Fixed lens “Retro” camera coming from Canon?
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
What Canon needs in the line is an up-to-date pocketable camera that takes really great images. Clearly a fixed-lens design is the easiest to accomplish pocketabilty with. APS-H would be an interesting choice in that it would not compete directly with FF RF cameras, but would have the best IQ in the pocket camera game. 35mm equivalent makes for about the smallest lens possible with decent speed and that would make it "classic" with just a few retro styling touches. I suspect most of us on this forum would add one of those to our collection.
Upvote
0
While a retro design just for the nostalgia feeling is IMHO quite useless, the compactness and ease to use of some rangefinder cameras is still useful, and the more ergonomic designs tend to make them bulkier. For this class of camera some features can be removed without compromising their usefulness.
That said, I would prefer an ILC rangefinder - but I understand a fixed lens camera is easier to design and doesn't require its own lenses to support it, since it would be a nonsense to have a more compact camera and then only bulky RF lenses to mount.
Still, it's a bit ironic that actually these are high-end P&S in disguise... what's the difference with a G1X, - but the zoom - after all?
Upvote
0
I would suggest - very occasionally - given that there has been only 3 bodies in ~20 years (20Da in 2005, 60Da in 2012, Ra in 2018) with modified filter to allow more Ha transmission to my knowledge released and significant times where no astro body was available eg today.
The 20Da also had a partially transmissible mirror added to allow for Live focusing with the mirror locked up so more than just a filter swap back then.
Definitely a small niche with limited sales but if it was so simple then there would be an ongoing option. R&D costs may be contained but there are still marketing/logistics (documentation, potentially certifications within each jurisdiction, holding spares etc) that would be additional costs.
Releasing a 6Diia or R5a or even a R8a would give a tiny bump in sales. Anecdotally, I know of at least 2 people who recently ordered an astro mod for a R8 from Spencers. Although Spencers have additional options for full spectrum etc.
Upvote
0
Ergonomics would be subjective but appeal to a significant majority based on cost to produce similar to garment sizing vs a bespoke item.I believe to make a distinction between good ergonomics, meaning recent cameras, and bad ergonomics, meaning so-called retro-designed cameras, is, no offense meant, absurd.
We all know that recent cameras, like Sony, Fuji or OM models have partly horrible ergonomics. While , on the other hand, Leica Ms or SLs have superb ergonomics, at least in my opinion. So, the simplistic assertion "retro = bad, newer = good is subjective and flawed.
My 2 Euro-cents...
One thing that Canon users have always like about their bodies was their design as a point of difference. Of course, it hasn't stopped Sony et al buyers but they say they prefer size over hand cramps which is their choice.
my AUD0.02
Upvote
0
maybe buyers like twiddling knobsI wouldn't confuse "retro" with "simplicity". Nikon proofs again with its ZF that "retro" can mean a totally confusing dial orgy on a camera top plate. What a design disaster!
Upvote
0
Walrus wrote:
My source just told me that the 35mm L has been put on hold and postponed to 2026, and all resources were steered to the retro camera.
Camera will have the 24mpx sensor from current R100/50/10, and the fixed focal lens will be a 21mm f7.1 (33mm FF equivalent) without IS; someone argued that a 6.3 lens would have been better, but the project manager responded that user can just raise iso, as modern sensors allow for it.
--- -- ---
I'd be deeply disappointed with an f7.1 lens -- in fact, my suspicion would be it's a fixed-focus lens. True, a slow lens would help undercut the price of a Fuji X100. A fixed-focus lens would do the same. What I want is a light camera for street photography. I use a Canon SL1 with either the 18-55 or an old EF24mm F2.8) and set at F8. So an F7.1 lens would be acceptable. But limited to f7.1 indoors? For me it might be a deal breaker.
Separately, we shouldn't be talking about whether such a camera is "retro" or not. Whatever the shape the goal should be a pocketable camera with a viewfinder that's faster and more flexible to use than a smartphone for those who find an R50 isn't small enough/pocketable.
My source just told me that the 35mm L has been put on hold and postponed to 2026, and all resources were steered to the retro camera.
