Odds & Ends - Mirrorless [CR1]

[Wild]

It will be interesting to see what Canon can do (or will do) with the mirrorless. There are so many suggestion (read it s demand) in this site: smaller size, reasonable priced, BIG sensor, small zooms etc. Unfortunately, they mutually exclusive. I am interested in seeing how fast is the AF or does it comes with MF and aview finder ( like the M9)?

The specs are not mutually exclusive:

1. SIZE - no problem
"FF" (36x24mm) can be packaged in a very compact and very high-quality camera without any problem.
example: 124.5 x 77.5 x 32 millimeters, sturdy metal body, weight only 13.405 oz./380.1g with batteries
http://www.cameraquest.com/cle.htm

2. LENS SIZE - no big problem
just look at M-mount lenses not only from Leica but also from Voigtlander and other manufacturers. Even a decent f/4 kit-zoom could be made very compact and with decent optical quality. As a matter of fact, no need to develop a new proprietary mount. Just take the patent-expired Leica M-mount and electrify it, using Canon pin layout and mountr-lens protocol. It would be backwards compatible with M-mount lenses w/ manual focusing.

3. FAST and 100% ACCURATE AF - no problem
Just take the approach of the Nikon 1 hybrid AF sized to FF. Take the 5D 3 sensor, take 10.000 sensels out of it for in-sensor-plane Phase-Detect AF for ultrafast stage 1 "pre-focusing" and then hand over for stage 2: DIGIC 5+ powered, fast and 100% accurate Contrast AF. All back-/frontfocus issues with any lens will disappear. No need for microfocus-adjustment.

4. VIEWFINDER - no big problem
Take the Fuji X1-Pro approach and make it REALLY RIGHT. Take the best available 3 Megapixel OLED plus parallax-corrected optical viewfinder. Users decide, whether they want to use optical, electronic or combination in a specific situation.

5. PRICE - no problem
same sensor, DIGIC, electronics and many other components from 5D 3 but minus the entire mirrorbox assembly (demanding very minute alignment = labor intensive) and minus prism. Therefore price should be somehat less, lets say 3 grand USD / Euro for starters.

Now, if I can think of this camera, Canon should be able to figure it out too and build it.

Take my money right now.

 

[mb66energy]

[...]

The only FF "mirrorless"exists is LEICA M9. It is a $9K camera. Let us look back into history. In the late 60's the price of the best Canon Range finder camera is about 80% of Leica M3. So if we strap the curve, A Canon M9 comparable mirror from Canon will be about $6k to $7K. Will you buy a 1D-X or the Mirrorless. Also Leica may be holding the offset micro lenses pattern also. Event some Leica lense cannot be used in M9 due to incident angle concern. If the FF mirrorless can be built so easily and cheaply,whay nobody is doing it???
I am not saying a good mirrorless cannot be done. It just have to be compromised and canot satisfy every body.

IMO a full frame mirrorless might be offered by canon for roughly 1200 Euro/$ if based on 5D Mark II components: It's just a exercise in removing non-needed parts:
Mirrorbox with mechanics and motor, pentaprism and related optics, phase detect AF with mechanics.

This reduces the need to align different delicate optical parts with an internal chassis - can be reduced to "hold sensor and lens flange".

Add a 1024x768 pixel EVF with good optics and you will have a 1200 Euro/$ FF mirrorless camera.

IMHO this camera might not be attractive enough to the typical FF user who needs fps and fast AF. On the other side for landscape, macro photographers and videographers such a system might be extremely interesting.

Your argument with the offset microlenses is a good one but I think it is just important for Leica because they never had a mirror box for their M-series cameras and lenses - lens back elements have a shorter distance to the sensor and the incident angles are larger (compared to a perpendicular axis of the sensor).
EF lenses are designed to bend the light at smaller angles - to allow the mirrorbox gap between last lense element and sensor. Again IMHO: This should avoid to use offset microlenses on the sensor.

I agree with you that comparable compactness (with 35mm film) is not possible due to the need for batteries and other stuff. Additionally the waste heat of the sensor hast to be spreaded - perhaps a special problem for a FF mirrorless of compact size to keep the sensor at low noise levels. Camera size helps here a lot: To give enough material to spread the heat and enough surface to remove it from the camera body!

