Unofficial Canon Mirrorless Concept

[Neeneko]

I briefly thought about that but it would be even more unrealistic from a marketing point of view than this unrealistic concept.

Well, there have been occasional rumblings about Canon entering the medium format market. That would be an interesting place to test out such a design, esp since a lot of MF photographers are used to not having a mirror already.

 

[CatfishSoupFTW]

curious how fast the burst fire would be. but the fact that it would possibly not support EF lenses makes me sad

 

[Jettatore]

I don't think Canon should enter the Mirrorless market in this way.

EOS mount is what it is. In order for a mirror-less system to make sense and really use the smaller body possibilities, you need completely new lenses/accessories along with the new body style, at which point it doesn't matter what the name is on the camera or what equipment you already own in your existing collections. There already are systems out there that handle this, Pan/Oly > Lumix/micro 4/3rds, etc. on the reasonable price/crop side, and Leica - M series, etc. on the high price/FF side, and those systems have a huge advantage already in lens selection, etc..

Personally, for any sort of new compact style system, I think the best direction(s) for Canon is to pursue pushing the bounds of point and shoot cameras as well as higher end camera gear built into cell phones/technology partnerships. There's money in that, there's interest in that, and the field is wide open. Mirror-less/compact systems photography is a niche and it's already well covered by Leica/Panasonic and others.

Another great direction Canon can persue on EOS is bridging the gap between Full Frame and Medium Format. Much like the partial compatibility between EF and EF-S, they could go the other direction and instead of a smaller sensor, go towards Medium Format sensors, with lenses to match that are compatible with Full Frame as well, possibly even vice versa with a circular image, like an 8mm fisheye on full frame which can be cropped to square/rectangle in post. Right now a transition from entry level EF-S to Full Frame is do-able, but the jump from Full Frame to Medium Format is enormous and as sensor technology is near commonplace architecture it's nigh time to bring Medium Format to a wider market. And this one might be hard to swallow but the idea of an open source camera system, one with interchange-able mounts from any vendor and user programmable functionality, is long over-due. The markets of the future will no longer bear the outmoded, planned obsolescence/proprietary models of yesteryear, better to come to terms with that ahead of time rather then when it's too late.

(very nice 3D designs and renderings/concepts from the designer, very cool)

 

[dtameling]

Neat artwork David, but what is the point of mirrorless?
You have a great lens line-up that you're not going to use?
No, you either have an aps-c 7d-like camera so it's fps make it a mini 1d or if you're using whole new lenses, why not make a bigger, square sensor -- larger than 24x 36 the 35mm film standard. Seems to me the mirrorless are all entry level for a reason.

I respectfully disagree that mirrorless is entry level. I've wanted a Canon mirrorless for a while. I stopped waiting and just bought a NEX-7. While it's no 5D or 1D, it easily matches or exceeds the performance of my 7D and destroys my G12...all in a package which is as pocketable. My 50D has been shelved, my G12 is now my wife's camera, and ALL of my old Minolta MC/MD and Nikkor manual focus lenses are being put back into use. I get more versatility and more performance in a package which weighs less and is more versatile. My bag is now lighter but now carries 3 cameras instead of just 2 before as I no longer have to decide between the second DSLR and a pro camcorder.

Once the Metabones EF to NEX adapter is back in stock, I'll gladly pay the $400 and all of my fast L lenses will work with the NEX as well.

In fact the NEX is working so well for me so far that I'm considering jumping to Sony for my camcorder needs too. Canon doesn't seem interested in an interchangeable lens system with a large sensor in my price range. Sony has several.

If Canon can't match or exceed what Sony and others are doing, they shouldn't bother. But if they do, I'll buy...unless I've already bought an FS100...that's the true cost of being late to the party.

 

[7enderbender]

Neat artwork David, but what is the point of mirrorless?
You have a great lens line-up that you're not going to use?
No, you either have an aps-c 7d-like camera so it's fps make it a mini 1d or if you're using whole new lenses, why not make a bigger, square sensor -- larger than 24x 36 the 35mm film standard. Seems to me the mirrorless are all entry level for a reason.

Not all. The M9 isn't - if you count a rangefinder as "mirrorless". I want Canon to give Leica a run for the money in that department. Either as a small and rugged full-frame manual DSLR (that would look and feel like my AE-1p for example) or a full frame rangefinder set with fast 35, 50 and 135mm lenses for total of under $5000. Or in other words: a camera for everyone who really wants an M9 but can't afford to shell out 15K or so. I mostly like my 5DII but that could be a camera I would love if done right.

 

[7enderbender]

Plus, a FD mount adapter would be easy to implement without degrading IQ since it will not require any optical elements.

