News Flash: Good news for some, bad news for others

[Jethro]

Really?....So the Sexy solution described to admin by a "source" was...an adapter... like everybody else. Seriously? I suppose only admin himself knows this person, but defining a standard adapter approach as... sexy is pretty damn weird...

Granted there is no product yet and the curtain hasn't lifted, but if all pans out as described, ...canon would be then supporting 3 mounts, two of which will need a lot of lenses going forward and are relatively immature, plus the legacy EF which I assume will continue to see some action...Compare that to just 2 mounts for Nikon, one F for legacy, plus Z, and one for Sony, who is all in the E.

That lens division is going to be busy and IMO sony is throwing a party. They dodged a bullet twice this month.

Or Canon think they can sell enough of the new mount to justify parallel lens development going forward. I guess this is saying that they do. It is probably also saying that they see the DSLR and mirrorless options as having a (at least a medium term) future cohabiting. The full specs are going to be interesting as to where this sits between the 6D2 and the 5D4. It seems like it is going to have its own space - video?

 

[scyrene]

YES!

I was concerned that Canon were going to do something stupid and release a mirrorless camera with a kludge mount that, in order to stop the adaptorphobics from having a panic attack

I'm not an adaptophobic, but using a 500mm lens handheld means a tiny body is not workable for me. So unless they bring out a larger mirrorless body or somehow shave the size of he superteles significantly (without massively inflating the price!), I'll stick with DSLRs (no problem so long as they keep making them!).

(This is just my personal position, I'm sure they know what they're doing).

 

[scyrene]

View attachment 180019
View attachment 180020

... she ain't pretty

Just looks like a camera to me. What were you hoping for?

 

[blackcat]

Continue reading...

Why can't Canon just modify a current DSLR body by taking the mirror out and using the space for the extra electronic features that mirrorless has? I am sure that there are people like me who actually like the size of current Canon DSLR cameras and don't need or want the more compact size of mirrorless cameras. I'd be happy with a camera body the size of my current 5DIV body with all the bells and whistles of a mirrorless camera as well as being able to use all my EF lenses without any mount adapter.

 

[psolberg]

Or Canon think they can sell enough of the new mount to justify parallel lens development going forward. I guess this is saying that they do. It is probably also saying that they see the DSLR and mirrorless options as having a (at least a medium term) future cohabiting. The full specs are going to be interesting as to where this sits between the 6D2 and the 5D4. It seems like it is going to have its own space - video?

Everybody in the business does parallel development. That's not the problem. It is capacity for production and design that is the bottleneck. You're still splitting your efforts either way the more mounts you have to serve. The more mounts you produce lenses, the less resources you have for each. Off course adapters help, but if you hope to catch up with Sony and their native lineup, it is beyond question that doing so with one mount is easier than two. Off course they will increase capacity, but so is everybody doing for sure. I'd bet if Nikon didn't have plans to drop in an APS-C camera, they do now, because that could use all the Z-mount FF glass without adapters on a Z-mounted APS-C, just like in current DSLRs, and lightweight APS-C glass in "crop mode" without adapter. So where does this leave EF-M people? Off course canon could slap an APS-C sensor on the R mount and do the same...and give the middle finger to every EF-M owner in the process

 

[scyrene]

I've adjusted the image so the hotshoes are approximately the same size. Now there may be some perspective issues with the new camera being shorter but not enough to justify the difference in the previous image!


View attachment 180022

Not quite so bad. Nice deep grip anyhow.

 

[psolberg]

Why can't Canon just modify a current DSLR body by taking the mirror out and using the space for the extra electronic features that mirrorless has? I am sure that there are people like me who actually like the size of current Canon DSLR cameras and don't need or want the more compact size of mirrorless cameras. I'd be happy with my current 5DIV body with all the bells and whistles of a mirrorless camera as well as being able to use all my EF lenses without any mount adapter.

They can. They (allegedly) won't. They don't need to use the space for anything electronic. Such idea works and could still happen in theory. There is a youtube video that shows you how to make your DSLR mirrorless (I don't advise you follow its advise). I saw some people theorycrafting there would be protruded elements like with some of the video lenses out there. TBH that sounded clunky as hell and outright horrible, but yes, it was physically possible, thus not impossible. It would have off course restricted further the size of any said rear elements as they had to clear the EF electrical contacts, plus allow some room for the rear housing to hold the glass, and hence complicated matters for lenses requiring big rear elements.

 

[rwvaughn]

I'm not an adaptophobic, but using a 500mm lens handheld means a tiny body is not workable for me. So unless they bring out a larger mirrorless body or somehow shave the size of he superteles significantly (without massively inflating the price!), I'll stick with DSLRs (no problem so long as they keep making them!).

(This is just my personal position, I'm sure they know what they're doing).

"Smaller and lighter" has always been a dubious selling point for mirrorless camera gear. The simple truth is that the laws of physics are constant. Smaller, lighter telephoto lenses are a pipe dream and the laws of physics can't be bent. There is a reason that the Hubble Space Telescope is the size of a school bus and weighs over 24000 pounds.

 

[Ditboy]

Ugh. I thought Canon was gonna kill Sony with this release, but both Canon and Nikon are at a severe disadvantage now. Sony has 60+ native lenses for EF mount. Nikon has 2 or 3, and Canon will have... 5. Yikes.

NO ONE WANTS TO USE ADAPTERS.

Why? If they have full functions and drop in filter, why not? I have several M5's and have used EF adaptors, FD to EF-M adaptors, Leica screw mount to EF-M, Olympus OM to EF-M and have a slew of native lenses. No biggie...

