Is a native EF mount coming to a Canon full frame mirrorless camera? [CR1]

[snoke]

Drop EF mount hurt. Ask foot.

 

[tron]

Which is why all FF 16-35 lenses (same FOV as the 10-22) have no AF tech at all, just the old sqeaky microm--

Oh. Hold on a minute.

Not everyone is shooting landscapes with their ultra-wides. If you are shooting people, candids, travel, photojourno, football coaches shaking hands after the game, environmental portraiture, etc. quick AF is a really nice thing to have. I loved my 10-22, but my move to FF saw me give it away to a friend.

- A

I also have 16-35 L lenses (4L and III) and I enjoy using them. But when I had a need for portability I got the 200D with 10-18, 18-55 and 24 with me (because I also had a 5DsR with 400 DO II and the total weight was more than enough) I do not recall having focusing speed issues with them (but true I was shooting static or slow moving targets). Plus they are wide enough to have a margin for focusing error. Of course YMMV (and the type of your shooting too).

 

[Quackator]

In the instance of a new mount, a smaller more compact package.

Only with pancakes or rather mediocre kit zooms.

Switch to better glass and/or longer focal lengths, and
the kit grows when you have more than one lens.

Also, compact translates to bad ergonomics, smaller
and/or less buttons and dials, shorter battery life.

You buy a lot of problems for the niche application of
a compact kit with slow pancakes.

Except for "compact", there is nothing that EF can't do
now or in the future. EF presents no technical limit for
Canon's engineers.

 

[Ozarker]

I have a back up camera in my car.

And that car is a Ford Raptor (drooling profusely). haha BTW: Probably going to be a classic one day. Gorgeous truck.

 

[tron]

Back to EF mount issue I do not believe all the native mount supporters are heavily invested on EF lenses. Some of them may not even have a Canon camera and they just spend their time on the internet. I do not think that a few fixed - and not so fast - Wide Angle lenses is reason enough for making a new mount. Just my opinion. We will know soon. I just preferred that Canon put their resources to making 7DIII and 5DsRII as major upgrades to their predecessors. Regarding lens range and lens IQ they are second to none.

 

[Quackator]

The SL1 is much smaller than the 80D, for example, and I would much prefer that
Canon uses the same approach for their smaller FF mirrorless.

I think many people don't realize that with the removal of the mirror box
one can easily fit a full frame sensor into the SL1 body.

Don't think that it needs to be any flimsier, but if it does, EOS M serves you well.

 

[Ozarker]

Only with pancakes or rather mediocre kit zooms.

Also, compact translates to bad ergonomics, smaller
and/or less buttons and dials, shorter battery life.

Less buttons and dials: Not the case, in my case. That tiny little mirrorless camera has crap crammed all over it. It has buttons on top of switches and dials. Just a mess. And yes, tiny buttons and switches and dials. Horrible ergonomics.

I still hope and believe that Canon will beat everyone else in ergonomics with their mirrorless offering.

 

[fullstop]

btw. i also expect all future Canon EF-X lenses to have focus by wire. EF-X "L" lenses will have a superb implementation (user adjustable throw and dampening for example, no play whatsoever) and FTM (full time manual override). non L consumer grade EF-X lenses may well come as "pure AF" - without manual focus ring and/or video-centric EF-X glass with powerzoom.

 

[snoke]

I think many people don't realize that with the removal of the mirror box
one can easily fit a full frame sensor into the SL1 body.

You pay 5D4 price for SL1?

 

[amorse]

non L consumer grade EF-X lenses may well come in AF only", without manual focus ring. and video-centric EF-X glass with powerzoom.

Oh please no. I'd rather have no autofocus at all rather than auto focus only. Are there any current examples of lenses that are AF only from any manufacturer?

 

[ewg963]

"Competing" implies the two are given the same offerings to fight over the same customers and customer needs. Canon may not go that route.

EF-X could get just a handful of lenses -- the ones to keep the overall rig small -- and that's it. Done. f/4 UWA zoom, f/4 standard zoom, a handful of small f/2-ish primes and a compact macro. Done. That's it. For everything else, they point you to the adaptor.

EF would get all the traditional resources and support a flagship mount should get.

That won't compete much at all. You'd get the EF-X body and a few of the smaller lenses to build a small & light rig and you'd get the full mount and use your EF lenses on that. Easy peasy.

- A

I agree with you ahsanford Canon has the great EF line up why not take advantage of that by using an adaptor but yet give us a new line of lighter lens. Yep problem solved.

 

[takesome1]

Only with pancakes or rather mediocre kit zooms.

Switch to better glass and/or longer focal lengths, and
the kit grows when you have more than one lens.

Also, compact translates to bad ergonomics, smaller
and/or less buttons and dials, shorter battery life.

You buy a lot of problems for the niche application of
a compact kit with slow pancakes.

Except for "compact", there is nothing that EF can't do
now or in the future. EF presents no technical limit for
Canon's engineers.

Bad ergonomics to some, not every one will have problems with a smaller package.

