Photos of Canon Smartphone with Integrated APS-C Sensor, Phone, Internet!

HarryFilm

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2016
705
166
neuroanatomist said:
HarryFilm said:
Hmmm....maybe my physics is more than a bit off

Just as a broken analog clock shows the correct time once in every 720 minutes, you've finally managed to be correct about something. Well done!

---

OKIE DOKIE --- Like I said, Optical Light Path Physics is not exactly my strong point, but what I AM CURIOUS ABOUT...is it or is it not true that the Canon 7D Mk2 contains a sensor that allows for a focal plane distance of anywhere from 25 to 44 mm if an adapter was able to be used?

I simply don't know how it could be done BUT I do wonder based upon YOUR professional medical/optical experience and opinion .... if it is at all possible (beyond any Canon financial or product lineup issues!) to create a box-like camera as thin as 27 mm with a lens bump containing what I am assuming an EF-S mount allowing for an APS-C sensor size to actually work in a mirrorless configuration.

CAN IT BE DONE?

What are the light path physics behind your yes or no answer?
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,070
347
Vancouver, BC
HarryFilm said:
neuroanatomist said:
HarryFilm said:
Hmmm....maybe my physics is more than a bit off

Just as a broken analog clock shows the correct time once in every 720 minutes, you've finally managed to be correct about something. Well done!

---

OKIE DOKIE --- Like I said, Optical Light Path Physics is not exactly my strong point, but what I AM CURIOUS ABOUT...is it or is it not true that the Canon 7D Mk2 contains a sensor that allows for a focal plane distance of anywhere from 25 to 44 mm if an adapter was able to be used?

I simply don't know how it could be done BUT I do wonder based upon YOUR professional medical/optical experience and opinion .... if it is at all possible (beyond any Canon financial or product lineup issues!) to create a box-like camera as thin as 27 mm with a lens bump containing what I am assuming an EF-S mount allowing for an APS-C sensor size to actually work in a mirrorless configuration.

CAN IT BE DONE?

What are the light path physics behind your yes or no answer?
Of course you can increase the focal flange Distance by having an adapter. However, this is a ridiculous proposition because who would build an EFS adapter for an EFS mount so that you could use an EFS lens?

In addition have you looked at the size of a sensor box on for example an a7r or an M5? It is actually quite deep.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,650
2,182
HarryFilm said:
neuroanatomist said:
HarryFilm said:
Hmmm....maybe my physics is more than a bit off

Just as a broken analog clock shows the correct time once in every 720 minutes, you've finally managed to be correct about something. Well done!

---

OKIE DOKIE --- Like I said, Optical Light Path Physics is not exactly my strong point, but what I AM CURIOUS ABOUT...is it or is it not true that the Canon 7D Mk2 contains a sensor that allows for a focal plane distance of anywhere from 25 to 44 mm if an adapter was able to be used?

I simply don't know how it could be done BUT I do wonder based upon YOUR professional medical/optical experience and opinion .... if it is at all possible (beyond any Canon financial or product lineup issues!) to create a box-like camera as thin as 27 mm with a lens bump containing what I am assuming an EF-S mount allowing for an APS-C sensor size to actually work in a mirrorless configuration.

CAN IT BE DONE?

What are the light path physics behind your yes or no answer?

Why do I bother?

The flange focal distance doesn't really matter as far as the sensor goes (notwithstanding the angles of refraction of the microlenses, but that affects IQ not whether an image can be focused on the sensor). The FFD does matter for the lens, and a lens must be designed for a specific FFD. If the FFD is too long or too short, the ability to focus the field image on the sensor is impacted (at one end of the range, e.g. infinity focus is lost, or throughout the focus range).

