Industry News: The First Rumored Specifications of Nikon's Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

littleB

EOS M6 Mark II
Jun 29, 2017
66
15
Russia
fullstop said:
excellent! If true, first Nikons i am really interested in. sounds like Nikon listened to me and my much hated wish-list!
It is your wish list that saved the Nikon. If it were not your list, Nikon would be *******.
 

Uneternal

EOS M6 Mark II
Jan 25, 2016
65
38
Each time if there is a mirrorless news, there's this argument about EF or not EF mount going back and forth.
WTH people, this news isn't even about Canon.
The only relevant thing I see for Canon owners here is, that 2 mirrorless cameras are in development. Which might give a clue why Canon also has 2 cameras in development: We might see a mid level full frame and a high end one next year.
Every other pro and contra EF just gets you nowhere. Lets just wait and see if Canon finds a solution to make everybody happy. Be it with an adapter or extruding element.
 

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,264
463
It seems to me that the situation is almost like a slow bicycle race.
Canon could have by now brought out a full frame mirrorless.
I think they are not sure whether to implement a new mount or not.
Maybe they are waiting for Nikon to choose and are waiting to see the reaction.
I’d say Canon have two options ready already and are stuck on the choice.
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,074
1,423
Brown said:
CarlMillerPhoto said:
God I hope Canon stands out from the pack and offers a mirrorless body with a native EF mount.

Then what's the point of it being mirrorless?
There is a lot of points. I can easily name at least five. The first is: without having high-precision moving mechanical parts, it should be cheaper to manufacture.
 

MartinF.

EOS 6D, 5D mkIV and some good EF lenses. DPP4 user
Feb 2, 2016
83
56
Denmark
I do hope that Canon stay with native EF mount for "full size" PRO and Prosumer cameras as the the current XD (one digit) series even when going mirrorless. A large telezoom or heavy 24-70 requires some ergonomics on the camerabody.
However - a smaller Mirrorless fullframe with a new mount targeting both pro and semipros that want a smaller body and smaller lenses for photojournalism, outdoor portraits, streets etc, i brilliant - but i guess that a smaller body is not what sportsphotographers want.
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
littleB said:
fullstop said:
excellent! If true, first Nikons i am really interested in. sounds like Nikon listened to me and my much hated wish-list!
It is your wish list that saved the Nikon. If it were not your list, Nikon would be *******.

you bet!

If Canon really were to go with a stupid EF-nozzle on their FF mirrorless cameras, I'll have to switch to Nikon, which will truly save their a** and start the final CAN-AGGEDON! No, I am never alone in my purchasing decisions but usually find *millions of people* around the world buying exactly the same things. :eek: :p ;D
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
Jaysheldon said:
Why not
--keep the EF mount for full frame mirrorless cameras
--keep the EF-M mount for those who want a lighter camera/lens package, including those light F6.3 and f5.6 lenses. (in other words, if you want a 70-200 f4 you have to go full frame. You want light, it means light lenses -- and Canon can market the hell out of lightness. You want big lenses, go with a bigger camera). This mount replaces the EF-S cameras/lenses. (In other words, better to piss off EF-S lens owners than EF lens owners)
The flaw in this, I admit, is it means Canon has to maintain a two-lens line.

No flaw. Canon is already transitioning from EF-S to EF-M - for APS-.C sensors only, of course. And they will go from EF to "EF-X" for full frame sensored cameras.

So from 2 mounts in the DSLR era: EF / EF-S to 2 mounts in the mirrorless age: "EF-X", EF-M
No flaw, perfectly fine. :)
 

jolyonralph

EOS R5 Mark II
CR Pro
Aug 25, 2015
1,410
888
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
fullstop said:
So from 2 mounts in the DSLR era: EF / EF-S to 2 mounts in the mirrorless age: "EF-X", EF-M
No flaw, perfectly fine. :)

I still think that EF-M will be used for full-frame to simplify the future lens lineups.

Imagine in the future you have a EF-X 70-300 lens - won't they want to sell this to APS-C shooters as well as FF shooters? There's no need for two different lenses.

I guess it's possible that you could have an EF-X mount that is wider than EF-M, but can take an adaptor to connect EF-M lenses.

That way all lenses that can work effectively with the EF-M mount would still use EF-M (and therefore be useable on APS-C and FF cameras), eg the 70-300, but any specialist lenses, such as the EF-X 50mm f/1.0 :) would require the wider mount and wouldn't therefore work with he EF-M.

That'd mean you need to take two adaptors with you, the EF-X->EF-M and the EF-X to EF

So, I still think that there's very little chance of a new 'EF-X' mount. The choices are either EF-M, or EF - simply from the point of view of Canon's logistics and marketing of future lens products.

Of course I may be wrong, hopefully we won't have long to wait to see..
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,074
1,423
fullstop said:
Canon is already transitioning from EF-S to EF-M - for APS-.C sensors only, of course.
What makes you think so?

The last two crop lenses Canon introduced were EF-S, not EF-M.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
jolyonralph said:
I guess it's possible that you could have an EF-X mount that is wider than EF-M, but can take an adaptor to connect EF-M lenses.

Given that a new mount for FF mirrorless (if that happens for Canon) will also be quite thin / have a small flange distance, an adaptor from 'EF-X' to 'EF-M' will likely be thickness-problematic, i.e. only a few mm thick. I don't see that happening, so if Canon does go thin with FF mirrorless, EF-M glass likely won't work with it.