Best - Michael

 

[AvTvM]

...
Digital camera needs multiple motor and a relative large battery. just look at the size of NEX7 or the Fuji Por 1. They are already bigger than the CLE and they are only APS-C sensor. You have also suggested to use the components from 5D. This will not be a small camera.
Leica lenses are"smaller" due to there is NO AF and NO electronically controlled apertute. Look at the 4/3 lenses, they are even bigger than the Leica lenses.
Nikon holds the patent right on their on sensor AF sensor. Do you think that they will allow any body to use it??
...
If the FF mirrorless can be built so easily and cheaply,whay nobody is doing it???
I am not saying a good mirrorless cannot be done. It just have to be compromised and canot satisfy every body.

What "motors?" ... no film to be transported in digicams. I want them to do away with the mechanical shutter too ... Nikon had an electronic shutter already way back in the D70. No noise, vno vibration, no bulky shutter mechanism unit and best of all: native X-Sync all the way up to 1/8000s!

NEX-7 body size would also be perfectly fine with me. ;-)

And if the body/chassis is made from solid magnesium alloy or even more advanced "liquidmetal" (TitanAl-alloy), proper heat dissipation away from FF sensor is no problem either.

Powerful DIGIC + electronic components are no issue either and a LP-E6 battery [as in 5D2,3 and 7D] is not overly large ... it would hold enough juice to power fast hybrid AF, metering, hybrid viewfinder and back LCD and still be small enough to fit into a compact mirorless camera body. It would also allow many Canonites to use only one type of battery and charger, which would be very welcome.

As far as lens size is concerned: electronic aperture without manual aperture ring takes less space and allows for more compact lenses. Ring-USM AF units are also extremely compact - unless we talk about big-ass super-teles with really large and heavy lens elements. If it was up to me I would make the zoom-lenses for the new mirrorless without focus ring and without manual focus. 99% of users will not miss ist, if the AF is up to speed.
Those who prefer to manually focus may use their existing M-mount lenses.

Hybrid-AF ... with in-sensor-plane phase-detect AF - Nikon for sure holds some patents there, but I doubt they got it totally locked up. Canon hopefully also has patented some of their "ideas" in that direction.

After all, even LPA's monopolistic patent-reinforced hold on remote radio-flash-triggers did not last forever ... and had gave way to competitive solutions as in Canon's new 600EX-RT flashes.

 

[Sith Zombie]

I expect a totally mediocre and underwhelming "G1X with a lens mount" ...
same unnecessary 4:3 mini-sensor plus a mediocre EVF and 3 utterly unexciting, dark but still not very compact kit-lenses along the lines of:
- 18-55/f3.5-5.6 equivalent kit-lens
- 55-250/f4.5-5.6 equivalent tele-zoom
- plus something like a boring 40/2.8 pancake macro
BUT certainly prices will be at least 50% higher than for a corresponding Rebel and EF-S lenses.
It is so very predictable and irksome.

As depressing and negative your prediction is, I think you've pretty much nailed it!

 

[infared]

Who cares what Canon does....I own 2 MFT cameras and 9 lenses..most of them tiny, fast f/stop primes. Canon will not touch that segment of the market...just like Nikon....and HEY ....I am taking great shots right now with my cameras. I have a Canon FF...and mirrorless is not a replacement (yet!)......but I am sure that Canon will just wade in the low end of the pool..and not take the dive. Oh...and the price will be stupid.

 

[Rocky]

What "motors?" ... no film to be transported in digicams. I want them to do away with the mechanical shutter too ... Nikon had an electronic shutter already way back in the D70. No noise, vno vibration, no bulky shutter mechanism unit and best of all: native X-Sync all the way up to 1/8000s!

NEX-7 body size would also be perfectly fine with me. ;-)

And if the body/chassis is made from solid magnesium alloy or even more advanced "liquidmetal" (TitanAl-alloy), proper heat dissipation away from FF sensor is no problem either.

Powerful DIGIC + electronic components are no issue either and a LP-E6 battery [as in 5D2,3 and 7D] is not overly large ... it would hold enough juice to power fast hybrid AF, metering, hybrid viewfinder and back LCD and still be small enough to fit into a compact mirorless camera body. It would also allow many Canonites to use only one type of battery and charger, which would be very welcome.

As far as lens size is concerned: electronic aperture without manual aperture ring takes less space and allows for more compact lenses. Ring-USM AF units are also extremely compact - unless we talk about big-ass super-teles with really large and heavy lens elements. If it was up to me I would make the zoom-lenses for the new mirrorless without focus ring and without manual focus. 99% of users will not miss ist, if the AF is up to speed.
Those who prefer to manually focus may use their existing M-mount lenses.

Hybrid-AF ... with in-sensor-plane phase-detect AF - Nikon for sure holds some patents there, but I doubt they got it totally locked up. Canon hopefully also has patented some of their "ideas" in that direction.

