Dimson said:
Not quite- prism, maybe, but you'd still need a mirror for PDAF. And while I'd be open to the idea of an EVF if the right one came along, you'd have to really sell me an SLR that only had CDAF.
Upvote
0
A New DSLR Line from Canon? [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
Not quite- prism, maybe, but you'd still need a mirror for PDAF. And while I'd be open to the idea of an EVF if the right one came along, you'd have to really sell me an SLR that only had CDAF.
Traveller, maybe we're talking at cross purposes, in fact I've always ended agreeing that it is likely possible to further shrink a Rebel body, I've even edited the last post while you were typing to make this as clear as possible. But maybe not. I do feel the OM series is more compact than rebels, that's doubtless, it's a fact. But, at present, an APS-C DSLR can't be as compact as a film OM or the OM-D, no way. You provided correct measurements for the flange-focal plane distances of the old OM system (46 mm) and for EF/ EF-S (44 mm, in fact you can mount Zuiko lenses on EOS cameras with a cheap adapter 2mm thick), but you don't provide the distance for the OM-D, which is 20 mm, if I remember well. Therefore, in any case, at present the answer is that unfortunately it's NOT possible to engineer an EF/EF-S DSLR to make it as compact as, or comparable to, the OM-D. 24mm difference is roughly 1 inch, you can't put aside this fact. Don't feel offended, I insisted to make this clear, not to hurt you in any way.traveller said:
Upvote
0
Dimson said:
UK Fashion Shooter Jonathan Posner has stepped-up from Canon's Full Frame 5D2 to the M4/3 Olympus OM-D http://jonathanposner.tumblr.com/post/40780795719/my-olympus-challenge-10 To quote Jonathan Posner "Good enough for Vogue Italia, good enough for me."
There are a lot of seasoned professionals who are tired of lugging-around un-necessarly large/heavy cameras and their large/heavy lenses.
I'd be interested in a smaller EF mount APS-C camera with an EVF. Canon really needs to introduce some EF-S primes for use with this camera. A 22mm f/1.8 (=36mm FF) would be a good start followed by a 15mm f/1.8 (=24mm FF). I already have the EF 85mm f/1.8
Upvote
0
pierlux said:traveller said:pierlux said:
Did you take a look at the OM-1? I think you'll find that it isn't micro-4/3rds :
I said the OM-D is micro 4/3.
I've owned an OM 2n since 1980, then I added an OM 1n and an OM 3, many many Zuiko lenses and, over time, an insane number of accessories for the Olympus system. I've been shooting with them for 30+ years. I went for the Olympus system primarily because of the size and weight. I still have all of them, all in perfect order, I occasionally use them (actually the OM 2n, my preferred one), and I think I know them quite well. Still, I think you can't squeeze all the stuff needed for digital in an OM-sized body currently. Just as an example, an LP-E6 batt alone is about as thick as the OM 1 body itself. But, again, for sure I agree that you can certainly make an APS-C DSLR smaller than today's Rebel, though not as small as the OM 1 or the OM-D.
I still have OM 1,2 and 3 bodies and winders and a few Zuiko lenses. With a few mods it could be possible to
reconfigure the winder to a battery pack and incorporate a sensor FF or APSC.
Zuiko 50 1.4 is still in use with an EOS adaptor
Upvote
0
Quite interesting. Maybe it's gonna be something like Panasonic's GH-Series with an APS-C sensor.
Upvote
0
Pentax 110 Auto from 1982
I had a Pentax 110 Auto back in 1984.
It was a real SLR with a set of 3 lenses. It was cute, small and useable.
I don't see why Canon can't make a small DSLR with unique interchangeable lenses.
Check it out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_Auto_110
I had a Pentax 110 Auto back in 1984.
It was a real SLR with a set of 3 lenses. It was cute, small and useable.
I don't see why Canon can't make a small DSLR with unique interchangeable lenses.
Check it out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_Auto_110
Upvote
0
They're so cute, aren't they? I've loved them, especially the OM2 n. Since I had a lot of glass, I purchased the OM to EOS adapter more for fun than for real need; on a 5D II, the old Zuiko lenses, compared to L glass, are light years apart in IQ.iaind said:
[OT] Digitalizing an old OM? Only if a digital back existed, I don't see such a metamorphosis as a DIY thing. [/OT]
Upvote
0
I am still a big fan of this mirror-less, compact, SLR look-a-like camera (use the Panasonic G/GH series as a standard). I would like to be able to use the lenses I already have, so if an adapter like that needed for the ES-M is required, I'm in.... I guess.
Upvote
0
Smaller than a Rebel? We talking Kiddie Cams? I'm interested what a smaller DSLR looks like and not be a point/shoot or 4/3 camera....
