Canon Mirrorless [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

<div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/02/canon-mirrorless-cr1/" 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/2011/02/canon-mirrorless-cr1/"></a></div>
<p><strong>Canon Mirrorless next week?

</strong>I received an email this AM stating that Canon will announce the Canon QL-D1 mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.</p>
<p>There were no specs or any other information given.</p>
<p><strong>CR’s Take</strong>

This is the first mirrorless information I have been given in months. If there’s an announcement coming next week, I can’t see this being all that gets sent my way.</p>
<p>The model name given is nostalgic and creative.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p>“QL” was used by the Canonet, a <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/canql17.htm">film rangefinder</a> that didn’t have interchangeable lenses.

<strong>*UPDATE* </strong>A reader wrote in and gave me a bit of a history lesson (I love em). “QL” actually stood for Quick Load. As in how film was loaded into the camera. There was also an FT-QL SLR. <em>Thanks!</em></p>
<p>“D1″ is a model used by Epson with their <a href="http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?oid=49164277">digital rangefinder the R-D1</a> and RD1x.</p>
<p>So while a creative little bit of information, I am going to say it’s highly unlikely. It would be so great if it were true.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[EYEONE]

I don't really care too much about the mirrorless systems that are all the rage now. But Canon would be foolish not to release something along these lines.

But I sometimes I could see how it would be nice to have a great small walking around camera.

 

[traveller]

I agree with your assessment: just another attention seeker fishing in the hope of a bite.

Why do people bother with this sort of thing? It does amaze me how someone can get a thrill out of unimaginative, well... Lying is what it boils down to. True hoaxes should have an entertainment factor that the people who are hoaxed can actually enjoy when the truth is revealed.

Having said all this, I'm not entirely sure if some of what CR gets sent isn't deliberate mis-information and market research from Canon itself, partly to muddy the waters in case there is a real leak and also to gauge reaction to proposed specifications of future models (probably a long way off).

P.S. I had a go on someone's NEX5 today: beautifully built, but the 18-55mm is too big for the body and the controls were a bit fiddly. The first criticism would be alleviated with a couple more primes; as for the second, I'm sure one could get used to it. It's a shame that Sony didn't put just one or two more buttons on the body, there's plenty of 'real estate' available.

 

[jonne]

This mirrorless thing is just a fad, like the Internet. Canon is smarter than that.

 

[c.d.embrey]

This would be a great camera, but Canon would never build it.

Something like a Leica M9, with simple film style controls, and short primes (NO ZOOMS) would be a good seller at a reasonable price.

 

[ms]

i agree that a reasonably priced and more modern (screen, live view, and perhaps an EVF that gets around the macro/tele limitations of an RF finder) M9 type camera would be awesome but I just don't see canon going that way... they are not going to risk cannibalizing sales of any of their SLRs... there are some rumors of nikon putting out a high-end mirrorless in the not to distant future... I think that's more likely though I do still hope against all odds that Canon do something remarkable for a change

 

[Loswr]

But I sometimes I could see how it would be nice to have a great small walking around camera.

PowerShot S95. Reasonable zoom range, shoots RAW, fits in the pocket of my jeans.

 

[EYEONE]

But I sometimes I could see how it would be nice to have a great small walking around camera.

PowerShot S95. Reasonable zoom range, shoots RAW, fits in the pocket of my jeans.

I've actually looked at that camera before for that purpose.
It's more pricey than I'd like. For $400 I lug my 7D around.

 

[Flake]

If Canon do produce a mirrorless camera, I wonder if it will take the existing EF lenses, that would make it attractive to exising users.

 

[Loswr]

I've actually looked at that camera before for that purpose.
It's more pricey than I'd like. For $400 I lug my 7D around.

I had a similar thought. But I balanced that against the shots I would continue to miss because I didn't lug along the 7D and a lens or two, and also the fact that while expensive, it's cheaper than most of the lenses I'd want to use on a dSLR, and decided to get it.