 

[psolberg]

Why? If they have full functions and drop in filter, why not? I have several M5's and have used EF adaptors, FD to EF-M adaptors, Leica screw mount to EF-M, Olympus OM to EF-M and have a slew of native lenses. No biggie...

the filter is a diminishing returns approach overtime and not the permanent advantage here. Every native lens can't use it so it is already becoming less relevant. It is a clever idea, and a slight differentiator. But it will not change much in the end and best of all, it is so simple to copy that it just not that strategically important. I'd expect every 3rd party adapter out there to toss such feature there for sony adapters before the year ends. probably for Nikon too once they reverse engineer the electrical protocol. it is a good day to be in the adapter business for sure.

There is also a problem with the new mount: Pro APS-C. If you put a pro-cropped ala 7D it on the R mount, you screw EF-M buyers who own glass there as you cannot adapt EF-M glass either because of the flange distance. If you put it on EF-M, then you cannot mount R glass there (unless a 2mm adapter is made). I imagine sony/Nikon are going to drop a pro aps-c body in their lineups. And it will be 100% compatible with native FF lenses with no adapter and 100% compatible with FF sensors in crop mode without adapters.

 

[weixing]

the filter is a diminishing returns approach overtime and not the permanent advantage here. Every native lens can't use it so it is already becoming less relevant. It is a clever idea, and a slight differentiator. But it will not change much in the end and best of all, it is so simple to copy that it just not that strategically important. I'd expect every 3rd party adapter out there to toss such feature there for sony adapters before the year ends. probably for Nikon too once they reverse engineer the electrical protocol. it is a good day to be in the adapter business for sure.

There is also a problem with the new mount: Pro APS-C. If you put a pro-cropped ala 7D it on the R mount, you screw EF-M buyers who own glass there as you cannot adapt EF-M glass either because of the flange distance. If you put it on EF-M, then you cannot mount R glass there (unless a 2mm adapter is made). I imagine sony/Nikon are going to drop a pro aps-c body in their lineups. And it will be 100% compatible with native FF lenses with no adapter and 100% compatible with FF sensors in crop mode without adapters.

Hi,
I don't see a problem since current EF-M lens also cannot mount on EF mount DSLR. The EF-M mirrorless is target for those who want a very small package... small camera and small lens while the RF mount is a mirrorless replacement for EF mount... basically a shorter flange EF mount.

Anyway, I think if Canon come out with a mirrorless 7D replacement, it'll be RF mount and not EF-M mount.

Have a nice day.

 

[crashpc]

I still cannot make anything from this, but EOS R would have that 35mm glued on it all the time, for compact setup. For special occasions something 16mm wide and 50-80mm, and that's it. Crop for reach....

 

[Skyscraperfan]

What I would really like: Make the adapters very cheap (like $50), so that we can buy a bunch of them and attach them to all EF lenses we take on our photo trip! Usually that will not be more than four lenses. There could also be a screw to attach the adapter to a lens even more firmly.

The need for an adapter is a systematic problem that Canon caused by changing the mount. So it would only be fair if they at least do not make money with those adapters and just sell them for the production price.

Not like cellphone makers who decided to put non-removable batteries into the cellphones and then charge a huge amount of money for changing the battery although it is a problem that THEY caused.

I would even like to see at least one adapter included in the box if you buy that $2000 camera. That is not too much to ask for.

 

[GaryJ]

Does this open the possibility of third-party lenses and adapters , if it had been the "clever" adapter that would have closed that avenue wouldn't it?

 

[Deleted member 378664]

Adapters are just not fun even if they're free. I'd rather just get new lenses, but if I'm going to do that, Sony has a lot more niches covered with their mirrorless EF lens lineup.

What about thinking the other way around?
If one is in need to use some of the EF lenses until there are RF equivalents available then one can "clue" an EF to RF adapter on each of this EF lenses. At least with the two or three most used EF lenses this could be a temporarily solution.

 

[Yasko]

did i just get canon burned ?

i knew i should have stayed away when the 24-70 2.8 and 6d bodies were literally being blown out this summer. they loooovvveee proving how anything and everything is too good to be true

i guess that’s my lesson , nice f2 glass , jeez i guess this is how it felt back in 1987 huh

my canon gear became a lot less impressive ... i should just go back to fucking film

The gear you bought is still fantastic... and usable! There was no way to use your FX Lenses in 1987 on modern bodies...
And EF lenses can be used on both DSLRs and Mirrorless Canon cameras.

Btw, the fact that they are still releasing EF lenses tells me that they are not dead but more targeted towards Pro photographers (especially long focal length), filter adapters support this.

 

[bergstrom]

should we just boycott thjis release and send a message to canon, ef mount please, we'll wait for the next one?

 

[BeenThere]

I want to see a 1.4x Teleconverter adapter for EF to R. No need for two adapters when using a teleconverter.

 

[Mark D5 TEAM II]

DOA for me. I was hoping for an EF mount MILC so Canon can leverage their existing lens lineup.

 

[michi]

I don't really see the issue. It's basically an extension tube with with data pass-through. If you have a lot of EF glass, you will probably always leave the adapter on the camera.

The statement makes it sound like there will be three versions? One plain, one with a drop-in-filter option and one with a control ring. One would hope that at least the basic adapter will be cheap.

If mirrorless ends up being the future, I think this is a good point to introduce the new mount and build from there.

Personally, I'm happy as can be with my 5DIV and tons of EF lenses. I will patiently see how this all pans out in the next few years. Maybe I'll consider the "RII" or "RIII".