Upvote
0
pierlux said:Traveller, maybe we're talking at cross purposes, in fact I've always ended agreeing that it is likely possible to further shrink a Rebel body, I've even edited the last post while you were typing to make this as clear as possible. But maybe not. I do feel the OM series is more compact than rebels, that's doubtless, it's a fact. But, at present, an APS-C DSLR can't be as compact as a film OM or the OM-D, no way. You provided correct measurements for the flange-focal plane distances of the old OM system (46 mm) and for EF/ EF-S (44 mm, in fact you can mount Zuiko lenses on EOS cameras with a cheap adapter 2mm thick), but you don't provide the distance for the OM-D, which is 20 mm, if I remember well. Therefore, in any case, at present the answer is that unfortunately it's NOT possible to engineer an EF/EF-S DSLR to make it as compact as, or comparable to, the OM-D. 24mm difference is roughly 1 inch, you can't put aside this fact. Don't feel offended, I insisted to make this clear, not to hurt you in any way.traveller said:
You're still missing my point!
The comparison between the Rebel and the OM-D was made because I could find side by side comparison photos of them and I could also find side by side shots comparing the OM1 to the OM-D, but I couldn't find any shots comparing the Rebel to the OM1. If you can find the latter, or are willing to photograph them yourself (assuming you own a Rebel), I would be most grateful if you could share the photo.
When you compare the OM1 to the OM-D EM5 (sidenote: why not just call it the OM-D1?), the additional thickness caused by the mirrorbox is not all that great. The bizzare thing is that small differences in overall dimensions don't seem to be as important in determining bulkiness as other design factors. The OM1 and OM-D EM5 aren't that much smaller than the Rebel, but they both appear to be so (to me at least) because of their cleaner lines. With prime lenses and careful design DSLRs needn't be anything like as bulky a system as they currently are.
Perhaps Canon could make a smaller DSLR as a modular system (like the OM1 popularised back in the '70s), or even a modular EOS-M series with hand/battery grip options and something like the Sony LAEA2 adaptor (with moving mirror and a pentaprism -go on Canon, take up the challenge!). This latter option would be a good way of enticing EOS system users to buy into the EOS-M system as well: use EF-M lenses without the adaptor when you need maximum compactness, or swap in the adaptor, battery grip and EF(-S) mount lenses when you need performance (the elephant in the room is full-frame and whether Sony will make a full frame NEX stills camera...)
Upvote
0
OK I just read on another blog that this new camera will be a Rebel...so this is NOT a new line of camera for Canon, which has been reported widely on the web. This camera will be in the Rebel line of cameras.
That should calm down a lot of the speculation, and confusion.
That should calm down a lot of the speculation, and confusion.
Upvote
0
If the 6D is the smallest FF camera Canon makes in the next couple years I will be very disappointed. I don't understand why companies cant give the market a FF compact high end body on par with the M series but with AF. The M9 has been out for years already(4-5?) and no camera company can match anything like that yet? I'm about to just buy an RX1 and sell all my DSLR stuff. It's fun to shoot if I have a car and i'm just out for a few hours, but traveling or carrying a DSLR around all day, to work, on the bus, it's just too heavy to really enjoy it.moreorless said:
Upvote
0
RLPhoto said:
Agree 100%. This camera should be the prosumer/enthusiast M camera with the world-class EVF and greatly improved focusing speed.
Upvote
0
Ah, now I get your point! I thought it was exclusively a matter of absolute bulkiness, but now it's clear to me it's more a matter of style and design. And yes, I would love such a camera from Canon, a retro styled APS-C or FF digital reflex. Actually I'm in for the Fuji X-100s, but a retro digital interchangeable lens Canon camera would be cool, many recent small EF lenses from Canon would fit it nicely. But you must admit your point was not that much evident in your original post. Maybe in a near future, when thinner OLED and compact sensor assemblies will be available, the thickness beyond the focal plane, previously being represented by the film and back only, won't grow too much, and such a camera may pop out, I'm sure it would be appreciated not only by you and I.traveller said:
traveller said:
This, and our previous mention of batteries, made me meditate on a curious thing about grips, in that they first appeared as ugly, undesired but necessary bulges to house bigger batteries for the rapidly growing electronics and automation in cameras; I remember a well known italian photo magazine, in the pre-internet age, complaining for how uncomfortable the unusual feel of that "angulous" protrusion was. What can't be cured must be endured, thus hand grips evolved, and also the way we handhold cameras eventually, so today you have to purchase them as expensive accessories for those cameras which don't have an ergonomic grip (think of Leica) if you want to feel comfortable, because we're used to this feel which, indeed, is better. This is making a virtue of necessity, but don't you think it's a bit funny?
Traveller, sure I can find an OM (except for the 4) because I've got the 1, 2 & 3, the problem is the Rebel, since the one I've got is the original one, the 300D (and this explains why I am interested so much in the forthcoming APS-Cstraveller said:
), which is way larger and heavier than all the others from the 350D on, it wouldn't be a worthy comparison. Anyway, the link you provided shows them both, evenly scaled though not side by side, so a bit of cut & paste would do the job. Nevertheless, if you're interested in the unfair comparison anyhow, I'll be glad to snap the elephant and the gazelle side by side, it seems we share a common passion for this kind of stuff after all! 
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