And I don't think that's a crime given that no premium, fast, fast-focusing glass for EF-M exists like Canon tried 10 years ago with EF-S. In other words, if the various EF-M lenses you own are only $299, $399 STM glass, are you really heartbroken it won't work with your $3000 new FF mirrorless body?

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
fullstop said:
littleB said:
fullstop said:
excellent! If true, first Nikons i am really interested in. sounds like Nikon listened to me and my much hated wish-list!
It is your wish list that saved the Nikon. If it were not your list, Nikon would be *******.

you bet!

If Canon really were to go with a stupid EF-nozzle on their FF mirrorless cameras, I'll have to switch to Nikon, which will truly save their a** and start the final CAN-AGGEDON! No, I am never alone in my purchasing decisions but usually find *millions of people* around the world buying exactly the same things. :eek: :p ;D

Because the FF f/0.95 'Noct' lenses will be ultra-light pancakes, I'm told. ::)

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Kit. said:
fullstop said:
Canon is already transitioning from EF-S to EF-M - for APS-.C sensors only, of course.
What makes you think so?

The last two crop lenses Canon introduced were EF-S, not EF-M.

+1. Crop SLRs keep the lights on at Canon. Most everything EF-M has offered has eventually had an EF-S 'clone' made for it:

EF-M 22 pancake --> EF-S 24mm pancake
EF-M 28 illuminated macro --> EF-S 35 illuminated macro
EF-M 11-22 IS --> EF-S 10-18 IS

They haven't transitioned anything yet. They did stop designing new higher end EF-S lenses ($799+ USM glass), but that's probably because they didn't sell well and/or gave users a reason to stay in crop rather than step up to FF.

- A
 

snoke

EOS RP
Jul 20, 2017
306
47
ahsanford said:
Some folks want to use their EF lenses in a mirrorless context, hate adaptors, etc. They value what mirrorless offers beyond size reduction, so they wonder why new lenses are needed at all.

Canon make more money.
This #1 priority.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
snoke said:
ahsanford said:
Some folks want to use their EF lenses in a mirrorless context, hate adaptors, etc. They value what mirrorless offers beyond size reduction, so they wonder why new lenses are needed at all.

Canon make more money.
This #1 priority.

It's not remotely that simple, Snoke. Were this the case, Canon would have 11 mounts right now.

New mounts and new lenses take a lot of R&D time and money to design to concept, DFM, optimize, etc. They may drive new focusing tech and communications protocols to the lens that take time to dial-in as well.

They also add bloat/complexity/confusion to a system, sow concerns of other product lines going away, etc. which can alienate current users.

That said, I think a small FF mirrorless platform would be profitable enough to wade into those realities if they don't overdo it with the new mount's lens portfolio. Keep it small (literally and scope-wise), see how the system is received, and then take the next steps.

- A
 

Generalized Specialist

I'm New Here
Jan 1, 2016
24
1
fullstop said:
No flaw. Canon is already transitioning from EF-S to EF-M - for APS-.C sensors only, of course. And they will go from EF to "EF-X" for full frame sensored cameras.

Yes, all 7 of them in the six years since EF-M came out. And three of the 7 are kit lenses. Setting the world on fire Canon is!

For comparision, Sony has 18 E mount lenses unless I can't count correctly with all my fingers and toes and I can only image how many Fuji has which is many more.

If that's the pace of transitioning at Canon it clearly explains why the vast majority of their releases the last couple of years has been so sleep inducing.
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
me and many purchasers prefer Canon EF-M lens lineup with a very useful zooms and peimes, all dirt cheap and optically decent to excellent lover Sony E-mount and Fuji X-mount, which are also crop only, but either priced and sized like Canon FF glass (fuji X) or optically mostly inferior but mirr expensive than EF-M lenses (Sony E-mount). Market share to prove this. :)
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
the mirror will go. it was only there because prior to digital imaging sensors and electronic viewfinders it was the inly way to get "through the lens" viewfinding, focussing and metering. that was the only reason to exist for moving mirrors and all related disadvantages from slap to size to alignment issues.

once the mirror is removed, there is no reason to keep making cameras any larger than necessary just to preserve a legacy lens mount, when legacy lenses can be used with a simple little adaptor.

Proof was delivered by Pentax - the hard way - with their DSLR- sized "native K-mount" K-01 mirrorless camera. Epic fail! it should be/become a very nice collector's item.

erez


i always chuckle when i see how some people believe in the mirage of a "native EF mount Canon mirrorless camera". :)
 

michi

EOS RP
Jul 26, 2011
275
12
If the Canon equivalent will cost the same, and with a new lens mount, it will be out of my league. I am willing to spend a lot of money for something like a 5DIV and some L lenses every five years or so, but to start with a new mount, no thanks.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
michi said:
If the Canon equivalent will cost the same, and with a new lens mount, it will be out of my league. I am willing to spend a lot of money for something like a 5DIV and some L lenses every five years or so, but to start with a new mount, no thanks.

Is it really new if it works perfectly with your EF glass? I hear you that a new mount means a new investment, but that investment is likely to be a (guessing) $200 one-time pickup in the form of an adaptor. That's not awful if you have what appears to be a ~ $5K budget to roll out every five years.

- A
 
<-- start Taboola -->