What will be the mirrorless full-frame mount?

[Don Haines]

Some seem to not have read or understood correctly what I stated. So one more attempt:

Canon should make FF MILCs asap.

Lol. We understand what you're saying, you're just wrong and unable to accept that fact.

A matter of opinion....

Personally, I would like to see a FF EF mount Canon mirrorless camera..... There are things you can do with mirrorless that you can't do with mirrored cameras.....like 120FPS burst rates....

 

[Bob Howland]

Some seem to not have read or understood correctly what I stated. So one more attempt:

Canon should make FF MILCs asap.

Lol. We understand what you're saying, you're just wrong and unable to accept that fact.

A matter of opinion....

Personally, I would like to see a FF EF mount Canon mirrorless camera..... There are things you can do with mirrorless that you can't do with mirrored cameras.....like 120FPS burst rates....

+1, although I'd settle for 30FPS.

 

[Dick]

FF should obviously work with the best lenses. Therefore I think that EF mount is a no-brainer. If it's anything else with or without adaptors, it sounds like a very stupid idea. Then again, it's Canon.

 

[Loswr]

Some seem to not have read or understood correctly what I stated. So one more attempt:

Canon should make FF MILCs asap.

Lol. We understand what you're saying, you're just wrong and unable to accept that fact.

A matter of opinion....

Personally, I would like to see a FF EF mount Canon mirrorless camera..... There are things you can do with mirrorless that you can't do with mirrored cameras.....like 120FPS burst rates....

Of course it's a matter of opinion. Personally, I'd like an EOS M-sized FF MILC and small-as-possible lenses (24-70/4 collapsible, and a 35/2 pancake). So we would both like to see a FF MILC, but we want very different cameras.

Ultimately, the only opinion that matters is Canon's. If they believed they should make a FF MILC, they'd have launched one already. They haven't.

 

[Don Haines]

Some seem to not have read or understood correctly what I stated. So one more attempt:

Canon should make FF MILCs asap.

Lol. We understand what you're saying, you're just wrong and unable to accept that fact.

A matter of opinion....

Personally, I would like to see a FF EF mount Canon mirrorless camera..... There are things you can do with mirrorless that you can't do with mirrored cameras.....like 120FPS burst rates....

Of course it's a matter of opinion. Personally, I'd like an EOS M-sized FF MILC and small-as-possible lenses (24-70/4 collapsible, and a 35/2 pancake). So we would both like to see a FF MILC, but we want very different cameras.

Ultimately, the only opinion that matters is Canon's. If they believed they should make a FF MILC, they'd have launched one already. They haven't.

I like to think that Canon is holding off on a FF mirrorless camera until they have one good enough to compete with the existing line of bodies. They could have put one on sale 5 years ago, but if it isn't as good as a 6D, then there is no market for it....

 

[Loswr]

I like to think that Canon is holding off on a FF mirrorless camera until they have one good enough to compete with the existing line of bodies. They could have put one on sale 5 years ago, but if it isn't as good as a 6D, then there is no market for it....

The M5 is arguably comeptitive with the 80D. I'm sure Canon will be looking hard at which sells better (my guess would be the 80D). The overall market is still 3:1 in favor of dSLRs.

 

[Loswr]

Indicentally, regarding the poll option:

EF-M. There will be an adaptor for EF to shoot natively, but there will be new FF mirrorless only lenses.


There 'will be' an adapter? There already is an adapter.

 

[ahsanford]

I like to think that Canon is holding off on a FF mirrorless camera until they have one good enough to compete with the existing line of bodies. They could have put one on sale 5 years ago, but if it isn't as good as a 6D, then there is no market for it....

Disagree. Did Canon hold off EOS M when it was a steaming turd AF/controls/responsiveness-wise compared to a Rebel? No, they did not. In the beginning, the product was aimed at different users and it was an experiment to court those users. It was an undercooked product that -- if you could live with its limitations -- took lovely pictures. That was enough for Canon to commercialize it.

Now cut over to FF -- in fairness, it's a very different ballgame users-wise, but the mirrorless tech still lags the traditional SLR tech. A mirrorless offering simply will not be as responsive or have the battery life as a 6D -- that's that. But Canon will not wait until those bars are cleared. They will offer something they believe will be compelling enough to attract new customers as a first body and satisfy existing users as a second body.

The billion dollar question (and the point of this thread) is where will they put their chips on the table -- what mount will give them that business? It gets to the heart of what Canon is trying to offer. Will they go thin for the small camp and court the Leica/A7/Fuji crowd with a nice initial smattering of tiny f/2.8 primes, or will they please the Canon faithful with a seamless, full-blown EF offering?