SIdebar, but the final straw was a trip up to New Hampshire where we went on a family outing to some glacial caves, with names like "Eye of the Needle" and "Lemon Crush". I had a backpack with my 7D and 3 lenses in it, and came very, very close to getting irrevocably stuck in one of those caves! With the S95, I never have to say, hmmmm...should I really bring along the 5DII or the 7D...it's going to be really inconvenient on this outing, but what shots will I miss without a camera, short of relying on my iPhone? The S95 produces some great images for it's size, especially once I started using DxO, which does a much better job at reducing the noise inherent to the smaller sensor, compared to DPP.

The other rationale for the S95 is as an emergency backup camera - most times when go out shooting, I am not taking both the 5DII and the 7D. If I'm on a long trip, what happens if the dSLR goes belly up? The S95 adds virtually no weight or bulk to the backpack full of camera gear, and gives me a backup camera, just in case.

 

[bvukich]

If Canon do produce a mirrorless camera, I wonder if it will take the existing EF lenses, that would make it attractive to exising users.

Native, it would be unlikely. As it would result in a body that is easily twice as deep as it needs to be.

However an adapter, be it first party or third, would be logical.

 

[jacrow]

I'd love to see Canon produce a FF range finder to compete with the Leica M9 that I can't afford. My first "serious" camera was a Yashica rangefinder and I learned so much from it. Having something similar for street photography that is inconspicuous would be great. At least until I can afford a Leica.

 

[EYEONE]

I've actually looked at that camera before for that purpose.
It's more pricey than I'd like. For $400 I lug my 7D around.

I had a similar thought. But I balanced that against the shots I would continue to miss because I didn't lug along the 7D and a lens or two, and also the fact that while expensive, it's cheaper than most of the lenses I'd want to use on a dSLR, and decided to get it...

You make good points. It is a topic I'd like to revisit when perhaps I'm making more money as a photography. I'm just trying to build more business and EF glass right now.

I think a good FF range finder would be great. But I will never happen. I don't think there is that much market for it just because it would have to be expensive, being FF. I have found myself wanting the 8 Grand to drop on a Leica M9.

 

[gmrza]

You make good points. It is a topic I'd like to revisit when perhaps I'm making more money as a photography. I'm just trying to build more business and EF glass right now.

I think a good FF range finder would be great. But I will never happen. I don't think there is that much market for it just because it would have to be expensive, being FF. I have found myself wanting the 8 Grand to drop on a Leica M9.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there: the market for rangefinders is very limited - basically to serious enthusiasts and a small number of pros. Even with film, rangefinders very quickly gave way to SLRs in the mainstream market.
That doesn't change the fact that for my compact camera requirements, I would be better served with a rangefinder than a camera like the G11.
Incidentally, I would even be very happy with a rangefinder with an APS-C sensor.

 

[J-Man]

they are not going to risk cannibalizing sales of any of their SLRs...

They won't any more than the current situation, if someone wants a mirror-less camera they will get one,
if they were not going to buy my(if I were Canon) dslr I'd want the customer to buy my mirror-less vs. the other guys.

 

[RuneL]

I'd love it if canon built a compact M-style camera that took EF-lenses. Don't care about the price either. I need it. Problem of course is the rather hefty mount, dwarfing every other mount on the planet, more or less.

 

[DuLt]

Couldn't canon release a small evil fixed lens camera to serve as a compact substitute for s95 or the g12?

 

[c.d.embrey]

they are not going to risk cannibalizing sales of any of their SLRs...

They won't any more than the current situation, if someone wants a mirror-less camera they will get one,
if they were not going to buy my(if I were Canon) dslr I'd want the customer to buy my mirror-less vs. the other guys.

There are many non-fanboys in the world who will buy what best meets their needs. Ricoh GRIII s are carried by many pros, so are Panasonic GF1 s.

Fuji's X100 will also be bought by many Canon shooters.

If Canon doesn't fill the perceived need, others will. Fuji, Ricoh, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica, etc stay in business buy building things that CaNikon won't.