After all, even LPA's monopolistic patent-reinforced hold on remote radio-flash-triggers did not last forever ... and had gave way to competitive solutions as in Canon's new 600EX-RT flashes.

Lets get the fact straight. Nikon D70 is an electromagnetic mechcanically controlled vertical travel shutter that synchronized up to 1/500 sec. This is from the Nikon website. Also NOBOBY have the right mind will expose the sensor in an interchangable lens camera to collect dust. Canon DSLR shutter are motor driven, shutter curtain cannot run by itself.
Nex 7 is an APS-C sensor. If a FF is based on it, it will be at least 1/2 inch longer and 1/3 in taller. May be even more than that.
Look at the Leica 35mm f2.0 and the canon 35mm f 2.0. You can see a big size difference. Electronic controlled aperture and USM make a lens smaller?? That is a fairy tale.

Let me restate my position:
1. The Canon mirrorless will be a compromise. it will not satisfy everybody.
2. If FF mirrorless is so easily done, why there is only one FF mirrorless., M9 by Leica. Are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax all dummies???
3. I want a FF mirroless also . But it is and will be either out of my reach or with features that I do not like.
4. What I really want is a reasonable priced Copy of M9, I would even be happy with a reasonable priced copy of M8. Both must be with M mount.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

2. LENS SIZE - no big problem
just look at M-mount lenses not only from Leica but also from Voigtlander and other manufacturers. Even a decent f/4 kit-zoom could be made very compact and with decent optical quality. As a matter of fact, no need to develop a new proprietary mount. Just take the patent-expired Leica M-mount and electrify it, using Canon pin layout and mountr-lens protocol. It would be backwards compatible with M-mount lenses w/ manual focusing.

So the adapter required to connect an EF[-S] lens to the mirrorless camera would be an extension tube with contacts?

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

What "motors?" ... no film to be transported in digicams. I want them to do away with the mechanical shutter too ... Nikon had an electronic shutter already way back in the D70. No noise, vno vibration, no bulky shutter mechanism unit and best of all: native X-Sync all the way up to 1/8000s!

NEX-7 body size would also be perfectly fine with me. ;-)

And if the body/chassis is made from solid magnesium alloy or even more advanced "liquidmetal" (TitanAl-alloy), proper heat dissipation away from FF sensor is no problem either.

Powerful DIGIC + electronic components are no issue either and a LP-E6 battery [as in 5D2,3 and 7D] is not overly large ... it would hold enough juice to power fast hybrid AF, metering, hybrid viewfinder and back LCD and still be small enough to fit into a compact mirorless camera body. It would also allow many Canonites to use only one type of battery and charger, which would be very welcome.

As far as lens size is concerned: electronic aperture without manual aperture ring takes less space and allows for more compact lenses. Ring-USM AF units are also extremely compact - unless we talk about big-ass super-teles with really large and heavy lens elements. If it was up to me I would make the zoom-lenses for the new mirrorless without focus ring and without manual focus. 99% of users will not miss ist, if the AF is up to speed.
Those who prefer to manually focus may use their existing M-mount lenses.

Hybrid-AF ... with in-sensor-plane phase-detect AF - Nikon for sure holds some patents there, but I doubt they got it totally locked up. Canon hopefully also has patented some of their "ideas" in that direction.

After all, even LPA's monopolistic patent-reinforced hold on remote radio-flash-triggers did not last forever ... and had gave way to competitive solutions as in Canon's new 600EX-RT flashes.

Lets get the fact straight. Nikon D70 is an electromagnetic mechcanically controlled vertical travel shutter that synchronized up to 1/500 sec. This is from the Nikon website. Also NOBOBY have the right mind will expose the sensor in an interchangable lens camera to coolect dust. Canon DSLR shutter are motor driven, shutter curtain cannot run by itself.
Nex 7 is an APS-C sensor. If a FF is based on it, it will be at least 1/2 inch longer and 1/3 in taller. May be even more than that.
Look at the Leica 35mm f2.0 and the canon 25mm f 2.0. You can see a big size difference. Electronic controlled aperture and USM make a lens smaller?? That is a fairy tail.

Let me restate my position:
1. The Canon mirrorless will be a compromise. it will not satisfy everybody.
2. If FF mirrorless is so easily done, why there is only one FF mirrorless., M9 by Leica. Are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax all dummies???
3. I want a FF mirroless also . But it is and will be either out of my reach or with features that I do not like.
4. What I really want is a reasonable priced Copy of M9, I would even be happy with a reasonable priced copy of M8. Both must be with M mount.

I very much doubt that you will se a M0/8 copy from Canon. A small FF camera would be amazing, but I don't see it happening this year or next. Quite prepared to be surprised though

 

[Rocky]

I very much doubt that you will se a M0/8 copy from Canon. A small FF camera would be amazing, but I don't see it happening this year or next. Quite prepared to be surprised though

It does not hurt to have a dream or hope.

 

[AvTvM]

So the adapter required to connect an EF[-S] lens to the mirrorless camera would be an extension tube with contacts?

Exactly. I world Expect it included with The camera

 

[c.d.embrey]

I world Expect it included with The camera

Why do you expect it to be included with the camera ???

Nikon doesn't supply the $269.97 FT-1 (F) Mount Adapter with the Nikon 1.
Olympus doesn't supply the $169.99 MMF-2 (4/3 to M4/3) with it's M4/3 cameras.
Sony doesn't supply the $399.99 LA-EA2 (Alpha mount to E mount) with NEX cameras.

Why would Canon give it away for free, when they can make a profit by selling it ??? just like everyone else ???

 

[gmrza]

Let me restate my position:
1. The Canon mirrorless will be a compromise. it will not satisfy everybody.
2. If FF mirrorless is so easily done, why there is only one FF mirrorless., M9 by Leica. Are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax all dummies???
3. I want a FF mirroless also . But it is and will be either out of my reach or with features that I do not like.
4. What I really want is a reasonable priced Copy of M9, I would even be happy with a reasonable priced copy of M8. Both must be with M mount.

Realistically, even if the M9 were cheaper, the market for rangefinder cameras is limited, because most people want a camera with AF. - Leica has effectively stayed with the rangefinder design as a way around the fact that nobody has developed an effective AF system without a mirror. - Even Nikon's 1 series seems to be less than perfect in respect of phase detect AF.

I think so far none of the mirrorless offerings has really offered anything really revolutionary, because there have been too many compromises involved - particularly on AF, image quality and view finders.

I think most more serious photographers want a view finder for most of their work. I for one don't care whether the view finder if optical or electronic. What I care about is that it works. EVFs have left a bit to be desired thus far.

The NEX 7 has probably come closest so far in terms of these compromises, but it is hobbled by being a Sony with the inherent lack of available lenses and accessories. - A good Canon or Nikon mirrorless would benefit from access to a huge selection of lenses (via an adapter), good flash equipment and other accessories, which Sony cannot.

I would be prepared to settle for an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless camera, but it would also need a decent viewfinder, decent AF and an adapter for my EF lenses plus the ability to use an ETTL Speedlite.

 

[AvTvM]

Realistically, even if the M9 were cheaper, the market for rangefinder cameras is limited, because most people want a camera with AF. - Leica has effectively stayed with the rangefinder design as a way around the fact that nobody has developed an effective AF system without a mirror. - Even Nikon's 1 series seems to be less than perfect in respect of phase detect AF.

I think so far none of the mirrorless offerings has really offered anything really revolutionary, because there have been too many compromises involved - particularly on AF, image quality and view finders.

I think most more serious photographers want a view finder for most of their work. I for one don't care whether the view finder if optical or electronic. What I care about is that it works. EVFs have left a bit to be desired thus far.

The NEX 7 has probably come closest so far in terms of these compromises, but it is hobbled by being a Sony with the inherent lack of available lenses and accessories. - A good Canon or Nikon mirrorless would benefit from access to a huge selection of lenses (via an adapter), good flash equipment and other accessories, which Sony cannot.

I would be prepared to settle for an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless camera, but it would also need a decent viewfinder, decent AF and an adapter for my EF lenses plus the ability to use an ETTL Speedlite.

Exactly. I fully agree with all of your observations!

My expectation for the coming Canon mirrorless line is a low-end total compromise lacklustre G1X with lens mount.

My hope is - or would have been - that Canon really seizes the mirrorless market with a truly innovative, ground-breaking design. An absolutely class-leading, modern, "fully-digital" FF or at least APS-C mirrorless camera with specs and price as outlined earlier in this thread. I am convinced this could technically be done and at reasonable cost. At the same time I am also convinced that Canon under its current geriatric, ultra-conservative management will not do it, since they do not (want to) understand that the age of DSLRs with anachronistic mirror box, prism and mechanical shutter is coming to its end very soon - irrespective of their decisions to "protect" their current DSLR-line.

The longer they wait, the higher their risk to not dominate the future world of photography any longer. Somebody else WILL do it. The first one to do it really right will own the market for years to come.