Your ridiculously sad photoshop mockup shows an EF-S mount, and all lenses designed for that mount (EF and EF-S) require a 44mm FFD. Sure, you can stick an adapter on a short FFD mount for compatibility with lenses that have a longer FFD – that's exactly what the EF EOS-M Adapter does, allow mounting EF/EF-S lenses with a 44mm FFD on a mount designed for EF-M lenses with an 18mm FFD. But the EF-M mount is a different mount, with different lenses. The mockup shows an EF-S mount, but if you mount an EF/EF-S lens on that mount, it will not be able to focus an image on the sensor, because the sensor is too close to the mount.

Your suggestion of an adapter is a red herring, thrown on the path post hoc to distract from the fact that the mockup is a fcukup. If the fcuked up mockup had a completely novel mount – let's call it the EF-BS mount (I think you can guess what BS stands for) – then you could sell the idea of really short FFD lenses for the EF-BS mount, like the 'glass cover adapter' (although that's another physics fcukup on your part, it would have to be a lens of some sort to form an image on the sensor – you really should have gone with a pinhole lens cover there). That would also allow an EF-BS mount adapter for EF/EF-S lenses.
 

HarryFilm

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2016
705
166
neuroanatomist said:
HarryFilm said:
neuroanatomist said:
HarryFilm said:
Hmmm....maybe my physics is more than a bit off

Just as a broken analog clock shows the correct time once in every 720 minutes, you've finally managed to be correct about something. Well done!

---

OKIE DOKIE --- Like I said, Optical Light Path Physics is not exactly my strong point, but what I AM CURIOUS ABOUT...is it or is it not true that the Canon 7D Mk2 contains a sensor that allows for a focal plane distance of anywhere from 25 to 44 mm if an adapter was able to be used?

I simply don't know how it could be done BUT I do wonder based upon YOUR professional medical/optical experience and opinion .... if it is at all possible (beyond any Canon financial or product lineup issues!) to create a box-like camera as thin as 27 mm with a lens bump containing what I am assuming an EF-S mount allowing for an APS-C sensor size to actually work in a mirrorless configuration.

CAN IT BE DONE?

What are the light path physics behind your yes or no answer?

Why do I bother?

The flange focal distance doesn't really matter as far as the sensor goes (notwithstanding the angles of refraction of the microlenses, but that affects IQ not whether an image can be focused on the sensor). The FFD does matter for the lens, and a lens must be designed for a specific FFD. If the FFD is too long or too short, the ability to focus the field image on the sensor is impacted (at one end of the range, e.g. infinity focus is lost, or throughout the focus range).

Your ridiculously sad photoshop mockup shows an EF-S mount, and all lenses designed for that mount (EF and EF-S) require a 44mm FFD. Sure, you can stick an adapter on a short FFD mount for compatibility with lenses that have a longer FFD – that's exactly what the EF EOS-M Adapter does, allow mounting EF/EF-S lenses with a 44mm FFD on a mount designed for EF-M lenses with an 18mm FFD. But the EF-M mount is a different mount, with different lenses. The mockup shows an EF-S mount, but if you mount an EF/EF-S lens on that mount, it will not be able to focus an image on the sensor, because the sensor is too close to the mount.

Your suggestion of an adapter is a red herring, thrown on the path post hoc to distract from the fact that the mockup is a fcukup. If the fcuked up mockup had a completely novel mount – let's call it the EF-BS mount (I think you can guess what BS stands for) – then you could sell the idea of really short FFD lenses for the EF-BS mount, like the 'glass cover adapter' (although that's another physics fcukup on your part, it would have to be a lens of some sort to form an image on the sensor – you really should have gone with a pinhole lens cover there). That would also allow an EF-BS mount adapter for EF/EF-S lenses.

---

"...Your ridiculously sad photoshop mockup...."

DON'T BLAME --ME-- FOR THAT !!!

I'm not the one who made those! I just got them from my usual Euro sources!

Anyways...at least you answered my question and I am satisfied with that!

Now for those who say the photo is fake, if you have Photoshop skills, please do tell us specifically what is wrong with the photos. I personally have a beef with the curved corner OF the upper-left corner on the 1st photo not matching it's corresponding curvature at the same location on the 2nd photo.

