Interview hints to future new Canon mount type

[Vossie]

http://photorumors.com/2014/09/20/canon-is-considering-a-new-mount-system/#more-62364

Maybe a new future mirrorless system that tries to find a good balance between size and iq. Quite interesting rumor. If Canon would release a new mount system, they would probably not maintain all those they have now (likely EF-M).

 

[sagittariansrock]

http://photorumors.com/2014/09/20/canon-is-considering-a-new-mount-system/#more-62364

Maybe a new future mirrorless system that tries to find a good balance between size and iq. Quite interesting rumor. If Canon would release a new mount system, they would probably not maintain all those they have now (likely EF-M).

I don't see how the observation leads to that conclusion. He was speaking of a mount for <APS-C sensors. EF-M is APS-C. They might maintain both lines, as Sony has done.

 

[Aglet]

Some allusion to MFT size sensor there, as well, it seems.
When I consider just how good the IQ is from my Oly EM10's tiny sensor, with just enough ability for OOF areas and DoF control, it seems like the 4/3 system was well conceived for all around compromises.
I can landscape at low ISO with some shadow push ability, use iso25600 and get usable images for small prints, put on a long lens for shallow DoF shooting, all in a tiny light package.
Yup, that sensor size is a good compromise.

 

[9VIII]

I'm guessing they're talking about something to expand the compact camera market, give people the versatility of an SLR in a really tiny camera.
As long as it doesn't come with SLR prices I don't think it's an outright terrible idea.

I really wish they would just stick a 50mm sensor behind the EF mount though.

 

[sagittariansrock]

Whatever improvements Canon might make elsewhere, they won't be competitive in the sub-APS-C market unless they really improve their sensors.
That is only my opinion, of course.

 

[brad-man]

Some allusion to MFT size sensor there, as well, it seems.
When I consider just how good the IQ is from my Oly EM10's tiny sensor, with just enough ability for OOF areas and DoF control, it seems like the 4/3 system was well conceived for all around compromises.
I can landscape at low ISO with some shadow push ability, use iso25600 and get usable images for small prints, put on a long lens for shallow DoF shooting, all in a tiny light package.
Yup, that sensor size is a good compromise.

On the other hand, when Canon finally decides to put both feet in the mirrorless race, the M mount system will yield better IQ than a 4/3 system can. Though Canon seems to have stumbled out of the gate, mirrorless wise, I think we all know that when Canon gets serious, they have the tools and knowledge to produce at least a very competitive camera. Maybe by then they will have improved their sensor/readout components and that, combined with maturing DPAF tech, may allow them to be class-leading in the segment. It's good to dream...