- Feb 26, 2012
Yes, RF mount isn't just about the shorter BF distance, but why make it shorter at all? Just to make the body ~1" shallower?
Apparently so. Just a guess, but Canon is probably looking for the sweet spot in size between the M series (uncomfortably small for perhaps half the world market, but near perfect for the home market), and their DSLRs (uncomfortably large for the home market, but acceptable for US/Europe). Yes, for decades we have all adjusted to whatever size was available because we had no choice (anyone remember the Olympus OM-1 making quite the splash in the 1970's because the body was a good bit smaller than the other 35mm bodies of the era), but now that there is opportunity to optimize the size of the body for the largest percentage of the population, it makes sense to do so to maximize market share overall.
Which is the overarching goal. Crush the competition, take their market share, maximize sales and profits, please the shareholders.
That they can do amazing things with the shorter BF distance might very well have been a nice benefit, even if perhaps it wasn't the initial goal.
Those must have been really interesting design meetings.