That's true and it would be nice to have that option on a full frame camera. Ideally though I'd like to see them go back to the good old mechanical lever for the aperture. I know that it's not going to happen. Just saying.

 

[dtameling]

The Flange Focal Distance for FD is only 2mm less than the EF. Old EF lenses wouldn't be usable unless the body were beefy.

Though that seems to be fine for Olympus. The new K-01 follows that design though the jury is still out on if anybody adopts it...it's not much smaller than a K-5.

What could be done however is use the EF mount and instead of complex and expensive adapters like Sony has chosen to do for Alpha lenses, they would simply require an extension tube with electronic pass through for EF lenses. Then, just like they have done with EF-S, there would be a third type of EF...lets call it EF-X which would only work on the mirrorless cameras. They could ship the camera with the extension tube adapter at minimal additional cost...THAT would sell cameras as the body only option could be very appealing to folks like us. It would also eliminate the issue many other manufacturers have when they introduce a new camera with a new lens system: "It would be great but there's only 3 lenses available.".

 

[CanineCandidsByL]

I'd only change two things in that spec...use the 5dm3 sensor since it seems better for video. Create a decent auto focus even if you have to use a second sensor (not through lens) to determine distances.

Ok maybe removable screen, even if wired.

 

[RobPan]

I fail to understand what the function of the pentaprism would be in a mirrorless camera. Where is the M-Leica-type viewfinder/rangefinder?
With some others I would prefer an 36x36 mm square format, kind of mini-Rollei so to say. A built-in flash is not needed (see the 5D). Flash is the plague of photography, gives ugly unnatural pictures and can be dispensed with most of the time if we can work with the extreme ISO speeds as seen in the 5D.
(The late Cas Oorthuys would have been delighted if he had been able to work with the 5D.)

Kind regards,

Rob.

 

[crazyrunner33]

The Flange Focal Distance for FD is only 2mm less than the EF. Old EF lenses wouldn't be usable unless the body were beefy.

Though that seems to be fine for Olympus. The new K-01 follows that design though the jury is still out on if anybody adopts it...it's not much smaller than a K-5.

snip

I disagree, the 50mm 1.4 SSC and 400mm 4.5 SSC FD lenses work just fine on our GH2 which is smaller than a rebel but similar in size to a Canon F1.

It'd be nice to have the short flange distance so we can use almost every lens possible, then I can get rid of the Panasonic. Canon could make something similar to the C300, have two different mounts but instead of a PL mount they can have a mount with a short flange distance, then a mount that has EF built in for people who do not wish to play with adapters.

 

[dtameling]

The Flange Focal Distance for FD is only 2mm less than the EF. Old EF lenses wouldn't be usable unless the body were beefy.

Though that seems to be fine for Olympus. The new K-01 follows that design though the jury is still out on if anybody adopts it...it's not much smaller than a K-5.

snip

I disagree, the 50mm 1.4 SSC and 400mm 4.5 SSC FD lenses work just fine on our GH2 which is smaller than a rebel but similar in size to a Canon F1....

They work...but only with an adapter. Flange Focal distance on 4/3 is 20mm, FD is 42mm. A GH2 style camera which accepted FD lenses natively would need to be thicker to build in the space which the adapter is creating. Depending on how miniature things can get this year, that may or may not make a viable product.

I agree however; less is better so that more lenses are compatible.

 

[Neeneko]

And this one might be hard to swallow but the idea of an open source camera system, one with interchange-able mounts from any vendor and user programmable functionality, is long over-due. The markets of the future will no longer bear the outmoded, planned obsolescence/proprietary models of yesteryear, better to come to terms with that ahead of time rather then when it's too late.

I suspect it is only a matter of time till someone starts a good DIY/OSS camera project, esp now that reprap derivatives are getting more common. I have occasionally fantasized about grabbing an Altara board and giving it a try, but then I realize I have no freetime as it is....

Still, I am starting to see some people out there with some cool ideas, and it is only a matter of time till someone grabs a low end machine vision camera from EO or something and builds something cool. This would probably move away from Canon and twoard Kodak and Sony though since you can buy their sensors (including development boards I believe) as 3rd parties. Crow, if someone was dedicated enough you can buy Kodak medium format sensors strait from them.

 

[goodmane]

I have to say on reflection I'd be happier with the g1x sensor in this body so I can afford it as a second camera. But I'd probably stretch to it anyway being fullframe.

For me the main advantage of full frame is just the bigger viewfinder which is not an issue with mirrorless.

If it were full frame though I probably would just sell my 5D and move to the smaller format, and more asesthetic manual controls. So long as they bring a 24-70 f2.8 or f4.