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Indicentally, regarding the poll option:

EF-M. There will be an adaptor for EF to shoot natively, but there will be new FF mirrorless only lenses.


There 'will be' an adapter? There already is an adapter.

Miss. My fault. Thx.

Corrected.

- A

 

[hmatthes]

The billion dollar question (and the point of this thread) is where will they put their chips on the table -- what mount will give them that business? It gets to the heart of what Canon is trying to offer. Will they go thin for the small camp and court the Leica/A7/Fuji crowd with a nice initial smattering of tiny f/2.8 primes, or will they please the Canon faithful with a seamless, full-blown EF offering?

Agree totally! I would love a FF M with f2.8 primes (and a few 1.4Ls) plus using the existing adapter for my EF glass.
THIS is my ideal replacement for my 6D (heck, it will be a keeper for a spare body)

Just PLEASE give it a EVF as fine as the Leica SL and maybe a mount for wonderful old Leica M glass on my Canon M!

 

[ahsanford]

The billion dollar question (and the point of this thread) is where will they put their chips on the table -- what mount will give them that business? It gets to the heart of what Canon is trying to offer. Will they go thin for the small camp and court the Leica/A7/Fuji crowd with a nice initial smattering of tiny f/2.8 primes, or will they please the Canon faithful with a seamless, full-blown EF offering?

Agree totally! I would love a FF M with f2.8 primes (and a few 1.4Ls) plus using the existing adapter for my EF glass.
THIS is my ideal replacement for my 6D (heck, it will be a keeper for a spare body)

Just PLEASE give it a EVF as fine as the Leica SL and maybe a mount for wonderful old Leica M glass on my Canon M!

That red bit above is what breaks the cute little puppy. The minute you use one of those, or an f/2.8 zoom, or a lens longer than 85mm, etc. and your length/size savings compared to an SLR go out the window and... you get the poll results you see above.

- A

 

[bencam]

EF definitely.

It's very hard to see how Canon would not, instead of spending $$$ on R&D for new full-frame mirrorless-only lenses trickled over the years, just go launch an all-new FF ML body that automatically comes with around 60 native lenses, counting only those currently in production.

 

[unfocused]

I've been thinking a bit more about this.

Canon already has a number of nice prime EF lenses that would not add much weight or bulk to a full frame camera: the 40 mm pancake of course, but also the 50 mm 1.8 STM; 24 mm and 28 mm f2.8s; the 35mm f2 and even the 85mm f1.8 are all reasonably compact. I'm not sure a new mount would reduce the size and weight of these lenses much if at all. The IS versions of the 24,28 and 35 are all very sharp and would pair very well with a mirrorless camera.

 

[Loswr]

I've been thinking a bit more about this.

Canon already has a number of nice prime EF lenses that would not add much weight or bulk to a full frame camera: the 40 mm pancake of course, but also the 50 mm 1.8 STM; 24 mm and 28 mm f2.8s; the 35mm f2 and even the 85mm f1.8 are all reasonably compact. I'm not sure a new mount would reduce the size and weight of these lenses much if at all. The IS versions of the 24,28 and 35 are all very sharp and would pair very well with a mirrorless camera.

The in-use length for all those lenses is an inch longer than it needs to be on a MILC.

 

[Josh Denver]

I've been thinking a bit more about this.

Canon already has a number of nice prime EF lenses that would not add much weight or bulk to a full frame camera: the 40 mm pancake of course, but also the 50 mm 1.8 STM; 24 mm and 28 mm f2.8s; the 35mm f2 and even the 85mm f1.8 are all reasonably compact. I'm not sure a new mount would reduce the size and weight of these lenses much if at all. The IS versions of the 24,28 and 35 are all very sharp and would pair very well with a mirrorless camera.

The in-use length for all those lenses is an inch longer than it needs to be on a MILC.

Yes we know and that's the thread's question: will they take the extra inch and keep using existing lens mount or shave off that inch and create a new line of lenses.

I say IF they create a FF mirrorless (I don't believd thet will, not anytime soon anyway, unless something inside Canon managment changed radically)

1- It will be a fixed-lens camera frim the G7x-like compact division

2- If not, it will have an EF-M mount. Why create a new mount when you already have a perfectly good one with a corresponding perfectly made adaptor?

A new EF-X logically must be something that doesn't already exist, i.e., a 1'' sensor mount with 1'' small lenses as the Nikons, or MF mount with large MF lenses. Both pretty unlikely but the former is less unlikely. They might be thinking of making a truly smaller ILC for travel and action and P&S users. Might

Now please somebody just make me that damn ef to ef-m speedbooster so I could get my FF mirrless Canon from my 350$ M3 (please nobody start a debate on SBs not being real FF. From what I've seen using the a6000 with SB EF adapter it took pictures exactly the same FOV and DOF, qresolution and look of the lens on the A7II. I'd settle for that!)

