Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Canon EOS R full frame mirrorless talk hots up

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

They can maintain the flange distance whilst still having a smaller depth of camera if they put the electronics to the side and front of the focal plane., rather than behind it as is the way on most digital cameras.

Fujifilm_X_T1_vs_Nikon_Df_size_comparison_600px.jpg.2de9b32c33b8dac60a4f98a24085f465.jpg

I wonder how price competitive Canon's system will be. One of the issues with Sony is the expensive lenses. $1000 for 55mm f1.8. $600 for 35mm f2.8 (or was it 600 for both?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a little poll with my possibly impossible but still, imo, interesting suggestion.
+1100 votes with 70% thinking it sounds cool.

What if Canon just added a built in optional EVF and called it a day?

First let me say that Im pro mirrorless. I use both extensively as anyone that follows me know.
And we are taking about Fullframe here, leave Fuji and MFT out of it.

In general lenses doesnt get smaller with mirrorless, they get bigger. Its just laws of physics, they just ad extra length to make up for the shorter flange. Unless they have a smaller sensor and/or slower aperture. (They can somewhat get around it with software correction.) So there really isn't any size difference in fullframe worth mentioning once you put on exotic glass. And often it just gets unbalanced in my personal opinion.

Ibis, instant focus in liveview with burst and no blackout, peaking, etc, all that exists in similar sized DSLRs today. The only thing really missing is an EVF. Which at the end of the day is just a "pretend" viewfinder, a tiny screen in a hole.

I'm thinking something pop-up, like in the X-Pro2/x100f. Then you have a true hybrid with the benefits of both systems like the DSLRs extremely fast AF and OVF, even in dim light. Also, then they can simply keep the EF mount which have exotic f1.2 lenses already.

Just a thought, not even sure if its possible :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

They can maintain the flange distance whilst still having a smaller depth of camera if they put the electronics to the side and front of the focal plane., rather than behind it as is the way on most digital cameras.

Fujifilm_X_T1_vs_Nikon_Df_size_comparison_600px.jpg.2de9b32c33b8dac60a4f98a24085f465.jpg

I wonder how price competitive Canon's system will be. One of the issues with Sony is the expensive lenses. $1000 for 55mm f1.8. $600 for 35mm f2.8 (or was it 600 for both?)

Personally, I dont even think this is strictly necessary especially amongst a core target DSLR audience who tenc to actually rather like bigger bodies - look at how excited people have got from Nikon's 'bigger' mirrorless. I happen to like smaller bodies but I still think the inherent advantages of a short flange distance are more myth than reality for 'FF'.

If we think that the EF-M flange is 18mm and with the EF mount it is 44mm the difference is 26mm or 1 inch as us Brits like to say. Now look at my A7riii with a 24-105 on it.

http://j.mp/2lgszKR

Note that the flange itself sticks out a bit and then there is a narrow tube. And if I look at the bottom of the lens I find that the rear element is at least an inch away from where the lens meets the flange. Sure there are some advantages to a short flange distance even with FF - say an ultra-wide zoom - but this is definitely a minority sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Robert Collins said:

Sure there are some advantages to a short flange distance even with FF - say an ultra-wide zoom - but this is definitely a minority sport.

Doesn't look like a minority report if you check Nikon new S 50mm f/1.8 MTF chart. It gives them more freedom to make a better corrected lens. It makes considerable difference in image quality. Short flange and wide mount is not just "good to have" feature, its necessary for the future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

I did a little poll with my possibly impossible but still, imo, interesting suggestion.
+1100 votes with 70% thinking it sounds cool.

What if Canon just added a built in optional EVF and called it a day?

First let me say that Im pro mirrorless. I use both extensively as anyone that follows me know.
And we are taking about Fullframe here, leave Fuji and MFT out of it.