I doubt "niche" will apply. That would indicate small or specialized. "Niche" applies better to the big white lenses, the macro lenses and the tilt and shifts.

 

[ken]

How many times have you heard "My back up camera is a ..."?
How many time have you heard "My backup car is a ..."?

My backup car is a pickup truck.

 

[nchoh]

1) You are conflating the mount and the sensor into 'the mount could deliver this' -- that's a bit misleading. But yes, a different sized sensor could change the game, absolutely.

2) ...

- A

You had me at yes.

 

[lightthief]

You pay 5D4 price for SL1?

No. But take the SL2/200D, add the sensor of 6DII, give it AFMA, and i will pay 1200-1500€ (2-3 x price of SL2) for it.
And yes, no need for AFMA when it comes with EFV.

 

[nchoh]

1) You are conflating the mount and the sensor into 'the mount could deliver this' -- that's a bit misleading. But yes, a different sized sensor could change the game, absolutely.

2) You need to explain your idea, b/c it kind of sounds like a 1.2x larger sensor than FF that somehow gives you more zoom range. It doesn't work that way. I must be missing something -- please set me straight.

• Canon could go with a smaller than FF sensor that works with either new lenses or EF on adaptors -- let's resurrect APS-H as an example -- and yes, sports users would enjoy a nice little 1.3x bump in their effective FL. But that smaller sensor would be worse in low light for a given resolution (see crop vs. FF low light performance as an example.
• Canon could go with a larger than FF sensor, but it gets complicated. Those sensors will cost a lot more and that cost will get passed on to us. New lenses with a larger image circle would be needed to use that sensor to its utmost, and those lenses would actually be bigger and heavier than EF lenses. EF lenses (via adaptor) would not change their zoom with this -- they'd just use the central parts of that sensor and would work as they do on FF.

I'm not saying there isn't something slick Canon could with the mount/sensor decision. They could. I don't think they will. The sensor defines this market because is provides ideal access to a massive slate of EF glass -- Canon's #1 competitive advantage. So I don't see them pulling out an APS-H or 44x33 medium format sort of surprise on us.

- A

What's the lifespan of a lens? 15~20 years? How long does it take to fill out a complete/competitive lineup of lenses for a new mount? 15~20 years?

Does Canon have enough market share and manufacturing capacity to support more than 3 lens mounts? I think they do.

 

[ken]

My wife didn't want the fully loaded Ford Raptor because they couldn't have vibrating seats.
She settled for the fully loaded King Ranch.
She drives my Raptor and sometimes she regrets that decision.

You are comparing convenience trim features of cameras that coax the common consumer to those of advance users. If you look at the 1D series it is built for professional work in adverse conditions. If your at the level to shoot with this body you really do not need the running man and mountain option on your camera. Needs are different at different levels. Different features for different tasks.

So an advanced user doesn't want convenience? Sorry, I'm not buying that argument. 6D had wifi before 5D3, and people justified that with "that's a consumer feature". Now 5D4 has wifi. If it's just a "common consumer feature", why is it now in the 5D4? What changed?

The flip screen is just the latest example of that. People will say "pro shooters don't want that." All they have to do is never flip it out if they're so worried about it breaking.

I predict the next 1D will have a flip screen. And most people will be very glad it does.

 

[Kit.]

I doubt "niche" will apply. That would indicate small or specialized. "Niche" applies better to the big white lenses, the macro lenses and the tilt and shifts.

Or a "compact" FF camera with a lens mount for mediocre lenses.

 

[ahsanford]

Suppose I have a fleet of very expensive lenses (I can be a rich photog or a company). If the new mount is not EF compatible, what do I do with my $15000 lenses? Also how long should I wait for the new mount lenses to arrive, e.g. 400mm, 800mm etc?

Simple. You use the adaptor or you wait for a Full EF mirrorless option. Opt in or wait, it's up to you.

- A

 

[amorse]

So an advanced user doesn't want convenience? Sorry, I'm not buying that argument. 6D had wifi before 5D3, and people justified that with "that's a consumer feature". Now 5D4 has wifi. If it's just a "common consumer feature", why is it now in the 5D4? What changed?

The flip screen is just the latest example of that. People will say "pro shooters don't want that." All they have to do is never flip it out if they're so worried about it breaking.

I predict the next 1D will have a flip screen. And most people will be very glad it does.

I don't think WiFi is a consumer feature any more - I've found it incredibly useful. I don't think I'd buy a camera without it after using it on my 5D IV. I'm not a professional, but I'd assume anyone who needs a fast turnaround time would really appreciate the option of transferring photos from their camera to their phone to deliver them immediately after taking them, rather than having to go back to the office, download them then send them. When time matters I'd assume WiFi is a must - I could see that being very useful to photojournalists (if that's still a thing).

In addition, maybe not as important for others, the WiFi remote shooting option has been amazing for me - I don't always have a wireless remote trigger on me, but I do have my phone. With that said, I didn't think I'd want a flip screen, but more and more I'm seeing the benefit of it. I was working on a composition a couple weeks ago and I realized that I literally had to put my head on the ground to get the right angle - that experience would have been much nicer with a flip screen.