The only explanation I have is that it might be the engineered place for an antennae assembly which is why the curvature might not match the other corners. Other than that, when I do some pixel peeping the JPEG artifacting, image noise and even texture noise on the phone case itself DO SEEM CONSISTENT with an actual physical item. The noise in the textures especially indicates a poor sensor (i.e. like a cheap smartphone photo) that took the original photos. I do NOT think the items shown are 3D CGI renderings. I think they are real cases....BUT OF WHAT?

Now the question becomes, what item are these photos actually OF? and Are they actually Canon-made items? If so, which technologies are they actually showcasing?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,650
2,182
HarryFilm said:
"...Your ridiculously sad photoshop mockup...."

DON'T BLAME --ME-- FOR THAT !!!

I'm not the one who made those! I just got them from my usual Euro sources!

Oh. Ok. Sure. Right. ::)


HarryFilm said:
Now for those who say the photo is fake, if you have Photoshop skills, please do tell us specifically what is wrong with the photos. I personally have a beef with the curved corner OF the upper-left corner on the 1st photo not matching it's corresponding curvature at the same location on the 2nd photo.

The only explanation I have...

Seriously? Some people can't see the forest for the trees, but you're focused on the bacterium on the dust speck on the thorax of the ant crawling on a pine needle.

The photo is fake because it shows a device with an EF-S mount and a sensor far too close to that mount, i.e. an impossible device.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
Harry - you’ve been had, by someone with a lot of time to spare.

It’s hard to choose, but probably the most presposterous thing of all is this:

Removable metal ring with Optical Quality Glass Cover for rear camera allowing
widescreen video and stills photo taking with no other external lens required.
Field of view is currently unknown when glass cover is attached.
5 mm lens bump when glass cover adapter is attached.

You aren’t going to get a 5mm thick glass cover to focus on the sensor.

That APS-C mount looks especially real and would be in the right place engineering-wise for a smartphone of this type.

Of course it looks real, it’s from a photograph of an EF-S mount. But I’ll bite: what about a smartphone of this type makes that the right place for it engineering-wise?
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,676
586
S Florida
neuroanatomist said:
HarryFilm said:
"...Your ridiculously sad photoshop mockup...."

DON'T BLAME --ME-- FOR THAT !!!

I'm not the one who made those! I just got them from my usual Euro sources!

Oh. Ok. Sure. Right. ::)


HarryFilm said:
Now for those who say the photo is fake, if you have Photoshop skills, please do tell us specifically what is wrong with the photos. I personally have a beef with the curved corner OF the upper-left corner on the 1st photo not matching it's corresponding curvature at the same location on the 2nd photo.

The only explanation I have...

Seriously? Some people can't see the forest for the trees, but you're focused on the bacterium on the dust speck on the thorax of the ant crawling on a pine needle.

The photo is fake because it shows a device with an EF-S mount and a sensor far too close to that mount, i.e. an impossible device.

So basically, what you're saying is that Harry is incredible ;)
 

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,250
450
1st of April would have been more effective for this.
A Canon APS-C drone might be more believable
 

LDS

EOS 5D Mark IV
Sep 14, 2012
1,710
245
HarryFilm said:
DON'T BLAME --ME-- FOR THAT !!!
I'm not the one who made those! I just got them from my usual Euro sources!

Sometimes tried to send the same rumors to Keith Cooper, maybe in hope to have a "rference", here what he thinks:

"Good to see the lack of solid camera rumours is firing up people’s creativity, but if you’re going to convince us, you need to dial it back a bit from a Canon smartphone with APS-C image sensor and EF-S mount or Canon mirrorless with MF sensors… As ever we appreciate tips, but try and keep the imagination in check ;-)" (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-camera-rumours-and-info/)

There are people who are good at spreading false rumors, others who are lame at that too...
 
<-- start Taboola -->