Camera will have the 24mpx sensor from current R100/50/10, and the fixed focal lens will be a 21mm f7.1 (33mm FF equivalent) without IS; someone argued that a 6.3 lens would have been better, but the project manager responded that user can just raise iso, as modern sensors allow for it.
--- -- ---
I'd be deeply disappointed with an f7.1 lens -- in fact, my suspicion would be it's a fixed-focus lens. True, a slow lens would help undercut the price of a Fuji X100. A fixed-focus lens would do the same. What I want is a light camera for street photography. I use a Canon SL1 with either the 18-55 or an old EF24mm F2.8) and set at F8. So an F7.1 lens would be acceptable. But limited to f7.1 indoors? For me it might be a deal breaker.
Separately, we shouldn't be talking about whether such a camera is "retro" or not. Whatever the shape the goal should be a pocketable camera with a viewfinder that's faster and more flexible to use than a smartphone for those who find an R50 isn't small enough/pocketable.
Upvote
0
Yeah, it’s a tool. I have made my living with tools for 45 years and there’s nothing in any of my toolboxes because it looks cool.
When I got back into photography, I started with a Fuji XT-30, because it was small and light and had dials that I understood from my film days! After using it for a year or two, I got rid of it because while it’s capabilities exceeded those of the operator, it was small and light and had dials. When shooting with it I always felt like I should have my pinky in the air and it was rather awkward with a 100-400 hanging off the front. Those dials that originally sold me lost their allure when I was always bumping them and borking my settings when taking it out of the bag…and when I realized it was a major chore to switch photo genres - custom settings only go so far, there are still physical switches that you need to remember to change. With my R5 it’s one button push to go from “landscape” to “animal” to “macro”.
Upvote
0
Funnily enough, I got myself a Nikon zfc yesterday in tan with silver. Pity Canon has nothing like it.
I don't intend to do do serious work with it, I'll leave that to my R5, but is a cute looking and fun camera bringing back the days of old film cameras I used to use.
It's small and light and perfect for putting in a jacket pocket and using it for when you go out and about, or for parties and restaurants.
Unlike the Fuji retros, it's cheap and has the advantage of interchangeable lenses.
I don't intend to do do serious work with it, I'll leave that to my R5, but is a cute looking and fun camera bringing back the days of old film cameras I used to use.
It's small and light and perfect for putting in a jacket pocket and using it for when you go out and about, or for parties and restaurants.
Unlike the Fuji retros, it's cheap and has the advantage of interchangeable lenses.
Upvote
0
I've got a wonderful bridge to sell you in New York City!
Back on topic.
In my opinion, the obsession or fascination with things that are "retro" are two-fold.
The first is aesthetics, some old things are just timeless. Think of a classic Porsche 911 or a 70's series Toyota Landcruiser, a four digit Submariner, a well worn Barbour Bedale jacket or Filson briefcase are all examples. In the photography world, I'd argue things like the Hasselblad 500 series, Rolleiflex, Leica M6 silhouettes are as beautiful today as they were 20-30 years ago. So when something like a Fuji X100 came along in a sea of amorphous black blobs that were so popular in the 00's and early 10's, I can see why it was such a hit. It was the epitome of a "sleeper"; something that looks unassuming but has some serious tech packed under the hood- an ultimate if you know, you know piece, and there was something very attractive about that.
The second is it was just a different experience. After several years of shooting R bodies (and 5D bodies before that) it's all the same. Tens, maybe hundreds of thousands, of shots done the same way you get burnt out and the love for the shooting experience just goes away. Enter something, anything new! Now, instead of having to twirl a infinite dial until you see a value change in your EVF, you have to count physical shutter or aperture stops. Instead of shooting everything in RAW to PP later, maybe I try a film simulation and shoot Jpegs this time around. Hell, sometimes I miss the OVF especially in low light and now I have a little camera that has an OVF built in again! I would hazard a guess it's why things like the ZF/ZFc and Q3 are as popular even though the moaners on the forum cry about them a lot. They're just offer a different enough shooting experience to scratch an itch that most photographers have but may not even know.
