Canon's Retro EOS RE-1: What to Expect Later This Year
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Personally I am with you, if I want classic industrial design, I'd better grab the AE-1 I inherited from my father and load it with a film. But if there is a market, why not feeding it? If Canon could eat some of Nikon's, Fuji's and Olympus' market shares? It isn't a challenge today to make a classic looking body and stuff it with mirrorless camera innerts. But I do hope for future users that Canon does not mess around like Nikon with horrible wheel pyramids on the camera. Grown into SLR photography with my old FM-2 which has a clear, well-made user interface, I really had to burst into laughter when I saw that "wheely monster" created by Nikon first. It may impress younger people who think that a manual classic camera may need a lot of wheels, levers, and buttons as a sort of "fumble-workflow" until you finally get to take a picture.
Upvote
0
I guess, currently the hype is more on the Pentax 17 side with young people, which is a true (half-frame) film camera. Recently a young tourist couple visiting Frankfurt asked me to take a picture of them with their Pentax 17. That was the first time I could try that funny little camera. I still love to shoot film in vintage cameras, but the Pentax 17 is really cheaply made for a price in the range of roughly 500 Euros (in Europe). I appreciate that Pentax took the risk of bringing out such a camera, but I was really disappointed by its very limited setting options, given its price.
Upvote
0
No, the AE-1 was made of light aluminum alloy, not plastic. Only the film door on the back was plastic, which as feature showed that the AE-1 wasn't intended by Canon as pro camera (but even many pro's used it, because it was compact, light and offered innovative electronic features).
Upvote
0
Me too, unless this new camera offers some suprising upgrades to the R8 / R6ii. If it sports a better EVF than it mght be an interesting camera.
However, my argument about retro styles caemras....is what are we calling retro? My old EOS 33 / Elan 7e is considered retro, my EOS 650 is very retro....sure my A1 nd AE1 program ave very retro....even my 300D and 20D are considered retro.
Surely if we mean really retro....then go full circle and do a Canon P range finder. Mirrorless is a modern interpretation of the range finder after all.....RF mount?
Upvote
0
The body chassis was aluminium but the top plate was ABS plastic. Can’t remember if the bottom plate was plastic or not.
Upvote
0
According to Wikipedia the bottom plate was made of brass, which is also what I remember shining through at the edges of my black AE-1:
“In keeping with its cost-cutting philosophy, Canon designed the AE-1 to use a significant amount of structural plastic for a lighter and cheaper camera at the expense of being less impact resistant. Canon went to great effort to disguise the use of plastic - the injection-molded acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) for the top panel finished with either satin chrome or black enameled to give the look and feel of metal. The bottom plate was made of brass and then finished with satin chrome or black enameled.”
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_AE-1
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Thanks. I took my old AE-1 out of the shelf and I have to say that the top plate is really well made, it looks and feels quite like metal.
Upvote
0
Interesting concept. A few questions?
- Where do you have them setting aperture?
- What do you see the DOF preview slider doing?
- What do you have under the AE-1 battery cover?
- The RF lens mount is 12.5% larger in diameter than the FD lens mount on the A-1/AE-1. Are you enlarging the body by 12.5% in both height and width to compensate visually so the mount doesn't look disproportionately too large?
Upvote
0
On the lens or command dial in case a ringless lens is attached. I would expect all controls to be user-remappable. Again, the issue of exposure triangle dials made digital has already been solved to perfection by Fuji and every maker attempting retro controls should copy them.
I assume DOF preview would work like any other camera on the market, i.e a button.
The concept visual is not to be taken literally, but as a general indication of the direction such a camera could take. For example, I'd assume the mount would be flush with the camera body, but that's something I didn't put in the visualisation because it would take too much photoshopping work. Likewise I'd expect the battery cover to not be present (there could be a multi-function button in its place). Those are details that should be assumed - the most important things here are the silhouette and ergonomics.
I assume the body would be about the size of the Zf, maybe a touch smaller since the battery would be inside the grip.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
There's obviously a minimum size here if they go for a full-frame sensor with IBIS. That minimum will be at the very least R6-sized.
If that's too small for you then sorry, but the market has been catering to you for decades. Just buy a used 5Dmk4...
Upvote
0
The 5 DIV, which I still own, is no solution if you want to use RF lenses.
And, sorry, if you want to keep controls apart, size matters, especially in winter with gloved hands. Exaggerated miniaturization has many drawbacks.
I surely would like my R5 II in an "L" size, just like the 5 DIV or the F1...
Upvote
0
Was the F-1 larger than an R5 ? I thought they were similar in size, though needless to say, I’ve never had them side by side !
Upvote
0
It was larger and, above all, less cramped than the R5. Of course, it also lacked many amenities of modern digitals, which are also partly the reason why these are so cramped...
Yet, the 5D series would be, for me at least, perfectly sized with excellent ergonomics.
But I know I'm part of a small minority, it seems a vast majority wants small and smaller. Thanks God, Canon cameras, even when small, still offer very good ergonomics. Unlike Sonies...
Do not misunderstand me, I can happily live with the R5 and R5 II cameras. I just expressed a preference.
Upvote
0
All I remember is they were heavy lumps ! I was a Nikon shooter, and my brother shot Canon. We had F3HP and F-1n respectively, but I remember preferring my ‘compact’ FM, and ultimately changed to those lighter cameras. Don McCullin once said in an interview that he really appreciated the lighter weight of the Olympus OM system, so it’s personal preference really. My brother was quite happy to lug the F-1ns about; in fact the more gear he carried the happier he seemed to be.It was larger and, above all, less cramped than the R5. Of course, it also lacked many amenities of modern digitals, which are also partly the reason why these are so cramped...
Yet, the 5D series would be, for me at least, perfectly sized with excellent ergonomics.
But I know I'm part of a small minority, it seems a vast majority wants small and smaller. Thanks God, Canon cameras, even when small, still offer very good ergonomics. Unlike Sonies...
Do not misunderstand me, I can happily live with the R5 and R5 II cameras. I just expressed a preference.
Upvote
0
As you just wrote, it's a matter of personal preference. While I loved the Leicaflex, the Canon F1 and the Nikon F2, I totally disliked the OM 2 which I got rid of within weeks...
And I fully sympathise with your brother!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
