More Than One Active Full Frame Mirrorless Project at Canon? [CR1]

[ahsanford]

*JUST HOW MUCH SMALLER & LIGHTER (than the 5DMk3/35mm 2.0 IS combo) could a designed-from-the-ground-up analogous full frame mirrorless camera+lens system get?

Look at the RX1R II, right? 35mm f/2 lens + FF sensor, but I don't know if it has IBIS. Pretty sure that lens doesn't have IS.

- A

 

[Ozarker]

Consider: how many landscapers left Canon for that Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8?

They left because they wanted the wide DR at base ISO offered by Sony sensors. Fred Miranda is an example.

How many left? How many stayed? How many moved to Canon from Sony? Fred is just one case. This question is rhetorical because you could give me 10 names and it still wouldn't mean anything.

 

[unfocused]

I'm curious. Can someone who owns and uses an adapter with the current Canon mirrorless tell me if you have to mount the adapter to the lens first, as with a tele-extender.

I ask, because I can see it being a real problem if you have to remove the adapter from the camera body every time you want to change lenses.

 

[AvTvM]

I'm curious. Can someone who owns and uses an adapter with the current Canon mirrorless tell me if you have to mount the adapter to the lens first, as with a tele-extender.

I ask, because I can see it being a real problem if you have to remove the adapter from the camera body every time you want to change lenses.

i use EF/EF-M adapter frequently - mainly with EF STM lenses [40/2.8, 50/1.8]. Adapter can be mounted as you like .. on lens first and then on camera or vice versa.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The likely big reason that Canon would use a new mount, is patents. They can patent it and make it difficult for 3rd parties to connect to the mount. It can use a different encrypted protocol, lots of ways to lock out competition. The Canon adapter can still let a EF lens work, but 3rd parties may not be able to make native lenses.

 

[josephandrews222]

*JUST HOW MUCH SMALLER & LIGHTER (than the 5DMk3/35mm 2.0 IS combo) could a designed-from-the-ground-up analogous full frame mirrorless camera+lens system get?

Look at the RX1R II, right? 35mm f/2 lens + FF sensor, but I don't know if it has IBIS. Pretty sure that lens doesn't have IS.

- A

Good point. Real good point...I guess that's where the notion that Canon's first full frame mirrorless might be a fixed-lens model, eh?

As I'm sure you realize, too, the RX1R II's body (minus the fixed lens) is more-or-less the same size and weight as...the M6!

 

[Cthulhu]

Canon just running behind as usual.

I don't mind. I rather Canon get it right for professional use than having their user be guinea pigs on paid assignments.

I do. I'd much rather have a FF mirrorless right now than an M5. I don't buy for one second that they are taking this long because they want to show up with an excellent camera, looking at Canon's history the first few will be terribly underwhelming. Might as well get on with it and get it out of the way

 

[meho1a]

Pearsonaly i don't care if it takes EF lenses nativaley or with adapter. I just hope it wont be so ugly as on the front photo.
I also think that uncompetative sensor was used in 6D mk ii to make space for new ful frame line. This might be mirrorless. Why not?

 

[jolyonralph]

Actually, I don't really care if the new Canon FF Mirrorless uses EF mount or not. Because by the time it's out the Sony A7RIII (or possibly A9R) will be out.


Now, if the new EF-mount Canon camera was a hybrid device keeping the mirror but with a combined OVF/EVF giving you the best of both worlds, then I'd be very interested.

But large heavy mirrorless cameras that only take EF lenses? Count me out right now.

 

[SecureGSM]

what is the point of posting on Canon centric forum then? I genuinely and admittedly have no interest in Sony system. That does not prompt me to start posting on Alpha Rumors?
I can recall that one of CR forum members asked you to stop promoting the Sony system around here and you replied to the effect that you made the post is "Other Manufacturers" section of the forum. Fair enough... but now you are posting in EOS Bodies section.

Actually, I don't really care if the new Canon FF Mirrorless uses EF mount or not. Because by the time it's out the Sony A7RIII (or possibly A9R) will be out.


Now, if the new EF-mount Canon camera was a hybrid device keeping the mirror but with a combined OVF/EVF giving you the best of both worlds, then I'd be very interested.

But large heavy mirrorless cameras that only take EF lenses? Count me out right now.

