Patent: A sensor protection assembly for a small form factor RF mount ILC

    By Updated:32 Comments2 Mins Read Canon Patents
    patentcompactshutter - Patent: A sensor protection assembly for a small form factor RF mount ILC

    Update on this patent translation from Canon News:

    Every now and then we post a patent application and make mistakes on assumptions with the Japanese translations.  This is one of those times, as noted to us, this patent application is not a shutter assembly but another assembly that Canon is looking at simply covering the sensor without using the delicate shutter (or in the case of cameras with global shutters).

    We will strive to do better than we apologize for the mischaracterization and reporting on the patent application.

    Canon News has uncovered a detailed patent showing what looks to be a compact shutter assembly for a small form factor RF mount camera.

    This shutter assembly is extremely small, and Canon News thinks the design is also very cost-effective and would make a lot of sense in the sub-$800 full-frame RF mount camera that I reported on a little while ago.

    As you can see from the images below, the camera body that they use for illustrations is quite small, maybe a little bit bigger than the EOS M6 Mark II. Keep in mind that illustrations used in this context aren't always an accurate depiction of what we may see this technology built into.

    An RF mount camera in this form factor is missing from the lineup and could give us an idea of how Canon plans to replace the EOS M lineup (which is still up for discussion) or reduce the costs of a full-frame body and appeal to a different kind of consumer.

    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    32 comments

    1. Why still use a mech. Shutter for a cheap entry level ILC? Get rid of it. Forever! And save the bucks.

      Maybe a professional camera may need a shutter until technology is ready but a smallish camera like this? No way.
    2. Why still use a mech. Shutter for a cheap entry level ILC? Get rid of it. Forever! And save the bucks.

      Maybe a professional camera may need a shutter until technology is ready but a smallish camera like this? No way.
      Avoiding rolling shutter in stills is one reason.
    3. My RF 35 1.8 is lusting for that body! And please make an EF lens to RF body adaptor with tripod thread (like that of the EOS M system) for those who like to use old EF lenses in non-homeopathic doses!
    6. No EVF, no sale.
      I’m with you on that. But so many people today have only ever used smartphone screens that I don’t think it would really hurt sales of an entry level $799 R-body camera. I personally find it uncomfortable to hold a body/telephoto lens out in front of me to view the live screen. And not very stable either. No EVF is probably fine for the video creators, who are the fast-expanding market.
    7. It is used to protect the sensor when changing the lens in the new bodies. I wouldn't think that it would save much money, in which case I would like to see them keep it on all bodies going forward.
    8. It's just a new design to improve/ stop the M/s from shutter shock on R5.

      R5 goes too much with it's 2-motor- driven shutter design which causes shutter shock worse than those from DSLR which is one of the main reason we upgrade to mirrorless from DSLR, meanwhile to avoid the shuther - shock.
    9. Why still use a mech. Shutter for a cheap entry level ILC? Get rid of it. Forever! And save the bucks.

      Maybe a professional camera may need a shutter until technology is ready but a smallish camera like this? No way.
      Electronic shutter necessitates more powerful and faster electronics by the nature of how it works. This cost more money and may eat up any savings from elimination of the mechanical shutter.
    12. Could this be the crop mirrorless we (some) have been waiting for? R7?
      I actually think they are running with the Siggy FP design here. Maybe it's an a7c killer? Stabs in the dark
    14. Why still use a mech. Shutter for a cheap entry level ILC? Get rid of it. Forever! And save the bucks.

      Maybe a professional camera may need a shutter until technology is ready but a smallish camera like this? No way.
      Because a lot of people like to use flash.
    15. If cheaper full frame RF mount is to be the replacement of APS-C with Canon, why would it be so? Has Canon found that APS-C wouldn't be profitable anymore? Potential Eos m users simply using the more and more advanced computational photography on their phones, with the different focal length lenses that are being added? Is it because fujifilm has got that segment covered and they don't want to compete there? While fujifilm themselves are reducing their digital imaging manufacturing. https://fstoppers.com/gear/fuji-refocuses-away-photography-570640
      Does Canon see there aren't pros looking for APS-C cameras anymore? Or does it see that the possibility of producing cheaper telephoto lenses with slower aperture negates the need for an RF APS-C system?
    16. Because a lot of people like to use flash.
      There are plenty of options for those who want flash, and who worry about electronic shutter effects and everything else.

      This would seem to be an entry level camera for low cost and small size.

      that’s a market segment that is probably large but virtually unrepresented by those who participate here.
      Except for people like me looking for a compact alternative to their R5 for pocketing occasionally, travel, while having the ability to share any lens.
    17. Electronic shutter necessitates more powerful and faster electronics by the nature of how it works. This cost more money and may eat up any savings from elimination of the mechanical shutter.
      This seems to be the only answer that makes sense to me.
    18. It is used to protect the sensor when changing the lens in the new bodies. I wouldn't think that it would save much money, in which case I would like to see them keep it on all bodies going forward.
      Not true. They do that in some cameras but they didn't in the RP they said they did it because they didn't want people sticking their finger in the shutter and harming it. Canon saying if you can't afford a $5000 camera you must be stupid.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment