Patent: A new mirrorless camera body design with integrated grip with pass-through

domo_p1000

EOS-1D X MkIII EOS-1D X MkII
CR Pro
Aug 22, 2013
47
52
That said, I wouldn't consider this specific patent's design as the exact look of whatever they're considering, it's lacking the third top control wheel that all other R-series cameras have. 0 chance Canon adds a third-wheel to all their photography, including the R3, and then randomly ditches it for another touchbar.
Perhaps this absence is a nod towards it being a R1 concept: All of the 1D's have had three wheels and this follows that lead, with one above each of the two shutter releases but then the design necessitates two thumb wheels within the 'gap', labelled 111a and 111b, rather than the single rear thumb wheel of the 1D's.
 

UpstateNYPhotog

EOS M50
Jun 3, 2021
48
41
Weird..

Could we focus on making an R5 in an R3 body please? Hi-res, fast, mirrorless, probody with inbuilt batterygrip.

That is what most of us are waiting for now, for the past couple of years. Would be great. Thank you!
Yes. I find the R5/R6 form factor a deal killer with or without the grip.
 

UpstateNYPhotog

EOS M50
Jun 3, 2021
48
41
I remember the somewhat revolutionary change in design as the pro Canon line moved from an FD mount to an EF mount (albeit the T90 had given a glimpse of what was to come - and perhaps this could be an 'R90', if you like)... the press photographers et al, coped well enough - no need for surgery on body parts to cope with the new design ergonomics! This overall concept sits well with me (and it is quite surprisingly bigger than the R3, so there would be room to fit everything in).

I like the look of dual thumb wheels within the body gap (111a & 111b).

Just a bit of fun... scales are not quite right, but not far off. The design evolution certainly doesn't look too silly: FD > EF > RF
View attachment 199543
Still own both the left two in this image, yes it is an LA Olympic one!
 

UpstateNYPhotog

EOS M50
Jun 3, 2021
48
41
With this design, you can actually use your camera as a dumbbell... :p Also, basically any strap can be use for this design and you can use a hook hanger to hang your camera for fast access... ha ha ha :p
You just keep putting on bigger big white lenses to up the workout!
 

scottburgess

Canonical Canon
Jun 20, 2013
239
28
The smaller mount/sensor afforded by this configuration make me wonder if this is the future of the EOS-M line. I can imagine that a light, grippable body with lighter lenses might aid the elderly coping with sarcopenia, though the tiny screen could be aggravating.

I can't imagine a desire for vertical shooting among video enthusiasts, though I am sure some weirdo is reading this post on his vertically-oriented computer screen this very moment, shaking his fist and shouting, "Heathens!" While I've also, like Martin, pondered the area efficiency of square sensors my conclusion is that there isn't a market for it outside of astrophotography as there are no print media or video screens which match. There might also be costs associated with the unusable wafer perimeter, and now I'm curious to pull out the equations again to test that. Here if one had a square sensor there is no reason for rotating the camera in the fashion supported.
 

LSXPhotog

Automotive, Motorsports, Commerical, & Real Estate
CR Pro
Apr 2, 2015
555
583
www.diossiphotography.com
I will pray to the camera Gods that this is not the R1 design...I agree, this is a loss of functional real estate on the back of the camera for buttons and electronics. Additionally, I can't at this point figure out what benefit it would provide me unless I kept my camera on a big ass D-ring while climbing a mountain which I plan to make sure I never do. haha
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,420
4,075
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Not an R1. The flagship is not the place for radical new designs. If it ever sees the light of day, I would not be surprised to see it as an alternative configuration to an existing line rather than an outright substitution. For example, taking all the R5 specs and putting them into this body design with the 1 series battery.

I'm a little skeptical about the ergonomics as well. If your hand is wrapping around the grip, I think it might make selecting buttons, wheels and touch screens a bit more clumsy.
 

Bdbtoys

R5
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2020
421
304
Using this with gloves on? Has anyone used the R's touch bar with gloves?

The better question is, has anyone 'intentionally' used the R's touch bar ;) . Honestly, the only real use I got out of it was to review pictures quickly (nothing during picture taking).
 

Australisblue

EOS R5
CR Pro
Aug 26, 2016
15
7
I had the same idea (well, only about the rotating 3:2 ratio sensor). Look at all the effort, extra space & cost & weight to make the dual grip even bigger than it was before! If you're going to go to that much trouble for portrait shots without moving your hand position, you might as well just add a 90 degree rotation mechanism to the existing sensor module. Whatever extra space & weight & cost it required to do so would have to be much less than all the extra stuff this patent is adding! I'd expect that a rotating sensor design would be smaller & lighter than the existing dual grip approach once implemented properly. And then they're only be one way to hold the camera as the sensor would rotate as needed, and the bottom could be designed to attach to a tripod without interfering with a 2nd grip and they're be no need for any "L bracket"! I'd pay extra for that in a heartbeat!

Of course, if the cost of a 3:3 sensor (36 x 36mm) could be made affordable in the future (something I don't know, but suspect might be possible), then simply making the existing 3:2 IBIS sensor into a 3:3 IBIS sensor would remove the need for a rotating sensor as well as the dual grip. That'd be the ideal choice if the extra cost of the enlarged sensor & IBIS module & body enclosure could be made to be the same (or less) as the extra cost of the existing bigger dual grip design. This design would work only if there was enough clearance in the existing R mount for the 3:2 portrait image to clear the mount pins at the bottom of the mount (also something I don't know as it'd be a close fit).
I too have been keen on something similar to this for quite some time. The optimal would be a circular sensor that covered the lens image circle and allowed full frame portrait and landscape (and any other ratio/size that would fit within). Having a button to instantly switch between portrait and landscape without needing to physically rotate the camera would be totally awesome. Much easier for tripods too as you mention.

Assuming the complexities of designing a sensor like this wasn’t too great, the only real downsides I see would be additional cost (I’d certainly be willing to pay more for this feature.. but I guess how much would be the question?) and a redesign of the EVF to allow a larger view in portrait mode?

I’m not a fan of the large 1D style bodies (and now R3…), I much prefer the smaller form factor of my Canon R5, nicer to travel with (not that there’s much of that going here at the moment…) and carry around plus slightly less intimidating to people when I pull out my camera. A feature like this would make the bigger style slightly redundant (imo anyway, some might disagree and prefer a larger body even in just landscape but I’m not in that camp. Maybe an optional grip that could bolt on more securely so it felt 100% part of the camera could cater for those people and reduce the number of camera lines a little).
 

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,252
2,138
Kentucky, USA
I too have been keen on something similar to this for quite some time. The optimal would be a circular sensor that covered the lens image circle and allowed full frame portrait and landscape (and any other ratio/size that would fit within). Having a button to instantly switch between portrait and landscape without needing to physically rotate the camera would be totally awesome. Much easier for tripods too as you mention.

Assuming the complexities of designing a sensor like this wasn’t too great, the only real downsides I see would be additional cost (I’d certainly be willing to pay more for this feature.. but I guess how much would be the question?) and a redesign of the EVF to allow a larger view in portrait mode?

I’m not a fan of the large 1D style bodies (and now R3…), I much prefer the smaller form factor of my Canon R5, nicer to travel with (not that there’s much of that going here at the moment…) and carry around plus slightly less intimidating to people when I pull out my camera. A feature like this would make the bigger style slightly redundant (imo anyway, some might disagree and prefer a larger body even in just landscape but I’m not in that camp. Maybe an optional grip that could bolt on more securely so it felt 100% part of the camera could cater for those people and reduce the number of camera lines a little).
A larger 3:3 (36 x 36mm) sensor would already be a very large investment for Canon, and probably more than it will ever do. I also don't know if the electrical pins along the lower part of the mount would partially block enough of the light to the lower corners of the 3:2 portrait portion of the sensor to make this idea moot anyway. But I am confident that they will never come out with a circular sensor (as you hope for) since it will waste much more space on a large silicon wafer as well as requiring even more clear pathway to every part of the full diameter circular sensor, as well as an even bigger IBIS module and body than the 3:3 sensor would, and (finally) I don't think you'll get much benefit from a 43(or so)mm diameter circular sensor compared to a 36x36mm sensor intended for 3x2 landscape or portrait shots since pretty much everyone expects images to be in a rectangular format.

Yes, a 3:3 sensor to allow 3:2 portrait shots without rotating the camera would beg for the addition of a square EVF to fully view both landscape and portrait modes, but that wouldn't be an absolute requirement if they thought the user would tolerate using the existing 3:2 EVF (and back LCD) in portrait mode (giving a smaller view of the 3:2 image).

And yes, all of this would be for the benefit of only those wanting a smaller/simpler body than the dual grip ones. In these times of diminishing high-end sales (vs smart phones) I have a feeling that these ideas will never happen (unfortunately).
 
Last edited:

Australisblue

EOS R5
CR Pro
Aug 26, 2016
15
7
A larger 3:3 (36 x 36mm) sensor would already be a very large investment for Canon, and probably more than it will ever do. I also don't know if the electrical pins along the lower part of the mount would partially block enough of the light to the lower corners of the 3:2 portrait portion of the sensor to make this idea moot anyway. But I am confident that they will never come out with a circular sensor (as you hope for) since it will waste much more space on a large silicon wafer as well as requiring even more clear pathway to every part of the full diameter circular sensor, as well as an even bigger IBIS module and body than the 3:3 sensor would, and (finally) I don't think you'll get much benefit from a 43(or so)mm diameter circular sensor compared to a 36x36mm sensor intended for 3x2 landscape or portrait shots since pretty much everyone expects images to be in a rectangular format.

Yes, a 3:3 sensor to allow 3:2 portrait shots without rotating the camera would beg for the addition of a square EVF to fully view both landscape and portrait modes, but that wouldn't be an absolute requirement if they thought the user would tolerate using the existing 3:2 EVF (and back LCD) in portrait mode (giving a smaller view of the 3:2 image).

And yes, all of this would be for the benefit of only those wanting a smaller/simpler body than the dual grip ones. In these times of diminishing high-end sales (vs smart phones) I have a feeling that these ideas will never happen (unfortunately).
I am not expecting something like this to come out anytime in the near future, I like to dream though. Surely at some distant point they'll be scratching their heads for the next innovation? "Ok team, we have our 4 Gigapixel sensor, 8,000 frames per second, 32K video, 35 stops dynamic range that's a few years old now.. hmm ideas?? Hang on, I remember a post on Canon Rumors from earlier this century about an idea.." :-D Yeah, there are other shapes that would allow for full frame landscape/portrait being slightly more efficient with silicon use but none quite as flexible.

It's also not just about size but also speed and convenience not needing to flip the camera around, I find in some action situations I change quite a lot and slows down the flow of things a little, maybe it's just me and everyone's situation/preferences are different.

Anyway, this idea wouldn't work with some of my RF lenses as far as I can see as they have a rectangular cutout at the rear to match the current sensor shape (not all RF lenses are like this though from a quick look at a couple in my collection).
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

martin_p_a

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 30, 2019
25
32
Montreal
Well... and why not simply integrate a mechanism that turns the sensor (or the whole cage of the mount) in either portrait or landscape mode (with a button to do so) or would be able to determine horizontal/vertical position by itself with a switch... or a fixed cross shape sensor... or a square sensor... round sensor, etc. ?
I thought about that, but I guess it would be another potential point of failure
 