 

[AvTvM]

No, EF-M mount dimensions are "too compromised" for FF sensor. While it might be possible, it would suffer from the same problem, Sony FE lenses suffer: too many obstacles to design optically very good, COMPACT and AFFORDABLE lenses. Just look at those Sony G-Master clunkers or at that way too long and way too expensive FE 55/1.8!

Mirrorless short-flange distance "EF-X" [or whatever Canon calls it] mount and lenses will come for sure. Only "when" is open. Of course it will be for FF-sensor image circle. EF-X will - eventually - supersede EF lenses, but it will be a multi-year process. Prior to that, EF-M will replace EF-S lenses.

No, Canon will *definitely* NOT repeat the Nikon CX mistake by bringing 1" dwarf sensored cams with interchangable lenses. They will likely bring more powershot G models to compete with the long announced yet never delivered Nikon DL cameras ... featuring bolted-on zoom lenses. No lens mount and no interchangeable lenses.

 

[Don Haines]

If you want compact and light, you go with M cameras.....

If you want a large body with good ergonomics and reasonable controls, you go FF and EF mount.....

I can't see them making something in the middle with a whole new mount and set of lenses.....

 

[Loswr]

If you want compact and light, you go with M cameras.....

If you want a large body with good ergonomics and reasonable controls, you go FF and EF mount.....

I can't see them making something in the middle with a whole new mount and set of lenses.....

I can easily see them making something in the middle – a compact FF MILC with dedicated lenses. But only if/when there's market demand for it...and that's a long time away (in the real world, apparently it's imminent in the AvTvM Universe).

I do think Canon's first foray into FF mirrorless will be a fixed lens camera with an L zoom.

 

[bencam]

It makes little or no sense for Canon to develop a new FF ML mount and native lenses to go with it. That entails new development/production/stocking/marketing/etc costs with an uncertain pay-off in a down market. It then won't only be trying to catch up with Sony in FF ML lenses but it would also be competing with itself, forcing current and potential future users to choose between EF and that new FF ML mount.

It makes so much more sense for Canon to just use the EF mount. Canon's taking its own sweet time releasing a FF ML but the ace up their sleeves is that if they use EF, on day one of release, they can instantly have the widest collection of "native" lenses for that FF ML body. No need to say "adapted". Their DSLR and ML also won't be competing on divergent lens lines. Canon can then be agnostic on DSLR with OVF vs ML with EVF, happily selling both types as these would use the same EF lenses anyway.

 

[AvTvM]

It wojuld make most sense for Canon to take the follwing 3 steps
1) expand EOS M system
* after M5 quickly bring strong updates to M10 and M3 ... both compatible with external DC-EVF2 ... that would please the "as small as possible" and "take it along as a backup crop body" crowd.
* add a select few EF-M lenses in line with current lineup: optically as good as 22/2.0 and 28/2.8, compact and very affordable. Especially a compact EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM. And a 50/1.8 IS. That might make the "we need more EF-M lenses" whiners happy. It would certainly make me happy. Smart, Canon!

2) Announce discontinuation of Rebel DSLRs and EF-S lenses and swithc to mirrorless crop sensor cameras only
* bring one last round of updates, namely an SL-2 and a 760 successor, and announce, "that was it, no more after this, but EF-S lenses will remain fully functional with adapater on EOS M bodies".

3) Introduce FF MILC system in a smart way
* bring a 3-pack of A7/R/S II competitors.
** call one EOS X1. Include full-blown 4k video, to keep the "4k video whiners" at bay. Include kick-ass AF-system, and fps, to keep the wannabe-wildlife and sports-shooters in forums happy. Make it big and fat to include a huge heat sink and a big battery in a big handgrip. That makes the "my hands are Trump-sized" crowd happy. Put a bolted-on EF-adapter-nozzle up front to make the "no adapter ever"-whiners happy. And make it very expensive (say 8 grand) ... all those folks should have to cough up some serious dough.
** call one X3 and make it hi-rez sensor, medium size and with an EF-nozzle up front. That should please the landscape and it's giotta have EF-mount crowd.
** call one X% and make it as small as possible with EF-X mount. Bring a select few good, small and affordable EX-F primes ... 24/2.8, 35/2.0, 50/1.8, 85/2.4 IS and compact, collapsible versions of 24-70/4 and 16-35/4 IS zooms. Include EF-X/EF adapter "for free".

Tell the world that for the time being, DSLRs will continue to be built, but 1 series only.
And updated EF-lenses also, but L-tele/supertele/Tilt-Shift only.

See what sells in what quantities ... and adjust strategy accordingly.