 

[jolyonralph]

I can recall that one of CR forum members asked you to stop promoting the Sony system around here and you replied to the effect that you made the post is "Other Manufacturers" section of the forum. Fair enough... but now you are posting in EOS Bodies section.

That must have been someone else, not me.

I'm not promoting Sony over Canon. I'd much rather have a Canon FF MILC than a Sony one, but I don't want a heavy DSLR-sized body tied to the old EF lens mount. Why compromise? Build something for the future, not the past.

 

[AvTvM]

I'm not promoting Sony over Canon. I'd much rather have a Canon FF MILC than a Sony one, but I don't want a heavy DSLR-sized body tied to the old EF lens mount. Why compromise? Build something for the future, not the past.

+1

 

[Loswr]

...but I don't want a heavy DSLR-sized body tied to the old EF lens mount. Why compromise? Build something for the future, not the past.

I guess in your future, we'll all have teeny tiny hands, and the laws of physics will no longer apply such that f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes will be small and light.

:

 

[AvTvM]

...but I don't want a heavy DSLR-sized body tied to the old EF lens mount. Why compromise? Build something for the future, not the past.

I guess in your future, we'll all have teeny tiny hands, and the laws of physics will no longer apply such that f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes will be small and light.

:

no. some people will continue to buy large cameras and large lenses. Others will hopefully get a chance to buy fully capable smaller cameras and fully capable compact lenses that will cover *the vast majority* of image capture situations very well. Big & heavy stuff will only be needed for special situations. And / or for XXL users who like/need things generally Texas size.

 

[snoke]

The likely big reason that Canon would use a new mount, is patents.

Sigma & Tamron have Canon "help". Zeiss no. Patent already mean no AF on Zeiss. Nothing change.

 

[snoke]

Consider: how many landscapers left Canon for that Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8?

Already buy A7RII and adapter. Don't need Canon. Ship sailed.

 

[jolyonralph]

I guess in your future, we'll all have teeny tiny hands, and the laws of physics will no longer apply such that f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes will be small and light.

:

I'd like a future where people realise you don't always need a 2.8 zoom or a 1.4 prime to take a great photo.

For that I have my 5DSR. That works great.

A compact mirrorless camera allows me to shoot in different ways, I don't want to replicate the same set up with 2.8 zooms and 1.2 primes that I use with the 5DSR. That's fine as it is.

Basically, I am very happy with the combination of using the A7RII and compact slower primes and using the larger 5DSR with the heavy artillery.

But far from being a Sony fanboy, I want to replace the A7RII with something comparable that's native Canon.

Then I'll upgrade the 5DSR when the appropriate upgrade comes along too - but that's unlikely to be a mirrorless body this time round.

 

[BillB]

I guess in your future, we'll all have teeny tiny hands, and the laws of physics will no longer apply such that f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes will be small and light.

:

I'd like a future where people realise you don't always need a 2.8 zoom or a 1.4 prime to take a great photo.

For that I have my 5DSR. That works great.

A compact mirrorless camera allows me to shoot in different ways, I don't want to replicate the same set up with 2.8 zooms and 1.2 primes that I use with the 5DSR. That's fine as it is.

Basically, I am very happy with the combination of using the A7RII and compact slower primes and using the larger 5DSR with the heavy artillery.

But far from being a Sony fanboy, I want to replace the A7RII with something comparable that's native Canon.

Then I'll upgrade the 5DSR when the appropriate upgrade comes along too - but that's unlikely to be a mirrorless body this time round.

Most would agree that a 5DSR plus a small FF mirrorless would be more flexible than one or the other. The fun starts with posts that imply that that a small FF mirrorless would be a better choice than a 5DSR (or another DSLR or a larger FF mirrorless) as an either or camera choice.

 

[snoke]

Mirrorless changed market.

Now I buy EF lens, don't need EF camera.

Canon EF-T (EF Thin) + adapter = use any non-mirrorless lens.

When all lens for mirrorless then adapter die. Lockin return.

Mirrorless unchain camera and lens from manufacturer.

Big problem for company.

 

[SecureGSM]

not such a big problem if Canon kept EF mount on FF mirrorless body. what other system lenses can be adopted to EF mount? Exactly..

..When all lens for mirrorless then adapter die. Lockin return.
Mirrorless unchain camera and lens from manufacturer.
Big problem for company.