of the first generation A7 cameras. The third generation A7 cameras as well as the Z6/7 are significantly beefier than the first gen A7 cameras (which had abysmal battery life and - at best - mediocre ergonomics). So while a thin camera body is nice in theory, recent camera models show that too thin isn't ideal either. Especially if you want to have a nicely sized grip, you're not gonna get a tiny camera.
I would consider it a mistake if Canon doesn't shorten the flange distance in its new mount.
As a sexy fix for EF lenses, someone wrote about a moveable sensor which would be really interesting but I don't understand why an adapter wouldn't work.
Why wouldn't it work? A Canon adapter, made by Canon for Canon, would work flawlessly and be extremely fast.
Canon would then have a new future-proof mount and the adapter would make all or their EF lenses work.
Is there really a reason to have a native EF mount (or an EF-R with an EF flange distance) on a Canon mirrorless? If so, what is it?
I don't see anything specifically related to mirrorless in the patents, but they do relate to a modernization of the EF lenses.
Right. And you'd still get a lighter camera, because there's no mirror box and mechanics needed. The body could also be much smaller, because AF and AE systems are on the sensor instead of underneath or above it. And the prisms for FF cameras are huge, so another big and heavy part to save.That I think is the "innovation" people are missing. Simply following suit with a thin, small body mirrorless is just more of the same. Giving us a full sized mirrorless, with the ability to control the focal plane depth, would be new. Not to mention not having to rebuild the entire lens line from scratch. I think that Canon is happy having the M line dedicated as the small & light, while keeping the FF cameras big.
Would that really be a problem? I mean not in terms of mechanics and optics, but more from a market perspective. The FE lens ecosystem is growing, attractive to 3rd party lens makers and can easily adapt existing EF glass. I don't see Canon coming out with a one of a kind lens for RF first, the kind that everyone would want/need. Especially not given the rumored price tag for the first RF camera.while it may not lock out lens designers where the problem may occur is metabones and the like reverse engineering the RF/EF mount to support Sony FE to EF/RF adapters.
Don't count on lighter glass. Sony's 2.8/24-70 GM is heavier, longer and just 1mm less diameter than Canon's 2.8/24-70 II - and that's with the advantage of being a mirrorless system. I feel like Canon is already p much on top of the game when it comes to keeping lenses compact and lightweight.All I want to know is if it has 4k with no crop and 120fps @ 1080p. I'm definitely picking up that 32mm f1.4 they're announcing for the EOS-M, but I will definitely consider selling the rest of my EF lenses if the native RF are reasonably fast enough and lighter. I love my 85mm f1.4 IS to death but moving with that thing all day even when attached to the super light M50 is less than desirable. That and weather sealing. I'm getting too excited for this thing, but it's only a few days away now.
If there are any lessons learned from the Nikon Z launch, it is that people will dismiss adapters, no matter how perfect they are, and only look at what is supported "natively". Despite the performance of Nikon's adapter, a common opinion of the Nikon Z is that it has too few "native lenses" - so essentially people overlook the adapter capabilities.
To have a camera natively support two formats - a legacy format (EF) and new format (RF) is far better when compared to an adapter solution.
Guess 1: Body approach -- An EF lens mounts directly. When an RF lens mounts on the camera, a sliding shaft is engaged which pulls the mounting assembly with the lens further in towards the camera. A mount within a mount, in effect. Hopefully they found a way to do this that does not impact unit cost too much.
Guess 2: Lens Approach -- All RF lenses will have a rear element that extends back towards the sensor once mounted. The basic EF mount stays the same. If a future new lens doesn't need the inward-extending element it will simply be designed as an EF lens. (I don't think telephotos, long zooms, or Big Whites will need the inward extending element, so they will be EF lenses now and in the future). (If an RF lens is mountable at all on a regular EF mount camera it wouldn't hurt anything; the inward-extending element would not deploy, and would not be harmed.)
I don't understand the point of mounting an EF lens directly onto the mirrorless camera body. It will be much too close to the sensor. How could it possibly work?
Essentially It would have to have a built in adapter. Instead of a mirror it would just have air space. This would prevent the boddies from being narrower like the all other mirrorless cameras. But would save weight. The more I have thought about it, the less I have thought Canon needs to introduce a new mount and design lenses with a shorter focus point. Sony has proved that a short flange distance does not make the lenses smaller, in fact in some cases they are larger, so there is no advantage in a full frame sensor body. The size and weight savings can really only be accomplished with an APS-C sensor like Fuji.I don't understand the point of mounting an EF lens directly onto the mirrorless camera body. It will be much too close to the sensor. How could it possibly work?
Essentially It would have to have a built in adapter. Instead of a mirror it would just have air space. This would prevent the boddies from being narrower like the all other mirrorless cameras. But would save weight. The more I have thought about it, the less I have thought Canon needs to introduce a new mount and design lenses with a shorter focus point. Sony has proved that a short flange distance does not make the lenses smaller, in fact in some cases they are larger, so there is no advantage in a full frame sensor body. The size and weight savings can really only be accomplished with an APS-C sensor like Fuji.