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
428
519
Orewa , New Zealand
Un
Well... and why not simply integrate a mechanism that turns the sensor (or the whole cage of the mount) in either portrait or landscape mode (with a button to do so) or would be able to determine horizontal/vertical position by itself with a switch... or a fixed cross shape sensor... or a square sensor... round sensor, etc. ?
Unfortunately the R mount contact base would obscure a square or round full frame sensor but for aps-c it would work .
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
428
519
Orewa , New Zealand
The idea of replacing the physical control wheels/dials with touch bars makes me uncomfortable, personally. The missing joystick may be a bigger problem for some, but it does appear to have that big eye-cup from he R3, so maybe the thinking is the joystick will be less necessary if they get eye AF right? I've always liked that Canon tries some weird stuff occasionally, but I guess I'd really need to try this to see if I could get by with it.
Rear scroll wheel appears to be replaced with dual scroll wheels 111a & 111b mounted on the inside of the handle
 
  • Like
Reactions: amorse and Bahrd

martin_p_a

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 30, 2019
25
32
Montreal
I am not expecting something like this to come out anytime in the near future, I like to dream though. Surely at some distant point they'll be scratching their heads for the next innovation? "Ok team, we have our 4 Gigapixel sensor, 8,000 frames per second, 32K video, 35 stops dynamic range that's a few years old now.. hmm ideas?? Hang on, I remember a post on Canon Rumors from earlier this century about an idea.." :-D Yeah, there are other shapes that would allow for full frame landscape/portrait being slightly more efficient with silicon use but none quite as flexible.

It's also not just about size but also speed and convenience not needing to flip the camera around, I find in some action situations I change quite a lot and slows down the flow of things a little, maybe it's just me and everyone's situation/preferences are different.

Anyway, this idea wouldn't work with some of my RF lenses as far as I can see as they have a rectangular cutout at the rear to match the current sensor shape (not all RF lenses are like this though from a quick look at a couple in my collection).
I didn’t think about the rectangle cutout at the back of some lenses, but looking at the pins in the mount, it wouldn’t work with RF as it is.

Another potential idea with a square sensor is that the orientation of your shot could be handled with metadata; the captured image would always be the full square sensor, and the crop for orientation (if not shooting square) could be applied non destructively in camera, with all the pixels accessible if you wanted to crop differently, rotate to correct horizon, or even change from landscape to portrait and vice-versa…
 

tapanit

.
CR Pro
Jul 17, 2012
119
64
Unfortunately the R mount contact base would obscure a square or round full frame sensor but for aps-c it would work .
There's room at the top though. So if not a full square, a 6:5, 36x30 mm² sensor could fit. Or (because corners of such a sensor would fall out of the image circle), a T-shaped sensor that could do either 36x24mm² horizontal or 24x30mm² vertical images.
 

Australisblue

EOS R5
CR Pro
Aug 26, 2016
15
7
I didn’t think about the rectangle cutout at the back of some lenses, but looking at the pins in the mount, it wouldn’t work with RF as it is.

Another potential idea with a square sensor is that the orientation of your shot could be handled with metadata; the captured image would always be the full square sensor, and the crop for orientation (if not shooting square) could be applied non destructively in camera, with all the pixels accessible if you wanted to crop differently, rotate to correct horizon, or even change from landscape to portrait and vice-versa…
I decided to do a diagram rather than trying to just visualise it in my head.

RSensor.jpg


A square sensor would certainly be a pretty good option and is 50% larger surface area, still smaller than a Fujifilm GFX 100S Medium Format (1,296 mm^2 vs ~1,444 mm^2) which although not cheap, are still affordable all things considered (I know, a bit hard to compare completely different cameras, but still). Make it 67 MP :) Just dreaming, still, of course.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,530
5,807
Because let’s face it, it is so much easier to make a new format that the current lenses don’t work on just to save turning your camera 90°.

I can’t remember how often this thoughtless thought experiment has come up on this forum over the years but it isn’t going to happen.