- Status
Probably at least another 23 years.
At a minimum, any new 35mm format mount would be backwards compatible with EF. For example, with the direction DSLRs have been going, I could envision the eventual need for fancy video targeted lenses that may need additional contacts for continuous AF/iris/aperture or who knows what else. But as long as the same image circle is cast, and the film plane is at the same distance, why come up with a whole new mount?
At a minimum, any new 35mm format mount would be backwards compatible with EF. For example, with the direction DSLRs have been going, I could envision the eventual need for fancy video targeted lenses that may need additional contacts for continuous AF/iris/aperture or who knows what else. But as long as the same image circle is cast, and the film plane is at the same distance, why come up with a whole new mount?
Upvote
0
Nikon is still using the same mount they have always had, but at the time, Canon needed to alter the FD mount to make way for auto focusing. It is doubtful that the mount would change again. The EOS/EF system is flexible and should be able to handle a lot more future changes.
Upvote
0
Let's consider what would "kill" EF mount. The only thing I can think of is EVIL, and even then that's a bit of a stretch. I'm not talking short term here, but suppose in the distant future we have an EVIL camera with AF system that is as good as DSLR phase AF in every way. That would be enough to obsolete crop sensor DSLRs, and only leave FF serving a niche position (unless Canon goes FF EVIL!), and who knows by then "affordable" medium format might be squeezing that space too.
The post above on video is interesting but I'm not familiar enough with it to guess any possible impact there. Videographers seem to be doing well enough with current kit. What lens functionality additions would increase value for video use? Consider what might be done in body as opposed to lens too.
The post above on video is interesting but I'm not familiar enough with it to guess any possible impact there. Videographers seem to be doing well enough with current kit. What lens functionality additions would increase value for video use? Consider what might be done in body as opposed to lens too.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
paul.themis said:
Couldn't they simply add a couple of contacts to new lenses and new bodies, while maintaining backward compatibility with current lenses. There's plenty of room around the mount ring. For example, the lenses compatible with the 1.4x and 2x extenders have 3 extra contacts for the TC (there are no contacts for them on the bodies).
Upvote
0
P
paul.themis
Guest
neuroanatomist said:
What concerns me the most with adding anything to the current technology, is the marginal increase in size and weight (which I believe is one of the key limitations of current photographic equipment).
Alas, what I would like to see (a full-frame system the size of today's "point and shoot" toys - and I use that terminology loosely), is probably many decades from fruition.
Upvote
0
I'm going to be a party pooper and agree with bvukich's realist approach ... the EF mount isn't going anywhere in at least the next decade or two.
and, as neuro points out, if they came out with a new series of video-optimized hybrid DSLRs, there's no reason old lenses won't still work, the newer lenses would just have even more functionality.
it would be pretty cool to see some cine-lenses that are native to EF mount.
and, as neuro points out, if they came out with a new series of video-optimized hybrid DSLRs, there's no reason old lenses won't still work, the newer lenses would just have even more functionality.
it would be pretty cool to see some cine-lenses that are native to EF mount.
Upvote
0
bvukich said:
You could use a kind of auto negotiation, if both camera and body support it you switch to a new protocol. Or simply increase the rate of updates to the framerate. Its an SPI connection after all. Canon could get respond times in the single digit ms range, if they want. I'd reckon the motors are the weaker links.
The main reason for a new mount would be a shorter flange focal distance. Nothing a simple adapter without image quality degrading optics couldn't handle.
Upvote
0
I couldn't imagine Canon retiring the EF mount any time soon, but I could imagine them adding a new line of lenses for potential mid-size bodies (a la Pentax 645 D) or EVIL bodies.
Of course, in that case there's probably gonna be adapters for EF lens anyways... :
Of course, in that case there's probably gonna be adapters for EF lens anyways... :
Upvote
0
C
Canonix
Guest
Gothmoth said:
On that note, maybe I could ask this: in England, we pronounce Nikon 'Nick-on' and Nissan 'Niss-an' and Canon 'Can-on', with short vowels - especially the second - and a light stress on the first syllable. In America, I have heard Nikon pronounced 'Ny-kahn' and Nissan 'Nee-ssahn' with long vowels, and stressed second syllables: so how do you pronounce Canon? 'Ca-nahn'? 'Cay-nahn'?
Upvote
0
Canonix said:
That's interesting. I knew that Nikon was pronouced Nick-on in England and Australia/New Zealand too but I didn't know that about Nissan. I think it's cool the way that works. I dont' think anyone told me how to say Nikon. I looked at it and thought "Ny-kon"
But yeah, Canon is the same. Can-on
Upvote
0
kubelik said:
Alright, here we go with linguistics again
The Japanese pronounciation of the term Canon (yeah, it's pretty funny to watch Canon-sponsored programs/commercials and hear the different pronounciations for the same name) is more like "Kyah-non" where the "non" sounds like the french "non".
However, the catch phrase/slogan used in the commercials seems to be unified under the English pronounciation.
All these from a company named after the Bodhisattva of Mercy (Kannon)....
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