In general lenses doesnt get smaller with mirrorless, they get bigger. Its just laws of physics, they just ad extra length to make up for the shorter flange. Unless they have a smaller sensor and/or slower aperture. (They can somewhat get around it with software correction.) So there really isn't any size difference in fullframe worth mentioning once you put on exotic glass. And often it just gets unbalanced in my personal opinion.

Ibis, instant focus in liveview with burst and no blackout, peaking, etc, all that exists in similar sized DSLRs today. The only thing really missing is an EVF. Which at the end of the day is just a "pretend" viewfinder, a tiny screen in a hole.

I'm thinking something pop-up, like in the X-Pro2/x100f. Then you have a true hybrid with the benefits of both systems like the DSLRs extremely fast AF and OVF, even in dim light. Also, then they can simply keep the EF mount which have exotic f1.2 lenses already.

Just a thought, not even sure if its possible :) 

To be honest the main reason Im attracted to mirrorless is the EVF. I miss full size bodies and I think you have a great idea. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.png.61c7e1c99e0431020cd4810c34d650a6.png

Here is my perfect camera body ( I’m not a video guy )

 

1.     Full Frame Sensor

2.     Professional grade body both in build quality and size.

3.     Evf to view my adjustments real-time

4.     2 storage card slots

5.     Long battery life

6.     Mirrored or mirrorless doesn’t matter

7.     High speed shutter up to 1/8000th

8.     Iso starting at 64

9.     EF lens mount to accept my great Canon glass

10.  Usb-c charging and tethering

11.  Price negotiable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

I did a little poll with my possibly impossible but still, imo, interesting suggestion.
+1100 votes with 70% thinking it sounds cool.

What if Canon just added a built in optional EVF and called it a day?

First let me say that Im pro mirrorless. I use both extensively as anyone that follows me know.
And we are taking about Fullframe here, leave Fuji and MFT out of it.

In general lenses doesnt get smaller with mirrorless, they get bigger. Its just laws of physics, they just ad extra length to make up for the shorter flange. Unless they have a smaller sensor and/or slower aperture. (They can somewhat get around it with software correction.) So there really isn't any size difference in fullframe worth mentioning once you put on exotic glass. And often it just gets unbalanced in my personal opinion.

Ibis, instant focus in liveview with burst and no blackout, peaking, etc, all that exists in similar sized DSLRs today. The only thing really missing is an EVF. Which at the end of the day is just a "pretend" viewfinder, a tiny screen in a hole.

I'm thinking something pop-up, like in the X-Pro2/x100f. Then you have a true hybrid with the benefits of both systems like the DSLRs extremely fast AF and OVF, even in dim light. Also, then they can simply keep the EF mount which have exotic f1.2 lenses already.

Just a thought, not even sure if its possible :) 

I think a hybrid viewfinder would be interesting.  Which would need probably two pelicle mirrors.   But why would they name the lenses as RF if they aren't making at least some change to the mount.  If there is no change there is no reason they wouldn't be called EF.  They could potentially have protruding rear elements like some apsc lenses but that could cause confusion and also you would expect them to be called EF-X or something similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wild guess: the mount could be a more extreme version of EF-S: same backward-compatible mount, but a special pin to prevent forward-compatibility. And then lenses with the RF mount are allowed to have a much deeper rear element, but it won't butt up against the mirror on a dSLR because it can't be mounted on one despite the superficially similar mount and forward-compatibility of the RF, due to the pin...

With the new lenses, the rear elements can go much deeper, so the rear element needs to be protected, so there's a deeper plastic ring extending around the rear element, and the lens caps are much deeper, too, to accommodate it. But otherwise it's the same basic shape of the EF mount. Telephoto lenses etc. will never be RF, because they don't need to be. Rear lens caps will not be interchangeable, but RF lens caps will mount on EF lenses, they'll just also extend too far.

Wild guess: RF stands for rangefinder, or something similar is implied.

Would be nice to see this mount on the FF 6k C300 Mk III when it's released in mid-September. (Another wild guess.)

Hoping that'll knock down the price of the C200. 😕 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×