 

[infared]

I have to say...I love my 5D Mk II (will most likely own a III)...but I also LOVE my MFT equipment. Two bodies and 9 lenses. Yes, a complete system. No kidding. The whole thing about mirrorless, for me, is to make it small with quality. The whole point is ...you have a complete system that fits in one little bag and weighs almost nothing. So if Canon is going to jump in...it has to be a whole new design and all new lenses. Small, small..small..did I say small? But keep the glass fast...or at least offer it. I love my full-frame...and right now nothing is replacing it...but let me tell you ....some of my snobbo photo friends have seen images I have shot with MFT..and their response is..."you shot that with what???". One thing you can't beat is the fun factor of MFT..and knowing that you are also getting great images is such a kick!!!! I sell the images a galleries, regularly. Its about the image in the end.
I hope Canon jumps in full-bore....but it would take a LOT for me to give up my existing, extremely versatile MFT system...no doubt.
I love David's rendering without the prism...RF-Style finder or add-on is a MUST though.

 

[gmrza]

"We know a mirrorless camera from Canon is likely to appear in 2012. What form it takes is anyones guess."

I just reread the post. Unfortunately looking at the G1X I think we'll see a formfactor closer to that camera with interchangable lenses. And the G1X sensor as well.
Oh well, we can dream, right?

There is some sense in what you are saying here. The G1X sensor fits the bill more from the point of view of cost. I have my doubts that Canon would put something into the market in the $2000+ category, which is what a full frame system would probably cost (body plus one lens).
Canon probably needs to have a play closer to $1000 (or below) in order to get the volumes to make a product viable.

Canon also has the problem that due its size as one of the biggest camera manufacturers in the world, it is very difficult to justify niche products. - A niche product would not make any appreciable difference on the Canon balance sheet, and would have to have a very very very strong strategic need to be developed.

Canon's biggest problem, right now, is probably Apple. Loads of people are ignoring P&S cameras because smartphones do an often great job of taking snapshots. (If I look at my wife, for instance, for a night out with the girls, she no longer takes a compact camera with - she takes her iPhone.)
One of the strategies that Canon appears to be following is to educate people more about photography, in order to make them more skilled, and hence more demanding of their equipment. A $2000 product would not benefit this strategy, whereas a $1000 product would (only just) form part of that kind of strategy. I believe the intention of this kind of approach is not to counter smartphones, but to drive demand for more sophisticated camera products in addition to smartphones. The 1X00D and XX0D EOS bodies fit into this strategy as they are now so cheap - a mirrorless system would probably also need to fit into that ballpark.

None of this helps anyone who would like something that follows in the lineage of rangefinder cameras, however.

 

[Neeneko]

I think one thing this thread has demonstrated, if Canon was willing to take the risk, it should not release a single spiffy mirrorless solution, but instead a whole range. An entry level, a mid level, a videoographer version, and a general professional body. That would not only show Canon's commitment to the future but its competency and its ability to offer a wide ranging solution. It would also not hurt to have a range of lenses the span the use cases...

If Canon got its ass in gear, they could utterly crush this market, but I have a feeling they will cling to their current model and, just like Canon stole the crown from Kodak and Nikon.... someone will be the leader for the next 10-20 years.

 

[stabmasterasron]

My two cents:

I don't think canon will develop a FF mirrorless system. Mirrorless systems are selling like hotcakes right now. Not because of the sensor size, but in spite of it. Canon knows this. If they decide they want a piece of the mirrorless market, they will develop a product that is similar to what is already out there. I mean, come on, when was the last time that Canon really went out on a limb for something. There products are usually evolutionary, not revolutionary. They probably feel safe to let Panasonic, sony, and Olympus develop the mirrorless market, then use Canon magic to sweep in with a superior product and capture a good market share when they are GD good and ready to do it. A FF mirrorless is a highly specialized product that would not have a very wide appeal, especially with the premium price that would certainly come with it. I love the idea of a FF mirrorless, but if the price were within $1000 of a 5d mk iii, I think I would take the mark iii.

This camera is a great concept and if Canon were to make it - good for them, they had the balls to make a gutsy move.

 

[Hillsilly]

Where can I buy it?

Love the concept. Like others, I'd prefer a shallower flange distance (you'd still be able to use EF and FD lenses with an adapter). But I understand the design dilema. The Olympus OM-D, which is the closest thing I can think of, looks a bit too narrow with the hump on top, and doesn't seem quite right.

If I was going to be nit-picky, I'd also suggest some form of grip on the RHS. It also looks a bit too rounded, but I'd have to see it in real life.

I like the thought that's gone into the detachable viewfinder. It looks very well integrated.

Where's the direct print button?

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

It is a pipe dream, though I believe not mine alone. The point of actually doing this was simply to visualize this dream. That's what I do.

 

[bycostello]

if only it was true!!...