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

Let me restate my position:
1. The Canon mirrorless will be a compromise. it will not satisfy everybody.
2. If FF mirrorless is so easily done, why there is only one FF mirrorless., M9 by Leica. Are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax all dummies???
3. I want a FF mirroless also . But it is and will be either out of my reach or with features that I do not like.
4. What I really want is a reasonable priced Copy of M9, I would even be happy with a reasonable priced copy of M8. Both must be with M mount.

Realistically, even if the M9 were cheaper, the market for rangefinder cameras is limited, because most people want a camera with AF. - Leica has effectively stayed with the rangefinder design as a way around the fact that nobody has developed an effective AF system without a mirror. - Even Nikon's 1 series seems to be less than perfect in respect of phase detect AF.

I think so far none of the mirrorless offerings has really offered anything really revolutionary, because there have been too many compromises involved - particularly on AF, image quality and view finders.

I think most more serious photographers want a view finder for most of their work. I for one don't care whether the view finder if optical or electronic. What I care about is that it works. EVFs have left a bit to be desired thus far.

The NEX 7 has probably come closest so far in terms of these compromises, but it is hobbled by being a Sony with the inherent lack of available lenses and accessories. - A good Canon or Nikon mirrorless would benefit from access to a huge selection of lenses (via an adapter), good flash equipment and other accessories, which Sony cannot.

I would be prepared to settle for an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless camera, but it would also need a decent viewfinder, decent AF and an adapter for my EF lenses plus the ability to use an ETTL Speedlite.

I agree with much of what you say here, but there are a few excellent lenses that could be used on the NEX7 with an adaptor: namely the Zeiss for alpha 16 - 35 and 24 - 70 plus there are one or two very good Sony G lenses like the 70 - 200 G. OK not as wide a range as Nikon or Canon, but these are all very good lenses. I used to have the A900 - a very meaty FF camera - A pity that Sony took the direction it did after.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

I world Expect it included with The camera

Why do you expect it to be included with the camera ???

Nikon doesn't supply the $269.97 FT-1 (F) Mount Adapter with the Nikon 1.
Olympus doesn't supply the $169.99 MMF-2 (4/3 to M4/3) with it's M4/3 cameras.
Sony doesn't supply the $399.99 LA-EA2 (Alpha mount to E mount) with NEX cameras.

Why would Canon give it away for free, when they can make a profit by selling it ??? just like everyone else ???

It would be the same as with current extension tubes w/ EOS contacts - Canon sells price it's branded tubes to cause sticker shock, and the unwashed masses will buy Chinese tubes for $15 a piece on Amazon.

 

[Rocky]

Let me restate my position:
1. The Canon mirrorless will be a compromise. it will not satisfy everybody.
2. If FF mirrorless is so easily done, why there is only one FF mirrorless., M9 by Leica. Are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax all dummies???
3. I want a FF mirroless also . But it is and will be either out of my reach or with features that I do not like.
4. What I really want is a reasonable priced Copy of M9, I would even be happy with a reasonable priced copy of M8. Both must be with M mount.

Realistically, even if the M9 were cheaper, the market for rangefinder cameras is limited, because most people want a camera with AF. - Leica has effectively stayed with the rangefinder design as a way around the fact that nobody has developed an effective AF system without a mirror. - Even Nikon's 1 series seems to be less than perfect in respect of phase detect AF.

I think so far none of the mirrorless offerings has really offered anything really revolutionary, because there have been too many compromises involved - particularly on AF, image quality and view finders.

I think most more serious photographers want a view finder for most of their work. I for one don't care whether the view finder if optical or electronic. What I care about is that it works. EVFs have left a bit to be desired thus far.

The NEX 7 has probably come closest so far in terms of these compromises, but it is hobbled by being a Sony with the inherent lack of available lenses and accessories. - A good Canon or Nikon mirrorless would benefit from access to a huge selection of lenses (via an adapter), good flash equipment and other accessories, which Sony cannot.

I would be prepared to settle for an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless camera, but it would also need a decent viewfinder, decent AF and an adapter for my EF lenses plus the ability to use an ETTL Speedlite.

Well said and agree. Another reason why M9 stays with the range finder approach is to allow owners of the M lenses to use most of their lenses on the M8 or M9. Without AF, the M8 or M9 can actually faster than AF as long as you do not wide open the lens and use "zone focusing". The reason why I will (or can) settle with M9 or M8 copy is that I am not a fan of long lens. 135mm is my upper limit that I use less than 5%. 28mm to 90mm are my major focal length. 35mm is the focal length that I use mostly.