So. I'd love to see what Canon has in the works for us. I'd rather it be a fixed full frame camera over an APSC one. If they are indeed going the retro way, then I'd love to have the lens with a working aperture hard control and the elimination of the PASM modes in lieu of dials like the Fuji where whatever is set to "A" is on auto. The ZF is a good first try from Nikon but it is essentially a Z6 in a costume especially once you start using the other non-SE giant zooms and primes.
If Canon goes with a fixed lens variant where they design the lens elements (of a 35mm f2) to fit inside the body then that could be really exciting. It would be the full frame Fuji X100, the modernised Sony RX1, and the working man's Leica Q3 all rolled into one- that would be a real winner.
Upvote
0
I don't know if they still believe it, but years ago Canon execs used the phrase "full lineup strategy", meaning something for everyone.
Upvote
0
I didn't say better than Canon. The body concepts are totally different. The Eos R3 and 5 DIV have brillant ergonomics. Yet, as a rangefinder camera, the M's ergonomics too are almost perfect. Hard to explain, if you have no or little experience of Leica M.To put it in a nutshell, all the controls are instinctively found, handholding it for a few hours is no pain at all. And if you haven't used it for a few months (covid), you are at home with it immediately. And the menus are logical.
Not to be misunderstood: Canons have usually excellent ergonomics, only they should start to standardize. Too many differences between various bodies (R6, R5, R, R7 etc...).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Don’t care if its Retro or Not!
But a small fixed lens, fast aperture apsc camera with built in ND’s, leaf or global shutter, lots of quick and beautiful “film” presets… would be very welcome.
What I like about he Fuji is its my, always there camera and the photos often dont “need” photoshop/lightroom unlike most canon snaps.
Makes the Fuji the perfect shot and share camera.
I recently sold my r7 as the Fuji fills that “leave out and use” camera niche I needed which was current filled by the r7.
Keeping the r5 ad r6 as a full frame tandems but no need for the r7 anymore.
But a small fixed lens, fast aperture apsc camera with built in ND’s, leaf or global shutter, lots of quick and beautiful “film” presets… would be very welcome.
What I like about he Fuji is its my, always there camera and the photos often dont “need” photoshop/lightroom unlike most canon snaps.
Makes the Fuji the perfect shot and share camera.
I recently sold my r7 as the Fuji fills that “leave out and use” camera niche I needed which was current filled by the r7.
Keeping the r5 ad r6 as a full frame tandems but no need for the r7 anymore.
Upvote
0
ashmadux
Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
I don't see an issue either..I just don't care, thankfully.
Otherwise it would look awfully desperate of canon to make that move imho. That said, if they did do it, FF is preferred, but with canon prices (before eventually reduction), whatever model they use better be crazy sexy to the vintage crowd or it's doa.
Lastly, it would be HILARIOUS if they put an aspc lens on it that isn't otherwise available. How embarrassing that the 22/f2 is not the kit lens for lowly, tired, RFS mount.
I'd even get a sony crop before RFS...just terrible.
Otherwise it would look awfully desperate of canon to make that move imho. That said, if they did do it, FF is preferred, but with canon prices (before eventually reduction), whatever model they use better be crazy sexy to the vintage crowd or it's doa.
Lastly, it would be HILARIOUS if they put an aspc lens on it that isn't otherwise available. How embarrassing that the 22/f2 is not the kit lens for lowly, tired, RFS mount.
I'd even get a sony crop before RFS...just terrible.
Upvote
0
ashmadux
Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
LOL my thoughts exactly. Well done.
Unfortunately with canon models that's NOT an r5 or above, what features will be cut/reduced/missing is still the main thing to watch.
Hell, the r62 doesn't even have the save your settings feature, and it's a newer body. For 2k+ price tag, still no soup for you!
21mm f7.1 LOLOL
Upvote
0
I mean, not quite as tiny, but my Bessa II has a leaf shutter and an aperture equivalent to f/0.9 on the X100V's crop sensor. And without that lens jutting out all the time I find it much easier to slip into a jacket pocket.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
