neuroanatomist said:psolberg said:My statement of fact refers to the fact canon is yet to show a full frame system for mirrorless while the rumors of it date back from quite a number of years, and some of its competitors have moved there. I say it is taking long because, just like nikon, every time there is even a hint of what they may do, everybody reports on it.
psolberg said:No doubt the reason nikon and canon have taken so long: creating the perfect adapters is key.
You said it's taking long because they haven't been able to create the perfect adapter.
Really, there's no point in discussing anything with someone so dishonest. Have a nice day.
peters said:I personaly thing this would be a bad decision. In my opinion the lense selection is realy important - and I would never want to carry different lenses around that I cant use with my secondary camera...
Nikon offers realy great and very sharp lenses - I realy don't think winning a few mm in camera size is eraly worth throwing all this away...
neuroanatomist said:So my money is on a thin mount FF mirrorless (+FX adaptor, surely) for Nikon, and -- their pride be damned -- without saying the words "Canon lenses will work on it" they will make it clear what the advantages of a thin mount is.
9VIII said:Canon could make an EF mount that allows Mirrorless lenses to sink another 20mm into the mount, giving you an effective 20mm flange distnace if required.
So it would basically still be an EF mount, but a few nice wide angle lenses could be made.
The worst part would be using a 20mm deep rear cap.
ahsanford said:brad-man said:
One of the pain points of being second or third in the market is that you have to come harder each and every new launch.
So if you can get a first Nikon grip for free with a body these days, the FX adaptor may just come in the box as well as two batteries with this new mirrorless offering.
jolyonralph said:Your personal fear of having to upgrade lenses is just that - fear. It has nothing to do with what Canon needs to look at, which is building the future market.
ahsanford said:But forget any fear you perceive for a moment. What is the benefit of going thin and making people either use an adaptor or buy new native glass?
ahsanford said:and hoping they never leave that adaptor at home while on assignment
But for me, the move to a thin mount will mean years of adaptor use as Canon builds the lenses I need for the new mount.
jolyonralph said:Well, if you're going to keep the adaptor stuck on the camera all the time you're not going to leave it at home, are you?
jolyonralph said:I love the idea of curved sensors, but that would be a real problem for all of us with legacy glass! Entirely new lenses for us all.
jolyonralph said:Selling cameras to existing customers is important, but the number of Canon EOS owners who own more than just the kit lens is a small percentage of their market.
ahsanford said:It's a rare threat, but it's still a threat. Most people if stuck with a thin mount setup will eventually say 'aw shucks' and get a pancake or smaller mirrorless mount lens.
ahsanford said:Any chance a *really* fancy adaptor can 'unbend' the light so than an EF lens works on a curved sensor?
9VIII said:Lenses already cast light at an angle, the sensor would work just fine with existing lenses, even the field of focus is already curved (if my understanding is correct).
The only problem is lenses corrected for a flat sensor would have a bit of distortion on the edges, but it would have to be pretty severe for most people to care, and Canon could build in a software correction.