 

[Rocky]

After reading the posts, I have the following thought:
1. In order to complete with the DSLR, the auto focusing speed of the EVIL must be as fast as the DSLR. So far non of the "mirrorless" can achieve that due to the "live view focusing". That is why Leica sticks to the manual focusing. Experience range finder user can guess the distance and use the " zone focusing " technique and endsup with zero focusing delay. Also all the Leica lenses have about 3/4 turn of the focusing ring for the entire focusing range and depth of field scale. That will definitely help.
2. Overall size is important. Sony has gone over board on minimze the body and ends up with a large lense. Using existing DSLR lens with an adapter is not an answer. That will be too big. Try to compare the f2.0 35mm Aummicro 9 leica) with any F2 35mm dslr lens. The volume is about a factor of 4. So the EVIL needs to have its own set of lens to make the size to be small to lure people from their DSLR.
3. Due to the decrease thickness of the camera body and the will to make smaller lenses, FF in EVIL is almost a dream due to the high cost of the sensor and the special angled and offset micro lens arrangement ( Leica used it on M9, they may be holding patterns on it) plus soft ware adjustment to achieve even explosre from corner to corner. Even APSC will facing similar problem to a lesser degree.
3. Marketing pressure/ user perference. Due to the lower demand, the sales volume of EVIL will be quite a bit smaller than the DSLR. So in order to get the R & D and tooling expense back, the EVIL (body and lenses)will be selling a lot higher than the DSLR at the same performance level. So how many people will buy an EVIL instead of a DSLR???
4. What is the advantange of EVIL over the DSLR beside size??? That is the same reason why the film SLR has literally wiped out the film range finder camera, except Leica. Even Nikon and Canon stopped producing range finder (with interchangeable lens) in the 60's.
5. my personal choice of mirrorless is down to two. 1. Leica M9. It combined the best of classic interchangeable lens range finder and the digital. Too bad at $8000 body only is too steep for me, even I have some Leica lenses from my M4. 2. FujiFilm X100, I look at it as a high tech M9 with a fixed lens.

 

[c.d.embrey]

After reading the posts, I have the following thought:
1. In order to complete with the DSLR, the auto focusing speed of the EVIL must be as fast as the DSLR.

Why do you think that a Mirrorless needs to compete with a DSLR ??? There are an awful lot of people who are not interested with carrying a large, heavy DSLR when going on a family outing. But want something better than a P&S.

2. Overall size is important ... needs to have its own set of lens to make the size to be small to lure people from their DSLR.

No need to lure away from a DSLR ... many people will own both. And some P&S owners with buy them who aren't interested in Big & Heavy DSLRs. Two different groups to sell to.

3. ... FF in EVIL is almost a dream ...

Sounds more like a nightmare. If people wanted oversized cameras Olympus, Panasonic and Ricoh wouldn't be selling all the cameras that they do.

3. Marketing pressure/ user perference. Due to the lower demand, the sales volume of EVIL will be quite a bit smaller than the DSLR. So in order to get the R & D and tooling expense back, the EVIL (body and lenses)will be selling a lot higher than the DSLR at the same performance level. So how many people will buy an EVIL instead of a DSLR???

P&S cameras out sell DSLRs because there are many people who don't want or need a DSLR. Mirrorless cameras will sell to people moving-up from a P&S you don't want the size and weight of a DSLR and don't need image quality of a DSLR. How many of your acquaintance s print their snapshots at 20x30 ???

4. What is the advantange of EVIL over the DSLR beside size???

For many people that is enough. Mico 4/3 cameras sell well because of their size and good enough quality. BTW why don't you own a 60 MP + MFD, much better quality than a DSLR

5. my personal choice of mirrorless is down to two. 1. Leica M9. It combined the best of classic interchangeable lens range finder and the digital. Too bad at $8000 body only is too steep for me, even I have some Leica lenses from my M4. 2. FujiFilm X100, I look at it as a high tech M9 with a fixed lens.

I think I'll go with a Panasonic GF2 with a 20mm f1.7 lens. YMMV